It's NOT All Or Nothing (cont.)

Dr. Claude Goldenberg, a Stanford education professor, has recently commented that there is very little evidence that culturally accommodated instruction has an impact on English Language or Hispanics. He argues that research has shown that familiar content does promote learning and comprehension but adds that there are lots of ways to make things familiar. Therefore, the question needs to be, "Does familiar material have to be part of the learner's home culture or does it simply mean that the learner has had sufficient experience with the content of the material?"

Goldenberg goes onto share something that is extremely important to remember and that is language of the reading material in relationship to students' language proficiency has more impact on reading comprehension than did familiarity with the content.

Obviously and as Goldenberg notes, even though familiar content will help a learner to learn the language and the academic curriculum at a faster rate, what is familiar shouldn't be limited to what is part of his/her home culture.

All this is not to say, as Goldenberg reminds us, this is not to excuse an educator from becoming familiar with and respectful of a learner's home culture. Being able to make connections for the learner based on his/her home culture is not only good teaching but it's beneficial to the student regardless of the impact it has on student learning per se. Plus, it will be worthwhile for other students to learn about cultures other than their own.

Yet, Goldenberg reiterates that there has not been one study conducted that has shown that culture-based curriculum improved achievement in reading and writing and those that do claim this connection have research design problems. He adds, though, that this is a worthwhile topic for investigation.

Dr. Roland Tharp, a research professor from the University of California Berkeley, says that even though it is difficult to provide empirical research concerning the effectiveness of culture-based instruction, he contends that research in this area needs to be given a high priority. He says that there have been studies that have shown "culture-based education systematically produces greater student engagement, greater parent involvement, better attendance rates, lower dropout rates, and general satisfaction of all participants, as opposed to a standard, traditional program based on mainstream models." Even though studies, according to Goldenberg, haven't shown the connection, yet, it would seem that these outcomes Tharp mentions could influence and improve academic achievement. To know this, we obviously need studies that carefully separate out cultural accommodations for examination as Diane August, a senior research scientist at the Washington Center for Applied Linguistics, recommends.

August asks the all important question, "Is it the cultural accommodation or the teaching that matters?" and then Dr. Luis Moll, an education professor at the University of Arizona, reminds us of the importance not to focus only on test scores as a learning outcome indicator. Doing so could cause us to miss other outcomes such as an increase in student engagement and participation which could be just as beneficial to the student, if not more so.

My note: Lessons learned from this discussion:

1. Research studies need to be conducted that carefully separate out cultural accommodations to better understand the impact they have on student learning as well as other outcomes that are beneficial to the student.
2. Whether cultural accommodations improve student learning or not, teachers who are familiar with a learner's culture can use that knowledge to help make connections for a learner.
3. It is beneficial for students of all cultural backgrounds to learn about other cultures.
4. IMPORTANT: Rather than using only that with which a learner is already familiar, it is important for a teacher to expand and increase a learner's familiar world.

Information for the content in this blog post came from a personal email with Dr. Claude Goldenberg and an article from Education Week entitled Evidence on Effect of Culture-Based Teaching Called Thin by Mary Ann Zehr which was posted and retrieved online on January 8, 2008.


January 8, 2008 on line at Education Week

What Are They Thinking?!?

Even though a recent audit shows that over the last seven years schools were given $460 million by the Utah legislature to reduce class size, class sizes in Utah have not been lowered. Now a new bill has passed committee this year to give schools another $26 million to reduce class size in K-3.

Why would legislation be supported that gives more money towards something in a way that has so far been an unsuccessful effort? Has the situation miraculously changed?

The seriousness of this decision becomes more acute when we are told that even though the audit found that districts were likely using the previous $46 million correctly, most didn't specifically track where the dollars went. This is appalling.

This bill is extremely flawed for the following reasons:

Reason #1: Before giving money to schools, each school should have a comprehensive strategic plan on how it is going to improve academic achievement, especially for those students in greatest need. The plan needs to be based on research. It also needs to include the funds that will be needed to implement each part of the plan giving a rationale as to why this particular implementation would be the most cost effective.

Reason #2: An evaluation component needs to be required to show that resources are achieving the desired outcome which must be student achievement. For example, if class size reduction was part of the plan, the effectiveness of the plan wouldn't be determined by the class size reduction in the school but by the academic achievement of the students. In other words, the end goal, not the means to the end is what is most important.

Not only is this bill putting the cart before the horse--giving money before there is a plan--but it has made class size reduction, not student achievement, the ultimate goal.

E. D. Hirsch and Closing the Achievement Gap

Yesterday's "blog" posting ended with two questions:

1. Which facts?
2. Who decides which facts?

Before answering these two questions, the following are some other questions to consider:

• Why does the learning gap for the haves and have nots grow wider as students move through the school in the U.S. while the opposite occurs in other countries?
• Why do more 2nd and 3rd generation immigrant students drop out of school than 1st generation immigrant students?
• What makes our schools unfair?
• What does educational justice mean?

Some points to consider while pondering the answers to these questions:

• Educational justice means equality of educational opportunity
• Imparting a universally shared core of knowledge helps overcome inequality
• Classroom learning can go forward more effectively when all students share some common points of reference
• ALL children will learn relatively well in an effective school--High quality tends to be correlated with high equity
• Some students are learning less than others because of systematic shortcomings in their schooling and social and economic differences rather than because of their own innate lack of academic ability
• New knowledge expands exponentially
• There is a "Matthew Effect"--the more background knowledge and the richer the vocabulary a learner has, the greater will be his/her ability to accumulate more knowledge
• Detailed guidelines provide clarity
• A diverse country has a greater need of a core-knowledge system than does a homogeneous one

The work of E. D. Hirsch's, Cultural Literacy, has been criticized not only in the multicultural education arena, but also in the general education arena. Yet, before criticizing him too harshly and "throwing the baby out with the bath water," it is my opinion that we need to have an understanding of why his work on core knowledge could be helpful to diverse learners:

• It addresses the snowball effect that allows a small knowledge difference in kindergarten to become a huge gap in learning within a few years
• It builds from year to year on the background knowledge learners need to be academically successful
• A teacher can identify what background knowledge a learner is missing
• It does not stipulate everything a learner should know. In fact, it is meant to comprise only 50% of the school's curriculum leaving ample time to address other learning needs, including more ethnically-centered curricula
• Because cosmopolitanism is a true friend to diversity, core knowledge has adopted a cosmpolitan approach to history and literature in order to reinforce the fact that no longer are Blacks, Latinos, Asians, and other ethnic groups invisible in the past or the present
• In order to be fair to diverse learners, it is critical that schools not neglect or reject the current dominant culture
• The Hirsch core knowledge is not the work of one person, but the work of many, including multicultural advisors, who combined scholarly research with grassroots experience to develop this sequence consensus
• It was empirical science and not ideology that originated cultural literacy and the core knowledge movement
• There is evidence that supports the connection between core knowledge and educational justice. In fact, the correlations between fairness and core knowledge are 100 percent.

As the U.S. becomes more diverse it is critical that we find ways to not only acknowledge the diversity and benefit from the richness that diversity brings, but also find ways to bring us together. It is my opinion that the principles of Hirsch's Cultural Literacy and core knowledge can help do both.

Response To Quality Research

Last summer the famed Harvard political scientist Robert Putnam was hesitant to publish the results from a 5 year research project he and his colleagues had conducted. He feared the implications some people would attach to what their research had discovered concerning how immigration challenges community cohesion. In fact, his concern was so great, the results were first published in the quarterly Scandinavian Political Studies.

Dr. William Jeynes could have had similar concerns when he published the results of his research which revealed the positive effects of religiosity and two parent families on closing the academic achievement gap.

Too often this kind of research is rejected because it is interpreted as blaming the victim. I would suggest that any quality research should not be dismissed just because it doesn't confirm our beliefs. Rather it needs to be valued for the insights it provides.

For instance, the research from Dr. Jeynes can help us see that if we want to close the achievement gap, we need to find ways to strengthen the family. Sharing with families the part they can play in making a difference in the academic achievement of their children is not blaming them. Not sharing this information with them is irresponsible, and even unethical.

Yet, we also want to be extremely sensitive to single parent families and not put them on a guilt trip. We need to find ways, as educators and as a community, to be supportive of single parent
families. Supportive doesn't mean denying the facts. It means finding creative ways to fill the gap.

Robert Putnam's reaction to his own research is impressive. He responded to it not by denying what the research said, but by saying in essence, "Now that we have this information, what can we do about it?"

As leaders who want to make a difference for diverse learners we must look at what quality research says. We do this by not taking a defensive stance against it, but by following Robert Putnam's example, "How can I use this information to benefit diverse learners?"

Spiritual Leadership: Meeting the Challenge

Spiritual leaders understand that best teaching practices are still waiting to be discovered. They know this is especially true when it comes to teaching our diverse learners.

Stephen Covey says in his book, The 8th Habit, that nothing fails like success. When there is a challenge and the response is equal to the challenge that is success. BUT when there is a new challenge, the old once-successful response no longer works. If it is the response implemented, it will result in failure.

Education is experiencing a new challenge---many of our schools are no longer predominantly white. This challenge of changing demographics requires different and new ideas beyond what was (and what is!) successful for a predominantly white student population

Spiritual leaders understand that to address this issue they will need to "build a ship that has never been built before." This will mean being a maverick and challenging the status quo by asking questions such as, "Why?' and "What if....?" ....and then being prepared to endure scorn and ridicule, even by "experts" in the field. Experts are often the least receptive to any new idea.

Yet, the very word research means to explore and find new ways. If we already had all the answers, there would be no need for research.