Improving Classroom Instruction

Last week’s article responded to feedback I’ve gotten from parents concerned about the high-stakes testing required by the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB). Generally speaking, I’m in favor of the intent of the tests: holding schools accountable for the quality of education they provide. As you can probably tell, however, I’m no fan of NCLB.

Research has already revealed several unintended negative results of high-stakes testing. Most obvious is that schools are focusing most of their efforts on improving test scores, or as teachers like to say, “teaching the test.” This causes a narrowing of curriculum. Schools tend to stop teaching the whole child. Subjects that are not tested are neglected. This fosters a two-class society. Children from more affluent families are exposed to the arts and other aesthetic aspects of American culture at home, but the children of less affluent parents, children who used to discover these things at school, are indeed “left behind.”

Perhaps the most distressing unintended result of NCLB is what researchers call “educational triage.” Until hurricane Katrina I’d never even heard the word triage. I learned it’s a medical term that doctors use in emergency rooms, on battlefields, etc. to see which patient should be given priority. Basically, doctors separate patients into three groups: those that are not in too bad shape and don’t need priority treatment, those that can be saved if given top priority, and those who are so far gone that treatment wouldn’t save them anyway.

Because of NCLB high-stakes testing our schools are beginning to triage students. Teachers are told to classify students into three groups: those whose grades are high enough that they don’t need any help in passing the tests, those whose grades are on the borderline and will likely pass the test if they are given top priority, and those whose grades are so bad that they have little chance of passing the test no matter what a teacher does. The logic is that by concentrating on the middle group, schools can get a higher percentage of students passing the test and improve the school’s state performance level rating. Educational triage may improve a school’s rating, but it strikes me at best as contrary to the purpose of public schools. At worst it is un-American and bordering on immoral. Our best students are not challenged to excel and our most needy students are “left behind.” Our goal should not be to raise test scores. Our goal should be to provide the best possible education we can to all of our children regardless of their God-given ability.

Another unintended result of NCLB high-stakes testing is the detrimental effect it has had on teacher morale. Good, resourceful, creative teachers resent being told to abandon what they know are good instructional techniques in order to “teach the test.” Researchers have found that more teachers are leaving the profession, fewer top college students are entering the profession, and many who are persevering in classrooms report higher levels of job dissatisfaction.

It doesn’t have to be that way. Schools around the world, across America, and right here in Mississippi are experiencing high levels of student achievement (evidenced by high test scores) without “teaching the test.” A few years ago I was lucky enough to win a Fullbright Fellowship to travel to Japan and study their school system first hand. Japanese schools are widely regarded among the world’s best. Their test scores go through the roof. Like most people, I suspected they were obsessed with test scores and made their students drill, drill, DRILL! I was wrong. Their philosophy is to teach the whole child. They concentrate on curriculum integration, problem-based learning, classroom projects, and other student-centered learning strategies.
These strategies work because they make learning relevant to students’ lives and (more importantly from the kids’ perspective) fun. Let me give some specific examples.

The year that I returned from Japan I used what I had learned to design a school-wide, curriculum-integrated project: a Medieval Fair. In August I presented the plan to my principal and got permission to hold the fair nine months later in May. I should note that I got my administrator’s permission, not support. There were no school funds allocated to buy materials, there was no directive to other teachers to participate, there was no anything except a verbal, “Sure, do whatever you want.” In fact, when the event which was scheduled nine months in advance took place, the principal failed to attend citing another commitment.

Over the next eight months I planned and worked. I talked up the project to other teachers and parents. I spent every penny of my own classroom money to buy resources other teachers could use. I got the PTO to kick in $100 for supplies. In the end about half the staff came onboard. The event was held on the playground. Mrs. Wright had math students build a display on Medieval mathematicians and their accomplishments. Mrs. Coleman had Weir and Ackerman students use puppets to stage Medieval morality plays. Mrs. Weeks had her music classes perform Medieval songs. There were re-enactments of the King Arthur legends, architectural displays of Gothic cathedrals, a display of Medieval illuminated manuscripts, performing court jesters, innumerable booths featuring medieval foods and more. One parent gave lessons in calligraphy. The fair was a tremendous educational success. In addition to local newspaper coverage we were featured on the Columbus television station’s evening news.

Elaborate events like this are not the only way to go. Problem-based learning is a technique that is very effective. As always the teacher begins by checking the state framework for the standards and objectives to be taught in that particular area of study. The teacher then thinks of a problem or project whose completion will require learning those standards and objectives. Student achievement is not measured solely with a typical multiple choice and true/false test at the end of a unit. Tests of this type tend to find out more of what a child didn’t learn than what he did learn. Instead, the project becomes the evaluation, providing a learning experience that takes place throughout the unit.

For example, in an English class we studied Shakespeare for nine weeks. I split the class up into five groups and had each pretend to be an entertainment promotions company. They were told that a touring company was coming to Choctaw County to put on a play. Each group had to pick a Shakespeare play and devise a plan for staging the play at a profit. They had to write and produce newspaper, television, and radio ads. They had to find suitable locations and dates. They had to design and produce playbills. They had to set ticket prices, estimate attendance, and predict profit margins. In short, they had to do real life activities in an educational setting. During this one unit we covered nearly every standard and objective in my state framework.

Good, experienced teachers (and new or struggling teachers with good instructional leaders helping them) can come up with problem-based instruction for almost any unit of study. When my kids studied the King Arthur legend, groups acted as advertising agencies hired to create a multi-leveled campaign to recruit knights for the Round Table. When we studied the Diary of Anne Frank student groups had to come up with a complete plan to successfully hide and sustain a family like the Frank’s somewhere in Choctaw County. At the end of one year of English literature I had student groups act as travel agencies that put together a “Literary Tour of England” that included sites relevant to all the authors we studied. They created maps showing the logic of their itinerary. They submitted detailed budgets covering food, lodging, transportation, and admission fees. Moreover, they used advanced thinking skills while researching and completing a complicated, relevant, real-life project.

I don’t mean to sound like I’m the only local teacher who uses these effective instructional strategies. For years Carol Wright, one of the finest teachers I’ve known, had her math classes build scale models of their bedrooms. At Ackerman Elementary students have used higher-level thinking skills to solve a mystery after investigating a “crime scene” that teachers set up. Over the years I have seen many good teachers go the extra mile to design lessons that are effective, student-centered, and fun.

My point is that this type of teaching should be the rule rather than the exception. Unfortunately, as school districts feel increasing pressure to improve test scores these strategies are being neglected in favor of worksheets and drills, drills, drills. No wonder kids don’t like school.

I am currently finishing my doctorate in Educational Leadership with a dissertation studying the Pierce Street School in Tupelo, Mississippi. The Pierce Street School focuses on curriculum integration, problem-based learning, and other student-centered classroom instruction. Pierce Street’s state performance level rating has been a level five every year since Mississippi adopted the rating system. I believe our kids are every bit as smart as Tupelo’s kids. If we will teach them using the best available instructional strategies their test scores will be as high as any in Mississippi.

If you’re supporting other candidates ask them what they will do to improve test scores. If they intend to keep on doing what we’re doing now, it’s time to look for another candidate.

Until next time, may God bless you and your children.
Bob Mamrak