Family Connections: Can You Make Your Child Smarter?

Sarah was the kind of fifth grader who was irresistible to peers and teachers.  She would brighten a room simply by entering it, and everybody wanted to be on her team, in her group, or somehow near her.  Always a delight in the classroom, when I would say something like, “Take out your spellers,” she would joyfully announce how much she liked spelling.  

Despite having an IQ only moderately above average, she went on to capture the number two slot behind her high school valedictorian.  She received thousands of dollars in scholarships, made a big impression at her college, and is now a financial analyst with a prestigious firm in San Francisco.

Sarah is gifted with the kind of intelligence that can be much more important than I.Q. for future success.  She has emotional intelligence.  This means she is diligent, persevering, cheerful, empathetic, and able to draw friends, teachers, coaches and others to her.  When she picks out a goal, she is able to focus her attention to it and delay gratification until that goal is achieved. 

Is she lucky?  Absolutely, but fortunately for those of us who are not naturally like Sarah, emotional intelligence (EI) can be nurtured and learned.  This is largely not true of IQ, which is hard-wired into our brains during the earliest months years of life. 

There are several ways to help your child develop a strong EI.  One is to encourage your child when he or she is acting emotionally intelligent.  Catching your child “being good” and pointing this out can help a person develop a strong self-view.  Some parents point out other family members who show strong EI and tell the child that he or she is like Aunt Grace in the same way.

Meanwhile, if you want an excellent book on the subject, read Emotional Intelligence by Daniel Goleman.  He often speaks directly to parents in this fascinating and readable book.

Sarah is one of several former students who still keep in touch with me. Few students will be able to develop their EI to the same degree as she, but all students will be able to have their EI raised with some effort.

Family Connections: Spring Behavior Changes

  A change is coming.  Your child has noticed this and understands that soon summer will bring huge and often wonderful changes to the normal routines.  It’s good-bye to comfortable classmates and teachers and hello to family summer plans.

  Is your child showing some different behavior at home lately?  Welcome to the club.  Children often react to the stress of change – even positive change – by unconsciously retesting limits and possibly reverting to an earlier developmental stage for a short while.

  If you think this is happening to your child, I suggest you patiently show your child that the limits haven’t changed.  Gently but firmly, your child needs to know that he or she must still live up to responsibilities and expectations.  See if you can do this in an unemotional and reassuring manner.

  Parents can help their children work through the stress caused by changes by maintaining routines and making extra time to listen to a child’s concerns and comments.  Plenty of rest resulting from a normal bedtime is helpful to your child.  This can be hard when other children (perhaps with less enlightened parents) are playing noisily outside or sports schedules keep your child up later than usual.

  If your family is not able to have dinner together nightly, this might be a good time to begin a family book or other ritual that gives the family a chance to be together and talk over the joys and frustrations of the day.  Talking over the feelings and problems of the characters in a book can give your family an extra feeling of togetherness.  

  When spring brings changes and stress to your child, you can show your child that the family is a secure and normal place.

Teacher Tech: One Reluctant Reader

      She entered class ready to fight.  Jennifer informed me straightaway that she hated me, my school and my class.  At recess she was seldom out of trouble for hitting, name calling or both.  She refused to do any of the activities the other students performed, pronouncing each undertaking “for babies”.  After two weeks of this I was able to find a quiet table in the library with just her and me.  It was there, her chin quivering and her chest heaving with emotion, that she told me she couldn’t read and she knew she was stupid.

            I had to teach her to read.

            My approach with Jennifer had four components: 

            •Using her own words, I would write them on strips and have her read them back.  We collected these in a log that she illustrated.

            •She participated in our class reading lessons pretending to read.  Sometimes I'd set her up with a memorized paragraph that I'd ask her to "read" to the class.

            •Reading an easy, but high-interest book with me, I gave her the support to read parts of it back to me and, eventually with peers.

            •Reading great children’s books from the easy book section of the library, she soon discovered a world that was safe and alluring.

            Although I saw steady changes in Jennifer’s reading skills, she still seemed defeated, angry and reluctant to try.  Every lesson was a struggle between us.  Frustrating my efforts was that she would not work with peers or other adults.  And like a steady rain, the behavior referrals continued to drown out the sounds of her progress.

            Why did she continue to resist my efforts to teach her?  Perhaps she did not see the progress so evident to me.  Soon, part of each lesson included recognizing her progress and learning how she should be expected to feel about it.  In essence, I had to force her to be successful, then compel her to notice it.  The result was like watching a tropical flower bloom in time lapse.

            Jennifer changed.  First I’d notice she was reading with another student.  Then, she’d read with my parent volunteer.  I’d see her read for pleasure during her free time.  She’d check out library books and bring them back the next day to exchange for more.  Her shiny nose was constantly in a book.  Her progress became less of a trickle and more like a roaring waterfall, breathtaking in its beauty and significance. 

            Like a tap shutting off abruptly, the behavior referrals stopped.  Jennifer was reading.  Jennifer liked to read, and she was proud of herself.  Her self-esteem was so high, she could learn other things as well, like how to play nicely with others.

            The rest of that school year was not without problems for Jennifer, but she had gained the key to future success.  She could read.

            I’ve been teaching for 35 years, and have received many kind notes from students and parents, but the one I treasure most is the lopsided note that Jennifer wrote thanking me for teaching her how to “read and be good”.  For Jennifer , reading was everything.

Family Connections: Why We Don't Ability Group

Message to Parents:

Why We Don’t Ability Group in Our Class

1.            It doesn’t work.  A huge body of research shows that it's actually harmful to many students.  We don't use the technique if it's proven to be ineffective.

2.            It has a negative effect on students’ self-esteem.  It can change a kid from thinking, “I think I can,” to “I know I can’t.”   Despite claims by teachers that students don’t know who’s in the low group — kids know. 

3.            It reduces a teacher’s ability to use thematic teaching.  Thematic teaching has proven to be an effective teaching tool, yet putting kids into different groups often fragments learning so there's no whole class vocabulary or shared experiences.  Instead of a class, there's just a bunch of people in the same room.

4.            Between-class grouping results in lost instructional time.  All that transition time is not instructional time.   In addition, there is less accountability when students have different teachers for different subjects.  The younger a student is, the more harm this practice causes.  Locking three or four teachers into a schedule reduces flexibility and a teacher’s ability to take advantage of serendipitous moments.

5.            Within class grouping has flaws that render it marginally useful.   When students are grouped within a class, the students not meeting with the teacher often do low-value “busy work” in workbooks.  Teachers then must spend precious instructional time teaching students how to do these activities instead of teaching reading. In addition, when a teacher is stuck behind a table with a group, it’s more difficult to monitor the other students.  Whole-class teaching has more kids on task for more time.

6.            The practice results in low kids reading fewer words each day and focusing on skills they may or may not be developmentally ready to learn.  Midlevel students have the class spark plugs removed when the highest students are sent to, what is typically, the most experienced teacher.  To cap it all, the bulk of studies show that high students do not benefit from ability grouping.

7.            Ability grouping causes more parental concerns.  As soon as a child receives a “low book” and is told she is in the bluebirds, that parent is rightly concerned about the social stigma.

8.            Often ability grouping places students of similar economic backgrounds in the same group.  This can rightly be viewed as discrimination. 

9.            It’s not fun.  It’s work.  In a whole class lesson, a teacher can build joy, excitement and enchantment into lessons involving good literature.  The writing lessons can be connected to the reading of fantastic stories, poems and plays.  No matter how skillfully it’s done, grouping kids removes the heady feeling of joy and belonging a whole class lesson can achieve.

10.            Ability grouping prevents or limits a teacher’s capability to run long, complex language arts lessons that involve speaking, writing, singing, acting, researching and plain reading.  Everything must be done in a week.

Teacher Tech: Class Demonstration, Why don’t they work?

You’ve asked a student to do a problem on the board, you’ve asked a group to perform a task in front of the class, or had a pair of students do an experiment for the class.  Why do things fall apart at that point?

As soon as a student begins to write on the board, other students lose their focus and disengage from the lesson.  An effective teacher can’t allow unengaged students.

I observed a veteran teacher, Carl, solve this problem by doing three things.

1.              Carl made sure that all students could see the demonstration.  If a student is visually cut off from the show, there’s no more reason to pay attention to the lesson.   I watched Carl praise a student who moved to the front of the room and sat on the floor in order to see what was going on.  In his class, it’s a student’s duty to see what’s happening.

2.              Prior to starting the demonstration, he made all students predict what was going to happen.  His students had access to scrap paper, and he made each one quickly jot down what they thought the results would be.  Carl then had students share their prediction with a partner and allowed them to change their predictions after the sharing.  By the time the demonstration began, all students were curious to see what would really happen.

3.              Just before the demonstration was to begin, Carl told his students that he wanted them to watch the demo carefully to see if their predictions were right.  This was key; he gave all students a job to do, not just the students involved in the demo.

Probably of these three steps, the most important was step number 3: giving everyone in the class something to do when a student approaches the board.  Next time you have a student come to the front to attempt solving a problem, or some other demo, think about Carl’s technique.   

Policy: Merit Pay

In 2007, New York City mayor Michael Bloomberg decided to put $75 million dollars into a program that was designed to incentivize teachers to work harder. He expected dramatic results.  What he got was nothing, according to a study by Harvard economist Roland Fryer.

Fryer’s study showed a slight decline in performance for schools that participated in the merit pay program.

These results add to a growing body of research showing merit pay as an ineffective method for improving schools.   Despite these findings, the federal government is eager to hand out Race to the Top (RTTT) federal education dollars to states which include a merit pay component. 

States receiving RTTT funds promise to link teacher pay with standardized test results.  This means, in order for a teacher to get the highest pay, he or she must produce students who score high on the reading/math standardized tests.  It seems that merit pay will incentivize teachers to skip teaching history, civics, science and the arts in order to cover more important topics like test-taking skills.

 

Individual states are jumping on the merit pay bandwagon.  Indiana and Florida have passed legislation mandating the practice, and Mississippi is rapidly moving that direction.  Despite ending the unsuccessful merit pay experiment that Fryor evaluated in 2011, Mayor Michael Bloomberg gave the practice a big endorsement at last month’s US Council of Mayors meeting.

It’s puzzling why Bloomberg and other politicians don’t address poverty other true causes of low-performing students, instead of thinking that thousands of lazy teachers just need to work harder.

Teaching Tech: Winning Power Struggles

If you are in a power struggle with a student and lose, it weakens your position for future confrontations with that student.  If you win the struggle, the student may feel humiliated and/or resentful — which can weaken your position for future confrontations with that student.  Truly, the only way to win is to stay out of it. 

Some students easily engage their parents and other family members in arguments.  They often don’t argue to win; it is a form of recreation for them.  When they arrive at school, they can be amazingly skillful and eager to see what happens when they try out the grownups in their classrooms.

Here’s how a conversation might go down with an expert student arguer:

The Wrong Way

Teacher:  Time to clean up.  Everyone put away your supplies.

Gerard: (Does not put away anything.)

Teacher: Hey Gerard.  I announced it’s time to clean up.

Gerard: You didn’t say anything.

Teacher: Just a few minutes ago, I told you to clean up.

Gerard: No you didn’t.

Teacher: I did too.   If you don’t clean up, you are going to get a behavior slip.

Analysis of teacher behavior:

If the teacher has an established signal for clean up, a triple hand clap for example, the student can't very well claim he didn't hear it.

This signal works best when established prior to the start of the lesson and used throughout the school year.  If you know Gerard needs to test adults, prior to the signal you can ask him, “What are you going to do when you hear the signal?”

The teacher also lost points by repeating the directions.  It would be better to ask Gerard a question like, “What are you supposed to be doing?” or "Gerard, why are all your classmates cleaning up?"

The biggest mistake the teacher made here was responding to Gerard's assertion that he "didn't say anything".  As soon as the teacher responds to his misstatement, Gerard has won.  The teacher should have said something like, “Maybe I didn’t say anything, but you still need to clean up.”  Teachers should never argue with a student.  

The second biggest mistake was when the teacher boxed herself into a corner where she must give a punishment to Gerard.  Gerard has his honor to uphold and probably views himself as a person who should be punished.  Several other students are watching this exchange, so Gerard can't back down without social consequences.  No matter what happens, both the teacher and Gerard lose.

A Better Way

Teacher:  (Does echo clap.)  Who can tell me what that means? (Waits for nearly all hands to be raised.)  Suzie?

Suzie: It means clean up.

Teacher: That’s right!  Show me how we do clean up.

Gerard: (Does not clean up.)

Teacher: (Stands silently near Gerard and does not look at him.)

Gerard: (Still does not clean up.)

Teacher: (Apparently noticing Gerard for the first time.) Gerard? (sounding a bit surprised.) Hey sport.  What are you supposed to be doing?

Gerard: I don’t know.

Teacher: I’d find out if I were you, and get started.  (Teacher turns her back on Gerard and appears to pay attention to some students who are following directions.

Analysis of Teacher Behavior II

Wait time - it’s when a teacher pauses the entire class to compel students to notice that they are expected to respond.  Wait time is rarely used by rookie teachers.  By calling on a student to give directions, students who pay attention get a social reward: a correct oral answer in front of her peers.

Students are hard-wired to show off to the adults in their lives.  When the teacher says, show me, students can not help but try to follow directions.

When Gerard does not comply, the teacher first uses a non-verbal, proximity reminder to get Gerard's attention.  Non-verbal cues allow Gerard to comply without losing face with his peers.  The teacher could have put her finger on his desk or silently pointed to his mess.

The teacher feigned surprise that Gerard wasn't cleaning up to give him the impression that she has high expectations for him.  She is saying, You are the kind of person who likes to clean up promptly.  Students most often try to live up to teacher expectations.

This teacher knows Gerard has behavior problems and has approached him at times when no conflict issues are present.  They've discussed basketball and the teacher calls him Sport to remind Gerard that they share the basketball connection.  It's also a sign of affection that Gerard tolerates well.

The teacher does not tell Gerard what to do, but instead asks a question.  This is another management technique that few rookies do well: never repeat directions, instead ask questions.  Questions compel the student to think, not just react.

If you look at the last teacher behavior, she has not put Gerard in a spot where he loses face with his peers if he complies with her.  Turning her back on Gerard  was actually a brilliant move that gives him a bit of time to think and start his clean-up without appearing to lose a battle.

If Gerard still didn’t clean up, an effective teacher would give him some choices instead of boxing both the student and the teacher into a place neither want to be.  A conversation might go something like this:

Teacher: Well Gerard, it looks like you’ve decided to delay your clean up.  You have a choice between starting your clean up right now or coming in during break time to do it.  Now make a good choice. (Then the teacher would turn her back on Gerard and engage another student as if she fully expected Gerard to start his clean up.)

In truth, Gerard has dozens of choices, but the teacher has limited it to two.  One of these is much easier on both parties.  By telling Gerard he gets to choose, he still has a feeling of power.  If he makes the bad choice, the teacher can discuss with him that he lost his free time due to his own choices, not due to the “teacher being mean”.