In “Building A Better Teacher,” Elizabeth Green presents cases personifying two perspectives on teaching effectively—one we often hear referred to as “classroom management” and the other regularly called “good content.” She uses Doug Lemov and Deborah Ball, respectively, as her exemplars of the cases.
Professor Ball, dean of the University of Michigan’s school of education, is widely noted for her studies of teachers’ content knowledge in mathematics. Mr. Lemov, a consultant and promoter of charter schools, has a forth-coming book documenting concepts about teaching practices that span content areas.
Continue reading ‘Sorta building a better teacher, maybe’
Over on Facebook Martha Gabler announced the opening a private tutoring center in Silver Spring (MD, US): Kids’ Learning Workshop. The focus is on what she calls “fluent foundation skills” by which she means rapid, accurate performance on such tasks as reading aloud, writing answers for arithmetic facts, and answering questions about academic content.
Readers might wonder why I would post a note about such a private enterprise on Teach Effectively. There are at least three reasons:
Continue reading ‘Tutoring the right way’
Today in Washington (DC, US) the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation and the University of Wisconsin Population Health Institute launch a public service Web site that allows visitors to learn about the healthiness of localities on a county-by-county basis across the US. The news got me thinking—Danger!—about the possibility of creating a similar resource for consumers of education: Providing a scientifically credible metric for the quality of teaching in each local education agency around a country.
Continue reading ‘Rating LEAs’ teaching?’
Robert Slavin and colleagues reported that reading programs that provide extensive professional development on instructional strategies which promote student participation, strengthen phonics competence, and explicitly teach comprehension strategies are the best bets for improving reading achievement. The clearest examples of the programs that led to the highest achievement were Direct Instruction and Success for All.
Writing in the December 2009 issue of the Review of Educational Research, Professor Slavin and colleagues reported the results of their examination of 142 studies. They wanted to determine whether curricula, technology, instructional processes, or combinations of curricula and processes produce greater reading achievement. The curriculum group included core reading programs, such as Reading Street and Open Court Reading. The technology group included programs that employ computers or similar methods such as computer-assisted instruction, multimedia (e.g., Reading Reels, or Writing to Read). The instructional process group included approaches that provide teachers effective strategies for teaching reading, such as Peer-Assisted Learning Strategies (PALS) and Cooperative Integrated Reading and Composition (CIRC). The combined curriculum-and-instructional-process group included programs that function as core curricula and also provide detailed professional development about using instructional strategies, such as Direct Instruction and Success for All. The researchers separated the studies into two groups: those with outcomes at the (a) beginning reading level vs. upper elementary level.
Continue reading ‘Go for DI and SFA’
My colleague and friend, Jim Kauffman, published an editorial in the Charlottesville (VA, US) Daily Progress over the past weekend. It’s a good one.
In his view, most educational reform proposals miss the mark. They overlook the critical element. Make a note about what element you think is ignored, then read Professor Kauffman’s editorial. I suspect that many readers of Teach Effectively will have notes about the same overlooked factor that he identifies.
I’d point readers to the Daily Progress for a chance to read it, but I can’t find the article on that Web site. However, thanks to the author, I have a PDF of the editorial. Download it by clicking on the accompanying image or by following this link.
An editorial in the Des Moines (IA, US) Register makes the case that students’ learning outcomes should be employed in the evaluation of teachers’ effectiveness. The focus of the editorial is (of course) local to the state of Iowa, but the implications are relevant for many other geographic regions and governmental entities.
When West Des Moines teachers are evaluated, their students’ progress on standardized tests doesn’t affect their ratings. It may be part of the conversation, but that’s about it. “It’s not something commonly done in Iowa,” said Superintendent Tom Narak.
But the Iowa Legislature should require it.
Today’s students have to be able to compete in a global economy. The role of teachers in the 21st century matters more than ever before. Schools should identify those who improve student achievement, and those who don’
Link to “ Use student achievement to measure teachers.” The editorial writer refers to the McKinsey report on education.
I only occasionally read the Ed Week team blog by Deborah Meier and Diane Ravitch, Bridging Differences, but I was avidly gobbling up the content and comments of one recent post. Why? Well, the much admired Mary Damer had waded into the fray and was tossing around a lot of sensible comments. It’s worth reading, so here’s a link to the entry entitled “What Works for Rich Kids Works for All Kids.”
Under the headline “Harvard Offers New Doctorate for School Leaders Who Aim to Shake Up Status Quo” in the Chronicle of Higher Education, Peter Schmidt reported that Harvard University announced a grant-funded doctoral degree program to leaders in education. The graduates are supposed to be people who can engender “major school reform.”
The program’s mission will be to train top officials of school districts, government agencies, nonprofit groups, and private organizations who will be equipped to shake up the status quo in elementary and secondary education.
“Our goal is not to develop leaders for the system as it currently exists; rather, we aim to develop people who will lead system transformation,” Kathleen McCartney, dean of the Graduate School of Education, said in written statement.
What reform, one might wonder? Transformed to what? Just any old transformation? I’d like it if the transformation was toward adopting evidence-based practices. Will the graduates of the program know anything about effective teaching?
Read Mr. Schmidt’s article.
Recent Comments