If I hadn't said this enough, I will say it again. I absolutely love what I do, I love working with children, teachers and people in general. I love helping others, making them feel successful, and learning each day with one another. I learn things from my students everyday. For example, yesterday was the big Engineering Expo Fair at my school. I enjoyed it so much, it was like a became a child again. I have never seen a group of students so smart and creative. I think Mark Cuban needs to cast some of my students on Shark Tank. I was so proud of my students and my teachers for pulling this event off. Thanks to all of the staff, parents, and students who made this event such a hit. I am proud of my students for being so innovative. I hope this allows them to see the sky is the limit and anything is possible. If you can dream it you can achieve. #notetoself Have a great Memorial Day Weekend,

Standardized Testing on the Computer vs. Paper

Should state standardized test be taken on the computer or with a pencil and answer document? This is a question that is plaguing the minds of educators across the nation. Moving into the world of technology is becoming second nature to our children in American schools. However, I have found that there are sometimes glitches, wifi networks crashes, and a number of other complications that arise as students are testing. Not to speak of the economically disadvataged districts across America. Does this derail the thinking process of a student when testing? Remember no matter what flaws or problems students encounter while testing, a failed score will not be altered because of these problems. So, what do you think, should the test be taken on a computer or paper? The article that I post in this blog will support my opinion and beliefs that taking the test on the computer may not be the best idea, although we live in a world ruled by technology. Teacher: Why computerized standardized testing is ‘frightening’ By Valerie Strauss This was written by Melissa Bollow Tempel, who teaches first grade in the Milwaukee Public Schools. Tempel co-edited “Pencils Down: Rethinking High-Stakes Testing and Accountability” with Wayne Au. Her 1st- and 3rd-grade daughters have been opted out of standardized tests. This was first published on the Rethinking Schools website. By Melissa Bollow Tempel I walked away from the rest of my class and over to the three computers in the corner of my classroom. Two of my 1st graders, Jasmine and Jayden, sat at their computers with their headphones off, waiting for me to reset their computers to Measure of Academic Progress (MAP) test number 2. “I got 162,” said Jasmine. “You got 142.” “You did better than me,” replied Jayden with a frown. Shelly sat at the third computer. “I don’t wanna do the computer test,” she pleaded. “Do I have to?” In the past three years I have experienced unimaginable computer frustration. Don’t get me wrong: I treat my MacBook Pro like a third child, and I definitely use technology in the classroom to enhance teaching and learning. I’ve been accused of being in love with my iPhone, which serves as a timekeeper, meteorologist, and DJ in my classroom. And the opaque projector is an excellent, plastic transparency-free alternative to the overhead projector. Computers and technology have come such a long way in the past 20 years, and they hold a big place in the lives of this generation of students. Unfortunately, one use of technology is failing in my classroom: the rapidly increasing use of computers for testing. Computerized testing, including the widely used MAP test, has infiltrated the public schools in Milwaukee and across the nation like an uncontrollable outbreak of lice, bringing with it a frightening future for public education. High-stakes standardized tests can be scored almost immediately via the Internet, and testing companies can now easily link districts to their online data warehouses, which allows districts to quickly access test scores (which would be good if the tests were generating usable data). This system provides momentum to those who believe more tests should be given to “track progress” throughout the year. In my district this means that every classroom teacher tests students at the beginning, middle, and end of the year, administering four tests in math and reading each time. Limited funding and fewer staff in our district, as in most urban public schools, creates even more of a problem because there are not enough adults to serve as proctors. Setting up these tests is a tedious, time-consuming job involving a web of long, nonsensical passwords and codes. Teachers are being mandated to use many hours of valuable instructional time and limited teacher planning time to complete these tasks. In schools like mine that don’t have a computer lab, teachers have only a few computers in their classrooms. We are asked to simultaneously teach while setting up and administering a few tests at a time, seriously compromising the quality of instruction we are able to deliver. To illustrate the scenario, picture this: I have three computers on one side of the classroom, set apart from our learning area, so three children can take the test at one time. First I go to each computer and log in to the network using an assigned proctor name and password. Then I log in to the test application using a different random alphanumeric name and nine-digit password. Once in, I select the test the child needs to take, select the student’s name, then sit the child down at the computer to begin, making sure he or she has the headphones on properly. (Yes, one of my students took the test wearing the headphones attached to her neighbor’s computer. If I’m not watching carefully, others have taken the whole test without headphones on at all!) Then I hurry back to the rest of the class and continue teaching. When the child has a question, I have to go help. When the child is done taking the test, I have to go over and enter yet another proctor password to finish the test and start the process over for the next child. Part of the score is based on how long it takes a child to complete each question, so if the child has to use the bathroom I need to enter a code to pause the test. Each test takes about 20 minutes to complete; however, students do not finish at the same time, so I am going back and forth at three different times to enter the proctor password for the children and set up the next student. I’m doing all this while I attempt to teach a lesson, lead an activity, or help the rest of the class do their work. The alternative is to stop instruction altogether for a few days and give my students “busy work” while three students at a time take the tests. And have I mentioned that we have no art, music, or physical education teachers at our school, so I have no prep time? Unfortunately, the issue of time wasting and misuse does not even scratch the surface of the computerized testing chaos. Computerized testing now starts with students as young as 4 years old. MAP test data are reviewed and used in the screening process for children for special education. Those already receiving special education services with IEPs [Individual Education Programs] are required to take the grade-level test regardless of their instructional level . In Milwaukee, all students attending 4-year-old kindergarten are required to take the district’s computerized test beginning their second week of school—ever. One of the literacy tests is 53 multiple-choice questions long, and to finish it students must select an answer for every question. After each testing session teachers report that students end up in tears. Most 4-year-olds cannot sit long enough to finish the whole test and need to be redirected to their chairs many times. District administration allows the test to be given one-on-one to kindergartners; however, pulling from the ever-shrinking list of support staff means pulling the only available staff, the English language learner teacher and the librarian, to help. This test creates a domino effect on the entire school. Although our district’s administration believes these tests are given on a level playing field (because in this age of technology most children are supposedly exposed to computers at a young age), our primary students often come to school with little or no computer experience. In fact, many early childhood researchers believe that responsible parenting means little or no screen time for primary school children. As a result, young students click at random. One of my colleagues reported that she often witnesses students rubbing the mouse on their faces or on the computer screens. And this data is supposed to help guide our teaching? Widening the Gap The biggest injustice here is the technology gap that has a direct effect on the achievement gap. Students who have regular access to computers at home are clearly advantaged, from a testing standpoint, because they have a higher likelihood of being computer literate. Meanwhile, kids who don’t are being scored on both how to use the technology they have never had access to in addition to what is in the content of the test. This imbalance creates an assessment that is less valid or invalid because it measures something beyond what it is supposed to, and it penalizes students for something that they are not supposed to be tested on. At least two of my first graders, Jasmine and Jayden, have figured out how to click past the dog at the end of the test to see their score. Sadly, I cannot be in two places at once to prevent it, and as a result there is little doubt that these 6-year-olds are drawing conclusions about how “smart” they are based on deeply flawed tests. To complicate things further, the data from these computerized tests are used to determine which intervention classes students should be enrolled in — or in many cases, which classes they are forced to attend in place of engaging elective courses. This widens the achievement gap and perpetuates the racial and socioeconomic disparity between haves and have-nots. Our district’s new plan to help students is heavily based on the MAP test results. In fact, at one inservice, the students with the lowest test scores were already entered into my account as my intervention group. My professional opinion had been replaced by the test scores. I was surprised to see Julia, one of my smartest, highest readers in the group (I suspect she got bored with the test and decided to click randomly). When I said that Julia was not in need of any extra help I was strongly advised by our school’s literacy coach (assigned to our school one day a week) not to remove her from the group because, based on her test scores, Julia needed interventions. Of course, I moved her anyway. This form of testing has not replaced other tests. Quite the opposite: It’s given us the ability to give more tests. Milwaukee Public Schools has mandated that those scoring in the bottom 20 percent on the MAP test be given a biweekly Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy Skills (DIBELS) test to track their progress. The new age of computerized high-stakes standardized testing is a frightening use of our advancing technology, but we can resist. Many parents see through the rhetoric and are choosing to opt their children out of standardized tests altogether, and a movement is brewing. Yong Zhao from the University of Oregon reports that a 6 percent opt-out rate is enough to invalidate standardized test results. However, that many opt-outs would also mean a school would not meet federal mandates for adequate yearly progress. Many involved in the opt-out movement feel that it’s worth potential negative repercussions. As educators and parents, we need to be honest about how computerized testing serves to emphasize economic disparities. We can speak out about how it takes away valuable instructional time and returns little helpful information. We need to push district administrations to reevaluate the quality and usefulness of all computerized testing and demand other, more meaningful, forms of assessment. And we can urge our unions to support teachers and parents who challenge the inappropriate use of tests. Unless we stand together, erroneous computer data and educational officials detached from the realities of teaching will continue to determine our students’ futures.

National Administrative Week

When a person walks into your school or company, who is the first face that they see? Perhaps, one might say it's the principal or director, because they are in charge of the campus/company. However, as we all know the principal or assistant principal are in classrooms, meetings, or in their offices. The first face that you see is your schoolis the secretary, clerks, or whatever your district calls them. It is important to place the right perosn in that position, they are the first impression of your school or company. With this week being recognized as Administrative Professional's Week : April 19-25, 2015; April 24-30, 2016; April 23-29, 2017, be sure to shower your front line with love. We could not do our jobs without their support. Below is a little history about how this week started. Enjoy! National Professional Secretaries Week and National Secretary's Day was created in 1952 through the work of Harry F. Klemfuss of Young and Rubicam. Klemfuss recognized the importance and value of the position to a company or business. His goal was to encourage more women to become secretaries. Using his skill and experience in public relations, Klemfuss, promoted the values and importance of the job of secretaries. In doing so, he also created the holiday in recognition of the importance of secretaries. The name of this special day has changed and evolved over the past few decades. But, the importance of recognizing these vital individuals remains. The two new terms in use today are: "Administrative Professionals" and "Executive Admins". The two names sometimes mean different roles and responsibilities in different companies and organizations. Both are broader terms, that encompass more positions than the original "Secretary" role. The name change recognizes and acknowledges that the role has changed significantly since 1952, and for the better at that. In Harry Klemfuss' day, these positions were the realm of women. Today, you find males in these positions. The most common ways of recognizing your Administrative Professional(s) today are: Flowers Cards, often with shopping gift certificates Take them to lunch Candies Assorted Gift Baskets Thanks, An Appreciative Assitant Principal

Does Bad Behavior Truly Affect Academic Success

Press Release 07-175 
Children's Bad Behavior Gives Insights to Academic Achievement and Later Career Success

Early behavior problems don't impede children's school achievement, but persistent problems may impede educational and occupational outcomes.

Early childhood behavior problems may not predict learning ability, but may predict career success. Credit and Larger Version

November 26, 2007

New research suggests that children entering school with behavior problems, as a rule, can keep pace with classroom learning, but persistent behavior problems can be a strong indicator of how well these students adapt to the work world.

Two studies entirely funded by the National Science Foundation's (NSF) Developmental and Learning Sciences program uncovered these results. Researchers working through the Center for the Analyses of Pathways from Childhood to Adulthood (CAPCA) at the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Mich., conducted both studies.

The findings may help parents, teachers and social and behavioral scientists improve educational and occupational outcomes for disruptive students.

"Every student deserves a good education and an opportunity to have a fulfilling work life," said NSF Developmental and Learning Sciences Program Director Amy Sussman. "These findings can help us understand how to make that goal a reality for even the most difficult-to-reach students."

One study examined data from six large-scale studies of almost 36,000 preschoolers in which the same subjects were observed repeatedly over time. The research included two national studies of U.S. children, two multi-site studies of U.S. children, one study of children from Great Britain and one study of children from Canada.

Using various statistical methods to synthesize research results, Greg Duncan, human development and social policy professor at Northwestern University, along with the study's 11 co-authors, found that, surprisingly, difficulty getting along with classmates, aggressive or disruptive behaviors, and sad or withdrawn behaviors in kindergarten did not detract from academic achievement in childhood and early adolescence.

The study's researchers examined several indicators, including picking fights, interrupting the teacher and defying instructions. They found that kindergartners who did these things performed surprisingly well in reading and math when they reached the fifth grade, keeping pace with well-behaved children of the same abilities.

Although Duncan's study found no predictive power in early behavior problems for later learning, another CAPCA study, which examined older children, found such a connection. According to CAPCA investigator Rowell Huesmann, persistent behavior problems in eight-year-olds are a powerful predictor of educational attainment and of how well people will do in middle age.

If behavior problems of the kind seen in younger children continue until age eight, they can create other challenges, said Huesmann. He noted that while a small group of children fall into this category, their behavior has the potential to lead them to lower occupational and academic achievement than that of their better behaved counterparts.

Huesmann based his conclusion on a prior research study and a recent analysis by CAPCA researchers Eric Dubow, Paul Boxer, Lea Pulkkinen and Katja Kokko. That team studied two longitudinal data sets from the United States and Finland.

Analysis of data from 856 U.S. children and 369 Finnish children showed that children who engaged in more frequent aggressive behaviors as eight-year-olds had significantly lower educational success by their 30s and significantly lower status occupations by their mid-40s. The results were published in Developmental Psychology.

"It makes perfectly good sense that persistent behavior problems would have a substantial impact on later success," said Sussman. "When interviewing for jobs and progressing through one's career trajectory, personality and other characteristics that are not measured by tests certainly come into play."

There's a good chance that personality traits also come into play in the classroom. Huesmann and his colleagues hypothesize that children with persistent behavior problems lasting into the third grade are those who cannot be easily socialized to behave well and who therefore are more likely to experience a "hostile learning environment."

They speculate that teachers and peers likely "punish" these children, reducing or eliminating positive support for learning. But researchers note that if a child's aggression is short-lived, it is unlikely to have the same long-term consequences.

"Socialization of disruptive preschoolers by teachers and peers may ensure that a child's behavioral problems do not affect his or her educational achievement," Huesmann said. "Attending class, spending time with classmates, observing the rewards of proper behavior, and being told, 'No,' to correct disruptive behavior can benefit unruly children."

Researchers also noted that popularity and positive social behavior in childhood and adolescence predicted higher levels of educational attainment in early adulthood. They said it is possible that children with stable positive social skills experience a supportive and conducive learning environment.

Duncan's study of kindergartners did not address what types of preschool curricula might be most effective in reducing aggression or promoting school readiness. But researchers pointed out that play-based activities, as opposed to "drill- and practice-based" activities, foster academic and attention skills in ways that are engaging and fun.

-NSF-

Media ContactsBobbie Mixon, NSF, (703) 292-8485, bmixon@nsf.gov

Program ContactsAmy Sussman, NSF, (703) 292-7307, asussman@nsf.gov

Principal InvestigatorsGreg Duncan, Northwestern University, (847) 467-1503, greg-duncan@northwestern.edu
L Rowell Huesmann, University of Michigan, (734) 764-8385, huesmann@umich.edu

The National Science Foundation (NSF) is an independent federal agency that supports fundamental research and education across all fields of science and engineering. In fiscal year (FY) 2014, its budget is $7.2 billion. NSF funds reach all 50 states through grants to nearly 2,000 colleges, universities and other institutions. Each year, NSF receives about 50,000 competitive requests for funding, and makes about 11,500 new funding awards. NSF also awards about $593 million in professional and service contracts yearly.

 Get News Updates by Email 

Useful NSF Web Sites:
NSF Home Page: http://www.nsf.gov
NSF News: http://www.nsf.gov/news/
For the News Media: http://www.nsf.gov/news/newsroom.jsp
Science and Engineering Statistics: http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/
Awards Searches: http://www.nsf.gov/awardsearch/

10 Ways to Raise a Competent, Confident Child

Latest Posts

10 Ways to Raise a Competent, Confident Child

"The exhausting cycle of constantly monitoring their work and performance...makes children feel less competent and confident." - Elizabeth Kolbert, in Spoiled Rotten: Why do kids rule the roost? in the New Yorker.

In discussions about whether kids today are "spoiled" it's common to hear accusations that we as parents are over-protecting, so our kids don't gain confidence from learning to handle things themselves. This is anxiety-provoking for any parent, because the line between appropriate support and helicoptering is rarely clear. (Isn't a helicopter parent just someone who hovers more than you do?)
We're also told that failure is good for kids, and builds resilience. There's no evidence to support that idea, though. In fact, what kids seem to learn from failing is that they're failures. Resilience comes not from failing, but from the experience of learning that it's worth it to pick yourself up and try again. That requires at least some experience of success.

So are kids today really less confident than they used to be? I don't know, and I haven't seen any research to support that claim. But it certainly stands to reason that the more practice children have engaging with the world and managing themselves and their lives, the more confidence and competence they'll develop. And I don't think it's news to any parent that our natural desire to protect our children and make sure that everything goes well for them can make us over-protective.

How do we hit that sweet spot of appropriate support and protection on the one hand, and enough independence to foster confidence and competence on the other?
1. Stop controlling and start coaching. Coaches help kids develop skills, but kids play the game. Your job as a parent is to support your child so she can flourish and develop. Doing things FOR her robs her of the opportunity to become competent. Doing things WITH her teaches her how and builds confidence.
2. Remember that perfection is not the goal. Resist the temptation to "improve" on your child's task, unless the outcome is vitally important. Constant intervention undermines a child's confidence.
3. Let him try to do it himself from the earliest age. Rein in your own anxiety. That doesn’t mean abandoning him to it. Stand by, smiling, ready to be helpful in whatever way actually helps your child -- BUT keep your mouth shut and your hands to yourself except to give appropriate encouragement, unless you REALLY need to help.
Clucking anxiously about how worried you are as he climbs that play structure may make you feel better, and it may impress the other parents on the playground with your attentiveness, but it won't help your child. In fact, it unintentionally limits him. Just ask if he is keeping himself safe, then stand by and spot him. Smile proudly. Say "Look at you! I knew you could do it!" (And if he falls, you’re there to catch him. Which is, after all, what allowed him to try it.)
4. Help her build confidence by tackling manageable challengeswith your assistance. Emotional development researchers call this "scaffolding," which could be defined as the framework you give your child on which she builds. You demonstrate how to do something, or you use words to suggest a strategy, or you simply spot her. This assistance helps her to succeed when she tries something new, and small successes achieved with your help give her the confidence to try new things herself. Scaffolding also teaches children that help is always available if they need it. You want your kids to know that deep in their bones before they hit adolescence.
5. Don’t set him up for failure. Offer structure to help him succeed. Should you step in when you see failure ahead, or "let him learn a lesson"? Always a hard call. Rescuing children can prevent them from learning important lessons. But research shows that children who see their parents stand by and let them fail experience that as not being loved. Instead of learning the lesson that they should have practiced that clarinet, or read the directions on that science kit, they learn the lesson that they are failures, that they cannot manage themselves, and that their parents did not care enough to help them not be failures or teach them to manage themselves.
But isn't stepping in “rescuing them?” That all depends on how it's done. If you take over the science fair project and do half of it the night before it's due, that's worse than rescuing: not only does your son learn that you will bail him out if he goofs off, he learns that he is incompetent.
But if you help him each step of the way to organize his ideas and his work, BUT resist the impulse to improve on the project yourself, he completes the job, hugely proud, and having learned something about how to plan and execute a complex project.
6. Praise effort, not results. "I see you worked so hard on this." "Wow! You didn't give up!"Of course it isn't perfect. She's a child. And even if it is great, the point is never the product -- you don’t want her resting on her laurels at the age of six, or sixteen. Your goal is for her to keep trying, practicing, improving, and for her to learn that hard work pays off.
7. Teach self-encouragement. Model maxims to repeat as mantras when the going gets tough. "Practice makes progress!" and "If you don't succeed, try, try again!" and "I think I can, I think I can!"are designed to help us manage our frustration. When your son goofs a piece on the piano and has to start over, or your daughter strikes out with the bases loaded, they need an automatic internal comforting voice to encourage and motivate them. Otherwise the harsh criticizing voice steps in, triggered by the disappointment.
8. Model positive self-talk. Positive self-talk has been shown to improve our ability to master difficult tasks, unlike the self-disparaging comments many of us so automatically make. If something negative about your child -- or, equally important, about yourself -- starts to come out of your mouth, bite your tongue. Most parents know better than to say "What an idiot!" to their child (and most of them are able to stop themselves), but a surprising number see nothing wrong with berating themselves that way in front of their kids. Whatever you model, your child will learn and will emulate. Just train yourself not to do it. (It certainly isn't good for you, either. Would you let anyone else talk to you that way?)
9. Manage frustrating circumstances. When your child encounters frustration, remember that your empathy will be a critical factor in his overcoming it. You don't have to remove the source of the frustration, but you do want to give it a larger context by communicating your confidence in your child, and your compassion that he has to encounter this circumstance.
Parents are often told that frustration is good for kids, since the world will be full of frustrations. That's a bit like saying that it's a cold, cruel world so your child should learn to sleep without blankets. It’s true that we all learn from overcoming challenges, but we also learn best when we experience success, which motivates us to tackle more difficult challenges. Mastery begets mastery. Failure sets up a cycle of lack of confidence, giving up and more failure.
Your child will naturally develop the ability to handle increasing amounts of frustration and anxiety as he attempts more difficult challenges. But those frustrations are inherent in growing up and are guaranteed aplenty in life. There is no benefit whatsoever to setting your child up for extra frustration or negative experience. In fact, he will see your doing so as evidence of your lack of caring, which is always translated in his mind as his lack of value, and which therefore undermines his confidence.
10. Affirm your child’s ability to impact the world. Competence and feelings of mastery are about power and derive from a child's experience of herself as having an effect on the world. "If I stand on the stool, I can flip this light switch and light up the room!" All children will experience reasonable limits to their power (“I can't make the rain stop, and neither can Mommy"), but the more your child has opportunities to make a difference in the world, the more she will see herself as capable.
In the end, our job as parents is to work ourselves out of a job, and it starts when our children are very young. All kids eventually grow up and live their lives without us. How they live will depend partly on whether we've been able to rise above our own anxiety and our impulse to control our child. You know the old adage about giving our children roots and wings? Unconditional love is the roots. Confidence is the wings. Young people who have both live bigger lives.