Charter Schools Reconstructing LAUSD: NCLB’s Downfalls are Improved through Charter Divisions

While the debate of No Child Left Behind is heating up in educational politics, likewise are the challenges that nationwide school districts face from charter innovators. There continues to be stringent criticism opposed to NCLB; opponents argue that “drilling kids with rudimentary knowledge, teaching the standardized test year round, and leaving no room for originality or authenticity,” in a terse are the most harmful consequences of the Act. Institutes that suffer the most from the law are public schools in impoverished areas. Consequently, audacious educators took the initiative to implement charter schools as a way of providing better opportunity for students coming from disadvantaged backgrounds. Furthermore, these new divisions offer small learning centers in order that each student receives 1 on 1 attention and provide parents with a variety of excellent school choices. While exploring the blogosphere, I came across two other posts that further expanded on these notions. The first is titled, “Finally, Some Real Changes in Public Education,” by a journalist of L.A Times who discusses the surpassing benefits students obtain from charter schools rather than public high schools; moreover, he mentions that the Los Angeles Board of Education handed over to Green Dot charter one of the lowest performing schools in the district, Locke High School. Displayed to the right Green Dot and Steve Barr celebrate superb decision. The latter is “Kozol on Hunger Strike to Protest NCLB,” by a LAUSD educator, who critically analyzes No Child Left Behind and describes how one educational activist fasts publicly to protest the Act. My comments for these posts can be viewed in the links provided.

“Finally, Some Real Changes in Public Education”

Comment:

Foremost, I would like to address that your title immediately drew my attention because of its ingenuousness; furthermore, its sincerity lead me to have high expectations for your blog. As a charter school teacher myself, I hinted that your post would allocate discussion to the charter division, if not placing it at the forefront of your argument. Secondly, your post was very well-composed and articulate, keeping me interested and fond of reading it thoroughly. I relished how you incorporated your own unique secondary school experiences into your argument; they were very appropriate and supplemented tangible evidence to your position. I definitely agree with your argument that charter schools are a miraculous remedy for students and parents from underprivileged backgrounds. Referencing Green Dot in particular was a very prudent decision being the non-profit organization has an outstanding reputation reflecting its great increase not only in test scores, thus fulfilling NCLB, but also in high school graduation rates and transitioning students into 4-year institutes compared to neighboring public schools. My only concern reflected primarily on athletics. Though Green Dot has been successful in many domains that traditional public schools remain unaccomplished, what happens to the various extra-curricular activities offered in public schools? Moreover, are sports and student clubs even a vital aspect of Green Dot’s entire curriculum? Extra- curricular activities, in addition to academics, remain prominent to a student’s high school experiences, if not his/her future career aspiration. Furthermore, what happens to highly gifted athletes who certainly desire good education alongside getting recruited into the University of their Choice on a full-ride scholarship? One memory that I admired at LACES but never got from my later charter high school was the great sense of school spirit being that I was one of the renowned Breaststrokers and dance team innovators. I wonder if Green Dot or similar charters consider athletics in their rigorous programs. Though athletics should not be the greatest aspect of a child’s educational structure, they do play a crucial role in the child’s overall school experience and transition into their next realm of education.

“Kozol on Hunger Strike Protest NCLB”

Comment:

Your post addresses prominent issues and you disclose cogent arguments by way of articulately presenting your views. I definitely acquiesce with your take on NCLB and Senator Kennedy’s stringent response to the bill. It is completely absurd that the Act continues to be implemented, consequently, as you mentioned, “plung[ing] urban education back to the dark ages of desegregation.” I think it is important that education activists take action on their beliefs beyond fasting like the legendary Kozol. I agree that if modifications are not made, NCLB should be discarded altogether. But after getting rid of the bill, what’s next? Though I initially opposed NCLB’s extensive focus on standardized testing owing primarily to the fact that it disallows teachers to incorporate creative teaching methods, schools could not be administered with unlimited spontaneity. A key focus on test results keeps the teachers and students, as a whole, mindful of grade-level standards that need to be acquired before a grade promotion. Furthermore, how else can educators assess kids and evaluate students' results if not through standardized testing? I consider the more salient issue to be concerning the discrepancies between public schools- how urban districts get much less resources and benefits in juxtaposition to their suburban rivals. I think you could heighten your argument by expanding on such notions. Furthermore, acknowledging that charter schools serve as a remedy for students attending disadvantaged institutes could have been a possible way of offering constructive criticism to the dilemma of NCLB. Contrary to public schools that overwhelm children with test-prepping courses in hope of receiving government funding, charter educators have applied different mechanisms and have made substantial progress in bringing urban districts up to par, and beyond. To the left, I have displayed a graphic chart as evidence to the significant results of Green Dot charter.

Leaving No Child Behind: Teamwork Models Fosters Students to Excel beyond Academics

President Bush’s, No Child Left Behind Act, is continuing to be a prominent debate in educational policy, principally, because several schools, urban districts in particular, are not generating the results of, nor reaping benefits from, the Act. Rather, most schools in the disadvantaged areas are still faltering on the standardized tests. Furthermore, students classified as gifted are suffering from the downward trajectory of NCLB. Parents, likewise are contending that public schools fail their high-achieving children owing to No Child, expressed in the corresponding photograph of a current article. These disappointing results seem to stem from the schools’ tendencies to segregate the classrooms based on achievement levels, coupled with disproportionate focus on the State Content Standards. Across the globe, recent studies indicate that students who learn in mixed or integrated classroom settings perform significantly higher than those grouped solely based on ability. As shown below, teachers incorporate collaborative English methods in the School District of Monticello. Conjointly, the European researchers discovered that collaborative methods of learning further fostered academic success along with improved social behaviors. Hence, mirroring the models of other continents may be a favorable route in fostering greater student success.

Working to have the entire class at the proficient level by spring’s standardized testing, teachers disregard talented students’ innovations, focusing surpassingly on low-achieving students. This method has worked for some schools particularly in the Rhode Island District. However, many gifted students in less advantaged areas have been steered in a downward track. They are set up for failure it seems, as expressed in a recent article by Catherine Gewertz. Her study finds that kids from disadvantaged backgrounds “start school with weaker academic skills and are less likely to flourish over the years in school than their peers from better-off families.” Consequently, gifted students are neither observed nor challenged from the start. Likewise in Europe, teachers often discredit student’s capabilities by prejudging them solely on prior test scores and socioeconomic statuses. According to Gewertz' study, “higher achieving students” in less advantaged areas “are more likely to lose ground. For instance, 44 percent fall out of top quartile in reading between the 1st and 5th grades, compared with 31 percent of high achievers whose family income is above the national median.” Furthermore, the high school drop-out rates synchronize in a homogenous pattern; compared to better-off families, they are more likely to not graduate on time or fail to graduate altogether. Similarly, in Europe, students “who are put into low caliber in school quickly learn to perceive themselves as unsuccessful and develop anti-school values that lead into general anti-social behavior”.

Furthermore, teachers’ excessive instruction on rudimentary standards causes high-achieving students to refute assignments. “Recently, a noted children’s author recounted her dismay when fifth-graders attending one of her workshops balked at a creative writing exercise”. She was startled to discover that the reluctant writers were deemed highly gifted. High-achieving students across the nation are refuting the mundane worksheets and drills handed out to them each day, because the assignments are frankly too abecedarian for their capabilities. Even math students note that the ‘one-way or the high-way’ drills are often tedious, causing them to become lackadaisical towards a once relished subject. Teachers religiously “emphasize incessant drilling of fundamental facts and teach that there is one right way to solve even higher-order problems”. Despite the most dexterous mathematician’s creativity in using shortcuts to problem solving, which makes the subject more interesting and fun for him/her, teachers continuously drill the gifted student with fundamental exercises, which tend to dull instead of sharpening their faculties.

One route to handling this dilemma is to use the model of European countries who are dealing with a similar educational crisis. Researcher, Professor Boaler remarked, “In England we use more ability grouping than possibly any other country in the world, and children are put into groups at a very young age. It is no coincidence that our society also has high levels of anti-social behavior and indiscipline.” Likewise, in the United States we not only classify kids based on prior test scores and presumed
capabilities, but we also educate every student at the basic level year round leaving out capacity for advancement. Boaler’s study found that by integrating the classrooms irrespective of students’ abilities was more advantageous than segregating high-achieving students from their lower scoring peers. The mixed grouping fostered collaborative efforts that allowed them to “learn work in greater depth,” she says. Additionally, the picture to the right displays a group of Illinois Mathematics and Science Academy students whose teachers' emphasized “group learning, team work and student classroom participation because that's how the best decisions and outcomes are achieved.” Hence, there were favorable results to support their innovative technique; students attained several trophies from state academic competitions, furthermore, international displayed along the walls of their school building.“The results of Professor Boaler’s study, which followed 700 teenagers in the US over four years, were all the more remarkable because the mixed ability group came from disadvantaged backgrounds and were initially less able at maths.” The highly gifted students had the opportunity to peer-teach the low achieving ones thereby gaining more wisdom and knowledge. As the Chinese saying goes, “The best way to learn a subject is to teach it.”Complementary, ISTE National Technology Standards incorporated this method. “As any educator quickly discovers, the surest way to truly learn something is to teach it to others.”

Rather than grouping students in classrooms based on abilities or even teaching rudimentary knowledge throughout the entire school year, teachers should begin to strike a balance between fundamental and innovative teaching, by using various modalities. This method has proven to create favorable effects beyond excelling grades. Students in Europe have generated a shared responsibility that makes each student more active in class assignments. Better work ethics and zeal have also been products of this new system of grouping and adequately leaves no child, whether gifted or average behind.