Heard an interesting stat at the WTI conference last month - children of families that make more than $108,000 per year, graduate college by 24 years old (6 years post HS) at a rate of approximately 75%. When the income range changes to between $34,000 to $108,000, the graduation rate drops to about 25% - and just because that was not terrifying enough - when income is less than $34,000 the percent that graduate college by 24 years old is less than 10%.
There is the challenge. And that feels daunting when you look at those percentages -- those college graduation rates are what our current system produces. And that stat is why we simply cannot teach like we always have - our results have not been great. Doing the same thing and expecting different results...... well we know what that is, insanity. How we introduce students topics, how we expect them to process and understand must be changed. We must recognize that the current system is not helping all students, and it was not designed to do so. The system was designed to sort.
We must not sort, time that is needed and grades must be done differently. Giving a student an F or B does not make him/her ready for their post HS life. Grades cannot be the final measure of a student in a class room. Their success after our walls should be, and that is why differentiation is key.
So when a school is over half free and reduced lunch your challenge is there. I strive to make sure that my students can successfully complete their first semester of secondary math beyond HS - whether that is a technical college, a 4 year-college Algebra course or a Calculus depending on the courses the student have taken with me at my school. And that is not easy; I continually push myself and my students to make sure they are all ready, even my D students. For all of them are moving to careers (some thru college, some not) - and I accept that it is my job to make sure they can do math for their next step.
If students are not pushed, are not given upper level work there will be no belief they can handle secondary education. And I think belief is what is really missing below $108,000 income level. We must stop sorting and start setting up students for post-HS success.
Showing posts with label college. Show all posts
Showing posts with label college. Show all posts
Saturday, January 30, 2016
Monday, July 7, 2014
82% Fail Algebra 1 Final
Saw this video -- where in Montgomery County, Maryland, "which is considered a well-off suburb of Washington, D.C." -- 82% of students failed their Algebra I final. And the video asks why - to me the video felt like they were searching for blame - and there is plenty of it to go around.
Lets start with a system of standardized testing that pushes too far too fast. If you do not take time for students to really understand the concepts & interconnections and have recursive practice students simply memorize to pass a unit test, then, they are doomed on any really understanding. This lack of understanding in turn dooms them on a final.
Teachers feel pressure to show what is on the standardized tests, but if a student is not ready - and they need more practice on "lesser" material - then that must happen. Yet the CCSS are demanding and there is a pressure there (which I think we teachers need to balance -- College Readiness is number one).
Also - the amount of material is a question. See the review final from there website. The amount of material covered is impressive, but are the students getting a deeper understanding - is it possible to push a very young adult through the amount of material on the practice final and have them truly understand? I always remind myself the students will always do the minimum - so they memorized during the semester, the minimum, and then are ill-prepared for the final (and college math - again somewhere around 30-40% are not college ready).
And I am careful not to criticize the teachers there - perhaps they have a K-12 math program where this is what Algebra 1 learns, but at my school - nearly half of their final is Algebra II. The challenge is not to look at any one course like Algebra I and ask what they need, but to look at the HS graduate with 3 years of math and ask if they have the skills. If you don't get deep into parabolas in Algebra I then save them for Algebra II, and spend time doing more projects, recursive practice, etc. It does mean trading away something in Algebra II - perhaps come conics, or some imaginary number graphing - that can go to PreCalc. I know we need to trade there too then, but that is our job to decide what is most important for the time we have - and if we make the curriculum manageable then the fail rate will fall.
Finally I don't blame the students - I believe that finals always fall one letter grade. And unless 82% of the students got a D or F mark for the 4th quarter - then there is something awry. Systems for grading need to be designed that ensure success - but if that system is impossible when overloaded with topics. For the record I only test what we have mastered on a final, my final changes based on the topics covered each year. (FYI - I have about 12% failure rate)
In the end - teachers need to take control. Set a curriculum that prepares the students for two places in their lives. Point 1 -- being college ready, and point 2 -- having the problem solving skills & basic math to be successful at 27 years of age. I often joke that I work for the students, the 27 year old student. And at 27 they want to be skilled at problem solving, and do not want to have flunked out of college because of math (skills or because of fear).
If we remember our accountability is not to a predetermined curriculum plan, or to politicians or to administrators - not really even to parents - but to students (it's their life!), then we are doing our job. Then we will be preparing the 27 year old for their challenges.
Lets start with a system of standardized testing that pushes too far too fast. If you do not take time for students to really understand the concepts & interconnections and have recursive practice students simply memorize to pass a unit test, then, they are doomed on any really understanding. This lack of understanding in turn dooms them on a final.
Teachers feel pressure to show what is on the standardized tests, but if a student is not ready - and they need more practice on "lesser" material - then that must happen. Yet the CCSS are demanding and there is a pressure there (which I think we teachers need to balance -- College Readiness is number one).
Also - the amount of material is a question. See the review final from there website. The amount of material covered is impressive, but are the students getting a deeper understanding - is it possible to push a very young adult through the amount of material on the practice final and have them truly understand? I always remind myself the students will always do the minimum - so they memorized during the semester, the minimum, and then are ill-prepared for the final (and college math - again somewhere around 30-40% are not college ready).
And I am careful not to criticize the teachers there - perhaps they have a K-12 math program where this is what Algebra 1 learns, but at my school - nearly half of their final is Algebra II. The challenge is not to look at any one course like Algebra I and ask what they need, but to look at the HS graduate with 3 years of math and ask if they have the skills. If you don't get deep into parabolas in Algebra I then save them for Algebra II, and spend time doing more projects, recursive practice, etc. It does mean trading away something in Algebra II - perhaps come conics, or some imaginary number graphing - that can go to PreCalc. I know we need to trade there too then, but that is our job to decide what is most important for the time we have - and if we make the curriculum manageable then the fail rate will fall.
Finally I don't blame the students - I believe that finals always fall one letter grade. And unless 82% of the students got a D or F mark for the 4th quarter - then there is something awry. Systems for grading need to be designed that ensure success - but if that system is impossible when overloaded with topics. For the record I only test what we have mastered on a final, my final changes based on the topics covered each year. (FYI - I have about 12% failure rate)
In the end - teachers need to take control. Set a curriculum that prepares the students for two places in their lives. Point 1 -- being college ready, and point 2 -- having the problem solving skills & basic math to be successful at 27 years of age. I often joke that I work for the students, the 27 year old student. And at 27 they want to be skilled at problem solving, and do not want to have flunked out of college because of math (skills or because of fear).
If we remember our accountability is not to a predetermined curriculum plan, or to politicians or to administrators - not really even to parents - but to students (it's their life!), then we are doing our job. Then we will be preparing the 27 year old for their challenges.
Tuesday, January 14, 2014
Curriculum & Standards - What is the mission? What is the right decision?
Had a good moment today! Had a parent pull me aside in a public place (not school) and thank me for helping their student with math. The student had just completed their math course required at college (college algebra). It was a student that struggled in all my math courses, a student who I demanded non-negotiable skills from.
The student struggled with grades - usually in the below average range, but I did not make the courses about a grade. We made it about the skills, the concepts, what the student would have to do at college. We quizzed, requizzed - worked at skills, would become frustrated and repeat. I spoke at length with the student prior to graduation that math at college was something that the student could do -- just find the proper math help -- tutors, help centers, etc. In the end the student got a C+ -- that is awesome!
It is times like this where I feel I have the curriculum balanced properly between how fast and how much mastery - because curriculum speed and mastery are not independent of one another. My Algebra 2 course - which is college prep - does not go as far as many other school's Algebra 2 courses. But the material we cover we know; we work hard at having a conceptual understanding of the items we do, and a mastery of the basics.
It means things like delaying the quadratic formula in favor of completing the square first. Doing Geometry proofs as a few weeks of enrichment versus a semester of memorization. About making each course a progression of the previous - including the course's grade. A Geometry grade at my school is about 50% Algebra 1 skills, an Algebra 2 grade is 50% Algebra 1 and Geometry skills. And so forth - except AP Calculus.
When I think about the trilogy of college prep courses - Algebra 1, Geometry and Algebra 2 - I am mostly concerned that they learn how to problem solve, have a true mastery of basics skills, and have a tenacity to stick with things - to look for the how and why. I simply don't care if all the "standards" have been met, I don't care about a grade -- I want the team (student & I) to care about the big picture.
And the big picture is that we do the things to make students successful. Because I work for the student, not the 16 year old in my class, but the "future student" - the 23 year old student. The student who wants the skills, knowledge and tenacity to be successful in their life - that is my math mission, that is how I set up my math curriculum.
The student struggled with grades - usually in the below average range, but I did not make the courses about a grade. We made it about the skills, the concepts, what the student would have to do at college. We quizzed, requizzed - worked at skills, would become frustrated and repeat. I spoke at length with the student prior to graduation that math at college was something that the student could do -- just find the proper math help -- tutors, help centers, etc. In the end the student got a C+ -- that is awesome!
It is times like this where I feel I have the curriculum balanced properly between how fast and how much mastery - because curriculum speed and mastery are not independent of one another. My Algebra 2 course - which is college prep - does not go as far as many other school's Algebra 2 courses. But the material we cover we know; we work hard at having a conceptual understanding of the items we do, and a mastery of the basics.
It means things like delaying the quadratic formula in favor of completing the square first. Doing Geometry proofs as a few weeks of enrichment versus a semester of memorization. About making each course a progression of the previous - including the course's grade. A Geometry grade at my school is about 50% Algebra 1 skills, an Algebra 2 grade is 50% Algebra 1 and Geometry skills. And so forth - except AP Calculus.
When I think about the trilogy of college prep courses - Algebra 1, Geometry and Algebra 2 - I am mostly concerned that they learn how to problem solve, have a true mastery of basics skills, and have a tenacity to stick with things - to look for the how and why. I simply don't care if all the "standards" have been met, I don't care about a grade -- I want the team (student & I) to care about the big picture.
And the big picture is that we do the things to make students successful. Because I work for the student, not the 16 year old in my class, but the "future student" - the 23 year old student. The student who wants the skills, knowledge and tenacity to be successful in their life - that is my math mission, that is how I set up my math curriculum.
Thursday, December 26, 2013
Open Letter to the Wisconsin Committee Taking Comments on the CCSS
To the Select Committee reviewing the CCSS in Wisconsin:
Thanks for the opportunity to comment on this issue. I am a father of 3 children (13,12 & 10 years old) and a second-career teacher just starting my eighth year of teaching High School math. I spent my first dozen years of my career as an engineer and manager in the private sector, which gives me a different view of the standards. As a nation we must embrace the ideal of making students who are college and career ready, and while the CCSS are not perfect, they are a step in the right direction.
I have spent the last few years working with the CCSS in mathematics and have formed some solid opinions:
1) Being from industry I knew some states' graduates were not as strong as others, some sort of national guideline is most likely needed. Many countries that we trail in education have a national set of standards. And anytime a small group forms a large set of standards there will be problems and complaints - as a nation we need to work together to move forward.
2) The core in math is strong K-6 but in my opinion simply has too many standards in High School, thus these individual standards take precious time from class room teachers to teach problem solving, deeper discovery, reasonsing, etc (the mathematical practices). But the practices are a strength of the CCSS which can be built upon and the standards will need to evolve.
3) We try to move too fast in education (the CCSS being a great example of too fast). We should move on a continuous improvement path; yet education moves with an all or nothing mentality. That is why the testing in 2014-2015 will be disastrous, we are trying to be 20% better in 2 years versus 2% better year after year. Whether the CCSS can survive the poltical "firestorm" that is coming (or is here) is an unanswered question.
And finally, 4) The standards are plenty rigorous and we need to focus on the practices in the CCSS.
As a parent and educator I worry about the CCSS being a list of standards to check off, and since the list is long deeming it rigorous. I worry about the politics and the desire for instant results derailing the opportunity for there to be true progress with the CCSS. I do not believe the CCSS are perfect, far from it, but it is a decent starting point.
And the CCSS should be a starting point for Wisconsin. While I feel the HS math standards are overloaded on topics, I think they provide a framework that can be used to move Wisconsin and the nation forward in education. It is the practices we should be focusing on - problem solving, tenacity, the ability to read, justify and revise. And that is why the CCSS should not be dismantled but allowed to evolve, I do believe the mathematical practices to be the strength of the CCSS.
In the end I support the CCSS with its flaws, because I view it as a first step in a continuous improvement process. We need national standards, and I feel the practices are good. I am hoping that as time passes we can correct some of the "mile wide, inch deep" issues and in the end have better students who are ready for college and career.
Scott Anderson
Math Instructor
Juda High School
Juda, Wisconsin
Thanks for the opportunity to comment on this issue. I am a father of 3 children (13,12 & 10 years old) and a second-career teacher just starting my eighth year of teaching High School math. I spent my first dozen years of my career as an engineer and manager in the private sector, which gives me a different view of the standards. As a nation we must embrace the ideal of making students who are college and career ready, and while the CCSS are not perfect, they are a step in the right direction.
I have spent the last few years working with the CCSS in mathematics and have formed some solid opinions:
1) Being from industry I knew some states' graduates were not as strong as others, some sort of national guideline is most likely needed. Many countries that we trail in education have a national set of standards. And anytime a small group forms a large set of standards there will be problems and complaints - as a nation we need to work together to move forward.
2) The core in math is strong K-6 but in my opinion simply has too many standards in High School, thus these individual standards take precious time from class room teachers to teach problem solving, deeper discovery, reasonsing, etc (the mathematical practices). But the practices are a strength of the CCSS which can be built upon and the standards will need to evolve.
3) We try to move too fast in education (the CCSS being a great example of too fast). We should move on a continuous improvement path; yet education moves with an all or nothing mentality. That is why the testing in 2014-2015 will be disastrous, we are trying to be 20% better in 2 years versus 2% better year after year. Whether the CCSS can survive the poltical "firestorm" that is coming (or is here) is an unanswered question.
And finally, 4) The standards are plenty rigorous and we need to focus on the practices in the CCSS.
As a parent and educator I worry about the CCSS being a list of standards to check off, and since the list is long deeming it rigorous. I worry about the politics and the desire for instant results derailing the opportunity for there to be true progress with the CCSS. I do not believe the CCSS are perfect, far from it, but it is a decent starting point.
And the CCSS should be a starting point for Wisconsin. While I feel the HS math standards are overloaded on topics, I think they provide a framework that can be used to move Wisconsin and the nation forward in education. It is the practices we should be focusing on - problem solving, tenacity, the ability to read, justify and revise. And that is why the CCSS should not be dismantled but allowed to evolve, I do believe the mathematical practices to be the strength of the CCSS.
In the end I support the CCSS with its flaws, because I view it as a first step in a continuous improvement process. We need national standards, and I feel the practices are good. I am hoping that as time passes we can correct some of the "mile wide, inch deep" issues and in the end have better students who are ready for college and career.
Scott Anderson
Math Instructor
Juda High School
Juda, Wisconsin
Saturday, August 11, 2012
Don't accept zeros....
I do not enter zeros and late work receives full credit in all my courses except Calculus AB. I believe my job as a teacher is to have students learn the material and prep them for college & Career. Allowing them to take a zero does not prepare them for the world or for college. (I also believe in rework, retests, etc - but we will save that for another post.)
But not doing homework is not consequence-free....
I treat homework just like a job in the real world. If a student does not have it done at the beginning of class I simply have them stay that day after school and work some math problems with me (usually something equivalent to the homework). Since we don't grade and rarely review any homework during class time it works fine.
Now some of the arguments I typically hear:
From college professors -- that I am not preparing them for college because they think late work is acceptable. First, no -- the students know it is unacceptable; I preach that no where in the world is not doing work acceptable -- school is their job but it is different then a real job - they don't get paid and I cannot fire them.
And professors and HS teachers have different jobs! College is the opportunity to learn, in High School the learning is required. But since AP Calculus is a college course I do enter zeros but in no other courses.
From other teachers -- that this policy is not like the real world and I am not prepping them. This always makes me chuckle because for 12 years I was an engineer and manager in corporations and mid-size companies. And if you think of homework as a report, or a quote or something like that -- those things are often late in the world. School is a job - but it is not a real job (again cannot fire). What we teach them is most important and consequences need to be what the student finds not pleasant. Zeros are often not unpleasant, hanging with Mr. A after school, well you get the point. [One thing I will concede is it does make more work for me -- but after a couple of weeks it is just one or two students that seem to miss.]
If I enter zeros I allow the students to skip required practice and knowledge -- and if my homework is appropriate and reasonable (I do my best with this) then it is important.
I have a policy, that I call a Homework FAQ sheet, that I send home with students on day 1 signed by them and their parents that lets me keep them after school. (Homework FAQ).
Finally I use judgement with this, it is a policy that requires being reasonable and fair. If it was run equally accross students I would probably lose my job. But it works, six years ago I had about 20% zeros, now I have less than one percent (sometimes I enter a zero at quarter end if the grade stays the same, the student still completes the homework -- helps with grade deadlines).
I really believe our job is to educate, these students are just kids looking for the path of least resistance. Our job is to make sure the path of least resistance requires them to learn enough to be successful after High School.
But not doing homework is not consequence-free....
I treat homework just like a job in the real world. If a student does not have it done at the beginning of class I simply have them stay that day after school and work some math problems with me (usually something equivalent to the homework). Since we don't grade and rarely review any homework during class time it works fine.
Now some of the arguments I typically hear:
From college professors -- that I am not preparing them for college because they think late work is acceptable. First, no -- the students know it is unacceptable; I preach that no where in the world is not doing work acceptable -- school is their job but it is different then a real job - they don't get paid and I cannot fire them.
And professors and HS teachers have different jobs! College is the opportunity to learn, in High School the learning is required. But since AP Calculus is a college course I do enter zeros but in no other courses.
From other teachers -- that this policy is not like the real world and I am not prepping them. This always makes me chuckle because for 12 years I was an engineer and manager in corporations and mid-size companies. And if you think of homework as a report, or a quote or something like that -- those things are often late in the world. School is a job - but it is not a real job (again cannot fire). What we teach them is most important and consequences need to be what the student finds not pleasant. Zeros are often not unpleasant, hanging with Mr. A after school, well you get the point. [One thing I will concede is it does make more work for me -- but after a couple of weeks it is just one or two students that seem to miss.]
If I enter zeros I allow the students to skip required practice and knowledge -- and if my homework is appropriate and reasonable (I do my best with this) then it is important.
I have a policy, that I call a Homework FAQ sheet, that I send home with students on day 1 signed by them and their parents that lets me keep them after school. (Homework FAQ).
Finally I use judgement with this, it is a policy that requires being reasonable and fair. If it was run equally accross students I would probably lose my job. But it works, six years ago I had about 20% zeros, now I have less than one percent (sometimes I enter a zero at quarter end if the grade stays the same, the student still completes the homework -- helps with grade deadlines).
I really believe our job is to educate, these students are just kids looking for the path of least resistance. Our job is to make sure the path of least resistance requires them to learn enough to be successful after High School.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)