Friday, December 11, 2020

National Reading and Math Scores Remain Stagnant

This week’s article summary is National Reading and Math Scores Haven't Budged in a Decade.

It’s probably not surprising that both reading and math standardized test results haven’t improved very much over the years, even when discounting Covid-19’s impact on student learning.

From my vantage point, these stagnant scores result from how America teaches reading and math.

As an article summary earlier this year pointed out, students who lack wide content knowledge typically struggle with reading comprehension: the more you know about the subject, the easier it is to understand readings about it.

Another article captures the dilemma of stagnant reading scores: “There are two essential components of reading comprehension: decoding ability and language comprehension. If a student can't decode, it doesn't matter how much background knowledge and vocabulary he understands—he won't be able to understand what's on the page. But the opposite is also true: If a student can decode but doesn't have a deep enough understanding of oral language, he won't be able to understand the words he can say out loud. Are students struggling on these tests to decode the words, or are students decoding words well, but lacking the background knowledge and vocabulary to know what they mean? Or is it some combination of both? Tests measure comprehension, not its components.”

Over the past few years, most schools have recommitted to emphasizing phonics and decoding, so my guess is the moribund test scores are more a result of not enough exposure to rich content.

To me, math test scores similarly relate to how we teach. Schools in the US continue to focus on one-step math problems and superficial coverage of concepts. On the international PISA exam, American students struggle mightily compared to students from other countries when it comes to multi-step math problems. This is partly due to our kids not having deep conceptual understanding of core math concepts, e.g., number operations, number flexibility, and algebraic reasoning.

What’s so gratifying to me is Trinity’s teaching of reading and math includes rich content exposure and ensures deeper conceptual understanding whether it’s subitizing in math or learning progressions in both subjects. And our standardized test results over the past few years tell the tale: our ERB scores both in reading and especially in math are well above the independent school norms.

Much like the slow food movement, I am a believer in the slow learning movement: for kids to truly understand, give them time to think, practice, go deeper, and demonstrate their learning in multiple ways.

Joe

------

American students are struggling with reading. And the country's education system hasn't found a way to make it better.

In fact, fourth and eighth grade reading scores on the National Assessment of Educational Progress essentially haven't budged in 10 years. That's causing some alarm, considering the number of reforms aimed at American schools over the past decade: stronger academic standards, more tests, stricter teacher evaluations and laws that discourage schools from promoting third-graders if they can't read proficiently, to name a few.

"Reading has just been more or less plateauing, stagnating," said Peggy Carr, a leader of the assessments division for the National Center for Education Statistics, which administers the NAEP to a representative sample of students across the country every two years.

Results of the 2019 NAEP, also known as the Nation's Report Card, showed elementary and middle school students scored worse in reading than they did two years ago. Specifically, 35% of fourth graders were proficient in reading in 2019, slightly down from 37% in 2017 and barely up from 33% of such students considered proficient a decade ago, in 2009. About 34% of eighth-graders were proficient in reading this year, a drop from 36% in 2017 and only a tiny bit better than 32% in 2009. 

To be clear, the national exams set a high bar for proficiency – higher than most state achievement tests. But they're the only consistent measure of how students nationwide are doing in core subjects over time.

"Since the first reading assessment in 1992, there’s been no growth for the lowest-performing students in either fourth or eighth grade," Carr said. "Our students struggling the most with reading are where they were nearly 30 years ago." Most schools also don't spend enough time having children practice reading fluency and developing their vocabulary, said a literacy professor at Kent State University. Fluency helps kids understand words immediately and not use up so much mental capacity laboring on each one. "Fluency requires different instructional methods than phonics," he said. "Practice is key." 

Are national math scores any better? In the short term, not really. But over 27 years, they've improved more than reading scores. About 41% of fourth graders and 34% of eighth graders scored proficient in math in 2019. That's not significantly different from 2017. Carr said the math scores are also about the same as a decade ago. But since 1990, students at both grade levels have improved in math: Fourth graders this year scored 27 points higher on the 300-point exam compared with their peers in 1990. Eighth-grade students posted an average score that was 19 points higher than in 1990.

What else has happened to math and reading scores in the past decade? The gap between the most- and least-competent students got bigger.  "Compared to a decade ago, we see that lower-achieving students made score declines in all of the assessments, while higher-performing students made score gains," Carr said. This divergence in performance is one reason why average student achievement hasn't changed in a decade, Carr explained.

Friday, December 4, 2020

The Importance of Influence in Relationships

This week’s article summary is about the various ways we influence others.

At first, I bristled at the article stating that ‘all relationships are transactional.’ 

But just like the author who at first questioned his own research, I reflected on my relationships with others and to what extent they involve transactions. All my personal and/or professional relationships include various degrees of give and take, negotiation and persuasion, trust and honesty, respect and responsibility, and/or leaps of faith. While the word ‘transaction’ has a negative connotation, the article’s author explains that the purpose of our interactions with others is to ultimately further or achieve something. This morning before I came to school, my wife asked me if I would be so kind as to get her a pumpkin spice latte at Starbucks. I said yes, went to Starbucks, and then brought it home for her. A nice gesture for a sleepy spouse, but a transaction nevertheless. 

Clearly working at Trinity (or in any school) involves establishing, furthering, and sustaining a variety of relationships---with students, colleagues, parents. Sometimes we influence others (through our support and encouragement, expertise, assistance, problem-solving, etc.) and other times we lean and rely on others. I’ve always worked in fairly big schools where it’s important to trust that others are doing their job, ensuring the effective and efficient operation of the school, be it recess coverage, drop-off/pick-up duty, balancing the budget, or scope/sequence of our curriculum.

Regardless of size, the most crucial aspect of relationship building at any school is how we treat and support one another. Teachers are caregivers and we both give and need care.

Whether or not you bristle at the word ‘transactional’ as I initially did, we need to remind ourselves and each other how important relationships are to our happiness and to school success.

Joe

--

I’ve just wrapped up three years of thinking, researching, and writing about the ways we build relationships to continue to engage in good work. Throughout the process, I’ve learned a lot about the power of relationships, and about my own ability (and sometimes inability) to form them and use them in ways that truly benefit all. Here are four of the big ideas I’ve gathered in this work.

All relationships are transactional: This was initially a tough pill for me to swallow because I do not like, particularly in education, to think that every relationship we form is for a purpose. But transactions don’t mean lack of caring, interest or responsibility. Instead, it simply means that we recognize that interactions are about give and take, and that our work with each other, regardless of the roles we play, is in service to something beyond ourselves.

Influence is something to be strengthened: This also seemed negative as the idea coalesced. When we think of exerting influence on somebody, we often see it as nefarious. What I’ve learned is that influence is something we all must look to build if we hope to assist others in making the decisions that are best for those we serve. Regardless of who said it first, “It takes a village” is certainly a true statement. And no matter who we are in that village, if the knowledge and skills we have will prove beneficial in making changes in ways that will be best for learners and our community-at-large, then we have a responsibility to use that knowledge and those skills. Influencing others simply means helping them see what they might not currently be able to visualize, and helping them get to where they might not currently be able to go.

Influence can be chunked into different buckets: The ways we use influence can be broken down into four areas, depending on how much effort is needed to start or sustain a relationship interaction. For instance, a Pull force requires a lot of work to start and sustain the interaction, while a Push really only requires work on the sustaining end. A Shove is very hands-off, while a Nudge requires a lot of pre-work and little to nothing in order to sustain. Each of these Forces of Influence, as we call them, have different characteristics, different optimal times of use, and different strategies to employ. The key is that no one influence move works in all situations; we become better at growing relationships by recognizing who needs what, when, and why. Then, it is all about the how of working with others to make change happen.

No person is an island: While relationship interactions can happen one-on-one, there is very little that we do that doesn’t involve a wider circle of people we know, value, and trust. In the world of relationships and influence, incorporating the skillsets of more than one person is precisely what is needed in order to make lasting change.

This work has made me rethink my strategies for interacting with others, and the steps I take when trying to lead to change, whether it be on my own part, or in partnership with others. Overturning some thinking around relationships and relationship building has helped me welcome the power of influence and the benefit it can provide in reaching positive outcomes for all.