Pages

Thursday, February 11, 2010

Problems with Teacher Training in CT, Test and Study Show

(I will not be posting stories during February break.  Have a good week and I'll start posting again on Feb. 21)

Two new reports indicate that Connecticut teachers are not making the grade. Statistics released by the State Board of Education shows that about one third of prospective teachers are not passing the new Foundations in Reading test which is now a prerequisite to getting credentialed as an elementary school teacher. Also, last month a study released by the National Council of Teachers gave Connecticut a D+ for its preparation of teachers.

The state began administering the  Foundations in Reading examination, which tests knowledge on teaching reading to children, last year because of the state's concern about lackluster reading scores among elementary school children, in particular low-income and minority students. 

Robert Frahm of the CT Mirror had an excellent story on this subject in the CT Mirror yesterday (The Connecticut Mirror is a new online newspaper,  launched last month, that has excellent investigative stories by some of CT best reporters.)

According to the article, about one in three students at teacher preparation programs in colleges and universities across the state have failed the exam.
Failure rates exceeded 40 percent at some of the state's largest teacher preparation programs, including the campuses of the Connecticut State University system.

"I'm rightly alarmed," said state Education Commissioner Mark McQuillan. "It's clear to me there hasn't been enough attention to the science" of teaching reading, he said. "You can't teach something well that you don't know."
The exam consists of 100 multiple-choice questions and two essay questions, and has been used in Massachusetts since 2002. It is teaches systematic reading methods including phonics.
When the new certification test was introduced, "there was a lot of pushback. There were a lot of people who protested," said Margie Gillis, a research scientist at Haskins Laboratories, a New Haven research institute specializing in language and literacy.
Gillis is a proponent of the test and of an approach that emphasizes skills such as phonics, vocabulary, spelling, fluency and comprehension. She said some professors may be unfamiliar with the latest methods or may disagree with their importance - a remnant of the intense, decades-old debate over how to teach beginning readers. In that debate, some educators have downplayed the skills-oriented strategy in favor of a literature-based approach.
 The disappointing results on the test are making colleges and universities in the state question their methods of teaching reading.
At Southern, Professor David Levande has been conducting review classes to help students prepare for the exam.
"The main reason they're not doing well is it's just a very rigorous test," he said. "It is taking awhile for faculty and courses to get up to speed with the objectives of the test." But, he said, "I haven't seen anything that correlates student performance on the test with their ability to teach reading in the classroom."
As reported by Danbury's News Times the National Council of Teachers study gave Connecticut a C for delivering well-prepared teachers; a B- for expanding the teaching pool; a D+ for identifying effective teachers; an F for retaining effective teachers; and a C for exiting those deemed ineffective.

The report criticizes Connecticut for awarding tenure virtually automatically, for failing to make evidence of student learning the heart of teacher evaluations, for not ensuring that elementary teachers are well prepared to teach mathematics, and for not ensuring that special education teachers have subject-matter knowledge.
Posted by Moina Noor
Labels:

17 comments:

  1. It is so discouraging that we have to rely on test data to sound the alarm about what teachers have known for years... that phonics instruction is crucial. But... if it isn't on the CMT test, there is no time to give to it. In addition to all that teachers now have to do, there are not enough hours in the day and teachers have several meetings to attend with much paperwork to do. Teachers are micromanaged and told what to do and when to do it by people who do not know what the students really need. The system has mushroomed out of control, all in the name of accountability. Assessments, assessments, assessments. There are students right now exiting elementary schools without the grammar and spelling skills that rigorous instruction affords. Time for the pendelum to swing back, people, but this time... let's shoot for the middle, please. Let's take what we know and apply it. Old school created excellent writers and mathematicians.
    ReplyDelete
  2. Whoaaaaa! 6:24, phonics has always been important. If you were trained correctly, phonics is part of the three/four pronged teaching strategy. I hope the questions you ask your students when they faulter are: 'Does it look right? Does it make sense? Does it sound right?' If the running record shows that the student it not showing knowledge of phonics, then of course it is to be taught. It is just not taught in isolation. This has always been the case with the aim of the current research in teaching reading. Too many teachers were teaching phonics in isolation and that is where the only emphasis was. That was why the myth started that 'no more phonics' should be taught. Phonics has its place, but not in worksheets that isolate the skills. Teach phonics along with writing and with reading, BUT in context.
    ReplyDelete
  3. Well said - and sounding like a former reading recovery teacher!!! I have seen too many teachers giving worksheet after worksheet of phonics in isolation. Phonological awareness is essential, and a strong primary teacher knows that the auditory is always the precursor to phonics. If analysis of miscues shows that a child needs it, fine.

    Phonics alone doesn't work. Whole language doesn't work. A comprehensive approach, using the 'four prongs' is what is needed. But giving everyone the same phonics drills day after day is the best way to kill reading.

    It has to look right, sound right, and make sense. Our children need tons of exposure to good literature, and explicit, differentiated teaching, to become readers.
    ReplyDelete
  4. How lucky Norwalk is to have three teachers so completely passionate about teaching reading - taxpayers make note!
    ReplyDelete
  5. Welll, one of us is an administrator, but still passionate and always a teacher!
    ReplyDelete
  6. Bravo, administrator - bet you are a great role model!
    ReplyDelete
  7. I'm 7:15, and I am a retired administrator. I know for a fact that there are many passionate teachers out in the schools. It's unfortunate that there are some who cause parents to think otherwise. I've had the pleasure and honor to watch many of the Reading Recovery teachers work really hard with students who have fallen behind. They are amazingly dedicated.I have also visited many classrooms where parents would be astonished at the wonderful teaching and learning taking place. Norwalk is full of good learning. Before judging all teachers with the same measuring stick, visit a few classrooms.
    ReplyDelete
  8. Speaking as a parent, I was glad to see that the test, the Foundations in Reading exam, is now given and must be passed in order to be credentialed as an elementary school teacher. I have seen firsthand what happens when good people with good intentions are not given the tools they need to do their job.
    Prospective teachers were only required to take 1 to 2 general reading courses during college; special ed teachers were required to take even less even though the majority of kids in special ed are there for some form of reading disability! Reading failure at the elementary level, the inability to take the words off of a page, affects everything a child does—math word problems, science, social studies, writing, the list goes on. Reading is the most fundamental of skills and, in our world today, nearly as crucial and indispensible as a right hand. Like many people, reading came easy for me as a child; it seemed to come ‘naturally’, but, it is not a natural process and must be taught. Some children need it taught more explicitly and more intensely than others. As dull as the ‘decoding’ piece might seem, without it, the road to comprehension, which is the ultimate goal, is blocked. Take a look at www.cmtreports.com, for 2009--statewide and in Norwalk, only about 66% of 3rd grade white students are reading at goal, about 28% of 3rd grade black students and about 27% of 3rd grade high poverty children. Reading is teachable to 95% of students and a child who has not learned to read by the end of first grade has only a 1 in 8 chance of ever catching up!
    Good reading instruction also relies on very good support structures for classroom teachers. Literacy specialist should be just that, specialist in literacy, with a broad, deep knowledge of the art of teaching reading and the student data and track record to prove it. Norwalk hires literacy specialists based on seniority; I’ve always questioned this process. We spend about $1.1 million a year for 12 literacy specialist. Greenwich, which has more rigorous requirements for the position, has 25 literacy specialists and spends $1.8 million.
    As a State and district, we need to close the holes in the net that have left so many children without the skills they will need to succeed; we need to ensure that dollars spent are producing results, we need to teach our children to read.
    ReplyDelete
  9. Ms. Haynie: We don't hire literacy teachers in Norwalk based on seniority. However, when the jobs are redefined (as they have been several times over the past few years), you are right and the vacancies have filled based solely on the number of years in Norwalk. This is shameful. We have lost outstanding literacy specialists due to this process, and there are several now who have no business occupying those positions. This is not a secret.

    Addressing it, however, would be a huge challenge. The dance continues, and those who can't do the job get moved from school to school.
    ReplyDelete
  10. 11:49, you are so right! I hope this Board addresses the need to get rid of those literacy specialists who are definitely not 'literacy specialists.' It's a total waste of money to have people who have no business occupying those positions. We all know who they are!
    As for the 'decoding skills' taught in a tedious fashion, please leave the teaching of reading to the experts, Ms. Haynie.
    ReplyDelete
  11. Thank you, 6:21. Some people never move beyond teaching those 'decoding skills.' The teaching of reading needs to be looked at with a comprehensive lens. No more drill and kill phonics - please. I for one would be happy to ban those stupid worksheets in my school.
    ReplyDelete
  12. I agree, 6:35. Someone has to say it! No more stupid drill and kill phonics!
    ReplyDelete
  13. Ms. Haynie, you may try to speak as a parent, but people listen to you as a board member when you air your beliefs. After all, you sit as a board member and listen to curriculum presentations, etc., not as a blank slate, but with some knowledge garnered from articles and others who talk to you. In my humble opinion, it is important for a board member to not jump in and claim that one method or another is better to teach our students. Do you have a degree in reading? Are you as well versed in reading as our Reading Recovery teachers? Enough said?
    I do not mean to be disrespectful, but I have also heard first hand about your preferred candidate for Superintendent. He didn't have central office experience and that was considered crucial by all.
    Please think and ask the experts before leaping in to state your opinon next time.
    ReplyDelete
  14. Always good to see the hacks don't take vacation from pushing their boy for superintendent.
    I dind't think that any of the school board's deliberations about the next superintendent were public-- so, for 10:51 a.m. to say anything about what Haynie may have voiced at a closed-door meeting, well, it would seem to be a leak from someone at that meeting.
    Anyone else outraged? A Papaload leak, again?The dems up to dirty tricks?
    ReplyDelete
  15. 1:04 PM, you don't know what you are talking about. I am not a Papallo friend nor am I a dem up to dirty tricks. Obviously you heard the same comment from Haynie. Were you at the closed-door meeting?
    ReplyDelete
  16. I didn't see anything in the posting about pushing anyone for superintendent. What is that person (1:04 PM) talking about?
    ReplyDelete
  17. Back to the topic of this thread, to quote Margie Gillis and the Haskins people, "Teaching reading IS rocket science!"

    For some kids, it comes very naturally. Others need more explicit instruction. Our job is to make sure they all get what they need. This does not mean that everyone gets the same thing.
    Always a Teacher
    ReplyDelete

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)

ShareThis