5
As a student, you may have enjoyed going to school with friends who lived in your neighborhood. But did you know that where you live also can impact how well-funded and well-resourced your school is? Because schools get much of their funding from property taxes, areas with more expensive houses have higher taxes, resulting in more school funding. While the United States believes education should be accessible to all, where you live can determine which resources will or will not be available to benefit your learning.
This chapter describes models of schools present in the United States today, including their funding, enrollment policies, and key characteristics. Different models of schools, varying configurations of classrooms and instructional models are presented and the variety of schools in the United States offers some families the option of school choice, including charter schools and vouchers.
Chapter Outline
Models of Schools
One central tenet of the U.S. education system is that all people in our country deserve access to education, regardless of the language you speak, how much money you make, where you live, or the color of your skin. Some other countries employ tracking, which means that certain individuals are channeled into certain educational “tracks” based on their perceived capabilities for future success. Tracking limits access to education for certain groups of people. In the United States, all children and youth have access to K-12 educational opportunities.
CRITICAL LENS BOX: TRACKING
While the U.S. does not “track” students in the ways some other countries do, we do still engage in some forms of tracking. For example, you may have heard of–or even experienced–ability grouping. This term refers to placing students in homogeneous groups by ability levels. In secondary school, tracking may result in college prep, honors, or AP-level courses. Historically, these different curricula were developed when more Black and working-class students were entering schools, and elite educational opportunities were reserved for upper-middle-class students, who were often White, wanting to attend college (Education Week, 2004). Therefore, tracking “quickly took on the appearance of internal segregation” (para. 2), which is a problem since racial discrimination in education is illegal. So, while U.S. educational systems do not force a student into a specific educational track for a specific career at an early age like some countries do, tracking by ability level is still a harmful practice in many U.S. schools. Teachers need to be aware of potential biases toward students in certain tracked groups (i.e., AP students are “good” and college prep students are “bad”).
The majority of schools in the United States fall into one of two categories: public or private. A public school is defined as any school that is maintained through public funds to educate children living in that community or district for free. The structure and governance of a public school varies by model, but shares the characteristics of being free and open to all applicants within a defined boundary. A private school is defined as a school that is privately funded and maintained by a private group or organization, not the government, usually by charging tuition. Private schools may follow a philosophy or viewpoint different from public schools; for example, many private schools are governed by religious institutions.
There are a variety of public school models, including traditional, charter, magnet, Montessori, virtual, alternative, and language immersion. Private school models include traditional, religious, parochial, Montessori, Waldorf, virtual, boarding, and international schools. Some school models may be public or private. Table 4.1 includes a breakdown of school models, their funding source, and key characteristics.
Table 5.1: School Models by Funding, Enrollment, and Key Characteristics
| School Model | Public or Private | Enrollment | Key Characteristics |
| Traditional Public | Public | Open/School Boundary Lines | State and local governance, policy and curriculum. |
| Magnet | Public | Open across school district/Application or lottery | Specializes in program (art, science, math, etc), promotes diversity across a district. |
| Alternative | Public | Students that cannot attend traditional school due to a variety of factors. | State and local governance, policy and curriculum. Small class sizes and alternative scheduling. Individualized support. |
| Language Immersion/ Bilingual | Both | Open across school district/Application | A portion of instruction is taught in a language other than English. Students are immersed in a second language for part of instruction. |
| Charter | Both | Open across school district/Application or lottery | Autonomous from local and state authority as long as the school meets charter mission and performance measures. |
| Montessori | Both | Open across school district/Application | Philosophy that children need connection to the environment. Focuses on real life experiences. |
| Waldorf | Private | Application/Tuition | Believes each child has unique potential that should be developed through education to better humanity as a whole. While not specifically religious, Waldorf schools are based on general spirituality. Focuses on imagination and fantasy. |
| Virtual | Both | Open across school district/Application | The majority of instruction is provided in an online environment. |
| Traditional Private | Private | Application/Tuition | Curriculum decided upon by the governing body (board, organization, or company). May be non-profit or for profit. |
| Religious | Private | Application/Tuition | Mission is to teach religious values in addition to teaching core curriculum. |
| Parochial | Private | Application/Tuition | Mission is to teach religious values in addition to teaching core curriculum. School is sponsored by a local church through funding. |
| Boarding | Private | Application/Tuition | Community of scholars, artists, and athletes. School provides food and housing. |
| International | Private | Application/Tuition | Follows a curriculum different from that of the country in which the school is physically located. May use International Baccalaureate curriculum, among others. Students consist of a diverse population that is often highly mobile. |
| Department of Defense Education Activity (DoDEA) | Public | Serves military and Department of Defense dependents serving overseas and in the U.S. U.S. contractor dependents may attend for a fee. | Follows a standard curriculum across schools. Makes up the 10th largest school district in the U.S. Consists of two parallel districts: Department of Defense Dependents Schools (DoDDS) operating in Europe and the Pacific and Department of Defense Domestic Dependent Elementary and Secondary Schools operating in the Americas. |
One type of school not listed in the table is homeschool. Homeschooling is a type of schooling that would not fall into either the public or private category. Homeschooling is defined as a child not enrolling in a public or private school, but receiving an education at home. Each state has its own rules and regulations that families must follow and report on if homeschooling. For example, the Virginia Department of Education (2021) requires that families inform the school division of their decision to homeschool their child, update the school district with the student’s annual academic progress, and provide evidence that the homeschool instructor (such as a parent) meets specific qualifications to fill the role. For information about homeschooling in Tennessee, follow this link: https://www.tn.gov/education/school-options/home-schooling-in-tn.html
Enrollment Policies
In addition to the schools being separated by their funding source, schools are defined by their process of enrollment. The majority of public schools operate on two basic enrollment guidelines: boundary or open. Districts with enrollment policies using school boundary lines allow all students within a geographic area to enroll in the school. If a school has an open enrollment policy, then the school will also allow students from other geographic areas within the district to enroll if space permits. School boundary lines are often highly politicized. Schools are publicly rated and this affects everything from property values to the quality of teachers recruited. Ratings may be based on data sources like the school report card, which may include data on teacher education levels, teacher retention, student demographics, student performance on standardized tests, and student and teacher attendance rates. However, ratings also can be culturally biased: one nonprofit rating site called GreatSchools ( https://www..org/ ) , which often is integrated into online realtor websites as families are choosing where to move, redid their rating formula in 2017 after it realized that their previous rating system prioritized schools in predominantly White neighborhoods (Barnum & LeMee, 2019).
Critical Lens: Redlining
Although the Supreme Court made segregated schools illegal in Brown v. Board of Education in 1954, you will see many schools today that continue to have student populations that are separated by race or socioeconomic status. This trend is due to a practice called redlining, in which housing was allowed or denied in certain areas based on people’s race or socioeconomic status. The impacts of redlining are ongoing de facto segregation, which means that while overt segregation was outlawed, it still continues in other ways.
Some public school models, including charter, magnet, and language immersion, may have more students desiring to apply than there is space. In these schools, applications or lotteries may be used. An application system allows the schools to choose students based on characteristics, such as grades, demographic diversity, or geographic area. Often these schools are looking for high-achieving students or have a mission of diversifying the school. A lottery system gives each student that has applied an equal chance of attending and is decided by randomly selecting names from the pool of students.
Key Characteristics
Schools also differ in several key characteristics beyond funding and enrollment. One key characteristic of schools is what individuals or entities provide supervision or oversight of the school’s functioning. A school’s ability to follow curriculum (how instruction is organized and managed) and policies (such as rules, expectations, and norms that school community members must follow) is directly tied to their funding.
For the majority of public schools (excluding charter schools), state and local entities supervise curriculum and policies. In private schools, boards, organizations, or companies often supervise curriculum and policies. In addition, a school’s curriculum is often defined by its mission or philosophy. Schools may differ in how curriculum is presented or in specialized programs. For example, language immersion schools present standardized curriculum in two languages, while magnet schools place an emphasis on a certain part of the curriculum like science or art. Religious schools may focus on presenting curriculum based on a religious viewpoint or values.
Season 2: Episode 6 – A Reckoning OPTIONAL (Link to Podcast)
Classroom/Instructional Models
Within each school a variety of classroom models may be utilized. Traditionally, schools have different grade levels with a different teacher for each grade. However, some schools may incorporate multi-age classrooms. Multi-age classrooms allow for students of different grades to be in one class. For example, students in second and third grade may be combined in one classroom. While this may seem difficult to manage, a traditional classroom model does not guarantee that all students with the same chronological age will be at the same developmental stage. Children develop at different rates and have different academic skill levels. Many multi-age classrooms recognize this and are able to provide both homogeneous and heterogeneous groupings in the classroom. When students are grouped homogeneously for small group lessons, a younger student may benefit from instruction at a higher level that they may not have had access to at their grade level. Heterogeneous grouping of students also provides peer modeling and support from more advanced students (Carter, 2005).
Many multi-age classrooms and traditional classroom models utilize co-teaching. Co-teaching is when teachers are paired up in a classroom and share the responsibility of planning, teaching, and assessing students. Having more than one teacher in a classroom provides additional support for students that need one-on-one instruction or additional supports. This is often seen in classrooms where special education or bilingual teachers are paired with a classroom teacher to make instruction for students with disabilities or English Language Learners more inclusive. Co-teaching also may elevate instruction by having two teachers plan together. The division of teaching responsibilities may present itself in a variety of ways, including the following: one teacher teaches and the other observes, one teaches and one drifts, teachers teach at stations, team teaching (both tag team at teaching same lesson), and parallel teaching (class is divided into two groups that receive the same instruction simultaneously) (Trites, 2017).
Sometimes an individual teacher may loop with their students. Looping occurs when a classroom teacher moves with a group of students from grade to grade. For example, a teacher may have a group of students for third grade, and then move with them to fourth grade. Early looping, or teacher cycling, has foundations in one-room schoolhouses. In the early 1900s, looping was also promoted in urban school districts as a way to improve relationships between students and teachers. Looping is also a key component of Waldorf schools. Looping may increase student-teacher relationships and family-teacher relationships, but it also may increase instructional time from year to year. When teachers loop with students, the classroom routines and structure remain the same, so valuable instructional time is not spent on teaching new routines and classroom structure. Teachers may also spend less time on initial assessment of students. Research has shown that when teachers loop, less retention and referral of students occurs (Grant, Richardson & Forsten, 2000). For looping to be successful, a teacher must feel comfortable teaching across grade levels and be seen as effective. If a teacher is ineffective, then students looping would be at a disadvantage. A teacher wanting to loop may also have difficulty doing so if it is not common in their school or district. Many teachers only teach one grade, but if a third-grade teacher loops to fourth grade, it means a fourth-grade teacher at the school must also be willing to leave that grade level.
Different classroom and teaching models vary from school to school and district to district. Multi-age classrooms, co-teaching, and looping may be implemented by choice, or as a way to consolidate or expand resources. For example, multi-age classrooms may help schools save space when classroom space is limited within the physical school. These practices may also help students when academic or developmental needs are highly diverse. If a school has a large percentage of children that are academically diverse, then dividing them by chronological age may not be appropriate. These decisions are often made at the school level by the principal.
With so many school models available in the U.S., how do families choose which type of school their child should attend? School choice is a complex issue for families to navigate. What may be best for one student is not always best for another. The choices for students also vary by geographic and socioeconomic boundaries. Many families make school decisions based on the following factors:
- transportation and distance to chosen school;
- cost or tuition of school;
- curriculum and programs available;
- religious affiliation; and
- fit for the individual student.
Families in some areas of the U.S. have greater access to the different models of schools. Small rural towns may only have one school within the immediate area. However, federal reform policies, such as No Child Left Behind (NCLB), have increased the number of charter schools and use of vouchers.
School Choice
With so many school models available in the U.S., how do families choose which type of school their child should attend? is a complex issue for families to navigate. What may be best for one student is not always best for another. The choices for students also vary by geographic and socioeconomic boundaries. Many families make school decisions based on the following factors:
- transportation and distance to chosen school;
- cost or tuition of school;
- curriculum and programs available;
- religious affiliation; and
- fit for the individual student.
Families in some areas of the U.S. also have greater access to the different models of schools presented at the beginning of this chapter than others. Small rural towns may only have one school within the immediate area. However, federal reform policies, such as No Child Left Behind (NCLB), have increased the number of charter schools and use of vouchers.
Charter Schools
In 2001, when NCLB was signed into law, federal and state funds required schools to make an Annual Yearly Progress (AYP) report, based on assessment data. Schools that did not meet AYP for two consecutive years were often required to earmark money for student tutoring or allow students to transfer. When a student transfers, the school’s funding formula decreases by one student, resulting in a loss of funds for the school. If a school continues to not meet AYP, then the school may be closed. When a school is closed, it often becomes a charter school (Brookhart, 2013).
As shown earlier in Table 4.1, charter schools are often publicly funded, but they do not have the same requirements as a traditional public school. When a student transfers out of a traditional school to a charter school, the funds follow the student. Charter schools are autonomous from public schools and to operate must meet the educational goals set forth in their charter. Charter school admittance is also application based, usually being first come, first served or by lottery. In 2010, charter schools comprised six percent of public school students, but now the number is closer to 30 percent in some localities (Prothero, 2018).
Why does it matter if public schools become charter schools? In many regions, like Minneapolis-St. Paul, California, and Texas, charter schools are more segregated than the public schools within those same boundaries, which were already highly segregated (Institute on Race and Poverty, 2008). Because charter schools rely on applications for admission, parent participation in the admission process also separates students by socioeconomics (Frankenberg et al., 2011).
Vouchers
One reason that school choice has become so politicized is the use of school vouchers. School vouchers are defined as “a government-supplied coupon that is used to offset tuition at an eligible private school” (Epple et al., 2017, p. 441). In the 1960s, some of the first school vouchers were awarded to promote desegregation. School voucher policies and programs today vary across localities and are present in over thirty states. Students who receive vouchers enroll in a private school, which receives those funds. The voucher may cover tuition in full, or offset it significantly. This video explains some of the pros and cons of vouchers.
Voucher Funding
Vouchers are funded by one of the following: tax revenues, tax credits, or by private organizations (Epple et al., 2017). The majority of states that use tax revenues to fund their vouchers provide vouchers to under-resourced students. For example, Milwaukee, Cleveland, New Orleans, and Washington, DC provide vouchers to students whose family income is just above the poverty line. Some areas, such as in Ohio and Indiana, provide vouchers using tax revenues to all students in failing school districts.
Some states (including Florida, Iowa, Georgia, Indiana, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, and Rhode Island) utilize tax credits to fund vouchers. Businesses in these states that fund vouchers are provided a tax credit. For example, Florida businesses can receive 100 percent corporate tax income credit up to $559.1 million dollars (EdChoice, 2019). In addition to tax revenues and tax credits, many states also have privately funded voucher programs. One notable voucher program is the Children’s Scholarship Fund, which was founded with contributions from the Walton Family Foundation (Epple et al., 2017).
Voucher Outcomes
When a student uses a voucher to attend a private school, this changes the funding formulas for a local school. This student is no longer included in the funding formula for the LEA or SEA. This means that the local and state budget is lowered because one less student is being counted in that funding formula. School vouchers are provided and promoted to give under-resourced students school choice, but not all students have equal opportunities.
Public schools allow and are required by law to provide services for all students. While policies prohibit private schools from discriminating against students based on race, many religious private schools may consider religious affiliation, sexual orientation (except Maryland, which has laws prohibiting private schools utilizing vouchers to do so), and disability in their admission decisions. Private schools are not exempt from discrimination laws, but the application process allows them to choose which students to admit. For example, a private school receiving government funds must provide students with disabilities with accommodations, unless these accommodations change the philosophy of the academic program, or create “significant difficulty or expense.” A large portion of private schools do not hire teachers trained to provide accommodations; thus, many claim they do not have the resources to serve students with disabilities. Vouchers are not beneficial for students with disabilities that cannot attend private schools, but vouchers also hinder these students further by diverting funds from the public schools, who do provide these services, when other students use vouchers.
Conclusion
While many individuals and groups call for school reform in order to provide equity to all students, the process is complex. School choice and the varied school models within the U.S. also makes school reform highly political. While families are given the right to choose their own child’s education, many families’ choices are constrained by geographic and economic resources. The landscape of schools in the U.S. is constantly changing, but one principle will remain as the foundation of schools in this country: everyone deserves access to education.
In this section, we will explore philosophical foundations of education in the United States.
Chapter Outline
Philosophical Foundations
As students ourselves, we may have a particular notion of what schooling is and should be as well as what teachers do and should do. In his book entitled Schoolteacher: A Sociological Study, Dan Lortie (1975) called this the “apprenticeship of observation” (p. 62). Many people who pursue teaching think they already know what it entails because they have generally spent at least 13 years observing teachers as they work. The role of a teacher can seem simplistic because as a student, you only see one piece of what teachers actually do day in and day out. This can contribute to a person’s idea of what the role of teachers in schools is, as well as what the purpose of schooling should be. The idea of the purpose of schooling can also be seen as a person’s philosophy of schooling.
Philosophy can be defined as the fundamental nature of knowledge, reality and existence. In the case of education, one’s philosophy is what one believes to be true about the essentials of education. When thinking about your philosophy of education, consider your beliefs about the roles of schools, teachers, learners, families, and communities. Four overall philosophies of education that align with varying beliefs include perennialism, essentialism, progressivism, and social reconstructionism, which are summarized in Table 3.1.
Table 3.1: Four Key Educational Philosophies
| Educational Philosophy | Purposes & Beliefs |
| Perennialism | Focus on the great ideas of Western civilization, viewed as of enduring value. Focus on developing intellect and cultural literacy. Also called a classical curriculum. |
| Essentialism | Focus on teaching a common core of knowledge, including basic literacy and morality. Believes schools should not try to critique or change society, but rather transmit essential understandings. |
| Progressivism | Focus on the whole child as the experimenter and independent thinker. Believes active experience leads to questioning and problem solving. Approaches textbooks as tools instead of authoritarian sources of knowledge. |
| Social Reconstructionism | Focus on developing important social questions by critically examining society. Recognizes influence of social, economic, and political systems. Believes schools can lead to collaborative change to develop a better society and enhance social justice. |
Perennialism
Perennialism is an educational philosophy suggesting that human nature is constant, and that the focus of education should be on teaching concepts that remain true over time. School serves the purpose of preparing students intellectually, and the curriculum is based on “great ideas” that have endured through history. See the following video for additional explanation.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P9V_50IVbng
Essentialism
Essentialism is an educational philosophy that suggests that there are skills and knowledge that all people should possess. Essentialists do not share perennialists' views that there are universal truths that are discovered through the study of classic literature; rather, they emphasize knowledge and skills that are useful in today’s world. There is a focus on practical, useable knowledge and skills, and the curriculum for essentialists is more likely to change over time than is a curriculum based on a perennialist point of view. The following video explains the key ideas of essentialism, including the role of the teacher.
https://youtu.be/OScVwnxLrWE
Progressivism
Progressivism emphasizes real-world problem solving and individual development. In this philosophy, teachers are more “guides on the sides” than the holders of knowledge to be transmitted to students. Progressivism is grounded in the work of John Dewey[1]. Progressivists advocate a student-centered curriculum focusing on inquiry and problem solving. The following video gives further explanation of the progressivist philosophy of learning and teaching.
https://youtu.be/6C6DUKx72_8
Social Reconstructionism
The final major educational philosophy is social reconstructionism. Social reconstructionism theory asserts that schools, teachers, and students should take the lead in addressing social problems and improving society. Social reconstructionists feel that schooling should be used to eliminate social inequities to create a more just society. Paulo Freire[2], a Brazilian philosopher and educator, was one of the most influential thinkers behind social reconstructionism. He criticized the banking model of education in his best known writing, Pedagogy of the Oppressed. Banking models of education view students as empty vessels to be filled by the teacher’s expertise, like a teacher putting “coins” of information into the students’ “piggy banks.” Instead, Freire supported problem-posing models of education that recognized the prior knowledge everyone has and can share with others. Conservative critics of social reconstructionists suggest that they have abandoned intellectual pursuits in education, whereas social reconstructionists believe that the analyzing of moral decisions leads to being good citizens in a democracy.
https://youtu.be/SAkdavC-lX8
Common educational philosophies including perennialism, essentialism, progressivism, and social reconstructionism reflect varying beliefs about the roles education should fill.
Like learning, teaching is always developing; it is never realized once and for all. Our public schools have always served as sites of moral, economic, political, religious and social conflict and assimilation into a narrowly defined standard image of what it means to be an American. According to Britzman (as quoted by Kelle, 1996), “the context of teaching is political, it is an ideological context that privileges the interests, values, and practices necessary to maintain the status quo.” Teaching is by no means “innocent of ideology,” she declares. Rather, the context of education tends to preserve “the institutional values of compliance to authority, social conformity, efficiency, standardization, competition, and the objectification of knowledge” (p. 66-67).
Season 2: Episode 8 - The Final Exam OPTIONAL (LINK TO PODCAST)
Conclusion
It should be no surprise then that contemporary debates over public education continue to reflect our deepest ideological differences. As Tyack and Cuban (1995) have noted in their historical study of school reform, the nation’s perception toward schooling often “shift[s]… from panacea to scapegoat” (p. 14). We would go a long way in solving academic achievement and closing educational gaps by addressing the broader structural issues that institutionalize and perpetuate poverty and inequality.
In this section, we will explore philosophical foundations of education in the United States.
Chapter Outline
Philosophical Foundations
As students ourselves, we may have a particular notion of what schooling is and should be as well as what teachers do and should do. In his book entitled Schoolteacher: A Sociological Study, Dan Lortie (1975) called this the “apprenticeship of observation” (p. 62). Many people who pursue teaching think they already know what it entails because they have generally spent at least 13 years observing teachers as they work. The role of a teacher can seem simplistic because as a student, you only see one piece of what teachers actually do day in and day out. This can contribute to a person’s idea of what the role of teachers in schools is, as well as what the purpose of schooling should be. The idea of the purpose of schooling can also be seen as a person’s philosophy of schooling.
Philosophy can be defined as the fundamental nature of knowledge, reality and existence. In the case of education, one’s philosophy is what one believes to be true about the essentials of education. When thinking about your philosophy of education, consider your beliefs about the roles of schools, teachers, learners, families, and communities. Four overall philosophies of education that align with varying beliefs include perennialism, essentialism, progressivism, and social reconstructionism, which are summarized in Table 3.1.
Table 3.1: Four Key Educational Philosophies
| Educational Philosophy | Purposes & Beliefs |
| Perennialism | Focus on the great ideas of Western civilization, viewed as of enduring value. Focus on developing intellect and cultural literacy. Also called a classical curriculum. |
| Essentialism | Focus on teaching a common core of knowledge, including basic literacy and morality. Believes schools should not try to critique or change society, but rather transmit essential understandings. |
| Progressivism | Focus on the whole child as the experimenter and independent thinker. Believes active experience leads to questioning and problem solving. Approaches textbooks as tools instead of authoritarian sources of knowledge. |
| Social Reconstructionism | Focus on developing important social questions by critically examining society. Recognizes influence of social, economic, and political systems. Believes schools can lead to collaborative change to develop a better society and enhance social justice. |
Perennialism
Perennialism is an educational philosophy suggesting that human nature is constant, and that the focus of education should be on teaching concepts that remain true over time. School serves the purpose of preparing students intellectually, and the curriculum is based on “great ideas” that have endured through history. See the following video for additional explanation.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P9V_50IVbng
Essentialism
Essentialism is an educational philosophy that suggests that there are skills and knowledge that all people should possess. Essentialists do not share perennialists' views that there are universal truths that are discovered through the study of classic literature; rather, they emphasize knowledge and skills that are useful in today’s world. There is a focus on practical, useable knowledge and skills, and the curriculum for essentialists is more likely to change over time than is a curriculum based on a perennialist point of view. The following video explains the key ideas of essentialism, including the role of the teacher.
https://youtu.be/OScVwnxLrWE
Progressivism
Progressivism emphasizes real-world problem solving and individual development. In this philosophy, teachers are more “guides on the sides” than the holders of knowledge to be transmitted to students. Progressivism is grounded in the work of John Dewey[3]. Progressivists advocate a student-centered curriculum focusing on inquiry and problem solving. The following video gives further explanation of the progressivist philosophy of learning and teaching.
https://youtu.be/6C6DUKx72_8
Social Reconstructionism
The final major educational philosophy is social reconstructionism. Social reconstructionism theory asserts that schools, teachers, and students should take the lead in addressing social problems and improving society. Social reconstructionists feel that schooling should be used to eliminate social inequities to create a more just society. Paulo Freire[4], a Brazilian philosopher and educator, was one of the most influential thinkers behind social reconstructionism. He criticized the banking model of education in his best known writing, Pedagogy of the Oppressed. Banking models of education view students as empty vessels to be filled by the teacher’s expertise, like a teacher putting “coins” of information into the students’ “piggy banks.” Instead, Freire supported problem-posing models of education that recognized the prior knowledge everyone has and can share with others. Conservative critics of social reconstructionists suggest that they have abandoned intellectual pursuits in education, whereas social reconstructionists believe that the analyzing of moral decisions leads to being good citizens in a democracy.
https://youtu.be/SAkdavC-lX8
Common educational philosophies including perennialism, essentialism, progressivism, and social reconstructionism reflect varying beliefs about the roles education should fill.
Like learning, teaching is always developing; it is never realized once and for all. Our public schools have always served as sites of moral, economic, political, religious and social conflict and assimilation into a narrowly defined standard image of what it means to be an American. According to Britzman (as quoted by Kelle, 1996), “the context of teaching is political, it is an ideological context that privileges the interests, values, and practices necessary to maintain the status quo.” Teaching is by no means “innocent of ideology,” she declares. Rather, the context of education tends to preserve “the institutional values of compliance to authority, social conformity, efficiency, standardization, competition, and the objectification of knowledge” (p. 66-67).
Season 2: Episode 8 - The Final Exam OPTIONAL (LINK TO PODCAST)
Conclusion
It should be no surprise then that contemporary debates over public education continue to reflect our deepest ideological differences. As Tyack and Cuban (1995) have noted in their historical study of school reform, the nation’s perception toward schooling often “shift[s]… from panacea to scapegoat” (p. 14). We would go a long way in solving academic achievement and closing educational gaps by addressing the broader structural issues that institutionalize and perpetuate poverty and inequality.
“He is just so lazy - sits there and refuses to do any work. And his parents are no help - they never return phone calls or emails. Why bother?”
This is an actual statement by a teacher frustrated with a fourth grader in her classroom. What this teacher did not know was the context in which the student was living. He was homeless and living out of his mother’s car. His mother couldn’t pay her cell phone bill, so had no way of receiving phone calls or emails. The teacher failed to realize what else could be contributing to his “laziness”: hunger, fear, lack of adequate care, and a parent unavailable to him with her own struggle to survive.
In order to teach our students, we have to know them. Multiple influences affect our students and their environments.
Chapter Outline
In this chapter, we will investigate how different systems influence learning and we will explore two theoretical perspectives on development.
Systems that Influence Student Learning
As humans grow and develop, there are many different systems that influence this development. Think about systems as interrelated parts of a whole, just like the solar system is made up of planets and other celestial objects. Two theories that consider various impacts on student learning are Maslow’s hierarchy of needs and Gardner’s theory of multiple intelligences.
Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs
One way to conceptualize influences on student learning is through need systems. Maslow’s hierarchy of needs (see Figure 2.2) theorized that people are motivated by a succession of hierarchical needs (McLeod, 2020). Originally, Maslow discussed five levels of needs shaped in the form of a pyramid. He later adjusted the pyramid to include eight levels of needs, incorporating need for knowledge and understanding, aesthetic needs, and transcendence. Figure 2.2 depicts these eight needs in hierarchical order. The first four levels are deficiency needs, and the upper four are growth needs. The first four are essential to a student’s well being, and they build on each other. These deficiency needs must be satisfied before a person can move on to the growth needs. Moving to the growth needs is essential for learning to truly occur. Now we will examine each of the elements within Maslow’s hierarchy of needs in more depth.
Of the eight levels, the first is physiological needs. These needs include food, water, and shelter. In this case, do students have a home where they are properly nourished? If not, students who are not attending to their work may be hungry, not just daydreaming. This is why free and reduced breakfast and lunch programs are so essential in schools.
Safety and security needs are the second level of the pyramid. Students need to feel that they are not in harm’s way. Schools are responsible for maintaining safe environments for students and classrooms need to feel safe and secure. This requires classroom rules that all students follow, including protecting students from bullying and threatening behavior. There are effective and less effective ways to structure a classroom so that it is safe for all students.
The third level of Maslow’s hierarchy is love and belonging. In schools, these needs are met primarily through positive relationships with teachers and peers, and people with whom students regularly interact. Feelings of acceptance are necessary here, and teachers can play a huge role in creating these feelings for students. It is critical that teachers are non-judgmental towards their students. It does not matter how you, as a teacher, may feel about a student’s lifestyle choices, beliefs, political views or family structures; it matters how a student perceives you as someone who accepts them, no matter what.
The fourth and final level of deficiency needs is esteem needs: self-worth and self-esteem. Students must have experiences in schools and classrooms that lead them to feel positive about themselves. Self-esteem is what students think and feel about themselves, and it contributes to their confidence. Self-worth is students knowing that they are valuable and lovable.
Figure 2.2: Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs
Following the four deficiency needs in Maslow’s hierarchy are growth needs. Once students reach growth needs, they are ready for true, meaningful learning. The fifth element, the need to know and understand, is also referred to as cognitive needs. It is our job as educators to motivate students to want to know and understand the world around them. In order to do this, we must be sure we are providing our students with questions that move them to higher-order thinking skills. An instructional model that is well-developed and utilized in many classrooms is Bloom’s Taxonomy. It can be used to classify learning objectives, and it is a way to encourage students to think more deeply about content and motivate them to want to know more.
The sixth level of Maslow’s hierarchy of needs is aesthetic needs. At this level, we can learn to appreciate the beauty of the natural world. When we are focused on deficiency needs in the lower levels of Maslow’s theory, it is more difficult to see the beauty in our environment and surroundings. In education, students need to be exposed to the beauty that is reflected in the arts: music, visual arts and theatre. Most schools separate these into distinct periods or blocks; however, it is essential that arts are also integrated into the curriculum. Additionally, students should be exposed to arts outside of Western art so they encounter art forms that include representations of all cultures, including their own.
Self-actualization is the seventh need on the pyramid and is another growth need. Maslow indicated that this happens as we age. It is our intrinsic need to make the most of our lives and reach our full potential. A way of thinking about this is to consider what we think of our ideal selves--or, for young people, how they see themselves or what they see themselves having achieved and broadly experienced as they get to later stages in life.
Finally, transcendence needs are the highest on Maslow’s hierarchy. Maslow (1971) stated, “transcendence refers to the very highest levels of human consciousness, behaving and relating, as ends rather than means, to oneself, to significant others, to human beings in general, to other species, to nature, and to the cosmos” (p. 269). Though most of us in K-12 schools will not experience students at this level, it is important to note that this is the goal in life, according to Maslow.
Critical Lens: Origins of Theories
Sometimes we hold theories as universal truths without stopping to consider the context in which they were made. For example, Bridgman, Cummings, and Ballard (2019) recently investigated the origin of Maslow's theory and discovered that he himself never created the well-known pyramid model to represent the hierarchy of needs. Furthermore, there are concerns that Maslow appropriated his theory from the Siksika (Blackfoot) Nation. Dr. Cindy Blackstock (Gitksan First Nation member, as cited in Michel, 2014) explains the Blackfoot belief involves a tipi with three levels: self-actualization at the base; community actualization in the middle; and cultural perpetuity at the top. Maslow visited the Siksika Nation in 1938 and published his theory in 1943. Bray (2019) explains more about Maslow's hierarchy of needs and its alignment with the Siksika Nation. You should be informed of Maslow's hierarchy, but you should also be aware that critiques of this theory exist.
Gardner's Theory of Multiple Intelligences
Teachers need to determine students’ areas of strength and need to allow students to work and grow in those areas. One approach to doing this is to determine students’ strengths in different intelligence areas. Theorist Howard Gardner (2004, 2006) initially proposed eight multiple intelligences (see Figure 2.3), but he later added two more areas: existential and moral intelligence.
Gardner's Theory DeBunked!
Based on extensive research, Gardner's theory has been declared a "neuromyth." The original theory was based on a survey of literature, but had no empirical evidence to support this theory. Though there is very little educational research evidence to support instructing students in these eight intelligences (for example: you should not plan a lesson eight different ways to address all eight intelligences in one lesson!), Gardner’s goal was to ensure that teachers did not just focus on verbal and mathematical intelligences in their teaching, which are two very common foci of instruction in schools. Avoid labeling students according to this theory.
Figure 2.3: Gardner's Multiple Intelligences
Similarly, while we often can hear reference to learning styles (often including visual, auditory, reading/writing, and kinesthetic, or VARK), Learning Styles has NO empirical research-based support. Instead, “people’s approaches to learning can, do, and should vary with context. In other words, people learn different things in different ways. Rather than assessing and labeling students as particular kinds of learners and planning accordingly, a wise teacher will do the following:
- Offer students options for learning and expressing learning
- Help them reflect on strategies for mastering and using critical content
- Guide them in knowing when to modify an approach to learning when it proves to be inefficient or ineffective in achieving the student’s goals” (Sousa & Tomlinson, 2018, p. 161-162).
Learn more about the myth of learning styles in the video below.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rhgwIhB58PA
Theoretical Perspectives on Development
While all human beings are unique and grow, learn, and change at different rates and in different ways, there are some common trends of development that impact the trajectories our students follow. Two foundational theories of development are Piaget’s cognitive developmental theory and Vygotsky’s sociocultural theory.
Cognitive Developmental Theory: Piaget
Cognitive developmental theorists such as Jean Piaget posit that we move from birth to adulthood in predictable stages (Huitt & Hummel, 2003). These theorists argue these stages of development do not vary and are distinct from one other. While rates of progress vary by child, the sequence is the same and skipping stages is impossible. Therefore, progression through stages is essentially similar for each child.
In 1936, Piaget proposed four stages of cognitive development for children:
- the sensorimotor stage, which ranges from birth to age two;
- the preoperational stage, ranging from age two through age six or seven;
- the concrete operational stage, ranging from age six or seven through age 11 or 12;
- and the formal operational stage, ranging from age 11 or 12 through adulthood.
Piaget argued that key abilities are acquired at each stage. We will now look at each stage in depth, along with videos demonstrating these abilities in action.
In the sensorimotor stage, little children learn about their surroundings through their senses. In addition, the idea of object permanence is emphasized. This is a child’s realization that things continue to exist even if they are not in view. An example is when parents play peek-a-boo with their infants. The child sees that the parent or caregiver is actually gone when the parent’s or caregiver’s hands are in front of their faces. The video below demonstrates the idea of object permanence.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ue8y-JVhjS0
In the preoperational stage, children develop language, imagination, and memory, working toward symbolic thought. One of the key ideas is the principle of conservation, meaning that specific properties of objects remain the same even if other properties change. The notion of centration is critical here in that children only pay attention to one aspect of a situation. An example is filling a shallow round container with water, then pouring the same amount of water into a skinny container. The child in the preoperational stage will say that there is now more water in the skinny container, even though no additional liquid was added. The video below demonstrates the principle of conservation.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GLj0IZFLKvg&feature=related
Additionally, in the preoperational stage, Piaget suggested that children have egocentric thinking, meaning that they lack the ability to see situations from another person’s point of view. The video below demonstrates the idea of egocentrism.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OinqFgsIbh0&feature=related
In the concrete operational stage, children begin to think more logically and abstractly and can now master the idea of conservation as they work toward operational thought. Children in this stage are less egocentric than before. Key developments in this stage include the notions of reversibility, which is defined as the ability to change direction in linear thinking to return to starting point, and transitivity, which is the ability to infer relationships between two objects based upon objects’ relation to a third object in serial order. The video below demonstrates the ideas of reversibility and transitivity.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UNmUjRf0ekQ
Finally, the formal operational stage continues through adulthood. This is when we can better reason and understand hypothetical situations as we develop abstract thought. Key ideas include metacognition, which is the ability to monitor and think about your own thinking; and the ability to compare abstract relationships, such as to generate laws, principles, or theories. The video below demonstrates the idea of hypothetical thinking, where we see how a boy in the concrete operational stage and a woman in the formal operations stage respond to the same scenario.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zjJdcXA1KH8&feature=related
In addition to his four stages of cognitive development for children, Piaget also discussed how we add new information to our existing understandings. Key terms in his conceptualization of cognitive constructivism include schema, assimilation, accommodation, disequilibrium, and equilibrium. Schema refers to the ways in which we organize information as we confront new ideas. For example, children learn what a wallet is and that it generally contains money. Next they learn that a wallet can be carried in various places, i.e. a pocket or a purse. The child is making a connection now between the idea of a wallet and the category of places where it can be carried. The child’s schema is developing as ideas begin to interconnect and form what we can call a blueprint of concepts and their connections.
In order to develop schema, Piaget would have said that children (and all of us) need to experience disequilibrium. Children are in a state of equilibrium as they go about in the world. As they encounter a new concept to add to their schema, they experience disequilibrium where they need to process how this new information fits into their schema. They do this in two ways: assimilation and accommodation. Assimilation uses existing schema to interpret new situations. Accommodation involves changing schema to accommodate new schema and return to a state of equilibrium. Let’s try an example. A child knows that banging a fork on a table makes noise, and the fork does not break. That child and concept are in a state of equilibrium, with the existing schema of knowing banging things on tables does not break the item. The next day, a parent gives the child a sippy cup. The child bangs it on the table and it also does not break, so the child assimilates this new object into their existing understanding that banging items on tables does not break the item. One day, a parent gives the child an egg. The child proceeds to bang it on the table, but what happens? The egg breaks, sending the child’s schema--everything that they bang on the table remains unbroken--into a state of disequilibrium. That child must accommodate that new information into their schema. Once this new information is accommodated, the child can once again move into equilibrium. The video below explains the idea of schema, assimilation and accommodation.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xj0CUeyucJw
Sociocultural Theory: Vygotsky
Whereas Piaget viewed learning in specific stages where children engage in cognitive constructivism (Huitt & Hummel, 2003), thus emphasizing the role of the individual in learning, Lev Vygotsky viewed learning as socially constructed (Vygotsky, 1986). Vygotsky was a Russian psychologist in the 1920s and 1930s, but his work was not known to the Western world until the 1970s. He emphasized the role that other people have in an individual’s construction of knowledge, known as social constructivism. He realized that we learned more with other people than we learned all by ourselves.
One of the major tenets in Vygotsky’s theory of learning (Vygotsky, 1986) is the zone of proximal development. As shown in Figure 2.4, the zone of proximal development (ZPD) is the difference between what a learner can do without help and what they can do with help.
Figure 2.4: Vygotsky’s Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD)
Vygotsky's often-quoted definition of zone of proximal development says ZPD is "the distance between the actual developmental level as determined by independent problem solving and the level of potential development as determined through problem solving under adult guidance, or in collaboration with more capable peers" (Vygotsky, 1978, p. 86). The concept of scaffolding is closely related to the ZPD. Scaffolding is a process through which a teacher or more competent peer gives aid to the student in her/his ZPD as necessary, and tapers off this aid as it becomes unnecessary, much as a scaffold is removed from a building during construction. While we often think of a teacher as the more “expert other” in ZPD, this individual does not have to be a teacher. In fact, sometimes our own students are the more “expert other” in certain areas. Vygotsky’s sociocultural theory emphasizes that we can learn more with and through each other.
https://youtu.be/kTIUAZbKidw
CRITICAL LENS: CONTEXT MATTERS
As we examine these four theories, it is also important to analyze the context of this work: these theorists and researchers all identified as White, often working with individuals close to them to conduct research (for example, Piaget studied his own children). We all absorb certain beliefs and social norms from our communities, so knowing that these theories came from communities that represented fairly limited diversity is important.
Conclusion
In this chapter, we surveyed two systems that influence students’ learning (Maslow’s hierarchy of needs and Gardner’s theory of multiple intelligences) and two theoretical perspectives on development (Piaget’s cognitive developmental theory and Vygotsky’s sociocultural theory).
There are several modern theories that have strong research supporting them. These theories are part of a course in Educational Psychology.
As we saw in the Unlearning Box at the beginning of this chapter, all of our students bring different characteristics with them to our classrooms. While some (not all!) students may share certain characteristics and overall developmental trajectories, teachers must acknowledge that each student in the classroom has individual strengths and needs. Only once we know our students as individual learners will we be able to teach them effectively.
“He is just so lazy - sits there and refuses to do any work. And his parents are no help - they never return phone calls or emails. Why bother?”
This is an actual statement by a teacher frustrated with a fourth grader in her classroom. What this teacher did not know was the context in which the student was living. He was homeless and living out of his mother’s car. His mother couldn’t pay her cell phone bill, so had no way of receiving phone calls or emails. The teacher failed to realize what else could be contributing to his “laziness”: hunger, fear, lack of adequate care, and a parent unavailable to him with her own struggle to survive.
In order to teach our students, we have to know them. Multiple influences affect our students and their environments.
Chapter Outline
In this chapter, we will investigate how different systems influence learning and we will explore two theoretical perspectives on development.
Systems that Influence Student Learning
As humans grow and develop, there are many different systems that influence this development. Think about systems as interrelated parts of a whole, just like the solar system is made up of planets and other celestial objects. Two theories that consider various impacts on student learning are Maslow’s hierarchy of needs and Gardner’s theory of multiple intelligences.
Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs
One way to conceptualize influences on student learning is through need systems. Maslow’s hierarchy of needs (see Figure 2.2) theorized that people are motivated by a succession of hierarchical needs (McLeod, 2020). Originally, Maslow discussed five levels of needs shaped in the form of a pyramid. He later adjusted the pyramid to include eight levels of needs, incorporating need for knowledge and understanding, aesthetic needs, and transcendence. Figure 2.2 depicts these eight needs in hierarchical order. The first four levels are deficiency needs, and the upper four are growth needs. The first four are essential to a student’s well being, and they build on each other. These deficiency needs must be satisfied before a person can move on to the growth needs. Moving to the growth needs is essential for learning to truly occur. Now we will examine each of the elements within Maslow’s hierarchy of needs in more depth.
Of the eight levels, the first is physiological needs. These needs include food, water, and shelter. In this case, do students have a home where they are properly nourished? If not, students who are not attending to their work may be hungry, not just daydreaming. This is why free and reduced breakfast and lunch programs are so essential in schools.
Safety and security needs are the second level of the pyramid. Students need to feel that they are not in harm’s way. Schools are responsible for maintaining safe environments for students and classrooms need to feel safe and secure. This requires classroom rules that all students follow, including protecting students from bullying and threatening behavior. There are effective and less effective ways to structure a classroom so that it is safe for all students.
The third level of Maslow’s hierarchy is love and belonging. In schools, these needs are met primarily through positive relationships with teachers and peers, and people with whom students regularly interact. Feelings of acceptance are necessary here, and teachers can play a huge role in creating these feelings for students. It is critical that teachers are non-judgmental towards their students. It does not matter how you, as a teacher, may feel about a student’s lifestyle choices, beliefs, political views or family structures; it matters how a student perceives you as someone who accepts them, no matter what.
The fourth and final level of deficiency needs is esteem needs: self-worth and self-esteem. Students must have experiences in schools and classrooms that lead them to feel positive about themselves. Self-esteem is what students think and feel about themselves, and it contributes to their confidence. Self-worth is students knowing that they are valuable and lovable.
Figure 2.2: Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs
Following the four deficiency needs in Maslow’s hierarchy are growth needs. Once students reach growth needs, they are ready for true, meaningful learning. The fifth element, the need to know and understand, is also referred to as cognitive needs. It is our job as educators to motivate students to want to know and understand the world around them. In order to do this, we must be sure we are providing our students with questions that move them to higher-order thinking skills. An instructional model that is well-developed and utilized in many classrooms is Bloom’s Taxonomy. It can be used to classify learning objectives, and it is a way to encourage students to think more deeply about content and motivate them to want to know more.
The sixth level of Maslow’s hierarchy of needs is aesthetic needs. At this level, we can learn to appreciate the beauty of the natural world. When we are focused on deficiency needs in the lower levels of Maslow’s theory, it is more difficult to see the beauty in our environment and surroundings. In education, students need to be exposed to the beauty that is reflected in the arts: music, visual arts and theatre. Most schools separate these into distinct periods or blocks; however, it is essential that arts are also integrated into the curriculum. Additionally, students should be exposed to arts outside of Western art so they encounter art forms that include representations of all cultures, including their own.
Self-actualization is the seventh need on the pyramid and is another growth need. Maslow indicated that this happens as we age. It is our intrinsic need to make the most of our lives and reach our full potential. A way of thinking about this is to consider what we think of our ideal selves--or, for young people, how they see themselves or what they see themselves having achieved and broadly experienced as they get to later stages in life.
Finally, transcendence needs are the highest on Maslow’s hierarchy. Maslow (1971) stated, “transcendence refers to the very highest levels of human consciousness, behaving and relating, as ends rather than means, to oneself, to significant others, to human beings in general, to other species, to nature, and to the cosmos” (p. 269). Though most of us in K-12 schools will not experience students at this level, it is important to note that this is the goal in life, according to Maslow.
Critical Lens: Origins of Theories
Sometimes we hold theories as universal truths without stopping to consider the context in which they were made. For example, Bridgman, Cummings, and Ballard (2019) recently investigated the origin of Maslow's theory and discovered that he himself never created the well-known pyramid model to represent the hierarchy of needs. Furthermore, there are concerns that Maslow appropriated his theory from the Siksika (Blackfoot) Nation. Dr. Cindy Blackstock (Gitksan First Nation member, as cited in Michel, 2014) explains the Blackfoot belief involves a tipi with three levels: self-actualization at the base; community actualization in the middle; and cultural perpetuity at the top. Maslow visited the Siksika Nation in 1938 and published his theory in 1943. Bray (2019) explains more about Maslow's hierarchy of needs and its alignment with the Siksika Nation. You should be informed of Maslow's hierarchy, but you should also be aware that critiques of this theory exist.
Gardner's Theory of Multiple Intelligences
Teachers need to determine students’ areas of strength and need to allow students to work and grow in those areas. One approach to doing this is to determine students’ strengths in different intelligence areas. Theorist Howard Gardner (2004, 2006) initially proposed eight multiple intelligences (see Figure 2.3), but he later added two more areas: existential and moral intelligence.
Gardner's Theory DeBunked!
Based on extensive research, Gardner's theory has been declared a "neuromyth." The original theory was based on a survey of literature, but had no empirical evidence to support this theory. Though there is very little educational research evidence to support instructing students in these eight intelligences (for example: you should not plan a lesson eight different ways to address all eight intelligences in one lesson!), Gardner’s goal was to ensure that teachers did not just focus on verbal and mathematical intelligences in their teaching, which are two very common foci of instruction in schools. Avoid labeling students according to this theory.
Figure 2.3: Gardner's Multiple Intelligences
Similarly, while we often can hear reference to learning styles (often including visual, auditory, reading/writing, and kinesthetic, or VARK), Learning Styles has NO empirical research-based support. Instead, “people’s approaches to learning can, do, and should vary with context. In other words, people learn different things in different ways. Rather than assessing and labeling students as particular kinds of learners and planning accordingly, a wise teacher will do the following:
- Offer students options for learning and expressing learning
- Help them reflect on strategies for mastering and using critical content
- Guide them in knowing when to modify an approach to learning when it proves to be inefficient or ineffective in achieving the student’s goals” (Sousa & Tomlinson, 2018, p. 161-162).
Learn more about the myth of learning styles in the video below.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rhgwIhB58PA
Theoretical Perspectives on Development
While all human beings are unique and grow, learn, and change at different rates and in different ways, there are some common trends of development that impact the trajectories our students follow. Two foundational theories of development are Piaget’s cognitive developmental theory and Vygotsky’s sociocultural theory.
Cognitive Developmental Theory: Piaget
Cognitive developmental theorists such as Jean Piaget posit that we move from birth to adulthood in predictable stages (Huitt & Hummel, 2003). These theorists argue these stages of development do not vary and are distinct from one other. While rates of progress vary by child, the sequence is the same and skipping stages is impossible. Therefore, progression through stages is essentially similar for each child.
In 1936, Piaget proposed four stages of cognitive development for children:
- the sensorimotor stage, which ranges from birth to age two;
- the preoperational stage, ranging from age two through age six or seven;
- the concrete operational stage, ranging from age six or seven through age 11 or 12;
- and the formal operational stage, ranging from age 11 or 12 through adulthood.
Piaget argued that key abilities are acquired at each stage. We will now look at each stage in depth, along with videos demonstrating these abilities in action.
In the sensorimotor stage, little children learn about their surroundings through their senses. In addition, the idea of object permanence is emphasized. This is a child’s realization that things continue to exist even if they are not in view. An example is when parents play peek-a-boo with their infants. The child sees that the parent or caregiver is actually gone when the parent’s or caregiver’s hands are in front of their faces. The video below demonstrates the idea of object permanence.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ue8y-JVhjS0
In the preoperational stage, children develop language, imagination, and memory, working toward symbolic thought. One of the key ideas is the principle of conservation, meaning that specific properties of objects remain the same even if other properties change. The notion of centration is critical here in that children only pay attention to one aspect of a situation. An example is filling a shallow round container with water, then pouring the same amount of water into a skinny container. The child in the preoperational stage will say that there is now more water in the skinny container, even though no additional liquid was added. The video below demonstrates the principle of conservation.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GLj0IZFLKvg&feature=related
Additionally, in the preoperational stage, Piaget suggested that children have egocentric thinking, meaning that they lack the ability to see situations from another person’s point of view. The video below demonstrates the idea of egocentrism.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OinqFgsIbh0&feature=related
In the concrete operational stage, children begin to think more logically and abstractly and can now master the idea of conservation as they work toward operational thought. Children in this stage are less egocentric than before. Key developments in this stage include the notions of reversibility, which is defined as the ability to change direction in linear thinking to return to starting point, and transitivity, which is the ability to infer relationships between two objects based upon objects’ relation to a third object in serial order. The video below demonstrates the ideas of reversibility and transitivity.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UNmUjRf0ekQ
Finally, the formal operational stage continues through adulthood. This is when we can better reason and understand hypothetical situations as we develop abstract thought. Key ideas include metacognition, which is the ability to monitor and think about your own thinking; and the ability to compare abstract relationships, such as to generate laws, principles, or theories. The video below demonstrates the idea of hypothetical thinking, where we see how a boy in the concrete operational stage and a woman in the formal operations stage respond to the same scenario.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zjJdcXA1KH8&feature=related
In addition to his four stages of cognitive development for children, Piaget also discussed how we add new information to our existing understandings. Key terms in his conceptualization of cognitive constructivism include schema, assimilation, accommodation, disequilibrium, and equilibrium. Schema refers to the ways in which we organize information as we confront new ideas. For example, children learn what a wallet is and that it generally contains money. Next they learn that a wallet can be carried in various places, i.e. a pocket or a purse. The child is making a connection now between the idea of a wallet and the category of places where it can be carried. The child’s schema is developing as ideas begin to interconnect and form what we can call a blueprint of concepts and their connections.
In order to develop schema, Piaget would have said that children (and all of us) need to experience disequilibrium. Children are in a state of equilibrium as they go about in the world. As they encounter a new concept to add to their schema, they experience disequilibrium where they need to process how this new information fits into their schema. They do this in two ways: assimilation and accommodation. Assimilation uses existing schema to interpret new situations. Accommodation involves changing schema to accommodate new schema and return to a state of equilibrium. Let’s try an example. A child knows that banging a fork on a table makes noise, and the fork does not break. That child and concept are in a state of equilibrium, with the existing schema of knowing banging things on tables does not break the item. The next day, a parent gives the child a sippy cup. The child bangs it on the table and it also does not break, so the child assimilates this new object into their existing understanding that banging items on tables does not break the item. One day, a parent gives the child an egg. The child proceeds to bang it on the table, but what happens? The egg breaks, sending the child’s schema--everything that they bang on the table remains unbroken--into a state of disequilibrium. That child must accommodate that new information into their schema. Once this new information is accommodated, the child can once again move into equilibrium. The video below explains the idea of schema, assimilation and accommodation.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xj0CUeyucJw
Sociocultural Theory: Vygotsky
Whereas Piaget viewed learning in specific stages where children engage in cognitive constructivism (Huitt & Hummel, 2003), thus emphasizing the role of the individual in learning, Lev Vygotsky viewed learning as socially constructed (Vygotsky, 1986). Vygotsky was a Russian psychologist in the 1920s and 1930s, but his work was not known to the Western world until the 1970s. He emphasized the role that other people have in an individual’s construction of knowledge, known as social constructivism. He realized that we learned more with other people than we learned all by ourselves.
One of the major tenets in Vygotsky’s theory of learning (Vygotsky, 1986) is the zone of proximal development. As shown in Figure 2.4, the zone of proximal development (ZPD) is the difference between what a learner can do without help and what they can do with help.
Figure 2.4: Vygotsky’s Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD)
Vygotsky's often-quoted definition of zone of proximal development says ZPD is "the distance between the actual developmental level as determined by independent problem solving and the level of potential development as determined through problem solving under adult guidance, or in collaboration with more capable peers" (Vygotsky, 1978, p. 86). The concept of scaffolding is closely related to the ZPD. Scaffolding is a process through which a teacher or more competent peer gives aid to the student in her/his ZPD as necessary, and tapers off this aid as it becomes unnecessary, much as a scaffold is removed from a building during construction. While we often think of a teacher as the more “expert other” in ZPD, this individual does not have to be a teacher. In fact, sometimes our own students are the more “expert other” in certain areas. Vygotsky’s sociocultural theory emphasizes that we can learn more with and through each other.
https://youtu.be/kTIUAZbKidw
CRITICAL LENS: CONTEXT MATTERS
As we examine these four theories, it is also important to analyze the context of this work: these theorists and researchers all identified as White, often working with individuals close to them to conduct research (for example, Piaget studied his own children). We all absorb certain beliefs and social norms from our communities, so knowing that these theories came from communities that represented fairly limited diversity is important.
Conclusion
In this chapter, we surveyed two systems that influence students’ learning (Maslow’s hierarchy of needs and Gardner’s theory of multiple intelligences) and two theoretical perspectives on development (Piaget’s cognitive developmental theory and Vygotsky’s sociocultural theory).
There are several modern theories that have strong research supporting them. These theories are part of a course in Educational Psychology.
As we saw in the Unlearning Box at the beginning of this chapter, all of our students bring different characteristics with them to our classrooms. While some (not all!) students may share certain characteristics and overall developmental trajectories, teachers must acknowledge that each student in the classroom has individual strengths and needs. Only once we know our students as individual learners will we be able to teach them effectively.
A substitute teacher was supposed to give an assessment while the classroom teacher was away, but one student refused to take the test. “He started yelling and walked out of the room, saying he wasn’t going to take this test that the teacher left for him. He kept saying that he is supposed to have questions read aloud to him, but that isn’t fair and I wasn’t going to do it!” Sometimes we think that fairness means everyone is treated the same way, but in reality, “fairness” involves meeting the needs of different students. In this example, the student had an IEP(individualized Education Plan) accommodation that allowed him to have tests read aloud to him. When considering instruction, and assessment, sometimes treating all students the same is actually quite unfair, since students have different learning needs and strengths.
In this chapter, we will begin to explore the standards and planning for instruction.
Chapter Outline
Effective teachers must plan effective lessons, which are based on standards. Standards vary depending on the state where you teach. Standards tell teachers the key information that students should understand in specific content areas at varying grade levels. As a teacher, you are responsible for knowing the standards you are responsible for teaching and planning effective lessons to help students learn the information explained in the standards. An elementary school teacher is responsible for standards in English, math, science, and social studies; a secondary teacher typically specializes in one area, such as history. There are also standards for fine arts, languages, and other areas.
Some states use state-developed standards, while other states adopted the Common Core State Standards[5]. These standards have been an attempt to move the nation closer to a unified set of standards. As of 2021, 41 states, the District of Columbia, four territories, and the Department of Defense Education Activity (DoDEA) have adopted them, with varying degrees of implementation and support at the district levels (Common Core States Standards Initiative, 2021).
It is not uncommon to hear a teacher or parent say that they want schools to “cover” curriculum or standards; however, “coverage” is not conducive to deep understanding. Instead, a teacher should review the standards and local curriculum as a part of their planning, with a focus on big, transferable ideas (Wiggins & McTighe, 2005). This is considered depth of material, rather than simply breadth of material.
Standards and curriculum are not the same thing. Standards tell you what to teach; curriculum (and corresponding methods) tells you how to teach. Figure 6.1 compares and contrasts standards and curriculum.
Figure 6.1: A Comparison of Standards and Curriculum
Planning
Sometimes your school or district will provide lesson plans for you, but more often, you will have the autonomy to make your own lesson plans. Teachers may be part of a Professional Learning Community (PLC) with other teachers in the same grade or content area. During these PLCs, teachers plan together and often look at student assessment data to determine what to further emphasize for students or teach in a different way. They may also have a common book or article to read in the field of education to expand their knowledge of teaching and learning. A teacher of a “special” area or elective subject like music or art might occasionally meet with teachers in other local schools to share information and discuss curriculum, lessons, or assessments. Working with others in planning is a critical skill to learn as a teacher.
One of the most effective planning strategies is Backward Design (Wiggins & McTighe, 2005). Figure 6.2 depicts a backward design planning process. While it is common for new or inexperienced teachers to focus on “filling the time,” or “what” they will teach, backward design involves following these steps:
- Identifying the desired goals and objectives;
- Determining acceptable evidence and assessments; and
- Planning instruction (Wiggins & McTighe, 2005).
This does not mean that a teacher will have the exact final assessment ready before the first day of instruction; however, teachers should have a clear idea of the format of the assessment and know what kinds of questions and content will be on it.
Figure 6.2: Backward Design Process
Critical Lens: Homework
We all have had homework during our K-12 schooling. You may have had it as early as kindergarten. There is debate about whether or not schools should even give homework, especially for a grade. Why? It comes down to issues of equity. If a family member is not available to help or is not fluent in the language of instruction, then the student has less of a chance to accurately complete a homework assignment. Since homework is often factored into grades, this can negatively impact students without additional resources. What is also important to remember as teachers is that homework should never be new material: it should always be a review and reinforcement of instruction that has already been provided. Listen to the "Is It Time to Ban Homework?"[6] podcast from Trending in Education to learn more.
Lesson Plan Components and Models
Lesson planning is a key component to any effective instruction. Experienced teachers do not usually script their lesson plans; however, many districts will ask even seasoned teachers to turn in lesson plans for the week or month. All lesson plans will contain similar elements, sometimes in a different order.
- Standards: Select the specific standards you will teach in this particular lesson. Note that you will often choose one sub-standard, or piece, of a standard to teach, and it may take multiple lessons for students to master the content.
- Objectives: State what students will know, understand, and do by the end of the lesson. Objectives can be phrased as “The student will…” or, from a student perspective, “I can…”. Content objectives should directly relate to the standards, and language objectives should be included for English Learners.
- Materials: List all materials, such as books, resources, tools, websites, and other items that will be used for the lesson. This assists you with gathering materials so you are prepared to teach the lesson.
- Procedures: Break down the lesson into specific steps you will follow. Think of it as programming: you must provide simple, clear steps to achieve the lesson’s instructional goals.
- Differentiation: Consider how you will adapt your lesson to meet the needs of specific types of learners. For example, how will you support your English Learners, challenge your students who are gifted, or enable a student who struggles with spelling to participate without getting frustrated? Sometimes you may design a lesson around a Universal Design for Learning (UDL) framework, which means you’ve built these considerations into the plan and do not need to retrofit differentiation strategies later.
- Assessment: Explain how you will measure students’ progress toward lesson objectives and mastery of selected standards. Make sure you are collecting tangible evidence. .
CONCLUSION
This chapter outlines effective methods of instructional planning, but other methods exist in the world. You may have observed a teacher teach differently, perhaps more spontaneously, and enjoyed the experience. Keep in mind that all students are not the same. What worked for you or your family or friends is likely not the best or only way that teaching should be done. Teaching is challenging, complicated work, but with a solid understanding of curriculum, planning, assessment, and instruction, teachers are prepared to reach all students and move them to the next level of knowledge, skill, and understanding.
A substitute teacher was supposed to give an assessment while the classroom teacher was away, but one student refused to take the test. “He started yelling and walked out of the room, saying he wasn’t going to take this test that the teacher left for him. He kept saying that he is supposed to have questions read aloud to him, but that isn’t fair and I wasn’t going to do it!” Sometimes we think that fairness means everyone is treated the same way, but in reality, “fairness” involves meeting the needs of different students. In this example, the student had an IEP(individualized Education Plan) accommodation that allowed him to have tests read aloud to him. When considering instruction, and assessment, sometimes treating all students the same is actually quite unfair, since students have different learning needs and strengths.
In this chapter, we will begin to explore the standards and planning for instruction.
Chapter Outline
Effective teachers must plan effective lessons, which are based on standards. Standards vary depending on the state where you teach. Standards tell teachers the key information that students should understand in specific content areas at varying grade levels. As a teacher, you are responsible for knowing the standards you are responsible for teaching and planning effective lessons to help students learn the information explained in the standards. An elementary school teacher is responsible for standards in English, math, science, and social studies; a secondary teacher typically specializes in one area, such as history. There are also standards for fine arts, languages, and other areas.
Some states use state-developed standards, while other states adopted the Common Core State Standards[7]. These standards have been an attempt to move the nation closer to a unified set of standards. As of 2021, 41 states, the District of Columbia, four territories, and the Department of Defense Education Activity (DoDEA) have adopted them, with varying degrees of implementation and support at the district levels (Common Core States Standards Initiative, 2021).
It is not uncommon to hear a teacher or parent say that they want schools to “cover” curriculum or standards; however, “coverage” is not conducive to deep understanding. Instead, a teacher should review the standards and local curriculum as a part of their planning, with a focus on big, transferable ideas (Wiggins & McTighe, 2005). This is considered depth of material, rather than simply breadth of material.
Standards and curriculum are not the same thing. Standards tell you what to teach; curriculum (and corresponding methods) tells you how to teach. Figure 6.1 compares and contrasts standards and curriculum.
Figure 6.1: A Comparison of Standards and Curriculum
Planning
Sometimes your school or district will provide lesson plans for you, but more often, you will have the autonomy to make your own lesson plans. Teachers may be part of a Professional Learning Community (PLC) with other teachers in the same grade or content area. During these PLCs, teachers plan together and often look at student assessment data to determine what to further emphasize for students or teach in a different way. They may also have a common book or article to read in the field of education to expand their knowledge of teaching and learning. A teacher of a “special” area or elective subject like music or art might occasionally meet with teachers in other local schools to share information and discuss curriculum, lessons, or assessments. Working with others in planning is a critical skill to learn as a teacher.
One of the most effective planning strategies is Backward Design (Wiggins & McTighe, 2005). Figure 6.2 depicts a backward design planning process. While it is common for new or inexperienced teachers to focus on “filling the time,” or “what” they will teach, backward design involves following these steps:
- Identifying the desired goals and objectives;
- Determining acceptable evidence and assessments; and
- Planning instruction (Wiggins & McTighe, 2005).
This does not mean that a teacher will have the exact final assessment ready before the first day of instruction; however, teachers should have a clear idea of the format of the assessment and know what kinds of questions and content will be on it.
Figure 6.2: Backward Design Process
Critical Lens: Homework
We all have had homework during our K-12 schooling. You may have had it as early as kindergarten. There is debate about whether or not schools should even give homework, especially for a grade. Why? It comes down to issues of equity. If a family member is not available to help or is not fluent in the language of instruction, then the student has less of a chance to accurately complete a homework assignment. Since homework is often factored into grades, this can negatively impact students without additional resources. What is also important to remember as teachers is that homework should never be new material: it should always be a review and reinforcement of instruction that has already been provided. Listen to the "Is It Time to Ban Homework?"[8] podcast from Trending in Education to learn more.
Lesson Plan Components and Models
Lesson planning is a key component to any effective instruction. Experienced teachers do not usually script their lesson plans; however, many districts will ask even seasoned teachers to turn in lesson plans for the week or month. All lesson plans will contain similar elements, sometimes in a different order.
- Standards: Select the specific standards you will teach in this particular lesson. Note that you will often choose one sub-standard, or piece, of a standard to teach, and it may take multiple lessons for students to master the content.
- Objectives: State what students will know, understand, and do by the end of the lesson. Objectives can be phrased as “The student will…” or, from a student perspective, “I can…”. Content objectives should directly relate to the standards, and language objectives should be included for English Learners.
- Materials: List all materials, such as books, resources, tools, websites, and other items that will be used for the lesson. This assists you with gathering materials so you are prepared to teach the lesson.
- Procedures: Break down the lesson into specific steps you will follow. Think of it as programming: you must provide simple, clear steps to achieve the lesson’s instructional goals.
- Differentiation: Consider how you will adapt your lesson to meet the needs of specific types of learners. For example, how will you support your English Learners, challenge your students who are gifted, or enable a student who struggles with spelling to participate without getting frustrated? Sometimes you may design a lesson around a Universal Design for Learning (UDL) framework, which means you’ve built these considerations into the plan and do not need to retrofit differentiation strategies later.
- Assessment: Explain how you will measure students’ progress toward lesson objectives and mastery of selected standards. Make sure you are collecting tangible evidence. .
CONCLUSION
This chapter outlines effective methods of instructional planning, but other methods exist in the world. You may have observed a teacher teach differently, perhaps more spontaneously, and enjoyed the experience. Keep in mind that all students are not the same. What worked for you or your family or friends is likely not the best or only way that teaching should be done. Teaching is challenging, complicated work, but with a solid understanding of curriculum, planning, assessment, and instruction, teachers are prepared to reach all students and move them to the next level of knowledge, skill, and understanding.
Unlearning Box
Joey comes to school in the morning, and one of his classmates makes a negative comment about his shirt. It’s already been a rough morning--he accidentally overslept his alarm and his grandma was yelling at him to hurry up so he wouldn’t be late--so he snaps at his classmate, “Oh shut up.” His teacher overhears and says, “We don’t use that language at school, so now your card is on yellow.” He tries to explain: “But he--” but his teacher interrupts. “Oh, now you’re talking back to me? That’s a red card and now you have silent lunch.”
Joey was having a rough morning, and the classroom environment didn’t help him at all. In this example, you can see how some traditional approaches to behavior management--including card-flipping systems and silent lunch--don’t get to the root of the problem and actually can cause more harm, making them ineffective practices.
In this chapter, we will investigate the elements of classroom environment, how trauma impacts classroom environments, critical community stakeholders in classroom environments, and strategies for building a positive classroom environment.
Chapter Outline
Elements of Classroom Environment
In order for students to be successful at school, we must first carefully craft a supportive, learning-centered classroom environment. There are many aspects to consider when designing your classroom environment. Some are within your direct control as an educator, and others are not.
Three things you can control as you craft your own classroom environment are physical set-up, overall atmosphere, and behavior management. Together, you may hear these elements referred to as “classroom management.” The idea behind this term is that you have certain systems in your classroom that need to be “managed,” or organized, in order to scaffold your students’ success.
- Physical set-up: How are desks and tables arranged? Can all students easily see the Smartboard or dry erase board? Are there spaces for students to participate in whole-group, small-group, and individual learning? Are learning materials (including math manipulatives, paper, pencils, science notebooks, and books for reading) easily accessible and organized?
- Overall atmosphere: Does the classroom feel structured, warm, and welcoming, or does it feel cold, sterile, and depersonalized? Does the teacher interact with students in positive ways that build their trust, or does the teacher yell at students and talk down to them? Do students feel like this is a “home” for them and their learning, or do they count down the hours each day until they can leave?
- Behavior management: Are there clear expectations of acceptable behavior in the classroom? Are there clearly-established norms or policies, or is everyone unclear exactly what the “rules” are? Are there clear consequences or rewards for off- or on-task behavior? Are these rewards and consequences applied to all students equitably, or are some students in certain groups offered more rewards or more consequences compared with similar behaviors in their peers? Is there a communication system in place so educators, students, and families know these expectations and how the performance of their specific student measures up?
Some elements are beyond your control in your classroom, such as trauma students may have experienced previously, or what resources your families or community has access to or lacks. In addition, sometimes cultural differences manifest themselves as apparent “misbehavior.” For example, if an educator comes from a culture where young people should look their elders in the eyes to show respect, they may accidentally label “misbehavior” in students who come from cultures where avoiding eye contact is actually a sign of respect. You may hear of these characteristics as part of a metaphorical “cultural iceberg” (Figure 11.1). On the surface, you may see cultural elements like cuisine, holidays, or ways of dressing; however, even more lies below this “visible” surface, such as body language, concepts of fairness, and even expectations of what “good behavior” means.
Figure 11.1: The Cultural Iceberg Model
Trauma, resources, and culture, though not part of “classroom management,” still impact the overall classroom environment, and therefore are important to be aware of. For this reason, we intentionally refer to “classroom environment” throughout this chapter because we feel it is more inclusive of the many contexts and systems that impact your students’ learning success.
Critical Lens: Race and Classroom Management
While we like to think of our classrooms as fair, equitable places when it comes to classroom management, the reality is that this isn’t always true. Teachers of all races are more likely to punish Black students (Smith, 2015), and Black girls are seven times more likely to be suspended than White girls (Finley, 2017). Sometimes, getting in trouble at school is an entry point into the juvenile detention system, leading to what is known as the “school-to-prison pipeline.” [9] It is important for educators to be aware of these statistics and trends in order to proactively support all students’ success within the classroom and beyond.
Trauma in the Educational Setting
When you think of a classroom environment, you may first think of a warm, welcoming environment where all students can thrive. The reality is that trauma can have a very real impact on students’ participation in instruction and the classroom community. Sometimes this trauma happens outside of the classroom, like Adverse Childhood Experiences; sometimes this trauma happens inside the classroom, like bullying. Being aware of different ways our students experience trauma both within and beyond the classroom helps us create learning environments that meet the needs of our students.
Adverse Childhood Experiences
Our students, like Joey, come to school each day wearing an invisible backpack, filled with all of the experiences they have had in life. Some of these invisible backpacks are light because our students’ experiences thus far have been loving, safe, and predictable. Unfortunately, too many of our students wear heavy backpacks full of experiences that have been frightening, unpredictable, and unsafe. These experiences can be characterized as Adverse Childhood Experiences (ACEs). Childhood exposure to abuse, neglect, and household dysfunction may lead to increased social, emotional, and behavioral difficulties as well as decreased academic performance in the educational environment. Additionally, traditional means of interventions and support may not be successful in modifying behaviors for the long-term. Meeting the needs of our students impacted by adverse childhood experiences requires a shift in the educational setting to focus on the consistent development of healthy relationships between students and staff including the implementation of trauma-informed classrooms and interventions.
The relationship between early adverse experiences and later health outcomes can be impacted by a variety of factors, including resiliency, or the ability to bounce back from these experiences. The Center on the Developing Child at Harvard University studies resilience in children and explains what it is in the video In Brief: What is Resilience?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cqO7YoMsccU&feature=emb_logo
Resilience can be fostered through protective factors including one strong, positive relationship with an adult. As educators, we have the opportunity to be a protective factor in our students’ lives through our understanding of adverse experiences, their impact on our students, and developing and utilizing empathy in the classroom.
ACEs in the Classroom
Our students’ invisible backpacks can be filled with experiences that weigh them down and impact their ability to function successfully in the educational environment. These can be single-episode experiences, such as a house fire or car accident, or the more complex experience of developmental traumas. Developmental traumas can include ongoing physical, sexual, and emotional abuse, physical and emotional neglect, and household dysfunction. Abuse is defined by a caregiver’s action, or failure to act, resulting in death, significant physical or emotional harm, or the exploitation of a child under the age of 18 (Child Welfare Information Gateway, n.d.). Physical neglect can include failure to consistently meet basic needs such as food and shelter, as well as providing a safe, clean environment. (Recall Maslow’s hierarchy of needs that you learned in previous chapters: our physiological needs, such as food and shelter, must be met before we can do other things, like learning.) Failure to provide adequate medical and dental care are also forms of neglect, though families without resources are subject to these issues and, as a result, children experience a lack of adequate care, beyond their families’ control. Emotional neglect involves the failure to meet or recognize a child’s emotional needs. Household dysfunction is the most common adverse childhood experience in childhood as many of the characteristics are often co-occurring. This category includes a variety of factors impacting caregivers such as divorce or separation, alcohol and/or substance abuse, mental health issues, domestic violence, and incarceration (Felitti et al., 1998).
The dose-effect, or the frequency, severity, and duration of the experiences in our students’ lives can heavily impact their behavioral, social, emotional, and academic success. Bessel van der Kolk (2014) states the impact of chronic traumatic stress, the repetitive exposure to an experience overloading the body’s ability to cope, includes “pervasive biological and emotional dysregulation, failed or disrupted attachment, problems staying focused and on track, and a hugely deficient sense of coherent personal identity and competence” (p. 168). In essence, our students who experience chronic, traumatic stress can struggle to tolerate frustration and control their emotions, struggle to engage in healthy peer and adult relationships, as well as struggle to engage in executive functioning tasks such as initiating, sustaining, and completing work. This primarily occurs because trauma impacts their ability to access the prefrontal cortex, the part of the brain responsible for these functions. The prefrontal cortex is part of the cerebrum. Instead, students with higher exposure to adverse childhood experiences tend to function more frequently in the brainstem, the part of the brain responsible for the autonomic responses of fight, flight, and freeze.
Figure 11.2 highlights the differences in brain functioning for a child who experienced typical early development and one who experienced developmental trauma. The areas of the brain responsible for cognition are far less active in students with developmental trauma while the part of the brain responsible for survival (i.e. fight, flight, or freeze) becomes the default response system.
Figure 11.2: Brain Development and Trauma
The fight, flight, or freeze response in the educational environment can inhibit our students’ ability to access their education effectively. It can also be disruptive to the learning of their peers. Some examples of fight, flight, or freeze responses include hitting, kicking, screaming, elopement (running away), pulling away from adults, not moving, hiding under furniture, shutting down, and withdrawing. It is important for us to remember these behaviors are coping skills that developed in response to stress or trauma the student was unable to manage any other way. Additionally, our student is not doing this to us. They are responding to a situation, internal or external, in which there is no other accessible way to cope. These situations are commonly referred to as triggers and may not always be predictable or observable for students with developmental trauma. For this reason, it is vital we develop policies and practices within the classroom which are trauma-informed as it will foster an environment in which empathy is present and healing can occur.
Bullying in the Classroom
While ACEs occur outside of the classroom setting, another element of trauma for students in school can be bullying. In 2017, about 20 percent of students ages 12–18 reported being bullied at school during the school year (U.S. Department of Justice, 2017). In order for behavior to be considered bullying, the behavior must be aggressive and include:
- An imbalance of power. Students who bully use their power--such as physical strength, access to embarrassing information, or popularity--to control or harm others. Power imbalances can change over time and in different situations, even if they involve the same people.
- Repetition of behavior. Bullying behaviors happen more than once and establish a pattern of behavior. One stand-alone hurtful comment or action is not the same as bullying.
There are generally three types of bullying: verbal bullying, social bullying, and physical bullying. Verbal bullying is saying mean things and includes behaviors such as teasing, name calling, inappropriate sexual comments, taunting and threatening to cause harm. Social bullying, sometimes referred to as relational bullying, involves hurting someone’s reputation or relationships. Social bullying includes leaving someone out on purpose, telling other children not to be friends with someone, spreading rumors about someone, and/or embarrassing someone in public. Physical bullying involves hurting a person’s body or possessions. Physical bullying includes behaviors such as kicking or hitting, spitting, tripping or pushing, taking or breaking someone’s things, and/or making rude or mean hand gestures. In 2017, about 42 percent of students who reported being bullied at school indicated that the bullying was related to at least one of the following characteristics: physical appearance (30%), race (10%), gender (8%), disability (7%), ethnicity (7%), religion (5%), and sexual orientation (4%) (U.S. Department of Justice, 2017).
Cyberbullying, also referred to as electronic bullying, is bullying that takes place using electronic technology. Electronic technology includes devices and equipment such as cell phones, computers and tablets, as well as communication tools such as social media sites, text messages, chat, and websites. Examples of cyberbullying include mean text messages or emails, rumors sent by email or posted on social networking sites, and embarrassing pictures, videos, websites, or fake profiles.
Unlike bullying, cyberbullying can happen 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, and reach a student even when they are alone. It can happen any time of day or night. Cyberbullying messages can be posted anonymously and distributed quickly to a wide audience. It can be difficult and sometimes impossible to trace the source. Deleting inappropriate or harassing messages, texts, and pictures can be extremely difficult after they have been posted or sent.
Bullying and cyberbullying have significant implications when it comes to trauma and our students’ school and life experiences. Children who are cyberbullied or bullied in school are more likely to use drugs and alcohol, skip school, be unwilling to attend school, receive poor grades, have lower self-esteem and more health problems. There can also be the most devastating of consequences: a child committing suicide.
As an educator, you are in a position to prevent bullying or intervene when it happens. Later in this chapter, we will discuss how to create a positive classroom environment for students in order to mitigate the chances of bullying in school and beyond.
Critical Community Stakeholders in Classroom Environments
As teachers, we are not expected to create positive classroom environments all by ourselves. Community stakeholders, including school social workers and families, also play a critical role.
School Social Workers
With their unique training, perspective, and expertise, school social workers can be valuable assets in school communities. Introduced to the education system in 1906 as "visiting teachers," school social workers were tasked with gathering the histories of students to assist in the evaluation process, and then delivering interventions based on the results.
Today, school social workers are considered to be “trained mental health professionals who can assist with mental health concerns, behavioral concerns, positive behavioral support, academic, and classroom support, consultation with teachers, parents, and administrators as well as provide individual and group counseling/therapy” (School Social Work Association of America, n.d.). Although school social workers may not be utilized in all states or school districts, the benefits for those that do are clear. As members of school teams, they are able to assist at the building level as well as classroom, group, and individual levels to meet the social-emotional needs of both students and staff. Their commitment to bridging the gap between home and school can facilitate stronger engagement and relationships with caregivers in the academic lives of their children. Additionally, school social workers are educated in understanding the impact of systemic experiences and structures on the development of children and families. This knowledge is important in today’s schools as we learn more about the effects of adverse experiences on our students’ abilities to fully benefit from their education.
School social workers can provide prevention and intervention services at the building level, including developing and implementing social-emotional curricula aimed at improving emotional intelligence and developing a sense of belonging within the school setting. Support can be provided at the classroom level as well to provide more targeted interventions based on the need of small groups. Teachers can work with school social workers to discuss specific student and family concerns, gain ideas for social-emotional interventions, and to monitor the progress of students' behavior. School social workers can also assist with prevention programs, such as those for reducing student drop-out or suicides, as well as targeting specific populations, such as students experiencing homelessness, who may need additional support.
At the family level, school social workers can connect families with community resources to increase stability, safety, and health within the community. School social workers can meet with families in their homes to better understand any specific concerns or needs the family may have and determine the appropriate interventions. Robert Constable (2016) stated, “The basic focus of the school social worker is the constellation of teacher, parent, and child. The social worker must be able to relate to and work with all aspects of the child’s situation, but the basic skill underlying all of this is assessment, a systematic way of understanding and communicating what is happening and what is possible” (p. 6). Operating from a strengths-based perspective, school social workers can engage with families in a nonjudgmental manner and ensure that all parties have a common understanding and goal.
Finally, the role of school social workers is heavily focused on ensuring the social-emotional health and needs of students are supported. Direct services provided can include individual and group counseling, as well as crisis response, such as conducting risk assessments for students experiencing suicidal ideation. Social workers can provide clinical intervention in a variety of school-related mental health concerns including anxiety, depression, coping skills, and emotional regulation. Services can also be provided to address social skills deficits including assisting students in understanding their social environment. The School Social Work Association of America (n.d.) provides a visual representation of The Role of School Social Workers.
Families and The Community
Sometime during your career, you may hear teachers talking about their students’ families in a way that conveys a deficit view of families by positioning families as “uncaring,” while the reality is likely quite different. Families might be unable to attend a conference due to various challenges with scheduling, transportation, childcare, or their own negative experiences in school. This statement also reveals misunderstandings of the differences between family involvement versus family engagement, two terms that are often used interchangeably but actually are distinct concepts.
Family Involvement vs. Family Engagement
Family involvement tends to be more school-oriented, whereas family engagement tends to be more family-oriented. Ferlazzo (2011) described family involvement as the school holding the expectations for family participation and telling families what they need to do. In other words, the school does things “to” or “for” families and families respond. For example, consider when it is time for teacher conferences: the school sends out a schedule, and the expectation is that families will come to school at the appointed time. The goal for these meetings is often a one-sided transition of information, where the teacher reports back to the family how the student is performing in class, while expecting the family to be somewhat passive acceptors of this information.
Family engagement, on the other hand, indicates working “with” families: sharing responsibility and working together to support children’s learning. In this case, when it is time for teacher conferences, the teachers are encouraged to work with families and find ways to communicate with all of them. While some families will come to school at the scheduled time, some might schedule a phone call when they are on break from work, while others might prefer to do FaceTime because they want to see the teacher. Teachers will also engage family members as contributors, asking them what they have seen at home, or what their celebrations, goals, or concerns are for their child’s learning.
Schools cannot exist without families, and therefore there is a great need for partnerships between schools and families. Families can contribute to school communities in a variety of ways, even well beyond volunteering in classrooms or contributing to required fundraisers. Families can use their firsthand knowledge of the local community to help connect teachers with community agencies or experts for a field trip or classroom visits. All students bring a wealth of background experiences--often built with their families--to the classroom each day, which can help students connect to and understand learning goals and the world around them. Remember that while there are some more visible, traditional forms of support (like volunteering or joining the PTA), families partner with educators in limitless ways to support a common goal: their child’s learning and growth.
Critical Lens: Cultural Norms for Family Engagement
Different cultures have different norms for how families should be involved in their child’s education. Some cultures believe that educators are the trained experts and leave their child’s learning fully up to the school as a sign of respect for the teacher’s position. Some cultures believe that families and teachers are co-educators. Be careful not to judge family engagement based on your own cultural background!
Building strong partnerships between schools and families also requires a reconfiguration of the traditional view of “family.” Be careful not to assume that a student’s family consists of a mother and father. Families might consist of same-sex parents, grandparents, aunts and uncles, step-parents, adopted parents, foster parents, older siblings, and more. For this reason, using the word “family” instead of “parents” can be more inclusive. In addition, we need to view communities as part of families, and schools can engage with their community “families” in creative ways. For example, some schools have “grandmas.” These community grandmas come into the classroom a few days a week to tell stories about their lives and listen to students share their own stories. This partnership demonstrates a beautiful way to build meaningful relationships between the school and community.
Interrupting Bias and Stereotypes in School/Family Partnerships
Viewing children and families through one lens, a deficit lens, is harmful and imposes limits on what they can accomplish. Implicit biases and stereotypes are damaging to school-family partnerships and are often detrimental to students' success. Let’s look at two fairly common stereotypes.
One common stereotype is that families do not come to school because they do not care. In reality, there are many possible reasons why families do not come to school. Edwards (2016) offers that families of color may have had unpleasant experiences in schools themselves and are not willing to succumb to the “ghosts” of school again. As children they were not welcome or well-treated in school and cannot bring themselves to enter the buildings again; schools were traumatic places.
Another common stereotype is that families have nothing to offer their children or school. In reality, families are their children’s first teachers. Deficit views of families negate the fact that prior to coming to school, children have learned their family’s language and culture by being immersed in them. Children learn their families’ and communities’ ways of knowing and being by interacting and engaging with community members and families.
To build stronger school-family partnerships, schools can reframe the traditional reliance upon family involvement instead of family engagement. The norm for involving families is that the school dictates the needs and reaches out to families, telling them the needs. Instead, reframing this partnership to one of family engagement invites collaboration and shifts from a deficit orientation to a strengths-based perspective. Families have a lot to offer in an educator’s work toward building positive classroom environments, and schools need to take note of the resources available in their community and extend invitations for meaningful work.
Strategies for Building a Positive Classroom Environment
The development of a strong sense of community and belonging in the classroom is essential to building relationships that may serve as protective factors for our students. Implementation of practices and approaches built around empathy, the ability to recognize and feel the emotions of others, has the ability to positively impact all students, but is critical to the success of students who have experienced adversity.
At times, it is difficult to separate our empathy with students from our sympathy for students. Some of our students experience such difficult lives and our sympathy leads us to expect less of them. Interacting with students from a place of sympathy does not build our connections with them and does not let them know we believe in them. Table 7.1 shows differences in statements focused on empathy versus sympathy.
Table 7.1: Statements Focused on Empathy vs. Sympathy
Empathy |
Sympathy |
| I can see you are frustrated right now. How can I help you? | I’m sorry you’re frustrated, but you need to get back to work. |
| Wow, you had a really hard morning. When I have a hard morning, sometimes I need a few minutes before I’m ready to work. Would you like some time before you get started? | Wow, what a horrible morning. You don’t have to do this assignment. |
| I noticed you aren’t with your friends like usual. Is there anything you want to talk about? | Why weren’t you with your friends today? |
| Can you tell me how you are feeling right now? | What’s wrong? |
https://youtu.be/1Evwgu369Jw
It is our job as educators to create an environment that models empathy for students to facilitate trust and security. Bob Sornson (2014) states, “By helping children learn empathy, we raise the odds they will have strong positive social relationships, truly care for others, and be able to set appropriate limits in their own lives without using angry behaviors or words” (para. 2). Traditional elements of a classroom environment, including structured, predictable routines and morning meetings, can be expanded with the intention to increase opportunities for empathy on a daily basis. However, some traditional models of classroom management include practices that interfere with the development of healthy connections between teachers and our students. Building connections with students can be challenging at times and take effort and repeated attempts with students who have experienced adversity; furthermore, these relationships can be damaged quickly if we use practices that do not align with building empathy.
Table 7.2 provides an overview of some management practices to avoid and to use, though you will get much more in-depth information on classroom management strategies as you continue in your pathway as a preservice teacher.
Table 7.2: Classroom Management Practices
| Classroom Management Practices to Avoid | Classroom Management Practices to Use |
|
|
As you develop getting-to-know-you surveys or beginning-of-the-year activities, it is important to make sure all students will be able to answer the questions. Avoid questions that may be impacted by privilege such as those related to vacations or material items.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n0Fv2NnqF5o
Mindfulness in the Educational Setting
The ability to self-regulate is an important developmental milestone for all students and requires co-regulation from a loving, consistent adult to develop in early childhood. The use of mindfulness-based activities in schools is a research-based strategy with benefits for students, teachers, and the classroom community as a whole. Strategies can include external and internal focuses as well as utilize the five senses to help students remain rooted in the present moment. Activities can be embedded into the structure of the daily classroom routine and increase the sense of calm across the environment. Mindfulness strategies can be modified and adapted to meet the needs of a variety of students. Utilizing these skills regularly in the classroom is a social-emotional strategy that can benefit all students regardless of their early life experiences.
Jon Kabat-Zinn (2003), an expert in mindfulness, defines it as “the awareness that emerges through paying attention on purpose, in the present moment, and nonjudgmentally to the unfolding of experience moment by moment” (p. 145). Simply put, it is intentionally noticing our internal and external environments without judging what we find. This intentional awareness requires consistent training and practice in order to benefit. Mindfulness can include a variety of activities based around movement, touch, breathing, and the senses as well as the use of reflection.
Students may need teaching practices to be adapted by using shorter activities, using more activities with movement (such as yoga), and using props or visual aides to assist them in focusing on specific sensations. Small things such as the use of a stuffed animal can be beneficial to teaching deep breathing by allowing the student to put it on their stomach and instructing them to make it go up and down using their breath. A strategy to use mindfulness to focus on sensations is the use of a mint to facilitate students’ ability to engage. Teachers can guide this practice by inviting students to use their senses to explore the mint. Questions that can be asked include: What color is the mint? Is there a pattern? What does the mint smell like? What does the mint feel like on your tongue? What does it taste like? How does the texture or size of the mint change over time? What sound does the mint make when you bite it? Having students focus on an object and use their senses to explore it, keeps students grounded in the present moment which is the essence of mindfulness practice. It is important to remember students may need concrete activities to be able to access the practices effectively. Additionally, students should be given the option to keep their eyes open during any mindfulness activity to promote safety and trust.
Mindfulness strategies can be simple activities which can be easily implemented in the daily routines of a classroom. It is important to consider the developmental age of our students as well as what activities might be appropriate on a given day. Implementation of practices should begin with short activities and increase as students are able to successfully engage in the strategies. Some activities may require props to implement and others can be done using visual or auditory guides from the internet. Waterford.org provides a list of 51 Mindful Exercises for Kids in the Classroom that can be accessed and used with a variety of age groups. Activities for secondary students are available from PositivePsychology.com under 25 Mindfulness Activities for Children and Teens. Remember, implementing mindfulness strategies in the classroom can cost nothing, other than the commitment to practicing intentionally and protecting time within the day for our classroom community.
Benefits of Mindfulness
The regular and consistent use of mindfulness strategies has been found to be beneficial for the whole person, including both physical and mental well-being. Hofmann et al. (2010) reviewed 39 studies on the impact of mindfulness-based therapy on a variety of mental health and physical diagnoses. Results of the meta-analysis revealed improvement in symptoms of anxiety and depression, including those that may be related to an underlying medical condition. Additionally, the benefits of mindfulness were not found to be relative to specific diagnoses because of the impact on general wellbeing. Within the school system, mindfulness has also been proven to positively impact a variety of areas for students, including attention, emotional regulation, compassion, and reduction of stress and anxiety (Mindful Schools, n.d.). The consistent use of these strategies also benefits teachers and improves teacher-student relationships (Flook et al., 2013).
The benefits of stronger emotional regulation through mindfulness-based practices extend into all areas of our students’ lives. Schonert-Reichl et al. (2015) found implementation of a social-emotional curriculum for as little as four months led to improved behavioral and academic functioning for students. Additional benefits include improved impulse control, focus and attention, and stronger peer relationships through the development of compassion and empathy for others. The implementation of a regular mindfulness practice in the classroom benefits not only individual students, but also the entire classroom community, including the teachers.
Conclusion
Before students can learn, they must first feel safe, supported, and valued. Creating empathy-driven classroom environments involves intentional decisions about specific elements under the educator’s control, such as an accessible physical arrangement of the classroom, an affirming atmosphere, and using humanizing management strategies while intentionally avoiding those that cause humiliation or shame. Additionally, educators can partner with critical community stakeholders, such as school social workers and family or community members, to access additional resources to support students’ success.
Creating empathy-driven classroom environments also involves awareness of elements that are not under the educator’s control. Adverse childhood experiences are common within our classrooms, with varying degrees of impact on the social, emotional, behavioral, and cognitive functioning of our students. Understanding the unique histories of each of our students is important, but so is uncovering who they are as individuals including what makes them resilient. A history of adverse experiences does not mean our students cannot learn and grow and develop healthy relationships. It means they have experiences that may change the path that gets them there and will need the positive adult connection we can provide as their teacher even more.
To create an empathy-focused classroom environment, there are certain elements to include--such as routines, morning meetings, and developing individual relationships with students--and elements to avoid, such as clip charts or card-flipping systems, group punishment, and public humiliation. Building and implementing a trauma-informed classroom with empathy at the core is a practice that supports all students and will increase a sense of community and belonging for all.
Building and modeling empathy fosters a reciprocal relationship in which students can feel educators’ genuine care and concern for their best interests. We lay the foundation for our students’ success by intentionally creating a humanizing classroom environment in which they can learn and grow.
Chapter Outline
Response to Intervention (RtI)
Response to Intervention (RtI) is a tiered model designed to help identify and support students with learning and behavior needs. The RtI framework consists of three tiers, referred to as Tier 1, Tier 2, and Tier 3. We will examine this framework in the next few paragraphs.
The Rehabilitation Act established a very broad definition of disability in 1973, which was subsequently incorporated into the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) in 1990. Any individual who has an impairment that significantly impacts their ability to perform a major life function (such as walking, speaking, learning, or sitting) is defined as an individual with a disability and receives protection under these two laws (Rehabilitation Act, 1973). The Rehabilitation Act and ADA are civil rights laws that evolved from the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and extend the protections of educational access and equal opportunity to individuals with disabilities.
Broadly, the Rehabilitation Act addresses disability-related discrimination by any institution that receives public funding and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act specifically applies to schools, including institutions of higher education. The ADA provides protections in all public facilities other than churches and private clubs (Smith, 2001). Generally speaking, educators implement the protections of Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act and the ADA by providing accommodations that allow students with disabilities to fully access curricular materials and physical spaces. In most cases, accommodations provided through Section 504 are specific to the needs of the individual student and are documented in a 504 plan. Examples include providing technology with speech-to-text features for a student with physical impairments that significantly impact writing or a chair with armrests for a student who needs additional support for core stability. Conversely in school settings, ADA supports are often proactively added to public spaces and materials to provide accessibility for all. Examples include closed captioning of videos, curb cuts, ramps or elevators, and fire alarms that provide both auditory and visual alerts.
In contrast to the Rehabilitation Act and ADA, the Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act (IDEIA) has a much more specific definition of disability. An individual must have characteristics that align with one or more of 14 eligibility categories (referenced in Table 2.2) and those characteristics must have a negative impact on learning. A very specific evaluation process is used to determine if a student qualifies for services under the IDEIA.
Table 2.2: Categories of Disability under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act
|
|
The IDEIA provides protections to students between the ages of 3 and 21, though the protections are discontinued when a student graduates from high school with a standard diploma. The law is focused on ensuring that students with disabilities receive a Free Appropriate Public Education (FAPE). This means that students must receive specially designed instruction, including special education and accommodations, that allows them to make meaningful progress toward the curriculum and their individual learning goals. All of these services must be provided at public expense. A unique learning plan for each student, called an Individualized Education Plan (IEP), must be developed annually by a team that includes general and special education teachers, administrators, the student’s parents, and the student (when age-appropriate). Additionally, the IEP must be implemented in the Least Restrictive Environment (LRE). The principle of LRE states that students with disabilities must be educated in the same setting as their peers who do not have disabilities, unless it is not possible for the student to make progress in that setting even when additional supports are added.
Critical Lens: IDEA or IDEIA? The Lingo of Special Education
In 1990, Congress reauthorized the Education for All Handicapped Children Act and renamed it the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. The acronym IDEA quickly became embedded in the lingo of education, referencing the law itself and the “idea” that equal educational access for individuals with disabilities was becoming a valued part of our educational system. In 2004, Congress reauthorized the law again, providing some additional clarity and protections. They named this update the Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act, making the official acronym IDEIA. Although IDEIA is the most technically correct abbreviation, educators still use the word “idea” when discussing the law.
With the reauthorization of IDEIA in 2004, RtI gained popularity as a model designed to identify and provide early intervention as a preventative method for students who are at risk of learning difficulties. Many states have adopted the Multi-Tiered System of Supports (MTSS) model instead of RtI. Although we are not going to expand on the similarities and differences of these two models, it is important to note that, as the name implies, RtI is often a component of MTSS.
RtI Framework
As previously mentioned, the RtI framework consists of three tiers. One of the main premises of RtI is the assessment and monitoring of students' progress. States have flexibility on how to enact RtI, but they generally follow some basic principles. At the beginning of each school-year, all students are go through a universal screening process in order to identify those who are potentially at risk of falling behind. After a specified timeframe and consistent monitoring, students who do not demonstrate expected progress might be referred to a different tier within RtI.
The basic principle of RtI is that every child should receive high-quality, research-based core instruction in their regular classroom. The regular education that every child receives in school is the Tier 1 in the RtI framework. By improving classroom instruction and implementing evidence-based practices, fewer students are expected to need educational intervention. Ideally, 75-85% of students will thrive in Tier 1.
However, some students struggle even when receiving high-quality instruction. Such students are referred to Tier 2, where they receive an extra layer of support. Student in Tier 2 work in smaller groups and receive differentiated instruction. For instance, some students struggle reading due to a lack of decoding skills, while other students might not speak English as their first language. Tier 2 is designed to provide differentiated interventions to meet the individual needs of each student. Tier 2 intervention is provided in addition to Tier 1. Ideally 10-20% of students will need Tier 2 intervention.
Finally, students who do not show the expected improvement in Tier 2 can be referred to Tier 3. Tier 3 intervention is more individualized and intensive. Students normally receive intervention in very small groups, generally up to three students, or individually. Tier 3 intervention also takes place more often and/or for a larger amount of time. Only 5-10% of students are expected to need this type of intervention. Students in Tier 3 who still do not reach their educational goals might be referred to Special Education (SPED).
Universal Design for Learning
Universal Design for Learning (UDL) is a framework to improve and optimize teaching and learning for all people based on scientific insights into how humans learn.
The UDL Guidelines are a tool used in the implementation of Universal Design for Learning. These guidelines offer a set of concrete suggestions that can be applied to any discipline or domain to ensure that all learners can access and participate in meaningful, challenging learning opportunities.
Engagement
For purposeful, motivated learners, stimulate interest and motivation for learning.
Representation
For resourceful, knowledgeable learners, present information and content in different ways.
Action & Expression
For strategic, goal-directed learners, differentiate the ways that students can express what they know.
Additional Similarities and Differences that Can Impact Learning
In addition to the influences on student learning we have already explored in earlier chapters, there are two additional sub-groups of students you will work with in your future classroom that have very unique learning strengths and needs: Emerging Bilinguals (EBs), commonly referred to as English Learners (ELs), and students with disabilities.
Gifted Learners
Teachers often find it difficult to understand the specific needs of gifted students, which means they often don't get the support they need in the classroom. A common response is "they will do fine all by themselves." However, that is far from accurate. The reality is, however, without a doubt the most difficult student in your classroom is generally the one who finishes every assignment in less than five minutes and requires constant redirection. Gifted learners have unique needs to help them reach their full potential.
The Davidson Institute has a long history of supporting gifted learners. There are generally five strategies that teachers can employ to help their gifted learners to thrive:
-
Familiarize Yourself with the Characteristics of Intellectually Gifted Students
Not all gifted students in your classroom will be identified and even those who are may not always appear to be gifted. Gifted students come from all ethnic groups, they are both boys and girls, they live in both rural and urban areas and they aren’t always straight A students. Students who are intellectually gifted demonstrate many characteristics, including: a precocious ability to think abstractly, an extreme need for constant mental stimulation; an ability to learn and process complex information very rapidly; and a need to explore subjects in depth. Students who demonstrate these characteristics learn differently. Thus, they have unique academic needs. Imagine what your behavior and presentation would be like if, as a high school junior, you were told by the school district that you had to go back to third grade. Or, from a more historical perspective, what if you were Mozart and you were told you had to take beginning music classes because of your age. This is often the experience of the gifted child. Some choose to be successful given the constructs of public school and others choose to rebel. Either way, a few simple changes to their academic experience can dramatically improve the quality of their lives — and, mostly likely, yours!
-
Let Go of “Normal”
In order to be an effective teacher, whether it’s your first year or your 30th, the best thing you can do for yourself is to let go of the idea of “normal.” Offer all students the opportunity to grow from where they are, not from where your teacher training courses say they should be. You will not harm a student by offering him/her opportunities to complete work that is more advanced. Research consistently shows that curriculum based on development and ability is far more effective than curriculum based on age. A large body of research indicates that giftedness occurs along a continuum. As a teacher, you will likely encounter students who are moderately gifted, highly gifted and, perhaps if you’re lucky, even a few who are profoundly gifted. Strategies that work for one group of gifted students won’t necessarily work for all gifted students. Don’t be afraid to think outside the box. You’re in the business of helping students to develop their abilities. Just as athletes are good at athletics, gifted students are good at thinking. We would never dream of holding back a promising athlete, so don’t be afraid to encourage your “thinketes” by providing them with opportunities to soar.
-
Conduct Informal Assessments
Meeting the needs of gifted students does not need to be an all consuming task. One of the easiest ways to better understand how to provide challenging material is to conduct informal whole class assessments on a regular basis. For example, before beginning any unit, administer the end of the unit test. Students who score above 80 percent should not be forced to “relearn” information they already know. Rather, these students should be given parallel opportunities that are challenging. Consider offering these students the option to complete an independent project on the topic or to substitute another experience that would meet the objectives of the assignment, i.e. taking a college/distance course. With areas of the curriculum that are sequential, such as mathematics and spelling, how about giving the end of the year test during the first week of school. If you have students who can demonstrate competency at 80 percent or higher, you will save them an entire year of frustration and boredom if you can determine exactly what their ability level is and then offer them curriculum that allows them to move forward. Formal assessments can be extremely helpful, however, they are expensive and there is generally a back log of students waiting to be tested. Conducting informal assessments is a useful and inexpensive tool that will offer a lot of information.
-
Re-Familiarize Yourself with Piaget & Bloom
There are many developmental theorists and it is likely that you will encounter many of them during your teacher preparation course work. When it comes to teaching gifted children, take a few moments to review the work of Jean Piaget and Benjamin Bloom. Jean Piaget offers a helpful description of developmental stages as they relate to learning. Gifted students are often in his “formal operations” stage when their peers are still in his “pre-operational” or “concrete operations” stages. When a child is developmentally advanced he/she has different learning abilities and needs. This is where Bloom’s Taxonomy can be a particularly useful. Students in the “formal operations” developmental stage need learning experiences at the upper end of Bloom’s Taxonomy. Essentially all assignments should offer the student the opportunity to utilize higher level thinking skills like analysis, synthesis and evaluation, as defined by Bloom.
5: Involve Parents as Resource Locators
Parents of gifted children are often active advocates for their children. If you are not prepared for this, it can be a bit unnerving. The good news is that, at least in my experience, what they want most is to be heard and to encounter someone who is willing to think differently. Offer to collaborate with them, rather than resist them, to work together to see that their child’s needs are met. For example, if they want their child to have more challenging experiences in math, enlist their help in finding better curriculum options. An informal assessment can help them determine the best place to start and then encourage them to explore other options that could be adapted to the classroom. Most parents understand that teachers don’t have the luxury of creating a customized curriculum for every student, but most teachers are willing to make accommodations if parents can do the necessary research. Flexibility and a willingness to think differently can create win-win situations.
6: There is much more!
There are many more strategies that can assist advanced learners along their learning paths. See https://www.davidsongifted.org/gifted-blog/tips-for-teachers-successful-strategies-for-teaching-gifted-learners/ for more detailed information.
Emerging Bilinguals
Emerging Bilinguals (EBs) are the fastest-growing group of students in U.S. schools: in 2018, they comprised 10.2% of learners, totaling over five million students (NCES, 2020). Most teachers can now expect to have EBs in their classrooms at some point in their teaching careers. The majority of our EBs know Spanish as their first language, but there are many different languages that EBs know as their first languages, including Korean, Arabic, Urdu, Vietnamese, Japanese, French, as well as less common regional languages, such as those from various African countries.
Emerging Bilinguals have gone by many acronyms over the years. Some of the most common acronyms were Limited English Proficient (LEP), English as Second Language students (ESLs), English Language Learners (ELLs), and English Learners (ELs). In recent years, many scholars and educators (the editors of this book included) have stepped away from deficit terms such as LEP, ESL, ELL, and EL and adopted the term Emerging Bilinguals to emphasize the strength of these student-population.
Programs that service EBs in schools are most often referred to as ESL programs (English as a Second Language programs) or ESOL programs (English for Speakers of Other Languages programs). These programs are generally taught by licensed ESL teachers who specialize in language learning. Most ESL/ESOL programs are “pull-out” programs where small groups of students work with the ESL teacher during certain parts of the day, depending on student and ESL teacher schedules. In these pull-out programs, ESL teachers are working with students on their English skills, while at the same time often assisting classroom teachers with frontloading academic content. This means that the ESL teachers find out what content areas the classroom teachers will be focusing on next, and they work with their ESL students to prepare them for the academic English demands of that content.
Most EBs are assessed using ACCESS testing, which is based on the WIDA (World Class Instructional Design and Assessment) standards used across most states. The WIDA standards[10] were developed to assess EBs’ English language skills. These are not content standards, such as the ones discussed in previous chapters. The WIDA standards were developed in response to the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, which required English Language Proficiency standards to be linked with grade-level content standards and be rooted in what is called “academic language,” often referred to as the language of schooling. Some states developed their own proficiency standards, such as Massachusetts, but some states decided to work together to create standards that could be used across state lines. The standards this consortium of states developed are the WIDA standards. Forty one states have adopted these standards, which helps with collecting data on their effectiveness, in addition to making it easier to determine an EL’s language proficiency level if they move schools within a state or across states.
It is important to understand that the ACCESS testing measures language proficiency. The testing is not used to determine whether or not an EB has a learning disability. It can be challenging for teachers to differentiate between a language issue and a learning issue. A general rule to follow is that if the issue is manifesting itself in the student’s first language, such as a delay in understanding the sound/symbol relationship in phonics, then it is likely a learning issue. However, because letters make different sounds in different languages, this could also be a language issue. The best course of action is to seek assistance from colleagues (such as your school’s ESL teachers or special education teachers) if you, as the classroom teacher, feel that your EB student is not making typical academic progress.
In the following section, we will discuss in more detail students who do have special needs.
Students with Disabilities
Upon entering any U.S. public school today, you will likely see evidence that learners with disabilities are present and included. You might see a student using a wheelchair or talking with peers using a voice output communication device. You might see adapted swings on the playground or calming sensory rooms as you walk down the halls. You might see students and staff creating sidewalk art on April 2 to advocate for autism acceptance or wearing wild socks on March 21 to raise awareness about Down Syndrome.
These signs of inclusion weren’t always present. In fact, the history of education in the United States is marked by practices that excluded, segregated, and marginalized people with disabilities based on the presumption that they were incompetent or incapable of benefitting from instruction. This presumption is demonstrated in this illustration, which depicts the expected limits of development for individuals with disabilities as described in a report to the Virginia General Assembly in 1915 (Virginia State Board of Charities and Corrections, 1915).
Because they were viewed as incapable and incompetent, individuals with clearly identifiable disabilities, such as significant intellectual disabilities or visible physical impairments, were often placed in institutions and residential facilities away from their families and communities well into the 20th century. This practice was described as a charitable and responsible way for society to protect them. This photograph depicts one such institution (Minnesota, 1893). This site was originally opened as the Minnesota Institute for Defectives in 1887 and was officially renamed the School for the Feeble-Minded in 1895 (Minnesota History Center, 2020). These images and the terms used in them are representative of practices and beliefs that existed to some degree well into the 20th century.
CRITICAL LENS: INSULTING LANGUAGE
When you look at some of the language used in the image above, you might see some overlaps with language used as insults (like calling someone an “idiot” or a “moron”). It is important to realize that these terms do have a long history of referring to people with special needs in negative ways. Learn more about which words have insulting histories[11], and check yourself when you use terms like “idiot,” “moron,” or “crazy” in your daily conversations. Watch this video to learn more about the "r word" and why it should be eliminated from your daily discourse.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i0-WEOmQtrI
Exclusionary practices continued into the 1970s when 1.75 million school-age children with disabilities were fully excluded from public schools and an additional three million children were placed in educational settings that did not meet their needs (Yell, 2019). These practices began to change in 1975 when the Education for All Handicapped Children Act (EAHCA) was passed. This law established a foundational set of protections for individuals with disabilities in U.S. public schools, which have since been expanded upon. These protections included the right to (a) a free education for all students between the ages of 3 and 18, (b) education in community schools when appropriate, (c) non-discriminatory evaluation to identify educational needs, (d) parent involvement in decision making, and (e) an individualized learning plan that defines appropriate goals and supports for each student with a disability (Yell, 2019).
Today, the educational rights of students with disabilities are protected by three major laws. These are Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act (1973), the Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act (2004; a reauthorization of EAHCA), and the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA, 1990). These laws differ in how they define disability and in how they provide supports and protections.
Serving Students with Disabilities in the General Education Classroom
Teachers of all levels and subjects should expect to work with students who have disabilities. Data from the 2018 - 2019 school year show that 7.1 million students, approximately 14% of the total school-age population, receive special education under the IDEIA. Of those students, 82% spend at least 40% of their school day in a general education classroom (Institute of Education Sciences, 2020). Essentially, this means that most students who have disabilities are taught in the same setting and by the same teachers as learners who don’t have disabilities for large portions of the school day. Therefore, all teachers must be prepared to educate these students.
It is important for teachers to realize that special education is a service, not a place. This means that services including specialized instruction, accommodations, and modifications that address student needs can be provided in any setting and school teams are required to ensure that this happens in the Least Restrictive Environment (LRE). Both the IDEIA and Section 504 establish the general education classroom as the first consideration for LRE. Teams may only consider more restrictive settings, such as separate special education classrooms, when specialized supports added to the general education classroom are ineffective at meeting student needs.
In addition to supporting students with identified disabilities under IDEIA or Section 504, educators will also serve students whose disabilities may be unidentified. Because so many factors influence student development and learning, as discussed earlier in this chapter, it is critical that educators thoughtfully and systematically distinguish learning challenges caused by disabilities from learning challenges caused by social and environmental factors. When concerns develop about a student’s learning, general education teachers are expected to provide research-based interventions in an attempt to meet student needs and to collect progress monitoring data to support educational decision making. The RtI process is beneficial in that all students who demonstrate learning difficulties are systematically supported, regardless of whether they ultimately qualify for special education. Further, Response to Intervention (RTI) models have been shown to reduce misclassification of students with disabilities.
While teachers may feel challenged to meet the diverse and complex needs of students with disabilities in the general education classroom, the outcomes can be rewarding for students and teachers, alike. Benefits for students with disabilities include academic gains, improved social skills, and increased friendships (e.g., Wehmeyer et al., 2020). Peers who do not have disabilities have been shown to have deeper understandings of themselves, positive expectations of interactions with people with disabilities, and, in cases where peers act in support roles, greater academic engagement (e.g., Carter et al., 2015). Additionally, general education teachers have reported feeling more aware of and more effective at meeting the needs of all students after working with students with disabilities (Finke et al., 2009). These positive outcomes are linked to the use of strategies that provide a broad range of support for all students.
Chapter Outline
What is Education?
Education is a social institution through which a society’s children are taught basic academic knowledge, learning skills, and cultural norms. Every nation in the world is equipped with some form of education system, but the systems vary greatly. The major factors affecting education systems are the resources and money that are utilized to support those systems in different nations. As you might expect, a country’s wealth has much to do with the amount of money spent on education. Countries that do not have such basic amenities as running water are unable to support robust education systems or, in many cases, any formal schooling at all. The result of this worldwide educational inequality is a social concern for many countries, including the United States.
International differences in education systems are not solely a financial issue. The value placed on education, the amount of time devoted to it, and the distribution of education within a country also play a role in those differences. For example, students in South Korea spend 220 days a year in school, compared to the 180 days a year of their United States counterparts (Pellissier 2010). As of 2006, the United States ranked fifth among 27 countries for college participation, but ranked 16th in the number of students who receive college degrees (National Center for Public Policy and Higher Education 2006). These statistics may be related to how much time is spent on education in the United States.
I Will Not Let an Exam Result Decide My Fate
In this spoken word piece by Suli Breaks, he explores how students are judged and tested by how well they perform on exams, but not all people perform well on exams. The inconsistencies of the education system are really peeled open to reveal a deep problem that needs to be addressed and how society's needs have changed to make this even more apparent. If the video does not show you can view it on YouTube by clicking this link.
Then there is the issue of educational distribution within a nation. In December 2010, the results of a test called the Program for International Student Assessment (PISA), which is administered to 15-year-old students worldwide, were released. Those results showed that students in the United States had fallen from 15th to 25th in the rankings for science and math (National Public Radio 2010). Students at the top of the rankings hailed from Shanghai, Finland, Hong Kong, and Singapore.
Analysts determined that the nations and city-states at the top of the rankings had several things in common. For one, they had well-established standards for education with clear goals for all students. They also recruited teachers from the top 5 to 10 percent of university graduates each year, which is not the case for most countries (National Public Radio 2010).
Finally, there is the issue of social factors. One analyst from the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, the organization that created the test, attributed 20 percent of performance differences and the United States’ low rankings to differences in social background. Researchers noted that educational resources, including money and quality teachers, are not distributed equitably in the United States. In the top-ranking countries, limited access to resources did not necessarily predict low performance. Analysts also noted what they described as “resilient students,” or those students who achieve at a higher level than one might expect given their social background. In Shanghai and Singapore, the proportion of resilient students is about 70 percent. In the United States, it is below 30 percent. These insights suggest that the United States’ educational system may be on a descending path that could detrimentally affect the country’s economy and its social landscape (National Public Radio 2010).
Sir Ken Robinson Speaks About Issues in American Education
In this video Sir Ken Robinson outlines 3 principles crucial for the human mind to flourish — and how current education culture in the U.S. is working against them. In a funny, stirring talk he tells us how to get out of the educational "death valley" we now face, and how to nurture our youngest generations with a climate of possibility.
https://youtu.be/wX78iKhInsc
Formal and Informal Education
As already mentioned, education is not solely concerned with the basic academic concepts that a student learns in the classroom. Societies also educate their children, outside of the school system, in matters of everyday practical living. These two types of learning are referred to as formal education and informal education.
Formal education describes the learning of academic facts and concepts through a formal curriculum. Arising from the tutelage of ancient Greek thinkers, centuries of scholars have examined topics through formalized methods of learning. Education in earlier times was only available to the higher classes; they had the means for access to scholarly materials, plus the luxury of leisure time that could be used for learning. The Industrial Revolution and its accompanying social changes made education more accessible to the general population. Many families in the emerging middle class found new opportunities for schooling.
The modern U.S. educational system is the result of this progression. Today, basic education is considered a right and responsibility for all citizens. Expectations of this system focus on formal education, with curricula and testing designed to ensure that students learn the facts and concepts that society believes are basic knowledge.
In contrast, informal education describes learning about cultural values, norms, and expected behaviors by participating in a society. This type of learning occurs both through the formal education system and at home. Our earliest learning experiences generally happen via parents, relatives, and others in our community. Through informal education, we learn how to dress for different occasions, how to perform regular life routines like shopping for and preparing food, and how to keep our bodies clean.
Education vs. Schooling
Often, students use the terms "schooling" and "education" interchangeably, but as you can discern from this reading, they have different meanings. What is the difference?
Cultural transmission
Cultural transmission refers to the way people come to learn the values, beliefs, and social norms of their culture. Both informal and formal education include cultural transmission. For example, a student will learn about cultural aspects of modern history in a U.S. History classroom. In that same classroom, the student might learn the cultural norm for asking a classmate out on a date through passing notes and whispered conversations.
Schools also can be agents of change, teaching individuals to think outside of the family norms into which they were born. Educational environments can broaden horizons and even help to break cycles of poverty and racism.
Purpose of Schools
The purpose of schools can be divided into four major themes or functions:
Intellectual: Schools provide intellectual growth.
Political & Civic: Land of the Free, Home of the Brave -- this doesn't transcend from one generation to the next automatically.
Economic: Do you want to grow the GDP?
Social: Probably one of the most undervalued, yet critically important to life-long success -- can you work on a team or be a leader? These skills are honed in the K12 classroom.
As you think about the four basic purposes of school: academic (intellectual), political and civic purposes, socialization, and economic purposes, what do you think? Which one (or more) do you find as primary purposes of schooling in your own personal philosophy?
Schools teach us far more than reading, writing, and arithmetic. They also socialize us to cultural norms and expectations.
From the moment a child is born, his or her education begins. At first, education is an informal process in which an infant watches others and imitates them. As the infant grows into a young child, the process of education becomes more formal through play dates and preschool. Once in grade school, academic lessons become the focus of education as a child moves through the school system. But even then, education is about much more than the simple learning of facts.
Our education system also socializes us to our society. We learn cultural expectations and norms, which are reinforced by our teachers, our textbooks, and our classmates. (For students outside the dominant culture, this aspect of the education system can pose significant challenges.) You might remember learning your multiplication tables in second grade and also learning the social rules of taking turns on the swings at recess. You might recall learning about the U.S. Constitution in an American Government course as well as learning when and how to speak up in class.
Season 2, Episode 7: The Recruitment Divide (Link to Podcast) THIS PODCAST IS OPTIONAL
Why does Public Education Exist? An Open Letter to Students Returning to School
In this video by the Vlog Brothers, John Green gives advice to students returning to school from summer break, discusses the reasons public education exists, and celebrates the landing of the Mars rover Curiosity, among many great things that have happened to humans since we began to invest in public education. If this video does not show you can view it on YouTube by clicking this link.
Kevin Kumashiro, Teachers Make a Difference
References
Education Week. 2004. “Tracking.” Education Week, August 4. Retrieved February 24, 2012 Click here to link to this article
Godofsky, Jessica, Cliff Zukin, and Carl Van Horn. 2011. Unfulfilled Expectations: Recent College Graduates Struggle in a Troubled Economy. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University.
Iverson, Jeremy. 2006. High School Confidential. New York: Atria.
Lauen, Douglas Lee and Karolyn Tyson. 2008. “Perspectives from the Disciplines: Sociological Contribution to Education Policy Research and Debate.” AREA Handbook on Education Policy Research. Retrieved February 24, 2012.
National Public Radio. 2004. “Princeton Takes Steps to Fight ‘Grade Inflation.’” Day to Day, April 28.
Mansfield, Harvey C. 2001. “Grade Inflation: It’s Time to Face the Facts.” The Chronicle of Higher Education 47(30): B24.
Merton, Robert K. 1968. Social Theory and Social Structure. New York: Free Press.
UNESCO. 2005. Towards Knowledge Societies: UNESCO World Report. Paris: UNESCO Publishing.
World Bank. 2007. World Development Report. Washington, DC: World Bank.
You may have heard comments implying that education in the United States is not political, separate from religion, and accessible to everyone. The reality is that from its early existence in the New World in the 1600s, it was indeed political, religious, and accessible only to a select few. These traits continue to influence the evolution of education in the United States today.
In this chapter, we will explore how historical foundations have shaped the trajectory of education in the United States.
Chapter Outline
Historical Foundations
Education as we know it today has a long history intertwined with the development of the United States. In this section, we will follow historical events through key periods of U.S history to see the forces that left lasting influences on education in the United States.
Introducing The NPR Podcast The Promise a limited-run series about life in public housing, smack in the middle of a city on the rise — stories of a neighborhood in flux, a community defined by its struggles and the growing divide threatening its very existence. You will listen to this podcast throughout the text as an illustration of many key ideas we will discuss.
Season 2: Episode 1 - A Tale Of Two Schools (Link to Podcast) THIS IS OPTIONAL and LENGTHY
NOTE: This podcast series is optional. The series is very lengthy! However, the other resources (YouTube videos) are NOT optional.
Colonial America
[h5p id="1"]
Public education as we know it today did not exist in the colonies. In the First Charter of Virginia in 1606, King James I set forth a religious mission for investors and colonizers to disseminate the “Christian Religion” among the Indigenous population, which he described as “Infidels and Savages.” His colonial and educational mission would impact settlement and education in America for centuries. Next, we will explore how education began evolving in Puritan Massachusetts and the Middle and Southern Colonies during the colonial period.
Puritan Massachusetts
Puritans in Massachusetts believed educating children in religion and rules from a young age would increase their chances of survival or, if they did die, increase their chances of religious salvation. Puritans in Massachusetts established the first compulsory education law in the New World through the Act of 1642, which required parents and apprenticeship masters to educate their children and apprentices in the principles of Puritan religion and the laws of the commonwealth. The Law of 1647, also referred to as the Old Deluder Satan Act, required towns of fifty or more families to hire a schoolmaster to teach children basic literacy. Because of similar religious beliefs and the physical proximity of families’ residences, formal schooling developed quickly in the commonwealth of Massachusetts. Connecticut, New York, and Pennsylvania followed in Massachusetts’ footsteps, passing similar laws and ordinances between the mid- and late-seventeenth century (Cremin, 1972).
During this time, children learned to read at home using the Holy Scriptures and catechisms (small books that summarized key religious principles) as educational texts. The primers that were used “contained simple verses, songs, and stories designed to teach at once the skills of literacy and the virtues of Christian living” (McClellan, 1999, p. 3).
The importance of faith, prayer, humility, rewards of virtue, honesty, obedience, thrift, proverbs, religious stories, the fear of death, and the importance of hard work served as major moral principles featured throughout the texts. When Indigenous people were depicted or mentioned in texts, they were portrayed as “savages and infidels,” needing salvation through English cultural norms.
Another form of education occurred in dame schools. Where available, some parents sent their children to a neighboring housewife who taught them basic literacy skills, including reading, numbers, and writing. Because families paid for their children to attend dame schools, this form of education was mainly available to middle-class families. Teaching aids and texts included Scripture, hornbooks, catechisms, and primers (Urban & Wagoner, 2009).
More expensive than dame schools, Latin grammar schools were also available. The first Latin grammar school was established in Boston in 1635 to teach boys subjects like classical literature, reading, writing, and math at what we would consider the high school level today in preparation to attend Harvard University (Powell, 2019).
The Middle and Southern Colonies
In Virginia, the Carolinas, and Georgia, town or village schooling was not as common. Their populations were sparser, and they focused more on economic opportunities for survival than religion. Education was considered a private matter and a responsibility of individual parents, not the government. Schooling was seen as a service that should be paid by the users of that service, creating a stratified system of education where wealthy families had access to schooling and others did not. Wealthier parents often sent their children to English boarding schools or paid for private schooling in the colonies. Wealthy families also sent their children to parson schools, operated by a highly educated minister who opened his home to young scholars and often taught secular subjects. Education for the poor was usually limited to the rudiments of basic literacy learned in the home or occasionally at church.
Charity schools, often referred to as “endowed ‘free’ schools” (Urban & Wagoner, 2009), were occasionally established when an affluent individual made provisions in his or her will, including land, to construct and manage a school for the poor. In addition, field schools were occasionally built in rural areas. Named after the abandoned fields in which they were built, these schoolhouses offered affordable education to students. The teacher’s salary came from fees students’ families paid, and teachers often boarded with a local family while serving a field school. These schools were also called rate schools, subscription schools, fee schools, and eventually district schools (Urban & Wagoner, 2009).
In Colonial America, education in the mid-Atlantic and southern colonies was heavily stratified and remained out of reach for most inhabitants. New England Puritans worked hard to establish schools. Fear, anxiety, and the struggle for survival lent urgency to their quest for cultural transmission, which helps us understand their desire for formal schooling. Table 3.2 summarizes the main forms of schooling in Colonial America.
Table 3.2: Forms of Schooling in Colonial America
New England |
Middle and Southern Colonies |
|
|
American Revolutionary Era
[h5p id="2"]
After the American Revolution, our new country was establishing its systems and identity. Many key Founders believed public education was a prerequisite in a republic. Three groups had distinct post-revolutionary plans for education and schooling, all of which were intended to serve as part of the founding process: Federalists, Anti-Federalists, and the lesser known Democratic-Republican Societies.
Federalists
Alexander Hamilton, George Washington, and John Adams, among other Federalists, focused on building a new nation and a new national identity by following the new Constitution, which consolidated power in a new federal government. The Federalists supported mass schooling for nationalistic purposes, such as preserving order, morality, and a nationalistic character, but opposed tax-supported schooling, viewing it as unnecessary in a society where elites rule.
Noah Webster was one of the great advocates for mass schooling, and the purposes for which he supported schooling included teaching children not just “the usual branches of learning,” but also “submission to superiors and to laws [and] moral or social duties.” Smoothing out the “rough manners” of frontier folk was very important to Webster. Furthermore, Webster placed great responsibility among “women in forming the dispositions of youth” in order to “control…the manners of a nation” and that which “is useful” to an orderly republic (Webster, 1965, 67, 69-77). Webster’s treatise on education and his spellers (like his 1783 American Spelling Book) were intended to develop a literate and nationalistic character to shape useful, virtuous, and law-abiding citizens with strong attachments to Federalist America.
Anti-Federalists
Anti-Federalists, on the other hand, were opposed to a strong central government, preferring instead state and local forms of government. The Anti-Federalists believed that the success of a republican government depended on small geographical areas, spaces small enough for individuals to know one another and to deliberate collectively on matters of public concern. Anti-Federalists feared concentrated power.
Thomas Jefferson was an Anti-Federalist. An aristocrat whose genteel lifestyle was bolstered by his violent oppression of enslaved people, Jefferson put forth proposals to educate all white citizens in the state of Virginia. Jefferson proposed a system of tiered schooling. The three tiers were primary schools, grammar schools, and the College of William and Mary. The foundation of his tiered schooling plan included three years of tax-supported schooling for all white children with limited options for a few poor children to advance at public expense to higher levels of education. While he suggested very limited educational opportunities for women, no other key Founder advocated giving high-achieving scholars from poor families a free education. Religion was not a core curricular area in the primary and grammar schools. However, his plans were viewed as too radical by his aristocratic peers, and they correspondingly rejected his state education proposals.
Democratic-Republican Societies
The third group of post-revolution political activists formed several clubs broadly described as the Democratic-Republican Societies during the 1790s. Members of these political clubs included artisans, teachers, ship builders, innkeepers, and working class individuals. They generally supported universal, government-funded schooling, not simply to secure allegiance and order, but also to develop democratic citizen virtue and venues for deliberative learning and opportunities for dissent. The Democratic-Republican Societies viewed education as a means to prepare active citizens for new civic roles, and they considered the government responsible for providing positive benefits to individuals to realize a more fulfilling citizenship through venues such as education.
Table 3.3 summarizes the key differences among these three political groups and how they related to their views of education.
Table 3.3: Federalist, Anti-Federalist, and Democratic-Republican Stances
Federalists |
Anti-Federalists |
Democratic-Republican |
| Support strong central government via the new Constitution | Support a decentralized system of governing: states and local governance | Support a decentralized system of governing: states and local governance |
| Maintain social and economic status quo | Accept limited structural change in order to develop economic and political independence among individuals | Accept structural changes in order to develop economic and political independence among individuals |
| Support publicly funded school systems to develop and maintain strong inner moral values based on Christianity and patriotic adherence to the nation-state; order and harmony are emphasized | Support public school systems detached from religious institutions and a greater focus on the use of individual reason; preparation for limited political participation at the local level; three years of primary schooling available to all white children at public expense with opportunities for male scholars from poor families to advance | Support universal public schooling throughout the United States at public expense; curriculum expected to focus on some form of critical analysis of the status quo and preparing citizens to be active in democratic governance |
Early National Era
[h5p id="3"]
During the early- to mid-nineteenth century, the United States was expanding westward, and urbanization and immigration intensified. This period of history was defined by the emergence of the common school movement and normal schools, though conflicts over the organization and control of education continued. This period also saw the advent of higher education.
The Common School Movement
Common schools were elementary schools where all students--not just wealthy boys--could attend for free. Common schools were radical in their status as tax-supported free schooling, but their conservative-leaning curriculum addressed traditional values and political allegiance. Schooling offered increasing opportunities for families’ children, especially working-class families, by teaching basic values including honesty, punctuality, inner behavioral restraints, obedience to authority, hard work, cleanliness, and respect for law, private property, and representative government (Urban & Wagoner, 2009). Horace Mann, Massachusetts’s first Secretary of Education and Whig (formerly Federalist) politician, was the leader of the common school movement, which began in the New England states and then expanded into New York, Pennsylvania, and then into westward states.
The Development of Normal Schools
With the rise of common schools, Horace Mann then turned to how female teachers would be educated. For Mann, the answer was to create teacher training institutions originally referred to as normal schools. A French institution dating back to the sixteenth century, école normale was the term used to identify a model or ideal teaching institute. Once adopted in the United States, the institution was simply called a normal school.
The first normal school in America was established in Lexington, Massachusetts in 1839 (now Framingham State University). They were primarily used to train primary school teachers, as middle and high schools did not yet exist. The curriculum included academic subjects, classroom management and school governance, and the practice of teaching. Teacher credentialing began and was regulated by state governments. Moreover, this contributed to the professionalization of teaching, and normal schools eventually became colleges or schools of education. Many normal schools eventually became full-fledged liberal arts and research institutes. Catherine Beecher was the first well-known teacher of the time and one of the normal schools’ first teachers.
Because the teaching profession was being feminized, administrators and policymakers viewed this as an opportunity. Men were exiting the profession, and women were typically paid much less, allowing more women to be hired for less money to educate the growing ranks of students as common schools spread westward. Furthermore, once the profession was feminized, teaching became perceived as a missionary calling rather than an academic pursuit. While male policymakers insisted women were better nurturers and more suited to teaching morality and correct behavior in children, framing the discourse of teaching around a calling helped rationalize lower pay for women and fewer advancement possibilities.
Conflicts in the Common School Movement
The common school movement was not without its conflicts. Whigs (formerly Federalists), including Horace Mann, sought to establish state systems of schooling in order to create standardization and uniformity in curricula, classroom equipment, school organization, and professional credentialing of teachers across state schools. Democrats, however, often supported public schooling but feared centralized government, thus opposing the centralization of local schools under the common school movement. The battle between Whigs and Democrats during the nineteenth century represents one of the initial conflicts related to public schooling.
Another important conflict related to the common school movement was the clash between urban Protestants and Catholics. Typically from Protestant backgrounds, common school reformers continued to use the Bible as a common text in classrooms without considering the potential conflict this could generate in diverse communities. Horace Mann advocated using only generalized Scripture in order to prevent offending different sects. However, what appeared to Protestants as a generalization of Christian text was actually very insulting to Catholic immigrants, who were becoming the second largest group of city dwellers at the time. Protestants realized that it was best to reduce the religious content in the common school curriculum, but unhappy Catholic leaders created their own private parochial schools. This conflict generated a greater theoretical acceptance of the separation of church and state doctrine in publicly-funded common schools, though in practice, common schooling continued to infuse Protestant biases for over a century.
Common schools also faced conflict in Southern states, including Jefferson’s Virginia, until after the Civil War. Planters had no interest in disturbing the status quo by educating poor whites or enslaved people. Driven by Southern aristocracy, education continued to be viewed as a private family responsibility and class privilege. In fact, many southern states prohibited educating enslaved people and passed state statutes that attached criminal penalties for doing so, such as the ones below.
| Excerpt from a 1740 South Carolina Act:
Whereas, the having slaves taught to write, or suffering them to be employed in writing, may be attended with great inconveniences; Be it enacted, that all and every person and persons whatsoever, who shall hereafter teach or cause any slave or slaves to be taught to write, or shall use or employ any slave as a scribe, in any manner of writing whatsoever, hereafter taught to write, every such person or persons shall, for every such offense, forfeit the sum of one hundred pounds, current money.
|
Excerpt from Virginia Revised Code of 1819:
That all meetings or assemblages of slaves, or free negroes or mulattoes mixing and associating with such slaves at any meeting-house or houses, &c., in the night; or at any SCHOOL OR SCHOOLS for teaching them READING OR WRITING, either in the day or night, under whatsoever pretext, shall be deemed and considered an UNLAWFUL ASSEMBLY; and any justice of a county, &c., wherein such assemblage shall be, either from his own knowledge or the information of others, of such unlawful assemblage, &c., may issue his warrant, directed to any sworn officer or officers, authorizing him or them to enter the house or houses where such unlawful assemblages, &c., may be, for the purpose of apprehending or dispersing such slaves, and to inflict corporal punishment on the offender or offenders, at the discretion of any justice of the peace, not exceeding twenty lashes. |
Enslaved people have often been depicted in American history textbooks as passive toward their owners. This is a misrepresentation of history. African Americans escaped, committed espionage on plantations, negotiated statuses, and occasionally educated themselves behind closed doors. For enslaved people, education and knowledge represented freedom and power, and once they were emancipated, they continued their relentless quest for learning by constructing their own schools throughout the South, even with minimal resources. Unlike many free whites, African Americans placed an exceptional value on literacy due to generations of bondage.
CRITICAL LENS: WORDS MATTER!
You will notice in this chapter that we use the term “enslaved person” instead of “slave.” Part of critical theory involves questioning existing power structures, even in word choice. Recently, academics and historians have shifted away from using the term “slave” and have begun replacing it with “enslaved person” because it places “humans first, commodities second” (Waldman, 2015, para. 2).
Even while slavery continued throughout the South, segregation continued in the North. One of the first challenges to segregation occurred in Boston, Massachusetts. Benjamin Roberts attempted to enroll his five-year-old daughter, Sarah, in a segregated white school in her neighborhood, but Sarah was refused admission due to her race. Sarah attempted to enroll in a few other schools closer to her home, but she was again denied admission for the same reason. Mr. Roberts filed a lawsuit in 1849, Sarah Roberts v. City of Boston, claiming that because his daughter had to travel much farther to attend a segregated and substandard black school, Sarah was psychologically damaged. The state courts ruled in favor of the City of Boston in 1850 because state law permitted segregated schooling. This case would be cited in Plessy v. Ferguson in 1898 and in Brown v. Board of Education in 1954.
Post Civil War and Reconstruction
[h5p id="4"]
Following the Civil War, significant restructuring of political, economical, social, and educational systems in the United States occurred. Schooling continued to be viewed as a necessary instrument in maintaining stability and unity. During this era, education was shaped by increasing influence of the federal government, the beginning of education in the South, the Morrill Acts, and Native American boarding schools.
Increasing Influence of the Federal Government
Elazar (1969) asserted that “crisis compels centralization” (p. 51): when the nation undergoes a calamity, it eventually leads to the federal government exercising extra-constitutional actions on its own will or as a result of demands made by state and local governments. The post-Civil War Era provides one example of this effect. The U.S. Congress established requirements for the Southern states to reenter the Union. Radical Republicans, as they were identified after the Civil War, believed that the lack of common schooling in the South had contributed to the circumstances leading to war, so Congress required Southern states to include provisions for free public schooling in their rewritten constitutions.
Of course, southern states followed through with the requirements and drafted language supporting schools, but they created loopholes like separate and segregated schools. Black schools received substantially lower funding than White schools, creating yet another form of institutionalized racism that would have long-lasting consequences for African American communities.
The Beginning of Education in the South
Following the Civil War, nearly four million formerly enslaved people were homeless, without property, and illiterate. In response, Congress created the Freedmen’s Bureau (officially referred to as the U.S. Bureau of Refugees, Freedmen and Abandoned Lands). Supervised by northern military officers, the Freedmen’s Bureau distributed food, clothing, and medical aid to formerly enslaved people and poor Whites and created over 1,000 schools throughout the southern states. The Freedmen’s Bureau effectively lasted only for seven years, but it represented a massive federal effort that provided some benefits.
In addition to Freedmen’s schools, Yankee schoolmarms also headed south as missionaries to help educate formerly enslaved people. They sought mutual benefits: to educate the illiterate and simultaneously secure themselves in the eyes of God. As missionaries, female teachers learned that their work was a calling to instill morality in the nation’s students, and this calling was pursued for the good of mankind instead of financial gain. This same missionary status fueled both the migration of teachers westward following national expansion, and the thousands of schoolmarms that migrated to the South to educate formerly enslaved people who, they believed, had to be redeemed through literacy, Christian morality, and republican virtue (Butchart, 2010).
However, African Americans were preemptively educating themselves. Formerly-enslaved people knew the connection between knowledge and freedom. Ignorance was itself oppressive; knowledge, on the other hand, was liberating. Literate African Americans were often teaching children and adults alike and creating their own one-room schoolhouses, even with limited resources. By 1866 in Georgia, African Americans were at least partially financing 96 of 123 evening schools and owned 57 school buildings (Anderson, 1988). The African American educational initiatives caught Northern missionaries off guard:
Many missionaries were astonished, and later chagrined…to discover that many ex-slaves had established their own educational collectives and associations, staffed schools entirely with black teachers, and were unwilling to allow their educational movement to be controlled by the ‘civilized’ Yankees.” (Anderson, 1988, p. 6)
In addition, industrial schools were built in the South for Black Americans. Southern policymakers, northern industrialists, and philanthropic groups partnered to establish industrial schools focused on vocational or trade skills. Southern policymakers benefitted because industrial schools resulted in segregated higher education, which further limited access to equality. Northern industrialists benefited because they gained skilled laborers. Philanthropists believed they were giving Black Americans access to education and jobs.
Two African American leaders in the late nineteenth century had different perspectives on newly-developed industrial schools. Booker T. Washington was born an enslaved person in 1856 and grew up in Virginia. He attended the Hampton Institute, whose founder, General Samuel Armstrong, emphasized that “obtaining farms or skilled jobs was far more important to African-Americans emerging from slavery than the rights of citizenship” (Foner, 2012, p. 652-653). Washington supported this view as head of the Tuskegee Institute in Alabama. In his famous 1895 “Atlanta Compromise” speech, Washington did not support “ceaseless agitation for full equality”; rather, he suggested, “In all the things that are purely social we can be as separate as the fingers, yet one as the hand in all things essential to mutual progress” (Foner, 2012, p. 653). Washington feared that if demands for greater equality were imposed, it would result in a white backlash and destroy what little progress had been made.
W.E.B. Du Bois viewed the situation differently. Born free in Great Barrington, Massachusetts in 1868, Du Bois was the first African American to earn a Ph.D. from Harvard University. He served as a professor at Atlanta University and helped establish the NAACP in 1905 to seek legal and political equality for African Americans. He opposed Washington’s pragmatic approach, considering it a form of “submission and silence on civil and political rights” (Urban & Wagoner, 2009, p. 176).
Critical Lens: The "Value" of Education
The opinions of Booker T. Washington and W. E. B. Du Bois are prevalent in today’s options for education after high school. Some believe that technical schools have a place in society for those who do not choose to, or who are not able to afford, four-year colleges. In essence, that the four-year college experience is not needed to be a contributing member of society. Others believe that one must attend college to expand understanding for future, more “professional” careers. Who is right in these scenarios? What influences where students choose to learn in post-secondary education? It is important to critique the implicit biases we hold regarding others' educational choices.
Native American Boarding Schools: Cultural Imperialism and Genocide
Using its military, the federal government created a number of Native American boarding schools throughout the country. The first and most famous of these was the Carlisle School, founded in Pennsylvania in 1879. The federal government convinced many Native American parents that these off-reservation boarding schools would educate their children to improve their economic and social opportunities in mainstream America. In reality, this experiment was intended to deculturize Indigenous children. Supervisors at the boarding schools destroyed children’s native clothing, cut their hair, and renamed many of them with names chosen from the Protestant Bible. The curriculum in these schools taught basic literacy and focused on industrial training, intended to sort graduates of these boarding schools into agricultural and mechanical occupations. A total of 25 off-reservation boarding schools educating nearly 30,000 students were created in several western states and territories, as well as in the upper Great Lakes region. Based in ethnocentrism, or the belief of the White, Protestant mainstream culture that they were superior to other cultures, these boarding schools relied on a harsh form of assimilation, a fundamental feature of common schooling.
K. Tsianina Lomawaima's work straddles Indigenous Studies, anthropology, education, ethnohistory, history, legal analysis, and political science. Her scholarship on federal off-reservation boarding schools is rooted in the experiences of her father, Curtis Thorpe Carr, a survivor of Chilocco Indian Agricultural School. Here she discusses the question, Why Boarding Schools?
Conclusion
Education in the United States has a complicated past entrenched in religious, economic, national, and international concerns. In Colonial America, Puritans in Massachusetts knew education would teach children the ways of religion and laws, vital to survival in a new world. Meanwhile, the Middle and Southern Colonies viewed education as a commodity for the wealthy families who could afford it. After the American Revolution, Federalists, Anti-Federalists, and Democratic-Republican Societies all had different perceptions of how schools should be organized to support our newly-established independent nation. In the Early National Era, common schools, normal schools, and higher education grew as education became more widely established. Following the Civil War, the federal government was increasingly involved in education.
Critical Lens: Indigenous Boarding Schools in the News
In the summer of 2021, the dark history of Indigenous boarding schools made headlines as Canadian authorities discovered unmarked graves and remains of children[12] killed at multiple boarding schools for Indigenous children. In July 2021, the U.S. launched a federal probe[13] into our own Indigenous boarding schools and the intergenerational trauma they have caused. These boarding schools are one way that education has been used to oppress and deculturize a particular group of Americans.
“He is just so lazy - sits there and refuses to do any work. And his parents are no help - they never return phone calls or emails. Why bother?”
This is an actual statement by a teacher frustrated with a fourth grader in her classroom. What this teacher did not know was the context in which the student was living. He was homeless and living out of his mother’s car. His mother couldn’t pay her cell phone bill, so had no way of receiving phone calls or emails. The teacher failed to realize what else could be contributing to his “laziness”: hunger, fear, lack of adequate care, and a parent unavailable to him with her own struggle to survive.
In order to teach our students, we have to know them. Multiple influences affect our students and their environments.
Chapter Outline
In this chapter, we will investigate how different systems influence learning and we will explore two theoretical perspectives on development.
Systems that Influence Student Learning
As humans grow and develop, there are many different systems that influence this development. Think about systems as interrelated parts of a whole, just like the solar system is made up of planets and other celestial objects. One theory that considered various impacts on student learning was Maslow’s hierarchy of needs.
Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs
One way to conceptualize influences on student learning is through need systems. Maslow’s hierarchy of needs (see Figure 2.2) theorized that people are motivated by a succession of hierarchical needs (McLeod, 2020). Originally, Maslow discussed five levels of needs shaped in the form of a pyramid. He later adjusted the pyramid to include eight levels of needs, incorporating need for knowledge and understanding, aesthetic needs, and transcendence. Figure 2.2 depicts these eight needs in hierarchical order. The first four levels are deficiency needs, and the upper four are growth needs. The first four are essential to a student’s well being, and they build on each other. These deficiency needs must be satisfied before a person can move on to the growth needs. Moving to the growth needs is essential for learning to truly occur. Now we will examine each of the elements within Maslow’s hierarchy of needs in more depth.
Of the eight levels, the first is physiological needs. These needs include food, water, and shelter. In this case, do students have a home where they are properly nourished? If not, students who are not attending to their work may be hungry, not just daydreaming. This is why free and reduced breakfast and lunch programs are so essential in schools.
Safety and security needs are the second level of the pyramid. Students need to feel that they are not in harm’s way. Schools are responsible for maintaining safe environments for students and classrooms need to feel safe and secure. This requires classroom rules that all students follow, including protecting students from bullying and threatening behavior. There are effective and less effective ways to structure a classroom so that it is safe for all students.
The third level of Maslow’s hierarchy is love and belonging. In schools, these needs are met primarily through positive relationships with teachers and peers, and people with whom students regularly interact. Feelings of acceptance are necessary here, and teachers can play a huge role in creating these feelings for students. It is critical that teachers are non-judgmental towards their students. It does not matter how you, as a teacher, may feel about a student’s lifestyle choices, beliefs, political views or family structures; it matters how a student perceives you as someone who accepts them, no matter what.
The fourth and final level of deficiency needs is esteem needs: self-worth and self-esteem. Students must have experiences in schools and classrooms that lead them to feel positive about themselves. Self-esteem is what students think and feel about themselves, and it contributes to their confidence. Self-worth is students knowing that they are valuable and lovable.
Figure 2.2: Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs
Following the four deficiency needs in Maslow’s hierarchy are growth needs. Once students reach growth needs, they are ready for true, meaningful learning. The fifth element, the need to know and understand, is also referred to as cognitive needs. It is our job as educators to motivate students to want to know and understand the world around them. In order to do this, we must be sure we are providing our students with questions that move them to higher-order thinking skills. An instructional model that is well-developed and utilized in many classrooms is Bloom’s Taxonomy. It can be used to classify learning objectives, and it is a way to encourage students to think more deeply about content and motivate them to want to know more.
The sixth level of Maslow’s hierarchy of needs is aesthetic needs. At this level, we can learn to appreciate the beauty of the natural world. When we are focused on deficiency needs in the lower levels of Maslow’s theory, it is more difficult to see the beauty in our environment and surroundings. In education, students need to be exposed to the beauty that is reflected in the arts: music, visual arts and theatre. Most schools separate these into distinct periods or blocks; however, it is essential that arts are also integrated into the curriculum. Additionally, students should be exposed to arts outside of Western art so they encounter art forms that include representations of all cultures, including their own.
Self-actualization is the seventh need on the pyramid and is another growth need. Maslow indicated that this happens as we age. It is our intrinsic need to make the most of our lives and reach our full potential. A way of thinking about this is to consider what we think of our ideal selves--or, for young people, how they see themselves or what they see themselves having achieved and broadly experienced as they get to later stages in life.
Finally, transcendence needs are the highest on Maslow’s hierarchy. Maslow (1971) stated, “transcendence refers to the very highest levels of human consciousness, behaving and relating, as ends rather than means, to oneself, to significant others, to human beings in general, to other species, to nature, and to the cosmos” (p. 269). Though most of us in K-12 schools will not experience students at this level, it is important to note that this is the goal in life, according to Maslow.
Critical Lens: Origins of Theories
Sometimes we hold theories as universal truths without stopping to consider the context in which they were made. For example, Bridgman, Cummings, and Ballard (2019) recently investigated the origin of Maslow's theory and discovered that he himself never created the well-known pyramid model to represent the hierarchy of needs. Furthermore, there are concerns that Maslow appropriated his theory from the Siksika (Blackfoot) Nation. Dr. Cindy Blackstock (Gitksan First Nation member, as cited in Michel, 2014) explains the Blackfoot belief involves a tipi with three levels: self-actualization at the base; community actualization in the middle; and cultural perpetuity at the top. Maslow visited the Siksika Nation in 1938 and published his theory in 1943. Bray (2019) explains more about Maslow's hierarchy of needs and its alignment with the Siksika Nation. You should be informed of Maslow's hierarchy, but you should also be aware that critiques of this theory exist.
The same can be said about popular theories that hit the education field between 1979 and 2000, many which have been identified by contemporary cognitive neuroscience research as learning myths!
Gardner's Theory of Multiple Intelligences
Teachers need to determine students’ areas of strength and need to allow students to work and grow in those areas. One approach to doing this is to determine students’ strengths in different intelligence areas. Theorist Howard Gardner (2004, 2006) initially proposed eight multiple intelligences (see Figure 2.3), but he later added two more areas: existential and moral intelligence.
Gardner's Theory Debunked!
Based on extensive research, Gardner's theory has been declared a "neuromyth." The original theory was based on a survey of literature, but had no empirical evidence to support this theory. Though there is very little educational research evidence to support instructing students in these eight intelligences (for example: you should not plan a lesson eight different ways to address all eight intelligences in one lesson!), Gardner’s goal was to ensure that teachers did not just focus on verbal and mathematical intelligences in their teaching, which are two very common foci of instruction in schools. Avoid labeling students according to this theory.
Figure 2.3: Gardner's Multiple Intelligences
Similarly, while we often can hear reference to learning styles (often including visual, auditory, reading/writing, and kinesthetic, or VARK), Learning Styles has NO empirical research-based support. Instead, “people’s approaches to learning can, do, and should vary with context. In other words, people learn different things in different ways.
DUNN and DUNN
Dr. Rita and Kenneth Dunn were entrepreneurs who devised this theory in 1979. They charged teachers and other interested parties from $500 to $1500 to take their course.
What we know:
After nearly 40 years of research, especially the contemporary neuroscience research, on this theory there is still no empirical evidence to support the validity of "learning styles."
Rather than assessing and labeling students as particular kinds of learners and planning accordingly, a wise teacher will do the following:
- Offer students options for learning and expressing learning
- Help them reflect on strategies for mastering and using critical content
- Guide them in knowing when to modify an approach to learning when it proves to be inefficient or ineffective in achieving the student’s goals” (Sousa & Tomlinson, 2018, p. 161-162).
Learn more about the myth of learning styles in the video below.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rhgwIhB58PA
Theoretical Perspectives on Development
While all human beings are unique and grow, learn, and change at different rates and in different ways, there are some common trends of development that impact the trajectories our students follow. Two foundational theories of development are Piaget’s cognitive developmental theory and Vygotsky’s sociocultural theory.
Cognitive Developmental Theory: Piaget
Cognitive developmental theorists such as Jean Piaget posit that we move from birth to adulthood in predictable stages (Huitt & Hummel, 2003). These theorists argue these stages of development do not vary and are distinct from one other. While rates of progress vary by child, the sequence is the same and skipping stages is impossible. Therefore, progression through stages is essentially similar for each child.
In 1936, Piaget proposed four stages of cognitive development for children:
- the sensorimotor stage, which ranges from birth to age two;
- the preoperational stage, ranging from age two through age six or seven;
- the concrete operational stage, ranging from age six or seven through age 11 or 12;
- and the formal operational stage, ranging from age 11 or 12 through adulthood.
Piaget argued that key abilities are acquired at each stage. We will now look at each stage in depth, along with videos demonstrating these abilities in action.
In the sensorimotor stage, little children learn about their surroundings through their senses. In addition, the idea of object permanence is emphasized. This is a child’s realization that things continue to exist even if they are not in view. An example is when parents play peek-a-boo with their infants. The child sees that the parent or caregiver is actually gone when the parent’s or caregiver’s hands are in front of their faces. The video below demonstrates the idea of object permanence.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ue8y-JVhjS0
In the preoperational stage, children develop language, imagination, and memory, working toward symbolic thought. One of the key ideas is the principle of conservation, meaning that specific properties of objects remain the same even if other properties change. The notion of centration is critical here in that children only pay attention to one aspect of a situation. An example is filling a shallow round container with water, then pouring the same amount of water into a skinny container. The child in the preoperational stage will say that there is now more water in the skinny container, even though no additional liquid was added. The video below demonstrates the principle of conservation.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GLj0IZFLKvg&feature=related
Additionally, in the preoperational stage, Piaget suggested that children have egocentric thinking, meaning that they lack the ability to see situations from another person’s point of view. The video below demonstrates the idea of egocentrism.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OinqFgsIbh0&feature=related
In the concrete operational stage, children begin to think more logically and abstractly and can now master the idea of conservation as they work toward operational thought. Children in this stage are less egocentric than before. Key developments in this stage include the notions of reversibility, which is defined as the ability to change direction in linear thinking to return to starting point, and transitivity, which is the ability to infer relationships between two objects based upon objects’ relation to a third object in serial order. The video below demonstrates the ideas of reversibility and transitivity.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UNmUjRf0ekQ
Finally, the formal operational stage continues through adulthood. This is when we can better reason and understand hypothetical situations as we develop abstract thought. Key ideas include metacognition, which is the ability to monitor and think about your own thinking; and the ability to compare abstract relationships, such as to generate laws, principles, or theories. The video below demonstrates the idea of hypothetical thinking, where we see how a boy in the concrete operational stage and a woman in the formal operations stage respond to the same scenario.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zjJdcXA1KH8&feature=related
In addition to his four stages of cognitive development for children, Piaget also discussed how we add new information to our existing understandings. Key terms in his conceptualization of cognitive constructivism include schema, assimilation, accommodation, disequilibrium, and equilibrium. Schema refers to the ways in which we organize information as we confront new ideas. For example, children learn what a wallet is and that it generally contains money. Next they learn that a wallet can be carried in various places, i.e. a pocket or a purse. The child is making a connection now between the idea of a wallet and the category of places where it can be carried. The child’s schema is developing as ideas begin to interconnect and form what we can call a blueprint of concepts and their connections.
In order to develop schema, Piaget would have said that children (and all of us) need to experience disequilibrium. Children are in a state of equilibrium as they go about in the world. As they encounter a new concept to add to their schema, they experience disequilibrium where they need to process how this new information fits into their schema. They do this in two ways: assimilation and accommodation. Assimilation uses existing schema to interpret new situations. Accommodation involves changing schema to accommodate new schema and return to a state of equilibrium. Let’s try an example. A child knows that banging a fork on a table makes noise, and the fork does not break. That child and concept are in a state of equilibrium, with the existing schema of knowing banging things on tables does not break the item. The next day, a parent gives the child a sippy cup. The child bangs it on the table and it also does not break, so the child assimilates this new object into their existing understanding that banging items on tables does not break the item. One day, a parent gives the child an egg. The child proceeds to bang it on the table, but what happens? The egg breaks, sending the child’s schema--everything that they bang on the table remains unbroken--into a state of disequilibrium. That child must accommodate that new information into their schema. Once this new information is accommodated, the child can once again move into equilibrium. The video below explains the idea of schema, assimilation and accommodation.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xj0CUeyucJw
Sociocultural Theory: Vygotsky
Whereas Piaget viewed learning in specific stages where children engage in cognitive constructivism (Huitt & Hummel, 2003), thus emphasizing the role of the individual in learning, Lev Vygotsky viewed learning as socially constructed (Vygotsky, 1986). Vygotsky was a Russian psychologist in the 1920s and 1930s, but his work was not known to the Western world until the 1970s. He emphasized the role that other people have in an individual’s construction of knowledge, known as social constructivism. He realized that we learned more with other people than we learned all by ourselves.
One of the major tenets in Vygotsky’s theory of learning (Vygotsky, 1986) is the zone of proximal development. As shown in Figure 2.4, the zone of proximal development (ZPD) is the difference between what a learner can do without help and what they can do with help.
Figure 2.4: Vygotsky’s Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD)
Vygotsky's often-quoted definition of zone of proximal development says ZPD is "the distance between the actual developmental level as determined by independent problem solving and the level of potential development as determined through problem solving under adult guidance, or in collaboration with more capable peers" (Vygotsky, 1978, p. 86). The concept of scaffolding is closely related to the ZPD. Scaffolding is a process through which a teacher or more competent peer gives aid to the student in her/his ZPD as necessary, and tapers off this aid as it becomes unnecessary, much as a scaffold is removed from a building during construction. While we often think of a teacher as the more “expert other” in ZPD, this individual does not have to be a teacher. In fact, sometimes our own students are the more “expert other” in certain areas. Vygotsky’s sociocultural theory emphasizes that we can learn more with and through each other.
https://youtu.be/kTIUAZbKidw
CRITICAL LENS: CONTEXT MATTERS
As we examine these four theories, it is also important to analyze the context of this work: these theorists and researchers all identified as White, often working with individuals close to them to conduct research (for example, Piaget studied his own children). We all absorb certain beliefs and social norms from our communities, so knowing that these theories came from communities that represented fairly limited diversity is important.
Conclusion
In this chapter, we surveyed two systems that influence students’ learning (Maslow’s hierarchy of needs and Gardner’s theory of multiple intelligences) and two theoretical perspectives on development (Piaget’s cognitive developmental theory and Vygotsky’s sociocultural theory).
There are several modern theories that have strong research supporting them. These theories are part of a course in Educational Psychology.
As we saw in the Unlearning Box at the beginning of this chapter, all of our students bring different characteristics with them to our classrooms. While some (not all!) students may share certain characteristics and overall developmental trajectories, teachers must acknowledge that each student in the classroom has individual strengths and needs. Only once we know our students as individual learners will we be able to teach them effectively.
You may have heard comments implying that education in the United States is not political, separate from religion, and accessible to everyone. The reality is that from its early existence in the New World in the 1600s, it was indeed political, religious, and accessible only to a select few. These traits continue to influence the evolution of education in the United States today.
In this chapter, we will explore how historical foundations have shaped the trajectory of education in the United States.
Chapter Outline
Historical Foundations
Education as we know it today has a long history intertwined with the development of the United States. In this section, we will follow historical events through key periods of U.S history to see the forces that left lasting influences on education in the United States.
Introducing The NPR Podcast The Promise a limited-run series about life in public housing, smack in the middle of a city on the rise — stories of a neighborhood in flux, a community defined by its struggles and the growing divide threatening its very existence. You will listen to this podcast throughout the text as an illustration of many key ideas we will discuss.
Season 2: Episode 1 - A Tale Of Two Schools (Link to Podcast) THIS IS OPTIONAL and LENGTHY
NOTE: This podcast series is optional. The series is very lengthy! However, the other resources (YouTube videos) are NOT optional.
Colonial America
Public education as we know it today did not exist in the colonies. In the First Charter of Virginia in 1606, King James I set forth a religious mission for investors and colonizers to disseminate the “Christian Religion” among the Indigenous population, which he described as “Infidels and Savages.” His colonial and educational mission would impact settlement and education in America for centuries. Next, we will explore how education began evolving in Puritan Massachusetts and the Middle and Southern Colonies during the colonial period.
Puritan Massachusetts
Puritans in Massachusetts believed educating children in religion and rules from a young age would increase their chances of survival or, if they did die, increase their chances of religious salvation. Puritans in Massachusetts established the first compulsory education law in the New World through the , which required parents and apprenticeship masters to educate their children and apprentices in the principles of Puritan religion and the laws of the commonwealth. The Law of 1647, also referred to as the Old Deluder Satan Act, required towns of fifty or more families to hire a schoolmaster to teach children basic literacy. Because of similar religious beliefs and the physical proximity of families’ residences, formal schooling developed quickly in the commonwealth of Massachusetts. Connecticut, New York, and Pennsylvania followed in Massachusetts’ footsteps, passing similar laws and ordinances between the mid- and late-seventeenth century (Cremin, 1972).
During this time, children learned to read at home using the Holy Scriptures and catechisms (small books that summarized key religious principles) as educational texts. The primers that were used “contained simple verses, songs, and stories designed to teach at once the skills of literacy and the virtues of Christian living” (McClellan, 1999, p. 3).
The importance of faith, prayer, humility, rewards of virtue, honesty, obedience, thrift, proverbs, religious stories, the fear of death, and the importance of hard work served as major moral principles featured throughout the texts. When Indigenous people were depicted or mentioned in texts, they were portrayed as “savages and infidels,” needing salvation through English cultural norms.
Another form of education occurred in dame schools. Where available, some parents sent their children to a neighboring housewife who taught them basic literacy skills, including reading, numbers, and writing. Because families paid for their children to attend dame schools, this form of education was mainly available to middle-class families. Teaching aids and texts included Scripture, hornbooks, catechisms, and primers (Urban & Wagoner, 2009).
More expensive than dame schools, Latin grammar schools were also available. The first Latin grammar school was established in Boston in 1635 to teach boys subjects like classical literature, reading, writing, and math at what we would consider the high school level today in preparation to attend Harvard University (Powell, 2019).
The Middle and Southern Colonies
In Virginia, the Carolinas, and Georgia, town or village schooling was not as common. Their populations were sparser, and they focused more on economic opportunities for survival than religion. Education was considered a private matter and a responsibility of individual parents, not the government. Schooling was seen as a service that should be paid by the users of that service, creating a stratified system of education where wealthy families had access to schooling and others did not. Wealthier parents often sent their children to English boarding schools or paid for private schooling in the colonies. Wealthy families also sent their children to parson schools, operated by a highly educated minister who opened his home to young scholars and often taught secular subjects. Education for the poor was usually limited to the rudiments of basic literacy learned in the home or occasionally at church.
Charity schools, often referred to as “endowed ‘free’ schools” (Urban & Wagoner, 2009), were occasionally established when an affluent individual made provisions in his or her will, including land, to construct and manage a school for the poor. In addition, field schools were occasionally built in rural areas. Named after the abandoned fields in which they were built, these schoolhouses offered affordable education to students. The teacher’s salary came from fees students’ families paid, and teachers often boarded with a local family while serving a field school. These schools were also called rate schools, subscription schools, fee schools, and eventually district schools (Urban & Wagoner, 2009).
In Colonial America, education in the mid-Atlantic and southern colonies was heavily stratified and remained out of reach for most inhabitants. New England Puritans worked hard to establish schools. Fear, anxiety, and the struggle for survival lent urgency to their quest for cultural transmission, which helps us understand their desire for formal schooling. Table 3.2 summarizes the main forms of schooling in Colonial America.
Table 3.2: Forms of Schooling in Colonial America
New England |
Middle and Southern Colonies |
|
|
American Revolutionary Era
[h5p id="2"]
After the American Revolution, our new country was establishing its systems and identity. Many key Founders believed public education was a prerequisite in a republic. Three groups had distinct post-revolutionary plans for education and schooling, all of which were intended to serve as part of the founding process: Federalists, Anti-Federalists, and the lesser known Democratic-Republican Societies.
Federalists
Alexander Hamilton, George Washington, and John Adams, among other Federalists, focused on building a new nation and a new national identity by following the new Constitution, which consolidated power in a new federal government. The Federalists supported mass schooling for nationalistic purposes, such as preserving order, morality, and a nationalistic character, but opposed tax-supported schooling, viewing it as unnecessary in a society where elites rule.
Noah Webster was one of the great advocates for mass schooling, and the purposes for which he supported schooling included teaching children not just “the usual branches of learning,” but also “submission to superiors and to laws [and] moral or social duties.” Smoothing out the “rough manners” of frontier folk was very important to Webster. Furthermore, Webster placed great responsibility among “women in forming the dispositions of youth” in order to “control…the manners of a nation” and that which “is useful” to an orderly republic (Webster, 1965, 67, 69-77). Webster’s treatise on education and his spellers (like his 1783 American Spelling Book) were intended to develop a literate and nationalistic character to shape useful, virtuous, and law-abiding citizens with strong attachments to Federalist America.
Anti-Federalists
Anti-Federalists, on the other hand, were opposed to a strong central government, preferring instead state and local forms of government. The Anti-Federalists believed that the success of a republican government depended on small geographical areas, spaces small enough for individuals to know one another and to deliberate collectively on matters of public concern. Anti-Federalists feared concentrated power.
Thomas Jefferson was an Anti-Federalist. An aristocrat whose genteel lifestyle was bolstered by his violent oppression of enslaved people, Jefferson put forth proposals to educate all white citizens in the state of Virginia. Jefferson proposed a system of tiered schooling. The three tiers were primary schools, grammar schools, and the College of William and Mary. The foundation of his tiered schooling plan included three years of tax-supported schooling for all white children with limited options for a few poor children to advance at public expense to higher levels of education. While he suggested very limited educational opportunities for women, no other key Founder advocated giving high-achieving scholars from poor families a free education. Religion was not a core curricular area in the primary and grammar schools. However, his plans were viewed as too radical by his aristocratic peers, and they correspondingly rejected his state education proposals.
Democratic-Republican Societies
The third group of post-revolution political activists formed several clubs broadly described as the Democratic-Republican Societies during the 1790s. Members of these political clubs included artisans, teachers, ship builders, innkeepers, and working class individuals. They generally supported universal, government-funded schooling, not simply to secure allegiance and order, but also to develop democratic citizen virtue and venues for deliberative learning and opportunities for dissent. The Democratic-Republican Societies viewed education as a means to prepare active citizens for new civic roles, and they considered the government responsible for providing positive benefits to individuals to realize a more fulfilling citizenship through venues such as education.
Table 3.3 summarizes the key differences among these three political groups and how they related to their views of education.
Table 3.3: Federalist, Anti-Federalist, and Democratic-Republican Stances
Federalists |
Anti-Federalists |
Democratic-Republican |
| Support strong central government via the new Constitution | Support a decentralized system of governing: states and local governance | Support a decentralized system of governing: states and local governance |
| Maintain social and economic status quo | Accept limited structural change in order to develop economic and political independence among individuals | Accept structural changes in order to develop economic and political independence among individuals |
| Support publicly funded school systems to develop and maintain strong inner moral values based on Christianity and patriotic adherence to the nation-state; order and harmony are emphasized | Support public school systems detached from religious institutions and a greater focus on the use of individual reason; preparation for limited political participation at the local level; three years of primary schooling available to all white children at public expense with opportunities for male scholars from poor families to advance | Support universal public schooling throughout the United States at public expense; curriculum expected to focus on some form of critical analysis of the status quo and preparing citizens to be active in democratic governance |
Early National Era
[h5p id="3"]
During the early- to mid-nineteenth century, the United States was expanding westward, and urbanization and immigration intensified. This period of history was defined by the emergence of the common school movement and normal schools, though conflicts over the organization and control of education continued. This period also saw the advent of higher education.
The Common School Movement
Common schools were elementary schools where all students--not just wealthy boys--could attend for free. Common schools were radical in their status as tax-supported free schooling, but their conservative-leaning curriculum addressed traditional values and political allegiance. Schooling offered increasing opportunities for families’ children, especially working-class families, by teaching basic values including honesty, punctuality, inner behavioral restraints, obedience to authority, hard work, cleanliness, and respect for law, private property, and representative government (Urban & Wagoner, 2009). Horace Mann, Massachusetts’s first Secretary of Education and Whig (formerly Federalist) politician, was the leader of the common school movement, which began in the New England states and then expanded into New York, Pennsylvania, and then into westward states.
The Development of Normal Schools
With the rise of common schools, Horace Mann then turned to how female teachers would be educated. For Mann, the answer was to create teacher training institutions originally referred to as normal schools. A French institution dating back to the sixteenth century, école normale was the term used to identify a model or ideal teaching institute. Once adopted in the United States, the institution was simply called a normal school.
The first normal school in America was established in Lexington, Massachusetts in 1839 (now Framingham State University). They were primarily used to train primary school teachers, as middle and high schools did not yet exist. The curriculum included academic subjects, classroom management and school governance, and the practice of teaching. Teacher credentialing began and was regulated by state governments. Moreover, this contributed to the professionalization of teaching, and normal schools eventually became colleges or schools of education. Many normal schools eventually became full-fledged liberal arts and research institutes. Catherine Beecher was the first well-known teacher of the time and one of the normal schools’ first teachers.
Because the teaching profession was being feminized, administrators and policymakers viewed this as an opportunity. Men were exiting the profession, and women were typically paid much less, allowing more women to be hired for less money to educate the growing ranks of students as common schools spread westward. Furthermore, once the profession was feminized, teaching became perceived as a missionary calling rather than an academic pursuit. While male policymakers insisted women were better nurturers and more suited to teaching morality and correct behavior in children, framing the discourse of teaching around a calling helped rationalize lower pay for women and fewer advancement possibilities.
Conflicts in the Common School Movement
The common school movement was not without its conflicts. Whigs (formerly Federalists), including Horace Mann, sought to establish state systems of schooling in order to create standardization and uniformity in curricula, classroom equipment, school organization, and professional credentialing of teachers across state schools. Democrats, however, often supported public schooling but feared centralized government, thus opposing the centralization of local schools under the common school movement. The battle between Whigs and Democrats during the nineteenth century represents one of the initial conflicts related to public schooling.
Another important conflict related to the common school movement was the clash between urban Protestants and Catholics. Typically from Protestant backgrounds, common school reformers continued to use the Bible as a common text in classrooms without considering the potential conflict this could generate in diverse communities. Horace Mann advocated using only generalized Scripture in order to prevent offending different sects. However, what appeared to Protestants as a generalization of Christian text was actually very insulting to Catholic immigrants, who were becoming the second largest group of city dwellers at the time. Protestants realized that it was best to reduce the religious content in the common school curriculum, but unhappy Catholic leaders created their own private parochial schools. This conflict generated a greater theoretical acceptance of the separation of church and state doctrine in publicly-funded common schools, though in practice, common schooling continued to infuse Protestant biases for over a century.
Common schools also faced conflict in Southern states, including Jefferson’s Virginia, until after the Civil War. Planters had no interest in disturbing the status quo by educating poor whites or enslaved people. Driven by Southern aristocracy, education continued to be viewed as a private family responsibility and class privilege. In fact, many southern states prohibited educating enslaved people and passed state statutes that attached criminal penalties for doing so, such as the ones below.
| Excerpt from a 1740 South Carolina Act:
Whereas, the having slaves taught to write, or suffering them to be employed in writing, may be attended with great inconveniences; Be it enacted, that all and every person and persons whatsoever, who shall hereafter teach or cause any slave or slaves to be taught to write, or shall use or employ any slave as a scribe, in any manner of writing whatsoever, hereafter taught to write, every such person or persons shall, for every such offense, forfeit the sum of one hundred pounds, current money.
|
Excerpt from Virginia Revised Code of 1819:
That all meetings or assemblages of slaves, or free negroes or mulattoes mixing and associating with such slaves at any meeting-house or houses, &c., in the night; or at any SCHOOL OR SCHOOLS for teaching them READING OR WRITING, either in the day or night, under whatsoever pretext, shall be deemed and considered an UNLAWFUL ASSEMBLY; and any justice of a county, &c., wherein such assemblage shall be, either from his own knowledge or the information of others, of such unlawful assemblage, &c., may issue his warrant, directed to any sworn officer or officers, authorizing him or them to enter the house or houses where such unlawful assemblages, &c., may be, for the purpose of apprehending or dispersing such slaves, and to inflict corporal punishment on the offender or offenders, at the discretion of any justice of the peace, not exceeding twenty lashes. |
Enslaved people have often been depicted in American history textbooks as passive toward their owners. This is a misrepresentation of history. African Americans escaped, committed espionage on plantations, negotiated statuses, and occasionally educated themselves behind closed doors. For enslaved people, education and knowledge represented freedom and power, and once they were emancipated, they continued their relentless quest for learning by constructing their own schools throughout the South, even with minimal resources. Unlike many free whites, African Americans placed an exceptional value on literacy due to generations of bondage.
CRITICAL LENS: WORDS MATTER!
You will notice in this chapter that we use the term “enslaved person” instead of “slave.” Part of critical theory involves questioning existing power structures, even in word choice. Recently, academics and historians have shifted away from using the term “slave” and have begun replacing it with “enslaved person” because it places “humans first, commodities second” (Waldman, 2015, para. 2).
Even while slavery continued throughout the South, segregation continued in the North. One of the first challenges to segregation occurred in Boston, Massachusetts. Benjamin Roberts attempted to enroll his five-year-old daughter, Sarah, in a segregated white school in her neighborhood, but Sarah was refused admission due to her race. Sarah attempted to enroll in a few other schools closer to her home, but she was again denied admission for the same reason. Mr. Roberts filed a lawsuit in 1849, Sarah Roberts v. City of Boston, claiming that because his daughter had to travel much farther to attend a segregated and substandard black school, Sarah was psychologically damaged. The state courts ruled in favor of the City of Boston in 1850 because state law permitted segregated schooling. This case would be cited in Plessy v. Ferguson in 1898 and in Brown v. Board of Education in 1954.
Post Civil War and Reconstruction
[h5p id="4"]
Following the Civil War, significant restructuring of political, economical, social, and educational systems in the United States occurred. Schooling continued to be viewed as a necessary instrument in maintaining stability and unity. During this era, education was shaped by increasing influence of the federal government, the beginning of education in the South, the Morrill Acts, and Native American boarding schools.
Increasing Influence of the Federal Government
Elazar (1969) asserted that “crisis compels centralization” (p. 51): when the nation undergoes a calamity, it eventually leads to the federal government exercising extra-constitutional actions on its own will or as a result of demands made by state and local governments. The post-Civil War Era provides one example of this effect. The U.S. Congress established requirements for the Southern states to reenter the Union. Radical Republicans, as they were identified after the Civil War, believed that the lack of common schooling in the South had contributed to the circumstances leading to war, so Congress required Southern states to include provisions for free public schooling in their rewritten constitutions.
Of course, southern states followed through with the requirements and drafted language supporting schools, but they created loopholes like separate and segregated schools. Black schools received substantially lower funding than White schools, creating yet another form of institutionalized racism that would have long-lasting consequences for African American communities.
The Beginning of Education in the South
Following the Civil War, nearly four million formerly enslaved people were homeless, without property, and illiterate. In response, Congress created the Freedmen’s Bureau (officially referred to as the U.S. Bureau of Refugees, Freedmen and Abandoned Lands). Supervised by northern military officers, the Freedmen’s Bureau distributed food, clothing, and medical aid to formerly enslaved people and poor Whites and created over 1,000 schools throughout the southern states. The Freedmen’s Bureau effectively lasted only for seven years, but it represented a massive federal effort that provided some benefits.
In addition to Freedmen’s schools, Yankee schoolmarms also headed south as missionaries to help educate formerly enslaved people. They sought mutual benefits: to educate the illiterate and simultaneously secure themselves in the eyes of God. As missionaries, female teachers learned that their work was a calling to instill morality in the nation’s students, and this calling was pursued for the good of mankind instead of financial gain. This same missionary status fueled both the migration of teachers westward following national expansion, and the thousands of schoolmarms that migrated to the South to educate formerly enslaved people who, they believed, had to be redeemed through literacy, Christian morality, and republican virtue (Butchart, 2010).
However, African Americans were preemptively educating themselves. Formerly-enslaved people knew the connection between knowledge and freedom. Ignorance was itself oppressive; knowledge, on the other hand, was liberating. Literate African Americans were often teaching children and adults alike and creating their own one-room schoolhouses, even with limited resources. By 1866 in Georgia, African Americans were at least partially financing 96 of 123 evening schools and owned 57 school buildings (Anderson, 1988). The African American educational initiatives caught Northern missionaries off guard:
Many missionaries were astonished, and later chagrined…to discover that many ex-slaves had established their own educational collectives and associations, staffed schools entirely with black teachers, and were unwilling to allow their educational movement to be controlled by the ‘civilized’ Yankees.” (Anderson, 1988, p. 6)
In addition, industrial schools were built in the South for Black Americans. Southern policymakers, northern industrialists, and philanthropic groups partnered to establish industrial schools focused on vocational or trade skills. Southern policymakers benefitted because industrial schools resulted in segregated higher education, which further limited access to equality. Northern industrialists benefited because they gained skilled laborers. Philanthropists believed they were giving Black Americans access to education and jobs.
Two African American leaders in the late nineteenth century had different perspectives on newly-developed industrial schools. Booker T. Washington was born an enslaved person in 1856 and grew up in Virginia. He attended the Hampton Institute, whose founder, General Samuel Armstrong, emphasized that “obtaining farms or skilled jobs was far more important to African-Americans emerging from slavery than the rights of citizenship” (Foner, 2012, p. 652-653). Washington supported this view as head of the Tuskegee Institute in Alabama. In his famous 1895 “Atlanta Compromise” speech, Washington did not support “ceaseless agitation for full equality”; rather, he suggested, “In all the things that are purely social we can be as separate as the fingers, yet one as the hand in all things essential to mutual progress” (Foner, 2012, p. 653). Washington feared that if demands for greater equality were imposed, it would result in a white backlash and destroy what little progress had been made.
W.E.B. Du Bois viewed the situation differently. Born free in Great Barrington, Massachusetts in 1868, Du Bois was the first African American to earn a Ph.D. from Harvard University. He served as a professor at Atlanta University and helped establish the NAACP in 1905 to seek legal and political equality for African Americans. He opposed Washington’s pragmatic approach, considering it a form of “submission and silence on civil and political rights” (Urban & Wagoner, 2009, p. 176).
Critical Lens: The "Value" of Education
The opinions of Booker T. Washington and W. E. B. Du Bois are prevalent in today’s options for education after high school. Some believe that technical schools have a place in society for those who do not choose to, or who are not able to afford, four-year colleges. In essence, that the four-year college experience is not needed to be a contributing member of society. Others believe that one must attend college to expand understanding for future, more “professional” careers. Who is right in these scenarios? What influences where students choose to learn in post-secondary education? It is important to critique the implicit biases we hold regarding others' educational choices.
Native American Boarding Schools: Cultural Imperialism and Genocide
Using its military, the federal government created a number of Native American boarding schools throughout the country. The first and most famous of these was the Carlisle School, founded in Pennsylvania in 1879. The federal government convinced many Native American parents that these off-reservation boarding schools would educate their children to improve their economic and social opportunities in mainstream America. In reality, this experiment was intended to deculturize Indigenous children. Supervisors at the boarding schools destroyed children’s native clothing, cut their hair, and renamed many of them with names chosen from the Protestant Bible. The curriculum in these schools taught basic literacy and focused on industrial training, intended to sort graduates of these boarding schools into agricultural and mechanical occupations. A total of 25 off-reservation boarding schools educating nearly 30,000 students were created in several western states and territories, as well as in the upper Great Lakes region. Based in ethnocentrism, or the belief of the White, Protestant mainstream culture that they were superior to other cultures, these boarding schools relied on a harsh form of assimilation, a fundamental feature of common schooling.
K. Tsianina Lomawaima's work straddles Indigenous Studies, anthropology, education, ethnohistory, history, legal analysis, and political science. Her scholarship on federal off-reservation boarding schools is rooted in the experiences of her father, Curtis Thorpe Carr, a survivor of Chilocco Indian Agricultural School. Here she discusses the question, Why Boarding Schools?
Conclusion
Education in the United States has a complicated past entrenched in religious, economic, national, and international concerns. In Colonial America, Puritans in Massachusetts knew education would teach children the ways of religion and laws, vital to survival in a new world. Meanwhile, the Middle and Southern Colonies viewed education as a commodity for the wealthy families who could afford it. After the American Revolution, Federalists, Anti-Federalists, and Democratic-Republican Societies all had different perceptions of how schools should be organized to support our newly-established independent nation. In the Early National Era, common schools, normal schools, and higher education grew as education became more widely established. Following the Civil War, the federal government was increasingly involved in education.
Critical Lens: Indigenous Boarding Schools in the News
In the summer of 2021, the dark history of Indigenous boarding schools made headlines as Canadian authorities discovered unmarked graves and remains of children[14] killed at multiple boarding schools for Indigenous children. In July 2021, the U.S. launched a federal probe[15] into our own Indigenous boarding schools and the intergenerational trauma they have caused. These boarding schools are one way that education has been used to oppress and deculturize a particular group of Americans.
You may have heard comments implying that education in the United States is not political, separate from religion, and accessible to everyone. The reality is that from its early existence in the New World in the 1600s, it was indeed political, religious, and accessible only to a select few. These traits continue to influence the evolution of education in the United States today.
In this chapter, we will explore how historical foundations have shaped the trajectory of education in the United States.
Chapter Outline
Historical Foundations
Education as we know it today has a long history intertwined with the development of the United States. In this section, we will follow historical events through key periods of U.S history to see the forces that left lasting influences on education in the United States.
Introducing The NPR Podcast The Promise a limited-run series about life in public housing, smack in the middle of a city on the rise — stories of a neighborhood in flux, a community defined by its struggles and the growing divide threatening its very existence. You will listen to this podcast throughout the text as an illustration of many key ideas we will discuss.
Season 2: Episode 1 - A Tale Of Two Schools (Link to Podcast) THIS IS OPTIONAL and LENGTHY
NOTE: This podcast series is optional. The series is very lengthy! However, the other resources (YouTube videos) are NOT optional.
Colonial America
Public education as we know it today did not exist in the colonies. In the First Charter of Virginia in 1606, King James I set forth a religious mission for investors and colonizers to disseminate the “Christian Religion” among the Indigenous population, which he described as “Infidels and Savages.” His colonial and educational mission would impact settlement and education in America for centuries. Next, we will explore how education began evolving in Puritan Massachusetts and the Middle and Southern Colonies during the colonial period.
Puritan Massachusetts
Puritans in Massachusetts believed educating children in religion and rules from a young age would increase their chances of survival or, if they did die, increase their chances of religious salvation. Puritans in Massachusetts established the first compulsory education law in the New World through the , which required parents and apprenticeship masters to educate their children and apprentices in the principles of Puritan religion and the laws of the commonwealth. The Law of 1647, also referred to as the Old Deluder Satan Act, required towns of fifty or more families to hire a schoolmaster to teach children basic literacy. Because of similar religious beliefs and the physical proximity of families’ residences, formal schooling developed quickly in the commonwealth of Massachusetts. Connecticut, New York, and Pennsylvania followed in Massachusetts’ footsteps, passing similar laws and ordinances between the mid- and late-seventeenth century (Cremin, 1972).
During this time, children learned to read at home using the Holy Scriptures and catechisms (small books that summarized key religious principles) as educational texts. The primers that were used “contained simple verses, songs, and stories designed to teach at once the skills of literacy and the virtues of Christian living” (McClellan, 1999, p. 3).
The importance of faith, prayer, humility, rewards of virtue, honesty, obedience, thrift, proverbs, religious stories, the fear of death, and the importance of hard work served as major moral principles featured throughout the texts. When Indigenous people were depicted or mentioned in texts, they were portrayed as “savages and infidels,” needing salvation through English cultural norms.
Another form of education occurred in dame schools. Where available, some parents sent their children to a neighboring housewife who taught them basic literacy skills, including reading, numbers, and writing. Because families paid for their children to attend dame schools, this form of education was mainly available to middle-class families. Teaching aids and texts included Scripture, hornbooks, catechisms, and primers (Urban & Wagoner, 2009).
More expensive than dame schools, Latin grammar schools were also available. The first Latin grammar school was established in Boston in 1635 to teach boys subjects like classical literature, reading, writing, and math at what we would consider the high school level today in preparation to attend Harvard University (Powell, 2019).
The Middle and Southern Colonies
In Virginia, the Carolinas, and Georgia, town or village schooling was not as common. Their populations were sparser, and they focused more on economic opportunities for survival than religion. Education was considered a private matter and a responsibility of individual parents, not the government. Schooling was seen as a service that should be paid by the users of that service, creating a stratified system of education where wealthy families had access to schooling and others did not. Wealthier parents often sent their children to English boarding schools or paid for private schooling in the colonies. Wealthy families also sent their children to parson schools, operated by a highly educated minister who opened his home to young scholars and often taught secular subjects. Education for the poor was usually limited to the rudiments of basic literacy learned in the home or occasionally at church.
Charity schools, often referred to as “endowed ‘free’ schools” (Urban & Wagoner, 2009), were occasionally established when an affluent individual made provisions in his or her will, including land, to construct and manage a school for the poor. In addition, field schools were occasionally built in rural areas. Named after the abandoned fields in which they were built, these schoolhouses offered affordable education to students. The teacher’s salary came from fees students’ families paid, and teachers often boarded with a local family while serving a field school. These schools were also called rate schools, subscription schools, fee schools, and eventually district schools (Urban & Wagoner, 2009).
In Colonial America, education in the mid-Atlantic and southern colonies was heavily stratified and remained out of reach for most inhabitants. New England Puritans worked hard to establish schools. Fear, anxiety, and the struggle for survival lent urgency to their quest for cultural transmission, which helps us understand their desire for formal schooling. Table 3.2 summarizes the main forms of schooling in Colonial America.
Table 3.2: Forms of Schooling in Colonial America
New England |
Middle and Southern Colonies |
|
|
American Revolutionary Era
After the American Revolution, our new country was establishing its systems and identity. Many key Founders believed public education was a prerequisite in a republic. Three groups had distinct post-revolutionary plans for education and schooling, all of which were intended to serve as part of the founding process: Federalists, Anti-Federalists, and the lesser known Democratic-Republican Societies.
Federalists
Alexander Hamilton, George Washington, and John Adams, among others focused on building a new nation and a new national identity by following the new Constitution, which consolidated power in a new federal government. The Federalists supported mass schooling for nationalistic purposes, such as preserving order, morality, and a nationalistic character, but opposed tax-supported schooling, viewing it as unnecessary in a society where elites rule.
Noah Webster was one of the great advocates for mass schooling, and the purposes for which he supported schooling included teaching children not just “the usual branches of learning,” but also “submission to superiors and to laws [and] moral or social duties.” Smoothing out the “rough manners” of frontier folk was very important to Webster. Furthermore, Webster placed great responsibility among “women in forming the dispositions of youth” in order to “control…the manners of a nation” and that which “is useful” to an orderly republic (Webster, 1965, 67, 69-77). Webster’s treatise on education and his spellers (like his 1783 American Spelling Book) were intended to develop a literate and nationalistic character to shape useful, virtuous, and law-abiding citizens with strong attachments to Federalist America.
Anti-Federalists
Anti-Federalists, on the other hand, were opposed to a strong central government, preferring instead state and local forms of government. The Anti-Federalists believed that the success of a republican government depended on small geographical areas, spaces small enough for individuals to know one another and to deliberate collectively on matters of public concern. Anti-Federalists feared concentrated power.
Thomas Jefferson was an Anti-Federalist. An aristocrat whose genteel lifestyle was bolstered by his violent oppression of enslaved people, Jefferson put forth proposals to educate all white citizens in the state of Virginia. Jefferson proposed a system of tiered schooling. The three tiers were primary schools, grammar schools, and the College of William and Mary. The foundation of his tiered schooling plan included three years of tax-supported schooling for all white children with limited options for a few poor children to advance at public expense to higher levels of education. While he suggested very limited educational opportunities for women, no other key Founder advocated giving high-achieving scholars from poor families a free education. Religion was not a core curricular area in the primary and grammar schools. However, his plans were viewed as too radical by his aristocratic peers, and they correspondingly rejected his state education proposals.
Democratic-Republican Societies
The third group of post-revolution political activists formed several clubs broadly described as the Democratic-Republican Societies during the 1790s. Members of these political clubs included artisans, teachers, ship builders, innkeepers, and working class individuals. They generally supported universal, government-funded schooling, not simply to secure allegiance and order, but also to develop democratic citizen virtue and venues for deliberative learning and opportunities for dissent. The Democratic-Republican Societies viewed education as a means to prepare active citizens for new civic roles, and they considered the government responsible for providing positive benefits to individuals to realize a more fulfilling citizenship through venues such as education.
Table 3.3 summarizes the key differences among these three political groups and how they related to their views of education.
Table 3.3: Federalist, Anti-Federalist, and Democratic-Republican Stances
Federalists |
Anti-Federalists |
Democratic-Republican |
| Support strong central government via the new Constitution | Support a decentralized system of governing: states and local governance | Support a decentralized system of governing: states and local governance |
| Maintain social and economic status quo | Accept limited structural change in order to develop economic and political independence among individuals | Accept structural changes in order to develop economic and political independence among individuals |
| Support publicly funded school systems to develop and maintain strong inner moral values based on Christianity and patriotic adherence to the nation-state; order and harmony are emphasized | Support public school systems detached from religious institutions and a greater focus on the use of individual reason; preparation for limited political participation at the local level; three years of primary schooling available to all white children at public expense with opportunities for male scholars from poor families to advance | Support universal public schooling throughout the United States at public expense; curriculum expected to focus on some form of critical analysis of the status quo and preparing citizens to be active in democratic governance |
Early National Era
[h5p id="3"]
During the early- to mid-nineteenth century, the United States was expanding westward, and urbanization and immigration intensified. This period of history was defined by the emergence of the common school movement and normal schools, though conflicts over the organization and control of education continued. This period also saw the advent of higher education.
The Common School Movement
Common schools were elementary schools where all students--not just wealthy boys--could attend for free. Common schools were radical in their status as tax-supported free schooling, but their conservative-leaning curriculum addressed traditional values and political allegiance. Schooling offered increasing opportunities for families’ children, especially working-class families, by teaching basic values including honesty, punctuality, inner behavioral restraints, obedience to authority, hard work, cleanliness, and respect for law, private property, and representative government (Urban & Wagoner, 2009). Horace Mann, Massachusetts’s first Secretary of Education and Whig (formerly Federalist) politician, was the leader of the common school movement, which began in the New England states and then expanded into New York, Pennsylvania, and then into westward states.
The Development of Normal Schools
With the rise of common schools, Horace Mann then turned to how female teachers would be educated. For Mann, the answer was to create teacher training institutions originally referred to as normal schools. A French institution dating back to the sixteenth century, école normale was the term used to identify a model or ideal teaching institute. Once adopted in the United States, the institution was simply called a normal school.
The first normal school in America was established in Lexington, Massachusetts in 1839 (now Framingham State University). They were primarily used to train primary school teachers, as middle and high schools did not yet exist. The curriculum included academic subjects, classroom management and school governance, and the practice of teaching. Teacher credentialing began and was regulated by state governments. Moreover, this contributed to the professionalization of teaching, and normal schools eventually became colleges or schools of education. Many normal schools eventually became full-fledged liberal arts and research institutes. Catherine Beecher was the first well-known teacher of the time and one of the normal schools’ first teachers.
Because the teaching profession was being feminized, administrators and policymakers viewed this as an opportunity. Men were exiting the profession, and women were typically paid much less, allowing more women to be hired for less money to educate the growing ranks of students as common schools spread westward. Furthermore, once the profession was feminized, teaching became perceived as a missionary calling rather than an academic pursuit. While male policymakers insisted women were better nurturers and more suited to teaching morality and correct behavior in children, framing the discourse of teaching around a calling helped rationalize lower pay for women and fewer advancement possibilities.
Conflicts in the Common School Movement
The common school movement was not without its conflicts. Whigs (formerly Federalists), including Horace Mann, sought to establish state systems of schooling in order to create standardization and uniformity in curricula, classroom equipment, school organization, and professional credentialing of teachers across state schools. Democrats, however, often supported public schooling but feared centralized government, thus opposing the centralization of local schools under the common school movement. The battle between Whigs and Democrats during the nineteenth century represents one of the initial conflicts related to public schooling.
Another important conflict related to the common school movement was the clash between urban Protestants and Catholics. Typically from Protestant backgrounds, common school reformers continued to use the Bible as a common text in classrooms without considering the potential conflict this could generate in diverse communities. Horace Mann advocated using only generalized Scripture in order to prevent offending different sects. However, what appeared to Protestants as a generalization of Christian text was actually very insulting to Catholic immigrants, who were becoming the second largest group of city dwellers at the time. Protestants realized that it was best to reduce the religious content in the common school curriculum, but unhappy Catholic leaders created their own private parochial schools. This conflict generated a greater theoretical acceptance of the separation of church and state doctrine in publicly-funded common schools, though in practice, common schooling continued to infuse Protestant biases for over a century.
Common schools also faced conflict in Southern states, including Jefferson’s Virginia, until after the Civil War. Planters had no interest in disturbing the status quo by educating poor whites or enslaved people. Driven by Southern aristocracy, education continued to be viewed as a private family responsibility and class privilege. In fact, many southern states prohibited educating enslaved people and passed state statutes that attached criminal penalties for doing so, such as the ones below.
| Excerpt from a 1740 South Carolina Act:
Whereas, the having slaves taught to write, or suffering them to be employed in writing, may be attended with great inconveniences; Be it enacted, that all and every person and persons whatsoever, who shall hereafter teach or cause any slave or slaves to be taught to write, or shall use or employ any slave as a scribe, in any manner of writing whatsoever, hereafter taught to write, every such person or persons shall, for every such offense, forfeit the sum of one hundred pounds, current money.
|
Excerpt from Virginia Revised Code of 1819:
That all meetings or assemblages of slaves, or free negroes or mulattoes mixing and associating with such slaves at any meeting-house or houses, &c., in the night; or at any SCHOOL OR SCHOOLS for teaching them READING OR WRITING, either in the day or night, under whatsoever pretext, shall be deemed and considered an UNLAWFUL ASSEMBLY; and any justice of a county, &c., wherein such assemblage shall be, either from his own knowledge or the information of others, of such unlawful assemblage, &c., may issue his warrant, directed to any sworn officer or officers, authorizing him or them to enter the house or houses where such unlawful assemblages, &c., may be, for the purpose of apprehending or dispersing such slaves, and to inflict corporal punishment on the offender or offenders, at the discretion of any justice of the peace, not exceeding twenty lashes. |
Enslaved people have often been depicted in American history textbooks as passive toward their owners. This is a misrepresentation of history. African Americans escaped, committed espionage on plantations, negotiated statuses, and occasionally educated themselves behind closed doors. For enslaved people, education and knowledge represented freedom and power, and once they were emancipated, they continued their relentless quest for learning by constructing their own schools throughout the South, even with minimal resources. Unlike many free whites, African Americans placed an exceptional value on literacy due to generations of bondage.
CRITICAL LENS: WORDS MATTER!
You will notice in this chapter that we use the term “enslaved person” instead of “slave.” Part of critical theory involves questioning existing power structures, even in word choice. Recently, academics and historians have shifted away from using the term “slave” and have begun replacing it with “enslaved person” because it places “humans first, commodities second” (Waldman, 2015, para. 2).
Even while slavery continued throughout the South, segregation continued in the North. One of the first challenges to segregation occurred in Boston, Massachusetts. Benjamin Roberts attempted to enroll his five-year-old daughter, Sarah, in a segregated white school in her neighborhood, but Sarah was refused admission due to her race. Sarah attempted to enroll in a few other schools closer to her home, but she was again denied admission for the same reason. Mr. Roberts filed a lawsuit in 1849, Sarah Roberts v. City of Boston, claiming that because his daughter had to travel much farther to attend a segregated and substandard black school, Sarah was psychologically damaged. The state courts ruled in favor of the City of Boston in 1850 because state law permitted segregated schooling. This case would be cited in Plessy v. Ferguson in 1898 and in Brown v. Board of Education in 1954.
Post Civil War and Reconstruction
[h5p id="4"]
Following the Civil War, significant restructuring of political, economical, social, and educational systems in the United States occurred. Schooling continued to be viewed as a necessary instrument in maintaining stability and unity. During this era, education was shaped by increasing influence of the federal government, the beginning of education in the South, the Morrill Acts, and Native American boarding schools.
Increasing Influence of the Federal Government
Elazar (1969) asserted that “crisis compels centralization” (p. 51): when the nation undergoes a calamity, it eventually leads to the federal government exercising extra-constitutional actions on its own will or as a result of demands made by state and local governments. The post-Civil War Era provides one example of this effect. The U.S. Congress established requirements for the Southern states to reenter the Union. Radical Republicans, as they were identified after the Civil War, believed that the lack of common schooling in the South had contributed to the circumstances leading to war, so Congress required Southern states to include provisions for free public schooling in their rewritten constitutions.
Of course, southern states followed through with the requirements and drafted language supporting schools, but they created loopholes like separate and segregated schools. Black schools received substantially lower funding than White schools, creating yet another form of institutionalized racism that would have long-lasting consequences for African American communities.
The Beginning of Education in the South
Following the Civil War, nearly four million formerly enslaved people were homeless, without property, and illiterate. In response, Congress created the Freedmen’s Bureau (officially referred to as the U.S. Bureau of Refugees, Freedmen and Abandoned Lands). Supervised by northern military officers, the Freedmen’s Bureau distributed food, clothing, and medical aid to formerly enslaved people and poor Whites and created over 1,000 schools throughout the southern states. The Freedmen’s Bureau effectively lasted only for seven years, but it represented a massive federal effort that provided some benefits.
In addition to Freedmen’s schools, Yankee schoolmarms also headed south as missionaries to help educate formerly enslaved people. They sought mutual benefits: to educate the illiterate and simultaneously secure themselves in the eyes of God. As missionaries, female teachers learned that their work was a calling to instill morality in the nation’s students, and this calling was pursued for the good of mankind instead of financial gain. This same missionary status fueled both the migration of teachers westward following national expansion, and the thousands of schoolmarms that migrated to the South to educate formerly enslaved people who, they believed, had to be redeemed through literacy, Christian morality, and republican virtue (Butchart, 2010).
However, African Americans were preemptively educating themselves. Formerly-enslaved people knew the connection between knowledge and freedom. Ignorance was itself oppressive; knowledge, on the other hand, was liberating. Literate African Americans were often teaching children and adults alike and creating their own one-room schoolhouses, even with limited resources. By 1866 in Georgia, African Americans were at least partially financing 96 of 123 evening schools and owned 57 school buildings (Anderson, 1988). The African American educational initiatives caught Northern missionaries off guard:
Many missionaries were astonished, and later chagrined…to discover that many ex-slaves had established their own educational collectives and associations, staffed schools entirely with black teachers, and were unwilling to allow their educational movement to be controlled by the ‘civilized’ Yankees.” (Anderson, 1988, p. 6)
In addition, industrial schools were built in the South for Black Americans. Southern policymakers, northern industrialists, and philanthropic groups partnered to establish industrial schools focused on vocational or trade skills. Southern policymakers benefitted because industrial schools resulted in segregated higher education, which further limited access to equality. Northern industrialists benefited because they gained skilled laborers. Philanthropists believed they were giving Black Americans access to education and jobs.
Two African American leaders in the late nineteenth century had different perspectives on newly-developed industrial schools. Booker T. Washington was born an enslaved person in 1856 and grew up in Virginia. He attended the Hampton Institute, whose founder, General Samuel Armstrong, emphasized that “obtaining farms or skilled jobs was far more important to African-Americans emerging from slavery than the rights of citizenship” (Foner, 2012, p. 652-653). Washington supported this view as head of the Tuskegee Institute in Alabama. In his famous 1895 “Atlanta Compromise” speech, Washington did not support “ceaseless agitation for full equality”; rather, he suggested, “In all the things that are purely social we can be as separate as the fingers, yet one as the hand in all things essential to mutual progress” (Foner, 2012, p. 653). Washington feared that if demands for greater equality were imposed, it would result in a white backlash and destroy what little progress had been made.
W.E.B. Du Bois viewed the situation differently. Born free in Great Barrington, Massachusetts in 1868, Du Bois was the first African American to earn a Ph.D. from Harvard University. He served as a professor at Atlanta University and helped establish the NAACP in 1905 to seek legal and political equality for African Americans. He opposed Washington’s pragmatic approach, considering it a form of “submission and silence on civil and political rights” (Urban & Wagoner, 2009, p. 176).
Critical Lens: The "Value" of Education
The opinions of Booker T. Washington and W. E. B. Du Bois are prevalent in today’s options for education after high school. Some believe that technical schools have a place in society for those who do not choose to, or who are not able to afford, four-year colleges. In essence, that the four-year college experience is not needed to be a contributing member of society. Others believe that one must attend college to expand understanding for future, more “professional” careers. Who is right in these scenarios? What influences where students choose to learn in post-secondary education? It is important to critique the implicit biases we hold regarding others' educational choices.
Native American Boarding Schools: Cultural Imperialism and Genocide
Using its military, the federal government created a number of Native American boarding schools throughout the country. The first and most famous of these was the Carlisle School, founded in Pennsylvania in 1879. The federal government convinced many Native American parents that these off-reservation boarding schools would educate their children to improve their economic and social opportunities in mainstream America. In reality, this experiment was intended to deculturize Indigenous children. Supervisors at the boarding schools destroyed children’s native clothing, cut their hair, and renamed many of them with names chosen from the Protestant Bible. The curriculum in these schools taught basic literacy and focused on industrial training, intended to sort graduates of these boarding schools into agricultural and mechanical occupations. A total of 25 off-reservation boarding schools educating nearly 30,000 students were created in several western states and territories, as well as in the upper Great Lakes region. Based in ethnocentrism, or the belief of the White, Protestant mainstream culture that they were superior to other cultures, these boarding schools relied on a harsh form of assimilation, a fundamental feature of common schooling.
K. Tsianina Lomawaima's work straddles Indigenous Studies, anthropology, education, ethnohistory, history, legal analysis, and political science. Her scholarship on federal off-reservation boarding schools is rooted in the experiences of her father, Curtis Thorpe Carr, a survivor of Chilocco Indian Agricultural School. Here she discusses the question, Why Boarding Schools?
Conclusion
Education in the United States has a complicated past entrenched in religious, economic, national, and international concerns. In Colonial America, Puritans in Massachusetts knew education would teach children the ways of religion and laws, vital to survival in a new world. Meanwhile, the Middle and Southern Colonies viewed education as a commodity for the wealthy families who could afford it. After the American Revolution, Federalists, Anti-Federalists, and Democratic-Republican Societies all had different perceptions of how schools should be organized to support our newly-established independent nation. In the Early National Era, common schools, normal schools, and higher education grew as education became more widely established. Following the Civil War, the federal government was increasingly involved in education.
Critical Lens: Indigenous Boarding Schools in the News
In the summer of 2021, the dark history of Indigenous boarding schools made headlines as Canadian authorities discovered unmarked graves and remains of children[16] killed at multiple boarding schools for Indigenous children. In July 2021, the U.S. launched a federal probe[17] into our own Indigenous boarding schools and the intergenerational trauma they have caused. These boarding schools are one way that education has been used to oppress and deculturize a particular group of Americans.
Chapter Outline
Response to Intervention (RtI)
Response to Intervention (RtI) is a tiered model designed to help identify and support students with learning and behavior needs. The RtI framework consists of three tiers, referred to as Tier 1, Tier 2, and Tier 3. We will examine this framework in the next few paragraphs.
The Rehabilitation Act established a very broad definition of disability in 1973, which was subsequently incorporated into the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) in 1990. Any individual who has an impairment that significantly impacts their ability to perform a major life function (such as walking, speaking, learning, or sitting) is defined as an individual with a disability and receives protection under these two laws (Rehabilitation Act, 1973). The Rehabilitation Act and ADA are civil rights laws that evolved from the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and extend the protections of educational access and equal opportunity to individuals with disabilities.
Broadly, the Rehabilitation Act addresses disability-related discrimination by any institution that receives public funding and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act specifically applies to schools, including institutions of higher education. The ADA provides protections in all public facilities other than churches and private clubs (Smith, 2001). Generally speaking, educators implement the protections of Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act and the ADA by providing accommodations that allow students with disabilities to fully access curricular materials and physical spaces. In most cases, accommodations provided through Section 504 are specific to the needs of the individual student and are documented in a 504 plan. Examples include providing technology with speech-to-text features for a student with physical impairments that significantly impact writing or a chair with armrests for a student who needs additional support for core stability. Conversely in school settings, ADA supports are often proactively added to public spaces and materials to provide accessibility for all. Examples include closed captioning of videos, curb cuts, ramps or elevators, and fire alarms that provide both auditory and visual alerts.
In contrast to the Rehabilitation Act and ADA, the Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act (IDEIA) has a much more specific definition of disability. An individual must have characteristics that align with one or more of 14 eligibility categories (referenced in Table 2.2) and those characteristics must have a negative impact on learning. A very specific evaluation process is used to determine if a student qualifies for services under the IDEIA.
Table 2.2: Categories of Disability under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act
|
|
The IDEIA provides protections to students between the ages of 3 and 21, though the protections are discontinued when a student graduates from high school with a standard diploma. The law is focused on ensuring that students with disabilities receive a Free Appropriate Public Education (FAPE). This means that students must receive specially designed instruction, including special education and accommodations, that allows them to make meaningful progress toward the curriculum and their individual learning goals. All of these services must be provided at public expense. A unique learning plan for each student, called an Individualized Education Plan (IEP), must be developed annually by a team that includes general and special education teachers, administrators, the student’s parents, and the student (when age-appropriate). Additionally, the IEP must be implemented in the Least Restrictive Environment (LRE). The principle of LRE states that students with disabilities must be educated in the same setting as their peers who do not have disabilities, unless it is not possible for the student to make progress in that setting even when additional supports are added.
Critical Lens: IDEA or IDEIA? The Lingo of Special Education
In 1990, Congress reauthorized the Education for All Handicapped Children Act and renamed it the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. The acronym IDEA quickly became embedded in the lingo of education, referencing the law itself and the “idea” that equal educational access for individuals with disabilities was becoming a valued part of our educational system. In 2004, Congress reauthorized the law again, providing some additional clarity and protections. They named this update the Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act, making the official acronym IDEIA. Although IDEIA is the most technically correct abbreviation, educators still use the word “idea” when discussing the law.
With the reauthorization of IDEIA in 2004, RtI gained popularity as a model designed to identify and provide early intervention as a preventative method for students who are at risk of learning difficulties. Many states have adopted the Multi-Tiered System of Supports (MTSS) model instead of RtI. Although we are not going to expand on the similarities and differences of these two models, it is important to note that, as the name implies, RtI is often a component of MTSS.
RtI Framework
As previously mentioned, the RtI framework consists of three tiers. One of the main premises of RtI is the assessment and monitoring of students' progress. States have flexibility on how to enact RtI, but they generally follow some basic principles. At the beginning of each school-year, all students are go through a universal screening process in order to identify those who are potentially at risk of falling behind. After a specified timeframe and consistent monitoring, students who do not demonstrate expected progress might be referred to a different tier within RtI.
The basic principle of RtI is that every child should receive high-quality, research-based core instruction in their regular classroom. The regular education that every child receives in school is the Tier 1 in the RtI framework. By improving classroom instruction and implementing evidence-based practices, fewer students are expected to need educational intervention. Ideally, 75-85% of students will thrive in Tier 1.
However, some students struggle even when receiving high-quality instruction. Such students are referred to Tier 2, where they receive an extra layer of support. Student in Tier 2 work in smaller groups and receive differentiated instruction. For instance, some students struggle reading due to a lack of decoding skills, while other students might not speak English as their first language. Tier 2 is designed to provide differentiated interventions to meet the individual needs of each student. Tier 2 intervention is provided in addition to Tier 1. Ideally 10-20% of students will need Tier 2 intervention.
Finally, students who do not show the expected improvement in Tier 2 can be referred to Tier 3. Tier 3 intervention is more individualized and intensive. Students normally receive intervention in very small groups, generally up to three students, or individually. Tier 3 intervention also takes place more often and/or for a larger amount of time. Only 5-10% of students are expected to need this type of intervention. Students in Tier 3 who still do not reach their educational goals might be referred to Special Education (SPED).
Universal Design for Learning
Universal Design for Learning (UDL) is a framework to improve and optimize teaching and learning for all people based on scientific insights into how humans learn.
The UDL Guidelines are a tool used in the implementation of Universal Design for Learning. These guidelines offer a set of concrete suggestions that can be applied to any discipline or domain to ensure that all learners can access and participate in meaningful, challenging learning opportunities.
Engagement
For purposeful, motivated learners, stimulate interest and motivation for learning.
Representation
For resourceful, knowledgeable learners, present information and content in different ways.
Action & Expression
For strategic, goal-directed learners, differentiate the ways that students can express what they know.
Additional Similarities and Differences that Can Impact Learning
In addition to the influences on student learning we have already explored in earlier chapters, there are two additional sub-groups of students you will work with in your future classroom that have very unique learning strengths and needs: Emerging Bilinguals (EBs), commonly referred to as English Learners (ELs), and students with disabilities.
Gifted Learners
Teachers often find it difficult to understand the specific needs of gifted students, which means advanced students often do not get the support they need in the classroom. A common response is "they will do fine all by themselves." However, that is far from accurate. The reality is, however, without a doubt the most difficult student in your classroom is generally the one who finishes every assignment in less than five minutes and requires constant redirection. Gifted learners have unique needs to help them reach their full potential.
The Davidson Institute has a long history of supporting gifted learners. Check out the weblink above and browse the Davidson website.
There are generally five strategies that teachers can employ to help their gifted learners to thrive:
-
Familiarize Yourself with the Characteristics of Intellectually Gifted Students
Not all gifted students in your classroom will be identified and even those who are may not always appear to be gifted. Gifted students come from all ethnic groups, they are both boys and girls, they live in both rural and urban areas and they aren’t always straight A students.
Students who are intellectually gifted demonstrate many characteristics, including: a precocious ability to think abstractly, an extreme need for constant mental stimulation; an ability to learn and process complex information very rapidly; and a need to explore subjects in depth. Students who demonstrate these characteristics learn differently. Thus, they have unique academic needs. Imagine what your behavior and presentation would be like if, as a high school junior, you were told by the school district that you had to go back to third grade. Or, from a more historical perspective, what if you were Mozart and you were told you had to take beginning music classes because of your age. This is often the experience of the gifted child. Some choose to be successful given the constructs of public school and others choose to rebel. Either way, a few simple changes to their academic experience can dramatically improve the quality of their lives — and, mostly likely, yours!
-
Let Go of “Normal”
In order to be an effective teacher, whether it’s your first year or your 30th, the best thing you can do for yourself is to let go of the idea of “normal.” Offer all students the opportunity to grow from where they are, not from where your teacher training courses say they should be. You will not harm a student by offering him/her opportunities to complete work that is more advanced. Research consistently shows that curriculum based on development and ability is far more effective than curriculum based on age. A large body of research indicates that giftedness occurs along a continuum. As a teacher, you will likely encounter students who are moderately gifted, highly gifted and, perhaps if you’re lucky, even a few who are profoundly gifted. Strategies that work for one group of gifted students won’t necessarily work for all gifted students. Don’t be afraid to think outside the box. You’re in the business of helping students to develop their abilities. Just as athletes are good at athletics, gifted students are good at thinking. We would never dream of holding back a promising athlete, so don’t be afraid to encourage your “thinketes” by providing them with opportunities to soar.
-
Conduct Informal Assessments
Meeting the needs of gifted students does not need to be an all consuming task. One of the easiest ways to better understand how to provide challenging material is to conduct informal whole class assessments on a regular basis. For example, before beginning any unit, administer the end of the unit test. Students who score above 80 percent should not be forced to “relearn” information they already know. Rather, these students should be given parallel opportunities that are challenging. Consider offering these students the option to complete an independent project on the topic or to substitute another experience that would meet the objectives of the assignment, i.e. taking a college/distance course. With areas of the curriculum that are sequential, such as mathematics and spelling, how about giving the end of the year test during the first week of school. If you have students who can demonstrate competency at 80 percent or higher, you will save them an entire year of frustration and boredom if you can determine exactly what their ability level is and then offer them curriculum that allows them to move forward. Formal assessments can be extremely helpful, however, they are expensive and there is generally a back log of students waiting to be tested. Conducting informal assessments is a useful and inexpensive tool that will offer a lot of information.
-
Re-Familiarize Yourself with Piaget & Bloom
There are many developmental theorists and it is likely that you will encounter many of them during your teacher preparation course work. When it comes to teaching gifted children, take a few moments to review the work of Jean Piaget and Benjamin Bloom. Jean Piaget offers a helpful description of developmental stages as they relate to learning. Gifted students are often in his “formal operations” stage when their peers are still in his “pre-operational” or “concrete operations” stages. When a child is developmentally advanced he/she has different learning abilities and needs. This is where Bloom’s Taxonomy can be a particularly useful. Students in the “formal operations” developmental stage need learning experiences at the upper end of Bloom’s Taxonomy. Essentially all assignments should offer the student the opportunity to utilize higher level thinking skills like analysis, synthesis and evaluation, as defined by Bloom.
5: Involve Parents as Resource Locators
Parents of gifted children are often active advocates for their children. If you are not prepared for this, it can be a bit unnerving. The good news is that, at least in my experience, what they want most is to be heard and to encounter someone who is willing to think differently. Offer to collaborate with them, rather than resist them, to work together to see that their child’s needs are met. For example, if they want their child to have more challenging experiences in math, enlist their help in finding better curriculum options. An informal assessment can help them determine the best place to start and then encourage them to explore other options that could be adapted to the classroom. Most parents understand that teachers don’t have the luxury of creating a customized curriculum for every student, but most teachers are willing to make accommodations if parents can do the necessary research. Flexibility and a willingness to think differently can create win-win situations.
6: There is much more!
There are many more strategies that can assist advanced learners along their learning paths. See https://www.davidsongifted.org/gifted-blog/tips-for-teachers-successful-strategies-for-teaching-gifted-learners/ for more detailed information.
Emerging Bilinguals
Emerging Bilinguals (EBs) are the fastest-growing group of students in U.S. schools: in 2018, they comprised 10.2% of learners, totaling over five million students (NCES, 2020). Most teachers can now expect to have EBs in their classrooms at some point in their teaching careers. The majority of our EBs know Spanish as their first language, but there are many different languages that EBs know as their first languages, including Korean, Arabic, Urdu, Vietnamese, Japanese, French, as well as less common regional languages, such as those from various African countries.
Emerging Bilinguals have gone by many acronyms over the years. Some of the most common acronyms were Limited English Proficient (LEP), English as Second Language students (ESLs), English Language Learners (ELLs), and English Learners (ELs). In recent years, many scholars and educators (the editors of this book included) have stepped away from deficit terms such as LEP, ESL, ELL, and EL and adopted the term Emerging Bilinguals to emphasize the strength of these student-population.
Programs that service EBs in schools are most often referred to as ESL programs (English as a Second Language programs) or ESOL programs (English for Speakers of Other Languages programs). These programs are generally taught by licensed ESL teachers who specialize in language learning. Most ESL/ESOL programs are “pull-out” programs where small groups of students work with the ESL teacher during certain parts of the day, depending on student and ESL teacher schedules. In these pull-out programs, ESL teachers are working with students on their English skills, while at the same time often assisting classroom teachers with frontloading academic content. This means that the ESL teachers find out what content areas the classroom teachers will be focusing on next, and they work with their ESL students to prepare them for the academic English demands of that content.
Most EBs are assessed using ACCESS testing, which is based on the WIDA (World Class Instructional Design and Assessment) standards used across most states. The WIDA standards[18] were developed to assess EBs’ English language skills. These are not content standards, such as the ones discussed in previous chapters. The WIDA standards were developed in response to the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, which required English Language Proficiency standards to be linked with grade-level content standards and be rooted in what is called “academic language,” often referred to as the language of schooling. Some states developed their own proficiency standards, such as Massachusetts, but some states decided to work together to create standards that could be used across state lines. The standards this consortium of states developed are the WIDA standards. Forty one states have adopted these standards, which helps with collecting data on their effectiveness, in addition to making it easier to determine an EL’s language proficiency level if they move schools within a state or across states.
It is important to understand that the ACCESS testing measures language proficiency. The testing is not used to determine whether or not an EB has a learning disability. It can be challenging for teachers to differentiate between a language issue and a learning issue. A general rule to follow is that if the issue is manifesting itself in the student’s first language, such as a delay in understanding the sound/symbol relationship in phonics, then it is likely a learning issue. However, because letters make different sounds in different languages, this could also be a language issue. The best course of action is to seek assistance from colleagues (such as your school’s ESL teachers or special education teachers) if you, as the classroom teacher, feel that your EB student is not making typical academic progress.
In the following section, we will discuss in more detail students who do have special needs.
Students with Disabilities
Upon entering any U.S. public school today, you will likely see evidence that learners with disabilities are present and included. You might see a student using a wheelchair or talking with peers using a voice output communication device. You might see adapted swings on the playground or calming sensory rooms as you walk down the halls. You might see students and staff creating sidewalk art on April 2 to advocate for autism acceptance or wearing wild socks on March 21 to raise awareness about Down Syndrome.
These signs of inclusion weren’t always present. In fact, the history of education in the United States is marked by practices that excluded, segregated, and marginalized people with disabilities based on the presumption that they were incompetent or incapable of benefitting from instruction. This presumption is demonstrated in this illustration, which depicts the expected limits of development for individuals with disabilities as described in a report to the Virginia General Assembly in 1915 (Virginia State Board of Charities and Corrections, 1915).
Because they were viewed as incapable and incompetent, individuals with clearly identifiable disabilities, such as significant intellectual disabilities or visible physical impairments, were often placed in institutions and residential facilities away from their families and communities well into the 20th century. This practice was described as a charitable and responsible way for society to protect them. This photograph depicts one such institution (Minnesota, 1893). This site was originally opened as the Minnesota Institute for Defectives in 1887 and was officially renamed the School for the Feeble-Minded in 1895 (Minnesota History Center, 2020). These images and the terms used in them are representative of practices and beliefs that existed to some degree well into the 20th century.
CRITICAL LENS: INSULTING LANGUAGE
When you look at some of the language used in the image above, you might see some overlaps with language used as insults (like calling someone an “idiot” or a “moron”). It is important to realize that these terms do have a long history of referring to people with special needs in negative ways. Learn more about which words have insulting histories[19], and check yourself when you use terms like “idiot,” “moron,” or “crazy” in your daily conversations. Watch this video to learn more about the "r word" and why it should be eliminated from your daily discourse.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i0-WEOmQtrI
Exclusionary practices continued into the 1970s when 1.75 million school-age children with disabilities were fully excluded from public schools and an additional three million children were placed in educational settings that did not meet their needs (Yell, 2019). These practices began to change in 1975 when the Education for All Handicapped Children Act (EAHCA) was passed. This law established a foundational set of protections for individuals with disabilities in U.S. public schools, which have since been expanded upon. These protections included the right to (a) a free education for all students between the ages of 3 and 18, (b) education in community schools when appropriate, (c) non-discriminatory evaluation to identify educational needs, (d) parent involvement in decision making, and (e) an individualized learning plan that defines appropriate goals and supports for each student with a disability (Yell, 2019).
Today, the educational rights of students with disabilities are protected by three major laws. These are Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act (1973), the Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act (2004; a reauthorization of EAHCA), and the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA, 1990). These laws differ in how they define disability and in how they provide supports and protections.
Serving Students with Disabilities in the General Education Classroom
Teachers of all levels and subjects should expect to work with students who have disabilities. Data from the 2018 - 2019 school year show that 7.1 million students, approximately 14% of the total school-age population, receive special education under the IDEIA. Of those students, 82% spend at least 40% of their school day in a general education classroom (Institute of Education Sciences, 2020). Essentially, this means that most students who have disabilities are taught in the same setting and by the same teachers as learners who don’t have disabilities for large portions of the school day. Therefore, all teachers must be prepared to educate these students.
It is important for teachers to realize that special education is a service, not a place. This means that services including specialized instruction, accommodations, and modifications that address student needs can be provided in any setting and school teams are required to ensure that this happens in the Least Restrictive Environment (LRE). Both the IDEIA and Section 504 establish the general education classroom as the first consideration for LRE. Teams may only consider more restrictive settings, such as separate special education classrooms, when specialized supports added to the general education classroom are ineffective at meeting student needs.
In addition to supporting students with identified disabilities under IDEIA or Section 504, educators will also serve students whose disabilities may be unidentified. Because so many factors influence student development and learning, as discussed earlier in this chapter, it is critical that educators thoughtfully and systematically distinguish learning challenges caused by disabilities from learning challenges caused by social and environmental factors. When concerns develop about a student’s learning, general education teachers are expected to provide research-based interventions in an attempt to meet student needs and to collect progress monitoring data to support educational decision making. The RtI process is beneficial in that all students who demonstrate learning difficulties are systematically supported, regardless of whether they ultimately qualify for special education. Further, Response to Intervention (RTI) models have been shown to reduce misclassification of students with disabilities.
While teachers may feel challenged to meet the diverse and complex needs of students with disabilities in the general education classroom, the outcomes can be rewarding for students and teachers, alike. Benefits for students with disabilities include academic gains, improved social skills, and increased friendships (e.g., Wehmeyer et al., 2020). Peers who do not have disabilities have been shown to have deeper understandings of themselves, positive expectations of interactions with people with disabilities, and, in cases where peers act in support roles, greater academic engagement (e.g., Carter et al., 2015). Additionally, general education teachers have reported feeling more aware of and more effective at meeting the needs of all students after working with students with disabilities (Finke et al., 2009). These positive outcomes are linked to the use of strategies that provide a broad range of support for all students.
