As I said in an earlier post, I am not sure if the teaching techniques and curriculum should be tailored to urban students, whether this is a form of racism or sensitivity. I’m listening and learning from teachers who know far more than I do. I worry about the danger of segregated schools and segregated learning styles. But I have heard the horror stories for years about teachers who couldn’t control their classrooms and about disruptive students and students who insult the teacher and think they are heroes for doing so. Back in the 1950s, the disorderly kids were white (think “Blackboard Jungle”). Now they are more likely to be kids of color. Affluence tends to bring decorum in its wings, regardless of race or gender or other factors. One seldom hears of unruly students at Choate or Exeter.
This teacher wants to set the record straight about the differences teaching in different communities:
Diane said: “I understand the importance of classroom management. So does every teacher. The question though is whether a militaristic approach is appropriate or necessary, and whether children who are poor and minority “need” an approach that is militaristic. I don’t know the answer. I worry about having one kind of school for poor black kids and another kind of school for white suburban kids. Should schools for the former be boot camps and schools for the latter be rich with the arts and inspiration? That’s why I am interested in the responses of experienced teachers.”It is more complicated than that.
I teach in Bridgeport CT– one of the epicenters of the failing schools/ ethnic and economic minorities/ privatization efforts. One issue in largely minority schools taught by mostly white teachers who come from out of town (as in many Connecticut urban schools) is that teachers unconsciously permit and expect worse behavior, lesser efforts and lower achievement because that is their expectation of inner city youth. What I saw as a teacher in New York was different– most teachers went to those schools, even if they now commute in from Long Island. No matter the divide of race, the teacher tended to believe that the students could achieve, just as they did when they were in the NYC schools. This is not so in smaller cities whose minority residents are so culturally divided from the educated teaching corps who come in to the city to teach. My solution to this as a teacher has been to be a little bit like the teacher described in your excerpt. But strictness MUST be applied with deep respect and understanding of the students. Content mastery, enthusiasm, respect for dignity, and positivity are essential, but I do not think that teachers’ decades-long slide from a position of respect and authority in the classroom has been a good thing for our nation’s schools. As an historian of education, you must be aware of this change– I see it as the pendulum swinging too far away from authority (which has definitely been abused by teachers in the past, and still is by some) towards — I can’t find a word for it– lassitude and helplessness. The ideas of community in the classroom and mutual respect developed in the second half of the 20th century can also be taken too far. The answer is in the middle. Authority tempered with real respect for students. Decisiveness with a willingness to hear other opinions and change one’s mind or admit mistakes. I must teach differently in Bridgeport than I would in Greenwich or in the Upper East Side private school where I began my career. The social complexities involved in ensuring that this is done with fairness and sensitivity are staggering. The fact remains, though, that there are these differences. When privatization takes greater hold and experienced teachers are eliminated or chased away from inner cities, many things will be lost. One of these things is the ability to strike a balance between A.) tailoring the educational experience to the demographics of your classroom and B.) ensuring that this educational experience is on par with schools that serve the most advantaged youths of our nation. Some classrooms have students that need to be brought from Point M to Point Z. Some classrooms and school systems have more students that need to be brought from Point A to point Z. Is it institutionalized racism to do this? Sometimes it can be. Sometimes it is racist to NOT do so. I can see nothing that could prepare a teacher to find this balance but some years of trial and error, successes and mistakes. And hopefully a few “been there for 35 years” teachers to get advice from– ha, even sometimes .f it is to see how it used to be done and what can use improvement. Homogenizing classroom management, instruction, and curriculum is akin to “trickle down education.” My concern is that cookie cutter Common Core standards and Online Instruction are nothing more than “cake” from Marie Antoinette. There are social strata in our country, and I believe it takes a human touch and some autonomy to best address these issues. |
You must be an outstanding educator.
We have our work cut out for us here in CT while dodging the carpet bagging reformers and self-appointed talking heads who have spent very little time in a classroom; they all bond together into group think and disregard the lowly teacher.
Scary to think they are in charge and every city one reformer has been is now in a crisis….what does Bridgeport have to look forward to…Chicago, Philly, New Orleans….they were all reformed the Vallas way. Yikes!
Vallas brought to us by Pryor…aren’t we lucky. Anybody want him back?
Thank you, Linda. It troubles me that modern corporate-driven school reform involves the practice of willfully ignoring what is positive in a struggling school or a school system. It is too much in their interest to make the schools look as bad as possible before implementing their “reforms.”
Even if they did wish to evaluate schools honestly, those without education backgrounds simply have not developed the “eye” for what is working, and I fear that much of what is good will be destroyed in a great “urban renewal” program of ed reform.
Sadly, with the impending implementation of charter schools and “Governor’s Alliance District,” I fear that everything positive I have to offer is on the chopping block, and that I must be on a footing to leave the school system I care about so much in order to protect my own young family when my school is “reconstituted.”
Kudos to this teacher. Most of us who went through traditional teacher training & have had some years of experience (necessarily trial-&-error) have been able to find this fork in the road. As someone who has taught middle school in a suburban system that was more like urban (differentiated population, 95% low income, gang problems, large ELL population, numerous {& unserviced} sp.ed. students), I adhered to refining & to redefining my role as a teacher & my demeanor with students. As much as keeping current with all the changes in my 35 years (technology, testing, growing poverty & social ills), constant awareness that “one size does not fit all” must be put into practice in order to achieve success. Then, both student & teacher are rewarded with the “aha” moment, when the light bulb goes on & the student understands what is being taught.
Does someone who has had 11-12 weeks of training understand this?
How true. Classroom management like lessons and all the reform ideas do not fit all. Every year for me brought new challenges because there was a new set of students.
Many thanks to Diane for for so decently inviting discussion on conundrums of teaching. Conditions for teaching/learning are outcomes of educ and social policy, though not reducible to these enormous factors. In terms of high expectations for kids of all colors and classes regardless of home address, I’d propose that all lessons in all classrooms should be designed for and with the students who are there. The local conditions, language use, cultural themes should be the starting point for a curric of critical inquiry offered to all students based in the familiar materials, issues, and words of their everyday lives. This is a common critical approach which rejects a “high-order” curric for high-rent districts and a low-order one for low-end areas. Common sense now is that schls in poor areas are out of control b/c kids are out of control. But, as Diane and others have said before, what is out of control is poverty and the imposition of degenerate/destructive conditions on kids and families and teachers who come to schools with hopes. Teachers are undermined by the same enemy hurting the vast majority of kids and families in public schools; Inequality, Class Prejudice, Racism, Privatization, Testing. We need small classes, lots of mentoring/tutoring time and staff to work individually with kids; project methods in and out of the classroom; after-school and weekend programs; good food; school nurses and librarians in all units; counseling, dental care, trips to historic sites, theaters and museums for all classes–basically all the stuff Geoffrey Canada buys for his privileged kids in the Harlem Children Zone with the $56mil/yr he gets from Wall St on top of the $28mil in public taxes….ira shor
The teacher put it well.
“One of these things is the ability to strike a balance between A.) tailoring the educational experience to the demographics of your classroom and B.) ensuring that this educational experience is on par with schools that serve the most advantaged youths of our nation.”
I find the RGSE/Lemov approach (as exemplified in the videos) insulting and gimmicky, though I understand some of the rationale. Yes, it is important to come back to students who aren’t able to answer a question the first time around. Yes, it is essential to teach certain classroom behaviors explicitly (though I see no need for strained and distracting things like wiggling the fingers and “tracking” with the eyes). But all of these should serve the larger point of the lesson. Is there something substantial in this lesson? is it something that will stay with the students, as a foundation, a memorable entity in itself, or both?
Once you have the substance in place, you can build your classroom culture. It can’t be established in a void. In order to create an atmosphere of honor, one must have something worth honoring.
Great posting. She said it well–and it all applies to teaching in NYC.
From my California perspective, Common Core State Standards is not a ‘cookie-cutter’ approach. I’m not trying to defend them. It is that they allow for teachers to make choices about content delivery and they aren’t as narrow as the 1997 State Standards are/were. It is the choice and flexibility that is implied in the CCSS. That doesn’t seem ‘cookie-cutter’ to me. It’s more like a ‘flexible plastic molding’.
BTW, the entire article is very good and worth the time to read.