August 25, 2010

On School Reform or When Good Words Go Bad

by ALISTAIR BOMPHRAY

Education writers, policy-makers, administrators, union leaders, and teachers alike drape their ideas in the rhetoric of reform as if it were some magic cloth immune to criticism. It peremptorily turns the critic of said idea into a behind-the-times hairsplitter who is getting in the way of progress.

The way industrial food corporations like Dole scramble to affix the “organic” label to their product, purveyors of educational policy are all too quick to identify themselves as “reform-minded.” But what does “reform” actually mean? Has the word been so overused as to have lost all meaning (much in the same way the meaning of “organic” has been appropriated to the point of meaninglessness)? Or is it kind of a deceptive concept to begin with?

Literally, the word simply means “to form again.” This means every time I change the seating arrangement in my classroom, I’m engaging in a mild version of educational reform. In this sense, the word carries no qualitative connotation. It just means changing shit up, for better or for worse.

The Random House dictionary, however, is not so nebulous. It defines “reform” as “the improvement or amendment of what is wrong, corrupt, unsatisfactory, etc.” In which case, anything that makes our education system better, could be described as reform. But if it makes our education system worse, then it would be the opposite of reform, right?

Merit pay is one of those ideas that’s consistently peddled under the umbrella of “education reform.” Problem is, at this point, we have no idea whether merit pay would make our education system better. Secretary of Education Arne Duncan theorizes that it would. But that in itself is not “reform.” The dictionary demands certitude in the matter, a kind of certitude that is impossible in the present moment.

Shouldn’t a policy like merit pay at the very least be tagged as “potentially reformative,” in the same way someone accused of theft is an “alleged” thief until proven guilty?

Keep reading →

July 27, 2010

Wading through the Bureaucracy: Teacher Certification

by GABRIELLE LENSCH PLASTRIK

This is the summer that I had to buck up and undergo the certification renewal process here in Wisconsin.  I should say that I probably find the Wisconsin process more annoying than people who have always lived here do because in my home state of Illinois, a teacher only needs to teach and take six credits to switch from an initial educator license to a professional one.  No such simplicity for Wisconsin.

The thinkers at DPI (The Department of Public Instruction) saw that young teachers leave the profession mostly because they feel that they have not accomplished anything.  Based on the nationwide research they were using, a plan that went beyond coursework and helped educators see themselves meeting goals would be highly superior. It is beautiful in theory—like most of education reform.

And such was the birth of the PDP (professional development plan).  Initial educators have five years to change their license to a professional one.  In order to do so, they need to set a professional development goal (a goal for their own learning) that ties into their students’ academic success (preferably judged by a standardized test).   Then, in order to ensure that teachers know how to go about meeting their goal, they have to set up three to five objectives, all of which need to be supported with three to five pieces of evidence.  Then, three people need to approve the goal plan: an administrator, a member of the higher education community, and a professional educator.  They all also have to have been trained in being on a PDP team.

At the end of every year of the plan—it is supposed to take four years after the first year, which is spent devising the plan—the teacher is supposed to reflect on his or her progress and submit evidence of progress toward the goal.  Then, at the end of five years, all evidence has to be submitted and approved in order for a teacher to be a professional educator.

There are a lot of great ideas in this plan.  I particularly appreciate the plan to have trained professionals evaluating the PDPs.  The process, while unnecessarily complicated, is by no means difficult. My major gripe, though, is how arbitrary the whole thing is.  It forces a new teacher to focus on filling out paperwork and reflecting on one small goal that is necessarily not central to his or her practice because of its focus on self-improvement linked to student improvement. That means that whatever the focus is has to be quantifiable.  I couldn’t, for instance, learn about fostering creativity in order to improve my students’ creativity in their short story writing or, more accurately, I could, but I would be unlikely to pass at the end of the cycle.

Keep reading →

July 8, 2010

TV Hat to the Rescue!

Instead of putting a smart screen in every classroom, why not give every student one of these?

June 30, 2010

Movie Review: Waiting for Superman: Or just another Clark Kent playing dress-up?

by ALISTAIR BOMPHRAY

Remember that movie An Inconvenient Truth? It was pretty good, right? Al Gore’s triumphant return to relevance, or something like that… Well, Davis Guggenheim, the director of that cleverly developed treatise on climate change, shifts his attention to the state of public education in America in his latest feature documentary, Waiting for Superman. A few weeks back I went to the Kabuki Theater in San Francisco to retrieve a lost phone only to discover that Waiting for Superman, a surprise entry into this year’s SF International Film Festival, was starting in five minutes. I had a stack of student work burning a hole (turning to compost is probably more accurate) in my teacher bag, but who am I to refuse destiny?

Let me make this clear right away. I think this is a bad documentary. As a piece of journalism, it’s lazy and manipulative. As a “methodical dissection” of our public education system (which the film’s official movie site purports it to be), it falls far, far short. Its flaws are multiform, but for brevity’s sake, I’m going to focus on, oh, I don’t know, four:

1. Waiting for Superman is a Michael Moore rip-off, plain and simple, and this in a time when Moore’s own stuff is a little tired already. From the amusingly quaint 1950’s-era footage to the use of animation to add humor and watchability, Guggenheim borrows freely from Moore’s bag of tricks. He even includes footage of Bush saying dumb things. I mean, I like laughing at Dubya as much as the next guy, but at this point, it just seems too easy, you know? All of this stuff would’ve been fresh eight years ago, but in 2010, I couldn’t help thinking, “Haven’t I seen this before?” There’s no nice way to say this—Guggenheim’s a biter.

All in all, it is a moderately entertaining film, which should come as no surprise; Moore’s shtick works. But unlike Moore in, say, Roger & Me or Bowling for Columbine, Guggenheim sacrifices content for entertainment. It’s one thing to propel a viewer through dense, difficult subject matter; it’s quite another to do so and also shed light on the subject.

2. And that’s the problem with this film—it doesn’t really have anything new to say about education. And the things it does say are oversimplified and/or politically trendy. About halfway through, I began to have the sneaking suspicion that Secretary of Education Arne Duncan called Guggenheim up and said, “Hey, remember what you did for Al? Well, I’ve got something for you.” (OMG—is Duncan the Man of Steel? He certainly is dreamy enough.). Personally, I have a hard time trusting a documentary that so unwaveringly cleaves to one party’s line, even if that line is occasionally my own.

One of the film’s major theses is that teacher unions are getting in the way of educational reform. To anyone even peripherally acquainted with the current educational zeitgeist, this is not a new sentiment. And with good reason—though their intent is to protect teachers, teacher unions too often simply protect the status quo. This includes keeping bad teachers in a job. Guggenheim points to oft-touted examples of bureaucratic excess such as New York City’s “Rubber Room” where suspended teachers receive full salary and benefits to do nothing (a story already covered by, most notably, The New Yorker and This American Life).

Unfortunately, Guggenheim’s view on this debate is as free from nuance as a DC comic book. Enter Michelle Rhee, the chancellor of D.C. schools, as the caped union buster. And over there, feasting on the wormy corpses of our children’s dreams, is Randi Weingarten, President of the American Federation of Teachers, as Lex Luthor. Rather than provide useful historical context or explore the philosophical gap between these two opposing figures, Guggenheim is content to paint the issue in broad strokes. Yes, of course, the Rubber Room is straight out of Catch 22, and, yes, of course, there are bad teachers out there (we’ve all had them), but, c’mon, what about all of the average to amazing teachers who are doing their job? Instead, Guggenheim focuses on a minority—the woefully inept, cruelly indifferent, really, really, bad teacher.

Keep reading →

June 17, 2010

The Teachable Moment: Seizing the Instants When Students Learn

by ALISTAIR BOMPHRAY

Just wanted to pass on some congratulations to fellow education blogger, Rebecca Branstetter of Notes from the School Psychologist, who, after two long years, published her book, “The Teachable Moment: Seizing the Instants When Students Learn.” It’s an anthology of different educators reflecting on their teaching experiences, and though I haven’t read it yet, my mom says it’s pretty great.

I should also thank Rebecca for including one of my own pieces despite repeated references to PCP (of all things) and a higher curse word per page ratio than is generally considered kosher for an ed book.

So, teachers, if you’re looking for some inspirational reading this summer (that’s not Nicholas Sparks’ latest gutwrencher), may I suggest “The Teachable Moment”? Here’s Rebecca’s more comprehensive synopsis.

And speaking of summer, ain’t slow mornings with the paper grand?

June 9, 2010

Another Year, Another Race: Taking our students from August to June

by GABRIELLE LENSCH PLASTRIK

I have my students do a lot of reflection at the end of the year, which in turn, leads to me doing a lot of reflection.  I inevitably end up making plans for the coming year at the end of the previous year.  I am sure that the same is true for almost every dedicated teacher out there.

Next year will be my third year teaching roughly the same curriculum to the same aged students at the same school.  As I look to next fall, I am occasionally overwhelmed by the journey that my students take.  They learn so much as writers who write about literature that it is exhausting just to think about starting where they start and ending where they end.

For example, before they enter my classroom, they have written persuasive, expository, and narrative pieces with an expectation of academic rigor, but they have never written a thesis statement analyzing a short story, poem, or novel.  By the end of the year, they can write six page essays that synthesize five or more literary sources in order to discuss an issue like Americans’ relationship with the land.

It is a journey that is exhausting for them, but also for me.  I wouldn’t  have it any other way.  Because they are doing all of that hard work, I feel pretty strongly that I ought to be working equally as hard.  One of my colleagues at school says that every school year is like a marathon.  Major school moments are all mile markers until we get to this time of year: when we can see the tape across the finish line.  I have never liked that metaphor because I used to be a runner and I remember how many races I forced myself to finish after hitting the 3/4s of the way done point and thinking, “If I fainted now, no one would be mad that I didn’t finish.” School is not like that.  I enjoy each part of the year for different reasons.

But, now, as I look to the starting line for next year, the metaphor seems apt—just on a different scale.  The students run a marathon, and it is grueling.  I am more like the pacer for each runner than like a runner myself.  My pace and my finish time are not accomplishments; they are insignificant.  Instead, it is my job to work as hard as I can to improve theirs while also working to make sure that they are going to make it through.  Our jobs are tough.  Teaching with your whole self means giving a piece of yourself to as many students as will take it. Keep reading →

May 30, 2010

Michigan Future Schools: Saving Detroit One School at a Time

by ALISTAIR BOMPHRAY

In this era of budget cuts—and, therefore, era of “creative funding”—we must look to alternative ways to fund the kind of education our kids deserve. Michigan Future Schools, a non-profit out of Detroit, has a plan to finance new schools in one of the grimmest economies in the nation.

Lou Glazer, the founder of Michigan Future Inc., an economic development think tank, believes one of the keys to rebuilding the economy in Detroit is to connect inner city kids to that economy, via an education that not only prepares them to get into college, but to stay in college.

I’m no economist, but my gut tells me (and you know how Stephen Colbert feels about the truth-gleaning power of the gut) that Glazer’s hypothesis represents an important divergence from current urban revitalization practices, so many of which seem to have an obsession with luring people of means to the city, often at the expense of the people who are already there. Glazer’s vision, by contrast, calls for an investment in urban youth, thereby increasing the likelihood that they will one day participate in—and perhaps take a leading role in—their city’s transformation. As an educator, it makes me happy to have an economist on my side.

Also, he has a plan. Currently he has raised $10 million in donations from local foundations such as Kellogg, Kresge, and McGregor. With this money, Michigan Future Schools will fund the inception of ten new high schools in Detroit ($1 million per school). Grants are for four years, one planning year, and three years of operation. Glazer’s larger ambition is to raise enough money to fund thirty-five new high schools over the next eight years.

Some of these schools will be public, others charter. They will all be high schools, and they will all be new. Beyond that, the only prerequisite is that the founder have a specific and compelling vision for their proposed school. May the best vision win.

So far, one charter school, Detroit Edison Public School Academy High School (yeah, a mouthful) has been awarded the grant. DEPSA is currently concluding their planning year and will open their doors for their first ninth grade class next fall.

Personally, if I still lived in Michigan, I’d want in on this. Keep reading →

May 23, 2010

My Favorite Lesson

by GABRIELLE LENSCH PLASTRIK

Buddha's Hand

I love teaching the writing of poetry maybe more than any other thing that I can imagine teaching, so I am biased.  Regardless, the lesson below is not only my perennial favorite; it is also the students’. It appears in my curriculum next week, and I have been eager for that class period since the poetry and nature unit began three weeks ago.

Perhaps, as the year winds down, some of you might have some time to squeeze in a great lesson, especially if you’ve already taught imagery because this lesson will help reinforce that earlier lesson.  There are plenty of variations.  Over the years, I’ve learned that different music evokes different sorts of poems.  It seems essential that it be only instrumental or the words find their way into the poem, which isn’t as much a sensory experience as repetition of someone else’s ideas.  I’ve used Clementines when other fruits were exorbitantly expensive, and that worked less well because the fruit was so familiar.  Nothing is as good as Buddha’s Hands.

I still remember the first time that I touched the strange leathery skin and thought of the inside of my father’s palm—hardened from a tractor accident when he was a child.  At the very end of this post, you’ll find the poem that I wrote when Thylias Moss taught a version of this lesson to me in an advanced poetry workshop at the University of Michigan.

Enjoy!

Sensory Imagery and Poetry Writing:

Accessing the Writer’s Senses through Mystery

Goals/Objectives:

  • To help familiarize students with sensory imagery
  • To encourage students to appeal to senses using sensory imagery in their own writing
  • To help students express themselves creatively in writing

Materials:

  • Walden Overhead (see below)
  • Buddha’s Hands (a citrus fruit available in the fall) or Star Fruit (available in the early spring)
  • Silk Road Journeys: Beyond the Horizon (cd)
  • Citrus Jelly Beans

Bell Ringer:

  • Have a passage from Walden on an overhead.
  • A student will read it aloud.
  • We will define any terms they need for understanding.
  • Then, we will discuss the types of images being evoked and how they enhance the writing.

Lesson:

  1. Tell students that they will be taken on a journey through the types of imagery that deal with the senses and that there is some mystery involved—show them the mystery bag.
  2. Explain the rules of the activity:  It is crucial that students understand the importance of keeping their eyes shut when they are told to do so.  Also, remind students that they do not need to change the subject of their pieces in order to introduce a new sense.  They should try to find a way to incorporate some aspect of that sense and then continue on with their writing. Keep reading →

May 13, 2010

Reflections on Urban School Teaching: Black Is Beautiful

by JILL GUERRA

When I was growing up in the 1970’s, people who had a similar cultural background to mine were nonexistent in the media.  The closest I got to a media representation of someone from my cultural background was Puerto Rican “Maria” on the children’s program, Sesame Street, because she spoke Spanish like people in my family. As I grew up, without any particular event to tie my reasoning to, I felt invisible in this society.  I had internalized the lack of importance my people were given anywhere in public space.

I was a college student before I started to learn about the history of people of color and their struggles to resist domination by those in power.  Their land, resources, labor, culture, and very being had been stolen during colonization and continued to be threatened in current struggles throughout the world.  I realized how powerful my people are, how rich our cultures are, and how that had been kept from me throughout my formative years.

I contemplated how youth of color in this society are taught through the mainstream media that their people are not worth representing, as I had learned.  Worse yet, when reflections of our people are given, we are taught through the perpetuation of adverse images that we are not valuable, that we are to be feared, even despised.

The majority of the students I work with are African American children from various parts of Oakland, California.  During my first year of teaching in this community, my third grade class was studying the poem, My People, by Langston Hughes. The poem expresses the poet’s love for his people, African Americans, and validates Black people as beautiful.  I started the lesson by asking the students what the media (news, TV, movies) tells us about Black people.  One girl immediately responded, “That we’re bad.”  Other students chimed in, “We’re poor.” “We’re criminals.” “We belong in jail.”  These were eight and nine-year-olds and they were already aware of mainstream society’s perception of them.  I thought about how precarious that could be for self-esteem and identity and about the host of related manifestations that could result when one’s fundamental being is perceived as contemptible.

This experience eventually led to a study of the media with my students and my master’s thesis.  Among many relevant findings, I confirmed that students must acquire the tools of critical analysis.  Because our society’s values, and therefore culture, are dictated, overwhelmingly, by a singular perspective educators must find ways to assist students in developing the tools needed to address systems of domination. The students in my study demonstrated a desire to understand the world around them, specifically, the injustices that affect them as a cultural group, including an understanding of how the media machine works.

I also learned that we, as a society, need a much more complex understanding of what racism is and how it functions.  Today, systems of oppression are sophisticated and they are ingrained into the everyday foundation of our lives.  These systems must be analyzed to assess for inequity and injustice because they have become so commonplace.  Not only do our students need that education, but teachers and other adults do as well.  While we are quick to blame communities for their circumstances, we must gain a deeper understanding of how these structures work to support the current system of inequities in resources and quality of life.  This should be a requirement of civic participation for all of us, regardless of race or socioeconomic status.

Furthermore, Enid Lee, an international consultant on equity issues of language, culture, and race and their roles in education and organizational development, once stated in a workshop I attended, that “the problem is that society doesn’t know enough about or value Black culture.”  It wasn’t until I was in college that I learned about the African Diaspora and how rich and influential it has been throughout the world.  I learned, and am still learning, about the connections in places I never knew there were any (a considerable African influence in Mexico and Guatemala, where my family is from).  There is so much to know and we are only shown a very limited perspective of history if we rely on mainstream sources.  I have come to feel it is my obligation, as an educator, to share what I know with my students and to invite investigations, including those that encourage family contributions.

So what else does this mean for a classroom teacher?  For me, most simply put, it means that I have a responsibility to participate in the process of interrupting the system of oppression and the effect it has on our youth– socially and personally.  I must participate in the process of “decolonizing” the mind, as bell hooks calls it, my students’ and well as my own. Because all of our minds/perspectives/world views have been influenced by the larger society, there must be a conscious and concentrated effort to disrupt the effects of this system. Keep reading →

May 8, 2010

Learning for the Sake of Life

by JESSE SCACCIA

Something that I tell my students over and over is that the point of school is not to succeed at the next level of school.

We go to school–and we work hard there–because what we learn in school enhances our lives.

It’s a sentiment that is so self-evident that it almost feels redundant to say out loud.

That a better-understood, more passionate, more alert, ultimately greater life is the purpose of school is at the core of my teaching philosophy. But teaching freshman-level composition at ODU, as I do now, this often leaves me at an uncomfortable crossroads:

Do I teach my students what they need to know to succeed over the next few years, things like citations, how to craft an academic argument, and how to write the long, clause-filled, lofty reference-littered sentences that are sure to earn them A’s?

Or do I teach my students what they need to know to succeed in life, things like how to write a letter to an insurance company, or how to write a not-totally-schmaltzy love letter, or how to write a just-saying-hello email to a professional contact that might be of some service down the line?

It is rare that an opportunity comes along that satisfies both sides of the pedagogy. So rare, in fact, that I would like to celebrate one such example here.

Spong Hall.

My particular section of English 111 was assigned to room 102 in William B. Spong Jr. Hall. From the outside, SPONG (as it is affectionately called by the registrar) is actually a fairly nice building. It has an institutional feel (in a good way), with stately red bricks, great old trees casting shadows on the lawn, and an attractive vestibule with a pitched roof and columns.

When I first saw the building I thought, Oh, cool, this feels like college.

But when I first saw room 102 I thought, Oh, damn, Senator Spong might very well be buried somewhere in this room.

The room was a mess. The paint on the walls was chipped. There were piles of junk in one of the corners, and in the opposite corner was the room’s only “technology,” a mangy looking projector that looked like it may have been salvaged from an ancient submarine. Streaks of brown residue of an unknown providence stained the back wall, almost as if the room was crying for itself. A fair portion of the ceiling was occupied by two giant, rusty, onerous–we assumed–heating/cooling devices that looked perilously fixed to the ceiling. When I flicked a switch on the wall I swear that those machines bleated, like lambs not ignorant of the slaughter to which they’re being led.

The students hated it. They hated it so much that–full disclosure to my part in this–I even one day gave them the assignment of writing a horror story that took place in SPONG 102.

We complained among ourselves for the first few weeks of class. It was good for us, in a way. It helped to bond us as a group. Then one day, just as we were getting into the argumentative essay unit, one of the students asked me, “If you asked them to change our room, you think they would?”

“They might,” I said. “But I bet it would be even more effective if you asked them.”

And with that a class assignment–a class cause, if you will–was born: To write a letter to the ODU administration so compelling that they couldn’t help but give us a better room. Keep reading →