This is part of a series of posts on my reflections on The Laboratory Charter School in my neighborhood — specifically how other urban schools could learn a few things from the way it models its program.
Directly teach to standards.
“The real problem is not whether machines think but whether men do.”
– B.F. Skinner
The Laboratory School regularly tests and rigorously prepares its students for standardized tests such as PSSAs. Direct instruction is given on how to read and write in a way that tests well on such assessments. Class and homework assignments even emulate the kinds of questions that appear on these assessments.
Now I know this is where I’ll run into some controversy. There’s a lot of problems with standardized tests; they only really assess very specific knowledge and skills that are only a subset of what is entailed in complicated abilities. As a result they may not give an accurate picture of true proficiency; a picture that may also be distorted by cultural bias. A heavy emphasis on standardized accountability could place blinders on the kind of teaching and learning that can take place and subversively espouse a kind of ruthless meritocracy of soulless arbitrary metrics.
Do I think this is the best form of instruction? In an ideal world, no. In an ideal world, there would be one or two or three teachers for every three or four or five children. Instruction would be individualized and organic, with a loose and flexible curriculum that allowed fanciful (and passionate) pursuits of knowledge while constantly making interdisciplinary connections. The world would be the classroom and children will construct their own learning and blahdiblahdiblah.
Separate question: Do I think this is the most effective instruction for your typical school? Yes. Neophytes need structure, feedback, specific goals, specific routines to practice and become fluent in. This is doubly true if what they’re learning is open-ended, ambiguous, difficult to define. Triply true if the students are young.
Top-down instruction is easy to organize, easy to manage, easy to keep accountable. And it doesn’t have to be tedious or inhumane. In fact, by allowing more students to be on task more often, it can even be more interactive more frequently than more progressive approaches.
Ted Sizer’s idea of cutting off mandatory education at the end of middle school makes a lot of sense to me. Let students really master basic reading, writing, math, civics, and science. Hold everyone’s feet to the fire until there is near universal competency at core literacies. And use the most effective, efficient systems of instruction we have to accomplish this: direct instruction, regular feedback, constant assessment, individualized support, sequential mastery. Don’t let students float on with the rest of their classmates if they haven’t really learned the material.
But past that point of accomplishment, open it up. Make every class an elective class. Go with each student’s intellectual hunger and leverage their personal curiosities. Let them take internships and apprenticeships and do their learning outside of class. Give them independent projects and open forums.
That’s why the Lab School’s K-8 approach makes sense to me. After kids graduate from there, go ahead and send them off to more progressive schools. They’ll be ready for it.
Of course, there’s no reason why you can’t have project-based learning to supplement directed sequential instruction and vice versa. The Lab School’s marketing video made it sound like they did everything all the time: multiple intelligences, project-based learning, service learning, scripted instruction, et cetera, et cetera. They have guest speakers and recess and fun experiments and field trips and all that. It seems clear to me, though, that their workhorse pedagogy is in tried and true behaviorist instructional techniques.
The result? The Laboratory School is always top-ranked in standardized assessments, not only in the city but also in the state. It even trumps Masterman. You can’t dispute the fact that Lab School students know how to read, write, and ‘rithmetic.
4 responses so far ↓
Concerned // September 24, 2006 at 6:20 pm
Tom,
You really need to take a closer look. You hit the nail on the head with the word “marketing”. They are marketing promises like most christian, private, and charter schools do. Yet, they never live up to a majority of these promises. They are not producing THINKERS, but walking databases of information.
Take the time to talk to various lab children and you will see that THEIR communication skills can be deemed as questionable and their foreign language skills are even more so.
Well rounded children need recess, music, art, field trips, and the like. This school seemingly has very little if any of the above.
Yes the academics are rigorous, as they well should be, but they are also very matter of fact and very scripted; thus leaving very little room for a child to think
independently.
Again, I ask that you take a closer look. Speak with the children who are actually struggling there and find out why. Speak to the parents who have transferred their children to Masterman, or Episcopal, or Friends Central. Ask them why they made such a decision. Ask those parents why they felt they needed to place their children back into their neighborhood schools. Find out if you can hold a fairly decent conversation with the children in either french or spanish…or even english for that matter. Find out if they can think on their feet and truly problem solve. Ask them if there is more than one way to arrive at an answer and challange them. Ask them what their interests are outside of such a rigorous environment.
FIND OUT… why some children don’t come back the next year and even more alarming, why some students are promoted to the next grade only to find themselves put back into their old grade after taking a few tests at the beginning of the year. Talk about a BLOW to the old self-esteem.
Ask why they eat in their classrooms and find an occassional rat running to and fro across the floor. Ask them why they are only told what to do and never asked.
These types of “experimental and under regulated” schools are turning out socially and spiritually dead children. Some are leaving the confines of the school riddled with low self-esteem and their critical and cognitive thinking crippled.
As parents, all we want is the very best for our children. Do we really have to go to these extremes to give them our best?
Are high test scores answers to true success? How do we know the next Einstein wasn’t gunned down on the streets of Philadelphia last week or the next Bach missed out on his calling because music wasn’t an option at his school.
I’m not impressed with any number or statistic. When man gets involved, you can always find a flaw. Our kids have to know that no one person is perfect and it’s ok if you make a mistake sometimes. Your still just as bright, just as gifted, and just as NEEDED as any other child who chooses to learn in such a commanding environment.
Again, look closer Tom. Test scores and a trip to an open house session isn’t going to reveal all the layers of a school such as this. If it looks too good to be true… it probably is. I too was DEEPLY impressed with this school, but once I found that I was dealing with big business and not the business of my child, I found myself back in the pursuit to find my child the best possible education that Pennsylvania has to offer.
As for diversity (I found I needed to touch on this area), I think there would be a more diverse student body if the school is truly all it is cracked up to be. Are white parents seeing something black parents aren’t? Or are they just not willing to come to the Wynnefield section of the city to get an EXCEPTIONAL and very FREE learning experience. View the Phillyblogs and ask parents what
tomkim // September 24, 2006 at 11:49 pm
Thanks for your impassioned reply. I’m sorry that it seems to have cut off at the end; I’d be very interested in having you finish your response.
You do us a service by posting your response here. As the parent of a child who considered this school, I don’t doubt that you scrutinized the Laboratory School more carefully than I did.
Perhaps the Laboratory School can’t compete with Masterman or private schools (like mine) or suburban schools in important ways. I wonder how you feel, though, about whether it still serves as an improvement over the typical inner-city public school. Do you think the risks of having a less-structured, constantly chaotic learning environment justify the possible rewards of a more free-thinking child? This is not a rhetorical question; I’m genuinely seeking a dialogue.
sharon // October 18, 2006 at 3:54 pm
I just read the response from your reader named “Concerned” (sorry, i’m very technilogically unsavvy!) My daughter is attending the Lab only because we couldn’t afford/get in anywhere else…I have been very upset with the school and our situation but I don’t know where else to send her…everyone tries to get in Russell Byers or Indepence Charter…if you don’t get in, and you can’t afford Quaker schools, where do people send their children? any help would be greatly appreciated…
Concerned // November 30, 2006 at 4:26 pm
Dear Tom,
First I would like to address why I use the name “concerned”. Well first and foremost, I am concerned about the safety, academics, and the overall well-being of my children. I also use the name concerned as a “cover” due to the fear of retaliation against me and my children by the school in some way or another.
Now Tom, I offer my sincere apologies to you for not responding to you sooner. I have been suffering from a severe Internet handicap lately and have finally gotten myself back on board thanks to a little technical know-how.
I see that my response to your synopsis of the Laboratory Charter School was somehow cut short. However, I am very eager to continue where I left off by speaking with you concerning the Laboratory Charter School and the many issues that have sprung forth over the past few years.
If at all possible, could you please contact me via email so that we may possibly set up a one-on-one meeting to discuss school issues in greater detail? The engagement would by no means act as an avenue to persuade you to change your views about the Lab School. It would act as more of a push for you to delve deeper into the Lab School and other Charter schools so that you may portray them on your site in a more equitable way.
And to Sharon, I have looked into Independence and a few other schools as well. Due to their lack of space and demographic restrictions, my options at this point are fairly nil at best. If you are a minority, my only suggestion is that you find a group that will help your family through the process of finding an exceptional education for your daughter. Start by contacting BAEO / The Black Alliance for Educational Options (www.baeo.org) they have a local chapter in our area and promote parental choice. Also, please visit http://www.abetterchance.org to learn about a great organization that will work on your behalf to match your daughter with the best possible school for her academic, emotional, physical, and social needs. And if you aren’t a minority, contact them anyway, as they cannot turn you away based on your race, demographic, or income.
Sharon and other Lab/Charter Parents, if you have any additional information that you would like to share concerning the Lab School or another charter, please voice your concerns and issue. I am certain Tom is very eager to hear what you have to say about your experience with Lab and other charters as well.
Leave a Comment