Closing the Achievement Gap

[Athanasios Bayiates]

Knox County’s public schools are performing better than the other large urban public school systems in our state, and Knox County’s public school educators are working hard to meet the needs of every child in our schools. However, there is general agreement that an achievement gap exists in our public schools, and we need to do things differently to close them. While we all have the goal of insuring that every child in Knox County has access to a great public school education, there are many ideas being put forward by those outside the profession focusing on the district and school level. But public school educators know that the most effective way to positively affect student achievement is to focus at the level of the classroom educator. The support of every educator in every classroom in our schools is essential if we are not going to just provide access to a great public school but to close the achievement gap that exists and to insure that every child has the opportunity to succeed.

The question then becomes how can classroom instruction, the achievement of individual students, and the closing of the achievement gap be achieved? If having highly effective educators in every classroom is the goal, professional development that is focused on the students’ and educators’ assessed needs is necessary. An evaluation framework that focuses on the continuing growth of educators as well as assessing classroom practice is necessary. A compensation system that supports the future growth of educators and best practices in the classroom that meets our students’ needs and encourages educators to take greater educational leadership roles in their schools should be adopted.

Professional learning communities are created when educators are integral to developing an environment in which student performance is the center of professional development. Educators need the time to work collaboratively, to analyze student data, and identify professional development opportunities that meet the needs found from student assessments. Only by analyzing individual student and classroom achievement data can educators identify what professional development is necessary to positively affect classroom instruction and student achievement where it matters: In the classroom. In the TAP model that has been implemented in four of Knox County’s public schools, this is accomplished in cluster meetings where mentors and masters work with classroom educators to use classroom instruction and assessments to develop future classroom instruction. Knox County’s public schools are moving to professional learning communities that will support a school-embedded professional development model. Curriculum and Instruction Facilitators, academic coaches, and classroom educators need to have the time and training so that they can effectively work collaboratively to affect classroom instruction and close the achievement gap.

In an effort to reform our public schools, the evaluation of educators was changed in the recent revision of the Basic Education Program. The changes necessitated the development of a performance assessment that will be conducted more frequently. Rather than looking at how often educators are evaluated to affect classroom instruction, the state framework of evaluation itself needs to be assessed. In The Collaborative School: A Work Environment for Effective Instruction, Smith and Scott argue that “evaluation strategies that rely on standardized checklists and other bureaucratic methods continue to be widely used even though they contribute little to teacher growth.” While the state framework does include a future growth plan, it is not imbedded in the evaluation process itself. If the goal is to just provide a summative assessment of educators, basically a grade, the state framework is adequate. However, if the goal is to insure that educators are continuing to develop their practice and affect classroom instruction, other models should be considered. There is an alternative evaluation framework that the state has allowed four Knox County schools to utilize. If that model is proven to be effective in closing the achievement gap, its adoption should be considered in all our schools.

To close the achievement gap, more needs to be done to continue to attract and retain educators to Knox County’s public schools. Everything, even how educators are compensated, should be discussed. A schedule that is based on measurable criteria should be developed, criteria such as successful evaluations using an improved evaluation framework that is more relevant to classroom instruction, continuing professional development as measured and reported by an educator’s individual growth plan, and a commitment to professional service that will directly benefit the students of Knox County’s public schools. The support of every educator in every classroom in Knox County’s public schools is essential and can be done to close the achievement gap and insure that every child in our schools has the opportunity to succeed.

[Jennifer Lubke]

Add to the list of the discussion topics the number of free, web-based technologies and applications that can assist professional learning communities in communication, collaboration, and innovation but are currently blocked from educators (and students). By "block" I mean both the state's content filter as well as certain out-dated and stagnant board policies.

Happily, both blocks can be negotiated, which is something that deeply interests me if we are to not only attract and retain young teaching talent but achieve the cultural and systemic shifts where teachers of all ages and experience levels feel supported (with training and resources).

I agree that "educators need the time to work collaboratively, to analyze student data, and identify professional development opportunities that meet the needs found from student assessments." The technologies and tools that I am currently studying are cheap (free), ubiquitous, and highly intuitive. The more immersed I become in online professional learning communities, the more convinced I am that these tools must be allowed to enhance face-to-face collaboration and one-to-one mentoring models currently being pursued in our county.

Although I generally avoid generational labels ("Gen Y" and the like) and the imagined "generation gap" between teachers and administrators, this Education Week column provides some good insights into the shifts that must come.

Thanks for a great forum topic!

[Pamela Treacy]

I hope this topic is on the agenda for the workforce summitt being planned.

[Athanasios Bayiates]

Yes, these issues are definitely going to be a part of that discussion.

[Athanasios Bayiates]

Technology really does create a platform from which educators will be able to share and collaborate easily and effectively. But first we need to create a culture of collaboration in our public schools. Without a change in the culture of education, new technology will not be able to facilitate true collaboration. When the TIMMS study was conducted, they found not just a difference in test scores but also a difference in how educators taught. In Japanese schools they found educators working collaboratively in what they termed lesson study groups. Educators in a study group studied student data, created a lesson, taught and videotaped the lesson, viewed and critiqued the lesson, reviewed the student data and refined the lesson, and retaught the lesson resulting in the creation of a master lesson or further refinement. The lessons and the data collected is then shared and reviewed by other educators not just in individual schools but throughout the country. In fact, master lessons are peer reviewed, published, and shared. Could technology facilitate this type of work in professional learning communities at the school, district, state, and even national level in our schools? Yes; however, I do believe we need to change the culture of how we teach as well as the tools we use. I agree that “these tools must be allowed to enhance face-to-face collaboration and one-to-one mentoring models currently being pursued in our county." Veteran as well as novice educators need to develop a community like other professionals that create best practices for their profession by working together, building on the work of their peers, and sharing their results. Again we need to develop a collaborative research-based culture in order to really change the culture of education.

[Jennifer Lubke]

Oh, absolutely. There is a shift in mindset that must come first. How else can we explain the fact that despite all "the tools in the schools" in the last 20-25 years, education and (student achievement) still remain essentially unchanged? The achievement gap persists despite unprecedented access to computers. In my six years as a Knox County teacher, I never once lacked physical, hands-on access. Even despite the seemingly arbitrary nature of the state's Internet filter, which caused occasional frustration, I had more technology than I could wrap my brain around. And believe me, the fact that my old high school here in Knox County just went wireless does NOT give me hope that somehow the threat of a state takeover can be magically adverted. (It won't.)

Educational technology as it is currently practiced is just an extension of the old mindset. The cliche "old wine in new bottles" comes to mind.

But we are foolish if we believe the desired culture shift in education can be achieved in this day and age without tapping into the enormous potential of participatory and social technologies currently being used to transform every public and private human enterprise EXCEPT education. (I mean, doesn't it bother you a little bit that SchoolMatters lacks the voices of folks so central to education in East Tennessee? I mean, where are the administrators, teachers, and, dare I say, students?)

That's why my focus has shifted in recent months from technology integration and classroom practice to technology integration and teacher professional development. I am convinced that the "collaborative research-based culture" you advocate can be achieved if teachers and administrators of all ages are provided training and, more importantly, time to "play" with participatory and social media. This needs to begin in teacher preparation programs and continue in a systemic and broad-based fashion within the building-level professional development communities into which preservice teachers are eventually inducted. Then, we will begin to see positive effect on student achievement? I don't know, but that is my hope.

Oh, and there is the small matter of repealing NCLB. ;)

To quote Will Richardson (an educational technologist who is still in touch with his humanity), “I really believe that until we understand the potentials and pitfalls of these shifts and these tools for ourselves, how they can connect us and transform our own learning, that it's difficult to understand the pedagogies that make their use successful in the classroom.”

[Laurie Alford]

Jennifer,
I could not have said it better.

[Athanasios Bayiates]

When you state: "But we are foolish if we believe the desired culture shift in education can be achieved in this day and age without tapping into the enormous potential of participatory and social technologies currently being used to transform every public and private human enterprise EXCEPT education,” I would say yes and no. Yes, technology can and should be used, but until we are able to create a culture in which educators have the time and structure to observe others, to collaborate, to begin to build a body of professional practice, participatory and social technologies will not be valued and used. Once you have that culture of professional practice, individuals and groups will naturally start using participatory and social technologies as a tool to enhance what they are doing in their classrooms and within their professional learning communities.

I think back to the action research papers that University of Tennessee education students complete during their internship year. They identify an educational purpose, state the significance of research, review literature, devise a methodology, present findings and results, and discuss the results and offer a conclusion that will then be used in professional practice. There is an expectation that this is a practice the interns will use as professional educators. But what happens as that educator is then inducted into our profession? Do they teach the way they were taught to teach or the way they were taught before they entered the college of education? So again, I go back to the fact that we have to change the culture of education. Can technology be a tool to do that? I would agree it can be. But first we as educators have to see the need and begin to change the culture of education.

In The Teaching Gap Stigler and Hiebert argue, “The star teachers of the twenty-first century will be those who work together to infuse the best ideas into standard practice. They will be teachers who collaborate to build a system that has the goal of improving students’ learning in the “average” classroom, who work to gradually improve standard classroom practices.” We can use technology to help build that system, but first we have to agree that it needs to be built and how.

[Jennifer Lubke]

Are we having a "chicken and egg" debate? I think I hear you saying that a whole new discipline of professional practice (observation, collaboration, community-building) must be in place BEFORE the thoughtful and innovative integration of technology into that practice can happen. We have to see the need and want the change -- there has to be "buy in" (ugh, hate that term).

I am saying that there are several powerful (and empowering), highly relational tools available right now to help teachers build that community of practice. Do we first have to wait for the entire industrial-era school model to implode and collapse in on itself? We can't wait that long. So we have to look for ways around the walls (both literal and figurative) to achieve the collaboration, communication, and creativity you and I both desire. Otherwise, yes, all those fresh-faced interns will enter the classroom, and before long -- zap -- they revert to teaching "the way they were taught before they entered the college of education." The means for putting the expectation into practice simply aren't available.

Even the college of education could innovate a little. For instance, what happens to all those wonderful action research projects? Where do they go? Who sees them? Who benefits from those reviews of literature, the presentations of findings, the resulting discussions? I suppose it culminates in a PowerPoint presentation shared among professors and the preservice teachers' cohort. (I performed two action research projects as part of the urban specialists certificate program at UT, and that is pretty much how it went down for me.) Why not publish them online in an interactive environment such as a wiki or blog, so the conversations and sharing can continue even after the intern transitions into the classroom? It's just an example.

[Athanasios Bayiates]

You are right; we are having a "chicken and egg" debate. In education, great ideas like professional learning communities are explored but are not fully implemented or given the opportunity to develop and then we move on to something else. I agree that new technologies can be an asset in an attempt to really change the culture of our profession. However, I worry that while we use terms like professional learning communities, if we do not do the work to not just provide the time for it to happen but to develop the capacity in our faculties for it to occur, we will not see a change in our professional practice or the culture of education. When that occurs, because it was not fully implemented or valued, the search will begin for something else.

At some point, the pendulum that many educators talk about needs to stop and we need to begin moving forward. In our education classes in college, we study educational theory that should guide our practice. But does it? Changing our schools into learning laboratories where educators work collaboratively to apply educational theory and to further our practice based on classroom experiences is essential in beginning to build a body of professional practice.

Again, I agree technology can help us reach that goal, but first there needs to be a change in what is valued. We need to spend time and resources in training educators, administrators, education coaches, etc., to work collaboratively and construct professional learning communities. Just saying we want it will not make it happen. That is my dilemma. Do you spend the resources and time training individuals in the use of participatory and social technologies before there is that culture in which the use of such tools would be used and valued by education professionals?

I am going to quote a passage from Stigler and Hiebert’s The Teaching Gap to illustrate another concern:

“Joseph Mayer Rice, an informed observer of America’s schools, published a series of articles in 1892 that focused on the conditions of schools in America’s cities. The first article was titled “Evils in Baltimore.” But a group of Baltimore teachers, interested in improving classroom practices, convinced the Baltimore city public schools teachers’ association to lobby the city school commissioners for time to meet and work together to improve teaching and learning in their classrooms. They wanted one afternoon each month to meet with other teachers. Teachers around the city who taught the same grade met to discuss methods of teaching that would facilitate improved student learning. Discussions centered on common problems of classroom practice. Wishing to share their insights and progress more widely, the city teachers began publishing a regular newsletter, The Expert Pedagogue, which was filled with suggestions for improved teaching.”

The authors go on to explain that in Baltimore the beginnings of a professional practice in education ended when a new superintendent was hired in 1900. The experience of the educators in Baltimore’s public schools illustrate that if the culture of education itself is not changed any changes that are on the surface can very easily be swept aside. The use of technology in education has often been a surface change not a change in the underlying practice.

[Jamey Dobbs]

I missed this discussion somehow from some very thoughtful people....I hope others take some time to read it. I would like to know if someone knows if Dr. McIntyre is working toward this new culture.

[Lisa Starbuck]

Yes, this is an excellent discussion. I do hope Dr. McIntyre and others are reading, since they obviously aren't participating.

I do have one question. I agree totally that teachers need to be empowered, that they need collaboration, they need continuing education, especially with technology, and that they need to be compensated based on measurable criteria. My question is this - will teachers give up automatic tenure in return for these things?

I am asking this because of what happened recently at Austin East. Under NCLB criteria, the school was restructured and only certain (good) teachers rehired. The rest (presumably poor, unskilled, ineffective?) teachers were shuffled around to other schools. This is an outrage in my opinion. I know this idea is not popular with KCEA, but it is the opinion of many in the community.

[Jennifer Lubke]

Lisa, question: have Dr. McIntyre and other downtown personnel been personally invited into the School Matters community? Just curious.Regarding your above question about the NCLB-driven restructuring of schools, my understanding is that when the faculty is reconstituted, as was the case at both AE and Fulton, it isn't in such black and white terms, i.e. "good" teachers rehired and "bad" teachers re-assigned elsewhere. It's more about finding staff with teaching philosophies, content area expertise, and classroom approaches that fit the needs and challenges within that school context.