So in this blog I want to reflect on my previous teaching experiences as well as my observations. Some teachers go into teaching preparation programs with ideas on how they would like their classroom to look and be run as well as the types of students they would like. When I entered into my NYC classroom in the Bronx last school year I was full of hope and excitement. I was going to plan lessons, meet my students, then teach these lessons. All my students were going to learn and be successful and this was going to be so much fun. Boy was I wrong. I had no idea of the real state of education. I wasn't aware that most of my students were below the poverty line, that most of them were well below reading level, and had low motivation levels when it came to learning and being in school. I found in the beginning most of my time was spent disciplining and not teaching. I would have many days where I could not get through my lesson. I was so frustrated and discouraged. At the same time, I loved my job. Some may wonder why would anyone want to teach under these conditions. The truth is many urban schools are in these conditions. I really cried, and asked myself some days is this really what education is like. I thought the goal or mission of education was to ensure that all students benefit from learning in ways that allow them to participate fully in public, community, and economic life. I didn't feel I was doing that.
Contrastingly, I observed recently at a private school. All the students were prepared, knew the answers, completed their assignments, no discipline problems at all. This was an ideal situation or was it? I was completely bored and said I didn't want to teach at a school like this. I said they don't need me. I want to be at a school where I feel I am making a strong impact. Although the beginning of my year started very difficult it became easier. One I adjusted my mindset and taught and did things according to what my students needed versus what I wanted to do, things improved. I maintained my high expectations for them I just changed my approach. I developed strong relationships with them that allowed them to know they could trust me and that I cared. I really believe that this is what students in urban settings need. When everything is hard at home they don't need to come to school and be given situations that are even harder. Yes, they will struggle with content but it is our job as educators to ease the transition and make the curriculum assessable to them. I mentioned in an earlier post that one way to do this make the lesson relate to their lives. What are some other ways we can achieve this? What are other teacher's thoughts about what they want in the classroom. I would rather work with "at- risk" students or in troubled schools, how do others feel?
Tuesday, April 13, 2010
Povery, education, and possible solutions
In the book A Framework for Understanding Poverty, U.S. leading expert on the mindsets of poverty, middle class, and well, Ruby K. Payne, Ph.D. researches the various aspects of poverty. In this text not only does Payne describe and analyze poverty, she also comes up with solutions and techniques to help both children and adults suffering from poverty, There was a particular chapter though that sparked interest in relation to this discussion on poverty and urban education. She states that the purpose in writing the book was to improve the achievement of students from poverty (87). It is said that low achievement is closely correlated with lack of resources, and there have been numerous studies that have documented the correlation between low socioeconomic status and low achievement. Payne's idea on this topic is that in order to bridge the achievement gap between the poor and the non poor instruction, instructional arrangements need to be reformed. What do we think about this? Is this the ultimate solution? Haven't many policy makers tried to continuously reform education? Has these reforms made any difference?
I believe in an earlier post I touched on what educational institutions were using as testing literacy may need to change. Payne shares this view. When looking at standardized tests we need to look at content. For example the SAT. If the content of the questions were changed to identify with the lifestyle and things that impoverished students encounter on a regular basis then the results of the test would flip to be in favor of these students. The books and other subjects that students are learning aren't necessarily to their lives, therefore they have no interest because they see no use for the information. If they were taught the curriculum using some materials that related to their lives it would be an easier gateway to get them to the point of literacy they need to be. An example of this would be giving them "The Tragedy of Romeo and Juliet to read as mandated in the curriculum but teach it from a lens of gangs possibly. Gangs are probably something all urban students know about and this would spark their interest and willingness to work with the text.
If a student isn't taught cognitive skills and engaged in a what that they aren't focused just on their homes lives then that decreases the students' chances of success. Cognitive strategies are fundamental ways of processing information. In order to accept and retain learning students also need concepts, skills, and content. Concepts store information and allow the learner to refer back to this information when necessary. Content is what the learner is learning. Teaching simply content is the most basic form of learning but lower income students tend to need this.
I think another important point here is learning styles. Teachers need to take into consideration that not all students learn the same. Some learners are visual, auditory, kinesthetic, as well as others. Teachers may have to adjust their assignments or teaching methods in order to reach the needs of their students. The video referenced in a previous comment also touches on this point. I think the main point is that we as teachers need to find other and better ways of educating. I think this is where new literacies come in to play. New literacies looks at how what the students need to learn is different yet the curriculum and testing hasn't changed with the times. New Literacies is that change that needs to occur in every classroom.
I believe in an earlier post I touched on what educational institutions were using as testing literacy may need to change. Payne shares this view. When looking at standardized tests we need to look at content. For example the SAT. If the content of the questions were changed to identify with the lifestyle and things that impoverished students encounter on a regular basis then the results of the test would flip to be in favor of these students. The books and other subjects that students are learning aren't necessarily to their lives, therefore they have no interest because they see no use for the information. If they were taught the curriculum using some materials that related to their lives it would be an easier gateway to get them to the point of literacy they need to be. An example of this would be giving them "The Tragedy of Romeo and Juliet to read as mandated in the curriculum but teach it from a lens of gangs possibly. Gangs are probably something all urban students know about and this would spark their interest and willingness to work with the text.
If a student isn't taught cognitive skills and engaged in a what that they aren't focused just on their homes lives then that decreases the students' chances of success. Cognitive strategies are fundamental ways of processing information. In order to accept and retain learning students also need concepts, skills, and content. Concepts store information and allow the learner to refer back to this information when necessary. Content is what the learner is learning. Teaching simply content is the most basic form of learning but lower income students tend to need this.
I think another important point here is learning styles. Teachers need to take into consideration that not all students learn the same. Some learners are visual, auditory, kinesthetic, as well as others. Teachers may have to adjust their assignments or teaching methods in order to reach the needs of their students. The video referenced in a previous comment also touches on this point. I think the main point is that we as teachers need to find other and better ways of educating. I think this is where new literacies come in to play. New literacies looks at how what the students need to learn is different yet the curriculum and testing hasn't changed with the times. New Literacies is that change that needs to occur in every classroom.
What is poverty and how it really affects learning?
I think it important when declaring a position on a topic to have some type of evidence to support your ideas. So on this blog all my thoughts will incorporate a reference to outside sources. With that being said, I read an article entitled "The effects of Poverty on Children by authors Brooks- Gunn and Duncan <http://www.jstor.org/stable/1602387>. The statistics given in this article for impoverished children were overwhelming. According to this article poverty is the "condition of not having enough income to meet basic needs for food, clothing, and shelter" (55). In order to have a discussion about poverty one needs to come to a full definition of what poverty consists of. Maybe I should have addressed this in my previous post. Reading the article made me think of how poverty affects a child in every aspect of their life not just when it comes to illiteracy. If a child is unfortunate and born into an impoverished family, they start of significantly disadvantaged. Although programs, such as Head Start have been developed to improve conditions, this still isn't enough to fully bring them out of the situation that hinders them. There have been many studies that show when children have outside issues or home issue's it is hard from them to devote time and focus to their studies. Some children come to school hungry, tiered, abused, as well as many other things that occur as a result of an impoverished home. Also, sadly enough, today children are cruel and tend to bully and criticize those that aren't able to afford the latest gear or technology. This distracts the students and discourage them from attending school.
The article shows that 28.8 percent of poor children repeat grades, compared to 14.1 percent of those children who repeat a grade level that aren't impoverished. Social factors such as teen pregnancy also occur more in poor homes than in non poor homes. Elven percent of poor families produce a teen that has a child out of wedlock, while only three point sic percent of teens in non poor homes become parents. The man statistic that stands out that is also a major eye opener is that; twenty one percent of children from poor homes were high school drop outs, while only 9.6 percent in non poor homes would not finish high school. According to this article, the NLSY and IHDP conducted a study between children of various socio- economic statuses and found that "The poorer children scored between six and twelve points lower on various standardized tests of IQ, verbal ability, and achievement" (61). The article found that the differences occurred in the younger children, more so. With this being known interventions need to be made early in order to prevent the many problems impoverished children face. There are many programs in schools such as Head Start, the breakfast program to help counter some of these effects. What more can be done? Yes, these programs help but it seems that they aren't helping enough because there continues to be a large literacy gap.
The article shows that 28.8 percent of poor children repeat grades, compared to 14.1 percent of those children who repeat a grade level that aren't impoverished. Social factors such as teen pregnancy also occur more in poor homes than in non poor homes. Elven percent of poor families produce a teen that has a child out of wedlock, while only three point sic percent of teens in non poor homes become parents. The man statistic that stands out that is also a major eye opener is that; twenty one percent of children from poor homes were high school drop outs, while only 9.6 percent in non poor homes would not finish high school. According to this article, the NLSY and IHDP conducted a study between children of various socio- economic statuses and found that "The poorer children scored between six and twelve points lower on various standardized tests of IQ, verbal ability, and achievement" (61). The article found that the differences occurred in the younger children, more so. With this being known interventions need to be made early in order to prevent the many problems impoverished children face. There are many programs in schools such as Head Start, the breakfast program to help counter some of these effects. What more can be done? Yes, these programs help but it seems that they aren't helping enough because there continues to be a large literacy gap.
"Poverty, Not Race, Holds Back Urban Students"
There is much debate concerning the root causes for illiteracy. In the article "Poverty, Not Race, Holds Back Urban Students", authors Bainbridge and Lasley argue that environmental factors are the root cause for illiteracy. The article argues that many researchers attribute illiteracy to race, but their findings are incorrect. Due to the history of various minorities in America; many minorities start at a disadvantage. Those living in poverty don't have full access to the programs and materials that are needed at an early age to start the foundation for a concrete, stable literacy foundation. Often times in poor families the parents or adult models are so consumed with providing for the family they don't have the time to devote to their children when it comes to education. The authors make the following statement: "Preschoolers living in poverty must have access to educational opportunities that develop literacy, particularly at an age when so much brain development occurs. this means seeking more money for schools" (2).
As a result of this many communities have begun to develop literacy programs such as Head Start in order to try to bridge the literacy gap that occurs within low income areas.
Something that often comes up during educational discourses is the term self fulfilling prophecy. In teacher education we are taught to be care not to impose our biases and personal thoughts onto the students. Traditionally, minorities have often been told they are more academically disadvantaged than their White peers. If they aren't specifically told this they look at things such as the enrollment in honors courses or hear statements such as "stop talking white". I speak from personal experience. As a result of being taught standard English and been held accountable for using it constantly, I was often picked on for "talking white". I would often ask why speaking standard English is equated with a particular race and more specifically not associated with the way an African America can and should speak? I believe this debate can go on forever.
If I go back to my original statement I feel as well as other scholars feel that part of the problem is the self fulfilling prophecy. As a result of minorities being told in one way or another that they are traditionally more academically disadvantaged than their White peers, they enter the classroom with this in mind and perform accordingly. They believe that because of their family history, environment, and/or where they come from they aren't fully able to break the barrier and perform at high literacy capabilities. Where do student's really get their ideas about education and their capabilities from? Do people really believe that their continues to be inequality in education?
As a result of this many communities have begun to develop literacy programs such as Head Start in order to try to bridge the literacy gap that occurs within low income areas.
Something that often comes up during educational discourses is the term self fulfilling prophecy. In teacher education we are taught to be care not to impose our biases and personal thoughts onto the students. Traditionally, minorities have often been told they are more academically disadvantaged than their White peers. If they aren't specifically told this they look at things such as the enrollment in honors courses or hear statements such as "stop talking white". I speak from personal experience. As a result of being taught standard English and been held accountable for using it constantly, I was often picked on for "talking white". I would often ask why speaking standard English is equated with a particular race and more specifically not associated with the way an African America can and should speak? I believe this debate can go on forever.
If I go back to my original statement I feel as well as other scholars feel that part of the problem is the self fulfilling prophecy. As a result of minorities being told in one way or another that they are traditionally more academically disadvantaged than their White peers, they enter the classroom with this in mind and perform accordingly. They believe that because of their family history, environment, and/or where they come from they aren't fully able to break the barrier and perform at high literacy capabilities. Where do student's really get their ideas about education and their capabilities from? Do people really believe that their continues to be inequality in education?
What is Literacy? Are our youth really illiterate or is that we are behind times?
As an English teacher, I am very interested in root causes for the high rates of illiteracy in secondary schools, specifically urban schools. One would think that by the time students reached seventh grade they would have a handle on basic literacy skills. This isn't always the case.
Through new literacies we have found that literacy encompasses much more than simply having the ability to read and write. For the purposes of this blog we are examining literacy under a lens of what state assessments will test; which unfortunately continues to be in the traditional form of literacy.
According to Tamara L. Jetton and Janice A. Dole authors of Adolescent Literacy Research and Practice http://www.guilford.com/cgi-bin/cartscript.cgi?page=pr/jetton.htm&sec=contrib&dir=edu/lit, high literacy is defined as the educational goal of teaching all students to think, read, and write critically. Where is the disconnect between urban and rural schools? Yes, there are small exceptions. Not all urban schools have high illiteracy rates just as not all rural school have high literacy rates; but the statistics to the contrary are overwhelming. Many believe poverty to be the culprit to this ongoing problem. Others argue with the proper supports this doesn't have to be the case. This blog seeks to examine research that shows how poverty and illiteracy have a direct correlation.
Others argue that the times have changed and so have our students but the practices of education haven't and this is why are students are being deemed illiterate. This is the age of the new literacies, where reading is more than having the ability to read and understand the words on the page. This is the technological age where students have new ways of expressing themselves and their ideas and these strengths are rarely highlighted in the classroom. Most students participate in literacy activities on an ongoing basis. Blogging, social networking sites, such as facebook, text messaging are all places where students use literacy skills. Are these skills valued? Not entirely but they should be.
Through new literacies we have found that literacy encompasses much more than simply having the ability to read and write. For the purposes of this blog we are examining literacy under a lens of what state assessments will test; which unfortunately continues to be in the traditional form of literacy.
According to Tamara L. Jetton and Janice A. Dole authors of Adolescent Literacy Research and Practice http://www.guilford.com/cgi-bin/cartscript.cgi?page=pr/jetton.htm&sec=contrib&dir=edu/lit, high literacy is defined as the educational goal of teaching all students to think, read, and write critically. Where is the disconnect between urban and rural schools? Yes, there are small exceptions. Not all urban schools have high illiteracy rates just as not all rural school have high literacy rates; but the statistics to the contrary are overwhelming. Many believe poverty to be the culprit to this ongoing problem. Others argue with the proper supports this doesn't have to be the case. This blog seeks to examine research that shows how poverty and illiteracy have a direct correlation.
Others argue that the times have changed and so have our students but the practices of education haven't and this is why are students are being deemed illiterate. This is the age of the new literacies, where reading is more than having the ability to read and understand the words on the page. This is the technological age where students have new ways of expressing themselves and their ideas and these strengths are rarely highlighted in the classroom. Most students participate in literacy activities on an ongoing basis. Blogging, social networking sites, such as facebook, text messaging are all places where students use literacy skills. Are these skills valued? Not entirely but they should be.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)