|
Teaching Efficacy
to Kids:
How Young is Too Young?
How young is too young to teach Efficacy to children? Dr. Melvin Chapman believes that, "If you are going to assist children at risk, you need to teach them Efficacy at a young age." Now retired from his long-time position as Executive Deputy Superintendent of the Detroit Public Schools, Dr. Chapman oversees an early education center serving students ages 3-5. He ensures that his teachers educate their children in Efficacy because, "By the time they get to second grade, they've already had three years as students." Three critical years--where their confidence can be damaged, or built up, depending on how they are taught to think about their own learning capacities.
The work of paraprofessionals at a Boston early education center further affirms that very young children can learn Efficacy. "Because they spend so much time with their kids," Efficacy Director of School Services, Barbara Logan says, "pre-school educators can infuse Efficacy into every moment they share." For example, when students are forming into neat bus lines at the end of the day, paraprofessionals can decide to praise them for "choosing their strong sides," rather than simply "being good." And instead of making judgments about how smart (or not) children are, an educator or parent trained in Efficacy might ask: "Now how did you get smarter today, honey?"
"A 3-year-old can understand what the teacher is saying," Dr. Chapman says. And following the Boston paraprofessionals' example, choosing your words carefully can help reinforce key Efficacy concepts like "Smart is something you can get," in and out of the classroom. And even if your children weren't exposed to Efficacy at an early age, Dr. Chapman's advice still holds: "You should never wait."
|
|
Quick Links...
Our Website
|
Efficacy Posters Are Here! 
Deck the halls with Efficacy! Hot off the presses, our colorful posters come in three designs to help promote Efficacy concepts on a daily basis. Available for purchase in sets of three ($20), each set comes with a poster illustrating Strong Side/Weak Side (Red), The "Get Smart" Model of Development (Yellow), and The Data/Feedback/Strategy Method (Blue).
Made of durable Polyart-TM, our Efficacy posters are tear-resistant and stain-resistant. Each poster measures 16 x 20 inches. For more information, contact us at: 781-547-6060 or download our Order Form online.
|
Did someone forward you this newsletter? Then by all means,
 |
|
QUOTES OF THE MONTH
"Assume all children are readers and that they can be successful as readers from the first day... I think many developing or dormant readers--I prefer these terms to 'struggling' or 'reluctant'--do not understand that reading is a skill that everyone can acquire. They see reading as a talent they just don't have."
-Donalyn Miller, Teacher
"Ask the Mentor: Creating Readers, Part I"
Teacher Magazine online
"Success builds on success, because each accomplishment can strengthen a child's motivation."
-Philip E. Ross
"The Expert Mind"
Scientific American
"How do I use what I believe to make decisions about myself and others? I know now that the actions I take as a new leader will have to come from a place inside of me that believes all children can learn... Efficacy is not only believing but also doing!"
-Participant in Efficacy Seminar at New Leaders for New Schools
"In Brazosport [Texas], the superintendent believed teachers could improve student learning if they learned how to examine student data and change their instruction based on what they learned. His action based on his belief had clear consequences that the district was able to measure."
-Joan Richardson
"What Actions Would Take Your District in a Better Direction?"
National Staff Development Council
"The ultimate measure of a man is not where he stands in the moments of comfort, but where he stands at times of challenge and controversy."
-Martin Luther King Jr.
| |
|
|
|
Whose Children Are These?
by Dr. Jeff Howard
An idea for the day: Accepting responsibility for the outcomes of the children in one's classroom, whatever their backgrounds and whatever baggage they bring with them, is the absolute requirement for learning how to effectively teach kids living in difficult circumstances. This ethic of responsibility is clear when we talk with our most effective teachers. Where does it come from? And why is it not evident in all?
When I present Efficacy to educators, I always ask a simple question: "Whose children are these, who daily walk through the front doors of your schools?"
Their initial answers usually cluster around the politically correct 'ours,' and one or two people, often primary grade teachers, will blurt out 'mine.' So I ask, "If I took the faculty of your school out to a local watering hole on a Friday night, what answer would the typical person give me after the third drink?" Following some nervous laughter I get a range of responses (the community's, the society's, the parents') that boil down to 'theirs.' Which is the best answer, I ask? Again they chorus: 'Ours.' Why? "Because if we believe they are our kids, we feel responsible for what happens to them." And if the answer is 'theirs'? "Then someone else is responsible.
"What about 'mine'," I say, "Then who's responsible for them?"
People acknowledge the implication of this answer: "I accept responsibility for what happens to the children in my class, whether the parents behave responsibly or not, and whether or not my colleagues join me in this responsibility." So 'mine' may be the strongest answer, even stronger than 'ours.' However, with remarkable consistency, most of the teachers I talk with believe that the real answer to the first question, for a majority of their peers, is 'theirs' - and they recognize there is a real problem with this ("someone else is responsible").
So the first question is: Whose kids are these? The dependent second question is: Who's responsible for them? And as I write this, a dangerous third question crosses my mind: "If three teachers were standing in front of you, a 'theirs,' an 'ours, and a 'mine,' which one would you choose to teach your biological child?" (The unspoken fourth question, of course, would be: "Which kind are you?")
For now, let's stay with the first two, foundational questions for our educators: "Whose children are these?" and "Who is responsible for preparing them to have a shot at functioning successfully in the 21st century?" The way we answer the first question, in our hearts, absolutely determines how we answer the second. And so, dear readers, I have a parting question for you: Whose children are these?
|
|
The Achievement Gap:
Doing Well Means "Acting White"?
What does it mean to "look black" and "act white"? And how does this relate to the persistent achievement gap between black students and their white counterparts? Boston 9th-grader Paige Carruthers believes too many young blacks are getting the virulent message that they are "acting white" when they do well in school. This attitude is spread, and given an edge of intimidation, through the common use of racial slurs like "Oreo" (black on the outside, white on the inside). In her article, "Crumbling the 'Oreo' Stereotype," Ms. Carruthers writes, "Terms like these equate being articulate and smart to being white, and because of this, many African-Americans, afraid of being seen as 'betraying their roots' or being deemed a 'sell-out' don't strive to excel in school."
Ms. Carruthers isn't the first to observe the "acting white" phenomenon; John Ogbu, the late UC Berkeley professor of anthropology, wrote extensively on the subject. Residents of Shaker Heights, Ohio, a mixed-race town of mostly middle to upper-middle class families, hired Ogbu to help explain their persistent achievement gap, but the answer his study provided was a bitter pill to swallow. Acting White and the Achievement Gap: Ogbu argued that black students in Shaker Heights were failing because of their own attitudes. In the East Bay Express article, " Rich, Black, Flunking," Ogbu explains that the average black students in Shaker Heights committed little effort in school, mostly because of a peer culture that equated academic success with "acting white," or a "renouncement of black identity." Ogbu concluded that "the African-American peer culture, by and large, put pressure on students not to do well in school, as if it were an affront to blackness." In a sad twist of irony, Ogbu himself was labeled by many as a sell-out who blamed the victim, a man with "no heart for his people." In effect, because he exposed the "acting white" phenomenon, Ogbu was accused of "acting white." Furthermore, most of the people in Shaker Heights continued to look for other answers to the achievement gap problem, discounting Ogbu's findings as irrelevant.
There is more than one influence behind the achievement gap, not least racism and unequal funding in our schools. But the "acting white" phenomenon within black youth culture is a critical factor, and one we can do something about. To ignore it does our children a disservice. The idea that you can be either black or smart, but not both, forces young people to make a false choice, and a dangerously unfair one. It is essential for adults to step up and take responsibility, as Ms. Carruthers suggests in a closing call to action: "The responsibility falls on the African-American community, which needs to celebrate achievement, rather than shun it."
In the complex, dangerous world we are sending our children into, only developed people can be truly free. As The Efficacy Institute's Vision/Mission statement puts it: "Developed people [are the only ones who] are free to find meaning, to build quality lives, and to leave a legacy of wisdom and humanity." Black students should grow up knowing it is educated people who are the greatest messengers of their heritage, not the other way around.
Read Paige Carruthers' full article online at:
Read "Rich, Black, Flunking" online at:
http://www.eastbayexpress.com/2003-05-21/news/rich-black-flunking/1
|
|
Memorization:
The Neglected Key to Learning?
Memorization, recently fallen out of favor in educational practices, is like a wallflower at the prom: Laced with hidden potential, no one is asking it to dance. Although Texas A&M professor of neuroscience, Dr. William R. Klemm agrees that the ultimate goal of education should be to "teach people how to think [and] solve problems," he worries that in getting there many educators "discount the importance of memory."
In his article, "What Good is Learning if You Don't Remember It?" Dr. Klemm makes the case that the ability to remember things is central to developing knowledge and skills. Students, as he says, "cannot apply what they understand if they don't remember it." He also provides evidence of a correlation between working memory and problem-solving ability.
Dr. Klemm writes that most students rely on rote memorization, a process of remembering that is not only inefficient but also discourages learners from actively thinking. What he proposes in his paper is a more effective process of memorization, one that calls for less effort and more fun. Key elements to effective memorization include recall (here Dr. Klemm speaks to test anxiety, and offers strategies to combat it), emotions, attention, organization, association, chunking, and rehearsal. He also provides his "Teaching Game Plan" that follows a 10-minute teach/learn format.
David Glenn's article, "You Will be Tested on This" adds to the discussion on memory by "dusting off an old insight: To maximize classroom learning, quiz early and often." Mr. Glenn reintroduces the work of 1930's graduate student, Howard F. Spitzer, whose studies found that students who were quizzed shortly after a lesson were more likely to remember the material later on. This follows Dr. Klemm's logic that students who actively work with the material being taught are more able to retrieve the information when necessary.
Mr. Glenn goes on to describe a recent study performed on psychology students at Washington University which shows student performance improves with the regular administration of short quizzes at the close of every class. Henry L. (Roddy) Roediger, one of the authors of the Washington study observes that, "In education today, people tend to think of tests as dipstick devices. You stick it in to measure what people know. But every time you test someone, you change what they know."
If frequent quizzing improves memory (and discourages students' from last-minute rote-memorization practices) then it is a sound technique to improve classroom learning. To those who say that quizzes eat up valuable learning time, Mr. Roediger responds: Frequent quizzing "is the best thing you could be doing if you want them to learn. Give them a quiz, and give them feedback on that quiz."
To read Dr. William R. Klemm's full article online, visit the Journal of Effective Teaching (JET) at:
http://www.uncw.edu/cte/et/articles/Vol7_1/Klemm.htm
View "You Will be Tested on This" with membership or a small fee by visiting The Chronicle of Higher Education online at:
http://chronicle.com/subscribe/login?url=/weekly/v53/i40/40a01401.htm |
| Know someone who'd like From Now On?
| |
|
How does the U.S. rank internationally in education? The most recent results show that the U.S. ranks 12th of 24 countries in 4th-grade math, 15th of 44 countries in 8th grade math (2003), and 9th of 35 countries in 4th-grade reading (2001).
These are the results of two highly respected, comparative international assessments of student performance, TIMSS (Trends in International Math and Science Study), and PIRLS (Progress in International Reading Literacy Study). TIMSS gives us an assessment of the math and science performance of U.S. students (grades 4 and 8) compared to that of their peers from around the world; it is administered every four years (1995-present). PIRLS is administered every five years (2001-present) and gives us an assessment of how our 4th graders compare with others around the world in reading, including studies of behavior and attitudes toward reading. Both are criterion-referenced assessments.
These tests are important, and it is important that Americans understand their results. A new national poll of registered voters shows that an overwhelming majority of Americans are concerned about how our children will compete internationally in the 21st century (for full results see the article "U.S. Students Need 21st Century Skills to Compete in Global Market"). Researcher Geoffrey Garin comments, "Right now, far more Americans perceive us as falling behind other countries... than see us taking the lead."
They are right to be concerned. Consider the 4th-grade math statistics: Although American 4th graders showed no change in their math performance between 1995 and 2003, children from five other countries significantly increased their scores and either passed, or came close to passing, the U.S. score. Perhaps more disturbing is the statistic from the PIRLS study of student attitudes toward reading. Out of 35 participating countries, U.S. student attitudes toward reading ranked third from the bottom--suggesting our children are showing little interest in this fundamental subject.
Former Colorado Governor and L.A. County School Superintendent, Roy Romer, Director of the organization ED in 08, recently commented: "The evidence is very clear that national leaders must strengthen America's schools to grow the economy and ensure our students can compete." The Partnership for 21st Century Skills even goes further; they suggest that No Child Left Behind (the federal legislation that mandates aggressive improvements in the academic performance of American students) extend its focus to include what they term the international achievement gap.
The 2007 TIMSS results are due this December, and the 2006 PIRLS are also forthcoming. Watch FNO for full reporting of the results, as soon as they are available.
Full URL addresses to articles reference in this article:
|
Don't wait for your friend to foward you this newsletter again...
|
|
|
|
|
