Translate

Showing posts with label Latino Achievement Gap. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Latino Achievement Gap. Show all posts

Tuesday, March 03, 2020

The Hechinger Report. Study: Boosting soft skills is better than raising test scores

This research shows that boosting soft, socio-emotional learning (SEL) skills is better than test-prep curriculum used to boost test scores.  We still need to address the injustices and lack of validity of our high-stakes testing systems and not let the testing companies get off the hook. 

In addition to SEL, let's fully incorporate Ethnic Studies and well-designed, staffed, and funded bilingual education programs to this list given that ample research solidly points to these as not solely achievement boosters, but achievement-gap reducers. 

These are not issues of evidence, but rather politics.  Why can't we do all three?  How and where do we get the leadership and teachers that can implement all three?  I have a lot to say about this, but I'll stop here for now.

-Angela Valenzuela



Study: Boosting soft skills is better than raising test scores

Chicago analysis finds schools that foster social-emotional development get better results for students


Proof Points

High school students comfort each other on Chicago’s South Side. A new Chicago study shows that students who attend schools that foster soft skills do better in high school and beyond. (Photo by Scott Olson/Getty Images)

We hear the phrase “failing schools” a lot but what really defines a failing school? Generally, we look at test scores. Schools that aren’t getting students to improve their math and reading achievement on the standardized tests administered by each state are the ones singled out for shame, punishment and sometimes closure. That’s led to excessive test preparation — and even fraud — to boost scores.
Education researchers are trying to come up with different ways to measure success. One of them, economist Kirabo Jackson of Northwestern University, has zeroed in on soft skills, which include traits like empathy and perseverance, and found that if you were to set up a competition between schools that raise test scores and schools that foster soft skills, the soft skills schools would win.
Sign up for Jill Barshay's Proof Points newsletter
In a large study of more than 150,000 students in all 133 of Chicago’s public high schools, Jackson has calculated that schools that build social-emotional qualities such as the ability to resolve conflicts and the motivation to work hard  are getting even better short-term and long-term results for students than schools that only boost test scores. The schools that develop soft skills produced students with higher grades, fewer absences and fewer disciplinary problems and arrests in high school. Later, the students who attended these high schools graduated and went to college in higher rates. In a few more years, we may learn that the students who attended schools that are strong in soft skills earned more college degrees.
“What we’re showing is that schools that actually cause kids to become more gritty, those kids tend to be likely to persist more in college,” said Jackson.
“You could actually do a lot more good by focusing on schools that promote social-emotional development as opposed to focusing on schools that raise test scores,” he added.
We haven’t been totally misguided to focus on test scores all this time. Schools that boost test scores also tend to be the ones that boost social-emotional skills. But the overlap isn’t perfect. An exemplar school for boosting test scores at the 95th percentile might only be 75th percentile for building soft skills, according to the Chicago high school data. Importantly, Jackson is noticing outliers: schools that are sensational at building soft skills but terrible at boosting test scores, and vice versa.


Jackson declined to identify strong or weak schools by name because the research is in early stages. The study, “School effects on socio-emotional development, school-based arrests and educational attainment,” is still a working paper, which means it has not yet been peer-reviewed and may still undergo revisions. In February 2020, Jackson presented these early findings at conference of the National Center for the Analysis of Longitudinal Data in Education Research (CALDER) and the paper was circulated by the National Bureau of Economic Research. Along with Jackson, there are four co-authors from the University of Chicago Consortium on School Research, Northwestern University and the Mindset Scholars Network.
Measuring squishy soft skills is controversial and complicated. Scholars have found many problems in measuring “grit,” a popular social-emotional trend in schools, for example.

Jackson and his research colleagues relied on students’ responses to a social-emotional survey given to Chicago public school students from 2008 onward. Students answered a range of questions about their own perceptions of their interpersonal skills, social well-being and hard work. For example, students said how much they agree with a statement like, “If I need to study, I don’t go out with my friends.” (For a more examples of survey questions, I typed up a bunch here.)
To tease out how much of these skills could be credited to a student’s high school, the researchers factored in students’ prior academic achievement and how they responded to the surveys in middle school. They also adjusted students’ responses for gender, race/ethnicity, family income and the socio-economic status of the student’s home neighborhood, down to the census block. All these adjustments are important because a student’s context matters in how he or she answers a question. Kids are more likely to say “I’m a hard worker” if they’re surrounded by kids who don’t work hard, Jackson explained.
In the end, the researchers had an estimate of how much each high school boosted soft skills, based on how ninth graders answered surveys from 2011 to 2017. And they found that the students’ self-reported answers had a significant correlation with school grades and attendance in ninth grade. The students who went to the high schools that were good at developing soft skills also had fewer disciplinary incidents.
For the older students in the study, the ones who entered ninth grade between 2011 and 2014, researchers saw that students who attended these soft-skills high schools had fewer arrests throughout their high school years and graduated high school in greater numbers. After high school, these students attended college, both two-year and four-year institutions, in higher numbers and persisted in college in higher rates. It’s too early to see college graduation rates for these students.
To check their findings, the researchers compared siblings who attended different high schools and the ones that attended to schools that were better at boosting soft skills had better outcomes.

The study is making several important contributions to educational research. It’s more proof that students are self-aware and honest enough to give survey answers that can actually measure social-emotional skills. It also indicates that increases in students’ soft skills matter for the educational outcomes that we care about like better grades and college attendance.

There’s a debate in the research community about whether interventions to boost “grit” or  “growth mindset”  actually cause students to learn a lot more or do better in school. Those trendy social-emotional concepts weren’t tested in this study. But schools that improved social well-being had larger effects on attendance and behavioral infractions while those that promoted hard work, which is closely related to the concepts of grit and growth mindset, had bigger impacts on grades. Jackson’s research is making a case that some schools are able to develop these soft skills much better than other schools.
A big question is what the schools are doing to achieve that result. Further research is needed to learn if the above-average schools had adopted a social-emotional curriculum or trained their teachers to foster these skills. Jackson told me he wasn’t aware of a particular social-emotional curriculum that was in widespread use. It’s also possible that successful schools weren’t doing anything special but were staffed by adults who treated students with respect, fostered a sense of community and inspired students to study hard.
What do we do with this research? Should we start surveying every high school student in America and rank schools based on how well they’re boosting soft skills? Jackson said that kind of ranking would be “misguided.”
“Anything can be gamed,” said Jackson. “If you say, ‘We’re going to reward you if you have students who say they are gritty,’ you’re going to have schools training students to report that they’re gritty. That’s not going to be very helpful.”
Jackson’s goal is to go into the schools that are at the top and learn what the grownups are doing in the building to promote social-emotional skills and see if those things can be replicated at other schools.
“Once we figure out what those are, maybe we can attach stakes to those behaviors,” said Jackson. “We can use the self reports [student surveys] as a way to figure out which practices we want to promote in professional development or teacher evaluation.”


This story about social-emotional development was written by Jill Barshay and produced by The Hechinger Report, a nonprofit, independent news organization focused on inequality and innovation in education. Sign up for the Hechinger newsletter.

Sunday, September 06, 2015

What Latino Students Want from School by Jason G. Irizarry

What Latino Students Want from School by Jason G. Irizarry

If you asked Latino students how
to improve schools for young
people like themselves, what would
they say? What recommenda-
tions would they have for edu-
cators committed to improving their
education?
Certainly, we need to do more to
improve the education experiences
and outcomes for the largest minority
group of students in the United States.
Approximately 13 percent of all U.S.
Latinos between the ages of 16 and 24
don’t have a high school diploma or
the equivalent. That rate is four times
higher than it is for whites and almost
twice that of blacks (U.S. Department
of Education, 2014). Some scholars
have called this a crisis (Gándara,
2010; Gándara & Contreras, 2009).
Most districts with significant con-
centrations of Latino students are
engaged in some type of school or
districtwide improvement initiative.
But who typically gets invited into
those conversations? Who gets to
share their expertise? Who gets to
shape education policy and practice? Continue reading here.

Thursday, April 09, 2015

Mexican-American Toddlers: (Mis)Understanding The Achievement Gap

This research by Bruce Fuller and colleagues perpetuates dangerous myths—particularly about Mexican mothers—and readers should consider how either the opposite of what is concluded here is observed elsewhere or a more critical view is offered that suggests how schools and society deprive our youth of resources that are important to success in life.


Education scholar, Dr. Laura Alamillo at Cal State University Fresno, is currently conducting research on Latina mothers that shows that they reading to their children at home in two languages.  I work with immigrant, Mexican parents, too, and know that they also work closely and intensely across two languages yet our schools—pre-K included—systematically fail to provide their teachers with the language supports that they need in order to carry out the kind of effective pedagogy that our bilingual children need.

We've had many a community discussion on these things here in Austin, Texas, and our very own bilingual teachers AT ALL LEVELS—pre-K included—voice these concerns with a extreme dearth of curricula, books, and materials that are not only linguistically appropriate for bilingual learners at ALL levels of development, but that once you parse it out, don't even speak to the Mexican or Mexican American experience in the U.S.  In my own work, I call this "subtractive schooling."  I don't have time to go into the manifold, historic, ideological, and layered reasons why this is so, but want to take the opportunity to share that we are doing something about this.

We started a Saturday Academy called "Academia Cuauhtli" (Eagle Academy)—a language and culture revitalization project—at the Emma S. Barrientos Mexican American Cultural Center.  Students get taught in Spanish a Mexican American Studies / Tejano Studies curriculum in grade 4, targeting three nearby east Austin elementary schools—Metz, Sanchez, and Zavala. 

This involves a partnership involving Nuestro Grupo (our community based organization organized by the Texas Center for Education Policy and the Tejano Monument Curriculum Initiative, both at the University of Texas at Austin and the National Latino/a Education Research and Policy Project [NLERAP], its fiscal agent and national nonprofit organization), the Austin Independent School District, the City of Austin Parks and Recreation Department and within it, the Emma S. Barrientos Mexican American Cultural Center where the Saturday academy takes place.

We have developed curriculum in migration/immigration, civil rights, and local history.  We are currently extending this curriculum to indigenous heritage, women, and the cultural arts. Moreover, all that we have developed is available to students district wide—currently in grades 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, and 11.
Consider liking us on Facebook where you can see video of some instruction there: https://www.facebook.com/AcademiaCuauhtl

Also check us out on our AISD Website: http://www.austinisd.org/academics/cuauhtli

AISD Chief Academic Officer, Dr. Pauline Dow, and so many others have demonstrated incredible leadership in this regard.  I am so happy an honored to be a part of this initiative.  

Though I am sure the authors of this research study didn't intend this to be so, they nevertheless offer a deficit perspective of what they say Mexican mothers and children presumably do not have, rather than a study conducted from a research lens of what they do have.  After all, a way of seeing is also always a way of not seeing.

Just as importantly, these authors also didn't situate their work in a sociopolitical or sociocultural perspective that like us here in Austin recognizes that at the root of our problems as a community as a whole are not an accumulated sum total of deficiencies that we collectively inherit or "possess," but rather a very deep, history of educational neglect, underinvestment, and cultural chauvinism in an otherwise highly alienating, test-driven curriculum where the knowledge of the dominant group is what counts in our state curriculum. 

And since knowledge, curriculum, and whose knowledge counts in society entails the reproduction of our commuities' social and political consciousness, our battle lies not in "fixing" Latina/Mexican moms, but rather in other areas as follows to name only a few problem areas:

  • Taking on the elitest Northeastern book publishers that either construct Southwestern Mexicans as a community that doesn't read [so why invest in them?] or as a "regional minority," making them less reluctant to publish our works; 

  • Libraries and book stores that fail to buy our books or that place the few that they do have in harder-to-reach spaces or that mix them up with Latin American authors as if we have no history or status of our own as U.S. Latino authors in multiple genres of writing; 

  • Universities that do not collect archives on the histories, writings, artifacts, or knowledge of our communities or that leave our neglected archives on life support;

  • Newspapers and magazines that can't ever seem to find a Latin@ author to recognize in any significant way except for a token few;

  • Journalists that are totally missing the statewide and national movement that is currently taking place with respect to the advancement of Mexican American Studies (although here is one such story).  Despite our numbers, they, too see us as a marginal community on the whole. 

  • Book festivals that exclude our books and that overlook knowledge production by Latinas or Latinos for book awards, our state boards of education that are resistant to secure inclusion of our histories, stories, and ways of knowing as part of what counts—or should count—as knowledge in a world that is increasingly not only diverse, but actually quite brown and is the demographic of destiny.

The legendary battles for inclusion of all subaltern histories involving the Texas State Board of Education is what also might come readily to mind in this regard. And though folks around the nation scoff at these goings on here in Texas, they have enormous consequences not only for Texas, but nationally, as well.  Why? Because Texas itself controls 10% of the school text book market and when it comes to purchasing text books for schools, other states take their lead from Texas.

When I think of this very significant, growing, and historic fight that we as a community have taken on—not just in Austin, but in Texas and throughout the nation—it troubles me that a single study devoid of this context or historical understanding could be used by policy makers to construct our Latina/Mexican mothers as "the problem" in need of fixing.

Education is never not a political issue for our communities. If you are a young or older Latin@, Mexican@, or Tejan@, you must understand that you need to get civically engaged in order for us to turn this circumstance around for our communities. You must vote, get out the vote, get naturalized and earn citizenship so that you can vote and get out the vote.  You should connect to our community's civil rights groups and organizations like LULAC and consider running for office. 

Form your own LULAC council and get out and testify on these things in your school boards, state board, and legislatures. Form partnerships like what we are doing here in Austin so that you can develop curriculum that speaks authentically to your children's and community's experiences so that you can (re)discover the importance of your own histories.  In short, organize!  Sí se puede! Yes we can!

 -Angela

 

#AcademiaCuauhtli #TxLege #EdPolicy

 





Mexican-American toddlers born in the U.S. do not develop nearly as fast as white toddlers when it comes to language and pre-literacy skills. That's the main finding of a new study by the Institute of Human Development at the University of California, Berkeley.

The study followed 4,550 Mexican-American children from birth to 30 months of age. At 9 months, these infants recognized words and gestures and had no trouble manipulating objects such as rattles and simple toys. But by age 2, their vocabulary, the number of words they knew and their overall pre-literacy skills lagged way behind. Four out of five Mexican-American toddlers displayed a slower rate of growth than that of their white peers.

Researchers say one reason is that Latino parents do not invite their children to speak at an early age. Bruce Fuller, co-author of the study, says that does not mean Mexican-American parents are less nurturing or caring.

"But what the new findings show," says Fuller, "is that a lot of that warm parenting is not necessarily infused with rich language, with questioning kids, with giving kids cognitive challenges."

So by age 2 1/2, the gap between Mexican-Americans and whites is significant — as much as five months. Children whose mothers are foreign-born fall the farthest behind. Only 28 percent of these mothers said they read to their child daily, compared with 59 percent of white mothers.

According to the study, white mothers are more likely to work on their kids' pre-literacy skills earlier, at around age 2. Mexican-American moms tend to wait until their child reaches kindergarten age, 4 to 5 years old. This raises sensitive questions about parenting especially among poor, foreign-born parents.

"It's certainly not a function simply of material poverty, but I think it is a weakness of parenting in the U.S. context," Fuller says.

"In school kids are rewarded to process symbols and mathematical tasks pretty quickly. So it's in the U.S. context and school context that [Latino] parenting practices are not up to snuff."

"It's not necessarily that they don't know how to parent," says Selma Caal, a researcher for Child Trends, a nonprofit with a focus on Latino children and families. She says there are two key factors in the development of toddlers: family income and the education of the mother.

"If the mother is working as well as the father, they will be more likely to provide the sorts of things children may need," says Caal.

Fuller says that's actually one of the study's more intriguing findings. Mexican-American toddlers showed more robust growth if their moms worked outside the home.

"Mothers working outside the home are exposed to more middle-class forms of parenting," Fuller says. "They're talking with fellow workers about how they question their kids, how they introduce kids to educational TV and digital media."

He says it's the kind of exposure that helps assimilation and leads to innovative parenting.
The full study appears in the Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences.


Tuesday, December 30, 2014

The Latino Achievement Gap by E. M. Madrid

Important read by Dr. E. Michael Madrid with the following citation:
Madrid, E. M. (2011). The Latino achievement gap. Multicultural Education, 19(3), 7-12.
 
This article is downloadable here.

http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ955929.pdf

Concluding quote from within:

" School administrators, teachers, and board
members must not only recognize that they
are part of the problem, but they must also
assume the responsibility for initiating and
implementing reform in the curricula and
programs that serve Latino students."
 
-Angela