Are CPS' New Approaches Best for Kids' Learning?

This is the original article/letter that I had to condense and was also edited...  Thoughts?

            I am a CPS teacher conducting Fulbright research on the teaching and learning of mathematics in Finland. I have taught middle school mathematics and science for sixteen years with CPS and I collaborated with teachers as an instructional coach the last four years. Since 2000, Finland has been among the world’s top achievers in literacy, mathematics, and science on the Program for International Student Assessment (PISA). Since I left for sabbatical in January, CPS has decided to implement several strategies that diametrically oppose both Finland’s successful approaches, as I have observed them, as well as recognized international research on the strategies that Finland uses to ensure that teaching and learning of mathematics occurs at high levels. I am concerned that by moving forward in the opposite direction of these successful approaches, CPS could do more harm than good to the quality of mathematics education in Chicago. Proven successful strategies include:   

NO Standardized Testing

Finland uses several methods to gauge how schools and students are performing. For example, the National Board of Education checks learning periodically by administering a test to a random sample of students.  Students are not tested in every subject, in every grade, every year. In addition, there are optional annual assessments that teachers and schools can choose to administer anonymously to compare their school to the national average. Students’ names with scores are not reported, nor ranked. Finnish educators are responsible for assessing their own students’ learning and do not understand why Chicago requires so many standardized tests that have been identified as narrowing the curriculum and instruction. According to the 2011-2012 CPS assessment calendar there are potentially over 30 instructional days for some form of standardized test at the 8^th grade level; whereas, Finland has none. Eliminating even half of these tests for the district would result in regained instructional time for kids and substantial savings with less test administration. 

Small Class Size

Based on classroom observations as well as interviews with teachers and principals, I submit that one of the most effective strategies that has contributed to Finland’s success is a smaller class size compared to Chicago. Every middle school class I have visited has 18-24 students. Furthermore, I have observed that almost every mathematics teacher here presents the day’s concept then touches base with each student 1, 2 or 3 times during class. Recently, in Chicago I have had classes of 33, 35 and even 37 students. With fewer students in a class, CPS teachers, like Finnish teachers, would be able to know their students better and support their range of learning needs.

Trust Teachers

            Finnish teachers are trusted to create, instruct, and evaluate the teaching and learning. Both teachers and principals say that they are successful because they are trusted as educators to design lessons that work for their students. In addition to this respect and autonomy, teachers and the teachers union are consulted by the National Board of Education whenever reforms are designed. When I talk to Finnish teachers, principals, and policy makers here, they have a difficult time comprehending why CPS does not involve teachers more in deciding what is needed for kids to be successful. As Chicago plans for a new school year, Central Office could make steps towards demonstrating some trust by giving schools the autonomy to design their instructional programs (including the length of the day ) that will meet the needs of all learners.

Slow, Consistent Approach

            Forty years ago, Finland was not performing at its current level but they made equity of education a top priority, developed their structures, and stayed the course. During my twenty years as a CPS teacher, I have lost count of the annual initiatives that have come and gone. The next school year, Chicago teachers will continue the monumental tasks of transitioning to the national Common Core State Standards curriculum, following a comprehensive CPS Framework for Teaching , effectively implementing a longer school day, and learning a new CPS teacher evaluation system (that will include students' performance on standardized tests). Recently, numerous local, national, and international educators stressed the importance for districts to have both research and evidence-based decisions for school reform initiatives.
             CPS leadership plans to implement yet again many new frameworks for the new school year. Chicago should slow down, study top performing countries’ educational systems, test our students less, and trust our teachers more. Instead of advancing more policies opposite those of top performing countries, Chicago should follow these countries' lead, give back control over teaching and assessment to teachers and thus return the focus to our students’ learning.

Robert Reynolds, NBCT/Mathematics

Distinguished Fulbright Teacher

Mary Gage Peterson Elementary School

For more information (links):
Time: Beyond the Classroom: An Analysis of a Chicago Public School Teacher's Actual Workday
Testing (please endorse): National Resolution Against Standards High-Stakes Testing
PISA: Finland's Slow and Steady Reform for Consistently High Results (Chpt 5)
Reform: What the U.S. Can Learn from Finland's School Reform
Dr. Pasi Sahlberg’s (Finnish educator & author) blog: Finnish Education Reform
Rob Reynolds’ blog: Mathematics the Finnish Way

Finnish Success: Teachers-Time-Trust-(No)Tests-Class Size

As I try to capture my time and Fulbright experience, the hardest aspect to explain thoroughly and accurately is the trust of teachers.  Many have written about it, but you just have to experience it.  I  am the fortunate one to experience the trust through Fulbright -- Thanks Senator Fulbright for envisioning these international partnerships and collaboration!

In Chicago and the U.S., we need to revisit, in the long term, our preparation and training of teachers.  I will write more about that soon.  Today, I want to write about more immediate issues that individual school districts have some control over:  Time, Trust, Testing (none), & Class Size.

Time:  There is plenty of research out there about the use of time -- more time in the school day (or year) does not necessarily equate to better achievement.  It is the quality use of time, along with other factors that enable teachers to set up the opportunity for quality teaching & learning for kids.  Look at Finland -- one of the  shortest school days, but still among the top performers world wide.  Why is that?  Shorter school days, especially for younger kids, so that they maximize their attention span.  Plenty of breaks built into the school day so kids are refreshed and attentive.

Trust:  Teachers have more time built into their school days and weeks without kids in front of them so that they can (1) collaborate with colleagues, (2) prepare experiments and inquiry-based lessons, and (3) provide substantive written feedback to kids (Love this last one -- I  spend so much of my personal time providing feedback to help kids with their misconceptions). 

Tests - NO STANDARDIZED TESTS:  OK, so we will not get rid of all of the tests in the U.S. any time soon, but couldn't we eliminate half?!  If districts eliminated some of the tests they would: (1) demonstrate trust for teachers' work (google Assessment for Learning and find all the international research out there how top performing countries have given this trust to teachers with formative assesments and reduced/elminated standardized tests), (2) regain instructional time, (3) provide substantial financial savings (think of all the costs), and (4) relieve kids' stress, and much more...

Class Size:  every middle school class I visited had 18-24 students.  The teacher typically (almost always) presented the lesson or challenging  problems then circulated the classroom and checked in with each student 1, 2, or 3 times.  In this setting, it makes sense to all that these teachers know their students' strengths and needs better than I ever will.  In recent years, I have had 33, 35, and even 37 kids in a class often with special ed and ELL kids included.

I want to shout from the roof tops one of the most obvious examples of trust here and lack of trust in the U.S.  When teachers in Finland speak about what is best for kids' learning -- they are heard and even sought out by principals & policymakers.  Usually when American teachers speak out, education officials, policymakers and even some parents perceive teachers to be advocating for themselves first and not what is best for kids to be successful.  How can teachers' suggestions be more respected by the supervisors and policymakers in Chicago and the U.S.?

Finnish Teacher Education in Action

As part of the celebration of Helsinki - World Design Capital for 2012, the University's Department of Teacher Education has produced a series of videos about teacher education (each subtitle is the link to YouTube).  Which video clip highlights best the differences between Finland and U.S.A.'s teacher training?

Becoming aTeacher
This first video introduces the respect that the teaching profession has in Finland and why so many Finns are proud to pursue this calling.

Finnish Teacher Education
The teacher education approach emphasizes their training and preparation for the teaching to the whole child.  Teachers are required to earn a master’s degree which usually takes five years.

TeachingPractice - Reflection in Action
This video clip is of two student teachers who are working together with a supervising master teacher in a sixth grade class at the practice teaching school.  An instructor from the university (my advisor) also observes and facilitates reflection during the practice teaching. (We are in the back of the class observing this lesson.)  As I stated in an earlier post, this practice teaching series happens three times during their training.

Tribute toDiversity
This segment provides background on the teacher’s code of ethics and among the techniques the supervising teacher models for the student teachers is differentiated instruction.

Smartphone inTeaching and Learning

This is a six minute video clip about using Smartphones in class.  I am not sure how many teachers are using this technique, but it is great to see the productive use of this technology.

Strategies to Support Struggling Learners

One common strategy in Finland with the early grades, but not a requirement, is to divide the class into two groups:  A and B.  For example, one day a week, typically the first period of the day, group A would come to school for a mathematics lesson and group B would come to school one hour later.  Then another day of the week, it flips with group B coming in early and group A one hour later.  Seems simple?  Can you imagine our schools in Chicago doing this?

Many people, especially my CPS teacher colleagues, would appreciate the effectiveness of this design.  Please excuse me for reminding you that the average class size I have seen is 22 or 24 students so think of providing a mathematics lesson to 11 or 12 students one day a week... That is one way to meet kids' needs in the early years -- but it is a funding decision and school level priority.

Here are some common strategies (but not requirements) at the middle school grades:  Typically there are 3 or 4 "lesson hours" a week for mathematics in grades 6, 7, 8, and 9.  Depending on the struggling students' needs, the student attends class with a special education teacher for 1 or 2 of those lesson hours.  It seems most often that they attend one hour a week with the special education teacher instead of the mathematics teacher.  Both the mathematics and special education teachers routinely collaborate to ensure there is continuity of the content.

In addition, the national curriculum specifically explains that when remedial teaching needs are identified, that the school should develop a plan in cooperation with the parents or guardians to meet that student's need.  As I understand it, it is not for special education but for a student currently struggling with a mathematics unit.  The teacher and the school can meet this student's need during the mathematics lesson, during the school day, or after school.  If it is after school, the small group may meet once a week for a few weeks or until the unit is done.  "Depending" on the school or situation, another group could be organized or not.  This is a school level decision and the principal sets aside funds to pay teachers for this type of flexible need.  If I am not mistaken, in Chicago, after school academic help is typically done for most of the school year for the same students.  While the intent makes sense for us in Chicago, it lacks the flexibility and versatility for the school and the teachers to meet their students' needs.  The limited CPS funding for after school academic help "tied" to and audited for the attendance of the identified students for the whole school year.  What do you think?  Anything unclear?

Autonomy at all Levels

As my project winds down, I have the opportunity to reflect on what I have seen and heard.  The biggest challenge for me is to articulate what I have learned concisely with accuracy. 

So how to bring home the huge impact of autonomy?!  As I listen to my recorded interviews of teachers and principals, the most common response is "It depends."  Why is that phrase a common response you might ask.  Often when I inquire about a particular strategy or framework, given the school and the teachers have autonomy, the teachers have the principals' support to design and implement what they determine to be the most effective approach to meet the identified need.  While this may seem obvious, my experiences in Chicago have shown me that both schools within the district and teachers within the schools are extremely limited by all the education requirements and funding formulas.

Finland is open and deliberate about their national approach to present the National Board of Education curriculum (links to the right) and then make each city, each school, and each teacher self-sufficient with the power and the independence to self-govern.  Isn't that what autonomy should truly be?  My next post will be about how some schools use this autonomy to support struggling learners with mathematics.

Trust & Respect for Teachers

You may have read about the respect and trust that teachers have in Finland.  I am experiencing it in several ways including the teaching load, the school day schedule, and even the teachers' lounges.

The number of hours a middle school mathematics teacher has is 21 hours to teach.  If they are needed to teach more than 21 hours, they are paid a little more for each hour accordingly.  So if "you do the math" there often is a day during the week with only 1 or 2 classes to teach.  Thus, the teacher can spend that time preparing lessons, grading papers with substantive feedback, or meeting with colleagues.  Teachers also have the independence to leave during the time they are not teaching to get their work done at home.

It is common for mathematics classes to be 60 minutes with a 15 minute break built in or 75 minutes followed by 15 minute break.  Some schools have shifted to 90 minute periods with a 15 minute break built in or followed by a 30 minute break.  Each school designs their instructional schedule with frequent breaks built in for both students and teachers.

Teachers' Lounges:  symbolic respect for teachers and the collaboration.  These are comfortable, welcoming rooms where you often find teachers sharing a cup of coffee and talking.   The school I visited yesterday --  many of the teachers have a coffee break at 10:15 while the students have their break.  This structured time fosters that collaboration and networking.

I will focus on capturing more "doable" steps American schools can structure to foster more trust and respect for teachers.

Collaboration in Action

Today I was able to meet with an important official at the Trade Union of Education in Finland (OAJ). A couple weeks ago, I attended the teachers' national conference and pursued this avenue as another resource to identify mathematics teachers and schools to visit.

When I arrived at OAJ the receptionist asked if my whole group was here. I responded that it was just me, but I had a follow up question, "Does she usually have large groups?" and the reply was yes -- now I felt important and told her when we met. In the course of our two hour conversation, I learned that she organizes visits for delegations from various countries including last year's visit by the American Federation of Teachers (AFT) President Randi Weingarten (that had a lot of coverage).

The HUGE difference in Finland is the recognized, understood, and expected role the teachers union has in shaping education policy, working conditions, and teachers' salaries. Case in point, the country is currently planning revisions to the national curriclum and there are three stakeholders working closely on the process: the government, that National Board of Education, and the teachers' union. Teachers have a respected voice in planning what is best for kids and their learning. How can we work towards this level of collaboration and respect in the U.S.?

I apologize if I am getting repetitive with my posts, but the current state of education in Finland took time. In the 1970s, Finland implemented the requirement for all teachers to earn a master's degree and the teacher preparation through universities with teacher training schools. Besides investing and strengthening their teacher force, over time this established teachers with high status and respect.

In our U.S. history, teachers had a higher level of respect and were listened to by parents, administrators, and political leaders about what is best for kids. We need to gradually and assertively rebuild this level of respect and collaboration.