Report: Just 4 percent of 3rd graders getting enough PE

Posted by Philissa at 3:20 PM

Yesterday, Public Advocate Betsy Gotbaum's office released a report on the state of physical education in the city's schools, concluding what we already know: schools stink at making sure kids get physical activity. But the facts, at least according to the Public Advocate's office, are worse than I imagined. Only 4 percent of 3rd graders get gym daily as required by the state; just 31 percent of middle schools give kids enough P.E. time; and more than half of all middle schools have no sports teams at all. Given the scope of its own failure, it's no wonder the DOE wants to hand off responsibility for fitness to families!

Most elementary schools not meeting state gym requirements

Posted by Philissa at 9:06 AM

In the last few years, the city's schools have gotten better about identifying overweight students and suggesting more activity for them, but physical education still gets short shrift at most schools, according to the Gotham Gazette. The DOE's Office of Fitness and Physical Education implemented a fitness test, called the FitnessGRAM, to give students and their parents more information about their fitness level. But because of the pressure to focus on tested subjects and space and staffing constraints, most elementary schools continue to offer far less than the state-mandated 120 minutes per week of physical activity, instead suggesting to parents ways to help their kids be active and eat healthfully at home. I wonder how many families are able to respond to the FitnessGRAM results the way the DOE expects them to. And even if every parent of an overweight child changes his or her habits because of the test results, should we let schools pass off state-required health and fitness instruction to students' homes?

Middle School Muddle: What should every 6th grader know?

Posted by inthemiddle at 9:27 AM

Why Are middle school curriculums so different? And should every 6th grader be expected to learn the same things? What should every sixth-grader know?

These questions have been on my mind since I began my second round of District Two middle school tours in Manhattan this fall.

I’m trying to find the best fit for my 5th-grade son, but I’m also trying to figure out what is actually taught in 6th grade, why each school approaches it so differently and how much it ultimately matters. How does one define a good education?

Should 6th graders study Newton and the Laws of Nature, The Rise of Napoleon and Greek and Latin Roots? Should they learn trillions, integers and square roots? Child Labor and Mexican Independence? The French Revolution and Ancient Rome? In what grade and in what sequence?

All of the above are among the suggestions for 6th graders by noted author and educator E. D. Hirsch Jr. in What Your Sixth Grader Needs to Know.

I read the book recently and had the chance to spend some time with Hirsch at a conference. I noticed that only some of his suggestions have made it into the middle schools I’ve visited so far.

Hirsch says parents should examine curriculums to make sure that “they spell out, in clear and concrete terms a core of specific content and skills all children at a particular grade level are expected to learn by the end of the school year.’’

I have yet to leave a tour with a curriculum in hand, although I always try to ask what will be taught.

So far, it seems to vary widely from school to school – and often changes from year to year.

Hirsch touched off a debate when he wrote a book called Cultural Literacy, Hirsch rejects the idea that a set curriculum is either authoritarian or conservative, instead describing it as “super democratic.’’

I can’t help wondering, as I continue these tours, who makes the decision in each school for what must be taught, beyond what will be on state tests that schools are increasingly judged – and graded on.

Whether or not you agree with Hirsch’s assessments of what every 6th grader should know – and many don’t -- the questions he raises seem both worthwhile and interesting to pose on tours.

I’ll try to find more answers.

Read all of Liz Willen's Middle School Muddle

Katrina curriculum features NYC schools

Posted by Philissa at 2:05 PM

Columbia University's Teachers College, with the support of the Rockefeller Brothers Fund, has developed a curriculum based on Spike Lee's documentary "When the Levees Broke." The curriculum, titled "Teaching the Levees," is intended for students in high school and older and addresses many of the social and political issues raised by Hurricane Katrina and its aftermath. It also encourages "citizen action through further study, community service, service learning, and political action," according to its website. I hope schools in New York and nationwide will be able to find space in their busy testing schedules for Teaching the Levees.

Two New York City schools that have already used Katrina as a tool for learning are featured in videos on the curriculum's website. One video depicts Beacon School students' trip to New Orleans to volunteer in rebuilding efforts there. Another shows a vibrant classroom discussion at a Brooklyn high school about the political implications of natural disasters.

TC is hosting a launch event Sept. 6 that will feature a panel discussion moderated by New York Times columnist Bob Herbert; you can RSVP through tomorrow.

Student Thought: Boys and girls

Posted by Seth Pearce at 1:30 PM

Yesterday, Newsday published an article entitled "Single-Sex School Aren't the Educational Answer," by Caryl Rivers and Rosalind C. Barnett, co-authors of a book on how gender myths are hurting our society. In the article, Rivers and Barnett explore the current media clash between those who think girls are favored in our schools and those who believe that boys are.

There has been a lot said about girls doing better in school thanks to (as New Republic puts it) a "verbally drenched curriculum," designed to encourage girls to succeed. In my experience as a student, only recently (the end of junior year) have boys been able to catch up to girls academically.

However, as Rivers and Barnett point out, data has shown that boys are getting into colleges and getting bachelor's degrees at ever-increasing rates. A recent US News article supports this side of the argument, noting that it is much harder for girls to gain admission to college than it is for boys due to overwhelming competition. When colleges try to maintain gender balance and have a larger female applicant pool, boys have it much easier.

With all of these gender issues some public school systems have been creating single-sex schools, something that Rivers and Barnett are very much against.

The evidence hardly suggests single-sex public schools are the answer. When you account for such factors as parents' income, student motivation, teacher ability and class size, kids in co-ed class and kids in single-sex classes perform about the same. When California set up single-sex schools in the '90s, it failed to improve academic performance. And, says the Ford Foundation, the schools tended to foster gender stereotypes, not helpful to either sex.

As a student, I cannot endorse this view. Sure, single-sex schools are not best for many students, but for some it is a very valuable option. I know that most of pro-single-sex-schools arguments were said a long time ago but for some students they are still true. Students of both genders can find members of the opposite sex distracting or pressure-causing in an academic setting. For them, a single-sex school can be much more relaxing and a better learning environment. Single-sex schools are not for everyone, but until the we have all the answers you need to keep all options open.