What a child doesn't learn

The most recent Parenting for High Potential- December 2016- includes an article "What a Child Doesn't Learn..." by Dr. Tracy F. Inman that briefly discusses some concerns that I have had about not addressing my child's educational needs. The soft skills that she lists include:

• work ethic
• responsibility
• coping with failure
• self-worth from accomplishment
• study skills,
• decision making and problem-solving skills
• sacrifice.

When I was in high school, I managed to acquire A's with little effort. I paid attention in class quickly completed my homework- only rarely actually reading the assigned readings from textbooks. I had to learn how to learn from reading when was in college. I had a midafternoon class that consistently put me to sleep. I began to read to the book in order to learn the material. When I managed to do , the work became especially easy. I put more time into that class all my other classes combined, and yet it still only amounted to about two hours per week. I am not gifted.

My daughter does not need to put in the effort I did to achieve the A's. Fortunately she has a work ethic from home- she does work that she does not need to do in order to achieve competence. She learned responsibility, decision-making and problem-solving from home and Science Olympiads. Classwork was not involved. In elementary school I would lie about studying because studying without does not teach skills- it wastes time. I do not worry about in high school. She has not ever studied for a final exam or AP exam. I do not know that her undergraduate program will require any study skills for her, but somewhere along the way, she will have to harness discipline and learn something  her own.

Sacrifice and self worth from accomplishment. These are tough ones. Now that she is working 23+ hours a week on top of school she has had to sacrifice some of her reading time, but it is pretty much unrelated to school. As the author points out, it is hard to really feel good about something you achieve without effort.

These soft skills are the skills that will be essential as our children grow up. Without giving our gifted children a chance to develop them, we condemn some to crash and burn when they encounter the challenges of adult life. We need to push our schools to find ways to push our children to learn these skills or at least to offer opportunities to  them. Things like clubs can help- if they are well coached. Parents need to find ways to help develop these skills in spite of school's ease. The CTY program at Hopkins certainly helped, but that level challenge was not available until middle school. We need to find challenge before then. It might mean acceleration beyond grade level while in elementary class. It might mean differentiation in which students are allowed to deeply pursue passions that may seem too old for. The move toward whole group instruction in math and ELA can be devastating to these bright young minds. Let's see what we can do for them.

Research on graduation of students with specific disabilities

We have long known that students with disabilities do not graduate at the same rate as students without disabilities. NCLB's core ideas around subgroup assessment acknowledged this achievement gap and wanted to push programs to better meet the needs of all students. New rules governing how graduation rates are reported has made the reported numbers more compareable. Overall graduation rates are not where we wish they were. Overall graduation rates Rochester, NY, the nearest city to where I live, consistently lie well under the 50% mark. We know that issues that put children at risk of not graduating on time include poverty, single parent households, changing schools/student mobility, parents without a high school diploma, English language leaners and yes- disability. Vanessa Barrat, BethAnn Berliner, Adam Voight, Loan Tran, Chun-Wei Airong Yu, and Min Chen- Gadgini dug deep into Utah's graduation information to identify what difference there were in disability  categories related to graduation outcomes in their report School mobility, dropout, and graduation rates across student
disability categories in Utah.

What they discovered was mostly expected, by me anyway. Here are some of the highlights:

1. Approximately 1 in 5 general education students dropout whereas 1 in 4 students with disabilities drop out with students with emotional disabilities (ED) leading the pack at twice the rate of nondisabled peers
2. Students with multiple disabilities (MD), intellectual disabilities (ID), traumatic brain injury (TBI) and (ASD) had lower graduation rates and continuing their education in school past grade 12.
3. Students with hearing impairments and speech and language impairments (SLI) had graduation rates on par with their nondisabled peers and were more likely than students with other disabilities to be in a grade consistent with their age.
4. Students with ED had the highest rates of changing schools- approximately 3 times that of the general education population
5. Students with disabilities were approximately 50% more likely to change schools than the general education population, but students with MD and SLI were significantly less likely to experience school change

Why are these not a surprise?
1. drop out rates: Students who struggle are more likely to decide to quit than to persevere when compared with their peers. This is especially true for students who are facing the knowledge that they cannot graduate with their peers because of credit concerns. It makes sense that ED population has the highest rate of students who run away and are more likely to come from the most challenging home life situations. When you struggle to respond socially-emotionally the way a typical peer will you find school a less appealing place than your peers do. When your ability to control your behavior is challenging- you miss classes, are less likely to pass and are more likely to be suspended. If you hate school or are allowed to be home alone, suspension may be a holiday to these kids.

2. The more complicated your disability the more time it takes for you to learn and consequently the more likely it is that you will need more years to meet the requirements graduation or, if you are functioning significantly grade level, you may just age out of the system. Since school is about compliance and verbal/math skills. People who lack strengths in these areas will not be as successful as their peers.

3. Students with hearing impairments or SLI are more likely to have average cognitive functioning than those with MD, ID, TBI, and ASD. We have good supports for helping these groups.

4 and 5. The more often you change schools the more likely you will not fit . Developing social bonds helps students be successful. When students do not form bonds with peers and adults, they are more likely to learn maladaptive behaviors. When a family is dealing with a child with MD, once they find what they determine to be a good place, they are more likely to stay there because they know the challenges mobility creates for them.

The next question is so what? This study did not go into that idea. For some the information we should not be surprised and probably need no interventions. MD students functioning at levels far below age level will likely never be able to attain a high school diploma and the goal should be as satisfying a life as possible. When you talk about non-mobile, nonverbal, ID individuals, you are not talking about independence, but this is a small piece of the disabled population.

How do we address the students who drop out. What interventions  we put into place to help the students with average cognitive capacity  a diploma- the key to the door of many post school opportunities? Clearly we need to focus on our ED kids. They need support that does not begin in high school.

• Their families need help dealing with the concerns that are present. Connecting with housing and food aid so that poverty impact is minimized and housing insecurity is addressed. Safe community housing needs to be available. Assistance with job training, job acquisition and maintenance as needed. Help navigating health insurance supports. High quality, affordable day care needs to be available so that parents can work and go to school to support their children. Transportation issues need to be addressed.
• Mental illnesses need adequate, early intervention. All too often there are inadequate therapists, psychologists and psychiatrists to deal with children. Insurance companies limit treatment protocols. One adolescent I worked with was repeatedly discharged because insurance had run out rather than adequate treatment had been established. His emotional issues continued to spiral out of control. Guess what? It impacted his education. While expensive, inpatient treatment programs need to become more readily available to deal with drug addiction, issues around ting and food, and significant mental health needs must be provided before crisis points. Intense early treatment is far more effective than delayed crisis management.
• Address the educational gaps formed when students have a history of mobility or poor attendance. This might mean providing summer school services for bringing students up toward grade level rather than maintenance and avoidance of regression.
• Provide training and support so that teachers have the tools to try and reach these struggling students. We may say that it is great that co-taught classes exist and students are mainstreamed, but if the expectations are not present for the students with disabilities, what is the point? Smaller classes and extra instructional time may be necessary for these kids to learn. I remember one of my early special ed classes in college going over the disability categories. Most included the characteristic of they need longer to learn the same material as their age peers. In part, that is why students with disabilities can attend school through age 21. They need more time. Some may never be able to attain a diploma, but with extra time, many will.
• Normalize alternative paths to graduation- this could be a five/six year plan, career training, or summer school.
• Begin early with birth to 5 programing to help children learn language skills, provide adequate nutrition and health care, and housing security.

We know the steps. We have learned the target subgroups. We just need to harness the will to make it happen. It is doable, just not with a four year, high school building target.

technology and feedback systems

Smartboards and other whiteboards are all the rage in education today. Every classroom should have one- right? Too many of these very expensive platforms ineffectively used and underutilized. If you are going use one effectively to maximize learning, why have one at all? Overhead projectors are far cheaper and less finicky. What makes them effective- two things increase response rate from children and increased feedback from teachers. 

Ryan Lacy's article in District Administration Magazine talks about the feedback element in his article, "Richer Responses, Faster Feedback." He talks about wanting to know where his kids were in understanding material and how various response systems have enabled this. Clickers are purchased with whiteboards, apps on smart phones and tablets, and website enabled programs are all available now. His article highlights many of these programs with. One caveat- if you are relying on student provided technology, be careful that everyone has a way to participate. Assuming everyone has a smartphone is a problem- they don't- and even if they do, they may not want to or be allowed to use their data for your activity.

Total participation response systems are highly effective in increasing achievement for students. It can be done cheaply through dollar store magnet, personal whiteboards, hand signals or paper cards or expensively through response systems. A key to performance is use. If a teacher is uncomfortable using Total Participation Techniques without technology, technology will not improve the situation. We can use this information to formatively assess learning and alter instruction to maximize learning or not. When we choose to ignore the wealth of research that says it is important, we are not committed to learning success for our whole class.

Interactive whiteboards do tend to increase engagement, but if it only passive entertainment style engagement, there is no point to it all. We need to use these programs to enhance instruction, eyes on us silence.

label gifted kids

Lisa Van Gemert wrote an interesting blog about labeling gifted kids. Often parents are against labels- a bias I have run into in special education. Parents worry that their kids will be labeled. I tell them that:

1. the other kids have labels for your kids- jock, brainiac, stupid, tall, best speller, class clown, preppy, bad reader, etc.
2. labels get you the support your child needs.

These are both items that Lisa highlights. She is very focused on the get your kids what they need. Just as students with learning disabilities need different kinds of support in school, so too do gifted kids.  She also argues that some people perceive "gifted" as an arrogance. If you have a kid who is gifted- defined as two standard deviations above the mean (IQ > 130)- your child is gifted. Just as if your child can run the 50 dash in under 6 and a half seconds, he is fast. This is not arrogance it is fact. Yes, IQ tests are not without problems, but they do tend to indicate who will perform well in today's schools. These children deserve an education that challenges them. If these kids live in an environment that suppresses them, their IQ will decrease. If they do not have adequate diets, their IQs will decrease. They need an environment that challenges and supports them so that they can make the most of their potential. Just like any other kid.

One often overlooked feature of gifted kids is that they tend think differently. When my daughter attended the CTY program at Johns Hopkins she alked about being surrounded by kids who thought like she did. We seek our friends from people share interests and values with us. We congregate around people who think like us. We try hard to deny our gifted kids this priviledge and this is simply not fair to them. We need to help them to have friends that enrich them.

The final two reasons that Lisa says we should embrace labels is that it allows for support. Both parents and children need support in navigating this world where they are often criticized being eliteist and racists and not looking out for all. I had to investigate programs for my daughter. I was lucky because I knew how to do this and that there were groups out there. I have been approached by other parents about how to get their children's needs met. Many parents and children are not that lucky.

Why Ed Tech has made so little difference

Marc Tucker wrote an article for one of Ed Week's blog entitled "Why Ed Tech has Made so Little Difference?" He questions why the past two decades have wrought little change in how we teach in regards to technology. In fact in places with higher tech use, there is lower performance on international tests. In no way is this a reflection of technology not being out there to support learning or teachers being untrained to teach using technology (although I might argue this one).

Our classrooms are often full of technology. Interactive whiteboards are becoming a mainstay. Teachers who use them as projectors miss the value of the technology and would be better off with a TV and an overhead projector for a tenth of the cost. (For interactive whiteboards to be educationally enhancing they need to increase student response rates and feedback- clickers are required to be used, every day.) One-to-one programs have generally demonstrated poor educational results because we are doing the same thing- read and answer these worksheet questions- we did with textbooks. We need to know how to use the technology to enhance the learning, not just to use the technology.

He argues that "change in the whole paradigm of the way education is organized in our schools" is required. This would be one that emphasizes problem solving and deep understanding of concepts. It would mean that technology supports the curriculum and the curriculum supports technology use. Interestingly, this focus on problem solving and deep understanding is at the root of the Common Core's math curriculum. Students are supposed to understand concepts rather than simply memorize. They are asked to be fluent with basic arithmetic but also to be able to solve word problems with ease. Here is the essence of the disconnect: we put in place a curriculum that was a slightly shaved version of the previous one with the addition that students think much deeper about the ideas and were surprised when teachers continue to complain that there is too much to teach in the school year.

Simulations are brilliant opportunities for students to explore complex systems. Back when I first started teaching Oregon Trail was a hallmark program. It showcased the challenges of traveling across the country during our period of western expansion. Unfortunately, it took approximately an hour and a half  to two hours to cover what a lecture might in about 15 minutes. Students in my resource room were encouraged to use it because it brought home some critical ideas and we had time, but the whole class did not get exposure to it. Years later my son's fifth grade teacher used it as a station during her American history program. The kids loved it, but only three computers in the room meant that it took practically forever to get the kids who worked in teams through the experience. Simulations take time. Simply put, without re-envisioning education so that the point is not merely getting through the curriculum, they will be sparingly used. Marc is right our current paradigm needs a shift.

I do believe that the other place that technology can really enhance learning is in the area of personalization. Students can move through lessons as quickly or slowly as they are able to master the content. Programs for this sort of personalization abound. Districts often use them for interventions when students are struggling, but they can be used as more than support- they can be the center of the program.

Back when I was a student I had two experiences with learning contracts. Teachers had spelled out the curriculum, put worksheets with learning experiences in folders and let students go through the program at their own speed. There were targets for achievement per quarter, but no penalty for soaring past or taking too long. Teachers were available for help and small groups were separated for extra support through difficult topics. You received more teacher time to help you get through the trouble spots. We worked independently and learned the material- this was fifth grade ELA and seventh grade advanced math. Computers allow for an enhanced program. instruction can involve video and podcasts instead of just reading. Mini quizzes within a program can be the gates to progress- we had to wait until the teacher graded our work. One challenge becomes what to do with students who soar. If they finish the program by the end of September, then what? A good program allows for "grade acceleration" within it. The other side is also a concern- students who do not progress because of learning disabilities, poor motivation, or weak executive skills need a plan as well. They may need to have access to extra time to move through the program- perhaps extra time during the school day, at home through weekends and vacations, during the summer or ungraded school programs with an allowance for extra time.

Communicate the message with simplicity and power

John C. Maxwell is a leadership guru. He has written many books, led many leadership training programs and been a leadership trainer for virtually his entire life. His book, Good Leaders Ask Great Questions: Your Foundations for Successful Leadership, is the latest that I have picked up. One section of a chapter spurred my thinking this morning: "Communicate the message with simplicity and power."

He says that leaders need to "communicate the vision for change" with "reasons for it" (p. 239). Leaders are constantly being confronted with a need for change. If is it a growing or shrinking work force, a new product challenge, market shifts or, as in education, a new school year with new students and regulations, standards and laws. Do our leaders- principals and superintendents- clearly and effectively communicate the vision? At its most basic, the mission of most schools is to raise or maintain test scores so that the powers at be will be happy. That incorporates improving instruction, meeting students physical and health needs, providing a safe learning environment with adequate resources and much more. At our most basic level though, it seems the driving force is test scores. Therein is a problem. If test scores are what the community at large is using as the yard stick, then that is our goal- whether we acknowledge it or not. If school leaders want a different goal, they need to communicate it as simply as possible. Skip the fancy language of politicians and bureaucrats, we need to the core and share it so that everyone understands and is on board with it.

Last year my department spent a couple of faculty meetings on refining and unpacking our mission and vision. We went from a three line of text vision statement to a three bullet point statement. The mere fact that it needed two faculty meetings to unpack the message should have been a clue that we were not looking at the vision and mission from the appropriate altitude. I was trying to find the reference to something I read years ago about mission statements: for many years the mission of Coke was "beat Pepsi." Two words encapsulated the entire movement of the organization. There was plenty of movement around how to do that- create the best, consistent product; develop markets in new areas; increase sales in current markets,... Everyone in the company knew and could provide the mission. I am not sure that my boss, who has the mission on every one of her emails in the signature line could state verbatim the mission. I know the rest of my team cannot. This is not unusual. The mission statement at my children's schools is full of wordy nonsense that cannot be restated and thus cannot be achieved by the team. That is danger of the complex mission- it cannot be the focus of the team. We need a "simple clear message" (p. 239) if we want our message to be consistently demonstrated in our ranks. If you ask me, our department's mission is "to help school districts meet the needs of their students." Words like professionalism and teamwork are the means to the end. Why cloud the mission with the mechanism for achieving it?

We also see this the classroom level. The fancier and more complicated we make our language, the less likely our students are to understand it. We use statements like, "Stop" or "walk" when we see a problem developing because that simple word gets attention. Too many words become the Charlie Brown adult, "wha, wha, wha, wha..." I have had teachers tell me everything they say is important and kids should learn it all. Very rarely is this the case. Let's drill down, find the essential elements of the instruction- that is what everyone needs- you can provide more for the more motivated and higher achieving, but know that everyone does not need to know it.

Simplicity of directions is essential. I have read some ridiculous directions over the years. If what the kids need to do is select the right choice- that is all the directions need to include. If there are many steps, break them down to bullets or a sequence and help kids to accomplish each part. You could and should teach them to do this, but it must me taught not expected. We have more power if we communicate simply than if we complicate it.

How to raise a genius

Scientific America's article by Tom Clynes, "How to Raise a Genuis: Lessons from a 45-year Study of Supersmart Children," has a somewhat misleading title. This article is not a recipe for turning your child into a genius. Rather it summarizes a study that originated out of Johns Hopkins University. A professor started with a superbright young child who was able to run circles around his undergraduate math colleagues, progressed to a small study of bright middle school students who took the SAT and emerged as a huge undertaking spanning both the country and the world. Hopkins runs the Center for Talented Youth, a program that takes exceptional young people- in the top 1% of their class- and allows them to take college classes in three week periods over the summer. [Disclaimer- my daughter has attended this program for three years- NO this is not bragging any more than saying my son had a resource room for two years is. It has been the one place where she has encountered challenge.] Holding the program has given researchers access to a unique subgroup. The researchers have followed these students beyond school and assessed their impact on society compared with the "average" American.

The results are not especially surprising to me. These students have doctorates, STEM doctorates, research journal publications, patens, and income in the 95 percentile at sometimes double the rate of the general population. This group truly represents the movers and shakers of society.

It is not enough to merely label these kids. They need the education and support to back them up. When my daughter sits in her accelerated classes, playing games on her graphing calculator because she is bored- we are not appropriately educating her. We are occupying her time. When I hear that these kids would learn in a blank room with a stick for an instructor, I agree that for some, they would, but that is not an education. For students with special needs, the law of the land decrees that they have access to a free appropriate public education. Unfortunately our gifted kids are not entitled to the same. For students with special needs, we provide additional teachers and aides. Our gifted kids sometimes have access to a teacher but it is district dependent- mine only has one for the entire five building program. For students with special needs, we modify curriculum. We need to fight for modifications for our gifted children- acceleration, the most cost effective modification available is a black sheep because it takes kids away from their age peers. For students with special needs, we have a federal testing protocol that allows for some students to be tested with alternative tests. Our gifted kids must take the same tests as their age mates- schools are greatful for the proficient scores they bring. We are not meeting the needs of our kids, we are using the cries of eliteism and fiscal stress to detract from their needs.

If we want to raise genius kids to help our society to innovate and succeed, we need to figure out who is gifted, provide enriching and challenging material, and emotional support to handle the differences they face as they move on. China, India and Singapor are doing this. We will be left behind if we neglect our great opportunities- our gifted children.