Re: [UC] The fourth grade slumpWe agree on a great deal. Your observations
from first hand experience are the same as I've heard from other primary
teachers.
I've worked with a lot of parents from earlier generations from the HS dropout
group. So I've seen how the problems can repeat. I've also seen individuals
functioning very poorly turn around and do an excellent job with their
children. Addressing the barriers to addiction treatment, adult literacy, and
good employment programs for the parents (who beg for these) is an extremely
valuable and cost effective intervention to help the kids.
The home life is extremely important but other mentors can also fill some of
the gaps, do fill the gaps in all economic classes, and can make huge
differences in a kids life. One group of people that often don't get credit
for their important role are the homeroom teachers like you. But teachers in
overcrowded classrooms can't possibly make up the difference for the large
number of poor kids in overcrowded classrooms.
Poor kids often can't get involved with youth soccer programs, boy scouts,
music lessons, etc. because the "small fees" might not be available. It's not
funny when people make fun of adolescents when they choose to buy a pair of
sneakers with all their money to be like the other kids.
The isolation and path towards gangs and substance abuse could be altered if
kids had access to other adult mentors doing things with them. It's not just
that certain subsets of kids are impacted by connecting to activities like
music, chess clubs, sports, Clark Park festivals, etc. but the adults offer
another bonding/mentoring experience that in itself might be the difference in
an individual childs life. When I speak of support for public school teachers,
I see these adults and activities as indirect support of the teachers work.
So while I agree that home life is important, we as a society can do a lot that
we are not doing to offer a change in the new generation. Many of the poor
parents are working long hours with no sick time, benefits, etc. Their kids
end up disadvanged just like the other poor kids.
If people remember that it is not a lack of love from the parents that cause
them to fall short of expectations or better outcomes, our society might
recognize the policy failures. (Note: Money and resources wasted on fraud and
incompetency, in the name of after school programs etc., does not mean that the
need is not there)
I think it's important not to give up on the kids or place too much "blame" on
the parents. It's not that simple and it distracts and misleads causing us to
forget about real problems and solutions. It's like dumping blame on teachers
has distracted people that consume too much corporate media.
The dropout report about the urban/suburban gap is incredibly strong support
that funding is one of the central problems.
Thanks for the discussion,
Glenn
----- Original Message -----
From: Wilma de Soto
To: Glenn ; UnivCity listserv
Sent: Friday, April 04, 2008 7:20 AM
Subject: Re: [UC] The fourth grade slump
I agree somewhat.
From my perspective, I see kids who come to school after their first four or
five years sitting in front of a TV or PlayStation. There is very little to
build on when they arrive at school because their best learning years are
already behind them.
We begin by teaching them what they already should have known before they
ever came to school. Kindergarten, first and second grade texts have lots of
pictures, there's coloring to do etc. These kids are already behind when they
started. Under normal circumstances at the end of second grade, one can begin
the transition for third grade. However, these kids are barely second grade
material.
Then, POW! third grade. Texts have lots more words than pictures. It's a
different level of interaction with assignments, more reading, more writing,
higher-order thinking skills and the like. They fall further behind. They
cannot make the transition there let alone the transition to Middle School
style work of High School.
It really starts at home because their best learning years are before the age
of five. One has to have something to build on. They have to know something
before they can be taught something else.
On 4/3/08 8:43 PM, "Glenn" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Newberg comments on the fourth grade slump:
"Others have shown that early school achievement is a strong predictor of
high school completion (Stroup and Robims 1972). We were also interested in
reaching students before the "fourth grade slump," the sudden drop-off between
third and fourth grade in the reading scores of low-income students (Chall et
al. 1990). Recognizing the need to intervene earlier in the lives of the
children chosen to participate in the SYTE program, subsequent classes of SYTE
have been identified as early as kindergarten. The new model recognizes that
establishing a connection with children early allows the program the best
opportunity to capitalize on their strengths and requires less remediation of
neglected problems (Bogaines 1993)."
Newberg, Norman A 2006. The Gift of Education. How a Tuition Gaurantee
Program Changed the Lives of Inner City Youth. The State University of New York
Press, Albany: 192
In this week's UC Review, University High School to Close in 2010 for Two
Year Renovation, consider this vague mention (the only printed mention to date):
"Penn and Drexel have said they would work with the feeder middle schools
to better prepare those children for the more advanced academic opportunities
in their neighborhood school."
Neighbors, if the Penn/Drexel school were being designed by real Penn
experts from the school of education, they absolutely would know that they
must, first and foremost, provide details about preparing the local kids! The
effects of poverty are measurable much earlier than middle school regardless of
funded or under-funded schools!!!
How do years of underfunded schools and barriers to quality extra
curricular activities compound the problems that start early? Wilma pointed
out that lots of us don't understand the range of issues or problems teachers
do their best (and often a heroic job) to deal with daily. Properly funded
schools (and fewer students with other problems associated with poverty) have
more supporting factors. The big problems like large class size are sometimes
recognized. Teacher turnover, low pay, low support of staff, and the resulting
poor morale can all be addressed with proper funding.
If Penn/Drexel start real quality interventions now, it would take years
before the gaps caused by decades of neglect would prepare neighborhood kids,
in any significant way, for any of the magnet high schools.
But, the new UC high school is obviously following the history of mapping
and planning our neighborhood for Penn's real estate goals. The people of
Phila. simply pay.
The most important details, the oblique plan for assisting the "feeder
schools," doesn't even make sense on the surface. The need for much earlier
intervention is so obvious and established that the only possible conclusion is
that the neighborhood is being deceived.
Penn and Drexel have no intention of making a real effort to reach the kids
and families they are attempting to deceive. If I am wrong and "the experts"
are sincere, they are so out of touch with the literature that they are
incompetent. They would have made a bold and prominent presentation of the
"assistance" long before selling the magnet school as a replacement. They are
deceiving us and attempting to transfer resources (the building and funds) from
our already under-funded public system for the purpose of attracting
replacement residents and condo buyers!
Sincerely,
Glenn
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG.
Version: 7.5.519 / Virus Database: 269.22.5/1357 - Release Date: 4/3/2008
10:48 AM
