Campuswide Interventions That Improve Student Achievement

In the last section of the Payne reading, the part that jumped out at me was her idea of creating benchmarks in each subject. These are general guidlines that set up units throughout a semester or a year and allow each department to have common goals to reach at certain times. This breaks up a year into more manageable pieces so thatteachers can evaluate how their students are doing earlier on than by one final test at the end of the year before its too late to do anything. Benchmarks usually show the natural progression of skills and lead to a final accumulative assessment of each section that the class has achieved.
This was another idea that I picked out because of my own experience with it. My high school was very openly structured by these kinds of benchmarks and when I was a tutor and a peer mentor, I was involved in the creation of some of these benchmarks which would usually be labeled by certain novels or literary time periods. This was a really good way to create units that the kids to look foward to as they were given them all on the syllabus at the beginning of the year. I really agree with Payne's explanation of this technique and think it's a really effective way to break up a subject.

Working with Students from Poverty: Discipline

From this section, I was most intersted by the little four part questionnaire that was used when students behaved badly in order to get them to think through it and come up with possible ideas as to how to better handle similar situations in the future. It asks that the students write down what he did, why he did it, four other things he could have done, and what he will do next time. Payne then suggests that the teacher or whoever is implementing this sits down with the student and goes over it to make sure that he leaves with a few appropriate ideas of how to better behave in the future.
I think the reason I picked this out of the reading is because it was practiced in my own elementary school. I attended a very artsy grade school, and it didn't have a lot of rules or discipline, but this was something that every student encountered because they strongly believed in its power to better behavior. I think I learned a lot from this questionnaire when I had to fill it out because it forced me to decide what were better ways to handle things which is something I wouldn't have done otherwise, but that I acutally did refer to when the situation came up again. This kind of practice is really beneficial I think because it gives the student a chance to think about what he did alone, and then get feedback from the teacher as well.

Building Learning Structures Inside the Head

In part 2 of Payne's Poverty Series, I found myself really liking her idea that, "Conceptual frameworks are the part of the structure that stores and retrieves data. In the house, it is analogous to the rooms. In most houses, rooms are identified by function-the bedroom, the living room, the kitchen, the bathroom, etc" (3). She explains the house analogy in relation to all of the learning structures, and with this one she talks about categorizing information as another way to help yourself remember things, just as we typically think of each room in a house having its specific purpose.
I really liked her use of a house to talk about these learning structures because I thought it was an effective analogy that made a complicated idea about learning easier for me to grasp. I personally tend to categorize everything in life obsessively so that I can clear my head for the next thing that comes my way, and I was glad to read her suggestion that this is an effective tool to teach students. There were a lot of organizational strategies she set forth that didn't make much sense to me but this one seemed logical and simple enough that it could actually be taught and used effectively.

Understanding and Working with Students and Adults from Poverty

In this first section of the Payne readings, the part that jumped out at me most was the chart that outlined the "Hidden Class Rules." It had three columns, each one dedicated to either "Generational Poverty", "Middle Class", or "Wealth". Within these class divisions, the chart outlined basic upspoken behaviors and rules that each group tends to pick up as a part of being raised by other people of that status. These rules include things like what drives desicion making, what defines a possession, how the world is defined, how fighting is done and so on. Payne essentially creates a basic overview of these hidden rules in order to show a distinction between classes and how that leads to different experiences in the classroom or at work.
I think the reason that this chart struck me was because I was at first very insulted by it. Although I do completely understand that Payne was intentionally grouping people and making generalizations, it is still hard to read it and not think about all of the examples that I have to refute her stereotyping. It was especially in her saying, "physical fighting is how conflict is resolved" (3) of the poverty section, and, "Fighting is done through social inclusion/exclusion and through lawyers" (3) about the wealthy class. I can think of so many people who clearly fit these explanations, but the part that bothers me is that I know so many people who work hard to get out of these labels. I know that in order to write a guidline like this, one must file people into specific categories that don't always work for everyone, but I guess it's just sad that we are able to do so this easily.

NYT Middle School Article

This article talks about two different approaches to schooling which both aim to get rid of one major transition for students. One side of the argument calls for a switch from the traditional Elementary, Middle School, and High School form of education to a K-8, 9-12 set-up. The other side suggests a switch to a K-5, 6-12 system. The first intends to keep a sense of stability for kids as they approach he tough stages of puberty. They would have 9 years in the same school during those years to act as a constant as they experience change in every other aspect of life. The second idea would serve the purpose of a longer time for college preparation. These advocates want more than the traditional 4 years to get kids ready for college and believe that 6th grade is the time to start this path.
At the moment, I don't really have a preference between the two. I strongly agree that something has to be done about Middle School or Jr. High School settings because personally that was the worst time in my eduaction. I felt that 2-3 years in one school was disruptive to my learning more than anything and making those transitions in such a short amount of time was really traumatic. If I had to choose, I would opt for the K-5, 6-12 set-up. I think that college is a huge aim nowadays and that it would be beneficial for kids to start thinking about it as early as possible. Also, I think that 6th graders are too old to be kept with 6 and 7 year olds and would be better off with older kids. As a Secondary teacher, I wouldn't mind having access to those kids for a longer period of time in order to give them that much more skill before they apply to college.