Bullying: How Should Schools Respond?

As school begins, we all set high hopes for wonderful school experiences in the new year.  Parents are excited to see their children return to the routine of school, but many are reticent as fear lies in the background, the fear of bullying.   A topic in schools and among parents, Queen bees, cliques, schoolyard fights and horrifying tormenting that has crippling effects on students are all lumped into the one category:  bullying.

Tormenting of children is an unacceptable occurrence, and schools must take a hard line in true bully prevention.

I am curious, however,  about childhood behavior that is often seen as intentional bullying but is rather the genesis of what later becomes bullying in the adult world: a child who has not been taught about emotional regulation, identifying feelings, development of empathy, and solving conflicts in peaceful ways. Children who are punished for isolated incidents instead of being taught new ways of dealing with emotion or problems become adults whose fear and anger run rampant later in life.

It’s true that some heinous things have happened to children who were victims of vicious behavior by peers. These stories and the books that have been written to enhance the financial security of authors create a mania of mislabeling normal childhood behavior as bullying. They are scary stories that provoke fear in adults, particularly in adults who feel vulnerable.  Adults who feel vulnerable need guidance in how to sift the fact from fiction and learn to support their child without enhancing problems.

Adrienne van der Valk, in her article “There are no Bullies: Just Children Who Bully—And You Can Help Them” (http://www.tolerance.org/print/magazine/number-45-fall-2013/there-are-no-bullies), wants educators and parents to ask about children who exhibit bullying behavior:

‘Why do they have this need for control and power?'”

As adults we must do all we can to ensure that children are safe. But being safe does not mean that children are never hurt. Life does bring with it unexpected situations. These situations allow children opportunities to develop the skills of dealing with adversity. Van der Valk points out that bullying behavior spikes when children feel off-kilter in the social scene. They use tools that think will get them what they want.  People learn through trial and error, especially young people.  And as adolescence bring in new factors, physiology and socially, their problem solving becomes newly challenged.

Mistakes are a part of learning.  Most children will bully at some point in their childhood.  We do not expect perfect behavior of children;  our goal is to create thoughtful humans who can learn from their mistakes, make reparations, and move forward in life as better people.

In The Bully, the Bullied, and the Bystander,  author Barbara Coloroso explains that the solution to bullying behavior and the often mislabeled isolated violent action is to involve parents and schools to support children in learning social tools.

Coloroso describes healthy family cultures that nurture secure attachment and foster strong self-directed behavior. She notes the following attributes of environments that foster healthy problem solving behaviors:

• Environments that teach democratic principles by respecting children’s feelings and perspectives.
• Environments that foster “creative, constructive, responsible activity”
• Discipline that allows for limit setting, but also allows the child to keep dignity and create reparations, leading to the teaching of self-regulation rather than a fear of punishment.
• Reasonable and natural consequences to undesired behavior.
• Children are given opportunities to learn about their feelings and to develop tools in which to help them use thinking to express those feelings in a healthy manner. (Social Thinking, developed by Michelle Garcia Winner, and mindfulness training can be implemented in classrooms to teach specific skills such as perspective taking, empathy, and learning to pause and consider options.

We are missing the very opportunity we require to help children learn how to be respectful members of a community when we punish children for their isolated lack of self-regulation skills rather than using  incidents for teaching. The root of the word discipline is not “to punish” but “to teach.”

Repeated hurtful behavior must be stopped. If a parent feels that a child is bullied and the bullying cannot be stopped, sometimes finding a new school is the best alternative. But parents need to know that a child who hurts another child is a hurting child. Both children need attention and development of social and emotional skills.

The pendulum has swung too far  from ignorance of the existence of bullying behavior to creating bullies where children who need our help exist. School handbooks outline specific definitions of bullying and harassment for adults and children as well as preconceived consequences instead of enlightening parents about the social causes for behaviors we label bullying.  Schools need to have effective programs that develop interpersonal skills within all classrooms;  teachers need training to become child advocates, not police.  School routines and supervision are often a factor in perceived bullying, easy remedies for bullying within the school environment.

Bullying is a problem and also a wonderful opportunity in our schools. The real solution to  what is commonly described as “a bullying problem” is for adults to become curious and mindful about their own behaviors, own the important task of teaching social emotional tools, and lead by example.

Powerful Invitation to Learning

I heard the dearest thing today. A young mom, a teacher, who had been struggling with the concept of expanding her approach, began to notice her child’s play. A scientist herself, she noticed that the process in which the baby explored his world was the same process replicated by scientists. A profound discovery, this knowledge of how we learn by exploration, observation, trial and error, changed the teacher deeply. She decided to apply what she learned about scientific inquiry to her approach with her students.

Christine Chaille and Lory Britain are working on the third edition of The Young Child as Scientist. The first edition was published in 2002, and while an easy read, is a highly regarded textbook in early childhood education.

The book clearly illustrated the concept of “constructivism,” and provided activities and materials to encourage the innate curiosity of children. It demonstrated the process of developing a theory by repeated testing. The tenets of the book are applicable to children of all ages; indeed, teachers use the same process as they collect data from student learning to design instruction. Constructivism is a theory, but also a fundamental strategy in all learning. Thoughtful teachers provide materials for exploration, encourage theory building and testing, and see the process evident in their own learning.

I wonder: how can we better support students and teachers to expand the constructivist approach in all classrooms and professional development to ensure that students are learning from the inside out?

What You Should Know About Public, Private, and Charter Schools

Education in this country is in crisis. For all of the patriotic rhetoric spewed during the last presidential election, in the “land of the free,” we have not yet made the connection that our children are the nation’s greatest resource and education deserves our greatest support. We do not take seriously the charge to educate all students. Some of our public schools are doing a great job, but in areas of the United States children are subjected to large classes, unskilled teachers, and unsafe school environments. Though for many school is a respite from troubled lives and overwhelmed parents, often schools are ill-prepared to give the children who most need a caring and safe environment and the confidence in themselves as capable learners needed in order to become healthy, prepared citizens.

Worse still, research reveals an alarming correspondence between poverty and school failure. With few exceptions, income level predicts academic levels in America’s schools. Data, such as test scores, can provide information that allows us to act in ways that serve change; or data can become a justification for doing nothing, blaming poor performance on “non-school” factors that we can’t change.

Data is used in public schools, organized on a top-down model. School boards make decisions that serve multiple schools, rarely able to be sensitive to the needs at each school. Well-meaning, high-level administrators and boards create policies that address the needs of the masses. Sometimes those policies support the schools in their districts; most of the time they do not. Federal attempts to create “one size fits all” policies are even more misguided. Current federal policies based on “research” overlook the fact that much of the research in education is based on assumptions that do not apply to all schools and all children. Statistics can lie; (consider the average of one’s feet in the freezer and one’s head in the oven—on average, just right) for children are individuals, not numbers.

Ronald , Nathan, and Hugo are three fictional boys who live in Los Angeles. Ronald, attends a public school downtown.  As an African-American child, born of a mother who struggles to support him and his three brothers, his chances of succeeding toward high school graduation are slim and toward college, slimmer. If by some chance he does make it to college, benefiting from one of the few non-profit,  innovative support systems , his chances of completing college are minimal, according to latest research.

Nathan’s future is rosy. Growing up in a suburb of Los Angeles, Nathan attends public school as well. His school boasts a “booster club” in which members of the school community raise $300,000 a year, allowing the school to hire extra teachers to supplement programs like art and music and to reduce class size.

Hugo is the luckiest of the three; he attends one of the city’s many private, independent schools. Although a student whose tuition is supported by partial scholarship, Hugo’s education is rich in scope, and his peers support his learning.  In all likelihood, he, like Nathan will attend college, graduate, and find a wonderful job.

Ronald, Nathan, and Hugo represent aspects of what has become known as “the achievement gap.” Ronald’s and Nathan’s achievement are measured by state testing that depicts individual and school success levels. In fact, the quality of the school is measured by the score.

Curriculum at Ronald and Nathan’s schools correspond directly to what is tested on the state tests, with math and language arts occupying the majority of time. Subjects such as social studies and science are evaluated sporadically during a child’s progression through grades K-12, and tests in those subjects focus on multiple choice responses about content.

In current discussion of the “achievement gap,” conversations focus on students such as Ronald and Nathan, and school programs are aimed at and judged by API scores, the aggregate of student scores at a school. No one would argue that a gap exists and must be closed. All students deserve good education. But do we all have the same definition of a “good” education? And why have test scores on one kind of test become the measure of what is “good” in education?

Viewing Hugo’s school expands the perspective of the discussion of the gap. Those students who attend independent schools are receiving an education that eclipses both Ronald’s and Nathan’s school experiences. Parents of public school students visiting good independent schools are often shocked at the difference between what is considered a good public school (one that boasts high test scores) and an independent school. I know I was.

March, 1989, Westlake School for Girls

As a young mother, I loved the idea of public schools and free education, and I hold that perspective today as well. Although my husband taught at a private school, I fought the very idea of any child of mine attending a private school. My own three years as a public school teacher, prior to becoming an “at home” mom, solidified my belief in neighborhood public schools as anchors of community and democracy. I saw public schools as a great leveler, providing my children with the opportunity to expand their world view of cultures and races, as I eschewed my own  segregated education of  in an isolated bastion of whiteness. I sent my oldest child to Westlake School for  Girls.  It was a “no-brainer:”  I saw what the school offered and compared it to her public magnet school.  Huge step for a person committed to public school.

Neighborhood Public School Districts

I began my teaching career at a well-funded school in a tiny beach district, and although my 28 kindergarten children had a slim slice of my attention within a three hour school day, the day was filled with enriching experiences for them. The school board decided to change the class size for all elementary grades. My kindergarten roster grew from 28 to 33 children reflecting increased class size across the district, designed to meet the challenges of shrinking enrollment resulting from skyrocketing property values that changed district demographics and new laws that limited spending in affluent school districts. A member of the school board supported the increase of class sizes as a solution to the districts shrinking enrollment, based on research of the day that substantiated the idea that class size did not matter; a “good” teacher could “disseminate instruction” (to quote the board member) to 40 students.

In 2012, the Assistant Superintendent of public instruction in Texas echoed the board member’s sentiment, wondering what connection ipads and smaller class sizes might have on the “dissemination of academic instruction.” Misapplication of research findings holds true today. Students in Texas may be in for a long, disappointing ride, as their districts attempt to meet student needs while placating the views of politicians whose narrow perspective on education stilt student experiences and derail their futures.

Out of what became a sad mess of public educational reality, developed a menu of educational choices, designed to provide parents who could afford options, alternatives for educating their children. Religious education, secular independent schools and later, the home school movement provided parents more “hands-on” input in their children’s lives. Seeking a way to better educate their children, parents attempted to create private educational opportunities for their children in spite of the taxes they already paid to the public system.

Each of these solutions provided an advantage over public education while at the same time requiring a commitment of time and money. Religious schools provided focus on character development and spiritual affiliation; independent schools with additional accreditation and oversight implemented standard practices for board governance and administrative practices.  Some parents began to  keep their children at home for schooling so they could control the content and environment of instruction.

To evaluate the effectiveness of instructional programs, school districts and state board use standardized tests to establish a uniformly applicable set of criteria. Unfortunately, many of the goals of education (student confidence, character, creativity, flexibility, and resilience, safety, and “belonging” to name a few) do not conform to methods of evaluation that can be applied on a large scale. The standardized tests themselves, therefore, are establishing an extremely narrow band  with which to judge the success of a school’s program.

Charter Schools
What seemed like an ideal solution to the challenge of education in America began appearing across the country in the late 90’s: charter schools. Charter schools seemed to blend the best of both options of private and public education. Charter schools are public schools governed by a board, created by private citizens or business affiliations, and sanctioned and evaluated by a state, county or city school district. Just as there are many kinds of public and private schools, charter schools represent a range of philosophies, environments, and methods of implementation. Some charter schools, like the KIPP family of schools, have strict policies for the enrollment and participation of its students and teachers. Some, like KIPP, have evolved to be the size of  school districts. A key attribute of independent schools, local school autonomy, may or may not be an attribute of a charter school. Many charter school leaders believe that a business model is the “saving grace” of education and should dominate the charter school movement, or that staff who attended ivy league schools create the best pool of talent.

As a movement, charter schools are not yet 20 years old; an adolescent in the field of education. There is much to try, fail, and learn as the movement matures. If nothing else, charter schools represent, at best ,“American ingenuity”, a free market approach to education, and independent thinking. At worst, charter schools run the risk of repeating the errors that plague our current public school system or creating new errors as business-trained non-educators assume leadership roles. A recent report by Stanford University attempts to summarize the success of charter schools. The report points to specific benefits and challenges to the success of charter schools, as seen by test score data.

The problem with evaluating schools by test scores alone is that Ronald and Nathan are left out of the equation. Ronald and Nation are the point of education, as are their parents, and their needs should be front and center, not hidden within pages of state testing data.

Building Community in Education
When one creates a school, one must consider not only how children will learn but how to structure the community in a way that supports parents, honors their fears, and gives them appropriate outlets for their needs to be involved in their child’s education. The Harlem Children’s Zone schools, developed by Geoff Canada, are examples of combining educational reform within a community framework.

Ideally, schools are a reflection of a triangle model, with a joint effort of staff, parents, and students. At the top, educators, whose job it is to stay current and informed, should be the leaders at a school. Parents, who have needed information about their children’s abilities, needs and skills and who have opinions worth hearing, not only contribute this information, but ideally contribute time and money to augment that which is provided by government or tuition. Students, who are the real consumers day to day, form the last third of the triangle. Their voices should be heard in concert with the adults who care for them.  The triangle model requires the participation of all three constituents, each with a particular role. In an ideal setting, there is mutual respect and understanding of the roles of each, as well as a clear understanding of the boundaries among constituents. Mutual respect and understanding requires commitment to processes that cultivate social norms and community expectations, often neglected in the focus on scores and day-to-day school issues.

Charter school developers are bravely experimenting with models. Some models exchange financial support for privilege, creating an opportunity to extend programs. Some charter models hold boldly to the belief in developing the leadership and participation of all community members. Teachers, principals and other staff give mightily of their time, energy, and creativity, often experiencing burnout as they attempt to create the learning environment enjoyed by Hugo–with meager resources.

There are no easy answers, and if we are to move forward we need to accept the current reality:
• Many of our public schools are held hostage by antiquated bureaucracies, and board/union political agendas.
• Some of our public schools are doing a great job despite limitations.
• Student in independent schools are getting an education that makes use of modern research and extended funding, and children who attend them are at an advantage.
• Charter schools are an option for some parents who feel their local schools do not serve their child’s needs.

Wisdom dictates that we consider a wide range of data to discuss and develop our public educational system. As a nation, we do not seem to do well with dissent, despite the examples of the founding fathers. We make quick judgments, discredit partial successes, and fight rather than listen. Our children deserve better. It’s time to bring all voices to the table to hear what is working and to move our schools forward in ways that provide commonly understood “good schools” for all.

What do you think? What are our next steps?  What are your and your child’s experiences?  Let’s start the discussion!

(photo courtesy of http://www.flickr.com/photos/aoisakana/288099156/)

“Deja vu” in Education?

“This is like déjà vu all over again,” said Assistant Attorney General (for the state of Texas) Shelley Dahlberg, quoted in yesterday’s New York Times.  Her concern was the dwindling funds for education, about which she blasted the requests of superintendents of school districts.  Dahlberg went on to say, ““Ask yourself or the witnesses whether a district can provide for the general diffusion of knowledge without iPads or teacher aides or brand-new facilities.”

She is right.  It is deja vu.  Back in 1974 I attended a city school board meeting in which a board member quoted a study, “An experienced teacher can disseminate information to 45 children.”  He was defending class sizes of up to 33 for k-6 schools.

Why is it that as a nation we allow the politics of school boards and state legislatures to determine what is best for children?  As educators we are not “disseminators of information,” but as Dr. JoAnn Deak, brain and learning expert says, we are “neurosculptors,” shaping the brains of children for effectiveness in their lives.  Our systems underlying education cannot support the needs of 21st century learning.

There is broad “buy-in” to the concept of achievement gaps throughout our nation, defined by socio-economic status.  Some brave souls refuse to accept such a link, and through their own perseverance and initiative have created schools like the Celerity Schools and Valor Academy, both charter schools in Los Angeles.  These schools demonstrate through that site-based, research-driven school leadership, all children can be successful.  School by school, these innovative institutions are closing the documented gap among students in public schools.

Once that gap is closed, we need to take a step out and notice that there is an even bigger gap, the gap between national school evaluations that define outstanding, blue-ribbon schools as schools in which all students read at grade level and schools that produce students ready for the 21st century.    A great number of our citizens are not even represented in the data, as they shuttle their children to independent schools that are current with 21st century trends, research, and knowledge of how the brain works.

What will happen when we as a nation take a look at the REAL academic gap in our country?

(photo courtesy of http://www.flickr.com/photos/siacademy/4098291846/)

Does school choice matter? Research says…NO.

Parents are  hungry for ways to give their children “edge” in the world of education, and with high hopes, the workforce.  As an educational consultant I advise parents about schools in Los Angeles, helping them to find the best match between their needs and the profile of their child.  Eager to leave no stone unturned in the search for the “perfect school,”  parents spend money on consultants, admission test preparation , tutoring, and eventually, most likely, private school tuition.  New research shared in Johns Hopkins University Department of Education’s Center for Research and Reform in Education newsletter, Best Evidence in Brief, indicates that more important than school profile in assuring student achievement is what the authors call “family capital.”

Best Evidence in Brief describes the research presented in Research in Social Stratification and Mobility describing the quality of interactions and values in the home which seem to be better indicators of high levels of student success than attributes of the school the child attends.  The skills that contribute to student academic achievement come from the home, say the researchers in the study, not the school.

What does this research mean for parents?  Does that mean that the kind of school your child attends does not matter? The good news, says the study, is that any family in any school can give a child a good foundation for academic achievement if the values and behaviors are supportive and nurturing.

However,  from my perspective, schools still matter.  Ideally, the relationship between a school and the families who comprise the school community is a mutually supportiv relationship.  Hopefully, the school is a repository of resources, both tangible and intangible, that assist parents in being and doing the best they can for their child.  Hopefully, there is quality communication between home and school, providing parents with the kinds of information that allow them to be actively involved in the rights kinds of ways, with their child’s education.  Good schools provide opportunites for parent education and for parents to interact with one another, develping supportive relationships with other parents that increase their skills as parents.

The study mentions that parents who talk to their children effectively, take an interest in their children’s schoolwork, and who create effective means of communication in the home lay the foundation for their children’s learning.  It’s highly possible for parents to develop effective family cultures on their own or with the help of friends, family, or other sources;  but a good school can be a huge support in helping parents develop effective family environments.

Ironically, many parents look to find a school with a good reputation of high levels of academic achievement or status, assuming that somehow the attributes of the school will inculcate their child against school failure or ensure copious amounts of school success.  What the study tells us is that unless the school’s academic success is as a result of its support of families, helping them to develop high quality environments for raising children, the reputation of a school is no insurance for student achievement.

Student achievement, like everything else in life, it seems, is an “inside job,”  in this case, predicted by qualities of life inside a family.

 

A Charter School Leading the Way to School Reform for All

What is so special about The Learning Community in Rhode Island is that it embodies so many of the best practices in education that have been right under our noses for so many years.  90% of the students receive free or reduced fare lunches subsidized by the federal government and many of the school’s children are learning challenged or English as a second language learners.  And yet, and here is the remarkable thing, the students are learning so well that they are partnering with the public schools to share what they have learned:

• Building a strong community is the key.  Parents are involved at all levels in the partnership between home and school.
• The leadership of the school is collaborative.  The board represents staff, parents, and outside experts rather than being a figurehead non-profit board.  The school is led by two directors and fosters teacher leadership, professional development a hallmark of the school.
• The school embodies workshop approaches to learning that stretch student cognition, and hosts a full roster of support staff to create one-to-one support for students who fall behind even a small amount.
• Housed in a modest environment, the school has implemented an outstanding, creative PE program, art program, and outdoor space designed by a sculptor.
• The school is a small school, 500 students in grades k-8.

The Learning Community serves one of the neediest populations in the country, and yet has spread its model to the nearby school district.  We will be watching to see how this partnership evolves;  I’m hoping this new year heralds the beginning of successful school reform.