I’ve been speaking and writing a lot lately
about content versus intent. I believe we are at a period in education where we
know more about teaching and learning than ever before. I am always inspired by
what colleagues share and am learning so much from what they write. I really
think we have the knowledge base (the content) firmly in place or, at the very
least, readily available. I think our next step is to determine our intent. Do
we really want to engage in the practices and procedures, really want to implement
policies that will lead to success for all students? The common and preferred
response is yes, but lurking just beneath that are the “yeah-buts”. You all
know these and they are progress stoppers. They conclude the great dialogue as
they come just at the end of highly productive conversation. We’ve all agreed
to commit to our next first step and then it appears. Yeah, but…
In some recent working sessions, the focus
of the RTI conversations was around providing sufficient time for Tier 3
interventions. It was easy to agree that all students need to be proficient in
the foundational skills of literacy, numeracy, and self-regulatory behavior. In
fact, high school colleagues are often frustrated at the huge gaps that are
evident in their students who are reading significantly below grade level or
can’t do basic math. An end product of those gaps is negative behavior, often
borne out of frustration. Let’s be clear – this is not an easily resolved
issue. We aren’t able to create time and there are some constraining factors to
consider. However, it is doable as I’m working in a number of schools that have
made it happen. Conversations have led right to final piece of the puzzle
needing to be slotted in – the time question – and the yeah, but emerges something
like this. “Yeah, I agree the time
is really important and the students need those skills, but I’m not giving up my course time. ___________________________
(fill in the blank with your course) is just as important as those other ones.”
This conversation is really not about the
adults. It’s really not about valuing one course over another. It is about
students and their learning needs. In some recent writing Chris Weber and I sum
it up this way:
We believe it’s educational malpractice to NOT insist upon providing Tier 3 interventions in reading, numeracy, and behavior in place of important social studies, science, and elective opportunities WHEN significant deficits exist. The potential outcomes are clear:
We believe it’s educational malpractice to NOT insist upon providing Tier 3 interventions in reading, numeracy, and behavior in place of important social studies, science, and elective opportunities WHEN significant deficits exist. The potential outcomes are clear:
- Students will not finish high school
- Or they will not fully participate in the comprehensive high school experience
- Or they will not graduate ready for college or a skilled career
- And they will not lead a productive life
…if they do not possess foundational literacy,
numeracy, and behavior skills.
No comments:
Post a Comment