When I was a public school student 10 years ago, I often witnessed lack of interest and creativity on the teachers behalf in my High School. They failed to motivate, engage and educate us properly. I also noticed, however, the lack of respect from students to teachers, the lack of personal motivation students had, and as you mentioned a number of other personal problems they brought to school with them that are typical within their impoverish neighborhoods.

But the most significant problem I noticed, was the disconnect between NYC students (mostly from minority groups) and their white teachers. I’m not sure how things are now a days but the communication simply wasn’t good back then. How can you teach when you fail to communicate? How can you teach if there isn’t a mutual understanding? How can you expect excellent grades when you fail to motivate?

I agree with you, that is often not the administrators’ or teachers’ fault but if are having the same problems with a significant amount of students I believe the school needs to address it. To your defense, often these problems should begging to be noticed at the High School level, but from primary education. It is just ridiculous and unfair to HS administrators and teachers, but if that’s the case then you need to strike back with a good plan to solve it and that’s what make it a good administration. You can’t just blame the students for their failure, the school is the institution that is supposed to guide them through the whole process of becoming educated.

Students can be motivated a number of ways, through programs that would address their needs, through activities they can enjoy while learning and by encouraging and rewarding participation. Basically offering them the support and resources they need and empowering them. The teachers should have the assistance and resources they need to make it happen as well. Is a collaborate effort. I believe both the teacher and the students carry the responsibility of making it work and neither is completely “guilty” of the failure.

You said: “When we also add in our new immigrants, many of whom had little or no schooling in their native countries, the result is a set of statistics that are less than excellent.”

Well, but have you thought about the language barrier? That’s is most likely the main issue there, not education. Communication (again) is absolutely one of the largest barrier when it comes to learning. I’m a new immigrant, a proud citizen now. I completed 5th, 8th, then 9th-12th grades here in the United States. In 5th grade, I dealt with a slight culture shock, and the teasing from other Hispanics kids at school because I didn’t speak English at a school without an ESL program. I was placed in an English only class because my local school was not accepting more students. I struggled! my excitement of being in America became a nightmare every time I had to go to school. An English teacher humiliated me in the classroom in 8th grade, but of course a timid student that I was I didn’t stand up for myself. Instead, I became more timid in class and learning was no longer my main concern but rather being fearful of being humiliated again. I innocently thought any learning difficulties I endured was through fault of my own. The teacher was just projecting her frustration on to me because she was upset I had been placed in her class not knowing how to properly read or understand “big words” (in English). I was excellent reader in Spanish, in fact it was one of my hobbies, so it was no my education getting in the way it was the language.

Have you any idea how difficult it was? Have you any idea of all the resources and information i missed out during my youth that could have helped become a successful person? Education was not my issue, it was language. Education was not my issue, it was attending the wrong school. Education was not the issue, it was not having the right mentors. My father was a great mentor, but what does he know? He was a new immigrant himself. He can only motivate me to finish a career and do well in school. He relied on the school to guide me through and he offered me support.

With all due respect, I would like for you to consider those issues when dealing with your students. Marketing companies conduct primary research such as surveys and focus groups to get to know their customers better, perhaps schools should do the same. If something is not working I think they first step would be to improve the communication you have with the students and then address those needs. Not every model fits every school.

Meanwhile, while there were modestly better gains in the CD schools vs. non CD SURR schools, it’s in no way clear what drove those gains. Was it reduced class size? Teacher quality? Extended day? Did each of those things contribute incrementally or was one intervention particularly making a difference. In a world of limited resources, that question is essential — because if one of the interventions was the primary driver of improvements, you’d want to focus on scaling that intervention up rather than replicating the entire, uber-expensive, not wildly successful slate of reforms in the CD. And this is even more true when you consider that both the groups of schools you looked at served gradually lower-need populations each year, which may in itself have been the primary driver of schoolwide gains (though not necessarily improved individual student achievement) in both groups.

Finally, my biggest problem with all of this is that in trying to figure out what works, I’d rather look to the schools serving high-need kids that never landed on the SURR list in the first place. Those schools existed in 1998-99 and they exist today, and frankly, those are the models where I think you’re likely to find evidence for what really works to help all students succeed. (Based on my anecdotal experience as a parent and educator, my totally unscientific guess would be that the most successful schools have excellent educators and leaders, who work collaboratively to plan curriculum across disciplines and grades.)

Interestingly, none of these folks send or have sent their own kids to public schools with extended school days and years. Obama’s offspring attend a very progressive school with lots of play time built into the day and, surprise, surprise, no test prep.

The lack of improvement in math in CD schools we attributed to the fact that the CD intervention at first did not include a focus on math. In fact, the intense focus on literacy probably crowded out math instruction. In sum, our research team found the CD Initiative to be an effective intervention in NYC elementary schools. Nevertheless, it was terminated in 2003 by Chancellor Klein.

It’s a no-brainer that a longer school day means more education…unless, of course, what the school is offering is doing more harm than good, in which case I would argue to SHORTEN the school day.

Like every other reform initiative, as one poster implied, “more time” is no silver bullet. It takes a purposeful, community-wide investment in a full set of reforms to move forward, not a magic wand reform.

Just curious: from the Mulgrew perspective, why this particular initiative, now, and not, say, smaller class size, or peer review, or something else?

Now, on the other hand, if you had a school day that included more professional development and collaboration for teachers, less time babysitting (yeah, I said that), a day that included more sports, physical activity, life skills, arts opportunities, one-on-one tutoring, even maybe just some time for kids to go to the library and read or do research, that might work, particularly for disadvantaged students who experience little to none of the aforementioned in their usual lives. That might help more students feel engaged with and confident and happy in their schools, which in turn might lead to higher achievement and fewer dropouts. But I currently work in an extended day program, and simply doing reading skills with my students–even with high-interest texts, group work, games, whatever–is not flying. They are absolutely done by 4:00 and want nothing more than to go home.
Extending the school day alone, without broadening the scope of what is offered for students and giving teachers more breathing room, will just give you burned-out teachers and frustrated, tired kids.

The Chancellor’s District was one of the best programs that provided the schools with resources, time, and PD so that teachers can help students succeed.

But the DoE is so determined to destroy the UFT that it will eliminate any program that works and helps students to earn a diploma.

The DoE’s plan is to have no plan in place.