Salmond on charter schools
December 7th, 2011 at 1:09 pm by David FarrarI love it how much more reasonable we all get (including me) after an election. Yesterday John Pagani was saying some of what ACT asked for in welfare reform is okay stuff, and today Rob Salmond blogs on charter schools:
We should be asking what makes successful charter schools successful, not declaring all charter schools a failure on the basis that some charter schools failed. More on that later. …
People who are about progressive educational outcomes should ask hard questions about the government’s proposal. Where will the schools be placed? How will the schools select their students? How many will there be? The answers to those kinds of questions will determine how supportive I am.
What we should not be doing is writing off charter schools en masse. There is evidence that charter schools, done right, are progressive institutions. Our challenge is to make sure the government does them right.
Worth reading Rob’s entire post on the issue.
Related posts:
- New York charter schools
- Labour threatening to axe charter schools
- Dunne against charter schools
- Hooton on charter schools
December 7th, 2011 at 1:20 pm
“What we should not be doing is writing off charter schools en masse. There is evidence that charter schools, done right, are progressive institutions. Our challenge is to make sure the government does them right.”
Its hard to argue with such a reasonable comment.
Cue: 3, 2, 1….
Vote:December 7th, 2011 at 1:21 pm
The teaching unions will fight this tooth and nails, make it a nasty personal campaign against Banks as they did with Tolley (B&B owner etc) and refuse to co-operate in any way. Such a shame as I suspect many young teachers will relish a more modern, less hidebound workplace, like their peers in private industry and other professions.
Vote:KIPP schools actually recruit teachers with a social conscience who will fight for their kids, even against the principal.
December 7th, 2011 at 1:31 pm
Also worth reading the annex to the National-ACT Confidence and Supply Agreement:
Annex to the National – ACT Confidence and Supply Agreement
The proposed School Charter System detailed below is a guide which sets out the vision and expectations of both the National Party and the ACT Party, and is subject to amendment at the agreement of both parties.
A Charter School System
The proposed charter school system is targeted at lifting educational achievement in low decile areas and disadvantaged communities where educational underperformance has become the norm. It is designed to provide greater flexibility in governance and management including the ability to attract top quality teachers, prepare and inspire children to achieve their potential and be accountable for doing so, and to better meet the particular needs of local communities.
Initially the system will be implemented in areas such as South Auckland and central/eastern areas of Christchurch. Once successfully established, and as fiscal conditions permit, the system would be extended to other areas of low educational performance.
The approach is modelled on successful international examples such as the KIPP schools in the US and to some extent on the system of ‘free’ schools currently being introduced in the UK.
Legislative basis
The system would be enabled under the Education Act 1989, sections 155, Kura Kaupapa Maori, or 156, Designated character schools, or any other section as appropriate.
Mission
Missions would be ambitious and clearly defined. They would likely differ from school to school, but would typically be some or all of the following:
a rigorous academic focus
a traditional curriculum
faith based
to serve a target population of students
based on specific governance principles eg Te Aho Matua, or
to focus on a particular language, vocational training or other area of specialisation.
Operation, governance and accountability
Groups proposing to operate charter schools may be non-profit, community organisations including iwi and Pacific Island groups, school trustees, faith-based educational organisations, and not-for-profit and for-profit management groups (likely to operate multiple charter schools). They would be granted a charter by an authorised body.
Boards of Trustees would be responsible for all aspects of school operations. They may operate the school themselves or contract out management to not-for-profit or for-profit education providers. Boards would be free to set the length of the school day and year, set their own teaching practices, raise their own revenues (including from iwi, private individuals, faith-based organisations and corporate and other philanthropic or community programmes), pay their teachers according to performance, and use any approved curriculum/qualification.
Schools may operate as individual entities or as a network of schools. Public funding would continue to be by way of normal operational grant funding and may include funding targeted at disadvantaged groups. Schools may also be eligible for capital funding for school property, although overseas experience suggests use of private capital will be required. Schools may choose to rent, rather than own the school building and hence may instead receive equivalent funding to cover rental costs.
As at other state schools, tuition fees would not be charged. Schools will be required to accept all students who apply for entrance (until they have reached capacity), irrespective of academic ability, although they may set geographical boundaries as long as these do not deny opportunities to disadvantaged students. Where demand exceeds supply schools may choose to conduct entrance on a ballot basis. Schools may co-locate with social service providers and/or early childhood providers and like other public school developments could use public designation powers to facilitate Resource Management Act consents.
Schools would be externally accountable to charter school sponsors (eg. universities, iwi, community organisations, a special accountability group within the Ministry of Education) and to external review (eg by the Education Review office). Charter schools will be required to enter into a contractual relationship with sponsors, with the latter being responsible for ensuring that charter schools meet agreed student achievement goals, as well as financial and operational standards.
http://www.act.org.nz/national-act-confidence-and-supply-agreement
Vote:December 7th, 2011 at 1:45 pm
“Progressive institutions”? As in “Progressive Party”? God forbid.
Vote:December 7th, 2011 at 1:46 pm
Same with public-private partnerships. I hate it when these proposals are unequivocally ruled out based on a poorly researched (if at all) notion that ‘these are bad’.
Vote:December 7th, 2011 at 1:58 pm
OMG, next thing we will hear that “some” privately run prisons might be OK and in “some” instances the management of a school’s infrastructure might be let to private contract. I’m not sure if I am ready for that much of a flipflop by the left.
Vote:December 7th, 2011 at 3:09 pm
I am neighbours with a couple who were both teachers in the past, who are insistent that National Standards is a waste of time. They get uncharacteristically angry about it. When I ask them, they say that National Standards won’t solve the problem.
Them: National Standards is not the answer
Vote:Me: So what is your solution to preventing 20% of kids leaving school with inadequate literacy and numeracy.
Them: More funding.
Me: To which schools?
Them: All schools
Me: That is inefficient. It would be better to provide more money per pupil to the ones that really need the help
Them: Low decile schools then
Me: You can’t assume all low decile schools have a problem, and where do you draw the line? 3? 4? 5?…
Them: Let the principals decide
Me: Which principals?
Them: They know who are most in need
Me: All principals will then say they have needs to get more funding. How do you work out who the kids are that need help?
Them: National Standards is not the answer…
December 7th, 2011 at 3:13 pm
I support charter schools, but with one big concern – the possibility of them being used as a “Trojan horse” to set up Islamic schools.
Vote:The UK has a number of Islamic schools which have been found to have been teaching hatred of non-Muslims. We do not want or need that here.
I would suggest that the legislation for these schools be amended to include a clause which forbids schools being set up by “any group which is known to promote an ideology of hatred.”
December 7th, 2011 at 3:50 pm
a clause which forbids schools being set up by “any group which is known to promote an ideology of hatred.”
Would that include a hatred of things like national standards, charters and performance pay?
Vote:December 7th, 2011 at 4:20 pm
HOW KIPP SCHOOLS GET RESULTS
KIPP (Knowledge Is Power Program) schools contend that they don’t cream high-achieving students, they don’t have higher attrition than regular public schools in their communities, and their old-fashioned ‘paternalism’ seems to be working in terms of college admissions and downstream success.
KEY SUCCESS FACTORS
• Define the mission.
KIPP’s goal is preparing students to enter and succeed in college, and that purpose is everywhere: college pennants, calling students ‘scholars,’ constantly emphasising ‘climbing the mountain to college,’ referring to students’ college graduation year (Class of 2023), speaking of the professions they will enter after college, and teachers chatting about their college experiences.
• Hire for the mission.
KIPP looks for teachers who have a social-justice orientation and would disobey authority to help students.
• Sweat the small stuff.
KIPP explicitly teaches routines in the three-week summer school and at the beginning of each school year, developing a culture where teaching and learning are not interrupted by discipline problems. They build culture through establishing really clear expectations and then constantly reinforce those expectations. They tell students exactly what they want. Then, they rehearse and rehearse with feedback until it becomes habit. They say there is no magic to building culture; it’s just hard work.
This includes how to organise their agenda books and homework files and clean up after lunch. By the second day of school, teachers are checking homework and calling parents if necessary. Discipline infractions are dealt with immediately, as is a derisory titter at another student’s wrong answer in a maths class. For example, here’s what one teacher said: “I will say this once and not again. In this class, laughter will never be used to make fun of another student. Laughter will be for joy, or occasionally it may be directed at me, but laughter will NEVER be used to make fun of another student or to divide this class, or you will have a problem with ME. Do I make myself clear?”
• Develop school-wide consistency. Teachers use the same terms throughout the school, so ‘I didn’t know’ is not an excuse. ‘Work hard; be nice’ is the school-wide motto.
• Build relationships.
Parents sign a ‘Commitment to Excellence’ to academic success with their children and teachers and have their photograph taken with the document. Teachers make home visits.
• Give principals the power to lead.
KIPP principals control staff, budgets, and calendars, giving them considerably more freedom of action than regular US public-school leaders.
• Measure success frequently.
Constant feedback on assessments of learning is one of the keys to KIPP’s success. One leader says that students wouldn’t enjoy video games if they had to wait three months for their scores, so interim assessment results are available almost immediately.
Acknowledgement: ‘Lessons from KIPP Delta’ by Robert Maranto and James Shuls in Phi Delta Kappan, November 2011
Vote:December 7th, 2011 at 4:22 pm
Umm! I’m thinking of becoming involved with the first charter school in South Auckland. I believe that I can make a difference in Maths/Science at that school and help out Pacific Island children. What I have in mind is to devise an accelerated learning programme to a select few only (to start with) and slowly expand it in the next few subsequent years since the programme started to include all students from certain level.
The program that I have in mind is accelerated math learning in late primary/intermediate school years or early high school years. In my observation in doing this sort of accelerated math learning over the last 2 years is that kids at that age group are easy to be taught even the topics are quite advanced (e.g., at year 11, 12, 13 level) . I think that their brain at that age, haven’t been fully developed, therefore they are very receptive & absorbent to external stimuli (such as coaching them new knowledge) since the re-wiring process in the brain hasn’t been concretely formed.
Hehe, I can hear you psychologists on this thread dismissing me, but I saw a Youtube video from UK neuro-scientist Prof. Baroness Susan Greenfield where she gave a talk on how the brain generate consciousness. She didn’t talk specifically about kids, but I can relate to what she said & what I’ve seen in the learning capability of kids in my accelerated math learning programme.
I’m not entirely sure if the accelerated math/science learning programme will work in mid-high school level, because at that stage, their brain is becoming fully wired, therefore not easy to change them. This will mean that it becomes difficult for them to up to speed in an accelerated math/science learning programme. The windows of opportunity for accelerated learning I think is when kids are younger. I have coached high school students in Physics/Maths in the past, but not accelerated learning. I have observed this difficulty in trying to relay to them a particular concept, which I can explain the same concept to a 9 or 10 year old and they will get (not in the first instant though but finally they will).
I believe that such programme can prepare primary school kids at year-5 level to be ready to sit year-11 NCEA math level in 3 years time, that’s when they’re in year-7 (intermediate school), provided that the Ministry of Education is not going to object to such programme and pull funding off, simply because they think that accelerated learning is something bad or some other reasons. I’m confident that it will work, if it starts with a small group initially, and then expand it in subsequent years to include all students in a specific year level.
This is something that I’ll have to talk with other Island math/science scholars & teachers and see if we can possibly come up with ideas & agree to devise an accelerated math/science program (to be largely based on what I’ve been doing accelerated math in the last 2 years with kids) for that charter school. The teachers at that charter school will be responsible for executing the programme, and they can modify/evolve it as they see fit, but the target for the first selected lot must be set in concrete and that is to prepare kids (year-5 level) to be ready to sit year-11 math in 3 years time.
I believe that if such programme is successful in the first lot to sit year-11 NCEA math, then parents from affluent school such as Kings Prep School in Remuera will inquire with that South Auckland charter school about enrolling their kids in there. He he, this is how free markets for education should work, because I’m opposed to state funding and monopoly in education.
Any (Auckland) Pacific Islander who’s reading this thread who’s interested to discuss this with other like-minded Island maths/science scholars/teachers that you may know, just indicate back here, so we can get others to meet up (informally) over a beer/whiskey/wine and have yap about it. I think that its time that we stop blaming poverty as the cause of our lack in education achievements. It’s all in the heads. If you can programme kids’ minds that they can do well as their wealthy counterparts, then nothing will stop them from succeeding.
Vote:December 7th, 2011 at 4:31 pm
Meanwhile the left are just screaming, and proposing the same old failed policies. No surprises there.
cheers
David Prosser
Vote:December 7th, 2011 at 4:36 pm
Rouppe, I suggest you move to a new address. That pair of other’s-money-throwers (your neighbours) will never change. The older they get, they more entrenched they become.
Vote:December 7th, 2011 at 4:55 pm
@Falafulu Fisi – ***Good on you!*** If you decide to go ahead and help out these children, I hope it really goes well!
Vote:I agree with you. **So much** is in the mind, as far as success goes. I seem to remember someone once saying “where the mind goes, the body will follow.” ( I think that’s what the quote was – it may have been to do with sport. )
I would LOVE it if these charter schools became raging success stories.
December 7th, 2011 at 5:04 pm
@Falafulu Fisi. All sounds good but you can’t open a charter school that just teaches maths. You have to fulfil the other needs of the student as well. Reading Writing, Science, Languages….
Vote:December 7th, 2011 at 5:11 pm
@rouppe – I think Falafulu may have been looking at helping at a charter school, rather than opening one himself. Just sayin’……
Vote:( I may be wrong, and that’s true – the school would need to cover the subjects that you mentioned. )
December 7th, 2011 at 6:44 pm
Roupe said…
I agree, but perhaps I should have elaborated a bit more. The aim is that kids still have to learn of what they’re supposed to taught be it reading, art, sports, etc,.., where other teachers in those area can cover that. A well rounded education is vital. The program will emphasize on giving a bit more time/resources to kids who are selected to take part in it. So, overall, the kids are not missing or skipping in other areas of their learning, however they’re being elevated to a level of learning (maths/science) that’s not normally targeted for them at certain specific age group according to some education experts who had devised the education national curriculum who think, that the way learning is supposed to progress (be done) is that the learner must know X first prior to introducing Y and then Z, although true, but not necessarily.
If X is a subset of Y and then Y is a subset of Z, then logically one doesn’t need to know X prior to learning Y or must know Y prior to learning Z.
X –> Y –> Z (X is a subset of Y and also Y is a subset of Z)
You can teach someone to know Z (the super-set of of both sets X and Y) without having prior knowledge of both the subsets X and Y. Once the learner understands Z, then it will naturally & logically follows as a consequent of knowing Z that he/she will also understand the subsets X & Y (with less difficulty or effort). This is a top-down way of teaching for me, which is completely different from accepted standard bottom-up methods done at schools. The main goal is to accelerate learning. So, ignore introducing concept X and Y first but just go straight and introduce Z.
Take a look at this past exam for year-13 CIE (Cambridge International Exams) pure math paper from 2010 which is one of the CIE pure math paper number that my top year-6 level primary school kid student (10 years old) just sat last month. My student thinks he will get an A grade. You may be pondering how the hell can a year-6 level primary school kid understands all that calculus in that paper? Answer? I used accelerated top-down learning method I described above. You may also want to ask. Had I missed teaching him certain lower level math topics? Yep definitely. Well, I say, a huge chunk of the math curriculum (from year-7 to year-12). But you may say, isn’t it suppose that they should know all those topics before introducing them to calculus? Well, that’s not necessarily required. You patched them on the go and they will understand it (that specific topic) far much better had they learnt it at lower level.
An example. I skipped teaching the concept of volume of object entirely (which is a topic taught at year-8/year-9). However I introduce it briefly and quickly when they need to use calculus to find an optimum volume of an object such as:
Calculus Math Problem:
————————–
An open top square-base cuboid has length x for its base and has a height H. The total surface area of this square-base cuboid is A square units. Find the maximum volume of this open top cuboid in terms of x , H and L.
—————————————————————————————————–
Solution:
———-
A = 4*x*H + x^2 (cuboid total surface area)
V = H*x^2 (cuboid volume)
Re-arrange so H is the subject in formula for A, then sub H into formula for V, then differentiate dV/dx, then solve for x
—————————————————————————————————–
Here is the main argument. Does the learner require to know how to calculate volume first? Yep, definitely.
Here is the main irony.
If the learner is required to know how to calculate volume apriori before solving that calculus problem above, then surely he/she can’t solve that problem. Nope! If you can teach them to understand integration, differentiation, optimization, then learning a lower level topic as calculating volume of an object can take less than a minute. This is actually what I’ve been doing and that’s exactly what I’ve observed in my students learning. Accelerate their learning straight into the superset Z, then getting to know the lower level subsets X and Y and so forth, are easy task for them. Their level of understanding of complex topics grow as they progressed. My year-6 primary school top student is now doing self study on his own. Give him a new topic in the text book and he will study that on his own, with very little help from me, however there are certain difficult OCR problems that I have to lend a help, but mostly he’s doing his learning on his own.
I believe that this method of top-down learning can be replicated in a real school environment and there is no doubt that it will be a success. We had been hardwired/pre-programmed for decades that learning is procedural (bottom-up), that is, the learner must learn X fist before learning Y, if X is a subset of Y.
Vote:December 7th, 2011 at 6:51 pm
For those who don’t know OCR that I mentioned in my previous post, it stands for Oxford, Cambridge and RSA Examinations.
Vote:December 7th, 2011 at 7:30 pm
@Falafulu Fisi – that’s great stuff!
Vote:As you mentioned above, I hope you can get a group of likeminded people together and show what’s possible. Your keenness and passion in this area comes through very strongly.
December 7th, 2011 at 8:22 pm
Fala, I wonder what you think of this video (12mins sorry, but worth it).
http://www.ted.com/talks/dan_meyer_math_curriculum_makeover.html
I saw this a while back and immediately it made sense to me in terms of teaching kids to problem solve rather than teaching them to remember the answers. In real world you actually have to think, and in the main those who can think do very well.
Vote:December 7th, 2011 at 10:11 pm
Badmac, that’s a good video, which is exactly how I do it. When I first explained the definition of a slope (or gradient) as Dan Meyer mentioned in the video you linked to above, I took 3 of my students for a walk down to Cavalier tavern along College Hill (Ponsonby). This is something that I do regularly just to change the learning environment from a whiteboard into a table in a bar. The reason I do that so they can have hamburgers/chips and I have a beer. Their parents usually joined up later near the end of our math session.
Anyway, on the walk to Cavalier (the first time), I took them on a detour along Pompallier Terrace first (half-way down & back-up again) to 3 Lamps shops and on to College Hill down to Cavalier tavern. We got a table and then when we all sat down, I asked them which road was steeper, Pompallier Terrace or College? One said Pompallier Terrace and the other 2 said College Hill. For me, I think Pompallier Terrace is steeper, but that was a secondary point to why I took the students on a detour. I explained to them the purpose of the detour, and the question I asked them about the steeper of the two. That little exercise made them really understood the concept of slope/gradient of a line equation : y = m*x + c , where ‘m’ is the slope/gradient and ‘c’ is the y-intercept. The steeper the line, the bigger the value of ‘m’ , irrespective if the line is slope-up (positive ‘m’), ie, bottom-left to top-right or slope-down (negative ‘m’), ie, top-left to bottom-right. So, my main point here, is that actual activities or (computer) visualizations help a lot. It takes kids much faster to grasp concepts by doing it this way. To get them to remember whether a slope/gradient is positive or negative. The walking exercise that we did is just one of the many examples via physicial activities to explain concepts to students. I can list them all here but there won’t be enough space.
I agree with Dan Myers on the solving problems side of teaching math. We’re different in the emphasis of problem solving. One typical argument from certain people who told me that what I’m doing is the wrong way to teach math to kids (yep, including the school principal in one of my student’s school). She said, that what I’m doing is rote learning. I said, in what way. You’re teaching them to memorize formulas but not understanding them. I protested heavily to her that’s not what I’m doing. I teach the kids to understand the formulas plus knowing how to use them. I then asked her to give a specific example and she said that they should learn to understand trigonometry like pythagorus rules. I stopped her straightaway and explained , how the hell that the student suppose to understand pythagorus rules without knowing/memorizing those formulas first.
I caught her there. She then diverted the conversation into something else. I had listened to people talking about rote learning as if if is the same thing as knowing/memorizing formulas. I know rote learning (in my view it is a bad form of learning), where students can’t apply the formula when the equations in the questions had changed from the ones they had memorized.
Vote: