As an educator I was touched today by this article from Mr. James Perry, former candidate for the Mayor of New Orleans:
“Among the most important lessons I’ve learned from Dr. King is the example of servant leadership. A servant leader is one who offers an inclusive vision; listens carefully to others; persuades through reason; and heals divisions while building community.
It is easy to spot servant leaders. In a room where others are jockeying for attention, they are the ones listening to someone others might consider unimportant. When faced with a problem, they look for solutions that benefit everyone. When something goes wrong, they take the blame. When things go well, they share the credit. They tell everyone the same story, even when it is inconvenient or difficult. They know that they don’t have all the answers, so they seek advice from others. They work hard and inspire others to do the same.
Martin Luther King, Jr. is an example of a servant leader. His life shows the extraordinary power of servant leadership to radically transform a nation.
Our communities and our country need servant leadership more than ever. Deepening economic woes threaten the American dream for far too many working people. Racial divisions are embarrassingly persistent in too many aspects of our economic and social lives. Political despair is battering the uniquely American optimism that has made us a great nation.
There are precious few servant leaders in our current political environment. Many elected officials are more interested in personal power, individual legacy, and financial gain than in the sacrifice and commitment that servant leadership requires.”
As an educator, we have the honor to teach the next generation of servant leaders….it is our job and privilege to instill in them the passion to effect change and the empathy to think outside themselves. All educators….indeed, all school staff….must work together to teach teens that taking responsibility for our lives gives us total power in creating the kind of life we want for ourselves. Yup….taking personal responsibility and thinking of the community…..and you know what? After seeing my Murray Hill Middle School kids last week rally around raising funds for Haiti Relief?…I think we’re doing pretty darn good! But we can always do better!
I wish I was more eloquent….here…but wait! These dudes are!
“Man must cease attributing his problems to his environment, and learn again to exercise his will – his personal responsibility.”
Albert Einstein
“It is a painful thing to look at your own trouble and know that you yourself and no one else has made it.”
Sophocles
“A sign of wisdom and maturity is when you come to terms with the realization that your decisions cause your rewards and consequences. You are responsible for your life, and your ultimate success depends on the choices you make.”
Denis Waitley
Thank you for being an educator. Thank you for following your passion and commitment to making a difference in your school and community. For working every day to effect real change in our most precious of customers – our kids. Let’s be inspired by the leadership of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr not just on his birthday – but every day – throughout the year!
___
Gwyneth Jones, aka The Daring Librarian, is a blogger, a Tweeter, an international speaker, a citizen of Social Media, and a resident of Second Life. Gwyneth is a Google Certified Teacher, DEN Star, an elected member of the ISTE Board of Directors, and the author of the award winning Daring Librarian blog. Jones was named a Visionary Leader by Teacher Librarian Magazine and a Mover & Shaker by Library Journal Magazine. Her work & writings have been featured in the New York Times, The Washington Post, and the Huffington Post. Admittedly, she’s also a goofball, a geek, and ridiculously humble.
Some people are dramatically better at activities like sports, music and chess than other people. Take the basketball great Stephen Curry. This past season, breaking the record he set last year by over 40 percent, Curry made an astonishing 402 three-point shots – 126 more than his closest challenger.
What explains this sort of exceptional performance? Are experts “born,“ endowed with a genetic advantage? Are they entirely “made” through training? Or is there some of both?
In a 1993 study, Ericsson and his colleagues recruited violinists from an elite Berlin music academy and asked them to estimate the amount of time they had spent engaging in “deliberate practice” across their musical careers.
Deliberate practice, as Ericsson and his colleagues have defined it, includes training activities that are specifically designed to improve a person’s performance in an endeavor like playing an instrument. These activities require a high level of concentration and aren’t inherently enjoyable. Consequently, the amount of deliberate practice even experts can engage in is limited to a few hours a day.
Ericsson and his colleagues’ major discovery was that there was a positive correlation between the skill level of the violinists and the amount of deliberate practice they had accumulated. As deliberate practice increased, skill level increased.
For example, by age 20, the most accomplished group of violinists had accumulated an average of about 10,000 hours of deliberate practice – or about 5,000 hours more than the average for the least accomplished group. In a second study, Ericsson and colleagues replicated the finding in pianists.
On the basis of the studies, these researchers concluded that deliberate practice, rather than talent, is the determining factor for expert performance. They wrote,
We reject any important role for innate ability.
In a recent interview, Ericsson further explained that
we can’t find any sort of limiting factors that people really can’t surpass with the right kind of training. With the exception of body size: You can’t train to be taller.
Is it all about training?
Based on this evidence, the writer Malcolm Gladwell came up with his “10,000-hour rule” – the maxim that it takes 10,000 hours of practice to become an expert in a field. In the scientific literature, however, Ericsson’s views have been highly controversial from the start.
In an early critique, Harvard psychologist and multiple intelligence theorist Howard Gardnercommented that Ericsson’s view required a “blindness” to earlier research on skill acquisition. Developmental psychologist Ellen Winneradded that “Ericsson’s research demonstrated the importance of hard work but did not rule out the role of innate ability.” Renowned giftedness researcher Françoys Gagnénoted that Ericsson’s view “misses many significant variables.” Cognitive neuroscientist Gary Marcusobserved,
Practice does indeed matter – a lot and in surprising ways. But it would be a logical error to infer from the importance of practice that talent is somehow irrelevant, as if the two were in mutual opposition.
How important is training?
For our part, working with colleagues around the world, we have focused on empirically testing Ericsson and colleagues’ theory to find out more about the relationship between deliberate practice and performance in various domains.
A 2014 study led by Case Western Reserve University psychologist Brooke Macnamara used a statistical tool called “meta-analysis” to aggregate the results of 88 earlier studies involving over 11,000 participants, including studies that Ericsson and colleagues had used to argue for the importance of deliberate practice.
Each study included a measure of some activity that could be interpreted as deliberate practice, as well as a measure of skill level in a domain such as music, chess or sports.
The study revealed that deliberate practice and skill level correlated positively with each other. In other words, the higher the skill level, the greater the amount of deliberate practice. However, the correlation wasn’t so strong as to warrant the claim that differences in skill level are largely due to deliberate practice.
In concrete terms, a key implication of this discovery is that people may require vastly different amounts of deliberate practice to reach the same level of skill.
A more recent study synthesized the results of 33 studies to understand the relationship between deliberate practice and performance in sports at a more detailed level.
One important finding was that deliberate practice lost its predictive power at the highest levels of skill. That is, on average, there was almost no difference in accumulated amount of deliberate practice between elite-level athletes, such as Olympians, and subelite athletes, such as contestants in national championships.
Training isn’t the only factor
As we discuss in a recent review article with behavioral geneticist Miriam Mosing, this evidence tells us that expertise – like virtually all phenomena that psychologists study – is determined by multiple factors.
Training history is certainly an important factor in explaining why some people are more successful than others. No one becomes a world-class performer without practice. People aren’t literally born with the sort of specialized knowledge that underpins skill in domains like music and chess. However, it now seems clear that training isn’t the only important factor in acquiring expertise. Other factors must matter, too.
What might these other factors be? There are likely many, including basic abilities and capacities that are known to be influenced by genes.
In a 2010 study with psychologist Elizabeth Meinz, 57 pianists ranging in skill from beginner to professional estimated the amount of deliberate practice they had accumulated across their musical careers, and took tests of “working memory capacity.” Working memory capacity is the ability to focus one’s attention on information critical to performing a task by filtering out distractions.
The pianists then attempted to sight-read pieces of music (that is, to play the pieces without preparation) on a piano in the lab. The major finding was that working memory capacity was a factor in the pianists’ success in the sight-reading task, even among those with thousands of hours of deliberate practice.
Our research on twins further reveals that the propensity to practice music is influenced by genetic factors. This research compares identical twins, who share 100 percent of their genes, to fraternal twins, who on average share only 50 percent of their genes. A key finding of this work is that identical twins are typically more similar to each other in their practice histories, as well as their scores on tests of basic music aptitude, than fraternal twins are to each other. For example, it’s more likely to find a pair of identical twins who have both accumulated over 10,000 hours of practice than a pair of fraternal twins who have both accumulated this amount of practice.
This discovery indicates that, while extensive practice is necessary to become a highly skilled musician, genetic factors influence our willingness to put in that practice. More generally, this research suggests that we gravitate toward and persist at those activities that we have an aptitude for from the outset.
Research by other scientists is beginning to link expert performance to specific genes. In a groundbreaking series of molecular genetic studies, the University of Sydney geneticist Kathryn North and her colleagues found that the ACTN3 gene, which is expressed in fast-twitch muscle fibers, correlates with high-level success in sprinting events. Based on these findings, North and her colleagues have called ACTN3 a possible “gene for speed.”
How can people excel?
In view of this evidence, we have argued that the richness and complexity of expertise can never be fully understood by focusing on “nature” or “nurture.”
For us, the days of the “experts are born versus made” debate are over. The task before us is to understand the myriad ways that experts are born and made by developing and testing models of expertise that take into account all relevant factors, including not only training but also genetic influences.
From a practical perspective, we believe that this research will provide a scientific foundation for developing sound principles and procedures for helping people develop skills. As sports science research is already starting to demonstrate, it may one day be possible to give people accurate information about the activities in which they are likely to excel, and develop highly individualized training regimens to maximize people’s potential.
Far from discouraging people from following their dreams, this research promises to bring expert performance within the reach of a greater number of people than is currently the case.
Being a kindergartner today is very different from being a kindergartner 20 years ago. In fact it is more like first grade.
Researchers have demonstrated that five-year-olds are spending more time engaged in teacher-led academic learning activities than play-based learning opportunities that facilitate child-initiated investigations and foster social development among peers.
As a former kindergarten teacher, a father of three girls who’ve recently gone through kindergarten, and as researcher and teacher-educator in early childhood education, I have had kindergarten as a part of my adult life for almost 20 years.
As a parent, I have seen how student-led projects, sensory tables (that include sand or water) and dramatic play areas have been replaced with teacher-led instructional time, writing centers and sight words lists that children need to memorize. And as a researcher, I found, along with my colleague Yi Chin Lan, that early childhood teachers expect children to have academic knowledge, social skills and the ability to control themselves when they enter kindergarten.
So, why does this matter?
All work, and almost no play
First, let’s look at what kindergarten looks like today.
As part of my ongoing research, I have been conducting interviews with a range of kindergarten stakeholders – children, teachers, parents – about what they think kindergarten is and what it should be. During the interviews, I share a 23-minute film that I made last spring about a typical day in a public school kindergarten classroom.
The classroom I filmed had 22 kindergartners and one teacher. They were together for almost the entire school day. During that time, they engaged in about 15 different academic activities, which included decoding word drills, practicing sight words, reading to themselves and then to a buddy, counting up to 100 by 1’s, 5’s and 10’s, practicing simple addition, counting money, completing science activities about living things and writing in journals on multiple occasions. Recess did not occur until last hour of the day, and that too for about 15 minutes.
For children between the ages of five and six, this is tremendous amount of work. Teachers too are under pressure to cover the material.
When I asked the teacher, who I interviewed for the short film, why she covered so much material in a few hours, she stated,
There’s pressure on me and the kids to perform at a higher level academically.
So even though the teacher admitted that the workload on kindergartners was an awful lot, she also said she was unable to do anything about changing it.
She was required to assess her students continuously, not only for her own instruction, but also for multiple assessments such as quarterly report cards, school-based reading assessments, district-based literacy and math assessments, as well as state-mandated literacy assessments.
In turn, when I asked the kindergartners what they were learning, their replies reflected two things: one, they were learning to follow rules; two, learning was for the sake of getting to the next grade and eventually to find a job. Almost all of them said to me that they wanted more time to play. One boy said:
Research has consistently shown classrooms that offer children the opportunities to engage in play-based and child-centered learning activities help childrengrow academically, sociallyandemotionally. Furthermore, recess in particular helps children restore their attention for learning in the classroom.
Giving children a chance to play and engage in hands-on learning activities helps them internalize new information as well as compare and contrast what they’re learning with what they already know. It also provides them with the chance to interact with their peers in a more natural setting and to solve problems on their own. Lastly, it allows kindergartners to make sense of their emotional experiences in and out of school.
So children asking for more time to play are not trying to get out of work. They know they have to work in school. Rather, they’re asking for a chance to recharge as well as be themselves.
As another kindergarten boy in my study told me,
We learn about stuff we need to learn, because if we don’t learn stuff, then we don’t know anything.
Learning by exploring
So what can we do to help kindergartners?
I am not advocating for the elimination of academics in kindergarten. All of the stakeholders I’ve talked with up to this point, even the children, know and recognize that kindergartners need to learn academic skills so that they can succeed in school.
However, it is the free exploration that is missing. As a kindergarten teacher I filmed noted,
Free and exploratory learning has been replaced with sit, focus, learn, get it done and maybe you can have time to play later.
Policymakers, schools systems and schools need to recognize that the standards and tests they mandate have altered the kindergarten classroom in significant ways. Families need to be more proactive as well. They can help their children’s teachers by being their advocates for a more balanced approach to instruction.
Kindergartners deserve learning experiences in school that nurtures their development as well as their desire to learn and interact with others. Doing so will assist them in seeing school as a place that will help them and their friends be better people.
In this series, appropriately titled “Black Boys in Crisis,” I highlight the problems facing black boys in education today, as well as provide clear steps that will lead us out of the crisis.
The statistics on high numbers of black and Latino boys in special education programs is more than an interesting tidbit – it’s a call to action. What can we do to identify true learning delays and isolated behavior problems and disseminate them from disabilities?
Early intervention.
Here we are again, using the word intervention to identify an actionable step to improve academic success for black boys. There’s a reason intervention is more than just a buzz word; catching developmental delays early on shows the greatest promise for improvement. This starts before Kindergarten in the Head Start programs across the country and state-run intervention initiatives, like Florida’s Early Step program. Investments in early education have shown to return as much as $17.07 to society on every dollar spent.
Doctors are at the frontlines of the early intervention referral program and know what warning signs to heed, even when parents may not. The time between a doctor’s referral and the start of services can take several months, depending on the state and resources available, and that is precious time in the development of the child. For early intervention to have its biggest impact, the time between suspicion of delays and start of services must be accelerated. Children who are diagnosed with developmental delays by the age of 3 have the best shot at catching up to their peers by the time they reach Kindergarten. After that age cutoff, the likelihood of children keeping with their classmates fades.
When black boys with obvious developmental delays do wind up in Kindergarten classes, however, it’s vital that teachers spot it. This takes specialized training that is updated and repeated throughout a teacher’s career to address the ever shifting issues facing our youngest students. Change also calls on teachers to look beyond their preconceived notions of learning disabilities to determine which students may have a shot at overcoming the hurdles and avoiding the special education label. Rather than grouping students for life, we need to start looking at some academic and behavioral issues as temporary and applying the resources we can to guide students over the hurdles.
Mainstreaming
The idea that special education students should be removed in order to learn best is actually being flipped on its head due to recent research. A study done at The Ohio State University found that special-needs preschoolers who spent at least some time in classrooms with typical students had language scores 40 percent higher than peers who remained in special-needs only settings. The improvements extended beyond the special-needs kids, as well. The highly-skilled peers also improved their reading skills over rates from when no special-needs students were in the classroom. In short, the “weakest link” mentality did not apply.
It’s true that true special needs students need a different educational plan than their mainstream peers and that ultimately means some time outside the typical classroom. Special needs students should never be completely isolated from their peers though, and in cases where the classification is not accurate, that will become apparent as children overcome the developmental hurdles they face.
Cultural awareness
It’s extremely vital that teachers have a knowledge set of students outside of their own life experiences and an understanding of how the way those children behave is impacted by it. Students without the benefit of preschool or parents who had the time and availability to teach them literacy basics will not perform as well when they arrive in classrooms. Next to their peers who have had such advantages, they may even seem delayed. It’s important to note, however, that the first required schooling for American children is Kindergarten. There is a push for a lot more learning a lot earlier, but from a purely legal standpoint, kids are not required to show up to learn until they are Kindergarten age (which is defined as late as 7 years old in some states). The cultural expectation is that these children should already know a lot when they arrive, both academically and socially, but for children from families who waited for that Kindergarten age, it truly is the first time they’ve seen a classroom.
Universal preschool in states like Florida, Illinois and Oklahoma can help bridge that learning and socialization gap for low-income families but once again, these programs are voluntary. It’s not fair or accurate for educators to assume that even in states when preschool education is affordable or free, parents are taking advantage of it. There are many factors that go into the level of education families pursue for their children before the school years officially start. Compared to peers, this puts children with no prior classroom experience at a disadvantage. But compared to what is actually required of the students when they show up on that first day of Kindergarten, these blank slate students are exactly where they need to be from a learning perspective.
With that in mind, early grade educators must know the difference between true special education warning signals and a kid who just needs to catch up. There are evaluation processes in place beyond the teacher but it starts in a classroom. This isn’t to say that teachers should try to champion behavior or learning issues they cannot change but merely for them to be aware that not all children have the advantages of an early learning foundation. That doesn’t mean necessarily that all of those children have special education needs.
What do you think? How should schools address this issue?
**The Edvocate is pleased to publish guest posts as way to fuel important conversations surrounding P-20 education in America. The opinions contained within guest posts are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the official opinion of The Edvocate or Dr. Matthew Lynch.**
A guest post by Beth Ellor
“I believe the purpose of public schools is to educate not exclude children and to help identify and meet child needs, not make children serve adult convenience, self interest, and systems.” So begins the article published in the 9/26/14 Newsletter of the Children’s Defense Fund, written by Marian Wright Edelman. Please read the entire article, here:
How often do you come upon an article that precisely aligns with your values and beliefs, as well as targeting a topic that has been resonating constantly in recent weeks? As a subscriber to the Children’s Defense Fund Newsletter, this will happen more frequently – talk about children, schools, poverty, injustice and discrimination is bound to resonate with a teacher these days!
This most recent article, however, is vital to the future of our schools and of a just society. It also bears hopeful news of documented efforts being made in Los Angeles, and in other parts of the country.
‘The School Climate Bill of Rights is a project of the Brothers, Sons, Selves Coalition, of which the Community Rights Campaign is a founding member,’ under the auspices of Liberty Hill, an L.A. organization which ‘advances social change through a strategic combination of grants, leadership training and campaigns.’ See their website here.
What is at issue here? First off, dismiss all the rhetoric about the past, and ‘the effectiveness of classes of 50 which nevertheless succeeded in graduating whole swaths of the population.’ Whatever it was like then, whatever was true or manageable then is irrelevant, because guess what, the whole social landscape has changed, and it’s not working now! Again, the seemingly condoned and unchecked tendency of schools to over-value compliance and obedience at the expense of nurturing the variety and complexity of every person who enters their doors. This doesn’t mean anarchy or the ascendance of the ‘me’ generation, but compare self-regulation to the “Whole Brain” discipline approach favored by many reform/charter schools! See a nice glitzy presentation here,
Discipline becomes the canary in the mine when you ask yourself: “What’s not working?” If so many of our students are having such a hard time participating fully in their educational experience, it’s time to stop blaming the students, their families, and/or their ethnicities and start asking why learning has become so toxic to so many of them? Ask yourself – if the Kindergarten program you are using (Core Knowledge in this case) causes some previously mellow children to hide under tables and pitch chairs and books, while alternately screaming and mumbling unintelligibly; “Uh oh, a disruption – we’ll never get done with the 25 minute direct instruction piece!” – or to cry inconsolably when they are asked to complete a page in their workbook, or scramble onto the lap of a visitor (me) and snuggle into her shoulder, trembling, is it the children we should punish (with 3-day out of school suspensions – no point in taking away recess, that was gone long ago)?
Is our only option to call the Security Guard to manhandle the 4 year old out of the room with a combination of motherly bribes and fierce threats? In upper grades, we have to find out why the required subjects are so hard/uninteresting – apart from the lack of text books and materials, the social pressures of real life, and the cumulative deficits of poor learning conditions of whatever kind. Of course it is frustrating to confront classes day after day which seem to have no interest in learning, and are routinely rude, dismissive and disruptive. Remember too that being oppositional isn’t the only way we lose kids – there’s a great deal of well-behaved boredom, obedience and lack of stimulus in classrooms across the country that manages to fly under the radar but are equally significant losses.
Hearing the descriptions of the routine ticketing of low-income minorities in Ferguson, Missouri, which lead to the issuing of bench warrants, fines, and imprisonment for non-payment of minor local ordinances created for this very purpose leads me back around to the exact same practices in schools. Once you’re singled out for any infraction, the noose simply tightens around your neck continuously. Even in elementary schools, children will tell you – “Oh, he’s bad, he don’t listen to no-one.”
The efforts described in this CDF newsletter must become the new rallying cry for our schools. These are all our children, and acting compassionately towards them must not be confused with weakness. Having high academic expectations must not be confused with expecting the impossible when content has never been taught. The social cost is unacceptable, as are the economic costs. We’ve gone a long way down the path of this new normal, where families and whole communities are destroyed by criminalization and incarceration. What does it look like to turn this around? This is the generation where the tide must turn, and the power be given back into the hands of communities and individuals. A great many people and organizations are focused on this transformation and facilitation must be made to make this happen, from the creation of dedicated Professional Learning Communities for support within schools, to the structural changes needed to enforce the protections passed in the L.A. School Climate Bill of Rights. Let it be so!
Beth Ellor has explored the New York City schools as a parent, as an early childhood teacher, and as a retiree currently providing professional development to inner city schools (as an independent contractor for a celebrated i3 provider). Also a substitute teacher in a wide range of schools, she is a close observer of the reality behind the rhetoric of school success, struggle and reform.
Most people like to think that American K-12 schools, workplaces and courthouses are pillars of fairness, but statistic after statistic all point to a crisis among the young, Black men of the nation. This crisis begins in homes, stretches to K-12 educational experiences, and leads straight to the cycle of incarceration in increasingly high numbers. In America’s prison systems, black citizens are incarcerated at six times the rates of white ones – and the NAACP predicts that one in three of this generation of Black men will spend some time locked up.
Decreasing the rates of incarceration for black men may actually be a matter of improving educational outcomes for black boys in America. In his piece “A Broken Windows Approach to Education Reform,” Forbes writer James Marshall Crotty makes a direct connection between drop-out and crime rates. He argues that if educators will simply take a highly organized approach to keeping kids in school, it will make a difference in the crime statistics of the future.
While there are many areas of improvement that we could look at changing for more successful outcomes for black men, I will discuss just four indicators that illustrate the current situation for black boys in the U.S., with the hope of starting a conversation about what we can do to produce a stronger generation of Black young men in our society.
Black boys are more likely to be placed in special education.
While it is true that Black boys often arrive in Kindergarten classrooms with inherent disadvantages, they continue to experience a “behind the 8-ball” mentality as their school careers progress. Black boys are more likely than any other group to be placed in special education classes, with 80 percent of all special education students being Black or Hispanic males.
Learning disabilities are just a part of the whole picture. Black students (and particularly boys) experience disconnection when it comes to the authority figures in their classrooms. The K-12 teaching profession is dominated by white women, many of whom are very qualified and very interested in helping all their students succeed but lack the first-hand experience needed to connect with their Black male students.
Black boys are more likely to attend schools without the adequate resources to educate them.
Schools with majority Black students tend to have lower amounts of teachers who are certified in their degree areas. A U.S. Department of Education report found that in schools with at least 50 percent Black students, only 48 percent were certified in the subject, compared with 65 percent in majority white schools. In English, the numbers were 59 and 68 percent, respectively and in science, they were 57 percent and 73 percent.
Black boys are not reading at an adequate level.
In 2014, the Black Star Project published findings that just 10 percent of eighth-grade Black boys in the U.S. are considered “proficient” in reading. In urban areas like Chicago and Detroit, that number was even lower. By contrast, the 2013 National Assessment of Education Progress found that 46 percent of white students are adequate readers by eighth grade, and 17 percent of Black students as a whole are too. The achievement gap between the two races is startling, but the difference between the NAEP report on Black students as a whole and the Black Star findings of just Black boys is troubling too. It is not simply Black children in general who appear to be failing in the basics – like literacy; it is the boys.
Reading is only one piece of the school puzzle, of course, but it is a foundational one. If the eighth graders in our schools cannot read, how will they ever learn other subjects and make it to a college education (or, in reality, to a high school diploma)? Reading scores tell us so much more than the confines of their statistics. I believe these numbers are key to understanding the plight of young Black men in our society as a whole.
Punishment for black boys is harsher than for any other demographic.
Punishment for Black boys – even first-time offenders – in schools is harsher than any other demographic. Consider these facts:
What’s most troubling is that not all of the Black boys taken from their schools in handcuffs are violent, or even criminals. Increasingly, school-assigned law enforcement officers are leading these students from their schools hallways for minor offenses, including class disruption, tardiness and even non-violent arguments with other students. It seems that it is easier to remove these students from class through the stigma of suspension or arrest than to look for in-school solutions.
School suspension, and certainly arrest, is just the beginning of a life considered on the wrong side of the law for many Black boys. By 18 years of age, 30 percent of Black males have been arrested at least once, compared to just 22 percent of white males. Those numbers rise to 49 percent for Black men by the age of 23, and 38 percent of white males. Researchers from several universities concluded earlier this year that arrests early in life often set the course for more crimes and incarceration throughout the rest of the offender’s lifetime.
No wonder they aren’t in college…
These trends are not conducive to improving the numbers of young black men who are able to attend college. In fact, the numbers are dismal when it comes to black young men who attend and graduate from colleges in the U.S. Statistically speaking, black men have the lowest test scores, the worst grades and the highest dropout rates – in K-12 education, and in college too. The recognition of this educational crisis has led to some strong initiatives targeted at young black men with the intention of guiding them through the college years and to successful, productive lives that follow.
This is why college motivation within and outside the black community is so vital for these young men. At this point in the nation’s history, they are in the greatest need for the lifestyle change that higher education can provide, and not just for individual growth, but also for the benefit of the entire nation. But in order to get there, black boys must experience the motivation to succeed well before college.
Question: Dr. Lynch, I am a youth counselor in Philadelphia, PA. Everyday I witness the public school system fail our children. The end result is that many of them drop out and end up in prison. What can activists like myself do to end the school to prison pipeline? Nate T.
Answer: Nate, thank you for sending this question my way. Though all people are genetically predisposed, it is ultimately the environment that encompasses the formative years that shapes lives. Some of that comes from home environments, and the rest from society. Our nation’s public schools play an integral role in fostering talents, but also in building our children’s internal worth.
When one student is causing a classroom disruption, the traditional way to address the issue has been removal – whether the removal is for five minutes, five days or permanently. Separating the “good” students and the “bad” ones has always seemed the fair, judicious approach. On an individual level this form of discipline may seem necessary to preserve the educational experience for others. If all children came from homes that implemented a cause-and-effect approach to discipline, this might be the right answer. Unfortunately, an increasing number of students come from broken homes, or ones where parents have not the desire or time to discipline. For these students, removal from education is simply another form of abandonment and leads to the phenomenon called the “school-to-prison pipeline.”
Children are just as much a product of their environments as the expectations placed on them. Parents on a first-name basis with law enforcement officials certainly influence the behavior of their children, but school authorities with preconceived negative associations create an expectation of failure too. Increasingly, educators are learning how to recognize the signs of textbook learning disabilities like ADHD or dyslexia. But what about the indirect impact that factors like poverty, abuse, neglect or simply living in the wrong neighborhood have on a student’s ability to learn? Where are the intervention programs that keep these students on academic track without removing them from the school setting?
The term “zero tolerance” may sound like the best way to handle all offenses in public schools, but it really does a disservice to students. Not every infraction is a black and white issue and not every misstep by a student is a result of direct defiance. Often students with legitimate learning disabilities or social impairment are labeled as “disruptions” and removed from classroom settings under the guise of preserving the learning experience for other, “better” students. I suppose there is an argument to be made for protecting straight-and-narrow students from the sins of others, but at what cost? Schools are the first line of defense against this early form of pigeonholing, but the community needs to embrace the concept. Students with discipline problems are individuals that need customized learning experiences to succeed academically, in the years ahead.
Note: Today’s op ed comes to you courtesy of George M. Johnson, an advocate for change in Higher Education. He is the Former Director of Student Accounts at Virginia Union University and counsels students properly preparing for college. He has been published in HBCUDigest.com and blogs at iamgmjohnson.com. Follow him on twitter @iamgmjohnson
Yesterday, a tweet from @Med_School12 took Social Media by storm that stated “A 4.0 at a HBCU is not equivalent to a 4.0 at a rigorous PWI. Sorry, but it’s the truth”. Immediately twitter swarmed this tweet as the thousands of retweets with comments ranged from a question mark to all out fury. I too, took my frustrations out tweeting how my multiple degrees from HBCU’s have in no way made me less that of a person who received their degrees from a PWI. After the initial shock and awe of the situation, I decided to sit down, gather my thoughts, and really think about what she actually wrote.
The tweet, although less than 140 characters is much layered in contradiction and furthermore should have been sold as her opinion not truth.
Issue 1: What differs a PWI from a Rigorous PWI
At first read, the tweet all but diminishes the worth of attending an HBCU in comparison to going to a PWI. But upon further analysis, she actually does compliment and offend all in the same sentence. Based on her teeth, she agrees that a 4.0 at an HBCU is equivalent or better than that of one from a normal PWI, just not a rigorous PWI. So the true question that needs to be answered is “what is a rigorous PWI”. Is it a top 20 ranked college? Is it a private school as opposed to a public school? Is it based on the college’s endowment? Either way, the determination of what makes one college rigorous compared to another is purely subjective to the student that attends. Some students probably thought Harvard was easy as compared to those who may have struggled at Rutger’s. There is no true way of determining the “rigors” of one college over another.
Issue 2: Is the statement based on where you were educated or where you teach?
This is one I had to think about. Let’s say the PWI is made up of 5 professors that all were educated at HBCU’s. The school they are being compared to is an HBCU that is made up of 5 professors that were all taught at PWI’s. There is probably no need to go any further as you can probably see where I am going with this. The statement does not take into account the people that are actually doing the instruction. Based on the statement, your professors could have come from community college and HBCU’s, but as long as they are “worthy” enough to teach at a “rigorous” PWI, the learning will be greater. But if you attend an HBCU with all professors with Harvard Education, your learning will not be equivalent because the perception of the HBCU as a whole is less than the standard. The patriarchy and privilege in that statement alone is disappointing.
Issue 3: The final issue, which was also my initial reply, “whose truth”?
In this age of social media, people are very quick to make accusations, assumptions, opinions, and poorly executed statements and claim that they are truth as if some actual research had been done. Her claiming that the PWI she is attending is rigorous for her is “her truth”. This should not be generalized and projected on others as a factual statement about the university that she attends. My truth is that I have never attended a PWI, and any statement made about the rigors of one would solely be my opinion. And to play devil’s advocate, there are many people whose truth is that they attended a PWI and an HBCU and found the HBCU to be more rigorous than the PWI. That statement vice versa is someone else’s truth.
Living in the age of social media can be quite fun and intriguing, but it can also be dangerous when we begin spreading our truth’s as facts and making them the beliefs of others. Rather than arguing if a 4.0 at an HBCU is equivalent to that of a 4.0 at a PWI, we should be praising and commending anyone that receives a 4.0 at any institution of Higher Education. For that takes “rigorous” work.
In this series, appropriately titled “Black Boys in Crisis,” I highlight the problems facing black boys in education today, as well as provide clear steps that will lead us out of the crisis.
Special education classes have changed drastically in the past 20 years. Namely, the students who take advantage of these adapted learning classrooms have changed. Contemporary public school education recognizes that there are degrees of disabilities that may impact student learning and the rise of conditions like autism has fueled the need for more special education intervention.
As a result, the mental image that even today’s youngest educators have of special education students is probably not accurate. For example, did you know that black boys are more likely than any other group to be placed in special education classes, with 80 percent of all special education students being Black or Hispanic males? Black boys account for 20 percent of U.S. students labeled as mentally retarded, even though they represent just 9 percent of the population. On the other end of the extreme, black boys are 2.5 times less likely to be classified as “gifted and talented” even if their academic record shows that potential.
If all things were weighed equally, these statistics would indicate that there is something genetically wrong with these young men that is causing a higher incidence of disabilities and smaller percentage of gifted individuals. Educators know better. While some, perhaps even a majority, of the black boys categorized as special education students belong in that grouping, some are simply misunderstood.
While unpleasant behavior is certainly a symptom of learning disabilities – like ADHD and some degrees of autism – it isn’t in and of itself a disability. A lack of understanding surrounding how black boys interact with the world, and a quick trigger when it comes to disciplinary and removal practices, is contributing to higher-than-average numbers of black boys in special education classrooms. This is not something that any educator can sit by and let continue, for it impacts the way all students are treated in the public school landscape.
Once an educator has thoroughly examined their own cultural beliefs, values, and biases, she is ready to begin learning about other cultures. Researchers have theorized that diverse cultures demonstrate common patterns of thought and community behavior. In order to explore these cognitive and behavioral patterns, an educator must be willing to spend a great deal of time reading about and observing the standards and practices of various cultural groups that they will be dealing with in the classroom.
Attaining a thorough base of knowledge is among the most critical steps that a teacher must take in order to educate students in a culturally responsive fashion. Prospective educators should become familiar with the cultural values, traditions, communication styles, learning preferences, contributions to society, and relationship patterns of their future students. While some of this education can be achieved by simply reading about cultural diversity, it is difficult to truly substitute for genuine interaction and discourse with members of students’ cultures.
While book knowledge about diverse cultural groups can come in handy to a certain extent when designing lesson plans and educational materials, one of the most important reasons for truly learning about the cognitive patterns of cultural groups is so that the interpersonal attitudes and behaviors of diverse students can be effectively interpreted in terms of the culture that they’re entrenched in. Traditional teaching environments force students from those and other groups to modify their thought and behavior patterns to fit standard European-American norms or else face academic and behavioral consequences. In a culturally responsive classroom, the onus is instead placed on the instructor to learn about and adapt to the cultural intricacies of the students that they teach.
At first blush it appears difficult to apply knowledge about cultural patterns of thought and behavior to the classroom without falling into the twin traps of over generalization and stereotyping. In order to avoid these problems, the educator’s next task is to engage in a rigorous examination of the general cultural practices of their students. This is the beginning of the personal dimension of culturally responsive pedagogy: learning about the specifics of students’ cultural backgrounds and how those cultural patterns and beliefs can be most positively expressed in a real classroom setting.
This can only be accomplished by viewing each student’s culture as a dynamic and individualized concept. A person’s culture represents the sum of many spheres of influence, including context within history, gender, age, religion, family relationships, group memberships, cultural beliefs and practices, historical context, and level of education; to avoid stereotyping, the educator must view each student as possessing a personalized culture instead of as a member of a homogenous group. At first blush this may appear to be a daunting task, but in practice there are a variety of methods that can be employed to learn more about a student’s cultural heritage and identity.
If used cleverly, classroom assignments can provide a primary window into a student’s cultural beliefs. Writing assignments can play a significant role in gathering information about student thought patterns and tendencies. Interviews with family members, assignments asking students to write about learning experiences that occur outside of school, and assignments involving family stories and traditions all can play a significant role in unearthing information about a students’ cultural heritage. Students’ parents can often be solicited as sources of useful personal information and visiting the neighborhoods where diverse students live can help give educators an idea about the level of social support present and the types of challenges that the student might face outside of the classroom.
References
Culturally responsive teaching is a theory of instruction that was developed by Dr. Gloria Ladson-Billings and has been written about by many other scholars since then. To read more of her work on culturally responsive teaching and other topics, click here to visit her Amazon.com page.
