Print | Email |

With new standards, will California’s youngest English learners lose their edge in math?

By

COMPTON, Calif. — Remarkable things are happening at Laurel Street Elementary School in Los Angeles. Ninety percent of its 580 students are eligible for free or reduced lunch. More than 60 percent of its students are classified as English learners. And yet the school has established a stellar record of success: a national Title I Distinguished School Award in 2012 in recognition of its high academic achievement, a Golden Bell Award for its innovative writing program, and a Dispelling the Myth award from the nonprofit Education Trust. Despite years of state funding cuts and classes that average 30 or more kids apiece, an amazing 83 percent of Laurel Street’s students scored at proficient or higher on a recent state language-arts exam, and 91 percent scored that high on the math test.

Laurel Street kids tend to do better on math because it’s a kind of transitional language for students still learning to read and speak English fluently, said fourth-grade math teacher Angel Chavarin. He learned English himself while attending a Los Angeles public school years ago. Laurel Street students rarely express a typical lament of American students: “I’m not a math person.” Instead, teachers say they’re more likely to hear the opposite. “We have kids who say they’re good in math, but not in language arts,” said Chavarin. “We tell them they can be good in both.”

But this year, teachers at Laurel Street are a bit more anxious about their achievement levels than usual. That’s because they, like most schools in the country, are in the midst of transitioning to the new Common Core standards. Voluntarily adopted by 45 states, the new standards stress critical thinking, deeper learning and more sophisticated vocabularies, with the aim of making the average American student more competitive with students from around the world.

The creators of these standards hope they will boost the achievement levels of most students, but some educators worry that the standards might inadvertently hurt one of the fastest growing groups of students in the country: students whose native language is not English. Since Laurel Street has been so successful in effectively educating these students in the past, it’s a good place to take an in-depth look at how one school is dealing with this issue, and the school leadership agreed to let a reporter follow the transition over the year.

“The language demands of the Common Core are enormous,” said Ben Sanders of the California Office to Reform Education. “This is absolutely going to be a big challenge to English learners.”

And English learners are a big challenge to the U.S. public school system.

There are already an estimated 5.3 million students in kindergarten through 12th grade whose English skills are less than proficient. This is the group that education professionals call English learners. Their numbers have grown by about 50 percent nationally since the late 1990s, and they currently account for about 10 percent of all American students. That percentage is growing in most states and is expected to rise to 40 percent of the U.S. kindergarten through grade 12 population by 2030.

As a group, these largely Hispanic students have persistently scored significantly lower than their white peers on standardized tests like the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), known as the nation’s report card, despite increased attention to this “achievement gap.” How — and if — schools can overcome this hurdle will be a key measure of success for the Common Core.

Principal Frank Lozier confers with a parent on the blacktop before the school day begins. (Photo: Pat Wingert)

Principal Frank Lozier confers with a parent on the blacktop before the school day begins. (Photo: Pat Wingert)

Nowhere does this issue loom larger than in California, the state that educates one of every nine American students, and has far more English learners than any other. Latinos now make up the majority of California public school children, and 37 percent of the state’s total enrollment comes from homes where a language other than English is spoken. Currently, about 27 percent of the state’s students are categorized as English learners.

While some California high schools have students with 60 different language backgrounds, more than 80 percent of the state’s English learners speak Spanish. “Almost every single teacher (in California) has English learners,” said Jeanette LaFors of Education Trust West, which is studying Common Core’s impact on these students. “It’s rare to see a class that does not have them.” California’s large number of English learners helps explain why California’s NAEP scores have repeatedly come in well below the national average.

Like a lot of educators in California, Laurel Street’s leadership team is enthusiastic about the Common Core because they think it’s research-based and encourages a better way of teaching and learning. But they also recognize that big changes are necessary if their kids, particularly their English learners, are going to do well on the new assessments linked to the new standards.

“They are absolutely our priority,’ said Principal Frank Lozier, who first came to Compton Unified School District in 2000 as a Teach for America recruit out of the University of California, Berkeley. “They are such a large part of our school.”

Despite years of state funding cuts and classes that average 30 or more kids apiece, an amazing 83 percent of Laurel Street’s students scored at proficient or higher on a recent state language-arts exam, and 91 percent scored that high on the math test.

As Laurel Street begins the process of adapting to the new standards, much of the focus is on their math program, a traditional area of strength at the school.

California’s old state assessment was pegged to its old standards and rewarded math students with good memorization and pattern recognition skills in ways that the new standards and assessments will not. “We had students who were good at finding the right answer because they had memorized the script,” said third-grade teacher Alejandra Monroy. “They could simply add or subtract and get the right answer.”

Common Core, on the other hand, emphasizes complex word problems, in part so kids realize math’s usefulness in everyday situations. “We had our big ‘Aha!’ moment when we realized we needed to shift from an emphasis on teaching isolated math skills to integrated skills because of the tasks that would be thrown at them” by the Common Core, said Lozier. “The intent is to get the kids to have a deeper and crisper understanding of how math can be used to solve real-life problems.”

The new standards also require students to explain in writing how they got their answer, and that requires a broader and more sophisticated vocabulary than many English learners have. “If they don’t have the words, it’s hard to read and listen and speak and write,” Chavarin said. “Vocabulary is the pillar to all of this.”

To address these new challenges, Monroy, who was born in Chile and was once an English learner herself, said teachers at Laurel Street are trying to incorporate more strategies into their math lessons that have proved effective for teaching English and expanding vocabularies.

Those efforts were apparent on a recent Tuesday afternoon, as Monroy introduced the use of “repeated addition” as a strategy for solving multiplication problems. She started with a vocabulary lesson. “There are very important words you need to know,” she told her class. “If you’re doing a multiplication problem — 3 x 4 = 12 — the numbers `3’ and ‘4’ are the FACTORS and the ‘12’ is the PRODUCT. All the numbers and symbols together—3 x 4 =12—is a “MULTIPLICATION SENTENCE.”

Third-grade team leader Alejandra Monroy listens in as her students discuss a math problem in pairs. (Photo: Pat Wingert)

Third-grade team leader Alejandra Monroy listens in as her students discuss a math problem in pairs. (Photo: Pat Wingert)

“What is this?” Monroy asked, pointing to the equation.

“A multiplication sentence,” the class echoed back.

Next, Monroy stressed that repeated addition involves “patterns,” in this case, 4+4+4 = 12

We need to know that a pattern is a regular or repeated sequence,” she said. “A pattern can be something like red/blue/red/blue, right? A sequence that repeats. When you count by skipping numbers—2-4-6—you’re doing a PATTERN.”

Once she was sure they understood the vocabulary, she introduced “sentence frames,” pared-down phrases they’ll need to learn in order to clearly describe what they’re doing. In this case, using repeated addition to solve a multiplication sentence involving 3 x 4 means “three groups of four.”  As the class worked through a series of equations — first as a group, then with a partner, and finally as individuals — the kids got repeated opportunities to use their new vocabulary words. Even when they were working on their own, Monroy urged them to talk their way through it. “I hear you saying the steps,” she said as she walked up and down the aisles, checking the students’ progress. “That’s very good.”

As the class neared its end, Monroy introduced an associated word problem involving the total number of wheels on four tricycles. She wanted to check that the kids would recognize how their new skill might be used in the real world. She also wanted to establish that they understood instructions that use phrases like “repeated addition” and “multiplication sentence.” As the kids set to work, Monroy did a quick check to see how they were doing.

“Is this hard?” she asked the group.

“Easy, easy,” the kids responded.

“We had our big ‘Aha!’ moment when we realized we needed to shift from an emphasis on teaching isolated math skills to integrated skills because of the tasks that would be thrown at (our students).” – Frank Lozier, principal, Laurel Street Elementary.

“Repetition is very important for English language learners,” Monroy said later. “Learning those sentences is like learning a recipe. The way I explain a solution is like a recipe to solving the problem. Then they have to practice doing it and saying it and writing it. This is a huge difference, but this is good practice and good teaching.”

Laurel Street started this transition with an advantage because their district uses a structured curriculum called Swun Math. It’s a widely praised program developed by Si Swun, a Long Beach, Calif., math teacher who was inspired to combine some of the best of American education techniques with methods used in Singapore, long a world leader in math achievement. Swun was impressed by the effectiveness of Singapore’s techniques while visiting his aunt’s classroom there many years ago. Both Common Core and Singapore-style math emphasize a deep study of the most basic elements of math in an effort to help students build a solid foundation before moving on to more advanced math. Swun Math also encourages collaboration and talking through the problem-solving process. With the introduction of Common Core, Swun said he is working with schools to supplement and adjust the original curriculum to make it more effective, and to strengthen students’ reasoning and writing skills.

To determine if the changes they’re making are on the right track, Laurel Street teachers monitor their kids’ performance in class and on weekly assessments that grade-level teams create together. Each student’s score is then added to a spreadsheet and scrutinized by the principal, all the teachers and even parents and students.

If one class gets better scores than the others, teachers don’t hesitate to compare notes and incorporate the most effective strategies into their own lesson plans, said fifth-grade teacher Rebecca Harris. It’s about collaboration, not competition, she said. “We learn from each other.”

Laurel Street proudly displays proof of their accomplishments to their school community. (Photo: Pat Wingert)

Laurel Street proudly displays proof of their accomplishments to their school community. (Photo: Pat Wingert)

“It’s a very transparent process,” Lozier said. “We have a culture where we make decisions based on evidence and results and data, rather than opinions. Mine included.” Simply put, Lozier said, “We do more of what works, and less of what doesn’t work.”

While the work is challenging, the deeper they get into it, the more school leaders are becoming convinced that the methods encouraged by the Common Core will help all their students get better at math as well English.

“I see a lot of things in the Common Core that we should have been doing in math all along,” said Harris, “because it will help our students get to a better place in math as well as language.”

Swun agrees. As a former English learner himself, Swun, whose native language is Chinese, said he’s “super sensitive to this issue,” but believes more emphasis on language in math will likely lead to more success for everyone.  “Some teachers don’t want their kids to talk a lot,” he said. “But to me, that is productive noise.”

That confidence is an important first step, and while they don’t have all the answers yet, Lozier said they feel good about the outlines they’re seeing of the path forward.

Comments & Trackbacks (3) | Post a Comment

X

UGH!!! OK, this article is very flawed. “83 percent of Laurel Street’s students scored at proficient or higher on a recent state language-arts exam, and 91 percent scored that high on the math test.” (That was with the old CA state standards and state test and teaching methods. Not under Common Core–CCSS. This school–according to the article–is very focused on education. It is not mentioned–although a huge characteristic of top scoring schools–that parents in the neighborhood are very engaged and supportive of academics.) “But this year, teachers at Laurel Street are a bit more anxious about their achievement levels than usual. That’s because they, like most schools in the country, are in the midst of transitioning to the new Common Core standards.” (Yes, the teachers should be concerned. This school found success with the CA standards and state test. Now they have to move away from those standards and a test that they scored well on last year. Remember these were standards and a test we were told were no good by edu-celebrities and the edu-corporation–Pearson–looking to take over all testing and materials in education, see $$$.) “Voluntarily adopted by 45 states, the new standards stress critical thinking, deeper learning and more sophisticated vocabularies.” (No, states did not voluntarily adopt CCSS. Race to the Top funds were attached to the adoption. Don’t adopt, don’t get the federal funds. Also, the author of this article failed to provide evidence that the CCSS demand higher level thinking and that the CA standards did not. That is because you will not find that to be the case. Higher standards and critical thinking are buzz words.) “Like a lot of educators in California, Laurel Street’s leadership team is enthusiastic about the Common Core because they think it’s research-based and encourages a better way of teaching and learning.” (Hmm, what will employees say about their jobs when asked by the media and they know bosses are watching? Also, “they think it’s researched based”–well no. CCSS was not field tested before implementation. States that adopted it earlier than CA have been through many challenges with it. Younger students are not developmentally ready to read and think of abstract concepts in language arts and mathematics. Many parents do not like the community organizer slant that CCSS brings to what students should be taught, such as writing complaint letters to persuade others with emotional language. Testing has and is also an large issue. CCSS testing is 8 hours on an laptop. 8 hours is way too long. 8 hours is a pain to schedule. 8 hours means less learning time for other things. A laptop or tablet for every student is not practical in public schools…unless you want to charge each family as private schools do…or raise taxes specifically for them, their updating, maintenance, and replacement.) ( Stop Common Core in California Diane Ravitch) http://pointeviven.blogspot.com/2013/11/state-senator-bob-huff-education-wolf_9911.html

Dave

The commentor above doesn’t like that these teachers appear to be enthusiastic about common core. I don’t understand why the educators’ opinions here–such as “I see a lot of things in the Common Core that we should have been doing in math all along,” said Harris, “because it will help our students get to a better place in math as well as language.”–are any less valid than educators who don’t like it. Common Core might not be perfect, but there are clearly things that are good about it.

CCSS is happening. It’s time to stop trashing it reflexively and start really examining what it has to offer–despite popular belief, there was a massive amount of educator input on the actual standards.

“Critical thinking” is not a buzz phrase–it refers to problem-solving, and to say that “Younger students are not developmentally ready to read and think of abstract concepts in language arts and mathematics” is simply false.

And YES, states did voluntarily adopt CCSS, please check your facts. The Governors of the US formed the CCSS consortium in 2010, long before the Race to the Top program started. These states realized that collaborating made sense. Of course it did.

Jane C Conoley

A close analysis of the Common Core by researchers and educators associated with the University of California Santa Barbara indicated that the framework’s focus on language is exactly what English Learners need. Further, the decision to teach fewer topics at greater depth is exactly what other very high achieving countries do — teach youngsters to learn deeply and really understand not memorize. The current framework is NOT working for English Learners. Something new needs to be implemented. As the teachers at the Laurel School say, these kids can be good at both language and math — but the integrated approach that allows for a lot of writing and speaking practice is the logical way to make it happen.

Join the discussion. Your email is never published or shared.

Required
Required
CAPTCHA Image