Journal 10-Michelle Rhee and Her Ques...

Journal 10-Michelle Rhee and Her Quest to Change D.C. Education

Thomas, E, Conant, E & Wingert, P. (2008, Aug. 23). An unlikely gambler. Newsweek, [152(8)], 54-57.



I have always been a big fan of Michelle Rhee ever since I saw her on an interview with Charlie Rose. It was one year at Curriculum Camp when I snuck back to my room and turned on the T.V. to relax. Here is the interview (http://www.charlierose.com/view/interview/9170). She seems to be a smart, straight shooter who will not hesitate to say what she thinks. She also seems to not take to much stock in what people think about her. One can learn much more about Michelle Rhee by reading this Newsweek article entitled "An Unlikely Gambler" (http://www.newsweek.com/id/154901/page/1).

Michelle graduated form Cornell in 1992 and went on to teach 2nd grade in a Baltimore City School. She tells a story about her 8 year old students that seems to be a bit shocking and disturbing. One day she asked her students to line up. As they were lining up, a boy fell down, and as the other students passed by they kick him. Michelle goes on to say that it seemed like second nature for the other students to kick the boy that was down. Rhee says, "I was, like, 'What are they doing?' But it was like second nature to them. The kid is down. Kick him." Michelle openly admits that it took her over a year to gain control of her students.

Rhee also believes that teachers can make a difference. When all else is bad in a student's life, the teacher can improve a student's learning and performance on standardized tests. While Rhee taught 2nd grade, she was able to take her students, who previously preformed the worst to performing the best in Baltimore. She goes on to say that the students that she taught that went from worst to best still came from the same economically depressed, violence ridden environment than the students from previous years. She states that the only difference is the teacher they see everyday when they come to school.

As Chancellor of D.C. schools she is putting her belief in the teach to the test. Her biggest struggle will be a new merit pay program for teaching excellence in her school district. Teachers actually can choose to give up their tenure and receive merit pay of around $100,000 to $130,000 a year. Teachers who choose to keep their tenure will still receive a 26% pay increase. Rhee really could only do this type of teacher merit pay program if poor teachers were not previously removed, and they were. Of course, removing any tenured teacher is not without controversy.

Rhee seems to be sensitive to educational equality for students in her city, Washington D.C. As a democrat, she is not always thrilled with the way the Democratic Party addresses education. Often, Democrats will state that Bush's No Child Left Behind act is, as she says "sucking the life out of our teachers." Rhee goes on to say, about this statement, "come on." Who is looking out for the black child in Washington who historically had to attend under performing schools, Rhee states? She goes on to say that not until the Democratic Party breaks the ties with teacher's unions will true educational reform occur in this country.

Journal 9-Pussycat Dolls on the Nicko...

Journal 9-Hey, President Obama, Did You Let Malia and Sasha Watch the Kids Choice Awards?

The above video is from the opening act of the Pussycat Dolls' performance at the Nickelodeon's Kids Choice Awards. You will see that in the video the barely dressed performers touch themselves while gyrating in suggestive ways. The video is the second song that the Pussycat Dolls sung which was "When I grow up." I just wonder how many girls watched this performance and thought, when I grow up I too want to dress suggestively, touch myself and gyrate in suggestive positions. I hope that all the 12 year old girls will actually grow up chronologically and psychologically before they even think about acting that way, even though it really does not seem appropriate for any age, I wonder who thought this was appropriate for children to watch. A guy name Greg at the Kultureblog stated, "Someone please explain to me why the Pussycat Dolls are an appropriate
live act for performing at a kids’ award show? Was there a burlesque
deficit at the prior awards show" (http://www.kulturblog.com/2009/03/liveblogging-the-nickelodeon-kids-choice-awards/)

The Pussycat Dolls originated as a burlesque group in Los Angles in 1995. The Pussycat Dolls eventually moved to Las Vegas and gained their own lounge and casino in Caesars Palace. The casino has woman dressed in "Pussycat Doll Attire." The is a second Pussycat Dolls burlesque troupe that performs in the Pussycat Lounge.

Hasbro considered making a line of dolls after the famed Pussycat Dolls but decided against it. A group called "Dad's and Daughters" campaigned against the line of dolls. The Dad's and Daughters group stated, “We asked Hasbro executives to imagine encouraging their own 6-year-old
daughters and granddaughters to engage in developmentally unhealthy
behavior,” said Joe Kelly, president of Dads & Daughters, in a
statement.” It appears that they did that, and then made the right
decision for their families, our families, and the company.” I wonder how the executives at Nickelodeon came to the decision that having the Pussycat Dolls perform would not be a "developmentally unhealthy behavior."

As for the title of this blog post, I have no idea if the Obama girls watched this year's Nickelodeon's Kids Choice Awards. I cannot find any evidence of it on the Internet. I do know that the year before, both Sasha and Malia were at the Kids Choice Awards. My question for President Obama is, how does having the Pussycat Dolls as the opening act on the Kids Choice Awards, help parents and teachers teach children that this type of sexual behavior is not appropriate? I am not sure that the 11,000,000 children between the ages of 2-11 really need to know what fish net stockings look like. I am not the only parent, or father, for that matter, that feels this type of "entertainment" is inappropriate for children. After reading the Fairly Odd Mother's blog and comments, I realized I was not alone. (http://fairlyoddmother.blogspot.com/2009/04/and-i-thought-worst-thing-on.html)

Ever since the 1960's, educators have realized that we now must teach values, morals and ethics to our students. When executives making decisions that are unhealthy and inappropriate, that makes our jobs as educators more difficult. If you really want Nickelodeon to have more wholesome programing, we as parents and educators need to band together and stop buying products that are advertised on Nickelodeon. I would think that, that might get some people's attention.

Journal 7-Delayed Gratification

Journal 7-Delayed Gratification

Abumrad, Jad & Krulwich, Robert (2009, March 9). [Podcast] Mischel’s Marshmallows. RadioLab. Retrieved April 7, 2009, from http://blogs.wnyc.org/radiolab/2009/03/09/mischel%E2%80%99s-marshmallows/

Click here for the original podcast. You should listen to it because it is fascinating and very well done

I first learned about the famous marshmallow test this past week while I was in my car listening to a radio show/podcast that I love. It is called RadioLab. Dr. Walter Mischel (said like the President's wife) was the man who conducted the marshmallow test. He is currently employed at Columbia University in New York City. What Dr. Mischel did is he took 4 year olds and had them come to a room that was rather plain. In the room on a plate was a marshmallow. Each 4 year old entered the room and was told they could eat the marshmallow now if they chose to or they could wait until Dr. Mischel returned and they would get two marshmallows. Mischel tested 500 children and there was a huge range. Many children made it and were able to earn a second marshmallow, but many children could not wait. Some children ate their marshmallow right away but the average time a child delayed gratification was 7 to 8 minutes.

asked his girls how specific children, who he dealt with exclusively on this study, were doing. Some children were doing well and others were not doing so well. Then Dr. Dr. Mischel had two daughters going to the school where he tested these 500 children. About 5 years after the study, over pancakes in the morning, Dr. Mischel made some kind of inference that seems to be true. This is the amazing thing. There seems to be a direct correlation between the children who were able to delay gratification and their success in school. And the children who ate the marshmallow without waiting were, well, not doing as well.

You would never think this would happen but it has. Ten years or so later, Dr. Mischel looked at the children's SAT scores and there is distinct connection between the students who were able to delay gratification and higher scores on the SAT. Dr. Mischel calls the connection a "remarkable correlations between the actual SAT score and the delayed gratification time." Well, how much better did students do? How much better did the children who delayed gratification do than children the children that did not delay gratification? The SAT scores for both groups are startling? For one student, on average, the difference in SAT scores between a child who waited 1 minute to eat the marshmallow and the student who waited 20 minutes was a difference of about 210 points. And what happened to the kids that were not able to delay gratification? Dr. Mischel says that these kids are "most likely to become a bully."

40 years later Dr. Mischel is still in touch with these children from the marshmallow study. Dr. Mischel's and his group expanded the data that is being collected. They keep in touch with about 250 of these now adults. The kids who were able to delay gratification now have better jobs, have gone further in school and are even healthier. Does this mean I can try this test on my 4 year old and find out if he or she is going to be a good student and be successful? Well, the answer to that is, statistically, yes. So, am I to believe that at 4 years old, when the concept of will power is forming, that a child either has it or they don't? And if my child does not have will power are they doomed? Could schools use this marshmallow test as a screening tool for kindergarten and future schooling? Could a pediatricians use this test to judge whether the child who grows up and has a family history of diabetes will be more likely to get this disease. Do we even need to have a child's genetic code? Can we come up with a mathematical equation that predicts how successful a child is going to be at the age of 4 much like how a pediatrician comes up with a child's height and weight percentile? I keep coming back to the thought of, "is there any hope?"

All is not lost. What Mischel found out is that children who delayed gratification used little tricks to distract themselves or pretend that the marshmallow was some how not as desirable. And if that is the case, tricks can be taught and learned. So, Mischel took this one step further. He said to the child, who was unable to delay gratification previously, and was face to face with the marshmallow again, to pretend that there was a picture frame around the marshmallow and that it was a picture and not an actual tasty marshmallow. Guess what? Children, once they were taught this trick, were able to delay gratification.

This study has some interesting implications for education, early child development and quite possibly the future of our nation. If we can control obesity by teaching 4 year olds tricks to delay gratification we may have really got something. If we can control obesity, which is associated with various diseases such as cardiovascular disease, diabetes, certain cancers and osteoporosis, we can help people live heather and happier lives. We will also save our nation a great deal of medical and health care expenses that seem to have major implications for our economy. These connections to delaying gratification go far beyond just obesity and a person's health.

Journal 6-Synchronous Online One-on-One Professional Development

Journal 6-Synchronous Online One-on-One Professional Development

Yes...there were some glitches. For example, I forgot to share my screen a couple times and the movie froze up a couple times from YouTube, but all in all it went very well. I am talking about my first synchronous staff development opportunity via an on-line meeting software called Adobe Connect. I had two teachers sign up for the training, but only one teacher was able to attend. Lyn Mattern attended by sitting at her classroom computer and following along with a lesson. She practiced what she learned "on the spot" and did it on her own machine. The professional development opportunity that CA Boces offered was all about Social Bookmarking. We explored sites like Diigo.com and Delicious.com. I have to be honest, it took me some time to accept these sites and even explore them since they had the word "social" in them. Social...ah, that's something you do outside of school. I also felt that if it was "social" it had little to do with school. I was wrong, which is a great example of Piaget's idea of "Cognitive Dissonance." My hope is that you will be so inclined as to follow me down this Piaget path as I diverge slightly off topic. I will not take lone. Cognitive Dissonance is the idea that what you are learning goes against what your believe. Here is how Cognitive Dissonance is defined by Wikipedia.org

Cognitive dissonance is an uncomfortable feeling caused by holding two contradictory ideas simultaneously. The "ideas" or "cognitions" in question may include attitudes and beliefs, and also the awareness of one's behavior. The theory of cognitive dissonance proposes that people have a motivational drive
to reduce dissonance by changing their attitudes, beliefs, and
behaviors, or by justifying or rationalizing their attitudes, beliefs,
and behaviors.^[1] Cognitive dissonance theory is one of the most influential and extensively studied theories in social psychology.

What does this have to do with the training Lyn and I participated in? Well, I want to be transparent in my thinking about a tool that I thought was really not that useful and designed for something not pertaining to education what so ever, or at least I believed that, to a tool that I use just about everyday. I went from not considering it for even a bit of exploration to a tool I use everyday and now am training teacher how to use. Not only am I teaching teachers how to use social bookmarking sites, I am offering it to them in an extremely ubiquitous way by offering the trainings online and adjusted to teacher's busy schedule, not to mention possibly causing less environmental impact due to the fact that no one had to drive.

What did Lyn and I learn? Well, we learned that you can actually create groups in Diigo and join groups with similar interests. There are many teacher groups on Diigo that could be very helpful. We also learned that you could highlight and comment on any webpage with what is called a sticky note. This could be very helpful for students who may be looking at a teacher's bookmarks that were saved for a specific class assignment. We also learned that you can actually communicate within Diigo and discuss articles or websites that have been added or recommended for you. Lyn was able to share her screen and sign up for a Diigo account and install the toolbar while I watched and gave little pointers.

I must admit that I learned a great deal from this workshop. I learned that Adobe Connect can be a great product to collaborate with. I really wish that Lyn had a headset/microphone so that we could have conversed with each other. We did most of our communication by me speaking and Lyn chatting in the chat area. Well, once again, technology can be a live and learn type of endeavor so we will have headset/microphones the next time.

Journal 5-

Journal 5-Top News - Podcast trumps lecture in one college study

 

Carter, Dennis (2009, March 6th). Podcast trumps lecture in one college study . eSchool News, Retrieved March 20, 2009, from http://www.eschoolnews.com/news/top-news/?i=57612&page=2

 

On March 6th, I bookmarked an article that I was going to read later.  I bookmarked it on March 6.  I finally did read the article on March 20, 2009.  The article discusses how at one college, State University of New York Fredonia, students who listened to podcasts did better than students who actually went to the lecture.  For those of you who may not know, a Podcast is a type of audio that is published online and generally has an RSS feed so that one can subscribe to future audio broadcasts that occur on the Internet.  Using RSS, which stands for Real Simple Syndication, allowes for all future audio broadcasts to automatically download to ones computer.  I found this article in eSchool News very interesting since, for years now, I have been teaching k-12 teachers and on occasion students how to podcast.  And in my estimation, podcasting has never really taken off in our school districts.  The main reason I feel it has not taken off is it is not easy enough yet.  This is changing.

 

 

It seems that the main reason students who listened to the podcasts out performed students who attended the face to face class is the pause and rewind button.  Many students took advantage of these buttons to process the information, take notes on it and re-listien to anything that they may have missed or did not understand.  The article states:

 

Students who watched the lecture podcast--available from the iTunes U online video library--scored an average of 71 percent. Students who sat through the 30-minute classroom lecture scored an average of 62 percent, according to the study.

The article goes on to say that this was a very small sample of students who were tested, suggesting it may not be very reliable.  The article also stated that some college professors were concerned about the study.  Some professors felt that if students could perform better by listening to the podcast than students who actually came to class would make an argument to students that they really don't need to go to class.  The article also touches on this concern:

 

For those professors who might worry that the technology discourages students from showing up in class, this statistic might be welcome news: More than 90 percent of students said they preferred "traditional lectures with computer-based learning as a supplement for revising" their notes.

  

 I actually used to do the same thing when I went to college, well, I actually still am going to college.  During my undergraduate schooling I would tape record all of my lectures.  In my notes books, you know the blue line on the edge of notebook paper, I would fold it.  I would take notes on the face to face lecture in class and in the folded area I would take notes from my tape recorder.  This method really helped me get through many of my classes.  Of course, when there was something I did not understand, I would rewind and listen to the part in question again.  This older technology that I used is really not that much different than the technology of the podcasted lecture and how students at Fredonia used this newer type of technology. 

 

 

  

 

Journal 4-Non-inclusive Disease

Journal 4-Non-inclusive Disease

 

I first heard about this issue from Dean Shareski.  Dean is an Educational Technologist in Canada and I received this communication via a tweet, on, you guessed it, twitter.  Dean's tweet went something like "check out this case of political correctness" so I checked it out.  College students from Carleton University dropped Cystic Fibrosis from the list of organizations that they would be donating money to.  Why?  It has been determined that Cystic Fibrosis is a disease that primarily inflicts white people, primarily men.  Cystic Fibrosis was deemed not an "inclusive" enough disease.  Many college campuses across Canada have an orientation week and during this week students raise money for good causes.  Last year alone Canadian college students raised over $1 million dollars to aid in researching cures for the disease.  Cystic Fibrosis has been supported by college students for 25 years.  Students are now considering rotating charities that will receive money.

    Only one student on the Orientation Week counsel descended.  His name is Nick Bergamini.  Bergamin stated that he feels that this case of political correctness has gone to far.  Bergamini went on to say that the college students were just attempting to be more diverse when in fact they are not supportting people with a disease with the average life span of about 35 years.

    I of course Googled Nick Bergamani.  Like many college students, Nick has a Facebook account.  So, I sent him an email to get his reaction to a couple things.  He did not respond to the email. 

    A later article was published in an online magazine called the National Post. It stated that students were concerned about all the bad press that Carleton University was getting.  Many students started petitions to have fellow students who were in charge of the committee that dropped Cystic Fibrosis from it's charities removed.  Students at Carlton University back petaled and changed their stance on funding Cystic Fibrosis.  I did some deeper investigating and noticed that this topic made it to the Stormfront website.  http://www.stormfront.org/forum/showthread.php?t=545980  For those that don't know what Stormfront is, it is the new face of the KKK and their online presence is at http://stormfront.org.  If you are reading this blog post from a school, you most-likely will not be able to get the the Stormfront link. 

    Once again, you just never know.  You never know when an issue will get blown out of proportion.  You will never know it as a student in grade school or college.  You will never know it if you are an administrator either. 

 

   

Journal 3-Paying Students For Grades

Journal 3-Should Students Be Paid?

 

Toppo, G (2008, Aug. 1). Good grades pay off literally. USA Today, Retrieved 2/3, 2009, from http://www.usatoday.com/news/education/2008-01-27-grades_N.htm

 

    The idea of paying students for grades is really nothing new.  But for a large school district in Washington D.C. to try the experiment is a big deal.  15 middle schools in Washington D.C. have started what is called the "Capital Gains" program.  Students get paid incentives to go to school, behave and get good grades.  The program just started this past fall and provides payment for some 3,300 students.  Supporters of the "Capital Gains" program state that many life lessons are being learned.  Showing up on time and putting in 100% effort are just two of the life lessons students learn that are not part of the stated curriculum.  The maximum that students can earn is $100 every two weeks.  When the first payments came out in October 2008, the average check was $43.  This program did cost Washington D.C. $137,813.  The money does not go directly to the students.  It is placed in a student bank account that they can not access until they are 18 years old.

    Some have stated that in away a pay-to-behave program for inter-city students is in some ways racist.  The argument there is that D.C. school officials may be sending the message that we understand that your students are out of control and don't work hard in school and in-turn your methods have not work.  The message may be that black parents are not able to discipline or motive their children to do well in school so we will just pay them off.  Fryer, the black Harvard Economist who created the "Capital Gains" program for D.C. middle schools, totally disagrees.  If any thing, Fryer states, "the real subtle racism here is the fact that we're continuing to do the same things we've always done, and we're allowing these children not to achieve."  

    Does this kind of incentive program work.  Well, in Texas it did.  According to Cornell economist C. Kirabo Jackson "found that it linked to a 30% rise in the number of students with high SAT and ACT scores and an 8% rise in college-going students." (Tuppo, USA Today)  Many people feel that these incentives can be harmful.  Many students seem to be self motivated to earn good grades and go to school and not earn money.  Often, college credit is give to students in classes and the college credit seems to be a bigger motivator than money.  Bob Schaeffer of the National Center for Fair & Open Testing, a watchdog group, is more blunt: "Bribing kids for higher test scores — or paying teachers bounties for their students' work — is similar to giving them steroids," he says. "Short-term performance might improve but the long-term effects can be very damaging." (Tuppo USA Today)

    I really feel that we want students, at whatever cost, deep down, to love learning and the love of learning be the true motivator for them as part of their journeys to lifelong learners.  I cannot see how earning money for behavior and good grades can in any way contribute to love of learning being the motivator.  Money, to some, is the anti-motivator.  I understand the program and I actually give Dr. Fryer a lot of credit for giving it a try in 15 D.C. middle schools.  I understand the idea of being a risk taker and trying something new.  And honestly I hope it works.  But if it does not work, I wonder if we could be further behind?  How will all students feel if the money is no more and the "Capital Gains" experiment goes away.  Will teachers have a harder time getting students to come to school, behave and work hard?  Oh, ya...what happens to the love of learning for learning's sake.  I feel that concept will be even farther out of reach.