TOPIC:  The Achievement Gap - some "reflections"

Newsletter Edition #46__________Date:  October 30, 2000

A few weeks ago, I listed long range planning, teaching strategies, and modeling as the three major avenues that are inadequately addressed by   education reformers. Let's focus in on "modeling" today. Why is it important? What does it mean?

Modeling means that everyone connected with education must model the teaching strategies he/she wants to see employed by everyone else. This means the commissioner, SED, school boards, administrators, parents, and teachers must all model the strategies and behaviors we expect from students.

Why is it important? The obvious answer is that people do as we do, not as we say. But that is only part of the reason.

The major reason that "modeling" is so important in an era of education reform is because the strategies needed in a reformed classroom are so new, so unique, that teachers and students need to experience them (be immersed in them) at every turn in order to learn how to implement them.

Why are cooperative learning, journal writing, portfolios, authentic assessment, performance tasks, and peer tutoring like the weather - everyone talks about them, few do anything about them?

Because it is damn tough to teach through cooperative groups, to use journals and portfolios effectively, to engage students in authentic performance tasks and to assess them in a reasonable period of time and still prepare students for state and national assessments. It is damn tough.

Students who haven't worked in groups, haven't written in journals, and haven't been assessed authentically, don't take to it easily. This makes it more difficult for teachers. It becomes a catch 22 cycle: Teachers who are inexperienced with interactive teaching strategies find it easier if their students have familiarity with them. But most students, themselves, are inexperienced with interactive strategies.

There are a small, but growing number of first grade classrooms where students are working with rubrics, engaged in cooperative learning, self assessing, and beginning journal writing. As these students work their way through school systems, it will be easier for teachers in higher grades to implement these strategies. The process is slow, but it is happening.

However, under present circumstances, it is a long, difficult journey for a teacher who is trying to master the strategies necessary to teach in an interactive, standards- focused classroom.

Teachers can learn and refine the strategies that are necessary for a learner centered classroom if they see them modeled - if every time they attend a workshop they are handed an agenda which lists the standards for the workshop and performance indicators of success. Teachers can learn and refine the strategies necessary for a learner centered classroom, more quickly, if every faculty meeting, workshop, and State Education Department meeting is run the way we are asking teachers to run their classrooms.

Parents, too, need to be exposed to learner centered classroom strategies at every opportunity. We cannot convince parents of the need to change teaching strategies if we conduct parents' nights the way parents were taught years ago, with lectures. If we want parents, students, teachers, or anyone else to open their minds to the possibility that students learn better when they are actively engaged in what they are learning, then we must actively engage parents on parents' nights, teachers at faculty meetings, and administrators at SED meetings.

We must stop lecturing on the need to be interactive in the classrooms!

The author welcome comments, feedback, reactions of any kind to the thoughts expressed (above).

Please feel free to forward this message to a friend or colleague. If
you know someone who would like to be put on the list, please send a
message to Don Mesibov at dmesibov@twcny.rr.com.

Copyright (c) 2000, Institute for Learning Centered Education. All
rights reserved.

Recently, I ran two successive articles on the need to enjoy the journey, not the final results. My point was that educators need to be able to take pride in what they are accomplishing relative to what is possible, not relative to the ideal.

I wasn¹t sure these articles would be well received. Surprisingly (to me anyway) I received more feedback on those two articles than on most of what I write. People I respect thanked me for giving them reason to take pride in what they are doing. People who were feeling overwhelmed and frustrated wrote that these articles helped them realize how much they were accomplishing.

All of us need praise, a sense of accomplishment, and a feeling that what we are doing is worthwhile. When was the last time you helped the people you supervise to "celebrate?" When was the last time you helped your students to celebrate the fruits of their labor?

If you are a staff developer, have you created a celebration recently for some of the people you have worked intensively with? If you are an administrator, when was the last time you held a staff meeting just to celebrate successes?

I recall a gentleman who was working with the Niagara Falls School District on a "Total Quality Management" approach saying to administrators "If you want education reform, your most important job is to be a cheerleader - a cheerleader for your staff, for your parents, and for your students." This person continued: "The job of education reform is really tough for anyone undertaking it. The reformers need to be cheered and they need to celebrate."
 

Too often we are so focused on the next challenge that we don't take the time necessary to reflect on how far we've come and what we¹ve accomplished. Every good mountain climber takes at least a few minutes to relax, boast, and reflect on the peak just conquered before taking off on another climb. We, in education, need to do the same.

Quite a few years ago, Nick Donohue - just now taking over as Commissioner of Education in New Hampshire (congratulations, Nick), sent me a bulletin from the Northeast Regional Laboratories which had a good activity for helping a group appreciate its accomplishments.

Very simply, the group was asked to spend a few minutes mapping (charting) each of its successes since it first began working together.  The successes were recorded on a time line.

This is an activity that can be used by a shared decision making team, by a school faculty, by a parent group, a board of education, an administrative team, a State Ed. team, a class of students, or any other group. It is worth taking fifteen minutes to put down on paper what you have accomplished over the past year, or few years. Then devise a good pat-on-the-back celebration.

A celebration of successes is not just a nice event - it's essential to continued success on the road to education reform.

Wishing you all a Happy Thanksgiving - and I thank each of you for what you are doing to help improve the climate for educating all of our children"

The author welcome comments, feedback, reactions of any kind to the thoughts expressed (above).

Please feel free to forward this message to a friend or colleague. If
you know someone who would like to be put on the list, please send a
message to Don Mesibov at dmesibov@twcny.rr.com.

Copyright (c) 2000, Institute for Learning Centered Education. All
rights reserved.

I need to preface this article by stating emphatically that I am not an expert on the stock market, the economy, or anything related to forecasting the economic destiny of our country. The only course I failed in college was Economics 1.

That said, those of you who have suffered through a close relationship with me know that I have been forecasting a depression (or at least a serious recession) for the past five years. I see frightening similarities between the 1920s and the 1990s.

Both periods were highlighted by a stock market that went almost straight up and made millionaires out of people who could invest by throwing darts at a target of stock picks.

Both periods were highlighted by an economy that was statistically strong, but which had pockets of weakness.

In 1929, Hoover was predicting that Americans would have a chicken in every pot and a car in every garage. In 2000, Republicans and Democrats are tripping over each other to take credit for the economy. If my forecast is on target, who ever wins the electoral vote may be assured of
a one-term presidency.

Since the market peaked last March, it has fallen as far, in many respects, as the market had fallen when it hit bottom on October, 1929. The market crash in 1929 saw the Dow about 30 percent below the all time highs it had hit earlier that summer.  When the Dow hit bottom last May it was almost as far down as it had gone in 1929. The NASDAQ, on the other hand, has lost almost 50% of its value since last Spring (far more than the market had lost at the time of the crash).

"But the market is still well above where it was a few years ago, and its losses are from a very lofty peak," many people will argue.

The same was true in 1929.

At the time of the 1929 crash, the newspapers were full of quotes from economists who were claiming the economy was still healthy, that the market crash was not cause for panic, and that the future was rosy.

The real damage - to the market and the economy - came between the Spring
of 1930 and 1935.

If the current situation continues to mirror 1929, the Dow will settle back to a level below 2000, and the NASDAQ will eventually bottom out below 500, by the year 2006.

What about credit?

In 1929, you could put down 5 percent of the purchase price of stock and get 95% margin. Today you need 50% margin, or more, but banks are falling all over themselves to extend credit to anyone who can make an 800 call or drop an envelope in a mailbox. In other words, by combining credit
from a bank with margin from a brokerage house, people can still own stock by putting down as little as five percent of their own money.

The savings rate of Americans is at record low levels, and we are over extended on credit - this is the foundation for a domino effect toward depression as business starts to slow.

I hope I am wrong. You may take solace that I have no formal training in the study of the stock market or the business cycle so there is every reason to doubt my ability to forecast the economy.

If, unfortunately, I am right, what will be the ramifications for education?

Obviously, funding will dry up, taxpayer groups will come to the fore, a teacher shortage will become a surplus, and competition for what funding is available will increase.

On a more positive note, all of us will be forced to be sure we are using our resources wisely. Everything we want to accomplish to raise standards for student achievement still will be possible, provided we focus on what is important for student achievement and provided we prioritize so that
there is little wasted effort, time, or funding.

Also, on a positive note, at times of serious economic problems, a society tends to revisit its values, education is valued more by children and their parents, and there is a reduction in the number of superficial and material temptations that divert people from important values.

The author welcome comments, feedback, reactions of any kind to the thoughts expressed (above).

Please feel free to forward this message to a friend or colleague. If
you know someone who would like to be put on the list, please send a
message to Don Mesibov at dmesibov@twcny.rr.com.

Copyright (c) 2000, Institute for Learning Centered Education. All
rights reserved.

Next week I will address the stress being created by the State's standards initiative, and will offer constructive suggestions in a two part series. Then I will begin more than a month of articles on strategies for helping students take responsibility for their own learning.

However, because of an experience in the class I teach at St. Lawrence University, I want to focus this article on strategies for creating independent learners. As you read about this activity, you might consider it as an activity you could use for student review at the end of a unit, or semester.

(Or, if you are a staff developer, you might want to use this near the end of a workshop to encourage participants to reflect on what they have learned.)

For a secondary school class, this activity may require little or no adjustments from the manner in which it worked at the college level (which I am about to describe). For elementary students you may want to adjust it, but it will still work - you may just need to give extra coaching and more specific direction.

As you read this, please consider:

1. Creating an activity that makes a student responsible for his/her own learning does not mean there is little structure - to the contrary, it requires more structure than a good lecture.

2. Students can be given assignments that encourage independent learning in kindergarten as well as at the college level.

3. From a teacher's standpoint, making a student responsible for his/her own learning requires focusing the student on the task, and giving latitude for the student to determine the steps to take to accomplish the task, rather than spelling out each step for a student to take. But the teacher must be there to coach, and provide scaffolding (so the student doesn¹t fail to the point where frustration leads to giving up rather than accepting the challenge to accomplish the task).

I believe these principles were at work yesterday when I put my class of 28 into seven teams of four each and asked each team to develop a 10 to 15 minute activity that would pull out of the rest of the class what they have learned so far this semester.

My specific instructions to the class were:

"Design and implement an activity that will get the rest of the class to share what has been learned during this semester. The activity should last no more than 15 minutes and it can bring forth verbal and/or written information from the class."

Now it's true, my students have been working in groups throughout the semester. More preparation might have been required if this was their first group activity.

Only one of the seven teams presented yesterday, the other six will go tomorrow. But here is what happened:

After being given 15 minutes of class time to prepare, during the previous class, the four students, in the group that was responsible for conducting the activity, arrived in class with six large poster boards, each with a question written on top. Some of the six questions (each related to the content of our SLU course) included:

What educational issues were discussed this semester?

What are different methods of learning?

What did you learn from the four guest speakers?

What are the important aspects of group work?

(If this had been a math class, I'm sure their questions would have related to math content.)

Then, students placed the six posters at different locations in the room,
and asked the class, in six groups of four each, to begin responding to a question on one of the posters. A marker was given to one person in each of the six groups. After allowing a minute or two, the class was asked to rotate to another poster and add to the responses begun by the previous group.

This is called a carousel. I did not ask the group to use a carousel for the review. But we had done carousels during the year and, to me, an added benefit of putting the students in charge of their own learning was that they chose a technique we had studied in class as the vehicle for the review. I had not suggested it.

The responses of the class to each question, once all six groups had visited each poster, surprised me and surprised the students.

We were surprised by how much we had covered during the semester. I was impressed with how much of what we had studied had ³stuck² with the students. This activity also demonstrated to me ³what² had stuck with the students and what had not.

Additional benefits:

1. The group that planned the activity was forced to address what they had learned just to design the activity.

2. Cooperative learning was at its best as students, in groups of four, recalled and reminded each other, of what they had learned and how they could articulate it on the poster.

3. Critical thinking skills were required of students - particularly those students in the group designing the activity.

There are many ways to make students responsible for their own learning. (There are many ways for staff developers to make workshop participants responsible for their own learning.) What I have described is one strategy that worked. In order to make it work, the students needed:

1. to understand the task

2. be given latitude (options) in terms of how they could accomplish the task.

3. be assigned a task within their capabilities.

4. be given sufficient time to plan and implement the task (either in class, or as a part of a reasonable amount of homework).

5. to have access to the teacher to respond to their questions and to notice if they were on track or needed coaching.

The assessment? Since this assignment wasn't for a grade, but was to prepare students for work that would be for a grade, the assessment was for the purpose of evaluating how well the activity was working. (In other words, I wanted to know if the activity was accomplishing its goal.) Therefore, the assessment was by "Teacher Observation" (mine). The assessment was not for high stakes, but for the purpose of instructional improvement.

The author welcome comments, feedback, reactions of any kind to the thoughts expressed (above).

Please feel free to forward this message to a friend or colleague. If
you know someone who would like to be put on the list, please send a
message to Don Mesibov at dmesibov@twcny.rr.com.

Copyright (c) 2000, Institute for Learning Centered Education. All
rights reserved.

As readers of these newsletters know, I applaud the goals of the commissioner's office , and I admire many of the steps being taken to achieve higher student achievement through a focus on standards, sharing of best practices, and requirements for data driven, task specific long range plans. It is through the implementation of its plans that I feel SED is jeopardizing the degree of success it will achieve.

In this article, I will attempt to define the problem, as I see it. Within a few days, I will propose alternative means of achieving the goals of higher standards for all students.

First, the problem:

Headlines in a recent Sunday paper screamed "Teachers Stressed Out By Higher Standards."  In the article, a kindergarten teacher/union president from Ithaca was quoted as saying "The standards are putting a lot of pressure on teachers and some teachers are leaving because of it."

White Plains Superintendent Saul Yanofsky is quoted, in the same article, as saying "We have a lot of teachers who don¹t want to teach fourth grade any more because of the pressures."

In my opinion, it is not the higher standards that are creating the stress, nor is it the standardized tests, nor other reform changes. Yet, as this article illustrates, the blame will fall on the standards and it will become more difficult for the Commissioner's office to pursue its goals.

The problem is not the standards; the problem is the lack of an effectively organized approach toward implementation. The goals of the commissioner's office are on target, as are many of the programs being implemented by the State.  However, as I stated May 22 in my article on "Classroom Rage," the State is lacking a realistic, organized approach for supporting districts in implementing the standards.

Districts are asked to submit PDPs, CDEPs, PPRPs, AISs, Safe school plans, and to prepare students for a growing list of standardized assessments. In turn,  administrators, teachers, and parents are asked to serve on a growing list of committees to generate "shared" involvement in turning out all these plans.  Some schools turn to outside providers (others to in-house staff) for programs to prepare students for all the  assessments.

State Education Department (SED), please listen:

Districts are not equipped to turn out quality plans, and to devise sound approaches to assessment preparation according to the ridiculous timelines you have established.

SED is not equipped to evaluate the plans that are submitted on time and to give meaningful feedback so that districts learn what they need to do to improve their plans.

Many of the plans being submitted are not being implemented because they were "paper plans" only - ie. plans that were written to appease the State, but without any intent to be used to improve instructional practice.

There are still few good rubrics to guide districts in developing many of these plans. It is the State¹s responsibility to provide such rubrics if it wants quality plans.

The PDP submitted by my own district, Potsdam, is a pathetic joke. It is a Professional Development Plan with few references to professional development. The few actions steps described in the plan have not been implemented by the target dates specified in the plan. Yet, Potsdam has answered all of the questions on the State form for PDPs. (If you don't ask the right questions it doesn't matter what answers you get.) The problem is that it is possible to fill out the State's PDP form without adequately addressing the key components of a professional development plan. This is because the State doesn't have a good rubric for assessing PDPs.

Just as stock market investors feel the greatest stress from uncertainty, the stress being felt by educators is not being caused by the movement toward higher standards (even though that is the whipping boy for people looking to place blame for the stress they are encountering). The stress described in the Sunday papers is caused by a growing uncertainty among educators of which State initiatives should be given priority and how they should proceed. Almost everyone in the field of education is inundated and overwhelmed. Few are able to prioritize effectively. Too many plans are required in too short a time span, with too little guidance available from the State, so educators are scrambling to figure out what they should address first and how they can address the myriad of state plans and programs with limited time, resources, and people.

It could take a competent administrator at least a year to become conversant with the intricacies of a CDEP, create the committees necessary for its effective implementation, and pursue the steps necessary to make a CDEP the cornerstone of a district¹s planning. The same might be true for a PDP, AIS, or PPRP.

Yet, at the same time districts are wrestling with the implications of all the new assessments, they are asked to submit a PDP, CDEP, AIS, and PPRP, one right after the other.

The State is insufficiently staffed to be able to give appropriate feedback to districts, so once again districts which rush anything into print and call it a plan are being reinforced because there are no consequences for ignoring the spirit of intent of the State's mandates.

What we have is a well organized education reform program being implemented by the State of New York in a disorganized, ineffective manner that is causing stress, disrespect, and, in some cases, defiance.

The worst part of it is that the districts that are suffering the most are the ones the commissioner most wants to help - the high need districts. Why are they suffering the most? Because a wealthier district already has people on staff (or is able to hire outside providers) who can help sort through the state mandates and can assist the district in designing the appropriate plans and preparing students for the assessments. It is the districts with the lowest educational and economic bases that have the least ability to effectively prioritize from among all the State is demanding - even with stepped up assistance from the State, including the joint management teams.

In effect, the  wealthier districts will continue to get better while the poorer off will continue to slide, and this process is expedited by the well intentioned (but poorly organized) efforts of the State.

I am not being a doom sayer. Much is being accomplished in the war to increase standards.  The commissioner and all who are working relentlessly to implement plans for raising student achievement are to be commended for what they are accomplishing. However, their efforts would bear much more fruit if the implementation plans were as effective as the design of the goals and objectives, and the component programs.

My suggestions, in a day or two.

The author welcome comments, feedback, reactions of any kind to the thoughts expressed (above).

Please feel free to forward this message to a friend or colleague. If
you know someone who would like to be put on the list, please send a
message to Don Mesibov at dmesibov@twcny.rr.com.

Copyright (c) 2000, Institute for Learning Centered Education. All
rights reserved.

I concluded the previous article with the statement:

"What we have is a well organized education reform program being implemented by the State of New York in a disorganized, ineffective manner that is causing stress, disrespect, and, in some cases, defiance."

What would I recommend as an organized, effective approach to education reform that would limit stress and encourage educators to fulfill the spirit of intent of the State¹s movement toward higher standards?

The State needs to follow-through on what it has been pledging for the past ten years - it must provide top down support for bottom up reform. It must facilitate, not direct.

But how does it do this?

With the implementation of the "Compact for Learning," approximately ten years ago, I noticed a sincere desire from many people in SED to change the image of SED from the perception of being a department that tells others what to do. The SED members I worked with early in this decade (as well as current SED staffers) were/are, I believe, sincerely motivated by a desire to be perceived as resource providers and facilitators, not top-down directors.

However, just as it is difficult for a classroom teacher who wants to become the "Guide on the Side" to give up the lectern, it has proved equally difficult for SED to figure out how to become resource providers and facilitators of the movement toward higher standards.

To its credit, I think SED sees teacher centers, BOCES, and private providers as vehicles for implementing change on a statewide basis. I believe this is critical, particularly at a time when SED has downsized and can't pretend to have the people power necessary to carry out its mandates. The key does lie in effective utilization of BOCES, teacher centers, teachers' unions, and other providers.

However, in trying to enlist the support of these groups, SED (while sincerely motivated) has not created a structure that enables these providers to maximize their expertise in support of Statewide initiatives.

The state, in my opinion, should stop trying to design methods for spreading the standards throughout the state. Instead it should structure an approach for familiarizing trainers with its goals and - once they understand the task - let them design the methods of turn-keying.

(I realize that SED is quite receptive to input from us all. But soliciting input and actually facilitating the design of strategic plans are two different things.)

How would a facilitative approach work in the current effort to raise standards? I suggest that SED follow the five steps I am about to outline, but try it with one or two regions of the state, initially. Then try it on a statewide basis.

1. Invite teacher center directors, BOCES staff developers, and others (including some classroom teachers and administrators) to a multi day session focused on the State initiatives to raise standards.

2. Provide, in writing - and in advance - a clear statement of State goals and objectives. This should include objectives such as "Districts will have a CDEP,"  "Districts will have a PDP," etc., etc.

3. At the start of the multi day session, discuss the goals and objectives, and rewrite for clarification, if necessary. However, it is clearly the right (and obligation) of the State to set the goals (although they should listen to the input of others), but it is necessary for the people closest to the professional educators (the BOCES trainers, TC directors, teachers, administrators, and parents) to design the implementation steps.

At this initial day of the multi-day session, there should be an agenda of interactive presentations designed to help everyone understand the goals and objectives of the State, current implementation plans, and resources which are available. (These presentations should be offered, as much as possible, through jigsaws, focus groups, and discussion groups - not by marching one set of presenters after another in front of an audience of talented people who are asked to sit passively as recipients of information).

4. Also, on the first day of these multi day sessions, discuss with participants whether current time limits are realistic. For instance, what is a reasonable expectation (re: time) for a district to design and begin implementation on CDEP, PDP, AIS, etc.? What are the obstacles? the resources needed?

5. Turn the participants loose to address this question:

"What would a strategic plan look like that would achieve the State's goals and objectives over the next five years, for every district in our region?"

The goal for the participants is to have a detailed plan for their region by the end of the three days - one copy goes with the participants and one copy stays with SED which can now provide the support and follow-through.

The "detailed plan" must have timelines  and measurable objectives (benchmarks). There must be a user-friendly process for periodically assessing the progress of this plan and for modifying it, as necessary. As one region enjoys a success with its plan, this should be shared with others across the State, just as SED is effectively sharing Best Practices.

All I'm really asking the State to do is to model, through creation of a strategic plan for raising standards, exactly what it is asking every school district to do:

A. Involve, in the decision making, the people responsible for  implementation. (In this case, it is the BOCES, Teacher Centers, Teachers' Unions, private providers, parents, classroom teachers and building administrators who must turn-key the training for the state to be successful in achieving its goals and objectives.)

B. Move from being the Sage on the Stage to being the Guide on the Side.

C. Facilitate the design of strategic plans that outline steps to be taken, people responsible, target dates, and benchmarks, in the form of measurable objectives, along with a process for monitoring and modification.

The State should hold fast to its goals of higher achievement, specific plans (PDP, CDEP, etc.), but it should let the people more closely attuned to the needs at the implementation stage design the time lines and methodology for accomplishing the goals.

The author welcome comments, feedback, reactions of any kind to the thoughts expressed (above).

Please feel free to forward this message to a friend or colleague. If
you know someone who would like to be put on the list, please send a
message to Don Mesibov at dmesibov@twcny.rr.com.

Copyright (c) 2000, Institute for Learning Centered Education. All
rights reserved.

I am going to start a series on classroom strategies, on January 1. Today, I want to share some feedback I¹ve had on the last two newsletters regarding whether the standards initiatives are causing stress. It is my contention that it is not the initiatives, but lack of adequate support and realistic time tables that will cause the standards initiatives to be blamed for the increased stress being felt by many people. Here is how others feel:

FROM A PARENT:

Dear Don,

I think that you have a point. A major concern of parents (elementary especially) is that teacher stress means kid stress. Many children are feeling the teacher's stress and start to worry themselves. Some parents get stressed as well because they think that it is all over for their child if they "fail" the 4th grade ELA, for example. They need to be told that their child didn't fail as the test is not a test, it is an assessment. They need to know the difference and need to be able to reassure their child. High school Regent's tests are a different story, but there is a second chance to pass them as well.

Please try to pass on to teachers, administrators, and SED the idea that their personal stress is passed on to kids.

Thanks for your newsletters.

A Concerned and Involved Parent

FROM A RESPECTED SECONDARY TEACHER who has worked on her district's CDEP:

We have spent weeks creating our CDEP, and we were all on fire to continue our work. Lately, we've been under tremendous pressure to forget about it being comprehensive, and just focus on a few key areas, so that the board can act before budget calculating time. I feel so rushed, and so ill-prepared to do that. Your latest mailing at least makes me feel vindicated.

FROM AN AWARD WINNING ELEMENTARY TEACHER:

Dear Don,

"I was interested to read your article about standards and stress. I have been so very busy trying to help my students prepare for the state assessments that I have had no time for anything else including personal life. Not even a Christmas present bought yet!!!

"I do agree that uncertainties about priorities is a major problem. However, not being an administrator, and not having the slightest idea what any of the acronyms stand for (ie. AIS, CDEP, PDP, APRP), I do know what my colleagues and I are feeling: we are feeling: TOTAL FRUSTRATION!

"It seems like each year our students come to us less prepared than the year before, while at the same time, we are expected to get them to a point by the end of January where they can perform successfully at a very challenging level."

This teacher adds that a major frustration is that her administration's response to the difficulty of improving student achievement is to regiment every teacher into teaching the same curriculum, on a timetable which limits the ability of teachers to engage students in active learning. Additionally, his district is now emphasizing memorization as a priority over skill development despite evidence, in the district and in literature, that skill development will have a bigger impact on student learning.

FROM ANOTHER INDIVIDUAL IN EDUCATION who is working hard to improve the educational environment:

Hi, Don - This newsletter (Are Standards Creating Stress?) is so on target. Keep up the good work! And happy holidays!

The author welcome comments, feedback, reactions of any kind to the thoughts expressed (above).

Please feel free to forward this message to a friend or colleague. If
you know someone who would like to be put on the list, please send a
message to Don Mesibov at dmesibov@twcny.rr.com.

Copyright (c) 2000, Institute for Learning Centered Education. All
rights reserved.