I was interested in Darling-Hammond’s references to
high-quality preschool for low-income students and the connection to student achievement. I
recently read (skimmed, actually) a study of Head Start’s effectiveness
spearheaded by the Department of Health and Human Services (a pretty rigorous
study) that followed 5,000 3-4 year olds from low-income families through third
grade. They looked at three domains (social/emotional health, cognitive
development, parenting skills, and one other, can’t remember) and found that
essentially there was no lasting benefit of the services provided by Head
Start. Any benefits or gains those students made in gaining a “head start”
faded by the time they got to third grade. This study interested me mostly
because the Head Start program in our district is essential for some of our
students to come to school with skills like letter recognition, counting, and
using scissors. Our kindergarten teachers work closely with the Head Start
teachers, collaborating and sharing ideas that help our students achieve at high
levels when they get to school. What this study may confirm is what
Darling-Hammond has already concluded, and that is that teacher quality
matters. I’d like to know what the teacher selection process is at Head Start
and what their qualifications are.
Another subject that interested me was the idea of states
directing their funding to give higher salaries to good teachers in high-needs
districts. The point made was that equally qualified teachers will not be
tempted to teach in a high-needs district while getting paid the same to work
in a more affluent school. Paying teachers more to work in low-income district
would even the score, if you will, in getting and keeping great teachers. There
have been several occasions when I’ve been asked where I teach that I receive a
response of shock and horror. What they’re really thinking is, Oh, the poor
thing must not have been able to get a job anywhere else. Yes, it’s a great
deal harder to work in a lower socioeconomic community, but I do it because I
love the students, the parents, and the community. I work fifty hour weeks
(like a lot of other teachers, I know) so that I’m prepared with best practice
lesson plans to help my students achieve. Now, we’ve had some teachers land in
our district that did not have the skills or background knowledge to teach our
students effectively. Could we attract more highly effective teachers to our
district if we paid them more? Absolutely. Another reason I work in the
district I do is that I receive excellent support from a knowledgeable
principal that leads with integrity. Successful teachers in our district have
the same vision for student success and our administration supports us.
Teacher quality is HUGE. Getting the support we need is imperative to student success in our districts and our nation.
Skilled teachers are definitely required in the high-need communities if a difference is going to be made for the students. We also have to have highly skilled principals who can help focus the educational vision of the building and do whatever it takes to help support the teachers who are directly working with the students. Early intervention is huge for students living in poverty and other at-risk situations. Consistent, reliable, quality teaching staff makes a huge difference. Everyone wants to say early intervention makes a difference, but then not supporting or funding it in a way that fosters high standards in a consistent fashion. Our two local HeadStart agencies are constantly battling midyear staffing turnover. It impacts students when the routines and people get changed too often. One of the biggest game changers for young students from poverty is vocabulary and language development. When they learn the structure of language and how to express their ideas effectively...learning can happen at a much deeper level.
ReplyDelete