There is absolutely no magic in achieving the goal of effective schools and classrooms. Quality teachers and principals are the key ingredients to excellence for all. Strong confident leaders and teachers encourage parent participation and inspire all students to learn.
On Sept. 30, the 40th Annual Teacher Recognition Ceremony will be hosted by the Santa Clara County Office of Education at the Heritage Theater in Campbell. Thirty teachers will be recognized for excellence in the classroom. The selection criteria included commitment, personal attributes and professional growth. The actual selection process was left up to the individual districts.
Educational research clearly links student learning to practices that include:
• Teacher clarity and ability to structure content material
• Enthusiasm for the subject
• Providing specific feedback to the learner on strengths and areas of growth
• Higher order questioning
• Building meaningful relationships with students
• Involving parents in cooperative ways
• Making connections between content and real world applications of content
The schools and classrooms working the best on behalf of their students are those that take care of the social-emotional health of each student while maintaining high expectations for their academic growth. Using student achievement data to drive instructional practice is important, however, learning is all about relationships.
One area that needs far more attention than it receives in our local schools is the importance of allowing relationships between student and teacher to develop for more than one year. It is the norm in many countries, including Japan, Germany, Israel and France, to keep students with the same teacher for multiple years.
On the surface, it makes no sense to pass the student to another educator after learning all the information needed to build success in 180 days. It can require more than one school year to know the student well enough to teach to their strengths and personal areas of growth. The research strongly indicates that sustained relationships with students for two or more years increases student achievement.
Of course, it is imperative for all teachers to have strong pedagogical and personal skills or else some children would be stuck with a weak teacher for an extended period of time. The other serious concern would be for the teacher who might be stuck with a student who is a behavioral concern for more than one year. As more schools initiate this practice, administrators will have to be ready to resolve these two potential conflicts in appropriate ways.
To those 30 teachers being recognized by the Santa Clara County Office later this month: I congratulate you on your distinguished achievement. As respected leaders perhaps you can investigate the practice of keeping students longer than one year and looping with them for at least one more grade. You can ask your principal to pilot the practice and then share the results of your action research.
Interesting. Everything that you haven mentioned about keeping children in the same classroom has crossed my mind before. I also thought about the negative outcomes just as you have put them. How about if you have children in a classroom for 2-3 years? I remember when I was in elementary school I loved having a new teacher and new people in my class every year. I looked forward to that. I think that if the same student had the same teacher all through elementary there might be too much emotional attachment and boredom. I do believe at least 3 years in the same classroom would be great and beneficial to the students. But, I also think that students like a little change so they don’t get bored.
I have to agree with Tiffany’s post. As a child I did enjoy the “new beginnings” that each school year brought. New clothes, new students and a new teacher… unless I’d heard the teacher was drab. I have to back up the research though. If research indicates that it is more beneficial, educationally speaking, to have sustained relationships between students and teachers, this is most important. School is for education. It doesn’t make sense that teachers have to get to know a whole different set of kids every year. The teachers probably get to know the best way to direct the class by the end of the school year and then its on to another class.
Tiffany, Jenna, Sarah, Katie, Melissa E., Melissa F., Erika, Erin, Kimberlee, Edana, Natalie, Kayla, Cate, Kaela, Dalia, Alicia, Oksana, and of course, Joshua,
I would just like to say that I totally agree completely and 100% with everything all of you have said. I would also like to say that I hope Mr. Di Salvo makes sure you all get extra credit for your thoughtful comments. I would also just like to say that I would be very impressed if any of you actually posted a comment on a subject that was not written by Joseph di Salvo.
I would just like to say that THAT would indicate that you are pehaps not just another pre-programmed automoton being churned out by our “education system”.
What you said is very interesting and actually made me kind of laugh. (Not is bad way). I am going to post on another subject…I see you don’t have any articles yourself….so would that make you a person who knows Di Salvo?
Thanks Tiffany. As promised, I AM very impressed. Keep thinking for yourself and be skeptical of everything you hear, particularly when everybody is saying the same thing.
No, I don’t know Di Salvo but I follow his writings with great interest.
I wish you the very best of success in your teaching career.
I am inclined to recognize the comment shared by John Galt posed in order to ridicule those students writing their opinions on topics that have value in education. Although I am participating in this blog as part of a class, I desire to make it explicitly clear that I was not asked to solely agree with Joseph Di Salvo nor do I agree with him on every item that he has shared in his opinion pieces. I would not concur with any professor who pushed a political agenda on students by connecting it to strict adherence to his/her belief system for a grade. Whatever your disagreement with his writings or beliefs, you always have a forum to voice your opinion too. Just to reiterate my statement, my comments are not the result of strong arm tactics by anyone. They constitute my honest feelings on the subjects expounded on this website. If you had read my statements, you would have realized that disagreement with the columnist had surfaced on various occasions already. One more thing, I would write on more topics, if I were not busy with full-time university study and a full-time job. I am not complaining; I just feel that I can make better use of my time than becoming a blogosphere addict.
With that being said, I have no problem with maintaining classroom integrity for multiple years in order to offer students an affective environment, consistency, and relationship building opportunity. I will present two examples to illustrate my point. Having worked in various job settings, I have experienced the feeling of being thrust into a new situation with strangers in a work structure foreign to me. This was and is not necessarily a negative occurrence, but the first few months in the position and the environment were perhaps not the most productive as I slowly developed my role in relation with my coworkers and boss. My second example stems from my experience in a special education classroom in our California public schools. When I arrived in this specific site, many of the students in the program had also recently arrived in this particular classroom situation. As the children attempted to acclimate themselves to the new environment and each other, it become obvious that it was slow and somewhat difficult. This should not be surprising considering the students’ situation and their backgrounds being from an underprivileged area of San Jose. When the next academic year rolled around, our staff was pleasantly surprised to encounter many of the same students from the previous year. These children surpassed our expectations in behavioral areas. They understood our point system and schedule. They spent little time developing a classroom hierarchy due to the fact that they had already cultivated relationships during their first year in this specific program. Finally, they knew us, the teachers, and our personal styles and values. Could more time with a teacher and classmates prove beneficial? It most certainly could.
I completely agree with you Joseph. In the classroom environment, I feel that a teacher’s relationship with their students makes all the difference in their learning. If more time were allowed, student-teacher relationships would likely become more meaningful and benefit both parties. It would benefit educators to have more time to get to know their students well so that they are more able to educate them on their own individual level. As a result, the learning environment will change for the better and it will enable students to feel that they are safe, cared about, and respected. From my own experience, knowing how much a teacher cares and respects me has helped me believe in myself and reach my potential in many different subjects. It is with those relationships that further facilitate and motivate learning.
As much as I agree that the relationship between a student and teacher is very important, what concerns me is having to be able to teach the same students for than a year would mean that I, as a teacher, would have to know A LOT of material. Which would also entail that I know A LOT of standards. If I were teaching only one subject that would be easier, but in elementary school we teach everything, and I would worry about learning all the material for 3rd, 4th, and 5th grade in every subject and the standards that go with them.
Along the same lines, I think it can be good for a students to get a change of scenery. At our jobs our bosses change, our fellow employees change, and we move around as well. Change is something we have to get used to. It is a good character builder to be building new relationships often and learning to work with different types of people.
The idea of keeping students with the same teacher for more than one year has its flaws, as many of you stated. Having to know more than one grade levels worth of curriculum could prove difficult for some teachers. However, it may also be beneficial for many students. When students enter a teacher’s classroom for the first time, the teacher has to take time to get to know the students (duh), but they are also learning each students particular quirks, learning styles, behaviors. The teacher is simultaneously developing instructional strategies and methods to teach those students. Sometimes it can take several moths to find the “groove” of teaching certain students. For some students, they won’t pick up the pace towards the end of the year, and then they have to go straight to a new classroom and start all over.
I have been teaching swim lessons (I know swimming lessons is a bit different, but I still think the point is valid) for almost 10 years, (while studying to become an elementary school teacher) and one of the biggest complaints I get consistently from parents is that they have to switch to a new teacher every 14 weeks. They notice that their is a major “slowing-up” point when their child goes to a new teacher. First off, their child has to get to know a new teacher. This often creates a lot of anxiety for the little ones and some of the older students just never click with the teacher and all learning ceases. The parents say to me “I feel like we start all over every time we get a new teacher.”
It would be interesting if their could be a program where, after some form of assessment, students might be able to stay with the same teacher for the next year. I know this exists in some forms, but I am curious to what research may be done and what programs may be designed to allow some students to stay with the same teacher (of course not all teachers would participate in such a program) for more than one grade year. Obviously some students may want to change, and for some that change be more beneficial, but it is not that way for all students. Just a thought. Thanks Professor DiSalvo for the article.
Up until recently, I had never heard of keeping students for more than one year with the same teacher. I guess that shows how uncommon that is in this area. I am not really sure how to feel about it and I think I would need to learn more about the process in order to form a better opinion. But I do agree with some of the previous comments about wanting a fresh start every year. Also, I agree that all of those bullet points mentioned are essential to becoming a great teacher.
A school that I worked at in Santa Clara County was talking about looping this school year. This would only take place with one class that was a 1/2 combo last year. This teacher would keep her first graders (now second graders) and get a new group of first graders. In this situation I feel this was not such a good idea. Yes those students who already had her formed relationships but won’t that harm those new students entering the classroom? To form a bond with half a class and be completely unfamiliar with the other half just does not seem like the ideal situation.
“Looping” teachers, the practice of keeping a group of students together with the same teacher, seems like a benefit to all involved regardless of the difficulties. Difficult students or “weak” teachers have to cope with the circumstances in school weather they are “looping” or not, so why not make it a regular practice. It seems like the benefit of deepening the teacher-student relationship is worth any of the pitfalls along the way, which must be overcome anyways.
One of my most favorite teachers ever was my 2nd-3rd grade teacher. He had animals in the class, we went on numerous field trips, and classwork never seemed like drudgery. I learned cursive in third grade there (this was in 1971 in Berkeley) and came back when I was in fourth grade to help the students in this teacher’s class because I liked him so much.
If a relationship is not working and has to be ended, that can be done on an individual, case-by-case basis. That is what happens anyways if a student-teacher relationship is not working, right?
A major concern I have right now is for my daughter, who is in first grade, and is significantly higher-level than the curriculum (sp?). Not only that, first through third grades in her district now have 30 (thirty) students per class. How is a teacher, even an excellent, well trained teacher, going to address her needs? Or, for that matter, how is that teacher going to address most of the student’s needs? No matter how “strong” a teacher is, it looks like all public school students are having their educations compromised. I’m actively pursuing getting my daughter into second grade because her academic skills are good enough, but there is still that 30-student classroom.
We are not a rich family and cannot afford private school. I’m really concerned that no matter how good a teacher’s practices are, our public schools are seriously compromised. I can only hope to do the best within my power to get my daughter what she needs within our family’s means.
I have never experienced having a teacher more than one year. I enjoyed the fresh start of a new year, which included a new teacher. I think that having a new teacher allows students to have somewhat of a clean slate and also requires them to adjust different styles and personalities, a useful real-world skill. However, for some students, having the same teacher might create comfort in the classroom, leading to learning and higher classroom participation. I’m not sure if all students would benefit from staying with a teacher say, throughout elementary school. But continuity for a few years might be worth trying.
As it has been pointed out, there are complications to consider, but for the most part I agree that at least two years with a student would do a lot of good provided that progress is being made and that there is a strong teacher-student relationship. Furthermore, along the same train of thought, a kind of conferencing between old and new teacher should always take place so that there is a transfer of knowledge about a student’s progress, personality, learning style, areas of weakness and strength, etc.
Looping is an excellent idea for all parties included. Looping is all about allowing relationships between students and teaches to deepen. Teachers are great role models for children, and if they were allowed to have the same children for more then one year they would be able to make a deeper impact. Children would have the time to get to know their teachers and open up to them, allowing the teachers to get insight into students personal lives and how their lives are impacting their learning. Teachers will be able to find the teaching practices that work best for their students and then develop them, so that their class excels. Teachers will not have to learn an entire new classes names and abilities each year, but can stick with one class and cater to that class, by using what they have learned through out the school year. Teachers know what they have taught and how they taught that subject, so there would be no question as to whether something was taught, and I think it would allow more flexibility in the standards. The teacher/student relationship is so important and looping would be a way to strengthen that relationship.
I currently work in a 4th/5th grade combo classroom, so it is my second year working with my fifth grad students. I do see a great difference in how my fifth grade students act, perform, and their relationship with me is completely different than with my fourth graders. Obviously, there are many other contributing factors as to why some students are acting differently than others, but I’ve noticed a great change in myself. I know how to react to my class, how to approach their various learning styles, and I feel that our relationships have improved. It’s amazing to see the academic and emotional growth within each student. I highly recommend this style of education and can see that there are more pros than cons.
I remain unconvinced by looping. I am willing to believe that there is good research that shows that students make greater academic gains by being with the same teacher for more than one year. However, I see a few issues. First, in a looping situation there is either a split level grade class (eg: 15 1st graders and 15 2nd graders) or the teacher is constantly shuttling from one grade to another and back again. Both seem less than ideal. In a mixed grade classroom the younger students could benefit from interacting with the older students (Vygotsky and all that) and the older students could benefit from a year of experience with a given teacher and his/her routine. However, I am under the impression that the full contingent of standards can be difficult to cover in a single year, so covering two sets of standards in one classroom seems like an insurmountable task. The teacher might be able to make up for his/her own gaps from the previous year in the second year but it seems like a slippery slope. I would be interested to see the exact nature of the looped classrooms studied to see if there are other changes that could be made to the school environment to achieve the same results.
On a personal note, I agree with several of the above comments that I liked changing teachers every year. Over the course of a year I got to know my classmates so that we were all friendly and then got sick of many of them in just time for summer vacation. For a child, 2 years is a lifetime. I think I would have felt trapped and bored with the same teacher for 2 years. Based on my negative gut instinct and the fact that I have seen split classrooms come and go (rather than multiply) I would be interested to read more about successful looping here or in other countries before I made up my mind completely.
My fifth grade year, I had a young, energetic, devoted teacher. She was one of those rare teachers with whom I was reluctant to part ways with when summer came. The following year, classes were rearranged in the first few weeks of school, and my 5th grade teacher actually took on a 5/6 combo, which I was moved into. I entered her class knowing her routines, her expectations, and her personality. I also entered with a reassuring feeling of comfort. That being said, were I to have been looped with my curmudgeon of a 4th grade teacher, I would not have been a happy camper. This fall I began my second year teaching and have felt nostalgic on more than one occasion in the past 5 weeks for my class from last year, not because they were better kids, but because of that feeling of comfort, familiarity, and understanding that only comes with time.
As in many things in life there are pros and cons to everything, and so also in this matter of if it is the right thing to keep a group of students for more than one year. One of the pros being that the teacher will get to know the students very well and will be able to build a strong and lasting relationship with the students and the parents.
The cons being that the teachers would have to be knowledgeable in the content of many grades. It is not impossible, but I think that teaching only one grade would mean improving on the mistakes that you’ve made the year before.
Another con and the one that I think is very important is that teachers may have biases towards certain students. We’re all human and because of personality differences we like some students more than others. If students are placed with teachers that stay with the same group for multiple years parents should have the option of placing the child in another group if they feel that the teacher are biased towards their child.
Looping seems to make sense the same reason going to the same doctor or dentist makes sense. That individual knows about you and your history. While I’m not suggesting that students stay with their teacher forever, I do believe that keeping a student and teacher together for 2-3 years surely benefits both. I agree with Matthew that there must be some alternative for unhappy students, parents, and teachers to end the relationship if it is not proving beneficial. The only teacher I had for two years was in high school and it was miserable. I struggled despite being an above average student and barely passed both classes. I would have liked to have the option to move to another class but that wasn’t possible. Perhaps a petition could be filed by the unhappy party and the decision would ultimately be made by the principal of the school.
Agreeing with the previously noted pros and cons, I would add that these special relationships we are talking about can be created under the larger umbrella of a school’s culture. I have spent time observing a small school Gardner-Bullis (not the charter), that has 14 teachers who work really well together. They discuss children with difficulyies, share strategies, and keep an eye out for ALL of the students, not just their own. With strong communication, the educators seem to know each and every child. This awareness would be difficult to recreate in a large school, but really helps kids feel they are special and part of a school community. I think schools who can create this sort of culture, lessens the need for students to “follow” and educator through the grades. With lots of participation, communication and educational advocacy, the schools can achieve many of the beneficial effects that they are seeking.
Teaching is strongly connected to a teacher’s ability to form relationships with their students. Looping is an excellent way to allow teacher’s to build a relationship with each student in their classroom. The best element that comes out of a strong teacher-student relationship is that the teacher grows to understand how the student learns best. Not only does the teacher learn how to work with students best but the students themselves form a tight knit community where students understand how to work with each other. As DiSalvo points out it is a disservice if a student gets a weaker teacher. There will always be some variance in teachers abilities but I do believe if we work on creating more effective training for our teacher looping would be the next logical step. As Talita said there should always be an option to switch teachers if a valid reason can be stated and supported.
Since enrolling in the credential program at San Jose State, time and time again the idea of keeping students with the same teachers for ‘X’ amount of years surfaces. I would love to say that everything about the idea is amazing yet I keep flashing back to my fourth grade teacher. I couldn’t imagine being stuck with that woman for any time longer than the one year I had with her. She acted as though she had no desire to get to know her students or really help the students who needed it the most. If all teachers had the ‘desire’ to build relationships with their student’s then I would be 100% for the idea. There will always be that teacher who doesn’t love their job and is doing it for the ‘security’ that a state job offers. The teacher who never thinks outside of the box and teaches by the book.
My daughter attends a Montessori school and “looping” is encouraged in the Montessori method. I understand that there are benefits to this structure and that was part of my attraction to this school in the firt place. However, after agonizing all summer, I asked the principal to switch my daughter’s teacher this year. My request was not granted. I trid to explain to the principal that every teacher has strengths and weaknesses. Every teacher has a unique perspective, style, rapport, inerests and passions. I wanted my daughter to be exposed to something else because she sometimes struggles and has never really bonded with the teacher. I wanted a fresh start, something different, not because her teacher isn’t dedicated and a good teacher, but becasue maybe she isn’t the best match for my daughter.
Based on personal experience, I think that having students for more than one year has great benefits. I taught for several years to junior high students teaching them all three years of 6th,7th, and 8th grade. It was great in so many ways, I was able to learn about the students, develop relationships with them and their families and I knew academically where they were at the beginning of each year and how capable they were to be challenged. I also have to say as a side benefit, it was really amazing to watch the transformation of the students. I had students come in so young and “green” as they say and to watch them develop socially, emotionally and academically was one of the reasons I loved my job so much. And it never failed . .. I cried at every graduation, aminly in part because I was so proud of who they had become and what I know they will accomplish.
Joseph,
I have not read all of the literature on this topic, but your point seems to make sense. If teaching is “all about relationships”, then it should follow that we would want to keep our children with the same teachers longer. I agree that getting to know our students is an investment that is in a sense “wasted” if the relationship is terminated after 180 days. Furthermore, I think that you also addressed the two major critiques of having students stay with the same teachers. I think it is a legitimate concern that certain teachers and students will inevitably clash, and that prolonging the relationship for another year would be harmful to one or both parties.
I would be interested to know what sorts of administrative strategies would be used to combat these potential problems.
Kirk
Talking about class size: the East Union High School District Board has raised class size by 2-3 students, with the OK of the teachers union to save money.
The same District Board also spent over $140,000 to remove Superintendent Bob Nunez because he cared about the students and the staffs of the school. The ESUHSD board members have political agendas that are contrary to the needs of the students and staff.
No matter what noise the teachers make for clasas size reduction, responsible spending, good decisions, and visionary thinking it is not happening in East San Jose.