Happy Summer!
It has been a looooonnnnnggggg time since we have blogged and I'm looking forward to hearing your reactions and thoughts about the article "Schools Where Failure is Not an Option." Please share 1 idea that you agreed with and 1 idea that you did not agree with in the article. I will share mine after I hear some of yours. I hope everyone enjoyed their 4th of July holiday. I will be counting fingers on Wednesday for those of you who like to set off fireworks!
skip to main |
skip to sidebar
This blog was created as a communication tool for the Bradwell School of Excellence teachers and staff as we begin this journey to reclaim Bradwell! Join us as we share the joys, triumphs and challenges of building excellence together in an inner city school in Chicago. At Bradwell we NEVER blame the lettuce!
Never Blame the Lettuce!
We never blame the lettuce. If a lettuce fails to grow we look for the reasons it is not growing. We check to see if it needs more water, more sun, or more fertilizer. But we NEVER blame the lettuce!
Principal Kimberly Henderson
Followers
Blog Archive
About Me
- Kimberly Henderson
- Chicago, Illinois, United States
- My name is Kimberly Henderson and I am the principal for Bradwell School of Excellence, a turnaround school for 2010-2011 in Chicago. I am excited to begin this journey of giving our students the world class education they deserve with a staff that has been handpicked to lead this challenge! Anyone can lead a school, I seek to transform the lives of our students who in turn will transform the lives of our staff forever!
I agree with the idea of making the invisible students visible, and not letting some students just slip through the cracks.
ReplyDeleteI did not completely agree with "annoyance" being an intervention strategy to help students stop procrastinating. I think the other idea of investing students in worthwhile assignments is a better alternative.
This was definitely a thought provoking article. One premise that I agree with is the fact that teachers began to approach instructional planning with more purpose to ensure that there was relevance, rigor, and alignment to outcome specific goals.
ReplyDeleteOne premise that I didn't necessarily agree with was the lack of planning for implementation and buy in from students and parents. It tends to leak to lack of buy in, commitment and true ownership.
A.P. Perkins
Welcome to the blog AP Perkins! Great point. Emily your comment is one of the areas that I struggled with as well.
ReplyDeleteI appreciated how the approach caused many teachers to reflect on the quality and purpose of assignments. Also, the article reported that the staff tried to fully embrace the new methods. Although I didn't agree with them entirely, I appreciate when a group of people are willing to be on board and at least try to implement something unfamiliar.
ReplyDeleteI didn't agree that the approach automatically caused tension between the teachers and students. The article seemed to imply that due to this approach, students became more apt to behave dishonestly to avoid work. I believe that all students want to learn and succeed, and when a lack of motivation or communication exists, an opportunity arises to be more clear about expectations. It is possible that these students remained unclear about their exact responsibilities because it was a completely different system.
Interesting article. Not sure how well thought out the whole study was. Premise was loose... but one thing I agreed with was teachers deciding to take responsibility for student's success and not blaming outside factors for the failures.
ReplyDeleteBut I must say that the whole idea of changing or watering down the grading scale seemed weak as day old dishwater. Is that really preparing our kids for an ultra competitive world? A world were resources get thinner every year? Their competition gets A's,B's & C's and turns things in on time, while our babies (theoretically) turns things in weeks after the date. When does that fly in the real world? "Uhh, so sorry Mrs. Henderson, I know my lesson plans are poor but can I have two more weeks to get them right?" If this premise would be the norm then what pray tell are we scaffolding them to? Excellence? Maybe we should call it "Eventual Excellence" or "Excellence when the mood is right?"
Who knows maybe I'm not liberal enough and I am a part of the problem. But I don't think so.
I agreed with the fact that we should not blame outside circumstances for any failures inside the classroom.
ReplyDeleteI didn't agree with the changes to the grading scale. It feels like the bar is actually being lowered. That stance doesn't prepare children for the ultra-competitive world that demands you commit to excellence. Excellence is doing what needs to be one when it needs to be done.
Test
ReplyDeleteTest
ReplyDeleteI thought this article was extremely interesting with Colbert and Wilsons approach. I agree with the main idea of a “must needed change” in this school system but some of the things they implemented I am not extremely on board with.
ReplyDeleteI don’t agree with not involving parents. Getting support and collaboration from parents is very important in any new situation for their child. These teachers believed that they could control only what happened during school hours and involving the parents might widen the achievement gap even more.
I also am confused by the idea that teachers pick and choose the assignments that they “fight the battle for”. In other words the article implied that grade levels choose the assignments they need completed for grades and the other “less important” assignments weren’t worth the bother. I don’t really agree with this, every assignment they give a child should be taking seriously and worth the battle in my mind, especially when aligned with the No Failure program.
I find all of the comments interesting, especially the one about "not involving the parents". I did not process the authors' statement about parents to mean not invloving the parents or taking into account the circumstances outside of the school, but rather I took it as a call to not use that as a scapegoat for failure to reach students. I think this speaks to knowing enough about your students and those things that may affect his/her ability to perform well and not reinforcing the idea "you can't" because of "XYZ". I like the fact that teachers, as the authors' state, took "responsibility for students' success and not blame factors outside their control".
ReplyDeleteI think Corbett and Wilson's article highlights the importance of raising expectations-that students have the ability to learn, that although it may take a little bit longer for some,they can and they will! Perhaps I am being overly optimistic but I think that in addition to raised expectations (teachers of students, students of themselves), students learn to stay the course; that it's okay to try again until you succeed.
Optimisim aside, I did struggle with the possibility that lack of "negative grades" might have the effect of causing some of the higher achieving students to not turn in their best work. The NQs, Is and NYs would do wonders for the self-esteem of the lower performing students but I wonder, outside of the annoyance of "giving good students the freedom to procrastinate and watching them take advantage of it" if implementing this program had a negative impact on higher performing students.
What a great discussion! As I said in the newsletter I struggled with some of these ideas as well. If homework is a reinforcement of what we learned in class then every assignment is important. But the idea of no excuses is just why we chose the school motto that we did.
ReplyDeleteWhen I first read what you wanted us to post on the newsletter I was quite confused but throughout this article I really did go back and forth.
ReplyDeleteTo start, I obviously agreed with and was intrigued by the attitude these teachers took towards their students in which failure was not an answer. At first, I also agreed with the way they changed the grading scaled but then it felt like the teachers were working their way around the system to improve their students grades with the new scale. Is this a bad thing? I'm not really sure. I appreciate the fact that the teachers got together in grade levels and worked on assignments that were more meaningful to their students because I think that if students are simply redoing homework assignments to earn satisfactory grades then eventually they will find their own ways around the system and memorize/cheat to get by.
I feel that this article presents some very compelling notions. First off, I have to say that I feel that the idea of not accepting failure is what we as teachers should have already signed up for. It should be where our hearts and minds are already at. What Colbert and Wilson discuss in their article is a system of measurement and record keeping that backs this posture up. It sounds like an incredible challenge, and I say, bring it. So does our school credo.
ReplyDeleteI agree that the content of our curriculum needs to be heavily evaluated for it's quality and alignment with goals and standards. It seems to me that a system that requires students to cross the finish line, a system in which teachers commit to getting students there, not just in word but in deed, will encourage teachers and students to get down to brass tacks and cut the fat. Relevant, rigorous goals with tight and engaging learning activities? - sounds dreamy to me. I can also see how, while a transition to such a system might initially be painful, in the end I believe it would help establish a richer, more streamlined program.
What I found missing from the article was any discussion about how differentiation could be incorporated to keep advanced learners engaged while less capable students get the support they need to back up and catch up. The concepts related in the article got me thinking about the benefits of project learning and portfolios, and I think that differentiation by ability, interest, and learning profile could be used to great advantage to create a climate of meaningful and engaging learning in a way that meets every student where they are at and shepherds them towards achievement.
Great to hear from all of you!!! Sorry I missed the big meeting. My bad.
I agreed with the article's primary point. We cannot accept failure from students. I actually appreciate the modified grading scale because it puts part of the onus on teachers for improvement. I've heard plenty of D's and F's handed out with a "you (student) need to get it together" message. Handing out a "Do It Again" grade requires that the student and teacher continue working together to master the content. The teacher now must make sure the student can do it properly the second time and the student has to do the work properly!
ReplyDeleteI think we oftentimes put too much stock in the capacity of low grades to motivate students. I've seen far more give-up than motivation when students receive low grades. This refusal to let kids fail and tell them they're failures is so important.
I'm sure we can all agree that higher expectations for students is a must. I do think their are many benefits to a "no fail' grading system. I wonder, though, if this might in fact lead to lower expectations or an inflated grading system. I was a bit confused about how this led to procrastination by the more advanced students, and why this matters. If the students turn it in by the deadline, and its done well, why does it matter? I think this gives them more of an opportunity to self monitor their progress and take responsibility for completing work. But perhaps I'm not understanding what the article is trying to convey...
ReplyDelete