Archive for the ‘NYC Education’ Category

It Matters What We Test For

Wednesday, October 7th, 2009

Ever checked out iTunes U?  It’s iTunes’ collection of lectures and talks by people from around the world on a huge variety of topics.  Basically, it’s like being able to sit in the back of a college lecture hall and hear some pretty smart people talk.

StanfordOn a recommendation from a friend, I listened to a recording of a talk from a 2008 Stanford University Ethics in Society conference.  The topic was “Charter Schools Closing the Achievement Gap: Results from New York City and Chicago,” and the lead speaker was Caroline Hoxby, a Stanford University Professor of Economics and a Hoover Institution Senior Fellow.  Hoxby, who recently came out with a new report stemming from similar data, described how the study found that students at charter schools in New York City and Chicago performed better on reading and math scores than students who tried to get into those charter schools but did not get picked in the lottery (most charter schools use lotteries to select from the large pool of students who apply for limited spots).

From a research perspective, what I like about the study is how it controls for family engagement and demographics, since the group selected randomly in the lottery will be similar to the group that was not selected.

However, I was glad to hear my strong concerns about the study reflected by the speaker who was chosen to respond to Hoxby’s talk, Kenneth Strike, a Cultural Foundations of Education Professor at Syracure University.  Strike questioned the tools used to assess the students, saying that although math and reading are foundational skills that support other educational goals, “being foundational doesn’t make them proxies for other [goals]” (my emphasis).  In other words, we must not forget that there are other educational goals in addition to helping young people learn how to read and do math.

Then came the part I really appreciated.  Strike talked about there being both “Cultural Goods” like citizenship and autonomy, as well as “Economic Goods” such as jobs, income, and human capital.  He was expanding the goal and purpose of education beyond the narrow approach that looks at young people solely as future workers and job-holders, which justifies a standardized educational delivery for all young people and the merging of the fields of economics and education (such that one can’t be too surprised by policies such as monetary rewards for students).

Strike then questions the assessments themselves:

The way we use testing and accountability has a very high risk of goal distortion.  In fact, I think it tends to erode the adequacy and reasonableness of these things [current standardized assessments in math and reading] because it generates so much gaming.

By focusing so much attention on a narrow academic (though important) set of skills, the risk is that we lose sight of other essential educational goals, namely becoming a good citizen, developing autonomy, being creative, working well with other people, etc – Strike’s “Cultural Goods.”

Strike later says that we must look at measures for those cultural sets of skills and try to measure them.  They CAN be measured, he says.

They can indeed.  Here are a few research studies that study qualities like citizenship, autonomy, creativity, self-determination, compassion, and other important skills.  (These often focus more on what kinds of educational environments can best support such skills, rather than a high-stakes test that threatens teachers with firing, students with being held back, and in so doing completely distorting the educational process):

  • Self-Determination Theory: hundreds of studies have been carried out researching how people gain and develop self-determination, including the key importance of autonomy-support and internal motivation in learning as well as the negative impact of control and external motivation on learning.
  • The Hope Study: research showing that “motivation to learn increases when schools give students more autonomy, a greater sense of belonging, and more opportunities to pursue individual goals.”
  • Lives of Passion, School of Hope: a new book that surveys hundreds of graduates of an innovative participatory school, showing that graduates take part in society as active and productive citizens and point to the school as a key reason for that.
  • Moral Development in a Democratic School: describes how young people develop moral behavior through being in an environment where they can choose their own activities and where they are involved in decision-making and conflict resolution, providing students with “opportunities for them to develop and deepen understanding of the balance of personal rights and responsibilities within a community.”
  • Comparison of Freedom-Based and Conventional Learning Environments: a small study I did as part of my Masters degree, which establishes a correlation between freedom-based schools and a positive school atmosphere, high levels of perceived autonomy-support, high levels of student intrinsic motivation and self-determination, and strong development of personal qualities such as self-confidence, responsibility, and compassion.  The results also indicate higher levels of each factor for freedom-based schools as compared to a conventional school.

As Strike says, those important democratic and citizenship skills CAN be measured.  We must be wary of the slippery slope potential that measuring could lead to high-stakes assessments in these areas.  However, by measuring for these skills we recognize that they are indeed important, and we start to expand the very purpose of education beyond economic goals and standardized academics to include the cultural and citizenship goals that value development of democratic citizenship, self-determination, autonomy, confidence, and compassion.

Herb Kohl and Inspiration

Thursday, March 19th, 2009

I’m feeling inspired lately.  This is partly due to the coming spring, with the growing warmth, the early flower shoots coming up, and the birds starting to migrate back north for the summer.  (Birding is another big interest of mine.  I’ll have to weave together birding and democratic education sometime – an interesting challenge!)  So spring is always an exciting time of year for me.

Yesterday that inspiration grew after seeing educator and prolific education writer Herb Kohl speak at Bank Street College in Manhattan (not to be confused with the current Wisconsin Senator of the same name).  I have several of Kohl’s books on my shelf, collected during my education book buying craze a bunch of years back when I began learning about non-conventional approaches to schooling and learning.  Yet his books were some of those I only skimmed and had not sat down and read.  Until now, that is.

Kohl gave a deeply personal and deeply moving talk, blending stories of his own schooling and teaching experiences with a powerful moral outrage at the current direction of educational practice and policy.  I jotted down this line, which I found particularly stirring:

“NCLB is nothing more than the manifestation of a moral deficiency in our attitude towards children.”

But how can we talk to Obama and others about how misguided we might think their policies are, one audience member asked?

Kohl responded by saying first that we cannot avoid the word accountability, that in fact that word and concept are completely fine and positive.  The question is not whether or not to hold schools and teachers and students accountable, but rather how and for what?

Kohl also emphasized that we have a moral imperative to expose those who are denying young people the opportunity to grow fully as a human being and supporting approaches that shrink children’s souls and minds.   We have the moral responsibility, he said, to point this out to Obama and other policy-makers.

I greatly appreciated that moral perspective, which often gets lost in the nitty-gritty details of talk about testing, standards, curriculum, grades, merit-pay, and other education battle-grounds.  Kohl’s point is that we ought not lose sight of the moral argument, that we are talking about “the lives of children” (the title of my favorite book about education, perhaps my favorite book of any type, by George Dennison), and that the educational approaches we practice will have a profound effect on the minds and emotions and spirits of young people.

Herb Kohl’s poetic stories, passion, and humility resonate with me, and give me great enthusiasm and inspiration to continue “to speak the truth to power with love,” as Cornell West has said and my friend and colleague Scott Nine has reminded me.

So while Herb Kohl’s books have been gathering dust on my shelf for several years, they are now down on my coffee table, their pages are open, and I am ready to sit down and get to know Mr. Kohl a bit better.

News and Notes – Feb. 22, 2009

Sunday, February 22nd, 2009

A few news and notes related to Democratic Education:

  • Parker Palmer, the wise teacher and author of many books on education and living including The Courage to Teach and Let Your Life Speak, was on Bill Moyers Journal this past Friday, February 20.  The conversation is one not to miss, touching on the tension between what is and what might be, the potential for social change movements, and what we can teach to bring about what might be.  You can watch a view of the conversation and read a transcript here on the Bill Moyers’ website.  (Thanks to David Leo-Nyquist for alerting me and others to this interview).
  • The Gotham Schools blog, a prolific blog largely about education in New York City,  reported on a research study that showed that rating a school with a D or F (all schools in NYC are now given such a mark, based largely on test scores) was correlated with fewer projects and essays after the rating was assigned and a greater emphasis on direct instruction.  The scary thing, as Gotham Schools reports, is that the authors of the study support this change.
  • On the Change.org Education Blog, Clay Burrell has written a great deal about Bill Gates’ recent appearance at the TED (Technology, Entertainment, Design) gathering.  Check out the video of Gates’ talk, as well as Clay’s insightful commentary.  His most recent response also discusses how Nicholas Kristof has joined the Gates bandwagon, both talking about the necessity of “good teachers” and asserting that we can improve schools mainly through better teaching.  Clay echoes some of my own thoughts, questioning this notion of “good” in teaching and whether test score results ought to be the determinant of a good teacher (and therefore what is “good” in learning).
  • Finally, the New York City Student Union is holding a Student Government panel this Thursday, February 26 at 5pm at the UFT building (50 Broadway between Exchange and Morris in downtown Manhattan), to “develop connections between existing student governments and collaboratively create a basis of what a successful student government is and how it is run in different institutions.”  This is a great student organization, come and check it out.  Read more here.

Student Action at NYU

Sunday, February 22nd, 2009

Friday afternoon ended what was a nearly 2-day student demonstration at New York University in Manhattan, coming just two months after a similar student action at The New School.  The students involved kept the updates coming on their TakeBackNYU website and on Twitter, attracting both supportive and critical comments from other students and the public near and far.   The TakeBackNYU site gives the history and background to the group, and offers a look into their demands for NYU, including budget transparency, research into socially responsible investing, the right of student workers and TAs to unionize, and financial support for Palestinian students.  The New York Times covered the event, though focusing largely on the eventual suspension of the students involved in the action.

A few thoughts come to mind:

  • Student voice in society – Students are indeed left out of much decision-making and higher-level discussions in educational institutions, both in higher education as well as high schools and K-12 education overall.  This goes along with an overall lack of youth involvement throughout society, which analysts such as Adam Fletcher and organizations like FreeChild and the National Youth Rights Association have discussed in great depth.  Therefore, my eyes are quickly drawn to instances where young people and/or adult allies are reacting to this repression of youth by taking action to ensure that young people’s voices are not ignored.
  • Satyagraha – I’m reminded of the words of a good friend and educator colleague, who says it may be that only a “revolutionary, nation-wide, non-violent, satyagraha-style, youth-led movement” can move our country into a place to rethink our educational practices, how we treat people in a democratic society, and how we respect this world that we live in.  Young people do comprise a huge section of our society, and while adult allies cannot ignore their own role in societal change or romanticize the impact of youth-led movements, young people may be able to draw attention to issues in ways that adults who have worked for years on these same issues cannot.
  • Web 2.0 tools and advocacy – The NYU and The New School student actions have impressed upon me the value of Web 2.0 tools in organizing and advocacy campaigns, both to broadcast to the public in real time the progression of events as well as to enable immediate public comment and dialogue about the situation.  Browsing through the TakeBackNYU blog posts and comments and twitter “tweets” (which you can search on Twitter with a term like “takebackNYU”), you can see how the students themselves used these tools to inform and mobilize supporters, including asking people to write letters and contact NYU officials.  Critics also used these forums to question or denounce the students’ actions, a good sign that the students leading the action practice what they preach in their own demands by welcoming criticism.
  • Means and ends – While at first the NYU students declared a commitment to non-violence and no destruction of property, they later revised the property clause in order to gain access to a balcony in the building they were occupying.  I don’t know enough about the situation to comment or judge.  But it does bring up the crucial conversation about what tactics and means are justified to achieve one’s goals. How people act in their efforts to bring attention to an issue may have an even greater impact on the result as the content of the message.
  • Responding to student action – As mentioned above, NYU’s response to the students’ action was to suspend the students involved and evict them from their dorms.  Meanwhile, representing a very different reaction, the final agreement at The New School included a clause that granted amnesty for all participants involved and serious consideration of and agreement to many of the students’ concerns.  My hope is that the NYU situation is so new that we will hear about forthcoming genuine discussion of the students’ issues as well as the broad concern about student voice in general.  But the immediate administrative response is not very inspiring.  Once again, I cannot judge whether or not the students were justified in all of their actions.  However, a quick dismissal of the students without a process to consider the situation and the history leading up to the recent actions seems unfortunate at best and trampeling on the rights of the students at worst.  Most of all, it would be a shame if NYU ignored the sensible concerns the students raise and continue to deny young people a voice in the educational institution to which they and their families give tens of thousands of dollars to every year.

NYC Mayoral Control

Friday, February 13th, 2009

Working on my resolution to get more involved in the NYC dialogue on education and young people, I attended last week’s Manhattan version of the series of Public Hearings on Mayoral Control taking place in each borough this winter.  I barely got in, since by 9:45, when I arrived for the 10 o’clock hearing, the officials at City Hall were limiting admittance to those who were testifying.  A few non-testifiers like myself did find some helpful guards who graciously admitted us, even though we needed to stay in the overflow room.

img_0087.jpg

This is the view out the window of the overflow room on the 19th floor of 250 Broadway, looking to the tall Manhattan Municipal Building and the ornate City Hall building itself.

As for the 2 hours of the hearing I stayed for, I was highly impressed by the directness of the Assembly members who questioned Schools Chancellor Joel Klein, and highly unimpressed with Klein’s responses.  The hearing began with Klein and Deputy Mayor for Education Dennis Wolcott touting the success of the school system, according to increased test scores and the opening of hundreds of new schools.  Not even getting into the highly questionable aspects of those criteria in this post, it was clear right away that Klein and Mayor Bloomberg and company continue to believe that only they know what is best for the million plus students in the NYC public schools and how to implement it.

I found telling Klein’s comment, (I’m paraphrasing here), “Who else looks out for the lower-income students in this city?”  He and Bloomberg seem to place little faith and trust in local communities, students, and parents to own the educational planning for their own schools.  There were no specifics in reply to Assembly members’ repeated calls for greater parental involvement (nor did Klein or Assembly members mention student involvement in any way).   Klein kept repeating that the school system should be just like the fire, safety, and financial sectors in that the leaders for those sectors are appointed and have complete responsibility and accountability.  But does that make sense for the education of a million unique people in dozens of different neighborhoods across the city?

One of the more interesting exchanges occurred between Klein and Assembly member James Brennan about the NYC Panel for Education Policy, whose “responsibilities include approving standards, policies, objectives, and regulations that are directly related to educational achievement and student performance, as well as certain contracts, an estimated annual operating budget, and the DOE capital plan.”  The 13-member Panel includes a majority of 8 members who are appointed by the Mayor (and if that strikes you as an odd form of checks and balances, you are right! – check out what happened when the panel disagreed with the Mayor on stopping so-called “social promotion.”)

Here’s a paraphrased version of Brennan and Klein’s exchange:

 Brennan: Would it be a problem if the Panel for Education Policy disagreed with you?

Klein: Yes, because nothing would get done.

Brennan: So it’s bad if the group disagrees with you and has other ideas?

Klein: That’s the role of the legislature.  That’s where there should be meaningful checks and balances.

Brennan: But it’s not good to have internal checks and balances?

Kelin: That would be bad policy.

And other Assembly members noted to Klein that if parents and other members of the public disagree with what you (Klein) are doing, they have nothing to do except vote out the mayor in the next election.  Klein defended himself saying that the reason for consolidating power in the mayor and the chancellor was because of the “dysfunctional” local community school boards that especially hurt lower-income students.  I must admit to having an incomplete knowledge of the previous system of local boards before Mayoral Control, but I couldn’t think of a better way to stifle students’ individuality and excitement about learning than standardizing the learning process, dis-empowering students and teachers and parents, and judging students and teachers and schools based on the results of multiple-choice tests.

While I left before the Assembly members finished their dialogue with Klein, several hours of testimony by educators and members of the public followed, going well into the afternoon.  Here are some highlights:

Coming up, hearings in the Bronx (March 13) and Brooklyn (March 20).  More info here.

And here’s a picture of Klein testifying from the NY Times reporting of the Manhattan hearing.

Student Action at The New School

Thursday, December 18th, 2008

Students at The New School are taking action as I write this (Thursday evening, December 18, 2008) to raise the profile of their objections to The New School President Bob Kerrey and other university leaders, and to call for greater student voice in decision-making.  The students have taken residence in the school cafeteria and have quickly put together a website called New School in Exile,” a New School in Exile blog (which is being updated several times an hour), a Facebook group, and a document (PDF) outlining their position and what they are seeking.  Students are apparently coming and joining from other institutions as well.

I’m still trying to learn the background to this situation and what the issues are.  I’ve generally thought highly of Bob Kerrey, the little I knew of him as a politician and President of The New School.  And while I can’t say I support all the various wishes of the students without learning more, those advocating for democratic education can strongly identify with those that call for greater student voice and socially responsible actions, specifically:

Students, faculty, and staff elect the president, EVP, and Provost.

Students are part of the interim committee to hire a provost.

Intelligible transparency and disclosure of the university budget and investments.

The creation of a committee on socially responsible investments.

Money towards the creation of an autonomous student space.

Money towards scholarships and reducing tuition.

Money for the library and student life generally.

Rich Gibson of The Rouge Forum provides some interesting perspective in an email message sent out this evening as an “extra edition” to the regular Rouge Forum Update:

Students at the New School in New York City seized their buildings and are holding out for the demands listed below.

This direct action follows student uprisings in Greece and France in the last ten days and parallels the sit-down action by workers at Chicago’s Republic Works.

The building seizure is precisely along the lines that the Rouge Forum urged for a decade and shows, once again, that student action can spark social resistance–and reasoned analysis– involving poor and working people who hold the power to bring real transformation.

You can find links to coverage and videos of The New School in Exile group at their site and blog, and I’ll look to add updates here as they come.

Update December 19, 9am:

Students with The New School in Exile appear to have received a response from administration at The New School that agrees to several of the points the students sought, including greater student voice at the university by having voting status on Provost and President search committees and representation at the Board of Trustees meetings, as well as the establishment of a Socially Responsible Investing committee for the university’s endowment. Full report on this response on the students’ blog.

Critical Friendship in Schools

Tuesday, December 16th, 2008

Over the past few years I’ve had the opportunity to learn about the concept of “critical friendship” in schools, as a way in which to bring people together in open conversation, examine our assumptions, and re-think how we do things to improve education and better support young people.  Many books and resources advocate for dialogue-based school reform, often with the term “professional learning communities.”

One of the leaders promoting critical friendship and open dialogue in schools is the National School Reform Faculty, based at the Harmony School in Bloomington, Indiana, and it is through attending several workshops and NSRF-led events that I have gained a great deal of respect and appreciation for this approach.    From NSRF’s website:

The mission of the National School Reform Faculty is to foster educational and social equity by empowering all people involved with schools to work collaboratively in reflective democratic communities that create and support powerful learning experiences for everyone. …

At the heart of NSRF’s program are the concepts of Facilitative Leadership and Critical Friendship. We have learned that Critical Friendship, an essential ingredient for learning communities, is best achieved through providing deliberate time and structures to promote adult growth that is directly linked to student learning. Facilitative Leadership skills are needed to engage school communities in this practice, and are valuable for all leaders—school leaders, classroom teachers and district administrators.

Specifically, NSRF promotes protocols and critical friends groups (CFGs) as conversation structures that support people to release their egos and listen deeply to the dilemmas and comments of others.  After some experience with these protocols, I have found how incredibly rare that kind of conversation is, as most people, including myself, often try to dispense advice from our own perspective without really understanding the context of another’s issue.  Not only do these structures help us better listen, it forces us to step back from the habitual patterns of our own thinking and look out with new eyes. And for that, the value of CFGs and this type of open dialogue cannot be under-estimated.

Here’s a link to an Educational Horizons interview in PDF with Daniel Baron, former co-executive director of NSRF.  It’s an excellent and thorough introduction to the theory and practice of NSRF.

Still, coming from my belief in the importance of youth involvement in educational discussions and school change, I must also admit that professional learning communities in general and specifically NSRF’s approach initially struck me as unfortunately missing the voices of young people, focusing mainly on empowering dialogue among teachers.  And while I haven’t dropped that critique, I realize that it is important to consider NSRF’s work in relation to the current structure of schools and education policy, which largely leave out not only students but also teachers (and parents and community members).  What NSRF has created is an entry-point that all schools, public and private, can connect with: increasing dialogue among teachers seems basic and a no-brainer while also holding the seeds for deep reflection and change.  Moreover, if the principles of democratic education and youth engagement are to find greater play in U.S. education, advocates need to embrace diverse approaches that come at the same goals from varying directions.  In my view, NSRF’s critical friendship is an important part of that broad movement for democratic educational change: all schools could benefit from critical friendship-style conversation about what they do.

There are direct and indirect ways in which the critical friendship inherent in NSRF’s approach can have a powerful impact on the lives of young people.  The direct way is that through critical friendship, teachers hear new ideas about teaching and learning and may potentially re-think their assumptions about education and young people.  Just recently I participated in a protocol discussion at an NSRF workshop in NYC in which a teacher was seeking ways to respond to student work so as to build trust with her students.  After asking clarifying questions about her class and assignments, the group gave the teacher warm and cool feedback about what she has previously done, and then engaged in an open dialogue about what would help her in her situation to build relationships with students.  A good discussion that brought out many helpful ideas.

Indirectly, CFGs are based on the idea that everyone is an expert, that everyone brings knowledge and wisdom to the table – including students.  I’ve had discussions with various facilitators of NSRF work and teachers who are part of CFGs, and many knowledge (with positivity and support) the notion that the principles and practices of CFGs can and frequently are brought to and with students, to engage young people in the same kind of open dialogue.

Here’s one example: I had the honor to be part of a group facilitating a Teen Summit in Mississippi in early 2008 to address drop-out issues.  Leading this effort were several facilitators and youth engagement leaders connected wih NSRF and the Education Commission of the States, who used NSRF-style protocols to engage the 1000-plus students (and teachers from their schools) in dialogue covering the reasons why young people drop-out and what can be done to change this.  Most excitedly, youth on the State Superintendent of Education Hank Bounds’ Youth Advisory Board co-facilitated the event.  Through the structure of the protocols, young people delved into these questions and gave the Mississippi Education Department and other state leaders powerful insights (PDF) into the culture of schools that further disengagement and drop-out, and how schools and society can change to be relevant and engaging to students.

Participating in that event in Mississippi demonstrated the power of engaging diverse groups of people through tools such as NSRF and CFGs and that such engagement is a key piece of democratic educational change, especially when teachers and young people come together to hear each other openly and equally.

NYC Education Activism

Friday, December 5th, 2008

In the past couple of weeks I’ve had the opportunity to get to know folks from the NYC Student Union, a student-run group advocating for greater youth voice in the New York City education scene.  They meet weekly, and have several exciting projects in the works (check their website and blog for more information).  One of their project ideas is to connect the various education activist groups in the city so that they can know about each other and work collaboratively.  It’s a great project, and it made me want to sit down and try to draft a list of some of the great NYC education activist groups working out there.

So, here is my list of NYC Education Activist groups (admittedly this list focuses largely on groups that take a progressive, democratic, and justice-based approach to educational change):

Youth-led:

  • New York City Student Union: A completely student run organization whose missions are: To act as a powerful, collective voice for New York City students that can defend the rights we are so often deprived of due to lack of organization; To give students a voice in the decisions made about our own education…; and To provide communication between students from all ends of the city.
  • Sistas and Brothas United: SBU’s mission is to develop the leadership of youth in the Northwest Bronx community who are concerned with the conditions in their neighborhood, interested in developing creative ways to address these problems in concrete ways, and believe in their own ability to build people power to hold all public officials accountable for the decisions they make.
  • Urban Youth Collaborative: Brings New York City youth together to fight for change through local and citywide organizing strategies. We strive for social and economic justice throughout our communities—overcoming obstacles to make sure youth voices are heard and youth empowerment is emphasized.
  • Youth Researchers for a New Education System: A diverse group from all over New York City (NYC) who have come together for a common goal: to be instruments of change in the NYC public school system. Because of our experiences as public school students and now researchers on public schools, we are yaerning for something enormous: radical change within the NYC public education system.

Teacher-led:

  • New York Core of Radical Educators (NYCORE):  A group of public school educators committed to fighting for social justice in our school system and society at large, by organizing and mobilizing teachers, developing curriculum, and working with community, parent, and student organizations.
  • Teachers Unite: Seeks to redefine public education by rebuilding the relationship between teachers, students, families and communities as partners in the struggle for social and educational justice.

Adult and Youth-led:

  • Fertile Grounds Project: FGP’s mission is to provide young people with the space, tools, and support they need to take control over their own educations and build an identity in a world where they can belong.
  • Future Voters of America: A multi-cultural, nonpartisan organization incorporated in 1995 as a 501(c)3 non-profit. We propel the youth voice forward by empowering young people to set an informed and responsible political agenda.

Community-led (multi-generational):

  • Make the Road New York: Promotes economic justice, equity and opportunity for all New Yorkers through community and electoral organizing, strategic policy advocacy, leadership development, youth and adult education, and high quality legal and support services. Make the Road New York has centers in Bushwick, Brooklyn, Woodside and Jackson Heights, Queens and Port Richmond, Staten Island. Our membership comes largely from these and neighboring communities, but our advocacy work has citywide reach.

Adult-led:

  • Class Size Matters: A non-profit organization of parents and concerned citizens dedicated to achieving smaller classes in New York City and in the nation as a whole.
  • CUNY Graduate Center Participatory Action Research Collective: The PAR Collective dreams wildly about critical inquiry, social theory and the politics of social justice for youth. With the craft of PAR, our projects seek to reveal theoretically and empirically the contours of injustice and resistance while we challenge the very bases upon which traditional conceptions of “expert knowledge” sit.
  • iCOPE: A volunteer, citywide collective and the founding organization of the Education is a Human Right campaign. iCOPE believes that system transformation based on Human Rights principles, not merely a change in governance, is needed to create schools that meet the needs of every child and place greater power in the hands of parents, students, educators and school communities.
  • National Economic and Social Rights Initiative – Human Right to Education Program: Works with education advocates and organizers to promote policy change in public education using human rights standards and strategies. NESRI believes that human rights offer a framework for how to transform our public schools based on internationally recognized standards of equality, accountability, dignity and community participation.
  • Time Out From Testing: Time Out From Testing is a statewide coalition of parent, educator, business, community, and civil rights organizations in New York State committed to a “time-out” from excessive and high stakes exams.

Parent-led:

That’s at least a start.  What groups have I missed?  Post your comments and suggestions.

Youth on Schools – YRNES report 2008

Tuesday, September 9th, 2008

I first saw the Youth Researchers for New Education System (YRNES)’s report a few months ago, but came across it again yesterday and just sat down to read it cover to cover.  It is expertly done research with incredibly valuable findings.  Most importantly the research was completed and led by youth, collecting the views of young people about their schools and education.

The YRNES study (direct PDF link), initiated in 2007 and published in 2008, is highly valuable because it brings youth voices to some of the core educational issues we need to think about if we are to bring about democratic educational change, education aligned with the dignity and human rights of young people.  Those core issues include: the purpose of schooling, access to resources, relationships among students and teachers, and the extent to which young people are meaningfully involved in educational decision-making.

The youth researchers, primary investigator Eve Tuck, and the partnering organizations, The National Center for Schools and Communities (NSCS) at Fordham University, the Independent Commission on Public Education (iCOPE), and the Collective of Researchers on Educational Disappointment and Desire (CREDD), all deserve huge credit for this report.

I urge you to read through the whole study, though I wanted to cite some of the more powerful results.

FYI, the study surveyed 546 youth ages 14-22, reflecting racial and economic diversity of NYC public school students, and including a focus group of 18 youth activists.

The three major findings:
1) Young people in New York City believe their schooling is important to them
2) Resources and access to opportunities are unfairly distributed in our school system and in our schools
3) Young people in New York City want more meaningful opportunities to participate in decision making about schooling.

Some of the interesting stats:

  • In response to the statement, “My classes give me useful preparation for what I plan to do in life,” only 46% of young people surveyed agreed, while 54% disagreed.
  • Responding to, “I am getting a good education at my school,” 61% agreed and 39% disagreed.  But take a look at the data from this question disaggregated for socioeconomic status and school type:

Low income Youth – 48% agreed  52% disagreed
Middle-High income Youth – 70% agreed  30% disagreed
Large/converted school – 54% agreed 46% disagreed
Specialized school – 66% agreed  34% disagreed

  • The most common response to the question, “When do you feel safe in school?” was “Never.”
  • “I think that my school’s rules are fair”  39% agreed  61% disagreed

And especially take a look at these about youth participation:

  • “I would want to participate in setting the rules and policies of my school” – 80% agreed  20% disagreed
  • “Seventy-six percent of youth told us, ‘I know the changes that need to be made in my school, but the power to make these changes is out of my hands.’
  • “Members of my community have good ideas for programs or projects that would help solve the problems in my school” – 65% agreed,  only 35% disagreed.

Finally, this quote by one of the youth in the focus group:

“I agree that sometimes we don’t pay attention [to fliers and announcements about existing opportunities] but I think that if we believed that they really cared about us, cared about us participating in these opportunities, we would look.  If they actually cared, we would care too.”

How true.  Why would anyone make an effort to participate unless they believed the opportunity was authentic and that their perspective was wanted?

Check out the report (and the Problem Tree they created), send it along to others.  Show it to your principal or teacher or parent.  Present it to your school board.  Give it to a local or state politician.  If you live in NYC, show it to anyone and everyone – it is increasingly relevant given the recent discussions over whether the law should be changed to give Mayor Bloomberg another term.

And let’s do more research, following YRNES’s excellent approach not only in research design – quantitative (numerical) and qualitative (quotations, stories, etc.) – but also involving youth as researchers and leaders in building an education system based on our democratic values and human rights.

School Success in NYC!

Sunday, June 8th, 2008

New York City’s School Chancellor Joel Klein has just announced a tremendous sign of educational success. It appears that Mr. Klein and Mayor Bloomberg’s approach of increased high-stakes standardized testing, assessing schools with a single letter grade, and bribing teachers and students with money for good test scores is really proving beneficial. Are you ready for the evidence?

Here’s close to a direct quote from Mr. Klein on Up Close with Diana Williams on Sunday, June 8, 2008, in response to Ms. Williams’ question about whether the teacher and student award program is working:

“There’s a great story, where a student says excitedly, ‘When’s the next test?!’ That’s not something you hear a whole lot.”

Hmm. So, first create an alienating and damaging situation for young people and teachers by mandating tests that narrow the curriculum, disengage students and teachers from learning, and create stress and unnecessary competition. Then add financial rewards to those who score high on the tests, and we should be surprised and confident in our educational approach and policies because suddenly instead of hating the tests young people wonder when they’ll have another chance to earn some extra money?

Am I missing something??

Mr. Klein completely misunderstands young people, parents, and the general public if he believes that the ability to develop external motivation in response to a potential reward (better known as behavioral training) is really the success sign we are looking for in our schools.

Instead, if you ask most folks what skills they believe young people ought to develop for success in their future lives, the most common answers will include creativity, critical thinking, self-confidence, empathy, responsibility, determination, self-awareness, openness, and internal or self-motivation. Those are the qualities and skills that will enable young people to achieve their personal goals, strengthen our communities, and develop a more just and sustainable world.

It’s time to stop thinking of education as behavioral training and standardization and realize that we are talking about the lives and learning of young human beings, each of whom is unique and deserves a whole lot more respect and support than that being shown through the policies of Klein and Bloomberg.