Everything I Need to Know--I Learned By Third Grade

There isn’t a lot of admiration or sympathy for the state legislature in Michigan these days. Back in September, it took an eleventh hour (really—minutes before midnight) threat of shutting down the state government to get the two houses to agree on a tax plan that would not bankrupt and irreparably damage the state. (And since that dramatic showdown, the agreed-upon plan has been dissolved—go figure.) It’s not a great time to be an educator in a once-great industrial stronghold. It’s gotten so bad, Michiganders have taken to pointing out that when global warming makes Phoenix uninhabitable, we will still have the Great Lakes (if they haven’t been sold to pay off our debts).

While Michigan is starving its world-class higher education system, and trying to figure out how to get out from under crushing legacy retirement and benefits costs, the chairman of the Michigan Senate education committee, Senator Wayne Kuipers (R-Holland) has offered a bill that would automatically retain any third grader who is not reading at grade level. The senator kindly proposes that all students be tested at second grade, to ascertain who’s not up to snuff. Students who are, well, left behind will be offered additional instruction—but at the end of third grade, if you’re not average or above, it’s back to third grade again, until you get it right.

Senator Kuipers suggests that this bill will go a long way toward solving academic deficiencies in our middle and high schools, nipping them in the bud, and—with Michigan’s truly admirable new Merit Curriculum for high school students—set Michigan on a path to economic success. He believes that the law will serve as a powerful incentive for parents and teachers to do their jobs and make certain that kids learn to read. Response to the senator’s bill ranges from plaudits from the get-tough-on-these-lazy-kids crowd to accusations of political showmanship. From a research and policy perspective, however:

• Research on retaining kids is nearly all negative, in terms of their subsequent academic progress. Publicly failing kids makes them behave as failures, plain and simple—we have abundant examples of mandatory retention policies that didn’t make kids more motivated or smarter. And plenty of evidence about retained students dropping out of school earlier, hardly an indicator of progress in a depressed economy.
• Isn’t a third grade reading level (however defined) theoretically the average reading skill of an 8-year old? So—wouldn’t some kids necessarily be ahead and behind on the developmental path to reading facility? Has Senator Kuipers confused the Lake Woebegon effect with the Lake Michigan effect—and woe indeed to the child plugging along at the second grade reading level after reaching the third grade?
• Kuipers declared that his bill will end the “social promotion game and get kids on the right track.” What it may actually do is make teaching third grade the only growth industry in Michigan—but the implication that teachers unthinkingly pass kids along with nary a worry about their deficient academic skills isn’t borne out in my 30 years’ experience, or in conversations with my teaching colleagues. Retaining kids is serious business—teachers rarely suggest it unless they’re convinced that it will do some good, which is why most productive retentions happen very early in a school career, correctly positioned as developmental unreadiness for the demands of the next level, and before a child is “socially” identified as held back.
• It is the height of presumption to believe that legislation could—presto—solve the difficult challenge of teaching all kids to read efficiently and on a single timetable. Under such a proposed bill, blame for a child’s reading deficiencies can be more easily laid at the feet of his teacher or parents, rather than, say, an ineffective state government, unable to attract new jobs when said child enters the work force. 

Senator Kuipers says his bill is a “work in progress,” so stay tuned. In the meantime, however third grade teachers might begin thinking about how they will inform kids that they may be doing time in the third grade. Sorry, buddy—it’s the law.

Comments

[Susan Graham, Teacher]

What was that thing Einstein said about doing the same thing over again and expecting different results? If the senator is serious about repeating the third grade curriclum until they get it right as the answer, may I suggest he consider an addendum to fund student parking lots at elementary schools? Perhaps he could also throw in a supplement for hazardous duty for third grade teachers who will be held accountable and therefore act as targets for grandstanders who lob kneejerk solutions at serious problems and stand back and blame others for lack of success.

[Jessica Shyu]

If only Sen. Wayne didn't have to taint his reasonable call for improved literacy support with the call to hold back third graders... Ideally, his proposal (the part before the non-promotion) would include the necessary training, funding, staff cultivation and thorough on-going support for kindergarten, first, second and third grade teachers to teach literacy effectively throughout the year to keep the kiddos from being held back. I work with teachers with barely any education training who teach in under-resourced, low-performing districts. If they can raise student reading scores up by more than two grade levels in one year, with the appropriate support, the effective training and the must-do-it mindset, it is possible.

But by throwing in the ultimatum that third graders who don't pass the reading test by the end of the year would be held back, the spotlight is shifted away from possibly making clear action steps (and funding) for literacy support in the lower elementary grades. Knock out the ultimatum, Michigan, and refocus the discussion on literacy support.

[Jessica Shyu]

If only Sen. Wayne didn't have to taint his reasonable call for improved literacy support with the call to hold back third graders... Ideally, his proposal (the part before the non-promotion) would include the necessary training, funding, staff cultivation and thorough on-going support for kindergarten, first, second and third grade teachers to teach literacy effectively throughout the year to keep the kiddos from being held back. I work with teachers with barely any education training who teach in under-resourced, low-performing districts. If they can raise student reading scores up by more than two grade levels in one year, with the appropriate support, the effective training and the must-do-it mindset, it is possible.

But by throwing in the ultimatum that third graders who don't pass the reading test by the end of the year would be held back, the spotlight is shifted away from possibly making clear action steps (and funding) for literacy support in the lower elementary grades. Knock out the ultimatum, Michigan, and refocus the discussion on literacy support.

[Jessica Shyu]

If only Sen. Wayne didn't have to taint his reasonable call for improved literacy support with the call to hold back third graders... Ideally, his proposal (the part before the non-promotion) would include the necessary training, funding, staff cultivation and thorough on-going support for kindergarten, first, second and third grade teachers to teach literacy effectively throughout the year to keep the kiddos from being held back. I work with teachers with barely any education training who teach in under-resourced, low-performing districts. If they can raise student reading scores up by more than two grade levels in one year, with the appropriate support, the effective training and the must-do-it mindset, it is possible.

But by throwing in the ultimatum that third graders who don't pass the reading test by the end of the year would be held back, the spotlight is shifted away from possibly making clear action steps (and funding) for literacy support in the lower elementary grades. Knock out the ultimatum, Michigan, and refocus the discussion on literacy support.

[Nancy Flanagan]

Actually--I would argue that it is not the state legislature's place to mandate a particular reading program training, support or "staff cultivation," let alone retention for lagging third graders. We have school boards, administrators and teacher leaders for that--people with the experience and expertise to make good, site-based decisions on choosing and administering effective reading programs.

There are 550 school districts in Michigan. I cannot imagine a stock reading program that would be optimally effective for all of them. If Senator Kuipers wants to help teachers improve their reading instruction, he could begin with endorsing stable funding for schools, and then pay visits to classrooms of successful reading teachers in diverse settings. Building a professional practice as a literacy teacher involves much more than optimism, enthusiasm or threats.

[Marsha Ratzel]

While Senator Kuipers idea is missed the mark, I wonder if one of the underlying concepts has merit. That is the idea of time.

Right now time (length of class, length of day and length of year) are all held constant. When we look at how find ways to provide interventions that will assist children with all sorts of academic problems, time is the untouchable variable.

Yet what if time were variable? What if teachers and schools could adjust time to meet the needs of a student?

What if we had multiage classrooms where students could progress as they were able?

What if the length of the school year could be shortened if a student mastered that year's curriculum early than the required number of attendence days? or the reverse idea..lengthened to acccomodate more learning time?

Since I'm no expert in young children, I make no suggestions for 3rd graders specifically...but I think it would be wise to consider the input of time in the equation of learning.

[Nancy Flanagan]

Hey, Marsha.

I don't think you need expertise with young children to know that you're absolutely correct: kids learn at different rates, a factor that is seldom considered in our egg-crate schooling model.

All of the options you suggest are viable--I especially like the multi-age classroom, having flexibly taught 6th, 7th and 8th graders in the same class without making a big deal about it. And if the teacher doesn't make a big deal about mixed ages, the kids don't.

It's the educational establishment and tradition that cause us to panic and create constructs like "grade level"--which are equally limiting for kids who are ahead of the norm as behind.

Great ideas. You should write a blog!
Nancy

[Nancy Flanagan]

This blog and many other wonderful blogs are featured on this week's Carnival of Education, over at the Columbus Education Association this week:

http://blog.ceaohio.org/wordpress/index.php/2008/01/09/lets-carnival-the-carnival-of-education/

[Judy Krueger]

I've taught for 34+ years. My experience has shown me that the children, who fall be hind do so for a combination of reasons. They are often mobile...changing schools as rent is due. This is one leading cause. They are always trying to make connections and worrying about the next move when will it come. They often develop an attitude of why vest in friends or try to get good grades...only to move again.

Many are shy and find it hard to ask a new teacher for help or to slow down. Often the children with learning disability that have not been identified struggle the most. It takes the system so long to do the child studies, that by time they are completed the child has moved on. Eventually the child puts up a wall to block out the hurt from being different and develops a chip. Teacher sees the chip, but doesn't see the scars that put it there. If in experienced teacher gets the child, soon they are labeled as uncaring and a waste of their time. The child still feels disconnected and bombarded by all the rule changes from system to system. Some schools give lots of homework and no support, expecting the children to get it from home.

Forgotten is the little fact that for this family, mom is working or is unable to help with the work. Family values are not the same, nor is the family structure the same. It is neither right of wrong, but a fact of today. Some kids don't know where they are going after school or who will be there. If they leave their school bag with Dad (Aunty?) it is a big deal. This child does not have what he or she needs for the week(s) because the bag is in another county or state.

Another cause for lack of achievement is tardiness or leaving early. The time spent trying to catch them up is never really the amount of time needed to make the connections. One child left Monday morning to go to a tiger game during a important Genre Study... the MEAP TEST. The mother offered to bring him in 1 hour early the next day. My question is why did they not go on Saturday or Sunday? He missed 5 hours of instruction.

Parents pull them out all week long to keep important appointments that could not be scheduled on the weekend. Then the child comes back and shares that their scheduled appointment was for a week stay at some water park, which added to the Easter break or Daddy’s long weekend. Work asked for is often completed with no supervision and done wrong. The child loses again by whose choice.

It makes you question how important is school to the family. Many times homework is not returned and the reason offered is they had to go shopping. The work is usually 15- 20 minutes on Tuesday and Thursday. I never give during the holidays or breaks. It is usually Math practice of 5 to 10 problems or a short story with a comprehension task.

Holding this child back with no change of the environment, will only create an angry child and doesn't fix the underlying problem.
I don't know the answer, but this will not fix the current problem by holding them back. They need support not punishment. When you have not changed the underlying problem, then you are playing a shell game and only fooling yourself. The kids need help. Doctors write slips they are sick, and when kids go to lunch they share with other kids they were out of town. The system is failing them.