Should Bi-Lingual Learning be Required?

This generation of K-12 students is growing up in a society that is increasingly bi-lingual. Foreign language requirements have long been a core requirement for high school graduation and are also part of most arts-based college degree programs. Along with Spanish, languages like French and German are common options for students.

But just how “foreign” is Spanish in today’s society? The U.S. Census estimates that there are 50.5 million Hispanic people living in America, and another 3.7 who are residents of Puerto Rico. This number represents a 43 percent increase in the recorded Hispanic population from 2000 to 2010 at a rate four times faster than the rest of the U.S. population. Further, 35 million children 5 and over spoke Spanish at home in 2010. English as a second language K-12 programs have existed for decades, but maybe that program should be expanded.

Should English-speaking K-12 students be required to learn Spanish? Let’s take that question one step further: should bilingual learning be part of every U.S. classroom, no matter what the subject?

Some individual school districts have already taken the initiative to make dual-language programs a reality. The Irving Independent School District in Texas started a bilingual elementary program 10 years ago. Students can opt to learn in an environment that is taught 50 percent in English and 50 percent in Spanish. In Irving, 70 percent of the student population is Hispanic. Critics of the program cite the usual reason that my grandmother may have listed against American students learning a foreign language in school classrooms: Americans should speak ENGLISH. There is also some concern about whether each language can truly be mastered if it is sharing classroom time with the other.

Studies in language development, however, show that the more exposure young children have to all languages actually gives them a distinct academic advantage throughout life. Bilingual children are able to focus more intently on the topics at hand and avoid distractions from academic pursuits. They are also able to demonstrate higher levels of cognitive flexibility, or the ability to change responses based on environment and circumstances.

For children to truly see the full potential multi-lingualism has on learning, exposure to non-native languages should actually begin long before Kindergarten. Even children who learn their first Spanish words at the age of 5 can benefit from dual language curriculum though. Learning is learning. The more that children can take advantage of new concepts, the more in tune their brains will be to all learning throughout life. Some studies have also found that the aging of the brain is slower and the employment rate is higher in adults with bilingual capabilities. Why not set kids up for success and strengthen long-term brain health while we are at it?

The benefits to having a bilingual brain

There are also the cultural benefits to children learning two languages together. The children who come from English-speaking homes can lend their language expertise to friends from Spanish-speaking homes, and vice versa. Contemporary communication technology has eliminated many global barriers when it comes to socialization and even doing business. It makes sense that language boundaries should also come down and with help from our K-12 education system.

Dual language programs show students a broader world view, whatever the native language of the student, and lead to greater opportunities for collaborative learning. We should not limit what children learn based on outdated principles masked in patriotism. All K-12 students should have Spanish and English fluency by graduation.

What is your opinion on mandating bi-lingual education programs in the future?

A Guide to Ending the Crisis Among Young Black Males

When we talk about reaching students in our classrooms that come from disadvantaged backgrounds, we tend to put several groups under one umbrella. Minority students. Immigrant students. Kids from low socioeconomic households. While it’s true that all of these groups of students need a different approach than their white, English-speaking, middle-class peers, our education system is not yet doing enough to address specific needs within these at-risk groups. The initiatives that help one group tremendously may not have as large a positive impact on another, and vice versa.

Black boys are a student demographic that has been, and continues to be, misunderstood in P-20 classrooms. Misbehavior, learning styles, and social skills are often misconstrued as problems by educators when in fact, black boys are simply not receiving the most effective forms of discipline, lessons, and peer-interaction opportunities. As a result, many are slipping through the proverbial cracks and not learning at their potential levels. That lack of learning leads to higher school dropout levels, higher rates of poverty, and higher incarceration rates, too.

Perhaps there is no real connection between the academic failures of black boys and incarceration/poverty, or the eerily similar statistics associated with young Latino men. Are these young people simply bad apples, destined to fail academically and then live a life of crime? Proponents of genetic predisposition would argue that these young men never stood a chance at success and have simply accepted their lots in life. When I hear these sorts of excuses for why we aren’t best serving the black boys in our classrooms, I often think they are just too easy to be the right answers. They are all just too convenient, particularly if the people speaking them into existence come from backgrounds and experiences that are not indicative of black young men.

What if all of these theories, these so-called truths about these often-vilified children learning in our schools, are just the lazy way out? What if scoffing at a connection between a strong education and a life lived on the straight and narrow is an easy way to bypass the real issues in K-12 learning that actually put real barriers in place for black boys? What if the failures of black boys are really our faults, not theirs?

While there is always a level of personal responsibility on the part of the student to weigh in, I believe all of society’s failures when it comes to black boys are traceable back to education. While it is certainly not the fault of teachers or classroom settings, placing the blame on outside factors, like family setup or poverty, does not actually solve the problem. Schools, particularly public ones, are great equalizers for our children and youth. When we have disadvantaged students in our midst, why aren’t we employing every tactic we’ve got into trying to combat those outside factors that are so detrimental? When we throw up our hands and say that black boys can’t be saved, or that individual students are better off serving suspensions or expulsions than sitting in our classrooms learning, we are really saying that we don’t have any power in the lives of our students. I think most rational educators would argue that is the farthest argument from the truth.

Consider this: 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 public high schools with at least 50 percent Black students, only 75 percent of math teachers were certified, compared to 92 percent in predominantly white schools. In English, the numbers were 59 and 68 percent, respectively and in science, they were 57 percent and 73 percent. (Teacher Qualifications, 2010) Numbers like these are just the tip of the iceberg when it comes to the disadvantages that take place in schools where children of color are the majority. When those children are boys, the outlook is even more dismal. These statistics are just one area of disadvantage that I plan to point out in the chapter. The aim is not to place blame on any one group or entity but rather to lead us away from the excuses that keep us from improving the public school experiences of black boys, and other at-risk groups.

As an educational community, it’s time to stop acting like generational poverty and crime are not related – that harsh discipline in schools is not related to incarceration rates. Low rates of literacy and high rates of special education referrals among black boys aren’t coincidences. There isn’t one reason that black boys are failing on such a large scale; the factors that play into the general underachievement of the black young men in our classrooms are varied, and complicated. Like all of the intricate problems in our school systems, improving the achievement of black young men in our schools won’t happen overnight.

Starting from a place of understanding, grounded in facts, is a good jumping off point. Information has a way of triggering action which is the hope for this chapter. For every obstacle that black boys face, I will discuss practical strategies that educators can use to mitigate them.

The School-to-Prison Pipeline

It’s a statistically sound fact that high school dropouts in all demographics have a higher likelihood of incarceration at some point in their lives. Sadly, over half of black young men who attend urban high schools do not earn a diploma. Of the dropouts, nearly 60 percent will go to prison at some point (Crotty, Four Things I Learned from Coaching ‘Poor Black Kids’, 2011). In fact, The Sentencing Project projects that 1 in 3 black men will likely see the inside of a prison cell at some point in their lives (Racial Disparity, n.d.). The connection here is not just superficial. Yes, it’s fair to say that high school dropouts are more likely to commit crimes because they do not have the means to make an honest living, but I also think this connection centers on a mentality. The same black boys who believe they aren’t good enough to earn the basic American right, a high school diploma, are the ones who feel they cannot make a solid contribution to society at large.

In order to delve more deeply, we need to go even further back. The decision to drop out of high school, after all, isn’t reached overnight. There are many factors that play into any student’s choice to not continue on to earn a high school diploma, some that are completely out of the control of the school and others that are certainly influenced by it.

Look in the face of any Kindergarten student and you’ll find some common themes: innocence, unquenchable curiosity, and potential. More so than the grades that follow, Kindergarten is a mixed bag of developmental, social and academic levels. Some kids arrive with a few years of childcare and preschool under their belts, while others have never even had a book read to them. The students who arrive in these Kindergarten classrooms are already products of their limited life experiences but their public school classrooms are intended to be equalizers. In a perfect world, what has happened outside the classroom should not be a factor in the learning environment and all students should have the same clean slate.

The reality, of course, is that the behavior of children is impacted by their life experiences and that behavior does impact the way a classroom functions. Kindergarten is just the first opportunity in our official public school system for teachers to effect positive change in students who need it from a behavioral standpoint – the real work starts before that though. The U.S. Department of Education Office for Civil Rights reports that black students make up just 18 percent of preschoolers but account for almost half of all school suspensions.  Those statistics don’t improve with age. Around 5 percent of white students are suspended or expelled at some point in a K-12 career, compared with 16 percent of black students (U.S. Department of Education Office for Civil Rights, 2014)

Enter the school-to-prison pipeline, or the correlation between students who are removed (suspended or expelled) from school and those who end up in prison at some point in their lives. Students who are removed from school, either temporarily or forever, also drop out of high school at much higher rates than students who are never removed from a classroom setting.

A study published by the University of Pennsylvania reports that black students make up 39 percent of students suspended in Florida, which doesn’t sound all that terrible until you consider another statistic: black students only account for 23 percent of the public school population in Florida (Harper, n.d.). The study notes that black students are suspended and expelled more due to “unfair discipline practices” and appearing as “disrespectful or threatening.”

While the numbers for the state are bad, it gets worse in Orange County in the central part of the state where Orlando is located. Making up just 27 percent of the county’s public school population, black students represents 51 percent of the students suspended.

This is just a small portion of the country, of course, but consider this: 18 percent of the nation’s public school students are black but an estimated 40 percent of all students that are expelled from U.S. schools are black (Stevenson, 2013). This makes black students over three times more likely to face suspension or expulsion than their white peers. When you add in Latino numbers, 70 percent of all in-school arrests are black or Latino students. If you want to see the correlation between these school-age statistics and lifetime numbers, consider this: 61 percent of the incarcerated population are black or Latino – despite the fact that these groups only represent 30 percent of the U.S. population when combined. Nearly 68 percent of all men in federal prison never earned a high school diploma.

Given this information, the fact that the U.S. has the highest incarceration rate in the world is no surprise. The road to lockup starts in the public school systems — and it starts with unfair punishment.

Sixty-five percent of U.S. public schools reported at least one violent incident in 2013-2014, according to the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) in their schools each year, but that number rises to 82 percent for schools where black students make up a majority (Rates of School Crime, 2015) . Though Hispanic boys are the most likely to be involved with gang activity at school, it is certainly an issue for black boys too – with 31 percent of students nationwide reporting seeing black gang activity in their schools. Violence is just one part of the criminal side of K-12 hallways, though. There are also higher numbers of non-violent crimes, like theft, in schools where more students are black than any other race.

All of that being said, there is still plenty of violence in schools where black students are the minority, and those acts are committed by non-black students. It’s also important to note that reporting standards for school crime may vary from school to school. This isn’t to say that educators and administrators are not telling the truth in predominantly white schools, but rather to say that based on other statistics, students of color tend to face harsher punishment for even the smallest offenses.

Over and over statistics show that punishment for black boys – even first-time offenders – in schools is harsher than any other demographic.

Black boys taken from schools in handcuffs are not always 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.

Minnesota civil rights attorney Nekima Levy-Pounds writes that “it is a continual affront to the human dignity of black boys to be treated as second class citizens within the public school system and made to feel as though they are not welcome in mainstream classroom settings.” (Levy-Pounds, 2015)

Simply put, the currently accepted way of disciplining students—mainly “zero tolerance” policies — is doing more harm than good for young black boys.

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 don’t have the desire or time to discipline. Even the parents with the skillset to discipline in this fashion may not have the time or energy, especially in a home where finances are tight. For these students, removal from education is simply another form of abandonment and only furthers the lesson that they are not good enough to learn alongside their peers.

High profile instances of school violence in recent years have led to a higher presence of law enforcement officers in public schools, often politely labeled as resource officers or a similarly vague term. Of course the presence of guns and other immediate danger items in schools are cause for arrest, or at least temporary removal of the student, but the American Civil Liberties Union reports that children as young as 5 throwing tantrums have been removed in handcuffs by these officers (School-to-Prison Pipeline, n.d.). Rather than addressing the heart of the individual problems, it is easier for public schools to weed out troublesome students under the umbrella of protecting the greater good. Convenience triumphs over finding actual solutions.

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-behaved 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?

We tell students that gaining an education is an unalienable right in America but then we withhold it from their peers in the name of discipline and order. Would we withhold food from students who interrupted our math lesson? Of course we wouldn’t because nutrition is something that isn’t earned – it is a necessity for growing children. The same is true of education. Our knee-jerk reaction of removal, particularly of children of color, is not one that has the best interest of any children in mind.

Though ideology on problem students is slowly evolving, at least at present the removal process is most widely accepted. So let’s look at what happens when these individuals, these students who are suspended or expelled, do eventually slip through the accepted cracks and wind up dropping out of high school or landing in prison.

In a blog post by Sally Powalski, a 10-year employee of a juvenile long-term facility in the State of Indiana, she addresses what she sees every day: young men with no expectations of improvement and therefore no motivation.

Sally says this of the young men who come through her counselor’s office:

“They have been given the message for several years that they are not allowed in regular school programs, are not considered appropriate for sports teams, and have had their backs turned on them because everyone is just tired of their behavior… Why should they strive for more than a life of crime?” (Powalski, 2013)

Sally hits the nail on the head with her observations. 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? Why aren’t we finding ways to identify the known risk factors for academic impairment and intervening earlier?

Educators should approach students from disadvantaged backgrounds with more understanding, and less preconceived notions. Behavior is a choice but students who have never seen the right way to act modeled for them, or who are looking for that extra bit of attention in classrooms, bad behavior is an academic disadvantage. Instead of less time in classrooms, black boys and especially those with very minor behavior issues should participate more in the learning experience.

Why care about the school-to-prison pipeline at all?

People who fall outside this fringe group of perceived misfits may wonder why the school-to-prison pipeline should matter to them. Outside of caring about the quality of life for other individuals, which is really something that is not teachable, the school-to-prison pipeline matters in more tangible ways. Each federal prisoner costs taxpayers $28,948 per year based on 2012 statistics, which is about $79 per day (Supervision Costs Significantly Less than Incarceration in Federal System, 2013). That’s a measurable cost. What isn’t measurable is the indirect impact those incarcerations have on the economy in terms of those prisoners not contributing to the work force. Sure, we may pay the salary of prison employees or the CEOs of large prison privatization corporations but we are missing out on the positive impact these prisoners could have on our economy.

This is an American problem.  It hurts everyone. If we want more high school graduates, less crime, and a more robust economy, we have to stop punishing black boys with school removals or discipline effects that don’t match the offense.

How to break the school-to-prison pipeline

If removal and zero tolerance policies don’t help black boy students long term, what is the best way to discipline students when they do misbehave?

The best answer is found long before the moment when discipline is necessary. Prevention and intervention tactics need a place in all teaching pedagogy and those tactics must adjust for demographics – and individual students. Schools need to offer robust programs for at-risk students that include mentoring from older students, after-school tutoring, and customized learning. If all of this sounds like a lot of work, that’s because it is. Technology is making the customized learning portion much easier though and also allowing teachers to analyze student performance in a streamlined way long before problems arise. And as simple as it sounds, teachers must approach behavior problems with students in the same way they approach academic problems – with an analytical eye that looks for the best solution that will benefit everyone. Notice that I didn’t say the easiest or best for all the other students in class. I said the best solution for everyone – teacher, peers, and individual student. The benefits to keeping a child in class, or at least in school, far outweigh emotionally kicking a child out of class or recommending suspension.

Educators can certainly strive to reduce suspension and expulsion rates with better intervention and strategy. But what about the students who choose to walk away from their educations when they drop out of high school?

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. He says:

“Most importantly, instead of merely insisting on Common Core Standards of excellence, we must provide serious sticks for non-compliance. And not just docking teacher and administrative pay. The real change needs to happen on the student and parent level.” (Crotty, A Broken Windows Approach to Education Reform, 2013)

He cites the effectiveness of states not extending driving privileges to high school dropouts or not allowing athletic activities for students who fail a class. With higher stakes associated with academic success, students will have more to lose if they walk away from their education. And the higher the education level of a student, the lower the risk of criminal activity, statistically speaking.

Students who are at risk of dropping out of high school or turning to crime need more than a good report card.  They need alternative suggestions on living a life that rises above their current circumstances. For a young person to truly have a shot at an honest life, he or she has to believe in the value of an education and its impact on good citizenship. That belief system has to come from direct conversations about making smart choices with trusted adults and peers. If we know how much less a high school dropout makes than peers with a diploma, and peers with a college education, then we should tell all high school students that number. It’s not enough to imply that dropping out of high school is a bad idea; students should have all the facts.

For students who struggle socially or behaviorally in high school, schools should intervene with non-traditional options like online courses. This is also true for students who feel the pressure to start earning a living early. The technology is already in place for all students, regardless of discipline issues or life circumstances, to earn a high school diploma. A college degree is nice too, of course, but the true key to ending the school-to-prison pipeline for black boys is keeping them in classrooms instead of removing them, and getting them across the stage to receive their high school diplomas. It will take an organized ideology shift but it’s possible, even in the next generation of black boy students.

Black Boys Aren’t Reading

Literacy is the basic building block for the rest of an academic career and the lifetime that follows it. Research shows that kids who come from homes where reading was a priority, and they were read to by their parents, perform better academically throughout their lives. The National Center for Education Statistics reports that Kindergarten students who are read frequently to at home are more likely to count to 20, write their own names, and read (or pretend to read). Only 53 percent of children ages 3 to 5 are read to every day by a family member, though, and that number drops for families with incomes below the poverty line (National Center for Education Statistics, 2000). The importance of parental influence in reading extends beyond the youngest grades. The U.S. Department of Education reports that fourth-grade classrooms with low parental involvement have students with average reading scores that are 46 points below the national average.

Reading isn’t important just for its own sake, however. Literacy is the foundation for all other learning endeavors. The Educational Testing Services reports that students who read more in their homes perform better on math assessments (Educational Testing Service, 1999). The connection between reading in early childhood and its impact on future years is clear. Since parents, grandparents, and siblings are the default role models most of the time during that vital 0 to 5 age group, the responsibility to instill early literacy falls on families.

That’s a problem for black boys. Only 10 percent of eighth-grade black boys in the U.S. are proficient in reading. In urban areas like Chicago and Detroit, that number is even lower (Holzman, 2013). 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 Nation’s Report Card: A First Look: 2013 Mathematics and Reading, 2013). The achievement gap between the two races is startling, but the difference between the NAEP report on black students as a whole and the stats on black boys alone is troubling too. This is where that important dissection between at-risk groups needs to take place. It is not simply black children in general who appear to be failing in the basics, like literacy; it is the boys.

Where does that disconnect arise? Hypothesizing from the NAEP data, a brother and sister from the same household could have vastly different literacy levels, even if they come from the same environment and are read to the same amount of time (even if that amount of time is none). That difference – that gap in literacy achievement – shouldn’t fall on parents. That’s the fault of our schools. Literacy learning is tailored to girls. So how do we adapt it to better reach our boys – particularly our young men of color?

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 and I believe these numbers are one of the major keys to understanding the plight of young black men in our society as a whole.

Developing black readers

The statistics point to a startling, yet simple, truth: black boys who cannot read are already in trouble. So if we know that black boys aren’t reading the level they should, what can we do to improve that? It starts with awareness and extends to:

Customized reading plans.

A large part of improving the reading rates of black boys is to provide curriculum plans that are a little less rigid and a little more nuanced. As adults, the reading materials we pick up for the pure joy of reading are as varied as we are and it’s acceptable for individuals to prefer certain genres over others. Kids don’t have the same freedom. In fairness, before kids can determine what reading materials they will love, they must first have exposure to a wide variety. Still. When reading is uninteresting, it’s hard. That’s something that doesn’t change into adulthood. Early learning teachers, from preschool through the rest of elementary school, must have a diverse knowledge of the reading materials available for their age groups and try, try, and try again until a certain subject or genre clicks.

The idea that all Kindergartners, and older grades, should read the exact same things is not only flawed, it’s unnecessary. Today’s technology makes it simple for kids to read a variety of materials that are equal in grade level to each other, even if the topics differ. There is even educational software that creates supplemental and testing materials based on the individual pieces that children read so that teachers are not tasked with writing 20 different lesson plans based on reading preferences.

Young children love fantasy, but they also connect most with what they know. Diversity in reading materials and the ability to choose what to read based on interests will go a long way toward pulling black boys into the literacy realm early on and keeping them there. This is true from preschool through college graduation. This strict adherence to a literary canon filled with mainly white, European, male authors and viewpoints hurts all of our students, but particularly those of color. To instill a love for reading our students have to genuinely love what their eyes see. That view must expand to include much more diversity in options, both electronic and books in hand.

Intervention targeting.

The concept of learning everything first, and testing last, is starting to see its way out of our classrooms – but not fast enough. Feedback throughout the learning process, and taking action immediately when students are falling behind, is a much smarter way to keep students invested in learning. A student who misses out on a learning concept will not learn at the next level and that will continue indefinitely until remediation occurs. Teachers are on the frontlines of intervention, and parents are a close second string. Parents whose own parents were never involved in their learning pursuits may not know how to follow their kids’ progress and some may simply not care. When either scenario takes place, it falls on the teacher to step up and fill in the learning gaps.

When it comes to intervention targeting, Kindergarten teachers should take entry assessments as more than a baseline number; they should see them as a call to action. Very specific actionable steps should be at the disposal of the teacher so when certain weakness are noted, there is a plan in place that addresses them. These plans must be thorough and come with benchmarks that delve deeper than what the average and above-average performing students must achieve. Does this mean more work for teachers? Some extra upfront time and planning time, yes. Which is why entire school systems must recognize the need for better reading intervention that begins on day one of Kindergarten, whether that manifests itself in more teacher aides, better technology for reading customization, or more reading specialists on staff.

I’m not suggesting that teachers label and remediate every student individually, but rather that more concrete policies on how to bring students up to speed are put in place in school districts around the country. In public schools this is especially vital. While it’s true that some parents choose public schools, the majority of children attend out of default. It’s not a bad thing – but parents who take the time to research and send their children to non-public options often have the time and energy to follow the academic journeys of their kids. There’s a stronger chance that a child in a public school needs that extra watchful eye of a teacher in order to reach goals. That eye can’t just observe; it must take what it sees and use it as a tool for strengthen academic weaknesses.

Individual intervention is not the only thing that black boys need to read better and perform at a higher academic level. Blanket programs that research, create, and deliver literacy-driven content to black boys should exist. Public schools are wards of the state but this issue is too big to leave to the whims of partisan-driven agendas. More federal oversight into what black boys, and all at-risk groups, are reading from their earliest days in public school classrooms is needed. These programs need insight from experts in the fields of education, literacy, minority studies, and even civil rights. To really get to the heart of the problem of black boys not reading at an acceptable rate, expertise must combine with first-hand experience. Teachers who work in early education classrooms should certainly sit on the consultation teams in order to develop appropriate standards of intervention based on real-life scenarios that take place. A wider approach to answering the needs of black boys in a reading crisis will go a long way toward raising awareness and actually impacting individual children.

Black Boys and Special Education

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. (National Education Association, 2011)

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. Those behavior issues mentioned earlier in this chapter? You better believe that those play a factor in where these students are placed in school hierarchy. 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.

How to solve the black boy-special education problem

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 (Lynn A. Karoly, 2005).

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. (Grabmeier, 2014)

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.

Black Boys and the Lack of Positive Role Models

There are plenty of black men who positively impact the young men coming up in their communities. Some are high-profile while others are local businessmen, or even teachers. As a general statement, however, black boys have less people to look up to and hold accountable than their white, and even other minority, peers.

Consider these statistics: Less than half of black males graduate high school on time. In 2008, only 11 percent of black males in America had completed a bachelor’s degree – and only half of the 4.6 million who had attended college had made it to graduation (National Education Association, 2011). Seventy-two percent of black children are raised in single-parent households and the national average is only 25 percent. Those single parents are more likely to be employed than the national average, but also more likely to live in poverty (Kids Count Data Center, 2014). Then there’s that humbling stat from earlier in the chapter on incarceration: 61 percent of the U.S. prison population is black or Latino.

School is a second home to K-12 students and black boys don’t have many role models who look the way that they do. Black males make up just 2 percent of the K-12 school teacher population (Reckdahl, 2015) . Less than 20 percent of U.S. teachers are not white even though minority students combined make up a majority of K-12 students (Holland, 2014). It’s not that educators who are female and white can’t have a positive impact on the lives of their students – they certainly can and do. There’s a difference between a teacher who has a different life viewpoint than you and a true role model. Black boys need to see adults like them who are high school graduates, have college degrees, are successful in the workplace, and who aren’t incarcerated. If that adult also happens to be a teacher, even better. How do we make that happen though in a school landscape that is a far cry from it right now?

Better recruitment.

Here’s a thought: If we aren’t seeing enough diversity in our teaching pool, perhaps we need to try harder to bring them into the industry. This starts before college, though. Young black men of promise in middle and high school should see the field of education as a life path for them. Schools of education at colleges need scholarships to recruit these men and school districts need the extra funding to attract these men when they have their degrees.

The Call Me MISTER Program, first started in South Carolina, has made its way south and onto the campus of Edward Waters College. Starting in 2000 at Clemson University, the Call Me MISTER Program was designed to “increase the pool of available teachers from a broader, more diverse background particular among the State’s lowest performing elementary schools.” (Call Me Mister, n.d.)

In essence, the program is needed to address the low number of minority male teachers. According to the Department of Education, less than two percent of public teachers nationwide are black men. (Reckdahl, 2015)

This program aims to increase that number by offering scholarships to qualified applicants.

To apply for the program, applicants must have a high school diploma with a 2.5 GPA or better, letters of recommendation, an ACT score of 21 or higher, an SAT score of 1000 or better, and two essays. One to express interest in the program and the other regarding “Why I Want to Teach.”

Why is having more black men in the classroom important? Yes, it’s great for the purpose of diversity and to increase numbers that are tracked by the government. But for many students who need positive black male role models, this program certainly is one of the more important ones offered by our institutions of higher education.

Better tracking.

One teacher can make a positive impact on a student but what happens when the student moves to another class the next year? What happens to all of that shared knowledge and camaraderie? The technology exists for better data on students from one year to the next, and one class to another, with ways to target those who need extra guidance.

The message of hope for men of color is spreading, both through smaller gestures and through larger initiatives such as President Obama’s program My Brother’s Keeper.

Many of the nation’s largest school districts have joined President Obama’s initiative to improve the educational futures of African-American and Hispanic boys, beginning in preschool extending through high school graduation — dubbed the “My Brother’s Keeper” program.

The districts, which represent around 40 percent of all African-American and Hispanic boys living below the poverty line, have committed to improve access to high quality preschool, track data on male students so educators can notice signs of struggle as soon as possible, increase the number of boys of color who are enrolled in gifted, honors and Advanced Placement courses, strive to reduce the number of minority boys who are suspended and expelled, and increase graduation rates among minority males. The initiative is a five-year, $200 million plan.

In Washington, D.C., D.C. Schools Chancellor Kaya Henderson announced a plan to invest $20 million to support programs for Washington D.C.’s men of color. This included opening an all-boys college preparatory high school in 2017 under the “Empowering Males of Color” initiative. (Chandler, 2015) The funding for the support programs will come from private and public sources. The D.C. Public Education Fund is working to raise money to support these initiatives outside the operating budget.

Henderson’s decision to invest seriously in the specific needs of minority boys has everything to do with “mathematics,” she says. Black and Latino boys make up 43 percent of the students enrolled in D.C.’s public schools. The graduation rates, reading and math scores and attendance of minority boys are all lagging in the District. By fourth grade, nearly half of the city’s black and Latino male students are reading below grade level.

In the District, 48 percent of black male students and 57 percent of Hispanic male students graduate in four years, compared with 66 percent of their classmates. Only about a third of black male students are proficient in reading and math, compared with nearly 66 percent of students who are not black or Latino males, according to DC CAS scores.

The push is a citywide effort led by Mayor Muriel E. Bowser who is working to improve equity and increase opportunities for black and Latino males. The efforts also align with President Obama’s work to help keep male minority students in school and out of prison.

Through this initiative, black young men are given a larger pool of support, particularly from other male minorities. It’s not just individual teachers or schools that are standing up for these young men. It’s entire communities. These types of programs are vital to the success of young black boys because they take a multi-person approach to improving the outcomes for these men.

More outreach from the business community.

Educators alone simply cannot turn the tide for black boys of color. It’s important that those who have been successful breaking free of poverty or incarceration turn back around and inspire the next generation to do the same.

An example of this in action happened on the first day of school 2015 when 100 men of color wearing suits greeted elementary students of color on their first day of school. (Velez, 2015)

The message these men were trying to send was that if you did work hard and get good grades in school, you’ll eventually find some semblance of the American dream in life. It’s what all kids are taught as they matriculate through grade school. It’s why we so often hear the saying that one should “dress for success.”

This image contrasts against the statistics, which state that black male “students in grades K-12 were nearly 2 1/2 times as likely to be suspended from school in 2000 as white students” and that most of the nearly 2.5 million people in prisons and jails “are people of color…and people with low levels of educational attainment.” (Thompson, n.d.)

From pictures to videos, so many kids of color see men of color as effigies of what not to become. The criminal on the news is likely a man of color and so is the high school drop-out. Seeing a roaring crowd of black men cheering on young students from kindergarten to fifth and sixth grades was not only heartwarming, it was inspiring. A suit represents so much more than just a tailored look. It’s success; it’s happiness; it’s an ability to overcome; it’s positive; it’s anti-everything we’ve been feed to believe that’s negative about black men. For each kid seeing that image, it’s eternal.

I applaud this action and know it will have a long-term impact. Now it’s time for more men of means and success to throw their own hats in the ring as mentors and role models. Black men

Conclusion

Can the crisis in educating the black boy in America be solved? Yes it can: I am living proof. However, it’s going to take more than platitudes; more than speeches by politicians; more than one or two outstanding teachers . . . it’s going to take an entire culture that decides it’s time to do something. So let’s roll up our sleeves and plunge in. We have work to do.

Given the dire history outlined above, and the current difficulties faced by the African-American population, it would be easy to assume that educating black boys is a lost cause. This is demonstrably not the case. In fact, if one looks purely at the statistics surrounding young African-American males in education, the progress is inexorably upward. Dropout rates have been steadily decreasing. The achievement gap between blacks and whites is closing: from fifty-three points in 1970 to twenty-six points in 2004 for seventeen-year-olds.

It is clear that, even given the tremendous obstacles facing the black boy in education, his spirit remains unquenched: he will continue to strive for the best, and is making headway in the face of almost inconceivable historical injustices. To borrow the words of Frederick Douglass, he has been given the inch; he will now “take the ell.” Though we are still in crisis, there is a visible path out of the morass. In the next chapters, we will examine in detail the primary obstacles that continue to stand in the way of young African-Americans in education, and will look at concrete, actionable ways to tear those down, paving the way for a future of parity and promise.

References

Call Me Mister. (n.d.). Retrieved from Edward Waters College: http://www.ewc.edu/index.php/academics/academic-programs/elementary-education/call-me-mister-program

Chandler, M. A. (2015, January 21). D.C. schools to invest $20 million in efforts to help black and Latino male students. Retrieved from The Washington Post: https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/education/dc-schools-to-invest-20-million-in-efforts-to-help-black-and-latino-male-students/2015/01/21/27450ca8-a19d-11e4-903f-9f2faf7cd9fe_story.html

Crotty, J. M. (2011, 12 15). Four Things I Learned from Coaching ‘Poor Black Kids’. Retrieved 03 01, 2016, from Forbes.com: http://www.forbes.com/sites/jamesmarshallcrotty/2011/12/16/5-things-i-learned-from-coaching-poor-black-kids/#22cdba2d42b4

Crotty, J. M. (2013, August 30). A Broken Windows Approach to Education Reform. Retrieved from Forbes: http://www.forbes.com/sites/jamesmarshallcrotty/2013/08/30/a-broken-windows-approach-to-education-reform/#67e6d30b4855

Educational Testing Service. (1999). America’s Smallest School: The Family.

Grabmeier, J. (2014, July 28). Children with disabilities benefit from classroom inclusion. Retrieved from The Ohio State University: https://news.osu.edu/news/2014/07/28/children-with-disabilities-benefit-from-classroom-inclusion/

Harper, E. J. (n.d.). Disproportionate impact of K-12 school suspension and expulsion on black students in Southern states. Retrieved 03 01, 2016, from Center for the Study of Race and Equity in Education – Pennsylvania State University: http://www.gse.upenn.edu/equity/SouthernStates

Holland, J. J. (2014, May 5). Studies highlight teacher-student ‘diversity gap’. Retrieved from The Boston Globe: https://www.bostonglobe.com/news/nation/2014/05/04/teachers-nowherenot-diverse-their-students/Wq6nM4XOyoMwlOYJLtfL3L/story.html

Holzman, M. H. (2013). Minority Students and Public Education: Black and American Indian Students and Public Education (Volume 1). Briarcliff Manor, N.Y.: Chelmsford Press.

Kids Count Data Center. (2014). Children in Single-Parent Families by Race. Baltimore, MD: Annie E. Casey Foundation.

Levy-Pounds, N. (2015, May 14). Ferguson and Minneapolis are closer than we think. Minneapolis Star Tribune.

Lynn A. Karoly, M. R. (2005). Early Childhood Interventions: Proven Results, Future Promise. RAND Labor and Population, 200.

National Center for Education Statistics. (2000). Fast facts. Washington D.C.: U.S. Department of Education.

National Education Association. (2011). Educating Black Boys.

Powalski, S. (2013, May 21). Bully Proofing: Helping Children Deal with Cruel Behavior. Retrieved from Mumbling Mommy: http://www.mumblingmommy.com/2013/05/bully-proofing-helping-children-deal.html

Racial Disparity. (n.d.). Retrieved 03 01, 2016, from The Sentencing Project: http://www.sentencingproject.org/template/page.cfm?id=122

(2015). Rates of School Crime. Washington D.C.: National Center for Education Statistics.

Reckdahl, K. (2015, December 15). Training More Black Men to Become Teachers. Retrieved from The Atlantic: http://www.theatlantic.com/education/archive/2015/12/programs-teachers-african-american-men/420306/

School-to-Prison Pipeline. (n.d.). Retrieved from ACLU.org: https://www.aclu.org/issues/racial-justice/race-and-inequality-education/school-prison-pipeline

Stevenson, J. L. (2013, 05 17). State of Equality and Justice in America: The Presumption of Guilt. Retrieved 03 01, 2016, from The Washington Post: https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/therootdc/post/state-of-equality-and-justice-in-america-the-presumption-of-guilt/2013/05/17/49a51a42-bf07-11e2-89c9-3be8095fe767_blog.html

Supervision Costs Significantly Less than Incarceration in Federal System. (2013, July 18). Retrieved from United States Courts: http://www.uscourts.gov/news/2013/07/18/supervision-costs-significantly-less-incarceration-federal-system

Teacher Qualifications. (2010). Retrieved from National Center for Education Statistics, Institute of Education Sciences: https://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=58

(2013). The Nation’s Report Card: A First Look: 2013 Mathematics and Reading. Washington, D.C.: Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education.

Thompson, T. (n.d.). Fact Sheet: outcomes for Young, Black Men. Retrieved from PBS: http://www.pbs.org/wnet/tavissmiley/tsr/too-important-to-fail/fact-sheet-outcomes-for-young-black-men/

U.S. Department of Education Office for Civil Rights. (2014). Civil Rights Data Collection – Data Snapshot: School Discipline. Washington D.C.: U.S. Department of Education.

Velez, M. (2015, August 31). 100 Black Men Wearing Suite Greeted Kids on the First Day of School for an Incredibly Vital Reason. Retrieved from APlus: http://aplus.com/a/100-men-color-greet-kids-MLK-school-first-day

 

Why we should talk to children about race

Amanda Williams, University of Bristol

It’s a situation that many parents dread. Encountering a black man in the street for the first time, a white child might loudly ask something like: “Mummy, why does that man have dirty skin?” After cringing, shushing, or offering a distraction, parents may wonder where this kind of question has come from, how to deal with the situation or indeed avoid it in the future.

From a surprisingly early age, children can distinguish between faces from different racial groups. By the time they are three months old, experiments have shown that white, black, and Asian infants tend to look longer at faces from their own racial group or familiar racial groups compared to faces from other, less familiar racial groups. By three to four years old, children can consistently and accurately identify others by race. The ability to differentiate between people on the basis of race improves with age, with teenagers and adults automatically and effortlessly categorising others on the basis of skin colour.

Choosing to be colourblind

In many societies there is a widespread belief that individuals should receive the same treatment regardless of their race, ethnicity, gender, and ability. Partly in an attempt to appear egalitarian, many adults adopt a “colourblind” approach to race – avoiding mentioning race under the guise that if one doesn’t “see” race, then one cannot be considered racist. For example, in studies using a photo identification game, white participants asked to identify a particular face from an array of faces are less likely to use race to describe the faces, particularly when paired in the task with a black partner.

The norms enforced by this behaviour have now become so entrenched that adults tend to find situations that force them to talk about race extremely uncomfortable and anxiety-provoking, leading to a complete avoidance of the topic in social interactions.

Even when interacting with their young children, parents avoid race. In one study that observed the way parents read a storybook created to raise issues about race relations and racial prejudice with their four to five-year-olds, the majority of parents tended not to mention race, despite it being the theme of the book.

Let’s talk about race. www.shutterstock.com

But ignoring race does not make it go away. Like adults and older children, young children are aware of race even if no one seems to be talking about it. This may lead young children to ask questions about racial differences, which are sometimes embarrassing and untimely, in order to gain a better understanding of the world around them.

Only after having acquired a better understanding of social norms regarding race, at around ten years old, do children also begin to show colourblind behaviour and avoid using race to identify the target in a photo identification task. Like adults, older children avoid mentioning race even at the expense of how well they might perform in the task at hand.

But taking a colourblind approach to race is not the best way to promote equality and reduce racial prejudice. Studies with white people who avoid talking about race show less friendly behaviour when playing a photo identification task with a black partner compared to a white partner. Like adults, nine to 12-year-olds also tend to find situations where they have to talk about race uncomfortable, nerve-wracking, and unpleasant.

A new approach

But if colourblindness – and the tendency to avoid talking about race – impacts on relationships between diverse people, what approach should we take in order to resolve racial inequalities? The answer lies in embracing and celebrating our racial differences instead of minimising or even altogether ignoring them.

Fully recognising the multiculturalism in our society appears to be a better strategy. For example, in one study children who were read a story that placed value in racial diversity were found to be more likely to identify acts of racial discrimination and more likely to sit next to racially diverse peers in the school lunch room. In another study, white adults who adopted a multicultural approach (as opposed to a colourblind approach) showed less prejudiced behaviour when conversing with an Asian partner about racism and diversity.

We need to see the world in colour. www.shutterstock.com

Our concerns about discussing race can be reduced by placing more value in racial diversity, resulting in less stressful and more successful interactions with people from racial groups different from our own. As a caveat, most of the research mentioned in this article has focused primarily on the reactions of white participants. So there is more work to do researching attitudes and behaviour in diverse contexts with individuals who identify as racial minority group members.

For children, curiosity about their surroundings and the people they meet comes naturally. Rather than brushing aside children’s questions about race in an attempt to avoid social embarrassment, we ought to embrace and celebrate the differences that make us unique, remarkable, and that colour the world we live in.

Talking with children about race from an early age may not only derail embarrassing questions, but may, more importantly, serve to increase children’s comfort when interacting with people from different racial and ethnic groups – and increase the comfort of those they are interacting with too.

Given that we live in a society that is becoming increasingly diverse, children will be expected to interact with individuals from many racial and ethnic backgrounds. Children need to be prepared for this future – one way to do this is to encourage them to see this diversity as a positive feature of their worlds. It’s time to talk about race.

The Conversation

Amanda Williams, Lecturer in Psychology of Education, University of Bristol

This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article.

Ask Dr. Lynch: Teaching Students About Genocide

Question: How should the topic of ‘genocide’ be taught in schools?

Answer: Before I respond, I would like to thank you for your question. Nowadays, we are seeing the topic of genocide being covered even in the elementary grades and there is no consensus on when it should be introduced or taught. However, I will give you my expert advice, which takes all of the dominant schools of thought into consideration. In my opinion, the topic of genocide should not be discussed prior to grade six, because although younger students have the ability to empathize with the victims of genocide, they have difficulty understanding genocide in its historical context. Teachers of elementary school students should begin discussing the concepts of the diversity, bias and prejudice in order to prepare students for more advanced topics such as genocide, slavery, and human trafficking.

As a teacher, the overall goal of each of your lessons is to engage students intellectually and to teach to them to think critically about concrete and abstract topics. Thus, any lesson or unit that you create about the topic of genocide should bear this in mind. Since many of the members of your school or community will fail to see the wisdom in using the classroom as a platform for geopolitical issues, your lesson or unit plan should be used to formulate a rationale for your decision and anticipate possible questions and concerns.

The topic of genocide can be used as a springboard for the discussion of human and civil rights issues. The examination of genocide allows students to experience one of the main purposes of education in the United States, which is to study what it means to be a conscientious citizen. Taking time to craft your lesson or unit plan on genocide will allow you to create activities that mirror your student’s intellectual needs. Also, challenge them to contemplate the finality of genocide and the fact that it still occurs despite the “cautionary tales” of the past.

When teaching students about genocide, begin by defining the term. Also, teachers should discuss the topic of genocide and its many occurrences throughout history .

Secondly, discuss the geopolitical and sociopolitical dynamics that have led to genocide. Make sure that you avoid making amateur connections between the instances of genocide that have occurred throughout history. This way, students will learn that each atrocity has its own identity and characteristics.

Thirdly, have students examine the world’s response to occurrences of genocide. When is diplomacy, negotiation, isolation, or military involvement appropriate or effective? Traditionally, what has been America’s response? In the words of the great Eldridge Cleaver, “You’re either part of the solution or part of the problem.”

Lastly, illustrate constructive actions taken by people and entities in response to genocide. In each genocide that has occurred throughout human existence, there have been individuals who have spoken out against these atrocities and risked their lives to stand up to the perpetrators of these unspeakable acts.

Teaching and learning about such an emotional topic can be draining, but nonetheless important. If you follow the guidelines that I discussed in my column, your students will become miniature human and civil rights activists in no time. In the immortal words of George Santayana, “Those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it.”

 

 

Culturally Responsive Training: Exploring Cultural and Student Backgrounds

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.

Education Equity: Challenges and Suggestions

Equity in education has long been an ideal. It’s an ideal celebrated in a variety of contexts, too. Even the Founding Fathers celebrated education as an ideal, something to which every citizen ought to be entitled. Unfortunately though, the practice of equity in education has been less than effective. That is, equity is a difficult ideal to maintain and many strategies attempting to maintain it have fallen far short in the implementation.

The most obvious and horrendous element, of course, is the No Child Left Behind Act. But even Obama has notably dabbled in an attempt to manage equity in education. A 2013 report called, “For Each and Every Child”, reported that “some young Americans – most of them white and affluent – are getting a world-class education” while those who “attend schools in high poverty neighborhoods are getting an education that more closely approximates schools in developing nations.”

With this apparently the situation, the problem of ensuring that every child in the United States receives a quality education is quite a substantial one. This basic hurdle has not even been overcome.

The steps recommended by the government report to remedy this included having states specifically identify and report on the teaching staff, programs, and services they deem necessary for a quality education; and adopting and implementing a school finance system to provide “equitable and sufficient funding” for all students essentially to meet learning standards.

Part of the problem with these proposed solutions, though, is that they assume states and ultimately also schools can figure out what it is they need or what it is they need to do to provide a quality education. The assumption, based on this report and no doubt many others, is that money – preferably money poured into schools – is enough to solve educational issues. That is, reassignment of resources to support schools in poorer areas will be sufficient, along with some reporting on considered needs, to balance the public education system.

This is problematic because the issue of equity, and perhaps equality, is far more complex than this scenario allows. There are many elements at play, not just the immediate financial. Students in certain affluent areas have the benefit of the best teachers, given that it is highly desirable to have a placement in this area. It is also decidedly competitive to even try.

The first step is really for some determination to be made about how, under general circumstances, education can be made equitable to all students. Above all, this assessment should not directly involve teachers or administrators, whose assessment may be skewed, but rather the assessment should be through observation.

Second, the states should provide feedback on those programs and strategies that are most effective for equity building.

Finally, to maintain equity, if it is ever achieved, school systems need to have an approach for analyzing findings about recommended shifts in learning approaches and objectives. These approaches should be designed to help teachers and administrators understand not what they have to avoid but also what it is that they can do to achieve optimal equity moving forward.

 

Talented and Gifted Learning: Where’s the Diversity?

The “talented and gifted” label is one bestowed upon the brightest, and most advanced, students. Beginning in early elementary grades, TAG programs separate student peers for the sake of individualized learning initiatives. Though the ideology is sound, the reality is often a monotone, unattractive look at contemporary American public schools.

Earlier this year the New York Times visited Public School 163 located on the Upper West Side of the city to take a look at the disparities caused by the talented and gifted program there. This is what it looked like: a bunch of white kids on the “gifted” side of the school, and mainly children of color on the general or special education side. Teachers interviewed for the story admitted that it looked bad but did not seem to have a way to solve the problem. Just under a third of the talented students at P.S. 163 are identified as black or Hispanic – combined. Only 18 percent of the students in the average-student classes are white. Though unintentional, a modern-day segregation is taking place at New York City’s P.S. 163 and in other district schools across the country that employ talented and gifted programs.

Clearly white children are not always more gifted, so the selection process and operational procedures for such programs must be flawed. Education experts have long said that white, middle-to-high class students are at an advantage when it comes to standardized testing. Is the same true for talented and gifted programs? In both cases, the actual academics are not in question, but rather the methods of delivering learning and analyzing student performance are challenged.

Many TAG programs start around second or third grade. Though these students are old enough to read and write, the intricacies of an application for a TAG program are certainly the responsibility of parents. For working class parents, time is of a premium and even a one-page talented and gifted program application may rank low on a family priority list. To other parents that lack a college education, or even a high school diploma, the application process may seem foreign, uncomfortable and even cryptic. I use this example of the application process to highlight a larger point: the lack of minority students in talented and gifted programs oftentimes reflects poor communication between the parent and the school district. Better guidance for parents regarding the application process and program expectations can lead to more diversity in student representation in TAG initiatives. Parental comprehension is not a given thing; guidance through these programs for the benefit of the students is the responsibility of program administrators.

Parents are not the source of all the blame, however, when it comes to skewed numbers in talented and gifted programs. District schools need to find ways to better recognize different types of learning talent and look beyond the typical “gifted” student model. The CEC-TAG Diversity Award is a good example of thinking outside the box on minority inclusion in gifted programming. Established in 2010, the recognition goes to schools that look for innovative ways to include under-represented groups (read: blacks, Hispanics and Native Americans) in advanced K-12 programs. In addition, winning schools must be Title I certified. This national push to make talented and gifted programs better mirror the contemporary and ever-evolving student body as a whole is a step in the right direction. Real change happens on a smaller scale though, in individual districts, schools and TAG programs. That progress must start with understanding of the makeup of a particular student body and include innovative ways to include all students in TAG learning initiatives.

 

How community schools can beat summer learning loss for low-income students

Laura Bronstein, Binghamton University, State University of New York

This article is a part of The Conversation’s series on summer learning loss. For other articles in this series, read here and here.

My children spent summers reading Harry Potter, playing chess, swimming and hiking the Adirondack high peaks in upstate New York.

As a single parent with a career as a social worker and academic, I wasn’t rich. But I had enough to make sure that my children had what they needed to excel in education and enrichment outside of school.

While middle-class homes can often provide for summer enrichment activities, studies show a different reality for children from low-income families. These children and youth often lose months of reading and math skills over the summer, widening the achievement gap between the classes.

What can schools do to address this learning loss?

Summer slide

The learning loss for youth in low-income communities adds up dramatically over the years. By ninth grade, about two-thirds of the academic achievement gap between disadvantaged youth and their more advantaged peers can be explained by how they spend their elementary school summers.

What makes this of concern is that a majority of U.S. students in public schools are now from low-income families. A 2013 study found that for the first time in U.S. history, a majority (51 percent) of public school students in the United States were eligible for a free or subsidized school lunch, indicating that they fell below the government’s low-income cutoff.

The majority of these students lack quality summer activities.

A majority of kids do not have quality summer activities. Children image via www.shutterstock.com

Furthermore, these issues do not exist in isolation. Children from low-income communities who often experience summer learning loss also often face multiple related challenges that impact their ability to attend school or focus when they’re there. These challenges include insufficient access to health care, poor nutrition, community violence and lack of adult supervision, among others.

Partnerships between schools and communities can help students’ academic success. The Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA), which replaced the No Child Left Behind (NCLB) law in December 2015, addresses the achievement gap between children from low- and middle-income families.

Title IV of the ESSA under the program, “Community Supports for Success,” calls for a range of partnerships between schools and communities so students (especially those from low-income families) can gain access to services they need for academic achievement (e.g., physical and mental health care, adequate nutrition, supervision and access to healthy activities beyond school hours).

How can schools implement these partnerships?

Earlier this year, New York State Governor Andrew Cuomo announced a US$175 million plan that demonstrates a way to enable such partnerships. Cuomo’s plan aims to convert schools with the lowest test scores and graduation rates across the state into “community schools.”

Providing comprehensive services

So, what are community schools? And how do they help with student learning?

Community schools pursue a unique learning model whereby they supplement classroom-based instruction with out-of-school (before school, after school and summer) learning. They provide support to students whose families do not have access to academic support beyond the classroom. Their support is not limited to the school term, but continues all through the year.

My research on community schools across the U.S.and the world shows that they look different in each community as they develop in response to each school’s specific needs.

The idea behind this learning model goes back to the late 19th century. The first set of school-linked services (precursors to community schools) can be traced back to the 1890s. Back then, they were developed in response to the massive changes being brought about as a result of immigration and industrialization.

As teachers struggled with new sets of challenges in their classrooms, this model provided additional support. For example, in 1894, doctors visited Boston schools on a daily basis – a practice that helped bring down rates of communicable diseases.

The amount of school-linked services and their gold standard – community schools in the U.S. – have ebbed and flowed over the years. In the last few decades, there has been a marked increase in the number of community schools.

Many individual schools, several counties and an array of cities have incorporated the community school model to reduce the achievement gap between students from low- and middle-income homes. These include Multnomah County (Portland, Oregon), Broome County (upstate New York), Cincinnati, Chicago, Hartford, Tulsa and more recently, New York City, among others.

What’s the impact?

The community school model has shown numerous successes.

For example, Oyler School in Cincinnati had fewer than 20 percent of its students reaching 10th grade in the late 1990s. After implementing a community school model in 2010, 82 percent of students graduated high school.

Many of these schools provide extra outreach efforts to involve families that may be hard to reach in the education of their children – a critical component of the partnership. A recent study of the impact of family engagement in elementary and secondary schools found positive correlations between engaged families and improved academic achievement.

Oyler School in Cincinnati. Sean Biehle, CC BY-SA

School-based health centers are another frequent component of community schools. Studies indicate when there are school-based health centers, lost class time as a result of sickness reduces by as much as three times.

Summer programs are often part of community schools. These programs provide enriched summer activities for students, such as music, dance, crafts, athletics and academics. This enables teachers in high-poverty neighborhoods to begin teaching new content at the start of the school year, without losing months backtracking over content forgotten from the previous year.

Why we need community schools

The community school model has been so successful that universities too are making this a focus of college students’ civic engagement efforts.

In 1985, the University of Pennsylvania took the lead in developing a university-assisted community school approach. College students work with the community schools to integrate knowledge gained in their UPenn classrooms.

An example is the Moelis Access Science program where UPenn faculty and students provide STEM (science, technology, math and engineering) professional development to teachers serving students in West Philadelphia neighorhoods, which are marked by extreme poverty, violence and low educational attainment.

Over 20 universities are now part of the network of university-assisted community schools including Binghamton University (SUNY), Columbia University and University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA).

In an increasingly diverse society facing more complex social problems, the traditional model where education occurs completely within the school building, provided solely by teachers from 9 a.m. to 3 p.m. and from September to June, needs reviewing.

That calendar was designed long ago to leave youth free to work in their families’ fields in the summer. Since farming is no longer a major role for the vast majority of students, time outside the classroom can either enhance academic year learning or diminish it.

Do community schools that offer year-round programming and supplemental services cost money? Of course they do. But they have also been shown to save health care costs. They can also save funds that are now being spent on residential treatment facilities for youth, prison and remediation.

With too many youth dropping out of school, the jobs and workforce necessary to compete in a global economy are at risk. Community schools make sense in a country that is committed to opportunities for educational success for any and all students, irrespective of their family income or their zip code.

The Conversation

Laura Bronstein, Dean of the College of Community and Public Affairs Professor, Binghamton University, State University of New York

This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article.

Girls can have it all: how to stop gender stereotyping in schools

Athene Donald, University of Cambridge

Few things make us as competitive as getting our children into the right school. That is why families are willing to spend so much money either moving house to get into a good state school’s catchment area or sending their children to a fee-paying school.

But the vast majority are stuck with the local school, good or bad. So how can we create a level playing field for students? Unfortunately, it seems we are still a long way away as too many teachers continue to exhibit a tendency towards gender stereotyping by making assumptions about what girls or boys are suited to, such as boys being “better” at science. But, as outlined in a recent report, there are actually simple ways to avoid this.

Obvious actions

The report by the Institute of Physics highlights what can be done to ensure that boys and girls are offered the same opportunities and encouragement to pursue each and every subject. The IOP’s initial motivation for the work is the paucity of girls proceeding to Physics A-level: a mere 20-25% of the A-level cohort.

The factors at work in schools that affect the progression of girls to physics post-16 were detailed in a 2012 report. Building on this first report was another, which demonstrated that gender stereotyping is as damaging for boys, putting them off subjects such as Psychology and English. This third and most recent report aims to identify actions that every school could and should take to eradicate this unnecessary stereotyping, in order to ensure that all children can follow their dreams and fulfil their potential in whatever direction it lies.

Common examples of stereotyping include telling a girl “you do maths like a boy” (I’m not even sure I know what that means) or, perhaps even worse, “girls can’t do maths”. Too many parents have asked me how they could influence teachers to stop giving such negative messages to their daughters.

The actions seem so obvious. They include identifying a senior champion and providing training to counter stereotyping. Also, it should not need to be spelled out – yet it clearly does – that there should be a strict policy that all subjects are presented equally to students in terms of their relative difficulty and teachers refrain from making any remarks about how difficult they find particular subjects. Similarly obvious is the recommendation that sexist language should be treated as being just as unacceptable as racist and homophobic language and that all teachers should receive training on unconscious bias and equality and diversity awareness.

For all in or interacting with the teaching profession, whatever your subject speciality or at whatever level, I would recommend you read the full list of proposals and, if you have time, the full report.

A recent newspaper article illustrates the problem well. The head of Frances Holland School in London, one of those fee-paying schools wealthier families aspire to get their girls into (it is a single-sex school), was quoted as saying on motherhood and career: “I believe there is a glass ceiling – if we tell them there isn’t one, we are telling them a lie.” She added that: “Young girls have massive options these days and some of them will make a decision that they don’t want to combine everything and that is as valid as making the decision that you do want to combine everything.”

This doesn’t go quite as far as the headline, which read “Girls must choose career or motherhood, says top head”, implied, but it does suggest that those who do try both won’t get very far. It’s a deeply damaging message and dispiriting to see it run in a national paper.

Why aren’t we talking about fatherhood and careers?
Olesia Bilkei/Shutterstock

Surely this is not the advice we should be giving to young girls making crucial decisions about their futures. Why aren’t teachers acting according to the IOP guidelines and treating boys and girls in the same way? By and large, babies have two parents who, once the pregnancy and birth are over, should be working out how, as a pair, they can bring up the child. A head teacher who implies it is the mother’s sole responsibility has neither caught up with the law about parental leave nor our changing society’s expectations.

A recent report claimed that the mother was the main earner in a third of families (the bulk of these being low-income families). Head teachers have a responsibility to encourage aspirations and not to deter dreams. They should make sure that their pupils are aware of reality but not smothered by anachronistic views.

Positive role models

That girls are still discouraged from subjects such as maths and physics by teachers, as well as peers, parents and the media, is deeply disappointing. Forty years ago, this would perhaps have seemed less surprising. Indeed, back then, it was probably the norm.

Shortly before the report was published, I engaged in a public conversation with Dame Carol Robinson, a prize-winning chemist who holds the unique distinction of being the first woman to hold a chair in chemistry at both Cambridge and Oxford (where she now is). I was trying to tease out what motivated her, how she had set out on her career and how it had unrolled.

Even a brief conversation with her highlights her most unusual career path, starting with the fact that she left school at 16. She left in part because of the lack of encouragement she received from both school and family to stay in education of any sort. She simply wasn’t expected to make a career for herself, so education presumably seemed irrelevant. In fact, while working at Pfizer in Kent she was able to get further qualifications.

Ultimately, she moved back into full-time education to complete a PhD in Cambridge – without ever getting a first degree. After that she took eight years out to bring up her three children before going back to work. Yet now she is an acclaimed professor, and a fellow of the Royal Society with many awards to her name. (You can listen to the whole conversation here.)

Surely she is proof of the fact that not only can women be successful in the physical sciences, but that you can get to the top of the game and still be a mother, indeed still have a period as a stay-at-home mother. You might think that would not need saying, but apparently it does. Even today.

In a generation, perhaps aspirations – for boys and girls, regardless of subject, class ethnicity or any other irrelevant category – really will mean we have reached equity. I have to live in hope, but we are clearly a long way off that happy state as yet.

The Conversation

Athene Donald, Professor of Experimental Physics and Master of Churchill College, University of Cambridge

This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article.

Closing the College Gender Gap

If you have been following education hot button issues for any length of time, you’ve likely read about the nationwide push to better encourage girls in areas like science, technology, engineering and math (STEM). The thought is that by showing young women that these topics are just as appropriate for them as their male peers, more women will find lasting careers in these traditionally male-dominated fields.

I’m all for more women in the STEM workplace but with all this focus in one area, are educators neglecting an even larger gender gap issue?

Nationally, over 57 percent of college attendees are female when public and private school stats are combined. Females have been consistently edging ahead of their male classmates since the late 1970s when the percentages flip-flopped. Aside from all-female schools, there are others that have marked disproportionate numbers. Pacific Oaks College in Pasadena has nearly 96 percent females in attendance, and the University of Tennessee Health Sciences Center in Memphis has over 93 percent. At Indiana University Northwest, located just outside Gary, 67 percent of the student population is female.

There are a few reasons why more young women than men are choosing a college education. The first is that there are more trades that do not require a college degree that appeal to men. The second is that economically speaking, women earn a better living with a college degree than without one in comparison to men. Though there is still a wage gap (in 2012, women earned just 80.9 percent of the salaries of their male counterparts), women see the value their earning potential can gain from achieving a college diploma.

I hear people asking this question all the time: What are K-12 educators doing wrong when it comes to preparing young women for STEM careers? It’s a valid one.

But based on the statistics I’ve listed here, shouldn’t we also be asking this question: What are K-12 educators doing when it comes to preparing young men for a college education?

It all comes down to the weight we assign to the worth of a college education. If a diploma is simply a way to earn more money over a lifetime, then perhaps men are doing the intelligent thing by launching into the workforce early and without student loan debt. That logic is flawed, however, when taking into account the fact that blue-collar jobs are declining in favor of white-collar ones. A young man making a lifelong career decision today simply cannot predict what educational demands will be placed on his field in another 10, 20 or 30 years.

Money aside, there are other pitfalls in a disproportionate number of men going to college. Statistics show that marriages where the couples have differing education levels more often end in divorce than couples with the same educational achievements. And even before divorce is an option, women who set college educational goals may not want to settle for men with less motivation – at least when it comes to academics. If this trend continues, social dynamics may be impacted.

I wonder how much of this trend is based on practicality and how much is based on a lingering social convention that women need to “prove” themselves when it comes to the workforce. Do women simply need a degree to land a job in any field? If so, the opposite is certainly not true for men – at least not yet. Will the young men in our classrooms today have a worse quality of life if they do not attend college – or will it be about the same?

What do you think is at the core of the widening gender gap in education?

Click here to read all our posts concerning the Achievement Gap.