Friends,
I invite you to read the article: Don't Blame the Teachers as the author discusses current theories as they relate to educational reform. Ed Hirsch challenges the idea that, "Teacher quality affects student learning more than any other school-based variable (issues such as income and parental education levels are external)." He goes on to share research from Russ Whitehurst that seems to support the idea that the curriculum used in an educational environment can lead to better student outcomes - from slightly to more dramatically effective than the a teacher.
What are your thoughts? How do you select curriculum for your program? Do you feel student outcomes is more reliant on the teacher or the curriculum?
I'd love to hear your thoughts.
Sincerely,
Kathy Tracey
Comments
Kathy, I'll jump in here to get us started sharing my views on the topic that has long been discussed. I won't argue with many of the points raised by Hirsch. However, it is unwise to blame or not to blame any one variable for any student's failure. In an ideal environment, especially among our adult ed student, I strongly believe that "Teacher quality affects student learning more than any other school-based variable." Why? Our adults rely immensely on trusting their instructors. Community is a critical element to most, and the teacher is at the center of that. So many of our adults simply won't even give instruction a try if they don't connect to instructors. There are exceptions, of course. Some students do come to us with good logical and linguistic communication skills. They may very well do just fine learning from content, test taking, online resources, and independent studies. They are the exceptions!
In public schools, of course, many very good teachers simply are not given time and support to strut their stuff. They are buried in testing, reports, and grading pressures that leave them exhausted! If they choose to have a life away from school at all, many must accept the role of reporter and tester! Maybe instead of blaming a "Who," we should blame a "What" or "Whats." What would that be? I have some ideas... (So here's a thought. If teachers in general were paid four to ten times what they now earn, would instruction improve? Would more students succeed? Would strong competition for teaching positions provide incentives for better results? Hmmmmm...)
All to say that the role played by teachers and the influence that have on learners varies a great deal, depending on the environment and types of students targeted. What do others think? Leecy
Hi Kathy, Leecy and all, The consensus from research in recent years is that the teacher is the most important factor in learners' achievement. In the article Kathy cites, Hirsch questions these findings. I'd like to suggest that the quality of the teacher or of the curriculum-- as essential as both of these factors are-- may not be the most critical factor. Recently I've been thinking instead about equality of educational opportunity as the key.
There are two sources that have influenced my thinking. One is the outstanding performance of students in Finland. Ana Partanen's 2011 article in The Atlantic, "What Americans Keep Ignoring about Finland's School Success" has given me pause. When Finland's Education Secretary, Pasi Sahlberg, visited the US, he emphasized that equality of the Finnish education system is at the heart of its success. Partanen writes, "Since the 1980s, the main driver of Finnish education policy has been the idea that every child should have exactly the same opportunity to learn, regardless of family background, income, or geographic location. Education has been seen first and foremost not as a way to produce star performers, but as an instrument to even out social inequality." Of course, we also know that Finland's teachers must have master's degrees, and they are paid similar to other professionals with the same level of education. It's also interesting to note that the tiny number of private schools in Finland are all supported with public dollars.
The work of journalist Nikole Hannah-Jones has also affected the way I think about the important question raised in this thread. Hannah-Jones has made the case in recent articles and interviews that the lack of equality of opportunity in our public education system is the real problem. She makes a compelling case that the US has never actually integrated its public schools and that schools are more segregated today than they were at the height of desegregation in the 1960s and 1970s. According to Hanna-Jones, none of the strategies educators have tried to lower the so-called "achievement gap" has been effective, and yet we continue implementing similar policies over and over in the hope of achieving different results. On the other hand, there is hard data collected during the past surge of integration that showed that integrating the public schools had a dramatic impact on students' achievement. She wonders aloud why we no longer discuss integration.
In my view, Hannah-Jones' work is incredibly important. Here is a link to a thought-provoking NPR Fresh Air interview from January 2017 with Nikole Hannah-Jones, How the Systematic Segregation of Schools is Maintained by 'Individual Choices'" from January 2017. She also recorded a powerful episode of This American Life in July 2015, "The Problem We All Live With."
From learning about Finland's success and the state of segregation in US public schools, I have to say I'm wondering if we haven't been asking the wrong questions about the most important factors in learners' achievement.
I deeply appreciate your raising the issue, Kathy, and I'm looking forward to hearing members' thoughts.
Cheers, Susan Finn Miller
Moderator, Teaching & Learning
I firmly believe that teachers need to have access to high quality curriculum that provides students with the tools necessary to reach their potential. My purpose is to challenge the idea that student success is based solely on the shoulders of the teachers. Yes, teachers need to be prepared, skilled, and professional in their craft. Yes, curriculum needs to be meaningful. Yet that question fails to address the many challenges our students face outside of the classroom. Thank you for circling the discussion around to equity.
Kathy
Kathy et al, I appreciate the different views and resources shared here to date. It seems that we are addressing the Pre-K-12 scenario more than adult education issues. Am I correct? In my view, the two share some variables, but the critical issues relating to quality instruction in each are different. Or not? Leecy
Hi Leecy and all, Thanks for raising the question about how the PreK-12 world and the world of adult literacy education are different. I'm sure we would all agree that they are different in important ways.
I am not sure that the question about which is more important, the role of the teacher or the curriculum is much different, though. What do others think? It seems to me that both are so essential and are so intertwined, I have no idea how one would actually prove that one is more important than the other. If anyone has read the studies that Hirsch cites, it would be interesting to learn about the design of such studies.
I do think that blaming teachers for the problems in PreK-12 education is grossly misplaced. There is a lot to say on this topic. Have you heard that teachers are posting their resignation letters online? Tim Walker on the blog NEA Today has written about the "upside" of their doing so.
Cheers, Susan Finn Miller
Moderator, Teaching & Learning
The Leecy. I agree with the question you raised. Adult education has been caught in this trap of always looking at Pre K-12 model.( Strawman question as Arthur mentioned) Yes there are some things that are common, but there are major differences; some include the teaching structure and the nature of our student population, and the institutional context. The teachers in Pre K-12 are generally all certified and paid substantially more than adult education teachers. They are exposed to greater training and they operate within a narrow curriculum. Are we really aware of the per capita differences in funding for one child versus an adult student? PreK -12 students are mandated with none of the significant adult responsibilities and associated challenges ( earning a livelihood, taking care of parents, children and others, etc. Much of adult education is affected by the nature of the student population ( as someone mentioned before. The institutional structures are also so different - CBOs, Schools, Colleges.. There is tremendous variation in quality of instruction , curricula, resources, and contact hours.
Perhaps that was the reason that Thomas Sticht used to postulate the need for an adult education system (AELS) of organization to address adult education matters specifically.
So we need to be careful about the extent to which we take findings in Pre K-12 and apply them to adult education field of practice.
Winston
Hi Winston and all, Thanks, Winston, for articulating so well some of the myriad ways adult literacy education and K12 differ. These are two quite different worlds. I totally agree that research in PreK-12 is not always relevant to our work in adult literacy. I also think that sometimes that research does offer insights into our work.
The question of which is more important --the teacher or the curriculum-- is an interesting one to ponder. As Kathy notes, Hirsch discusses the quality of instructional resources as a critical factor. What do members think about the importance and the availability of high quality instructional resources in our field? How central are instructional resources to the work we do?
Cheers, Susan Finn Miller
Moderator, Teaching & Learning
Certainly, the article was talking about the traditional Pre-K-12 experience, but the idea of teacher quality and curricula is also relevant in adult education. (And we could even venture beyond this thread to discuss equity in curricula choices.) Adults need to have access to quality curricula that meets their needs. Without this relevance, we run the risk of adults dropping out of our programs. Yet, even with quality curricula, we need teachers who are skilled and have content knowledge. The original point of the article was even exceptional teachers struggle with teaching content specific lessons when they lack quality resources. Conversely, teachers who may lack content knowledge but have quality resources can still provide students with the resources needed to achieve their goals.
I'd really love to hear what our teachers have to say. :-)
Kathy
Kathy and All, and let us not take the student out of the picture. The best curriculum and the best teachers cannot overcome the student's decision to succeed or not. I would love to see that element included in what it takes for people to meet their academic goals.
There is a lot of good reading available (Wlodkowski and Ginsberg come to mind) supporting the fact that no one motivates another to learn although there are best strategies to invite students to motivate themselves. A student says, "I have to enroll!" Not! You want to enroll in order to avoid ..... (jail, expulsion from home, etc.) :) Leecy
I agree with this comment. As an Adult Educator and manager, the barriers the student faces in their daily lives is much more impactful to the quality of education than teacher skill or knowledge. This specifically raises the challenge that each student is a unique individual and has a unique set of skill, challenges, gifts, interests and home life. How can we fairly ask one teacher in a classroom to both create unique material and interact in a unique way? How then can we judge a teacher based on how successful a student is? Seems like we ARE asking the wrong questions!