Here are some examples from an imaginary, extended dialogue between a typical representative of the educult and Engelmann, disguised as Socrates, asking innocent, but pointed, questions about educational practice. In this presentation, Socrates (Engelmann) is pointing out what the Chicago reform effort presented as the “scientific” way to sound educational practice. It didn’t work, for reasons obvious. The Chicago “experts” weren’t reinventing the wheel, which would have been bad enough, they were reinventing which they thought was the wheel, but was really a carrot slicer.
These folks, at great expense, put together an exercise which depended on the opinions of experts and ignored previous programs which worked. Look up hubris. There are many ways to fail. This is one of them. I will guarantee that no one involved in this enterprise lost a penny in pay. I also guarantee that most of them refer to their work on this project as an example of “expertise”.
What follows is part of the exchange. The whole thing is found here.
“Dr. Williams: Well, the larger school districts are moving in the direction of doing more research and using evidence-based practices for teaching core content.
Socrates: Which specific districts are you referring to?
Dr. Williams: Chicago is representative of the trends in some larger cities. Chicago has a fairly large research and evaluation department, has initiated research, and has awarded contracts for evaluating key initiatives the district is pursuing.
Socrates: As I understand it the district is doing research on struggling readers.
Dr. Williams: True. But we refer to these students as “striving readers.” The district is in the process of conducting a large five-year study that incorporates everything we know to be effective.
Socrates: Like what?
Dr. Williams: Like smaller class size, more adults in the classroom, teachers networking and collaborating, parent involvement, increased emphasis on in-service training, a corresponding increase in the training personnel—all bringing a strong focus on evidence-based practices.
Socrates: Well, it seems that the project covers many facets.
Dr. Williams: Yes, and the program has a particularly strong emphasis on emerging readers in grades 1-3, where the city uses a three tier model to assure that children do not slip through the cracks. Each school has both a literacy impact teacher, and a lead literacy teacher.
Socrates: With all these strengths, it would seem that the program could not fail, unless, of course, the instruction is faulty. Tell me about the instructional programs that are used.
Dr. Williams: In all grades, teachers use high-quality, high- interest material. In all content areas teachers teach comprehension strategies. Teachers explicitly teach more vocabulary. A strong provision of the program is that lead literacy teachers are trained to use assessment and diagnostic data to adjust instructional practices. There are also after school programs for students who need more help.
Socrates: I understand the research is conducted in quite a few schools.
Dr. Williams: A little over 30 experimental schools and 30 control schools.
Socrates: Has the city evaluated this model on a smaller scale before implementing it on such a grand scale?
Dr. Williams: Absolutely. The project is built around practices that have been shown to increase student performance. In fact, the city’s chief instructional officer, Barbara Eason-Watkins, pioneered this effort when she was principal of an inner-city school, and she showed the impressive results that could be achieved.
Socrates: With such a large study and commitment to this all encompassing approach, the district must feel quite sure that the results of the study will be highly positive.
Dr. Williams: Yes, that’s why the study was designed so that it incorporated random assignment and other details needed for a pristine research study.
Socrates: Am I correct in assuming that the district’s assumption is that if the Striving Reader initiative is successful, it will be institutionalized in the city?
Dr. Williams: Correct. The study has a potential to serve not only other Chicago schools but to be an institutionalized model for other cities that have serious problems with striving readers.
Socrates: Am I correct in assuming that the city would not institutionalize it if it is a failure?
Dr. Williams: Yes.
Socrates: Good. You indicated earlier that all instructional material was of high quality and high interest. What procedures are used to judge that they are of high quality?
Dr. Williams: One basis is the degree to which they are consistent with the adoption standards for high-quality programs. The other is the judgment of panels of knowledgeable teachers, administrators and others.
Socrates: Isn’t this a rather circuitous way of judging the capacity of the program to affect student performance?
Dr. Williams: I fail to see that it is circuitous.
Socrates: Wouldn’t it be far more direct to simply identify a program that has strong evidence of effectiveness, rather than infer the effectiveness from the degree to which it meets standards and endorsements of committees?”
There is more on zigsite.com.
Cheerio and ttfn,
Grant Coulson
Cui Bono–Cherchez les Contingencies
