|
|
|
|
author:
|
Nancy Love
|
description:
|
We present an excerpt from Nancy Love's upcoming book "Using Data - Getting Results: Collaborative Inquiry for School-Based Mathematics and Science Reform" This book presents school-based teams with a straightforward approach to using data as a tool for improving mathematics and science education. The section we have chosen, "Beliefs that Block Equity" is from the chapter "Overcoming Obstacles to Equity."
|
published in:
|
from "Using Data - Getting Results: Collaborative Inquiry for School-Based Mathematics and Science Reform"
|
published:
|
2000
|
posted to site:
|
08/18/2000
|
|
Beliefs That Block Equity
|
"The biggest obstacle to equity
is that we keep trying to avoid seeing children. We want to resort
to some way of sorting and classifying. We are instistant in making
truer their deficiencies than their capacities."
(Patricia Carini, former Director, Prospect Archive and Center for
Education and Research, North Bennington, Vermont) |
Why, despite overwhelming evidence that tracking does
not work, does it prevail? Why do gaps in mathematics and science
achievement between rich and poor, minority and white, persist
despite decades of reform? Why do practices like cooperative
learning fail to catch on widely despite their well-documented
success for all students?
The answer to these questions lies in deep-seated beliefs that
perpetuate unequal opportunities and outcomes-beliefs that are
incompatible with success for all. This section examines three sets
of beliefs that are pervasive in our society and our schools, so
pervasive that, like the air we breathe, we may not even be aware
of them. They are not the beliefs we espouse or put in our mission
statements. But, intentional or not, they shape the way we treat
children. These include beliefs about the nature of intelligence
and the purpose of schools, the abilities of poor, minority, and
female students, and the nature of mathematics and science.
"There Are Only So Many 'Smarts' to Go Around"
Jeff Howard, a social psychologist and founder of the Efficacy
Institute in Lexington, Massachusetts gets
right to the point: "Our approach to educating children is failing
because the attitudes that underlie it are wrong" (1991, 1). He
describes these attitudes as the "innate ability paradigm," which
is based on three simple (and false!) assumptions: |
"No matter what their
socioeconomic background, race, or gender, babies of similar ages
tend to perform similarly on the basic [cognitive]
test."
(Denson 1990, as cited in Hilliard 1991, 34) |
- There is a distribution of intelligence in the population
ranging from "very smart" to "sorta smart" to "kinda dumb"
(in kid terms).
- How much intelligence you have determines what you can
learn and what you can be in life.
- All this can be sorted out through standardized testing and
teacher observation (1991, 4).
One outgrowth of this paradigm is our educational system's
obsession with testing and labeling. Think of all the labels you
may hear in the course of a school day: ADD, LD, LEP, SPED, gifted,
at risk, Title I . . . Even before kindergarten, children are
subjected to testing that is specifically designed to shake out
differences, identify deficiencies, and compare one child to
another. Minor differences in performance, representing only a few
months' difference in cognitive development, can determine what
label a child may get tagged with for his or her entire school
career (Howard 1991, 5). |
"I have heard teachers say that
math is a good indicator of how successful students will be and
that some don't. Until we question that assusmption, nothing is
going to cahnge." (Joy Wallace, Equity Specialist, Columbia
Education Center, Portland Oregon) |
Anne Martin, a kindergarten teacher in Brookline, Massachusetts,
expressed her dismay and anger at the effect of testing on children
just entering school, many of whom are quickly identified as "at
risk" on highly dubious grounds:
These young children, often not yet five years old,
were being sorted out and categorized with little allowance for the
infinite variety of their learning styles and developmental
patterns . . .
. . . there is no way that twenty minutes of contact and a set of
test scores can adequately describe a child's potential to learn.
All children come to school as complex persons with their own
unique backgrounds and sets of experiences. For me the fascination
of each new school year is the gradual revelation of this
complexity . . . (1988, 489-90)
If all this sorting helped so-called "slow" learners catch up, that
would be one thing. But the opposite is true. Once a child is
labeled as slow, teachers, counselors, and administrators start
expecting less. Low expectations undermine confidence; lack of
confidence undercuts performance; and the downward spiral of
self-fulfilling prophecy begins. Any small gap in performance that
may have existed initially tends to grow over the years, despite
special services students may receive (Howard 1991). And, saddest
of all, the children themselves come to believe the labels.
"All Kids Can Learn Except . . .":
The Devastating Effects of Racism, Classism, and Sexism
"During a science lesson, a primary school
teacher asked students to brainstorm what they knew
about eggs as she held up a sample. Some students
offered characteristics such as 'oval,' 'white,' and 'gooey on the inside' and were praised for
their answers. A latina student offered an example
of a time she had cooked eggs with her grandmother.
Her answer ws ignored, considered irrelevant by the
teacher."
(Presenter, Institute on Cultural and Lingistic
Diversity, 1997)
|
"A fourth grade teacher stood in shock when
she learned that an African-American student who
was failing mathematics was single-handedly
managing the family budget. 'How could I have
overlooked her obvious strengths in mathematics?'
"
(Panelist, Institute on Cultural and Linguistic
Diversity, 1997)
|
|
"Prejudice is a preconcieved
judgement or opinion, usually based on limited
information."
(Tatum 1997, 5)
|
When the innate ability paradigm meets racism,
classism, and sexism, the results are devastating for poor,
minority, and female students; they are the ones most often judged
as less intelligent. These ideologies are more than individual
prejudices: they involve a whole system of cultural messages and
institutional policies and practices, such as tracking,
differential allocations of resources, and unequal access to jobs,
housing, and power (Tatum 1997, 7; Weissglass [1997], 102).
Eliminating individual prejudices is a necessary but not sufficient
condition for equity. These deeply ingrained institutional
practices and power relationships have also got to go.
One of the most pernicious forms of institutional racism, classism,
and sexism is the way in which children are sorted in schools by
their supposed "intelligence." Society's image of the "very smart"
student is one with white, middle-class behaviors and values. If
students don't fit that image, if they are culturally different,
they are judged to be less intelligent. "There is a rumor of
inferiority that follows minority children to school," says Jeff
Howard (1991, 6-7). Students who have not yet mastered English are
also judged less capable, especially when it comes to mathematics
and science. Girls are considered to be not as smart as boys in
these subjects, and the poor are judged to be inferior by almost
any measure to the rich.
"Children from middle class homes tend to do better in school than
those from non-middle class homes because the culture of school is
based on the culture of the upper and middle classes of those in
power," explains Lisa Delpit (1995, 25). For Delpit, the culture of
power consists of ways of talking, writing, dressing, and
interacting; success is based on learning the rules and codes of
the dominant society. She advocates explicitly teaching students
these rules and codes, acknowledging the power relationships that
exist, while encouraging students to express their own culture and
language style.
Cultural differences emerge in subtle ways in the classroom. For
instance, students from different cultures have different styles of
recounting events, writing, and arguing, all important activities
in mathematics and science classrooms. Without understanding these
differences, teachers may judge certain students as having nothing
to contribute, missing important steps in a procedure, or being
disorganized (Estrin 1993).
|
"...racism [is] a 'symptom of
advantage based on race'."
(Wellman 1977, as cited in Tatum 1997, 7)
|
Take the example of the Latina in the vignette above.
When asked what she knew about eggs, she offered a story about
making eggs with her grandmother. In Latino culture, social
relationships are an important way that children experience and
understand their world (Sinha and Tripahti 1994). She was, as the
teacher invited, connecting the egg to her prior knowledge and
experience. The teacher, however, was looking for more objective
descriptions of the egg-oval, white, has a shell-but never
specified that that was what she expected. She was operating out of
the dominant culture's assumptions without teaching culturally
different children what the rules were. The result was to discount
the child's response and teach her that her contributions have no
value in that classroom.
The second example, about the fourth-grader who managed the family
budget, illustrates another way racism blinds us to students'
strengths. Many poor and minority students are successfully running
households and businesses at very young ages. Outside school, they
use mathematics, verbal, reasoning, and management skills on a
daily basis. They are, as Connecticut equity activist Mj Terry
remarked ironically, "only dumb in school."
Mathematics and Science:
The Special Realm of the "Very Smart"
"'What do you think you are not smart enough
to do?' Jeff Howard asked a group of Efficincy
Workshop participants seated around a giant
conference table. An uncomfortable silence took
over the room as participants realized that they
themselves, a group of adult educators, had been
victims of the innate ability paradigm. Some wept,
others spoke with anger as they recalled vividly
when and where it was - Mrs. Kraner's fourth grade,
geometry class, the guidance counselor's office -
that they learned they were not smart enough. For
virtually every African American and female
participant, the answer was higher-level
mathematics or science."
(Participant, Efficiency Institute Workshop,
1986)
|
A third set of beliefs comes into play specifically in relation to
mathematics and science: that these subjects are the special realm
of the "very smart." This is based on a view of science as a set of
authoritative facts accessible only to experts. Those who do well
in science tend to be students who can "talk. . . like science
books do" (Lemke 1990, as cited in Warren and Rosebery 1993, 3). A
similar view of mathematics is that it too is a static body of
knowledge. If mathematics is viewed as memorizing formulas and
giving quick responses to lots of questions that have right
answers, then students who do that well are considered to be good
at mathematics (Weissglass, interview, 1997).
These views of mathematics and science contrast sharply with those
put forward in the national standards. The standards advocate for
mathematics and science as dynamic pursuits involving asking
questions that may never be answered, making meaning, solving
problems, discussing ideas with peers, and using common sense. This
view is potentially more inclusive of diverse students (if other
barriers to equity are addressed), as the vignette below
illustrates.
"I was working with a child who had
difficulty with computation. That was disturbing to
him and his family. Then we started to notice some
things. In almost any kind of discussion, he would
be a person who would state a point of view and
then argue it from another angle and subvert his
own statement. We looked at his writing. He wrote
about knights and warriors' adventures. In one
story, he wrote about how many heartbeats it took
them to get to the cave. That reminded us that he
was a good estimator. We began to put things
together about this child. He didn't trust
absolutes. He saw a more complicated picture-much
more mathematical than numerical. He saw
complicated relations and patterns, so we thought
it better to start from geometry, patterns,
approximation and not keep beating away at
computation. It is so important that we have a
larger picture of what math and science are. The
bigger the picture, the more children we can
include." (Patricia Carini, former Director,
Prospect Archive and Center for Education and
Research, North Bennington, Vermont)
|
Right now our picture of mathematics and science, of schools, and
of human potential is still too small to include all children. The
belief systems described above-the innate ability paradigm; racism,
classism, and sexism; and elitist views of mathematics-continue to
have a strong hold on our schools, our policies, and our practices.
Making schools work for all children will require honest
examination of these belief systems and a concerted effort to
eradicate them in all of their manifestations.
Examining Belief Systems
Examining belief systems takes courage and conviction. It is a true
measure of our "will to educate all children," for it is only by
breaking the silence about racism, classism, and sexism that we can
begin to break their grip on our society and our schools. Because
beliefs are intangible, examining them is much more complex than
collecting and analyzing student learning data, although it may
begin there. How can teams begin to gain a better understanding of
these powerful, yet elusive, belief systems and how they influence
what we do? In this section we offer four questions to guide your
inquiry into beliefs, with suggested approaches and relevant
resources for each.
How Do Racial, Class, Cultural, and Gender Bias Manifest in
School and Classroom Practices?
Although beliefs themselves are invisible, they nonetheless
manifest in what we do and say. One window into beliefs is the more
objective forms of data collection about student performance and
school policies and practices discussed above. For example, gaps in
student performance and opportunities to learn signal the
prevalence of certain assumptions about students and their
potential. As you look at practices such as tracking or course
enrollment and counseling procedures, you can also ask yourself
what beliefs drive these practices. As you evaluate special
education or English language learners programs, consider the
deeper assumptions that underlie them. Classroom practice offers
another window into belief systems. Later in this chapter we
discuss how to monitor unequal expectations and treatment in the
classroom and how to scrutinize curriculum, instruction, and
assessment practices for overt and subtle biases-two other avenues
for exploring belief systems in practice.
|
". . . To really examine my class and
how I deal with the students and other people, it changes you. I
think that there's a lot of lip service. . . To really be conscious
of equity and effectively deal with equity in the classroom, you
have to open yourself up and look at yourself."
(European-American teacher, as cited in Weissglass [1997],
122)
|
How Can Individuals Come to Grips with Prejudice
and Its Effect on Their Lives?
Another whole avenue of investigation into beliefs is far more
subjective and personal. It involves looking at our own beliefs and
experiences and how prejudice and discrimination have affected us.
"Although we may feel afraid," says Julian Weissglass, Director of
the Equity in Mathematics Education Leadership Institute (EMELI),
"avoiding the issues through denial or intellectualization will be
harmful in the long run" (Weissglass [1997], 122).
Weissglass believes that addressing prejudice and discrimination
can be productive if it focuses on people telling their personal
stories, listening intently to each other, and avoiding blaming,
criticizing, and analyzing. In his work with mathematics educators,
he uses such structures as dyads ("the exchange of constructivist
listening between two people" [p. 45]), support groups, and
personal experience panels to facilitate constructive and deep
dialogue about equity issues. Guidelines for structuring this
dialogue are summarized in the box to the left.
Principles for Dialogue about Prejudice
and Discrimination
|
- Only one form of discrimination is
addressed at a time.
- Everyone in the group is listened to
attentively about their own experiences,
beliefs, thoughts, and feelings.
- Participants have the opportunity to
reflect deeply in dyads (pairs) on their
assumptions about equity.
- It is recognized that the origin of present
interpersonal difficulties is often in
early distress experiences, cultural and
racial biases, and societal
discrimination.
- Those who have not experienced a particular
form of discrimination listen respectfully
(without analysis or debate) to the
personal
|
experiences of people who have been
discriminated against.
Listeners get a chance (in dyads, support
groups, discussions) to talk about how they
found out about prejudice toward or
mistreatment of the group in question and
their own experiences at the time.
All participants have the opportunity to
talk about their common mistreatment as
learners and as children.
Participants have the opportunity to talk
or write about what they have learned and
their next steps (or goals) in working for
social justice in their personal lives,
classrooms, or schools (Weissglass [1997],
122).
|
Using these principles, you can engage in productive
conversations about questions such as those
below.
Exploring Prejudice and Discrimination:
Questions to Consider
|
What personal experiences have helped you
understand your own prejudices? What has helped you
understand better how inequity and discrimination
affect education?
- What productive educational experiences
that address prejudice and discrimination
have you participated in? What has been
ineffective?
- What support do teachers, parents,
administrators have in your school district
to address equity issues? What else is
needed?
- From your experience, what do people have
trouble listening to concerning prejudice
and discrimination? What do you think is
the source of their difficulty?
- What can you do to see that equity is
addressed productively in your school
community? Take some time to write down
some short-range and long-range goals for
yourself in this area.
- How did you first learn about the
mistreatment of someone different (racial,
gender, economic class, physical
difference) from yourself? Who was this
person? How did you feel? What were the
questions you wanted to ask? (Weissglass
[1997], 124)
|
Who Are Our Students? How Can We Better Understand
and Appreciate Their Cultural Backgrounds?
A third avenue for inquiry into belief systems is to
learn more about your students and their cultural backgrounds. If
you have not done this already, first collect and analyze straight
demographic data about your school's student population. (See
Data Tools, DT 3-2.) For many schools, like the one in the
first example at the beginning of this chapter, having a realistic
picture of who your students are can be a real eye-opener. Also
gather information about demographic trends in your area so you can
project what your student population might look like in the future.
Once you know your school's demographics, the next challenge is to
understand more about the culture of the children those numbers
represent. What are their traditions and languages? How does their
culture shape the way they make sense of the world and experience
school? Inquiring into your students' cultures requires going much
deeper than learning about food or music or dress. It involves, as
Lisa Delpit puts it so eloquently,
|
"By culture, we mean
traditions, language, and daily experiences of the home
and community." (Williams and Newcombe 1994, 76)
|
. . . seeking out those whose perspectives
may differ most, by learning to give their words complete
attention, by understanding one's own power, even if that power
stems merely from being in the majority, by being unafraid to raise
questions about discrimination and voicelessness with people of
color, and to listen, no, to hear what they say. (1995,
47)
By carefully listening to and observing students in a
nonjudgmental way, teachers can learn a great deal about their
students' cultural backgrounds, what knowledge and experience they
bring to school, and how they learn best (see information about
Descriptive Processes, page 5.37). Ewa Pytowska, Assistant
Superintendent of Schools in Central Falls, Rhode Island, where 70
percent of students speak Spanish, uses children's literature from
students' own cultures as a way to give voice to children and
promote teachers' understanding:
Resources for Learning about Students'
Cultures |
Connecting Cultures: A Guide to
Multicultural Literature for Children, by
Rebecca L. Thomas, 1996
Connections Across Cultures: Inviting
Multiple Perspectives into Classrooms of
Science, Technology, Math, and Engineering,
by the Connections Across Cultures Project,
1997
Multicultural Literature for Children and Young
Adults: Volume 2, 1991-1996, by Ginny Moore
Kruse, Kathleen T. Horning, and Megan
Schliesman, 1997
Multicultural Teaching: A Handbook of
Activities, Information, and Resources, by
Pamela L. Tiedt and Iris M. Tiedt, 1995
|
Multicultural literature can turn teachers'
negative perceptions of children into positive appreciation of
their language, culture, and learning capacities. When I read
children books which are familiar to them and congruent with their
sense of the world, they know exactly what questions to ask, what
to pay attention to, and what statements to make about the stories.
This is true of all children, but especially those with limited
formal schooling, just learning English, or placed in special
education. When teachers see this happening with a child they
perceive as a problem, they immediately begin to question
themselves. Instead of saying "What is wrong with this child?" they
ask "What's wrong with my teaching?" Multicultural literature helps
teachers to see how much their children already know, but cannot
share in a standard American classroom. (Interview,
1999)
Other ways to deepen your understanding of your students' cultures
are to talk to parents, visit their communities, and read about
their cultures. You can also survey or interview students and
parents to learn more about how they perceive themselves, their
children's future, and their school (see "Listening to Student
Voices: Measuring Aspirations" in Chapter 3). Taking the time to
investigate your students' cultures can help bridge the gap between
teachers and their increasingly diverse students.
How Can We Learn to Recognize Students'
Strengths?
A group of seven teachers from the Lawrence
School in Brookline, Massachusetts, squeezes around
a child-size table in a primary school classroom
after school one afternoon to do something they
have been doing on a monthly basis for years:
working together to better understand their
students' strengths. Today a kindergarten teacher
is presenting drawings done by Adam, a student
whose impulsive outbursts have been upsetting her
and the classroom. "These sessions give me hope,"
she explains. "I see things about the children I
never saw before. Then, instead of giving up on
them, I have an idea of how I can build on their
strengths." The meeting follows a set structure,
with a facilitator guiding participants through a
sequence of activities and carefully summarizing
after each. Most of the time is spent in a
go-round, where participants describe what they see
in Adam's drawings without judging, classifying, or
using clinical terms or labels-just their
impressions. "I'm struck by the fish." "I see a lot
of attention to what color is being used." Each
go-round probes a little deeper, revealing more
about the patterns, symmetry, use of color,
attention to detail, and variations in the child's
work.
|
A fourth area of inquiry, closely related to understanding
students' cultural backgrounds, is recognizing diverse students'
strengths. The teachers in the vignette above are using a method
called the "Prospect Center's Description of Work Process," one of
three Descriptive Processes developed by the Prospect School in
North Bennington, Vermont (see Data Tools, DT 2-6, and the
Prospect Archive and Center for Education and Research in
Resources, page 5.90). The Descriptive Processes provide a
structure for teachers to come together to discuss their
observations of students and their work in a descriptive rather
than a judgmental way. Structured group processes such as these can
help teachers discard cultural biases and discover students'
strengths.
Resources for Examining Belief
Systems |
"Building on the Strengths of Urban
Learners," by Belinda Williams and Ellen Newcombe,
Educational Leadership 51(8) (1994):
75-78
"Do We Have the Will to Educate All
Children?" by Asa Hilliard, Educational
Leadership 49(1) (1991): 31-36
Other People's Children: Cultural Conflict in
the Classroom, by Lisa Delpit, 1995
Ripples of Hope: Building Relationships for
Educational Change, by Julian Weissglass,
[1997] (see Equity in Mathematics Education
Leadership Institute in Resources, page 5.88)
The Efficacy Institute, Lexington, MA
Empowering Multicultural Initiatives (EMI),
Wayland, MA
Equity in Mathematics Education Leadership
Institute (EMELI), University of California, Santa
Barbara, CA
New England Desegregation Assistance Center for
Equity in Education (DAC), Providence, RI
The Prospect Archive and Center for Education and
Research, North Bennington, VT
|
Fully appreciating diverse students' strengths requires a shift
from the innate ability paradigm to a new set of assumptions about
learners and schools. Research for Better Schools in Philadelphia,
in their framework for working with urban students, offers some
guiding principles for building on the strengths of urban (and
other underserved) learners:
- Urban students bring to schools cultural strengths and
learning experiences that must be reflected in
curriculum, instruction, and school routines.
- Culture plays a fundamental role in cognitive
development. While many of us were taught that
intelligence is genetically determined, unitary, and
fixed at birth, psychologists now argue that
intelligence is modifiable, multifaceted, and mediated
by the cultural environment.
- Motivation and effort are as important to learning
as are innate abilities. Urban students will benefit
from school environments in which they can learn from
their mistakes, are effortful in their learning, and
fully engage themselves (Bernal 1992 and Stevenson and
Stigler 1992, as cited in Williams and Newcombe
1994).
- Resilience is a characteristic of urban learners.
Despite adverse conditions, many urban children grow
into healthy, responsible, productive adults. These
"resilient" children display characteristics of social
competence, autonomy, problem solving, and a sense of
the future (Williams and Newcombe 1994, 76).
Based on these assumptions, we offer the following questions to
guide your inquiry into diverse students' strengths:
Inquiring into Students' Strengths:
Questions to Consider
- What are the strengths of our diverse students? Do we
recognize their resilience, social competence, autonomy,
and problem-solving abilities?
- How do our curriculum, instruction, and school routine
reflect the strengths of diverse students?
- To what extent do we believe that intelligence is not fixed
at birth, but changeable based on the cultural environment?
How would our school practices change if we fully embraced
this belief?
- How do we encourage students to learn from mistakes and
connect effort to achievement?
- What structures, such as the Tuning Protocol or the
Descriptive Review Process (see Data Tools, DT 2-5
and DT 2-6), for collegial reflection can we use to support
us in discarding cultural biases and recognizing students'
strengths?
|
|
|