Time To Departmentalize?

Time To Departmentalize? on ParentChat with Regina | When is it time for elementary school kids to leave their classroom teacher so that they can be taught by teachers specializing in one subject field?When is it time for elementary school kids to leave their classroom teacher so that they can be taught by teachers specializing in one subject field? According to a story from Chalkbeat New York (by Monica Disare and Sarah Darville on January 7, 2016), New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio’s push to ensure that more eighth graders have strong preparation for algebra is leading to designating some classroom teachers as math teachers for fifth graders. The New York City teachers who may volunteer or be chosen by their principals for the new math assignments will receive additional training over the next 12 months—which certainly can’t hurt.

In New York City, there are already departments for each school subject in many middle schools, starting in sixth grade—as there are in middle schools in most school districts across the U.S. So “departmentalization” is not a new idea. It has been used for a very long time in high schools, where it is expected. It has been used for a long time in many middle schools and in junior high schools before them, where it is accepted. And it has been used in some elementary schools over the years, too. In the 1960s when I was in fourth grade, we began switching classes for math and for language arts (of course, switching teachers allowed for ability grouping in those days—and still could).

Whether New York City should have specialized math teachers in fifth grade in order to improve the math performance of its students is not the question here. The question is whether you should be departmentalizing in your elementary schools, as likely some of you already are. The next question is whether that departmentalization should lead to ability grouping, which a school can pull off a lot easier with departmentalized teachers than with general classroom teachers. Why? Because one math teacher can teach four or five levels of math to different groups of kids in a day, but one classroom teacher cannot teach all those levels of math and all of the other subjects to 30 kids in a day. But why departmentalize just in math? Why not language arts? And, while you are at it, why not science and social studies? Who is answering these questions in your schools?

There are certainly pros and cons to departmentalization, though my feeling is that the pros outweigh the cons. That is probably true at a fairly early age—even by first or second grade. Teachers who are expert in teaching one subject very well (just as high school teachers are) might be better, in the long run, for bright kids, average kids, and struggling kids than teachers who are spreading themselves thin over four or more subject fields. Furthermore, kids who have trouble getting along with one teacher have more chances in a day to form a bond with other teachers, who might suit them better. Maybe the New York City plan doesn’t go nearly far enough.

What did New York City parents say about math teachers for fifth graders? The article didn’t mention any parent input into the plan or any parent response to the plan. I hope that would not be true in your school district.

It is time to take a look at how your school district and your elementary school address departmentalization:

  • Elementary school parents: Ask your school board whether the board has a policy on departmentalization—that is, ask whether the board has given the superintendent any policy guidance on the grade level or school level at which teachers should teach one academic subject rather than be general classroom teachers. If the board does not have such a policy, ask the board to consider the adoption of one, after getting the input of parents and, of course, of teachers and of principals.

This discussion should be part of an open board meeting, but board members should have the opportunity to get the input of the superintendent before the meeting. Here are some questions that the board and/or the superintendent should be able to answer for you: Who decides now when schools start departmentalizing—the board, the superintendent, or individual school principals? How is departmentalization operating in various schools in the district? Which subjects are departmentalized at each grade level? Do teachers and principals believe that departmentalization has been successful? Do they believe it should be extended into lower grade levels? Has departmentalization led to ability grouping? If so, in what grades and subjects? If so, has ability grouping proved to be effective in teaching your students?

If the decision about departmentalization is left to individual school principals, ask your principal how it operates in your school. How were decisions about when to departmentalize made? How were parents involved in those decisions? How effective have those practices been? Is ability grouping used in conjunction with departmentalization? Should it be? Is it time to rethink any of those decisions? How would the principal know if it were time?

ParentChat with Regina: Getting a Handle on What Matters in #Education #parents

Bulletin Boards—Really?

Bulletin Boards—Really? on ParentChat with ReginaBulletin boards are a topic I have no patience for. You might recall that last week I ranted about dioramas. The case of dioramas pales beside my feelings about bulletin boards. Reader, beware.

In the December 28–January 10 issue of New York Magazine (one of the best-written magazines anywhere, in case you wanted my opinion), I was reading with interest Andrew Rice’s excellent piece on New York City’s mayor: “How Are You Enjoying the de Blasio Revolution?” Since taking office, Mayor Bill de Blasio has been making a fair number of moves on the public education front—at least some of which seem to be successful, perhaps most notably his impressively speedy implementation of universal pre-K.

One thing de Blasio did, as any incoming mayor would do, was appoint a new chancellor to lead the public schools. His choice was Carmen Fariña, a former New York City Department of Education teacher, principal, district superintendent, and deputy chancellor. She seemed like a reasonable choice.

In writing his article, Rice said that he asked Fariña “—who usually visits six schools a week—how she could tell a good one from a bad one.” Here is what Rice wrote next:

‘No. 1, I look for a welcoming lobby,’ she said. ‘Is there evidence that the school has pride, that there are bulletin boards that have kids’ work on them?’ Word about the chancellor’s aesthetic eye has filtered downward. ‘[Expletive deleted] bulletin boards!’ says an acquaintance of mine who taught math at a Brooklyn high school. She told me that last year she was barraged with emails from the principal reminding teachers to keep their boards well decorated, lest they fail a central-office pop test. (quoted from the article)

Like it or not, I cannot blame Fariña for the bulletin board fixation—though I can and do blame her for not ending it. When we opened our Early College high school in New York City in 2009, we were subject to the administrative system then in place that called for district superintendents to lead a relatively intensive site visit of individual schools to judge each school’s strengths and weaknesses. During the site visit, many constituents were interviewed—students, parents, college staff at our cooperating City University campus, business partners on our Advisory Board, and more—and classrooms were observed. All of which seemed reasonable to me. But one major directive in getting prepared for these site visits was always about our bulletin boards.

Now, let me say again that we were a high school. And we were an Early College school (we sent our kids to college classes after two years with us, and we graduated them after just three years with us). And we were a career and technical education school, with an active Advisory Board of business and industry and higher education representatives. We were all about college and careers—even before that became today’s popular mantra. Some of my colleagues and I truly felt that bulletin boards with kids’ work on them seemed out of place in our school culture.

To our credit, our hallways were decorated with very large college banners. Some bulletin boards had college information on them. One was dedicated to our Advisory Board and the businesses they represented. One was dedicated to our career-related after-school engineering clubs. We thought these were fine. We just didn’t see the point of putting kids’ essays from English class, for example, on a bulletin board—like bulletin boards you might see in an elementary school.

We were the first Early College career and technical education high school in New York City. We were a demonstration school for the State of New York. As such, we had lots of important visitors. Colleges don’t have student work on bulletin boards in their hallways, we argued. Corporations don’t have bulletin boards of employees’ work in their hallways, we continued. We got nowhere.

I think the idea that bulletin boards—in school hallways and even in school classrooms—should have students’ work on them might work for an elementary school, but has no place in a high school and probably no place in a middle school, either. My guess is that teenagers find that practice a bit childish. But why not ask them?

I won’t end with my usual advice to go ask the school board whether there is a policy on bulletin board displays in your district—though I can imagine there should be one and would even like to write a good one, if any school board is interested. Instead, talk to your principal about the bulletin boards in your child’s school. Are they appropriate for the school level—elementary, middle, or high school? Are they interesting for students and for visitors? What would students like to see on bulletin boards? I bet they have an idea—and I bet it is better than Fariña’s.

ParentChat with Regina: Getting a Handle on What Matters in #Education #parents