Archives for category: Teachers and Teaching

 

Thomas Ultican has put his research skills to work while reviewing the depredations of the corporate reform organization’s intent on destroying public education.

In this post, he analyzes the origins of TNTP, The New Teacher Project, a spin-off of Teach for America led initially by Michelle Rhee.

TNTP is a cash cow for ambitious reformers. It advances its self-interest by attacking experienced teachers.

TNPT is an integral part of the privatization movement. It ignores genuine scholarship and undermines teacher professionalism.

“TNTP is important for the DPE movement. It produces papers that undermine teacher professionalism and it works to circumvent proven teacher training led by universities. It also works to gain control of pedagogy in a way that narrows curriculum. Why? It is all about cutting costs and business transactions. It does not improve the quality of education in America; it harms it.”

 

 

 

Mercedes Schneider loves to learn. She has an intellectually curious mind, and she seeks opportunities to satisfy her thirst for knowledge. 

She describes her quest for a life that would allow her to continue to feed her intellectual curiosity.

“I believe that one of my most important tasks as a teacher is to stimulate intellectual curiosity. Of course, to do so, I must first experience intellectual curiosity myself. Secondly (and as a logical consequence of first experiencing intellectual curiosity), I must reveal my curious intellect to my students.

“They must see me get excited and be obviously interested in a world that includes (but necessarily extends beyond) the classroom. Modeling intellectual curiosity in my classroom can only be done successfully in the context of a respectful and healthy relationship chiefly between student and teacher (and, beyond teacher-students, with the teacher setting and enforcing parameters for healthy, respectful student-to-student interactions).

“And there must be time for conversation, for pursuing topics beyond a textbook entry and including personal experience and encouraging additional inquiry motivated by genuine interest.

“I believe intellectual curiosity is more important that intellectual intelligence in the setting of challenging life goals and promoting lifelong learning. Sure, high intelligence is an advantage; however, if one does not exercise (challenge?) one’s intelligence by living a life marked by the dynamic of intellectual curiosity, that intelligence arguably stagnates; life loses its fullness, and humans snuff their joy of living.”

She is challenged now to teach five classes a day without losing her intellectual curiosity. She remembers with each class that they are learning the topic for the first time.

I am reminded of hearing a teacher say that she was a performer who had five performances every day. She had to be fresh for every new performance.

Every teacher faces the same dilemma. Five performances a day, and the last must be as energetic and dynamic as the first.

 

Eric Smith, a high school German teacher, writes here about the joys of teaching. 

At a time when it has become fashionable to complain about teachers, and for teachers to announce why they can’t do it anymore, Smith asserts his powerful belief in his role as a teacher.

”The main reason for my belief that teaching is the best profession is that I’m able to work every day with wonderful, young human beings. People sometimes shake their heads in sympathy when they hear I’m a teacher. They’ve heard how hard it is to teach nowadays. But, although kids have certainly changed and do things differently, they are still energetic, creative and idealistic. They’re passionate and quick to make new friends. I may be having personal worries and problems, but when I greet my students with “Guten Morgen, alle zusammen!” and they reply, “Guten Morgen, Herr Smith!” it is as if a light goes on in the darkness.

“Indeed, I experience my students as brightly shining lights. They have not yet become cynical. They still believe that they can change the world. I consider it my sacred duty to keep their idealism alive and to enable them to really and truly change the world for the better.”

 

 

 

Arthur Goldstein is a veteran high school teacher in New York City. In this post, he asserts that every child can learn, but there are obstacles put in the way of teachers.

First, students must be willing to make the effort to learn.

Second, class sizes must not be too large.

Third, it is absurd to expect every student to learn the same things in the same way at the same pace.

He writes:

”There may be exceptions, actually, but I really believe this in general. The main thing that stands in the way of that goal, though, is often administration. Of course not every student will cooperate, and of course not all students will pay attention, study, or do homework. Of course some will fail. For the most part, though, it doesn’t mean they couldn’t have passed.

“Every teacher I know has heard about differentiated instruction. I know some supervisors have demanded multiple lesson plans for different students. Sometimes supervisors assume teachers have nothing to do and unlimited time. This is not a good approach. We have a lot to do, our work is important, and it’s sad when we’re burdened with wasteful nonsense.

“Differentiation is a tough demand when you have 34 students in a class. Of course, class size tends to be overlooked by administration, and in fact when I go to grieve oversized classes, they fight to keep them that way. It’s an ironic attitude from an organization that claims to put, “Children First, Always.” Of course, the real meaning of that slogan is demoralizing and devaluing those of us who do the important work of teaching the children (the very children Moskowitz Academies would not accept on a bet).

“I’d argue that differentiation is a fundamental human trait. Unless you are in possession of a remarkable lack of sensitivity, you treat people differently. I see, in my classroom, students who will challenge me. I’ll let them do it, and I’ll challenge them back. I have nothing to lose, really. If they manage to out-talk me, I must be doing a great job. I also see very sensitive and reserved students, students who need my understanding, students for whom a harsh word would be hurtful and damaging…

”There is spectacular irony in the fact that our system demands that every one of our students take the same tests. I mean, if we’re going to talk differentiation, how can it possibly exist when final assessment is exactly the same for everyone?

“Every kid can learn, but not necessarily the same things in the same way. I’m glad to see that NY State has finally allowed some leeway for different students with different needs. It’s a step in the right direction, but it isn’t enough. Every kid can learn, but every kid can learn differently at different times. Some kids need more time than others. Some have learning disabilities. Some don’t know English. A full 10% of our kids are homeless, and as long as we continue to ignore that, we won’t be serving them no matter how often we give them the meaningless label of “college ready.”

“Learning is not binary, and it’s not multiple choice either. It really is individual. The sooner administrators can understand that simple notion, the better we will serve our children.”

 

 

 

Joanne Yatvin has been a teacher, a principal, a superintendent, president of the National Council for Teachers of English, and a literacy expert.

This is her Christmas wish.

As this year ends I have chosen to pretend that I am Santa Claus for public education. I would come into all our public schools carrying a heavy sack, filled with all the goodies that children, teachers and parents need and deserve.

Afterward I’d be so tired that I will have to rest until January 1st 2018, while all of you will be dreaming of the goodies soon to come.

I’d Love to Be Your Santa Claus

By Joanne Yatvin

First of all, I will sweep out all the junk that has been piling up in classrooms for several years. All the test-prep sessions, the tests and their scores, the unreasonable standards, and the negative judgments on schools, students, and teachers that emanated from them will be gone forever.

Next, I will herd together all the politicians, decision makers, and clueless experts who have made the stupid rules for students and schools, and banish them from power once and for all.

Finally, I will erase all the laws that that have hamstrung good teachers and principals for years and allowed decent schools to be shut down because of their low-test scores.

Then, after catching my breath and cleaning the dirt from my hands, I will bring in all the wonderful gifts I have dreamed into existence, and spread them around all public school offices, teachers’ lounges, and students’ classrooms.

Try to envision each gift as I describe it below.

Golden links between each school and its community

Hearty projects growing and blooming in every classroom

Neat Package of well equipped classrooms with no more than 25 students in each one

Sweet tastes of recesses, physical education and interesting classroom activities every day

Endless piles of Gold coins to fund every school

Glowing and strong librarians with books stuffed in their arms

Crowds of well-educated teachers and principals with magic wands in every school

A huge variety of silver-studded classes for students to choose from

Afterward I will jump back into my sleigh and call out “Happy learning to all and to all a good life.”

Astrophysicist and author Ethan Siegel writes in Forbes magazine about the way that federal policies have disrespected and demoralized passionate teachers. No Child Left Behind, Race to the Top, and the Every Student Succeeds Act have been disasters for teaching and learning.

Every sentence in this short article is priceless, and I hate to abridge it. You will have to open the link and read it yourself in its entirety.

He writes:

The ultimate dream of public education is incredibly simple. Students, ideally, would go to a classroom, receive top-notch instruction from a passionate, well-informed teacher, would work hard in their class, and would come away with a new set of skills, talents, interests, and capabilities. Over the past few decades in the United States, a number of education reforms have been enacted, designed to measure and improve student learning outcomes, holding teachers accountable for their students’ performances. Despite these well-intentioned programs, including No Child Left Behind, Race To The Top, and the Every Student Succeeds Act, public education is more broken than ever. The reason, as much as we hate to admit it, is that we’ve disobeyed the cardinal rule of success in any industry: treating your workers like professionals.

Everyone who’s been through school has had experiences with a wide variety of teachers, ranging from the colossally bad to the spectacularly good. There are a few qualities universally ascribed to the best teachers, and the lists almost always include the following traits:

*a passion for their chosen subject,
*a deep, expert-level knowledge of the subject matter they’re teaching,
*a willingness to cater to a variety of learning styles and to employ a variety of educational techniques,
*and a vision for what a class of properly educated students would be able to know and demonstrate at the end of the academic year.

Yet despite knowing what a spectacular teacher looks like, the educational models we have in place actively discourage every one of these.

The first and largest problem is that every educational program we’ve had in place since 2002 — the first year that No Child Left Behind took effect — prioritizes student performance on standardized tests above all else. Test performance is now tied to both school funding, and the evaluation of teachers and administrators. In many cases, there exists no empirical evidence to back up the validity of this approach, yet it’s universally accepted as the way things ought to be…

If your goal was to achieve the greatest learning outcome possible for each of your students, what would you need to be successful? You’d need the freedom to decide what to teach, how to teach it, how to evaluate and assess your students, and how to structure your classroom and curriculum. You’d need the freedom to make individualized plans or separate plans for students who were achieving at different levels. You’d need the resources — financial, time, and support resources — to maximize the return on your efforts. In short, you’d need the same thing that any employee in any role needs: the freedom and flexibility to assess your own situation, and make empowered decisions…

Like any job involving an interaction with other people, teaching is as much of an art as it is a science. By taking away the freedom to innovate, we aren’t improving the outcomes of the worst teachers or even average teachers; we’re simply telling the good ones that their skills and talents aren’t needed here. By refusing to treat teachers like professionals — by failing to empower them to teach students in the best way that they see fit — we demonstrate the simple fact that we don’t trust them to do a good job, or even to understand what doing a good job looks like. Until we abandon the failed education model we’ve adopted since the start of the 21st century, public education will continue to be broken. As long as we insist on telling teachers what to teach and how to teach it, we’ll continue to fail our children.

Laura Chapman writes:

“E4E requires teachers to sign a “pledge” that endorses VAM as a component of their evaluation. I do not understand why anyone would sign a pledge to any organization that billionaires fund. This is a variant of the infamous Gates Compact that called for school districts run by elected officials and with public accountability to sign a memorandum of understanding (MOU) that would allow charter schools, privately run and often by out of state franchises, to use resources they did not pay for, occupy public school buildings, avoid the full costs of a district services such as those providing food and transportation. The charters were supposed to share their “best practices” with the district. The E4E pledge and the Gates compact are duping teachers and leaders of district in the same way…with contract-like arrangements totally out of bounds of professional work ing education.

“Imagine a hospital or medical practice that signed a ledge or a “compact” to prescribe only the drugs/treatments that a billionaire donor wanted, and under conditions where those drugs/treatments were known to be toxic for parents and the medical personnel.

“I am reminded of the pledge that I had to sign to be employed in Florida, mid-century last. The document asked if I had every been a member of the Communist Party or a member of one of the groups labelled “communist sympathizers”–with the list on legal paper, both sides, two pages two columns.

“I think the E4E pledge is intended to function much like a loyalty oath, but now it is one aspect of market-based thinking. It also draws on the actual and implied threats in a non-compete clause in some employment contracts.

“There is probably nothing that E4E can do to legally enforce compliance with the terms of the pledge–a pledge of loyalty to an agenda set by the billionaires. The whole point is to use teachers as marketers for the bad ideas of E4E and make them accomplices in their own demise.

“If you sign the pledge, you confirm that you are easy prey. Do not be duped or used.”

Mercedes Schneider discusses a study that was reported in Education Week. The study concluded that teachers from alternative certification programs such as Teach for America get students to produce test scores there are “marginally” better than traditionally trained teachers.

Mercedes thought this was a dumb study, although she didn’t use that word. Producing higher scores, even “marginally” higher scores is not a good measure of teaching. Getting higher scores from students is not, she writes, the same as proving a high-quality, well-rounded education.

“The fact that the JCFS meta-analysis finds that teachers trained via alt cert programs have students with slightly higher test scores than those trained in traditional teacher prep programs does not surprise me.

“What does surprise me is that the JCFS researchers not only fail to question the validity of measuring teacher job performance using student tests; they promote the idea as a means to gather useful data.

“It also surprises me that the JCFS researchers do not question the degree to which student test scores represent authentic learning. They do comment on “student achievement in the U.S.” as “still below average, in comparison to the rest of the world,” but they do not carry that thought further and question how it is that the US continues to be a major world power despite those “still below average” international test scores….

“There is a reason that no national testing company would dare include with its student achievement tests a statement supporting the usage of these tests to gauge teacher effectiveness: Measuring teachers using student tests is not a valid use of such tests, and no testing company wants to be held liable for this invalid practice.

“Certainly the pressure is on traditional teacher training programs to focus on the outcome of teachers-in-training “raising” student test scores and to use those test score outcomes as purported evidence that the teacher-in-training is “effective.” May they never reach the ultimate cheapening of pedagogy and reduce teacher education to nothing more that test-score-raising.

“Are teacher alt cert programs little more that spindly, test-score-raising drive-thrus lacking in lasting pedagogical substance? There’s an issue worthy of research investigation.

“What price will America pay for its shortsighted, shallow love of high test scores? Also worthy of investigation– more so than that of the ever-increasing test score.”

Steven Singer wrote a book! You probably know his Blog called “Gadfly on the Wall.” I often repost his writing because he writes with clarity and passion and first-hand experience.

His book is “Gadfly on the Wall: A Apublic School Teacher Speaks Out on Racism and Reform.”

It was published by Garn Press.

Steven explains here why he wrote a book and how it feels to see it in print.

He writes:

“How did this happen?

It was only three and a half years ago that I sat down at my computer and decided to write my first blog.

And now I’ve got a book coming out from Garn Press – “Gadfly on the Wall: A Public School Teacher Speaks Out on Racism and Reform.”

Like the title says, I’m just a public school teacher. I’m not important enough to write a book.

A blog? Sure. That could disappear any day now.

All it would take is WordPress deleting the site or maybe the power goes out and never comes back or a zombie apocalypse or who knows…

But a book. That’s kinda’ permanent.

It has mass and takes up space.

That won’t just poof out of existence if someone unplugs the wrong server.

It would take some sort of conscious effort for a book to go away. People would have to actively work to destroy it. They’d have to pile those rectangular paper bundles in a fire pit, douse them in gasoline and light a match.

Otherwise, they’d just maybe sit in a basement somewhere in boxes, unopened and collecting dust.

Or could it really be that people might actually crack the spine and read the things?

It’s a strange sort of birth this transition from cyberspace to 3-dimensional reality.

And it’s about to transpire with selected bits of my writing.

I am flabbergasted. Shocked. Almost in denial that this is really happening.

Did I mention that I’m a public school teacher? No one is supposed to listen to us.

School policy is made without us. Decisions impacting our kids and our careers are made by people who haven’t seen the classroom in years – if ever. And when we politely raise our hands to let people know that something isn’t working, the best we can hope for is to be ignored; the worst is to be bullied into silence.

Read the rest. Steven has a beautiful quote from Ray Bradbury’s “Fahrenheit 451” that all of us can live by.

David Madland and Alex Rowell of the Center for American Progress reviewed the impact on education of Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker’s infamous Act 10, enacted in 2011, which crushed unions.

Some teachers left the profession or the state. Salaries and benefits declined. The average age and experience of teachers declined. Teachers moved from district to district, seeking higher pay.

They wrote:

“Six years ago, the state of Wisconsin passed the highly controversial 2011 Wisconsin Act 10, which virtually eliminated collective bargaining rights for most public-sector workers, as well as slashed those workers’ benefits, among other changes. These attacks on public-sector workers are spreading throughout the country. Iowa recently passed an Act 10-inspired law with similar policies affecting public-sector workers and their unions.1 Other states and members of Congress are considering enacting such policies, and with its ruling on Janus v. American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees (AFSCME), the U.S. Supreme Court may act to weaken public-sector unions and teachers’ ability to collectively bargain.

“This issue brief examines the impact of the law on Wisconsin’s K-12 public education system and state economy. While this brief focuses on Act 10’s impact on Wisconsin teachers based on the data available, the same forces driving changes in the teaching workforce can also affect the broader public sector. Proponents of Act 10 insisted that reducing collective bargaining rights for teachers would improve education by eliminating job protections such as tenure and seniority-based salary increases. As Gov. Scott Walker (R-WI) argued, “We no longer have seniority or tenure. That means we can hire and fire based on merit, we can pay based on performance. That means we can put the best and the brightest in our classrooms and we can pay them to be there.” However, the facts suggest that Act 10 has not had its promised positive impact on educational quality in the state.”

Teachers have lower pay, lower pension and health insurance benefits. There is more turnover as teachers move from one district to another seeking higher pay. Act 10 had its intended effect of smashing unions, which represented 14.1% of workers in 2011, but only 9% now.

What kind of country thinks the way to get better teachers is to cut their pay and benefits?

Scott Walker is a puppet of the Koch brothers. His vision of the future is mean and stupid.