Fall 2006 Contemporary Issues Meeting

Minutes

The fall 2006 Contemporary Issues Meeting of the National Coordinating Committee for School Safety and Health (NCCSHS) was held at the Doubletree Hotel Crystal City, Arlington, Virginia on September 20, 2006. The meeting was chaired by Jim Bogden, Safety and Healthy Schools Project Director of the National Association of State Boards of Education.

Mr. Bogden opened the meeting by identifying its central theme (Engaging Children to Learn) and introducing other key members of the team: Dr. Trina Anglin, Chief of the Office of Adolescent Health in the Maternal and Child Health Bureau of the Health Resources and Services Administration; and Dr. Fran Meyer, NCCSHS Project Coordinator. Meeting participants then introduced themselves. Following that, Dr. Meyer reviewed several handouts and surveys found in the participants’ packets.

Opening Presentation -- Putting First Things First: Fostering Students’ Motivation to Learn

The first presentation featured two speakers representing the Institute for Research and Reform in Education (IRRE) -- Sally Leiderman, IRRE Senior Consultant, and Dr. William P. Moore, Director, Measuring What Matters -- discussing an IRRE report entitled Fostering Students’ Motivation to Learn: Putting “First Things First.”

Ms. Leiderman identified IRRE as an organization of practitioners and researchers engaged in partnerships with schools, school districts, and states for the purpose of implementing whole child and whole district reform, often but not exclusively centered on the concept of First Things First (FTF). She described FTF as a “comprehensive reform framework designed to raise students’ academic performance to levels required for post-secondary education and high quality employment” and listed as its desired outcomes the following:

1. For students: successful completion of all levels through high school coupled with the acquisition, at each level, of the academic skills needed at the next higher level.
   
2. For schools: changing existing relationships and focusing resources as needed to improve the quality of teaching and learning.
   
3. For school districts: providing system leadership capacity and directing resources toward achieving both of the foregoing sets of outcomes.

Ms. Leiderman identified twelve communities where FTF is currently implemented. This project involves 100 elementary, middle, and high schools stretching from California to New Jersey.

Ms. Leiderman then discussed portions of the 2004 National Research Council/Institute of Medicine (NRC/IOM) report entitled Engaging Schools: Fostering High School Students’ Motivation to Learn. After identifying members of the committee responsible for the report and stating reasons the report was commissioned (e.g., growing evidence of a large percentage of schools in disrepair, high school graduation rates in some areas on the order of 50%, continuing racial/ethnic gaps), she invited Dr. Moore to the podium.

Addressing the connection between First Things First and the NRC/IOM report, Dr. Moore noted that while IRRE agrees with all ten NRC/IOM recommendations, it does not necessarily focus on all of them in the work it seeks to accomplish. The primary IRRE focus is on developing and implementing school- and district-based strategies that encourage student personalization and engagement. Three such strategies are: Instructional Improvement, Family Advocate System, and Small Learning Communities (SLCs). Discussing the goals of each strategy and the methods used to accomplish them, Dr. Moore linked each strategy to the NRC/IOM recommendation to which it most directly pertained.

Dr. Moore noted that the first district-wide implementation of FTF, involving over 20,000 students in 43 schools in Kansas City, Kansas, resulted in substantial improvement over a five-year period in high school graduation rates (48% in 1999-00 to 81% in 2004-05), eighth-grade reading proficiency (36% in 2001 and 64% in 2005), as well as in several other measures, including a reduction in the annual survey rate of disaffected high school students. Similar results, including double-digit increases in national and state test scores across all grade levels, were also reported for high school students in Houston, Texas.

Dr. Moore closed with a series of charts showing the extent to which gaps in reading proficiency between Caucasian and African-American students and between Caucasians and Hispanics, as well as between students who participate in subsidized lunch programs and those who do not, have been reduced since the implementation of FTF in Kansas City, Kansas.

Second Presentation – Educating the Whole Child: Making the Connections

Emphasizing that academic achievement is not the only thing on which education is focused; Dr. Carter observed that many schools have responded to No Child Left Behind by narrowing their curricula, in some cases doing away with things like recess. He stated that standardized testing was not in and of itself the villain in the picture but that its nature, quality, and frequency of implementation were. He added that education must focus on preparing children for THEIR future, not for OUR past. Reporting that studies have shown an important connection between physical activity and learning, he stressed the importance of movement and daily physical education as part of the learning process.

Dr. Carter listed a number of attributes that typify children who are “whole.” They are:

-- physically, verbally, socially, and academically fit
-- empathetic, fair, kind, and caring
-- creative and curious
-- disciplined, self-directed, and goal-oriented
-- confident and aware of their wholeness

Such children know they are wanted, valued, and cared for; and tend to be critical, deep, integrative thinkers capable of using what they have learned to gain new knowledge.

He also listed a number of attributes typical of institutions that support the Whole Child:

-- mature/caring staff
-- structured in-depth curricula capable of adapting to differences
-- unhurried/purposeful schedule
-- culture that is holistic, connected, and imaginative
-- accountability

Expanding on these themes, he concluded by stressing the importance of close, interactive organizational collaborations in which all available resources are harnessed to create a positive, child-centered learning environment in which children are actively nurtured and engaged.

Group Discussion – Strengthening the School Environment: Engaging Students to Learn

Following Dr. Carter’s presentation, a group discussion was held during which each of the preceding speakers was given an opportunity to amplify his or her remarks. Several key points emerged:

a. Steps are needed to implement recommended strategies.

Ms. Leiderman noted that while school boards and superintendents commonly take the lead in effecting needed change, community advisors and parents must be involved as well if the change is to be effective and lasting,. Dr. Carter stressed the importance of strong organizational collaborations, i.e., partnerships in which commonalities are emphasized and differences minimized, adding that ASCD, with a membership that contains more school administrators than all other organizations combined, is fully prepared to engage in such partnerships. Dr. Moore reinforced the importance of effective leadership at the board level in setting the stage for needed change and seeing it through.

b. International differences in educational policy and practice exist.

The speakers noted that while the United States is ahead of other countries in educational creativity and imagination, it lags in other respects. Other countries build more opportunities into their daily teaching schedules for teachers to meet with others and provide greater emphasis in their curriculum on language skills and foreign cultures.

The role of government in supporting learning also was discussed. That role, including the allocation of needed resources, is more strongly pursued in other countries than in the United States. China, it was noted, currently implements a plan to shift its educational focus from didactic to interactive classroom methods. Most other countries respect the American university system but not its elementary, middle, or high schools.

Panel Discussion – Learning from Students: Student Responses to the Recommendations of the NRC/IOM Report

A panel of three students, assembled by Sandy Spavone, Executive Director of the National Organizations for Youth Safety (NOYS), was convened to provide response to the ten recommendations contained in the NRC/IOM report. Those recommendations, slightly paraphrased, are shown below:

1. High school courses and instructional methods should be redesigned to increase student engagement and learning.
   
2. Teachers should assess student understanding and skills on an ongoing basis and use this information to design appropriately challenging instruction for all students.
   
3. Pre-service teacher preparation programs should provide high school teachers with deep content knowledge and a range of pedagogical strategies and understanding of adolescents and how they learn. Schools and school districts should provide practicing teachers with opportunities to work with colleagues and to continue to develop their skills.
   
4. Schools should eliminate both formal and informal tracking by ability. They should use alternative strategies to ensure appropriately challenging instruction for students who vary widely in skill levels.
   
5. Tests used to evaluate schools, teachers, and students should assess high-level critical thinking and incorporate a broad, multidimensional conception of subject matter that includes fluency, conceptual understanding, analysis, and application.
   
6. School guidance and counseling responsibilities should be diffused among school staff, including teachers who are supported by professionals.
   
7. Schools should provide the support and resources necessary to help all high school students meet challenging standards.
   
8. Schools should develop efforts to improve communication, coordination, and trust among adults in various settings where students spend their time.
   
9. Schools should make greater efforts to identify and coordinate with social and health services in the community. Policy makers should revise policies to facilitate student access to the services needed.
   
10. School districts should restructure comprehensive urban high schools to create smaller learning communities that foster personalized and continuous relationships between teachers and students.

The youth panel, consisting of a 10th grade student from a suburban high school, a 12th grade student from a rural high school, and a college junior, was presented with a series of questions generated by Valerie Mendralla, NOYS Youth Coordinator, who moderated their responses.

Asked to identify which items advanced by the preceding speakers were particularly new or interesting, the ones identified were: (a) the importance of presenting students with learning materials that capture their interest, (b) the need for shifting educational focus to the Whole Child, i.e., from academic success to life success, and (c) the importance of everyone working as a team to accomplish those ends that experience has shown can be accomplished.

In responding to questions concerning the ten NRC/IOM recommendations, the panel expressed essential agreement with all but one. The one they disagreed with was number 4 (eliminate tracking by ability). Tracking by ability, they felt, was important in that it permitted teachers to realistically set the same goal for all students, i.e., to succeed. They also expressed concern regarding the manner in which recommendation 5, dealing with standardized testing, is currently implemented. The frequency in which such tests are conducted and the shifting of curricula in order to match their content were among the negative features identified.

The panel addressed several other issues as well, including the importance of school involvement in health and other personal issues that could endanger the student, the school, or the community. Asked whether teachers should get involved in post-graduation counseling, the panel agreed it was a good idea, adding that properly prepared teachers, interacting with students on a day-to-day basis, are quite capable of serving as surrogate counselors. Students should not, however, attempt to be therapists.

Small Group Discussion – Generating Strategies for NCCSHS and Member Organizations: Providing National Leadership to Build School Environments That Engage Students, Foster Their Motivation to Learn, and Support Their Needs

A major portion of the afternoon was devoted to small group discussions in which the following issues were addressed:

1. Gaps and Challenges. - What gaps need to be filled and what challenges need to be met if we are to enhance our ability to engage students and support the learning needs of the whole child?

2. Roles, Collaborations, and Strategies. – What roles could the various sectors play, and what collaborations need to take place, in order to fill those gaps and meet those challenges? In particular, what are the potential roles, collaborations, and strategies for NCCSHS and its member organizations?

Led by Sharon Murray, Executive Director of the Society of State Directors of Health, Physical Education and Recreation, and Dr. Susan Wooley, Executive Director of the American School Health Association, the audience was divided into four groups of approximately ten members each. Each group had its own self-appointed facilitator, note-taker, and reporter. When completed, the results of these deliberations were shared with the group as a whole in a session moderated by Ms. Murray and Dr. Wooley. Major points that emerged were as follows:

Gaps and Challenges

The gaps and challenges identified fell into six categories: Curriculum, Community, Parents, School Organization/Administration, Teachers, and Other. Commonly reported gaps in curriculum included

-- the limited emphasis on mental health, physical education, and health education in general

-- excessive emphasis on teaching methods as opposed to use of teaching strategies that can address learning needs of the “whole child.”

Limited involvement on the part of both the community and parents was cited as a major challenge. Additionally, there is a lack of a cohesive educational system across the country and there is organizational inertia/lack of resources that hamper the ability of schools and school administration to change. With respect to the teaching community, challenges mentioned were the need for teachers to be treated with greater respect and to be better prepared to handle the Whole Child. Challenges in the “Other” category included the health, social, educational, and economic disparities in today’s student population.

Needed Roles and Strategies

The focus in this part of the discussion was on NCCSHS and its member organizations’ roles and strategies for addressing gaps and challenges identified. Following are recommendations for further attention.

1. Develop a common set of organizational priorities.
   
2. Set aside meetings such as the present one to (a) convey the important efforts each organization is conducting, (b) highlight what works and what does not, and (c) identify and address any continuing gaps.
   
3. Survey existing research to find data that supports the Whole Child approach and then share the information with others.
   
4. Examine opportunities for working with foundations (e.g., The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation) and with the government (Laura Bush’s Helping America’s Youth) to conduct research relating to educating the Whole Child.
   
5. Examine opportunities for working with the business community to build a better understanding of the Whole Child issues as they relate to workforce development.

Other identified roles and strategies related to the family and community (“increase their involvement”) and to schools and school administrators (“modify existing curricula to more actively engage children in the real world”). The Family Advocate System mentioned earlier by Dr. Moore was cited as an example of the type of parental involvement likely to be productive. Introducing health disparities as a topic of discussion in math classes was cited as an example of a change in curricula that could enhance the engagement of children in the real world.

On the issue of resources, it was noted that categorical funding (e.g., nutrition, drugs, abstinence from sexual behaviors) may be too restrictive and should be replaced by something more holistic and cross-cutting.

Reflections on Small Group Reports: Creating an Action Agenda for NCCSHS and Its Member Organizations

Dr. Moore, Ms Leiderman, and Theresa Lewallen (ASCD’s Director of Healthy School Communities, filling in for Dr. Carter who had to leave early) were provided an opportunity to comment on the small group reports. The activity ultimately expanded into a full-group discussion on how to convert the roles and strategies identified into a cohesive action agenda for NCCSHS and its member organizations. Major items mentioned were:

1. NCCSHS should modify its mission statement to make it more action-oriented, specifically addressing issues relating to the Whole Child. Member organizations can either sign on or not as they see fit.
   
2. Standards for teacher accreditation need to be developed that emphasize preparation of teachers to educate the Whole Child so that he or she becomes a Whole Adult.
   
3. Use NCCSHS and/or its member organizations as a vehicle for conducting research into the precepts that support the Whole Child approach.
   
4. Explore the possibility of government and/or non-governmental support for fully integrated Whole Child demonstration projects.
   
5. In pursuit of the Whole Child concept, coalesce around a single idea, then develop a limited number of indicators of progress (“outcomes”).
   
6. Commission the writing of papers that identify practices shown, or otherwise deemed likely, to achieve those outcomes.
   
7. Focus on closing achievement gaps and health disparities among children.
   
8. Define the Whole Child approach in terms that are clearly understood, using images and pictures to help define and promote the concept.
   
9. Seize opportunities to comment on, and otherwise contribute to, government initiatives involving school health and safety. Possibilities mentioned included an effort currently underway to define goals for the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), a talked-about 2010 Health and Safety Summit, and the forthcoming publication Healthy People 2020.
   
10. Ways to engage the faith community should be identified.

Ms. Leiderman stated that there should be a covenant among those who work with families and children, one in which schools focus on educating every child and one where families and communities agree to provide a safe and healthy place for children to live.

Closing Comments.

Mr. Bogden offered the member organizations an opportunity to provide organizational updates. A number of such updates were provided. For example:

-- Action for Healthy Kids announced a series of events focusing on physical activities and nutrition education.

-- The latest update on the National Health Education Standards, expected earlier this year, indicates a delay and print versions of the document will be available no sooner than November 1, 2006.

-- The American School Health Association announced a call for papers for a conference to be held in Hawaii, July 9-13, 2007. .

-- The Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development announced that applications were sought from local schools for its project on Healthy School Communities.

-- The Center for School Mental Health Analysis and Action announced an annual conference to be held the following week.

Mr. Bogden thanked the speakers and attendees for what he termed “a great meeting”. The next meeting, he noted, will be held in the spring.

Memorable quote of the day (cited by one of the Youth Panelists): “You hear and you forget. You see and you remember. You do and you understand.”