اینترنت

برچسب: supports

  • California poorly trains and supports teaching math, report concludes 

    California poorly trains and supports teaching math, report concludes 


    Teacher apprentice Ja’net Williams helps with a math lesson in a first grade class at Delta Elementary Charter School in Clarksburg, near Sacramento.

    Credit: Diana Lambert / EdSource

    Top Takeaways
    • California leaders dismiss the criticism and methodology of the rankings.
    • And yet, graduate credentialing programs cram a lot in a year. 
    • Many teachers may struggle with the demands of California’s new math framework.

    In its “State of the States” report on math instruction published last week, the National Council on Teacher Quality sharply criticized California and many of its teacher certification programs for ineffectively preparing new elementary teachers to teach math and for failing to support and guide them once they reach the classroom.  

    “Far too many elementary teacher prep programs fail to dedicate enough instructional time to building aspiring teachers’ math knowledge — leaving teachers unprepared and students underserved,” the council said in its evaluation of California’s 87 programs that prepare elementary school teachers. “The analysis shows California programs perform among the lowest in the country.”

    The report’s call for more teacher math training and ongoing support coincides with the state’s adoption this summer of materials and textbooks for a new math framework that math professionals universally agree will be a heavy lift for incoming and veteran teachers to master. It will challenge elementary teachers with a poor grasp of the underpinnings behind the math they’ll be teaching. 

    Kyndall Brown, executive director of the California Mathematics Project based at UCLA, agrees. “It’s not just about knowing the content, it’s about helping students learn the content, which are two completely different things,” he said.

    And that raises a question: Does a one-year-plus-summer graduate program, which most prospective teachers take, cram too much in a short time to realistically meet the needs to teach elementary school math?

    California joined two dozen states whose math preparation programs were rated as “weak.” Only one state got a “strong” rating.
    Source: National Council on Teacher Quality, 2025 State of the States report

    Failing grades

    The council graded every teacher prep program nationwide from A to F, based on how many instructional hours they required prospective teachers to take in major content areas of math and in instructional methods and strategies.

    Three out of four California programs got an F, with some programs — California State University, Sacramento, and California State University, Monterey Bay — requiring no instructional hours for algebraic thinking, geometry, and probability, and many offering one-quarter of the 135 instructional hours needed for an A.

    But there was a dichotomy: All the Fs were given to one-year graduate school programs offering a multi-subject credential to teach elementary school, historically the way most new teachers in California get their teaching credential.

    On the other hand, many of the colleges and universities offering a teaching credential and a bachelor’s degree through an Integrated Undergraduate Teacher Credentialing Program got an A, because they included enough time to go into math instruction and content in more depth. For example, California State University, Long Beach’s 226 instructional hours, apportioned through all of the content areas and methods courses, earned an A-plus.

     The California State University rejects the recent grading from the National Council on Teacher Quality about our high-quality teacher training programs

    California State University

    Most of the universities that offer both undergraduate and graduate programs — California State University, Bakersfield; San Jose State University; California State University, Chico; California State University, Northridge, to name a few — had the same split: A for their undergraduate programs, F for their graduate credentialing programs.

    Most California teacher preparation programs have received bad grades in the dozen years that the council has issued evaluations. The state’s higher education institutions, in turn, have defended their programs and denounced the council for basing the quality of a program on analyses of program websites and syllabi.

    California State University, whose campuses train the majority of teachers, and the California Commission on Teacher Credentialing, which accredits and oversees teacher prep programs, issued similar denunciations last week.

     “The California State University rejects the recent grading from the National Council on Teacher Quality about our high-quality teacher training programs,” the CSU wrote in a statement. The council “relies on a narrow and flawed methodology, heavily dependent on document reviews, rather than on dialogue with program faculty, students and employers or a systematic review of meaningful program outcomes.”  

    The credentialing commission, in a more diplomatic response, agreed. The report “reflects a methodology that differs from California’s approach to educator preparation,” it said. “While informative, it does not fully capture the structure of California’s clinically rich, performance-based system.” 

    Heather Peske, president of the National Council on Teacher Quality for the past three years, dismissed the criticism as “a really weak critique.”

    “You can look at a syllabus and see what’s being taught in that class much in the same way that if you go to a restaurant and look at the menu to see what’s being served,” she said. “Our reviews are certainly a very solid starting place to know to what extent teacher preparation programs are well preparing future teachers to be effective in teaching.”

    It’s not just a problem in California.

    “When we compare the mathematics instructional hours between the undergrad and the graduate programs, often on the same campus, we saw on average that undergrads get 133 hours compared to just 52 hours at the graduate level. In both cases, it is not meeting the recommended and research-based 150 hours,” Peske said. 

    Part of the problem is that graduate programs usually don’t have enough time to instill future teachers with the content knowledge that they need.

    Heather Peske

    Whether or not examining website data is a good methodology, the disparities in hours devoted to math preparation between undergraduate and graduate programs raise an important issue. 

    True jacks of all trades, elementary teachers must become proficient in many content areas — social studies, English language arts, English language development for English learners, and science, as well as math. Add to that proficiency in emerging technologies, classroom management, skills for teaching students with disabilities, and student mental health: How can they adequately cover math, especially?

    “Part of the problem is that graduate programs usually don’t have enough time to instill future teachers with the content knowledge that they need,” Peske said. “California programs have to reckon with this idea that they’re sending a bunch of teachers into classrooms who have not demonstrated that they are ready to teach kids math.”

    Brown said, “There’s no way that in a one-year credential program that they’re going to get the math that they need to be able to teach the content that they’re responsible for teaching.”

    That was Anthony Caston’s experience. Before starting his career as a sixth-grade teacher at Foulks Ranch Elementary School in Elk Grove three years ago, Caston took courses for his credential in graduate programs at Sacramento State and the University of the Pacific. There wasn’t enough time to learn all he needed to teach the subject, he said. A few classes were useful, but didn’t get much beyond the third- or fourth-grade curriculum, he said.

    “I had to take myself back to school, reteach myself everything, and then come up with some teaching strategies,” Caston said. 

    Fortunately for him, veteran teachers at his school helped him learn more about Common Core math and how to teach it.

    The math content Brown refers to goes beyond knowing how to invert fractions or calculate the area of a triangle; it involves a conceptual understanding of essential math topics, Peske said. Only a deeper conceptual grasp will enable teachers to diagnose and explain students’ errors and misunderstandings, Peske said, and to overcome the math phobia that surveys show many teachers have.

    Ma Bernadette Salgarino, the president of the California Mathematics Council and a math trainer in the Santa Clara County Office of Education, acknowledges that many math teachers have not been taught the concepts behind the progression of the state’s math standards. “It is not clear to them,” she said. “They’re still teaching to a regurgitation of procedures, copy and paste. These are the steps, and this is what you will do.”

    Although a longtime critic of the council, Linda Darling-Hammond, who chaired California’s credentialing commission before becoming the current president of the State Board of Education, acknowledges that the report raises a legitimate issue.

    “Time is an important question,” she said. “It is true that having more time well spent — the ‘well spent’ matters — could make a difference for lots of people in learning lots of subjects, including math.”

    Darling-Hammond faults the study, however, for not factoring in California’s broader approach to teacher preparation, including requiring that teaching candidates pass a performance assessment in math and underwriting teacher residency programs, in which teachers work side by side with an effective teacher for a full year while taking courses in a graduate program.

    “You could end up becoming a pretty spectacular math teacher in a shorter amount of time than if you’re just studying things in an undergraduate program disconnected from student teaching,” she said.

    Weak state policies

    The report also grades every state’s policies on math instruction, from preparing teachers to coaching them after they’re in the classroom. California and two dozen states are rated “weak,” ahead of seven “unacceptable” states (Montana, Arizona, Nebraska, Missouri, Alaska, Vermont and Maine) while behind 17 “moderate” states, including Texas and Florida, and a sole “strong” state, Alabama.

    The council bases the rating on the implementation of five policy “levers” to ensure “rigorous standards-aligned math instruction.” However, California’s actions are more nuanced than perhaps its “unacceptable” ratings on three and “strong” ratings on two would indicate.

    For example, the council dinged the state for not requiring that all teachers in a prep program pass a math licensure test. California does require elementary credential candidates to pass the California Subject Examinations for Teachers, or CSET, a basic skills test, before they can teach students. But the math portion is combined with science, and students can avoid the test by supplying proof they have taken undergraduate math courses.

    At the same time, many superintendents and math teachers may be doing a double-take for a “strong” rating for providing professional learning and ongoing support for teachers to sustain effective math instruction.

    Going back to the adoption of the Common Core, the state has not funded statewide teacher training in math standards. In the past five years, the state has spent $500 million to train literacy coaches in the state’s poorest schools, but nothing of that magnitude for math coaches.

    The Legislature approved $20 million for the California Mathematics Project for training in the new math framework, which was passed in 2023, and $50 million in 2022-23 for instruction in grades fourth to 12th in science, math and computer science training to train coaches and teacher leaders — amounts that would be impressive for smaller states, but not to fund training most math teachers in California. (You can find a listing of organizations offering training and resources on the math framework here.)

    In keeping with local control, Gov. Gavin Newsom has appropriated more than $10 billion in education block grants, including the Student Support and Professional Development Discretionary Block Grant, and the Learning Recovery Emergency Block Grant, but those are discretionary; districts have wide latitude to spend money however they want on any subject.

    Tucked into a section on Literacy Instruction in Newsom’s May budget revision (see Page 19) is the mention that a $545 million grant for materials instruction will include a new opportunity to support math coaches, too. The release of the final state budget for 2025-26 later this month will reveal whether that money survives.

    Brown calls for hiring more math specialists for schools and for three-week summer intensive math leadership institutes like the one he attended in 1994. It hasn’t been held since the money ran dry in the early 2000s. 

    EdSource reporter Diana Lambert contributed to this article.





    Source link

  • Hanford program supports teen parents while they finish high school

    Hanford program supports teen parents while they finish high school


    File photo of a student in the HOPE (Helping Our Parenting Students Excel) program. At varying levels, HOPE is a part of nearly 50 Learn4Life centers in California. Some schools only provide donations for baby supplies and access to support groups while larger schools have separate classrooms for its HOPE students, including the Hanford campus.

    Photo courtesy of Learn4Life

    Pregnant in high school, 14-year-old first-year high school student Giselle Meza said she feared she’d be judged by her peers. She was one of only two pregnant teens at her school and felt isolated. She missed a lot of classes, falling behind. 

    Statistically, Meza has about a 50% chance of dropping out of school altogether. She hasn’t; instead, she withdrew from Hanford High to participate in Helping Our Parenting Students Excel at Kings Valley Academy, a Learn4Life campus — a network of dozens of public charter high schools across the state and nation. 

    The HOPE program and Learn4Life structure empowered her to walk onto the campus without feeling alone. The program provided her with peer support from other pregnant and teen parents, a personalized learning plan, and the ability to bring her daughter to school. 

    In a designated HOPE room at Kings Valley Academy, shelves stocked with children’s books line the walls. Educational toys, playpens and swings cover the floor. 

    The room is a home away from home, where Meza could nurse, tend to or play with her daughter, Desirae, while continuing her high school education and gaining skills to better herself. 

    Teen parents have thrived in that environment, including Nevaeh D. who earned a full scholarship to UCLA after graduating from Learn4Life. “While I did my lessons, she was sleeping or playing alongside me,” Nevaeh said in an April media release announcing her graduation from Learn4Life. For student privacy, the school did not disclose Nevaeh’s last name.

    “So many of them think they’re the only ones in this position,” HOPE founder Staci Roth said. HOPE, however, creates an environment where pregnant and parenting teens feel seen, safe and supported, Roth told EdSource. 

    After more than a year in the program, Meza, now 16, no longer feels isolated, and is comforted by “being surrounded by people going through the same thing.” 

    “We take away the shame and the stigma,” said Christianna Percell, assistant principal at Kings Valley Academy. 

    How HOPE started 

    Seven years ago in 2016, while working at Learn4Life Panorama City in Los Angeles, Roth noticed that pregnant and teen parents struggled to attend class. She started a group with teen moms to learn what obstacles were preventing them from coming to and staying in school. 

    Schools needed to do more to support them, she said. She designated one classroom for the group of teen parents and brought in swings and bouncers, diapers and wipes. 

    “Just made it their safe space,” she said. 

    By 2018, HOPE had grown from eight to 63 students in the Learn4Life schools, as word spread that parenting students could bring their kids to campus. 

    At varying levels, HOPE is now a part of 48 Learn4Life centers in California. Some schools only provide baby supplies and access to support groups, while larger schools have separate classrooms for its HOPE students, which, to Roth, has been the best way to achieve the organization’s goal of creating a safe space for parenting students to feel supported. 

    Learn4Life’s Hanford location adopted the program three years ago with about a dozen parenting teens. Today, the program serves almost 60 teen parents, said Lindsey Hoskins, the supervising teacher who oversees the HOPE program in Hanford. 

    “I was a teen parent,” Hoskins said. “There was no place I could take my baby.” She said she remembers having the choice of dropping off her child while she was at school or staying home to nurse the baby.

    As a result of HOPE, Hoskins said student parents aren’t dropping out like they were before the program’s implementation. 

    Being supported 

    The HOPE program allows students with children to bring their kids to school, so they can work toward a high school diploma at their own pace while receiving mentorship, supplies and peer support. Students have access to essentials such as diapers, car seats, strollers, cribs, clothes and toys, so the teens don’t feel pressured to work as much or to spend their earnings on baby supplies.

    Instead, the student parents can focus on their education and their children, Roth said. 

    The program provides resources by connecting the teens to community partners, providing transportation when needed or simply offering encouragement. 

    “We may be providing diapers and formula now while they’re at school,” Roth said, “but at the same time, connecting them to where they can get that in the future if they need it.” 

    The peer support ensures the parenting teens don’t feel alone and allows them to learn from each other, Roth said. 

    In the HOPE room, parenting teens often step in and help with a crying baby that has colic, Roth said. Or during a support group meeting, they’ll bounce ideas off of one another to treat a rash. “They’re their best teachers to each other.” 

    Teen parent Nevaeh earned a scholarship to UCLA after graduating from Learn4Life, which allowed her to continue her studies while bringing her daughter to the Hanford campus.
    Photo courtesy of Learn4Life

    Students also learn life skills, such as financial planning, lessons about child development, health and nutrition, as well as job readiness and career skills.

    Over time, HOPE programs have added elective classes to teach parenting skills; Roth said students can learn to be better parents while gaining needed credits to graduate.

    Created based on student input, skills classes range from preparing for childbirth and breastfeeding to building healthy relationships and co-parenting. Hoskins said students can pick a topic that’s specific to their life or situation. Some of Hoskins’ students have completed classes for potty training and teething — which has allowed them to gain confidence and address the challenges they currently face as a parents. 

    “They feel so empowered to take care of their little ones,” Roth said.

    According to a 2010 study of women in their early 20s, 53% of women who became moms as teenagers graduated with a high school diploma, in contrast to 90% of women who did not become teen parents. 

    Such statistics, Roth said, were the driving force behind HOPE’s goals: teaching teens how to parent and to support their family while encouraging and equipping them to go to college or find a career after high school. 

    Students supported by the HOPE program graduate at a 6% higher rate, according to Learn4Life and HOPE statistics. 

    Addressing the whole child

    Several parenting students said they joined HOPE because they no longer felt comfortable at their traditional schools after becoming pregnant, the Learn4Life staff said. 

    “We’ve heard the stories from our students (about) how they felt at their school when they found out they were pregnant,” Roth said. 

    To break that cycle, HOPE staff builds supportive relationships, Roth said. 

    “We say we’re going to be here, and we are here,” she said. “We say we’re going to support them, and we do support them. It’s life-changing for them to have someone who asks about their day (and) to call your teacher in emergencies.” 

    HOPE students can be teen mothers or fathers as well as students who help care for their siblings. Kristen Cooper, 17, nearing the completion of her sophomore year, brings her one-year-old brother to the program while her parents work. She said she gained trusting relationships with adults because of the program. 

    The HOPE and the Learn4Life school model allows staff to build lasting, meaningful relationships with students by addressing all their needs. 

    The school’s model focuses on one-on-one instruction, flexible scheduling and personalized learning, said Ann Abajian, a spokesperson for Learn4Life. Students, including those in HOPE, have the option to work virtually or spend minimal hours at school. 

    A “team of teachers” manages students’ action plans and goals as they get “layers of support” through tutoring; one-on-one, small group and traditional class instruction; three school counselors and an onsite therapist; resiliency programs, such as yoga, meditation and classes that teach organizational skills and coping mechanisms; and an alumni support group. 

    That support helps students navigate their challenges, including not being able to attend a traditional school because they’re dealing with social-emotional trauma, working every day, helping care for a sibling or raising a child. 

    Staff members are trained to be trauma-resilient education professionals who provide tools to build the resilience to face their past, present and future, said Roth, who is also the school’s coordinator of trauma-resilient education. 

    Students who take part in the HOPE program, Roth said, come to the Hanford campus for one-on-one instruction with their teachers. The difference for HOPE students is the designated space to bring their children. 

    Meza, the student who joined HOPE to avoid judgment at her traditional school, spends a lot of time on campus because she feels more comfortable there than in her own home, she said. There’s more room for her one-year-old daughter to play, and she gets the help she needs from staff. 

    “I’ve been doing better than ever, honestly,” Meza said about now being nearly finished with her first year of high school. 

    HOPE is ‘different’ from other youth parenting programs

    Schools in California have operated youth parenting programs for decades. Currently, programs are under the umbrella of Cal-Learn, a state program designed to encourage pregnant and parenting teens to graduate from high school or gain the equivalent, become independent and form healthy families. 

    Sixty percent of teenage parents who are currently receiving welfare will depend on government aid for 10 or more years, according to research noted in the legislation that established Cal-Learn to address the “unique educational, vocational, training, health, and other social service needs” of teen parents. 

    The Youth Parent Program in Clovis Unified, for example, serves parenting teens who are trying to graduate. 

    With a 91% graduation rate, the parenting program supports students on their journey to finishing high school and helps them gain basic parenting skills, district spokesperson Kelly Avants said. 

    The program is meant to “come alongside” students who are teen parents, ensuring they have access to transportation, nursing, counseling, academic support, encouragement to “stay in school, pass their classes and ultimately graduate,” and the skills to “parent well,” Avants said.

    Through the program, teen parents can learn areas such as basic infant CPR, lessons on childhood development and ways to be engaged parents.

    But HOPE is different, Hoskins said, because it’s on Learn4Life campuses, where educators can give students what they need with specific programming, such as personalized learning and the elective classes picked by students.

    “We meet them where they are,” Hoskins said. 

    ‘Impacting generations’

    The percentage of teen parents who do not finish school contributes to high incidences of their own children not graduating.

    The federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention found that the children of teenage mothers are more likely to drop out of high school, give birth as a teenager and face unemployment as a young adult, among other findings.

    Generational impact on kids

    A child who comes to campus sees their parent studying — something HOPE staff believe will foster a child’s love for school and can break the cycle of dropping out.

    Mayra Hernandez, 18, said her 2-year-old son Sebastian loves his preschool and isn’t shy like some of the other kids because he attended HOPE with his mom for the first two years of his life. She said Sebastian eagerly plays with and communicates with his peers.

    Parenting teens, Hoskins said, are “bringing their child who is exposed to books (and) exposed to mom reading,” Hoskins said. “They’re exposed to literature, structure, education, other peers and social behavior and norms.”

    “(Teen pregnancy) has such a generational impact,” Roth said. “This population has its own obstacles and trauma that go along with (being a teen parent).”

    Acknowledging those “high statistics,” Roth and Hoskins said the aspects of the HOPE program — bringing kids to campus, graduating from high school, gaining life and parenting skills and learning about careers — are “impacting generations.” 

    “I would be struggling still,” 18-year-old Mayra Hernandez said in hindsight. Her mom, also a teenage mother, didn’t graduate from high school. Hernandez, considered an 11th grader, said she is better able to manage her time as a mother and student because of HOPE’s and Learn4Life’s model. She is dual enrolled in high school and the West Hills Community College District and works two jobs to pay her bills. 

    She considers herself on track to graduate and pursue a career. Hernandez gained nearly 60 credits in just a month at Learn4Life,  has completed a semester of college through dual enrollment and plans to either become a traveling nurse, ultrasound technician or a medical professional in the Navy. 

    Hernandez said it will be “inspiring” for her son to see her graduate.

    Meza said she once viewed the military as her only option after graduation, but now after high school, her goal is to become an ultrasound technician — all because HOPE expanded what she viewed as her choices. 

    “A lot of our students will tell you, ‘I would not graduate high school if it wasn’t for Learn4Life and the HOPE program,’” Hoskins said. “Things that are deemed not possible are happening.”





    Source link

  • California poorly trains and supports its math teachers, report concludes 

    California poorly trains and supports its math teachers, report concludes 


    Teacher apprentice Ja’net Williams helps with a math lesson in a first grade class at Delta Elementary Charter School in Clarksburg, near Sacramento.

    Credit: Diana Lambert / EdSource

    Top Takeaways
    • California leaders dismiss the criticism and methodology of the rankings.
    • And yet, graduate credentialing programs cram a lot in a year. 
    • Many teachers may struggle with the demands of California’s new math framework.

    In its “State of the States” report on math instruction published last week, the National Council on Teacher Quality sharply criticized California and many of its teacher certification programs for ineffectively preparing new elementary teachers to teach math and for failing to support and guide them once they reach the classroom.  

    “Far too many elementary teacher prep programs fail to dedicate enough instructional time to building aspiring teachers’ math knowledge — leaving teachers unprepared and students underserved,” the council said in its evaluation of California’s 87 programs that prepare elementary school teachers. “The analysis shows California programs perform among the lowest in the country.”

    The report’s call for more teacher math training and ongoing support coincides with the state’s adoption this summer of materials and textbooks for a new math framework that math professionals universally agree will be a heavy lift for incoming and veteran teachers to master. It will challenge elementary teachers with a poor grasp of the underpinnings behind the math they’ll be teaching. 

    Kyndall Brown, executive director of the California Mathematics Project based at UCLA, agrees. “It’s not just about knowing the content, it’s about helping students learn the content, which are two completely different things,” he said.

    And that raises a question: Does a one-year-plus-summer graduate program, which most prospective teachers take, cram too much in a short time to realistically meet the needs to teach elementary school math?

    California joined two dozen states whose math preparation programs were rated as “weak.” Only one state got a “strong” rating.
    Source: National Council on Teacher Quality, 2025 State of the States report

    Failing grades

    The council graded every teacher prep program nationwide from A to F, based on how many instructional hours they required prospective teachers to take in major content areas of math and in instructional methods and strategies.

    Three out of four California programs got an F, with some programs — California State University, Sacramento, and California State University, Monterey Bay — requiring no instructional hours for algebraic thinking, geometry, and probability, and many offering one-quarter of the 135 instructional hours needed for an A.

    But there was a dichotomy: All the Fs were given to one-year graduate school programs offering a multi-subject credential to teach elementary school, historically the way most new teachers in California get their teaching credential.

    On the other hand, many of the colleges and universities offering a teaching credential and a bachelor’s degree through an Integrated Undergraduate Teacher Credentialing Program got an A, because they included enough time to go into math instruction and content in more depth. For example, California State University, Long Beach’s 226 instructional hours, apportioned through all of the content areas and methods courses, earned an A-plus.

     The California State University rejects the recent grading from the National Council on Teacher Quality about our high-quality teacher training programs

    California State University

    Most of the universities that offer both undergraduate and graduate programs — California State University, Bakersfield; San Jose State University; California State University, Chico; California State University, Northridge, to name a few — had the same split: A for their undergraduate programs, F for their graduate credentialing programs.

    Most California teacher preparation programs have received bad grades in the dozen years that the council has issued evaluations. The state’s higher education institutions, in turn, have defended their programs and denounced the council for basing the quality of a program on analyses of program websites and syllabi.

    California State University, whose campuses train the majority of teachers, and the California Commission on Teacher Credentialing, which accredits and oversees teacher prep programs, issued similar denunciations last week.

     “The California State University rejects the recent grading from the National Council on Teacher Quality about our high-quality teacher training programs,” the CSU wrote in a statement. The council “relies on a narrow and flawed methodology, heavily dependent on document reviews, rather than on dialogue with program faculty, students and employers or a systematic review of meaningful program outcomes.”  

    The credentialing commission, in a more diplomatic response, agreed. The report “reflects a methodology that differs from California’s approach to educator preparation,” it said. “While informative, it does not fully capture the structure of California’s clinically rich, performance-based system.” 

    Heather Peske, president of the National Council on Teacher Quality for the past three years, dismissed the criticism as “a really weak critique.”

    “You can look at a syllabus and see what’s being taught in that class much in the same way that if you go to a restaurant and look at the menu to see what’s being served,” she said. “Our reviews are certainly a very solid starting place to know to what extent teacher preparation programs are well preparing future teachers to be effective in teaching.”

    It’s not just a problem in California.

    “When we compare the mathematics instructional hours between the undergrad and the graduate programs, often on the same campus, we saw on average that undergrads get 133 hours compared to just 52 hours at the graduate level. In both cases, it is not meeting the recommended and research-based 150 hours,” Peske said. 

    Part of the problem is that graduate programs usually don’t have enough time to instill future teachers with the content knowledge that they need.

    Heather Peske

    Whether or not examining website data is a good methodology, the disparities in hours devoted to math preparation between undergraduate and graduate programs raise an important issue. 

    True jacks of all trades, elementary teachers must become proficient in many content areas — social studies, English language arts, English language development for English learners, and science, as well as math. Add to that proficiency in emerging technologies, classroom management, skills for teaching students with disabilities, and student mental health: How can they adequately cover math, especially?

    “Part of the problem is that graduate programs usually don’t have enough time to instill future teachers with the content knowledge that they need,” Peske said. “California programs have to reckon with this idea that they’re sending a bunch of teachers into classrooms who have not demonstrated that they are ready to teach kids math.”

    Brown said, “There’s no way that in a one-year credential program that they’re going to get the math that they need to be able to teach the content that they’re responsible for teaching.”

    That was Anthony Caston’s experience. Before starting his career as a sixth-grade teacher at Foulks Ranch Elementary School in Elk Grove three years ago, Caston took courses for his credential in graduate programs at Sacramento State and the University of the Pacific. There wasn’t enough time to learn all he needed to teach the subject, he said. A few classes were useful, but didn’t get much beyond the third- or fourth-grade curriculum, he said.

    “I had to take myself back to school, reteach myself everything, and then come up with some teaching strategies,” Caston said. 

    Fortunately for him, veteran teachers at his school helped him learn more about Common Core math and how to teach it.

    The math content Brown refers to goes beyond knowing how to invert fractions or calculate the area of a triangle; it involves a conceptual understanding of essential math topics, Peske said. Only a deeper conceptual grasp will enable teachers to diagnose and explain students’ errors and misunderstandings, Peske said, and to overcome the math phobia that surveys show many teachers have.

    Ma Bernadette Salgarino, the president of the California Mathematics Council and a math trainer in the Santa Clara County Office of Education, acknowledges that many math teachers have not been taught the concepts behind the progression of the state’s math standards. “It is not clear to them,” she said. “They’re still teaching to a regurgitation of procedures, copy and paste. These are the steps, and this is what you will do.”

    Although a longtime critic of the council, Linda Darling-Hammond, who chaired California’s credentialing commission before becoming the current president of the State Board of Education, acknowledges that the report raises a legitimate issue.

    “Time is an important question,” she said. “It is true that having more time well spent — the ‘well spent’ matters — could make a difference for lots of people in learning lots of subjects, including math.”

    Darling-Hammond faults the study, however, for not factoring in California’s broader approach to teacher preparation, including requiring that teaching candidates pass a performance assessment in math and underwriting teacher residency programs, in which teachers work side by side with an effective teacher for a full year while taking courses in a graduate program.

    “You could end up becoming a pretty spectacular math teacher in a shorter amount of time than if you’re just studying things in an undergraduate program disconnected from student teaching,” she said.

    Weak state policies

    The report also grades every state’s policies on math instruction, from preparing teachers to coaching them after they’re in the classroom. California and two dozen states are rated “weak,” ahead of seven “unacceptable” states (Montana, Arizona, Nebraska, Missouri, Alaska, Vermont and Maine) while behind 17 “moderate” states, including Texas and Florida, and a sole “strong” state, Alabama.

    The council bases the rating on the implementation of five policy “levers” to ensure “rigorous standards-aligned math instruction.” However, California’s actions are more nuanced than perhaps its “unacceptable” ratings on three and “strong” ratings on two would indicate.

    For example, the council dinged the state for not requiring that all teachers in a prep program pass a math licensure test. California does require elementary credential candidates to pass the California Subject Examinations for Teachers, or CSET, a basic skills test, before they can teach students. But the math portion is combined with science, and students can avoid the test by supplying proof they have taken undergraduate math courses.

    At the same time, many superintendents and math teachers may be doing a double-take for a “strong” rating for providing professional learning and ongoing support for teachers to sustain effective math instruction.

    Going back to the adoption of the Common Core, the state has not funded statewide teacher training in math standards. In the past five years, the state has spent $500 million to train literacy coaches in the state’s poorest schools, but nothing of that magnitude for math coaches.

    The Legislature approved $20 million for the California Mathematics Project for training in the new math framework, which was passed in 2023, and $50 million in 2022-23 for instruction in grades fourth to 12th in science, math and computer science training to train coaches and teacher leaders — amounts that would be impressive for smaller states, but not to fund training most math teachers in California. (You can find a listing of organizations offering training and resources on the math framework here.)

    In keeping with local control, Gov. Gavin Newsom has appropriated more than $10 billion in education block grants, including the Student Support and Professional Development Discretionary Block Grant, and the Learning Recovery Emergency Block Grant, but those are discretionary; districts have wide latitude to spend money however they want on any subject.

    Tucked into a section on Literacy Instruction in Newsom’s May budget revision (see Page 19) is the mention that a $545 million grant for materials instruction will include a new opportunity to support math coaches, too. The release of the final state budget for 2025-26 later this month will reveal whether that money survives.

    Brown calls for hiring more math specialists for schools and for three-week summer intensive math leadership institutes like the one he attended in 1994. It hasn’t been held since the money ran dry in the early 2000s. 

    EdSource reporter Diana Lambert contributed to this article.





    Source link

  • LAUSD families still struggling to access disability supports

    LAUSD families still struggling to access disability supports


    Special education has been inconsistent in California schools since the coronavirus pandemic.

    Alison Yin/EdSource

    When the Covid-19 pandemic led to school shutdowns in 2020, and students began plugging into their classes online, Naomi Burn saw her 17-year-old son’s grades soar. 

    Her son seemed more engaged, completed his assignments and was in better spirits. The virtual classes seemed to serve him better. So, when face-to-face instruction returned, Burn decided to enroll him in one of the district’s virtual academies, where he would also be able to receive the counseling outlined in his individualized education program (IEP). 

    But in October 2023, Burn received an unexpected message from her son’s psychiatric social worker, who had previously provided him with the support he needed. 

    “He was removed from my caseload at the start of the year, and due to staffing issues, none of the virtual students are receiving their IEP services,” the email read. “I hope they are able to find a solution soon, so that he may begin to access this support.” 

    Several months later, Burn received an email from the district offering a solution: a chance to make up for lost services whenever the district has adequate staffing.  Karla V. Estrada, LAUSD’s deputy superintendent of instruction, told EdSource in January that any problems with unfulfilled IEPs at Burn’s son’s school had been fixed. 

    On Jan. 9, the next day after Estrada’s statement, Burn said nothing had changed. No one had reached out to her. Her son’s educational plan and needs were still not addressed, and the family was still waiting. 

    “I understand it’s a societal issue,” Burn said. “But, at the same time, today’s counseling minutes don’t help the child with yesterday’s emotional social barriers.” 

    Burn is one of many parents in the Los Angeles Unified School District who say they have struggled to get their children adequate disability accommodations and support this past academic year. They say the district has been largely unresponsive and are concerned about possible repercussions for their children. 

    Experts warn that not providing accommodations in a timely manner could worsen students’ disability symptoms, while adding additional hurdles, including social and emotional challenges. 

    Meanwhile, the number of district students with disabilities continues to grow, and teachers have sounded alarms that as their workloads skyrocket, more student needs could go unaddressed. 

    “There’s no time like the present. Right, time only moves in one direction,” said Rebecca Gotlieb, a human developmental psychologist and educational neuroscientist at the University of California Los Angeles. “And I want every student to have all the supports they need.” 

    An old tale 

    Students with disabilities have long struggled to get the support they need in Los Angeles Unified. In April 2022, a federal investigation found that the district had provided hardly any special assistance to students with disabilities during the height of the Covid-19 pandemic. 

    When students were attending school online, LAUSD allegedly decreased services provided to students with disabilities and failed to properly track them, according to the U.S. Department of Education investigation. 

    The agency also found the district informed its staff that LAUSD was not responsible for school closures and was therefore “not responsible for providing compensatory education to students with disabilities,” according to the report. 

    Meanwhile, the investigation determined that the district “failed to develop and implement a plan adequate to remedy the instances” when students with disabilities were not provided access to a fair public education during remote learning.  

    Soon after the investigations, the district  entered an agreement with the agency, promising to address the Department of Education’s concerns. 

    “Today’s resolution will ensure that the more than 66,000 Los Angeles Unified students with disabilities will receive the equal access to education to which federal civil rights law entitles them,” Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights Catherine E. Lhamon said in a 2022 media release. 

    “I am deeply grateful for the district’s commitment now to meet the needs of its students with disabilities.”

    Estrada told EdSource that the district conducts a report at the beginning of each academic year to find out how many students aren’t receiving the services they are entitled to and need. The process also helps the district come up with solutions, including providing services retroactively once they are available, she said. 

    “There are certain students that aren’t receiving special education services or as outlined in their IEPs,” Estrada said. “Sometimes, it’s not that they’re not receiving services, but not to what has been prescribed in the IEP.” 

    Less than a year after the investigation, parents and advocates sounded alarms that the district was not following through on their promises and that children were still going without necessary supports. 

    Lourdes Lopez is one of many LAUSD parents who have had to work tirelessly to get the necessary support for their children. She has two children with disabilities who rely on speech and occupational therapy. 

    “As a parent, we’re begging for the services the child needs,” Lopez said in Spanish. “But always, they say she doesn’t need it.” 

    Her son, Dylan, was eventually able to get an IEP at his elementary school. But Lopez said she’s worried that the services Dylan is receiving are not enough to tackle the challenges his disability poses. 

    “They give him 10 minutes, and he’s in a group. They ask questions to one; they ask questions to another. It’s really sad how very little they are giving him,” Lopez said in Spanish. “Then, they return him to the classroom.”

    A growing need 

    Lopez said that LAUSD students with disabilities are only able to graduate and stay confident into adulthood if “they’ve really had everything, all the services, all the support.”

    Going Deeper

    From language barriers to jargon-filled legal language in the IEP application process, families often struggle to get accommodations for their child in the first place, according to Paul Morgan, a social and health equity endowed professor at the University at Albany, SUNY.

    Sometimes, Morgan said, schools are not proactive about informing parents about services because they can be costly to offer. And there can be instances where students don’t get an IEP because the findings of a school evaluation don’t match the conclusions of outside providers. 

    To increase the odds of getting an IEP, Morgan stressed the importance of having objective measurements that can answer these questions: 

    • What kinds of challenges is your child having?
    • Have these challenges been going on for a period of time? 
    • How are they performing in relationship to their peers?

    “I know families that are coming from two parent, two income households [where]both parents are highly educated … and they have great difficulty getting the services,” Morgan said. “I’ve had parents say they have to fight like hell to receive those services from schools.”

    Adrian Tamayo, a special education teacher at Lorena Street Elementary School, is one of the LAUSD educators who work day in and day out to support students with special needs. 

    Tamayo arrives at school at 7:30 a.m. to begin a day packed with regular teaching duties like working with students and planning lessons — as well as unique responsibilities that come with a job in special education, including district and statewide assessments that track students’ progress. 

    As a special education teacher, he also helps students secure IEPs; he administers standardized tests and carries out observations that are central to that process. This past year alone, he has conducted about 34 IEP assessments, with each taking three to four hours. 

    “It’s amazing how much time out of our own time we put in outside of the typical school day for the average educator,” Tamayo said. 

    Tamayo says he and his colleagues feel overworked and understaffed partly because the number of special education hires across the district has fallen — alongside retention, which dropped from 90% to 77% among credentialed teachers in the past three years, according to a district committee presentation.  

    Meanwhile, special educators who remain are having to support an increasing population of students with disabilities — which has  grown from 13.4% to 15.9%, despite LAUSD’s overall enrollment dropping by about 20% in the past decade.

    Estrada, the district’s deputy superintendent of instruction, added that since the pandemic, providing speech and language services has been especially difficult due to staffing constraints — but that the district has been able to contract with an outside provider to help fill the void. 

    “You have so many service providers, and IEPs are happening constantly,” Estrada said. “So, (a) new IEP requires potentially new services, and so we’re constantly adapting and making changes to caseloads.” 

    Soaring caseloads

    This year, Tamayo’s caseload began at 19 students — and increased to 27 by the end of the year. A load higher than 28, he said, would violate California’s education code. 

    He said having the support of a paraprofessional in the classroom is invaluable — as it allows him to break his class into smaller groups based on grade level. But paraprofessionals aren’t always available. 

    “I have got to mentally prepare for any unforeseen (circumstances),” Tamayo said, adding that he is “always adjusting as we go.” 

    Tamayo said he is one of the lucky ones at Lorena Street Elementary; some of the programs have far surpassed their cap of 12 students, with a single professional working with up to 20 students. 

    He also said the number of psychiatric social workers at his school — supporting students with needs, like Burn’s son — has dropped. A year ago, there was one on campus every school day, he said. 

    This year, one was available to students three days a week, he said. Next year, he anticipates, they will be available only one day each week. 

    “That doesn’t mean that children that need that support also decrease,” he said. “You’re basically being asked to do the same job with one day of service.”





    Source link