Equity & Justice

Special Education is like the Wild West of #edreform. Here's a tip: if it don't work for SWDs, then chances r it aint workin for other kids.

If we can grow rice at high yields without using chemicals, can we raise student achievement w/o harming communities? http://buff.ly/XfRpbN

Maybe this is an inane thought, but what if NOLA ed improvement is due solely to physical dispersion, rather than charter conversion?

@mandercorn Meaning, that the simple mechanism of dispersing students irregardless of geographical boundaries (hence, diversity) is key

@mandercorn Rather than the (I think misguided) common inference that charter schools are inherently more effective

If we can do this with giant flying sheets of metal, pretty sure we can figure out how to teach all kids to read. It requires a dedication to figuring out why failure occurs when it does, and what we can do systematically to address it. https://x.com/SimonCalder/status/947799731513823232

I'm studying the topic of acoustics in schools. Learning about signal-to-noise ratios and reverberation times. What stands out to me the most is that standards for acoustics are not compulsory, and older schools most definitely were not designed with acoustics in mind.

Acoustical treatments are not prohibitively expensive, but I have never heard them discussed, even in a school with an open classroom plan that makes learning especially challenging. Why would we make it harder for our most vulnerable students to learn?

This follows a theme on most matters of the physical environment for learning. They are of secondary, cosmetic concern. Yet research (and commonsense) is quite clear on the impact of factors such as acoustics, temperature, greenery, fresh air, and lighting.

I spoke recently with a pre-k teacher of students with autism. She can speak directly to the influence of the physical environment. One student would 'stem' off the fluorescent lighting. When she got light covers that removed flickering, the stemming ceased.

I am not a person with autism, but I cringe when I'm in most public school hallways during passing periods. The reverberating noise is deafening. Just think of our most sensitive students experiencing this every single day for years upon years of their most formative period.

So I went to each individual state website to see how they label their ESEA mandated 3-8 reading/language arts #assessments.

Here is the list: https://docs.google.com/document/d/11n2BxNjeIOox8KyEcUFopk526yq7dAeeMXO861onIjw/edit?usp=sharing

@AchieveInc @edcommission @ed1stconsulting #testing

This is interesting to me because it's really quite revealing of the confusion in the we have between ELA as a subject and literacy as a set of general skills

ELA as a subject, one would think, would mean much more than just general skills. There's specific knowledge and study of genres, literature and literary techniques, historical epochs and literary canons, critical methods, etc

But because tests are labeled ELA, despite their general nature, literacy then falls under ELA, thus watering down what was once a rich subject

The irony being that our reading scores remain stagnant both on PISA and NAEP because we've completely confused ourselves about what we mean by literacy and thus flub how we teach it.

92% of states refer to their tests as ELA. 12% include the word "literacy"

Thread. Some thoughts on the important new study from Chetty et al. which shows that where a child grows up matters—down to the micro-level https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/01/upshot/maps-neighborhoods-shape-child-poverty.html @emilymbadger @qdbui

Why? Because if you live on a lower floor, you're exposed to more chronic noise. http://psycnet.apa.org/record/1974-08197-001 Such findings have been replicated for sources like proximity to airports, trains, etc. Growing up with constant exposure to a source of pollution impacts outcomes.

There's a few points from other research to add to Chetty's data: a 1973 study of the Bridge Apartments in the Heights—a quartet of high rises bestride the highway that leads to the GWB—found that literally what floor a child lives on determines reading ability.

As part of my job working with schools, I take buses and walk all across the Bronx, from the East River to Westchester Creek, from Woodstock to University Heights. And it's endlessly fascinating to me just how much of a difference a block can make.

Another area of research, which Chetty et al.'s confirms, is the impact of the historical legacy of a neighborhood. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/322679394_Towards_Conceptualizing_and_Empirically_Examining_Legacy_of_Place_An_Exploratory_Consideration_of_Historic_Neighborhood_Characteristics_on_Contemporary_Dropout_Behavior We have to not only look at the present characteristics of a community, but it's past.

There's so many other variables of a neighborhood that have been demonstrated to influence health and learning, such as greenery. A longitudinal study in 2016 found that green space in urban neighborhoods in So Cal reduced aggressive behavior in teens. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27343886

Because the very floor in a particular building that a child is raised in, the particular room in a school where the child is taught how to read, can influence outcomes. It's that specific. Environment and context matters.

So it will be interesting to see how these and other factors are rediscovered in Chetty et al.'s data. Such factors compound, which is why it is so complex. But look first and foremost at quality of life factors. Then look at the history of the building, the block, the zone.

Please read this @NewYorker piece on noise pollution. And then please think also about noise pollution and it's effect on learning. Some our school environments are the worst acoustical design there is.

https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2019/05/13/is-noise-pollution-the-next-big-public-health-crisis/amp#referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com&_tf=From%20%251%24s

I work with one "open classroom" school where teachers are literally shouting at their students.

Think about it for a second. Our instruction relies upon hearing what is said. And yet in many classrooms students can't hear 25% of what a teacher says.

It's almost like we've designed some schools to make it as difficult to hear as we could. This only puts our most vulnerable students further behind.

A perfect example, just to illustrate: think of a typical public school cafeteria or stairwell. The sound reverberates. Noise begets noise once kids are in such poorly designed acoustical spaces.

Did you know that NYC stopped testing hearing in 2009? We need to bring them back as a universal screen. Especially given what we now know about the phonological basis for learning to read. https://www.newyorker.com/science/elements/what-new-york-city-misses-by-not-doing-hearing-tests-on-students

It's fascinating to watch the reactivity of entrenched speakers, PD organizations, and some educators to a recent resurgence of sci on lfoundational reading. Anyone committed to equity should be talking about how we teach reading in K-2 and how we can effectively intervene 3-12. https://x.com/markseidenberg/status/1203341625998659585

Disability, parenting, socioeconomic status, etc...none of that is an excuse. Decoding can be taught to mastery from K-2 for nearly all but the most rare and severe challenges due to hearing/speech impairment.

It's unacceptable that so many children, most especially in historically underresourced and segregated neighborhoods, are moving through our school systems unable to fluently and accurately decode. Most especially because decoding skills are constrained and achievable.

For all our kids. End rant. I got so worked up jabbing my fingers at my phone for this thread that I sent my phone spinning down the length of the bus. You're welcome.

So the reason so many of us are now focused on calling out fuzzy, ineffective practices K-2 that are not fully aligned to what reading research on decoding has revealed is BECAUSE WE CAN TEACH ALL STUDENTS TO DECODE. And currently, we aren't. We need to know better to do better.

Language comprehension and meaning-- the bailiwick of the current backlash--on the other hand, is much more complex and difficult to get right, requiring linguistically and print rich environments, sustained exposure to schema building curriculum, executive function ability, etc.

"It’s ironic that Black English speech is still dismissed and devalued as being linguistically broken, and at the same time is one of the richest sources of lexical innovation in English."

https://daily.jstor.org/black-english-matters/

We need to reconcile an asset based view of AAVE with the teaching of early reading. Seems like there's a tension there. How can we leverage the linguistic beauty of AAVE to learn to decode written English? What are those onramps between AAVE phonology and standard orthography?

Let's think beyond online learning when it comes to remote learning. Let's think about how to get books in the hands of kids at home who need it the most.

What does a culturally responsive and sustaining approach mean right now? It means helping your students process what is happening to them and to their world right now. Please don't just start throwing random passages at them right now. State tests are off the table.

@MsJasmineMN's response also pushed me to see how making superficial connections to police brutality and racial injustice and coopting Black voices because it's news du jour can be damaging. https://x.com/MsJasmineMN/status/1270086882228043778

This response really got me thinking. I tweeted the original article w/o critical reflection, and I was going to use Hammond's interview myself in an upcoming PD, where I'm trying to link SOR to culturally responsive teaching. I'm rethinking how I want to engage participants https://x.com/Ready4rigor/status/1270194275838341122

I believe strongly that equity work is teaching kids to read, write, and foster critical consciousness about what they read and experience. Trying to bring these threads all together.

@MicheleCaracapp has also got me thinking a lot about how we need to be very careful about how we frame the use of universal screeners and targeted support and instruction. I believe we need to do both -- meet kids where they are, but use that info to scaffold grade-level texts.

Are we considering what students and their families bring to the table and responding to their experiences and knowledge? Are we looking through the remedial lens of a deficit model, or are we planning how we can accelerate learning with grade-level content and expectations?

I view the science of reading as deeply connected to the work of culturally responsive and sustaining education, but there are so many ways that framing of SOR through that lens can go wrong. What texts do we teach? Why?

How about we use this time of school closure to invest in improving school buildings to ensure healthy indoor environments? To provide adequate access to natural light, install HEPA air filters, and add acoustic dampening to reduce noise?

I was going to write a book about the impact of the physical environment on learning, and then life happened, so I'm sharing this chapter on the importance of acoustics instead. https://schoolecosystem.org/2020/09/06/the-influence-of-acoustics-on-learning/

Here's another chapter of that never-to-be-finished book: The Influence of Greenery on Learning. Inequitable access to greenspace (and clean air) should be one of the defining issues of this moment. https://schoolecosystem.org/2020/09/10/the-influence-of-greenery-on-learning/

It never fails to fascinate me that the impulse so many have when a child needs MORE language and literacy is to provide them with FEWER opportunities to engage with meaningful texts.

Can you imagine how equity in reading outcomes might be achieved if health insurance covered dyslexia evaluation and intervention?

Let's start advocating.

https://www.contemporarypediatrics.com/view/a-pediatrician-s-role-in-dyslexia-where-theory-meets-practice

@JoAnneSimonBK52 I wonder how we could partner with pediatrics to make this happen along with senate Bill S4341?

The forces in our field that would deny students opportunities and access to grade-level expectations, knowledge, and texts is strong. And it is perpetrated under the guise of care and concern.

As schools and districts now shift to figuring out how to best spend the federal windfall, they would be well advised to invest in acoustical treatment, more access to greenery, and better air purification. These will reap benefits for the long haul. https://wp.me/p47B5n-13T

How about all educators gain access to relevant journals based on their area of speciality or grade-band?

It's really quite absurd that research is meant to expand knowledge, and there is constant decrying how educators don't know the research, but most articles are behind a paywall.

Yes, I get that you can email the author, but that avoids the underlying issue.

We need better ways

Crazy to think that bi/multilingualism is not only normal but a mandate in some other countries, meanwhile the ongoing struggle to establish bilingual education programs in the U.S.

I am totally on board with turning "the entire education system upside down" for that 20 percent who aren't learning to read. It's way bigger than 20 percent, by the way. https://x.com/EvidentlyR/status/1457857302170509312

Been seeing a lot about bilingual cognitive advantages lately. . . Listen, there are a lot of very strong reasons to advocate for multilingualism. We don't need a supposed cognitive advantage to make the case. https://x.com/mandercorn/status/1316076278865448960

Just finished Frederick Douglass: Prophet of Freedom.

I highly recommend. The continued resonance of Douglass's voice through the ages is remarkable, and this detailed account of his life is also inspiring. I knew little beyond his own Narrative...

https://g.co/kgs/kfcve7

Narrative was a touchstone for me in my professional development as a teacher. In my 3rd year teaching 5th grade, fed up with the scattered incoherence of my school curriculum (TCRWP), I bulk printed the Narrative and began reading it every day to my students, using CKLA lessons

This biography makes it clear just how amazingly rich and complex this remarkable man's life was. Basically from the minute he was embraced by Garrisonian abolitionists and added to their roadshow, he never stopped traveling and giving speeches until nearly his final breath

When I later cotaught 6-8 grades, his 4th of July Hypocrisy of American Slavery speech was another of my go-tos for close and critical reading. But I knew little of his words or life beyond these texts.

We read every single page. And his words carried the full force of his intellect, insight, and craft into my classroom. His vivid passage describing the painful irony of slaves singing on their way to the Great House Farm through the deep pine woods never fades in force.

Like a musician whose mastery is etched by constant performance on the road, Douglass evolved his oracy to the highest levels of eloquence, passion, pacing, and effect on his listeners. But he also developed his sharp irony and ability to cleave through racist and dim thinking...

I mean, it's crazy to think, his Narrative came out at the beginning of his career, and his Hypocrisy speech was in 1852. . . He died in 1895! So I'd basically been missing a whole body of his work, because he kept producing right up to the end. Much more to read!

He was rarely home, and his ever growing family life was always complicated. But he was able to successfully navigate between races, classes, cultures, and genders in his social life, maintaining deep, intimate and diverse friendships.

In addition, he had decades of experience as a writer and editor, honing his thinking and arguments. That his written voice carries so far through the ages speaks to the depth, range, and discipline of his craft.

...by direct and constant confrontation through his formative barnstorming years. The abolitionists were heckled, fought, and driven from churches, and would give speeches in fields or parks or wherever they could. His time on the road standing and delivering was long

He moved from radical abolitionist outsider to seasoned political insider, yet never lost the flame of raw anger against racism, & he continued to pen and speak jeremiads up to the end that cut through the morass of biased thinking with a clarity of intellect & force of morality

I didn't realize how close to John Brown he was -- he even had to flee the country for a time after Brown's prosecution, nor just how directly connected Douglass was to so many other Black luminaries, like Booker T. Washington, Paul Lawrence Dunbar, and Ida B. Wells.

So much more in the book to talk about, but just want to say this is essential history. Douglass's life spanned a critical period of our past that continues to reverberate today. And the words of his sharpest critiques of our racist society remain painfully accurate.

How can we innoculate one another against stories that simplify and demonize groups of people, and embrace stories that individuate and complicate our understanding of ourselves and one another? https://languageliteracy.blog/2022/05/15/the-danger-of-the-story-of-white-displacement/

Lower class sizes, tutoring, and coaching are backed by research.

But they all require more professionals--and a supporting infrastructure--in a time when schools are both losing enrollment and frequently short staffed.

These tensions need to be acknowledged if their promise is to be actualized for the students and school communities that need them the most.

Driving a car doesn't make you any more important than a person trying to cross a street or biking on the side. But it does make you far more dangerous. Why do we design roads to elevate the lives of those in cars, and more dangerous to the lives of everyone else?

It's the pervasive disconnect between what our children are capable of learning and doing and the motley assortment of materials and approaches that are used by so many in our schools.

I deleted an earlier tweet posted in frustration as a parent regarding the curriculum overview presented for his kindergarten class.

I want to be clear here. My issue is not the teacher, nor even the school. https://t.co/DJZjoKBCdJ

Foundational literacy and language skills and disciplinary and world knowledge and experiences should go hand in hand. It's not about having a program for every subject. It's about reading, writing, and talking around shared texts and topics.

My son came home from preK talking about metamorphosis. Now he's saying he doesn't like school and he only wants lunch time and recess.

So as a parent, and as someone who works to support our schools, I'm concerned. Granted, it's just the first full week, so I'll give it time.

So I shouldn't have tweeted in a way that makes it seem like I'm attacking his teacher. It's not about her. It's about a consistent pattern across schools I already well knew that disturbed me and that I have worked to push against that I am now experiencing directly as a parent

Teaching, and leading a school, is extremely hard work, and I don't want what I'm saying misconstrued. We have a lot of hard work to do collectively to ensure we have schools that are both supportive and rich in disciplinary and cross-disciplinary academic learning from Day 1.

Big cities increase segregation because they offer more niches for self-selective interaction.

But the built environment can foster greater diversity of interaction.

Top places of mixing: performing arts centers, stadiums, and theme parks.

https://arxiv.org/abs/2210.07414

As we all know, our schools are highly segregated due to marginalization, politics, policies, fear, physical distance, and more.

Given such circumstances, in what ways can we work to build more bridges between districts, schools, and neighborhoods, both virtual and physical?

What does it say about our beliefs about the impact of daily instruction in schools when we remain so focused on tutoring, afterschool programs, and summer school as solutions to pandemic effects?

A friendly reminder that outcomes data does not represent potential. They more often represent potential ignored or denied.

It is our birthright to learn to read and to speak and write and think in the language that allows us to transport our minds and hearts into worlds far beyond that of our everyday lives.

http://languageliteracy.blog/2021/06/05/our-brains-were-not-born-to-read-right/

And it is therefore incumbent on those of us responsible for teaching our children this language to ensure that all of them will be equipped and empowered to do so.

But these barriers are not barriers because reading is some alien thing being superimposed upon their delicate and fragile brain — they are barriers because of a lack of sufficient and coherent instructional opportunity.

https://languageliteracy.blog/2021/06/05/our-brains-were-not-born-to-read-right/

We need to acknowledge the barriers that prevent children from gaining the powers of written language, and tackle them headfirst.

Then I can feel more confident in bringing my preexisting knowledge and skills to bear. And when I am supported in producing the language of instruction through scaffolds and in participation through clear and consistent routines, I can engage in instruction very quickly.

Think about it for a second: if I come into a new country not yet speaking much of the majority language, I still possess language--the language I use at home.

I can certainly produce that language! And when bridges are built between home language & the language of instruction

I strongly disagree with this premise: "As teachers the expectation should not be that learners are producing language."

This idea of a "silent period" is unfortunately based on outdated theory and should not be used to lower expectations for language.

https://wp.me/papLcz-dO

I shudder to think of teachers waiting a year to expect their students to speak!

Please don't do this! Expect more and support more. Provide plentiful opportunities for kids to hear, see, read, speak, and write words, phrases, sentences, and passages.

The apocalyptic scenes from NYC brought back memories of fleeing our apartment in South Lake Tahoe from the Angora fire in 2007. It felt like that was a beginning to a neverending, everexpanding fire season in California, which now is encompassing everywhere. https://t.co/f83obODFm9

This is the world we are bequeathing to our children. For what? So we can have the convenience of driving gigantic SUVs by ourselves and having products shipped to us within a day? So we can have giant data centers so we can upload endless video streams of our forgetting?

Let me reframe this: bipartisan efforts to try to ensure the most disadvantaged children receive high quality instruction keep running into deeply entrenched ideologues who refuse to teach kids literacy coherently and systematically because it doesn't give them fuzzy vibes. https://x.com/alfiekohn/status/1670763796053278720

Equity for multilingual learners is about scaffolding up content, rather than watering it down. https://www.ascd.org/el/articles/what-does-equity-really-mean-for-multilingual-learners

Best feedback I got from today's PD on scaffolding a core curriculum for MLs: "I have been to many [vendor we shall not name] trainings and I know you kept telling us "you weren't the expert" -- but you taught me more in today's session than all of those trainings combined!"

But if we think of language as communicative, social, and interactive, and that it develops in tandem and reciprocally through rich disciplinary content and texts, then we will seek to engage students learning the language in grade-level tasks alongside their proficient peers.

How we think about language matters.

If we think of it as mere oral language proficiency, and if we think that language is a prerequisite for grade-level texts and content, then we might think putting kids on a program on a laptop or an app on a device will teach them language.

Should all students be expected to read the same texts? Or should all students be empowered to read different texts? Why?

Write a claim statement, such as by completing the following stem:

In my opinion, all students should read ______ because_____________________________.

This is of course deliberately framed as oppositional to draw out debate, but it's really about how we strategically design for both, to build an intellectual community engaged in disciplinary study, while reading a wide variety and larger volume of texts https://t.co/ipnFncPZnr

When I coordinated IEP development at a school, I structured the process to ensure students understood their data and had a say in their own goal-setting and aligned supports. And they were invited to share those goals and their reflection on their progress at the IEP meeting

"When kids have a better understanding of the condition that affects their learning, they tend to have a better self-concept, and they are more likely to feel empowered and motivated to self-advocate."

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/neurodivergent-kids-flourish-when-theyre-taught-how-their-brains-work/

We always had an eye on self-advocacy and agency when developing IEP goals, looking ahead to when students would leave our school and how their services and goals would best put them on a path for greater independence.

It all starts with supporting students with building their confidence to ask questions in class when they don't understand something and to ask for help when they need it--and to understand that self-advocacy as part of the learning process, rather than "not being able."

Outdated terms on language development such as "pre-production" or "silent period" can reinforce the misconception that English Learners have no language. ELs bring to our schools the language they use at home. Effective instruction recognizes and builds upon their HLs.

So why do we call learning to read unnatural?

Yes, it developed farther down the evolutionary line.

But what we probably are getting at is that it takes more effort to learn.

That doesn't make it unnatural. It just makes it not immediately and easily available to all.

Here's the thing that's kind of funny about calling learning to read "unnatural":

We humans invented the technology of writing. We could put a trademark on it.

We also pretty much have spearheaded the advancements in language, though we share traits of it with other species.

Yet that very notion of "accessibility" is culturally determined.

We can teach all our kids to read, if we truly believe it is essential to all.

So stop pretending learning to read is some alien imposition.

Learning to read should be more properly viewed as our birthright.

Stated another way: if learning to read is unnatural, then the human species is unnatural.