Peabloggy

This Spring, the Council for Exceptional Children’s (CEC) online newsletter included an interesting article entitled Teach Students How to Study - It Doesn’t Come Naturally! which essentially expounds on the notion that children - particularly those with learning disabilities - do not know how to do many of the things we ask them to do until we teach them how.

Of all the cultural trends that have taken place in recent years, the one that I find the most troubling is that of parents and teachers who simply expect children to know right from wrong while they allow them to “find their own way”, utterly devoid of moral and practical instruction. It strikes me as odd that we have come to a point where we need PhDs to remind us that we must teach our children.

- Peter Beddow

I was front-row center (literally in the first seat to the right of the aisle - no political implication intended) for Newt Gingrich’s IMPACT lecture on March 20 in the Student Life Center. The Tennessean covered the event here (why did they choose such an uptight photo? He was so relaxed in person!)

I have a number of thoughts on Mr. Gingrich’s speech and on the experience in general, but since I am no student of politics, I primarily want to relate the portions of his comments that relate to my studies at Peabody.

Mr. Gingrich’s recurring theme seemed to relate to the backwards nature of government spending, particularly in terms of how projects are funded. His characterization of NASA in its current form, for instance, was that of a bloated beast that can’t go anywhere very fast. NASA claims to need such-and-such billions of dollars for a manned mission to Mars to be completed 10 years from now; by the time the project actually gets underway, Gingrich said the estimates will have ballooned and timelines will have been extended many times over. Instead, he says, the government should offer what he called “prizes” for targeted goals. The first person (or team) who meets the goal gets the prize. He suggested that if the government offered $20 billion tax-free to whomever can get to Mars and back, you’ll have 20 teams competing, all of which would put bases on the Moon (because, according to Gingrich, it’s the only feasible launch point for a trip to the red planet) and it will be exciting.

“People will become engineers again,” Gingrich said.

In terms of scientific research, Gingrich proposed a complete overhaul of the current system of grant-disbursement, by which researchers (many of which reside at degree-granting institutions such as Vanderbilt) propose projects based on what they think will get funded. Under the current system, researchers receive a certain amount of money for a certain project based on anticipated costs, and they may spend that money only on said project; Gingrich referred to these as “process-oriented” prizes. Gingrich’s reversal would go something like this: the government funding agencies would propose a goal (e.g., find a cure for cancer) and offer up an enormous prize for the project that reaches the goal. By funding what we need to accomplish, Gingrich believes the competition would spur much more efficient work, in terms of both time and money. Along the same lines, Gingrich proposed a $1 billion tax-free prize for the first private citizen or team who can design a mass-producable vehicle that runs on hydrogen fuel.

Admittedly, I was too shy to ask the question (even though microphones were available) but I wondered whether Gingrich would propose a similar overhaul for the Special Education system, in research and in practice. Would he favor the current disability-diagnosis-before-funding system, or would he suggest more money be placed into other kinds of preventive interventions?

Would Gingrich be so bold as to propose a prize for the researcher who can find a “cure” for learning disabilities, emotional disturbance, autism, or ADHD? For non-biologically-based disabilities (and I’m making no claims about those I’ve mentioned) it seems research is incremental and based on prevention and intervention, not whole-hog cures. If my assessment is correct, I can’t see how Gingrich’s goal-based prize system would work. Some lines of research take years to develop, and progress may be practically measurable only when analyzed across a series of studies, research teams, and findings over a period of years. After all, researchers are expected to ground at least some of their hypotheses in prior research, and with the current peer-review process, research may take months or years to see the light of day in publication.

(Now I really wish I’d asked my question!)

I enjoyed Mr. Gingrich’s speech and appreciated the ease with which he addressed audience questions. Thanks to the student IMPACT organizers for setting up the event.

- Peter Beddow

CNN has a story out today stating that the US spends an average of $8,701 per pupil on education per year. I thought this was interesting since a few weeks ago, I wrote about African schools costing $25 for the essentials for a year. Obviously, the materials, teacher salaries and infrastructure supporting our schools make these numbers incomparable.

What is comparable is that New York spends $14, 119 and Utah spends $5,257. Is this a cost of living issue? How does the money we spend alter the quality of education? I haven’t looked up state rankings — and I know even rating states is a touchy issue — but the gap in spending is wide. There’s a nearly 300% difference between the two states.

Tennessee is also reworking the state’s BEP formula, which determines funding for state schools. From Wednesday’s Nashville City Paper, government reporter John Rodgers writes:

“In a possible carrot to critical Nashville lawmakers, Gov. Phil Bredesen’s new education plan has been expanded to give Metro schools an additional $6.6 million more than originally proposed.

“Under Bredesen’s original education plan, called ‘BEP 2.0,’ Metro schools were going to receive an additional $21.7 million when the plan was fully funded.

“Now, if the plan is voted as is into law, Metro schools will receive $28.3 million through adding more teachers to instruct students needing to learn English as a second language, or English Language Learners, documents revealed today showed.”

There’s a partial breakdown of where our money is going. And here’s the governor’s breakdown of it. The total proposed BEP changes amount to approximately $500 million; however, when the budget is passed, that may not be fully funded. Some funding could come from a cigarette tax hike.

Thoughts? Did anyone follow this BEP debate this year? It’s still moving through the committees in this last week or so of session.

~Kristen Hayner

As I’ve mentioned in past posts, I spent this year working as a research assistant on the Math Problem Solving (Hot Math) project with Doug and Lynn Fuchs. From October to March, I taught math story problems to Davidson County third graders for about eight hours a week. Since March, my fellow RA’s and I have been grading post-tests and entering data so that results and reports can be compiled. We’ve also listened to tapes of each other teaching in order to calculate the reliability of treatment as administered across classrooms by each of about seven different people.

None of us really enjoy listening to these tapes. Pencil sharpeners grate on the ears, kids yell out and no matter how good the teacher, anyone’s voice blaring from a 1980’s tape recorder sounds less than pleasant. But at the same time, I’ve found that each of my colleagues has something to teach me about teaching - and in listening to them I’ve gained a great deal of insight into what works and what doesn’t.

One of my colleagues always sounded grumpy with the kids. Another is playful by nature, and he somehow managed to let that shine in his teaching without losing control over the class. I wonder what my own tapes sound like, and I kind of wish I had listened to them earlier in the year when I still had time to make adjustments.

I’m betting that we can’t underestimate the positive benefits for kids when teachers willingly submit themselves to peer and self-evaluation, and make a good-faith effort to reform their practice according to what they find.

- Rachel Bowers

A mayoral campaign is underway in Nashville, and yesterday The Tennessean informed us that “residents generally agree that the city’s next leader must be an ‘education mayor.’” For those who agree, or simply want to know the candidates’ stances on education in our community, the paper also printed, in imitable Gannett style, a handy table with responses from the five major candidates. The table is available as a PDF here.

–Kurt Brobeck

What we have loved
Others will love, and we will teach them how.
(The Prelude, 1850, Book XIV, 1.446-447; AKA “to Coleridge”)

One of my favorite English professors once told me that Wordsworth wrote this line in his epic Prelude in response to Samuel Taylor Coleridge’s query, “Why do we write?”

How did you learn how to write?

Me, I learned by imitation. I read voraciously: stories, novels, poems, even song lyrics. Then I tried to copy them, writing about my own topics in the styles of the writers I had just read. Eventually, their styles were assimilated into my own, and I internalized whatever grammatical rules I learned in the process.

Having “switched” from the field of English literature to education, and now to research in education, I still learn by imitation. Only rather than imitating storytellers, novelists, poets, and lyricists as I did when I was learning to write creatively, my current models are research writers. The challenge in scholarly writing is in many ways as great - instead of trying to create word-pictures to take someone to another place while communicating a theme or message, I now try to meet readers right where they are - and keep them there - and then to communicate specific ideas as efficiently as possible.

I suspect that writing, and its prerequisite, communication, are the most important skills to have in any educational context. I’ve never been expected to write as well as I’ve been expected to write at Vanderbilt, but I’ve never been expected to communicate as well as I have as a teacher of children.

How did you learn how to write?

- Peter Beddow

“For every complex problem, there’s a simple solution that’s wrong.”

Mark Wolery, Ph.D., Professor, Department of Special Education (though I think H.L. Mencken might have said it first)

- Peter Beddow

The streets around Vanderbilt’s campus were eerily quiet yesterday. I crossed Blakemore in 4pm sunlight without a car in sight. Thursday night, I walked into Fido’s at 6 p.m., stunned to find most tables empty. I’m a little weirded out by this sudden dissolve of activity from Nashville’s landscape, but I also know that the quiet represents a resurgence of mental energy and creativity for the thousands of us who have been caught up in the day-to-day of academic life since last August.

In these summer months our minds will steep, infused with ideas about pay-for-performance initiatives (and whether or not they’re a good idea), race matters in the classroom, the challenges of teaching grammar to secondary students, the unlikely marriage of education and politics…

Anyone else have a list of perplexing issues to consider this summer? What is on yours?

I just read an interesting article on Education Week online, called Taming Montessori (free EdWeek registration required). In essence, the article discusses the apparent conflict between the philosophy of Montessori schools and the Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) requirements of No Child Left Behind.

This quote about the supposed Montessori “philosophy” of testing piqued my interest:

“We see more stress on the teachers. It’s really against their philosophy to test their children,” said Suzi Johnson, the assistant principal of Goddard, which has 550 students and began in the 2001-02 school year, when three existing Montessori sites were consolidated here. “But if we don’t show that this program helps children perform, then [school system officials] will do away with our program.”

Ms. Johnson makes the Montessori philosophy sound more like resistance to change than an open-minded system of beliefs about learning in which openness to change is a virtue. It seems to me that a better reason to assess the children is to determine whether or not they are learning what the teachers are teaching, not just because The Man is threatening to take your classroom away.

- Peter Beddow

Note: For more about Montessori, you may want to Google “Montessori” and/or check out The Montessori Foundation and Michael Olaf’s website. A word of caution: the word “Montessori” is not copyrighted, and therefore can be (and perhaps is) used by anyone. It’s probably best to triangulate (or quadrangulate) by looking at various descriptions and operationalizations of the Montessori philosophy to determine on which points most people agree.

Last weekend, I witnessed a leader’s public announcement of his stepping down from his post. It was rather remarkable in a subdued  sort of way.

You don’t read a lot of books in a masters program on leadership that  touch on departures of leaders – or, at least, I haven’t gotten there  yet.  In mainstream culture, a leader’s departure is typically marked  by and discussed through scandal, extraordinarily-long service, an expired term or some other sensational event.

But not this leader.  He simply had identified that the time had come to pursue another “adventure” following 12 years of service in the middle of his career.  His is one of many stories you rarely hear, so I thought I would share.

I have been personally involved with this leader’s tenure with the organization – first as a part of the organization for several years and then as a non-participating-yet-interested watcher.  So, I am aware of the good times and challenging times – and there have been many on a very deep level – faced by this leader and the organization.

Going into the announcement, I expected to witness a gasp, followed by an “Awww…”, followed by, perhaps, a spontaneous corporate display of gratitude like applause.

But none of that happened.  And I don’t think the crowd’s response was due to a lack of appreciation.

I think it was shock.

Upon this leader’s announcement, the entire room, which had just displayed an attitude somewhere between easy-going and joyful, was suddenly silent.  They remained in a hushed state for the remainder of their time together, and only broke the demeanor for a prompted applause by the individual facilitating the announcement.  See, this leader had just carried his audience through a very typical yet very heart-breaking season for an organization of its kind.  And I think they simply didn’t know how to react to the prospect of him soon not being there.

Only with the announcement over and the crowd breaking up did this leader and his wife, who have worked side-by-side throughout the tenure, receive their audiences’ unique expressions of, “We’re sad to see you go.”  They spanned the spectrum – from firm handshakes to tearful embraces to statements of, “We’re going to celebrate a good
time through this sad occasion!”

And I realized:  this happens all the time when good leaders leave and we never hear about it.  And after a search on Amazon for “leadership departure”, it occurred to me that someone needs to write on the topic of leaving well.  A few
title suggestions: Leading to Leave Well or When Good Leaders Exit.

Leadership is a process that always comes to an end.  And while looking to that end shouldn’t be the focus of a leader’s time with an organization, it should certainly be thought about.

Anyone read anything on this? Am I just missing the literature? Or is it all memoirs that I should be reading?

~Kristen Hayner