Archives for category: Teachers and Teaching

A parent in New York asked me to recognize the wisdom and courage of the district’s teachers.

I am glad to do so and to place the Corning Teachers’ Association on the honor roll of this blog for supporting the rights of parents and the interests of students.

 

 

Here is her letter:

 

 

“The Corning Teachers’ Association sent the following position statement to all members. As a parent in the Corning-Painted Post School District, I am grateful for their courage to share facts regarding NYS Grades 3-8 standardized testing.
“The CTA memorandum is an example of what needs to happen across NYS if teachers want REAL change instead of relying on empty promises outlined in the NYSED “tool kits”, flyers, and rhetoric from Commissioner Elia.
“Until there is REAL change in NYS classrooms, the opt outs MUST continue. Teachers supporting parents who are refusing the NYS standardized tests are supporting children and the future of public education.
“Will you please consider posting the CTA Position Statement on your blog? It is with hope that teacher associations in other school districts across NYS will have the courage to do the same.

“THANK YOU for all that you do every day to support children and educators!

“Kind regards,

“Lynn Leonard

“M E M O R A N D U M

 

“TO: Members of the Corning Teachers’ Association
FROM: CTA Executive Council
DATE: March 18, 2016
RE: New York State grades 3-8 Testing Position Statement

“We, the members of the Corning Teachers’ Association believe in academic rigor supported by engagement and the enchantment of learning. We believe that it is our responsibility to provide sound educational practices for our students, and we are to be held accountable to these practices.

 

“We believe that a strong curriculum provides time and resources for social and emotional development, practical skills, project-based and authentic learning opportunities, deep exploration of subject matters as well as a focus on social and cultural concerns. Our ultimate goal is to foster a high-quality public education system that prepares all students for college, careers, citizenship and lifelong learning, thus strengthening our social and economic well-being.

 

“We believe that the large amount of learning time that is lost through administration of these high-stakes test is not what is best for children. Mandated New York State standardized testing is an inadequate, limited and often unreliable measure for student learning. While we acknowledge that the test results are currently not tied to a teacher’s evaluation, teachers are still not given the professional freedom to design or score such tests. The delayed results are not available for use to drive further instruction or give meaningful feedback to the stakeholders.

 

“We believe that New York’s children belong to their families. We support the right of parents and guardians to choose to absent their children from any or all state and federal-mandated testing. We support the right of teachers to discuss freely with parents and guardians their rights and responsibilities with respect to such testing.

 

“The Corning Teachers’ Association will, to the best of its ability, protect and support members who may suffer the negative consequences as a result of speaking about their views of such testing or about the rights and obligations of parents and guardians with respect to such testing.”

 

A teacher left this comment on the blog:

 

 

Your blog has provided me solace in my darkest times as an educator. I have left two comments on your blog. One of the comments I left as anonymous (because I feared the consequences, some imaginary and some very real, if that mega-influential corporation worth multi-millions in California, who ran the charter school where I was last working, found out I had said anything), which you shared as a post with your readers. And another time I left a comment as myself to applaud all that you share.

 

 

I am sad to report that I have to leave this comment as anonymous as well. Although it has been almost a year since I worked at that place ( I am no longer even in that state), I still haven’t found the courage to share all that went on there. I am a daughter of a man who was granted political asylum a long time ago, a man who came to this country risking everything, including his life, so as to be able to exercise his freedom of expression. And yet here I am, afraid to share that story because of that corporation. I have enough knowledge of the law to know that I can’t be prosecuted for libel or defamation if I shared the truth. But legal action is the last thing one needs to worry about when it comes to these corporations; they can ruin your lives.

 

 

I have worked as an educator in three states now (east coast, west coast, and southwest, sorry I can’t reveal more) and I can tell you that the problem isn’t going to be fixed by either of the Democratic candidates. My African-American friends tell me that they can’t support Bernie because focusing on class takes away from focusing on race. My white friends tell me they want to support Hillary because America hasn’t had a female president yet. Relatives who have identified with the Republican party in its so called glory days feel disloyal switching parties even if they don’t support Trump. The only thing all of them have in common is they have no clue, absolutely none, about what is going on in public and charter schools. Teachers every day are dealing with parents who are really ignorant or really entitled; administrators who have very little control over decisions; and responsibilities that go far beyond inspiring real learning.

 

 

Can any candidate fix any of the following?

 

 

1) Parents, regardless of their socio-economic status, are unable to raise their children like they once could. Of course, this is even worse for those who have had to deal with generational poverty.

 

 

2) Teachers who have no mentors and are getting their lessons from Pinterest (I love all the websites for teachers; technology has made sharing of ideas so easy for educators but it doesn’t address lack of depth of knowledge that teachers now have). Teachers who have little to no knowledge of history are teaching social studies.

 

 

3) Learning for the sake of learning, for exploring curiosities that instill desire to change the world, is no longer acceptable. If you are not going to work for Google (which may not even exist by the time some of these kids grow up), what is your education worth? A college degree is now the equivalent of a high school diploma, except one used to be able to get a job with a high school diploma and could still be a literate citizen. We can’t fail kids.

 

 

4) The shoving of technology in the classrooms as a solution.

 

 

5) The preying of corporations in the form of charters on communities where you can’t find teachers, experienced administrators, and parents who don’t have knowledge.

 

 

6) The inclusion of students who once had to go to behavior programs because they just couldn’t work with other students are now the teacher’s responsibility or the parent will sue the school.

 

 

Once upon a time, Hillary Clinton wrote a book, It Takes a Village: And Other Lessons Children Teach Us that influenced me deeply. This was in 1996. I was inspired by her clarity. I wished she was the President then. Except a few years later we got the No Child Left Behind by a different president.

 

 

It baffles me how a woman who once believed and wrote, “forward-thinking teachers and school administrators across the country are creating a whole range of alternatives to cookie-cutter teaching and evaluation methods, such as the use of student portfolios and exhibitions in addition to conventional exams to assess students’ progress” could support the privatization of charters that do nothing but testing.

 

 

I have emails upon emails from former students who were passionate learners when I had them who are now stating, “we are so tired of interim testing every few weeks.” Most people don’t know that in addition to PARCC and SBACC, if the school can afford it, there is interim testing. The frequency depends on the administration. The less an administrator knows about education, the more testing there is, as if magically the students will read and write better by taking more tests.

 

 

No one is asking any candidate real questions because no one in a position to ask knows any better.

 

 

I don’t know how long we can continue fighting the good fight regardless of who “wins”. At the local district and state level, everyone is in bed with Silicon Valley in one way or another, this delusion that somehow the start-up generation is going to jump start education, a car they have never even sat in, is beyond ludicrous at this point.

 

 

Both Trump and Sanders are extremes. I am afraid Clinton will offer more of the same Obama “progress” and we just can’t have more of the same anymore. The country will crumble under Trump, an extreme, sad, crumbling, but perhaps that’s the only way forward after it all falls apart for good instead of pretending things are fine like we have for the last 8 years.

 

 

I respect all you said and all you do. I thank the Universe for this blog every night!

 

 

Sincerely,

 

 

Very tired teacher who won’t give up.

 

Mate Wierdl is a professor of mathematical sciences at the University of Memphis and a frequent commenter on the blog.

 

 

He writes:

 

 

“In math education, there’s not a single thing computers do that is necessary for a great math class. Not one. Occasional calculations? A $5 calculator does everything needed, and even at the university, a $30 Casio can even do symbolic calculations so it does more than needed. But of course, all calculations can be done by hand.

 

“There’s a free software called Sagemath. It does all possible math and statistics (and chemistry, etc) related calculations, visualizations. It can be used online or can be installed on any computer. At the university, I show it to the kids where it can be accessed. That’s all they need. It’s simple to use, and it has a freely available user guide. At home or library or computer lab, kids can use it as much as they want to. They can use it to check the solutions to all their home work, or they can do experiments with it.

 

“But whatever Sagemath can do has nothing to do with great math teaching. Great teaching is done by great teachers, so there is no choice between tablets and teachers when it comes to students’ need.

 

“If teachers’ pay doesn’t keep up with inflation, the quality of teaching will decline. If you don’t use computers in classes, quality of teaching doesn’t decline.

 

“So that’s where my priorities are: in great teaching. I believe, that’s very much in the interest of students, isn’t it?

 

“Before making yet more assumptions about my motives or state of mind, also consider the fact that I maintain computers, email and web servers, various free software, and each year I evaluate the newest software offerings that are supposed to help teachers in their work.

 

“Without exception, they are designed to take over a teachers’ job by distorting what math education is supposed to be. Kids, and that includes my daughter in 10th grade and my college freshman son, learn to press buttons, do calculations, enter solutions online with cumbersome interfaces instead of learning real math—math that would be useful and interesting for them.

 

“My daughter comes home every day and demands me to explain what she really learned in math because in class she just “learned which buttons to push to get the answers.”

 

“This pragmatic push to perceive math as a subject to get correct answers via calculations truly destroys math education.”

The schools in England are experiencing a “brain drain,” not unlike schools in the United States, and the reasons are not all that different. It is not just the pay, although low pay compared to other professions doesn’t help. It is the degradation of the profession by the government and the media. More teachers are leaving the schools than are graduating from teacher preparation institutions.

 

Francis Gilbert, a lecturer in secondary English at Goldsmiths, University of London, writes that:

 

Over the past decade, teachers have had to endure constant, chaotic policy change. These have included changes to school structures, through the introduction of academies and free schools, changes to the curriculum and exams, changes to the inspection framework, changes to policies for children with special needs, and much more.

 

Central government has put unprecedented pressure on schools to attain “top” exam results, with those schools failing to achieve certain benchmarks threatened with takeover or closure.

 

The issue here is that even the government itself has pointed out that many of these exams are “not fit for purpose”: they do not lead to productive learning in the classroom, but rather mean that teachers are forced to teach to the test.

The high-stakes nature of England’s current testing system means that teachers I’ve worked with and interviewed feel oppressed by the mechanistic ways in which they are obliged to assess students. The bureaucracy involved in creating the data needed for assessment can be very time-consuming.

 

This pressure comes to a head with visits from the schools inspectorate Ofsted. Teachers often work in fear that they will be judged as failing by the inspectorate or even by someone acting out the role of inspector – school senior leadership teams frequently run “Mocksteds” whereby teachers have to undergo a “mock” Ofsted, usually run by senior staff.

 

Government policies have encouraged candidates to see the profession as a short-term career option. Teach First is a classic example of this: the very name “Teach First” suggests that its graduate trainees should try teaching “first” and then move on to something better.

 

“Teach First” is the British version of TFA. Its recruits are likelier to leave the classroom more often than a traditionally trained teacher, who is in teaching as a career.

 

He adds:

 

There are other pressures too, and the expectations of parents and students have become increasingly unrealistic. Education has become marketised: teachers are expected by the government, parents and many students to be more like “customer service agents” delivering a product – a good grade for a student – rather than entering into a meaningful dialogue with learners and their carers about the best ways to learn.

 

Parents and students have come to expect “results on a plate” and can become very angry with teachers who “don’t deliver”. Over the last few years, pedagogues have endured rising numbers of unwarranted complaints from parents and students. I know of a brilliant, experienced teacher who was verbally abused and threatened at a recent parents’ evening by an angry mother who felt that this teacher should have “got” a better result for her child. The onus has shifted away from students to work for themselves and instead has been placed on the teacher to do the work for the student.

 

The pundits have taken to referring to teachers as “lazy” and “incompetent.”

 

It all sounds sadly familiar.

 

This is the work of GERM, the Global Education Reform Movement, the oligarch’s effort to turn schooling into a free market and to reduce the status of teaching so that costs may be cut by pushing out experienced teachers.

 

This is foolish, stupid, mad. The corporate reformers have bamboozled the public, and they are destroying education. No teachers, no education. A parade of new teachers, inferior education.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The previous post by Paul Thomas quote a post by John Warner. I read it and wondered, wow! Why didn’t I know this guy before?

 

Warner writes a devastating critique of “educational tourists” and “saviors” like Bill Gates and Mark Zuckerberg.

 

 
“This past Friday, under the headline, “The Myth of the Hero Teacher,” the New York Times shared the story of Ed Boland, an executive at Prep for Prep, a nonprofit tasked with putting minority children in elite private schools.
In 2006, Boland decided to leave Prep for Prep in order to “work on the front lines” and “be one of those teachers that kids really like and listen to and learn from….”

 
“He’d been inspired by movies like Dangerous Minds and Stand and Deliver, badass teachers that took control and led their students to the promised land of learning as measured by scores on standardized tests.

 
“Likely sniffing a fraud, Boland’s students had other ideas, challenging Bolland’s authority. As he recounts in his memoir of his experience, The Battle for Room 314, in the midst of a class disruption, a female student was, “towering above me like a pro wrestler about to pounce.” As the Times characterizes it, the student, “moved her hand in an obscene gesture then told him to perform an act that was anatomically impossible….”

 
“Boland has obviously been chastened by the experience. He seems to understand that the “hero teacher” is indeed a myth.

 
“I’m less convinced that Boland has had an awakening to where he went wrong. It appears that at least some measure of the hubris that led him into the classroom, follows him today. Reviewing Boland’s book for NPR, Nicole Dixon, a seven year veteran of NYC public schools says that Boland uses the word “monsters” to describe his students so many times that she “stopped counting.” Boland seems to understand that he was underprepared for the challenge, but also that the challenge was not winnable. If he couldn’t do it, no one can.
The seeds of Boland’s undoing are made apparent in the language he uses to describe his teaching. To Bolland, the key to success is for him to assume “control.” With control, he’s certain he can get the students to learn, inspire them to “success.”

 
“But from the beginning, it’s clear he put himself at the center of the learning equation. He wanted to be “liked” and “listened to.” He didn’t know enough that control and authority comes from respect and listening.

 
“When your chief metaphor is a “battle,” someone has to win.

 
“Those of us who teach know that control of the authoritarian variety is actually antithetical to genuine learning….

 
“Most of these saviors arrive with two things, a boatload of hubris, and a belief that the purpose of education is to help students succeed as competitors inside a so-called, meritocratic system.

 
“And the supposed key to success, according to each of these reformers, is establishing “control.”

 
“David Coleman, the “architect” of the Common Core State Standards and current president of the College Board (proprietor of the SAT) was spurred to action by his experience as a college student tutoring lower-income students in English Poetry and being surprised that “Thirty years after the civil-rights movement, none of these students were close – not even close – to being ready for Yale.”

 
“Coleman believes if he can control the curriculum and how it is assessed, he can create a level playing field. A man who has never worked in a classroom has had more influence over what is taught in schools and the chief gatekeeping test that stands between students and college than any other single person in the entire country.

 
“Unless that person is Bill Gates, another education savior who funded the development of CCSS and continues to search for a magic bullet that will allow us to control education.
The desire for “control” runs through all of our education saviors. Mark Zuckerberg’s well-meaning $100 million gift to the Newark public schools assumed that they could move teachers and families out of the way to make room for his version of “reform.”

 
“The charter school movement is predicated on gaining “control,” particularly over teachers, and yet we have a generation of data that says outcomes in charter schools are no better than traditional public schools, unless the charters (as they are wont to do) flush out the difficult students, the ones they can’t control…

 
“Ed Bolland learned what life is like without self-respect, when you have no authority or agency, and little hope. Perhaps if he’d put himself in his students’ shoes, he might’ve lasted more than a year.

 
“Maybe this is something we should bring to our discussions about education reform, less desire for control, and a little more humility. Listening, rather than telling. Those of us who have had the privilege to teach and to learn know that it is, by definition, messy, and that it necessitates risk, and giving up on control.

 
“People like Ed Boland and these other reformers are not saviors. They are education tourists. Boland has used his year as an education tourist to launch a book that’s been reviewed everywhere, and is now a sought after public speaker, a supposed expert on education and our educational system.

 
“This is like a student pilot who crashes on his inaugural flight being asked by the FAA about aeronautical safety.

 
“More and more I’m starting to think we need someone who can save us from the saviors.”

 

 

Emily Talmage teaches and blogs in Maine. She explains in this post how she developed the desire to teach, how she thought she would “save” poor kids from their “bad” teachers, how she learned her limitations, and how she learned through experience that the corporate reform narrative is a self-serving lie.

 

She writes:

 

 

 
When I was in college, I heard a riveting story.

 

Actually, you probably heard it too.

 

It went like this: American public schools are failing. Teachers have abysmally low expectations of their students. They are getting paid to spend their time in rubber rooms! This is the civil rights issue of our time.

 

I was indignant. And I needed a job.

 

And so, like so many college students of my generation, I went straight from college into a classroom in the Bronx as a New York City Teaching Fellow.

 

At first, I was elated. I had always wanted to teach elementary school, but it wasn’t really what you did if you went to a fancy and expensive college like I did. But now I had a way.

 

I was, of course, rudely awakened. You probably know this story too: young new teacher discovers she is utterly unprepared to manage a group of unruly students. She cries a lot.

 

I had taken a position teaching children with the “emotional disturbance” label in New York City’s district for students with severe special needs, and could do little more than hang on by my fingernails for the first year. They fought, they swore, and they saw me for what I was: a white girl from Maine who had no clue what she was doing. My experienced colleagues – the ones who were supposed be lazy and incompetent – offered to help, but I was a terrible listener. I was too busy searching for the story I had been told and trying the play the role I had been assigned – even though nothing fit.

 

By the end of my third year, I had grown humbler, but was no less gullible. This time, I fell for the second part of the story above – the part that tells how charter schools are the answer to all these failing public schools. You know, the Waiting for Superman story.

 

And so I left my position for one at a relatively new charter school in Brooklyn that modeled itself after the KIPP and Success Academy “No Excuses” regime.

 

You can read the details here, but the short version is that I was horrified. We snapped at the kids like dogs and obsessed over standardized test scores like they were cancer diagnoses. My previous school had been challenging, but it was full of warmth. There was no warmth at this school. No kindness. Panic filled our classrooms and hearts.

 

I have been fooled twice. Shame on me. But it won’t happen again. I hear, now, the stories reformers tell for what they are. Disrespect, hubris, empty jargon. PR.

 

Read on. Emily’s eyes were opened. And now she won’t be fooled again.

John Thompson, historian and teacher, read David Denby’s tribute to the importance of teachers on Valentine’s Day and was inspired to write a Valentine to his students.

 

He writes:

 

 

Thank you David Denby for your “Valentine for Teachers.” https://dianeravitch.net/2016/02/14/david-denby-a-valentine-for-teachers/ You wrote the unvarnished truth that explains the teacher-bashing of the last generation. “This rage” is due to a dilemma “that’s hard to talk about, and so it’s often avoided: the dismaying truth that we don’t know how to educate poor inner-city and rural kids in this country. In particular, we don’t know how to educate African-American boys.”

 

 

We know how to educate poor children of color but our segregated society doesn’t know how to scale up systems that treat all of our kids with the respect they deserve. My book, A Teacher’s Tale, is a valentine to my students. They taught me how to teach to “the Heart,” not just “the Head.” Its subtitle, Learning, Loving, and Listening to Our Kids, previews doable solutions. (Other than the obvious exceptions, the names below are pseudonyms.)

 

 

During my first semester teaching in a neighborhood school, I learned that our kids’ emotional and moral consciousness is the first rock on which great education systems must be built. Davina did not ask permission to get up and walk across the room. As I kept teaching, I wondered what was in Davina’s mind as she went to the far back corner. She acted as if she owned the place, but then again, there are worse things than students taking over their own classroom. She took a seat next to the only white kid in the room, a new transfer. Davina put her hand on the girl’s hand and said, “Honey, you look scared. Don’t worry. You will be alright.”

 

 

Yes! If we build on our kids’ decency, our democracy will be alright. And, we must stop this ceaseless focus on remediating children’s weaknesses and build on their strengths.

 
Teaching a challenging and authentic curriculum is one way to demonstrate respect for our kids. Some will recoil at reading aloud New Yorker articles, such as Marshall Frady’s “Children of Malcolm” and Connie Bruck’s “The Takedown of Tupac,” in classes where most of the kids carried felony raps, and reading comprehension ranged from 2nd grade to college level (with most being around 5th or 6th grade in comprehension.) But my kids had the background knowledge required to understand the stories’ deepest themes and how they fit into the Booker T. Washington and W.E.B. DuBois traditions (which were in the Standards of Instruction that I was required to teach.) For instance, to place the story of the hip-hop artist Tupac Shakur in its proper context, a reader had to, “Listen while I take you back and lay this rap … About a snitch named Haitian Jack.” If the New Yorker told the story of Tupac, “Shug” Knight, and “Biggy” Smalls so that middle-aged whites could understand, then it was comprehensible to these kids who knew these rappers’ stories.

 

 

At the beginning of his freshmen year, my Black Nationalist, Akili, challenged me daily. During his senior year, he borrowed every issue of my New York Review of Books. One evening we were shocked to learn that it was past 6:00 and we had been talking for hours. He had wanted to discuss Herbert Gutman’s theory about the black family. Akili said, “You are the coolest white man I’ve known. Here we are having an intellectual discussion. You respect my brain.”

 

 

The first rule of teaching should be: Listen to the students and they will teach you how to teach them. Above all, teaching is an act of love. A transfer student asked whether I had black kids, imitating my Okie accent and saying that I always talk about “ma kids.” From all across the room came shouts, “D.T. has hundreds of black kids!” One announced, “Yeah, D.T. is a playa!” High fives were shared throughout the room.

 

 

The way to scale up high-quality instruction is invite the full diversity of our society to participate in the team sport that is teaching and learning. Nothing could be more exhilarating than the cross-generational sharing of what we love. For me, it was daily pick-up basketball games and as many interactions as possible where my students and the city’s movers and shakers schooled each other. But, our kids all have different personalities and they need a diverse range of mentors.

 
The following passage, which starts in 1999, is just one example of why teaching in the inner city is the greatest calling that I can imagine but, I’ll admit, it’s my personal favorite:

 

 

By that time, my relationship with a former student, Brandy Clark, had grown especially intense. Brandy was a survivor of some of the worst generational poverty and abuse in Oklahoma’s “Little Dixie.” A turning point in our relationship occurred during a camping trip to the Grand Canyon. Our other traveling companion was Abbas, a black Muslim student. The road trip debates were endless. Being part Mexican, Filipino, and Chickasaw Indian, Brandy defined herself as both black and “multi-generational, multi-cultural,” and that upset Abbas, who defined himself only as “black,” saying he was “just keeping it real.”

 

 

My travel partners also sought clues about the secret lives of white people, and that gave me the opportunity to tell, with a straight face, why my people refuse to bring an extra change of underwear on extended camping trips. The punch line, “you all on the right, change with you all on the left” brought howls of derision, giving me a chance to reply, “just keeping it real!”

 

 

Hiking out of the Grand Canyon, Brandy introduced me to the hikers as “grandpa.” “He’s old,” she added, “I’m looking for a place to dump his body when he dies.” At the same time, Abbas reclaimed his “Indian roots” that explained his ability to scoot back and forth, discovering one new world after another. Abbas would rush up breathlessly, “I just met some Sikhs! Sikhs are monotheists in the Punjab who believe in …” Or, “this Polish family taught me …!”

 

 

The thin air and the hiking were tougher on Brandy. During a break when we were close enough to the top to see that victory was assured, she blurted out, “Nobody has ever done that before!” Nobody in her family, Brandy clarified, had ever encouraged her as I had when she struggled up the canyon. She had been warned against the trip because hiking was “just something that white people did,” and she wouldn’t be able to keep up.

 

 

Brandy was supposed to be preparing for her university scholarship audition, but she slacked off on that task. Procrastination was unlike Brandy, and her answers were unsatisfactory so I made her schedule an appointment at the Drama Department. As we pulled out of the school parking lot, Brandy said “D.T., you are going to yell. I missed my audition. … I can’t compete with those white girls from the rich schools with years of experience.” “You’re damned right I’m going to yell and yell,” I replied, “But by the time we pass 63rd Street, I’ll calm down, we’ll get it together, and you will win that scholarship!” Sure enough, Brandy swept them off their feet.

 

 

… In 2006, on the eve of taking her certification examination in preparation for moving to New York, I mentioned how I always said that I loved her “like a daughter,” and I wished that I did not have to put the qualifying phrase on the end. The next morning when driving Brandy to the testing center, we stopped for breakfast. Brandy then introduced me as, “my dad.”

 

 

During the next four years, Brandy and I shared our days’ school experiences during nightly phone conversations. Brandy’s observations about her middle school in Bedford Stuyvesant in Brooklyn were so similar to mine. Brandy said that the poverty in the projects of New York City and Oklahoma City was comparable. It was only a matter of degrees: violence and racial conflict in Oklahoma City were worse. Our state was first in incarcerating women and third in locking up men, so children brought gang loyalties with them to first grade.

 

 

Brandy now teaches in California and I’m even more convinced that she’s a genius who embodies what it really takes to provide the education that all of our kids deserve. And, guess what? This Christmas, my Jewish in-laws were visiting when Muhammad, the real “Abbas,” knocked on the door. The resulting conversation drew on close textual analyses of the Quran, the Torah, the New Testament, and contemporary politics. It was like we were back in school, sharing the joy of “teaching with an open door, an open mind, and an open heart.”

Reader Laura Chapman, retired consultant in arts education, often writes powerful comments. Here is her description of the Gates Foundation’s plans for teacher education.

 

 

Gates is not the only funder of specific content in EdWeek. Gates is also the major funder of the annual Quality Counts report in EdWeek, a report card.

 
Even more interesting is that Gates Foundation has recruited Lynn Olsen, a top EdWeek journalist, to replace Vicki Phillips whose farewell note included some self congratulations about getting the Common Core in place and so forth.

 
New initiatives for the Gates Foundation focus on getting rid of teacher education in higher education except as an authorizer of credentials, including a masters degree in “effective” teaching. More charter colleges of education are the next step. Relay is one model.
The aim is to dump scholarship in and about education within teacher preparation in favor of a bundle of “high leverage” tricks of the trade for raising test scores, with repeated practice In using these until they become automatic.
Practice could begin with teaching avatars followed by doing an on-the-job residency program, with lots of tests, online tutoring and such. Think Relay Graduate School of Education, with Doug Lemov’s bag of tricks, highly prescriptive teaching with no critical thinking allowed, 3.5 GPA for admission, content mastery tests, and so on.

 
Gates wants to control who gets to teach, where, and all of the criteria for credentialing teachers. He is certain that critical thinking and almost all scholarship bearing on education is an unnecessary distraction from raising test scores and getting kids launched into college and/or career. He has funded an “inspectorate” system for rating teacher preparation programs aimed at replacing existing state and national accreditations.

 
Look for lots of marketing of those ” high leverage” tricks of the trade via social media, especially the Twitter platform called “teacher2” or TeacherSquared. Gates is paying Relay Graduate a school of Education to exploit social media for recruiting and data gathering. Concurrently, the Foundation is also hiring a new manager to help exploit the Twitter teacher2 platform and others. The manager will be assembling a “portfolio” of social media sites united by some connection to education and, of course, the prospect of mining all of them for data.

 
The new slogan for the foundation’s work is the fuzzy and warm phrase “teachers know best”…(if they are not critical of the work of the Foundation).

 
Meanwhile the Foundation is still pushing charters and technology and teacher evaluations with VAM, observations, and student surveys, the latter from his $64 million investment in the deeply flawed Measures of Effective Teaching project.

 
Like many others, I refer to Bill Gates when the proper phrase should be the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. That is because Bill, far more than Melinda, is vocal about education and speaks as if had earned expertise sufficient to shape policy and practice on a national scale. He has lots of money and a lot of really bad ideas about education.

Peter Greene borrows concepts from sports and business to explain what teachers should be and what reformers want them to be.

He writes about the transactional coach and the transformational coach.

The transactional coach wants to win. He views each of the players for their capacity to contribute to a winning game and season.

The transformational coach tries to bring out the best in every player. The goal is developing every player’s potential, not racking up points on the scoreboard.

He writes:

“Advocates of education reform have, intentionally or not, worked to redefine teachers as transactional coaches. We are supposed to be there just to get that good test score out of each kid. We should use test prep, rewards, threats– whatever works to get the student to make the right marks on the Big Standardized Test so that we can have that easily measured, numerically-coded win. Charter schools have the additional freedom to sort students based on which ones can best complete the transaction and which ones need to be benched. And since the transaction is a fairly simple, we have no shortage of ideas about how to have it broken into short, simple competency-based transactions that can be handled by a computer.

“Transactional coaching is simple, clear and can provide distinct short-term rewards. It is also narrow, shallow, and ultimately subordinates humanity and the value of individuals to an artificial and ultimately meaningless excuse for a life purpose. Transformational coaching is way to see the pursuit of athletic excellence as a means of pursuing human excellence and giving an athlete the tools to pursue whatever goals they might set for themselves. A transformational approach puts humanity at the center, setting goals that recognize higher values than the simple pursuits in front of us. A transactional approach sets up an artificial goal and holds it up as a god to be worshipped and pursued at the expense of any human beings who stand in the way. Can there be any doubt that education should be transformational?”

I don’t often disagree with Peter, but in this case, I think the King of Metaphor is not right. If he refers to a life coach, he makes an important point. If he refers to a sports coach or a business leader, the metaphor fails. The business wants to make a profit, and the CEO has to produce or be fired. In sports, every school or university wants a winning team, and they care more about the results, the scores, than human potential.

Teaching is not sports, not business. It is the profession of developing children into responsible young adults.

Daniel Katz teaches secondary education at Seton Hall University in Néw Jersey. In this post, he warns his students not to join Teach for America and explains why.

He writes:

If you are tempted to join TFA, DON’T DO IT.

“I don’t come to this advice lightly, and while I respect that my students might be excited to join an organization that says it is dedicated to getting young and talented people into classrooms with our most needy students, there is literally nothing positive that Teach For America offers my students that they cannot do for themselves. And what they package with those positives is entirely negative for our profession. There are a number of truths about TFA that my students should consider before seeking an application….”

“First, Teach For America needs my students far more than they need TFA.” My students, he says, are fully licensed and certified. They don’t need TFA. It needs them.

“Second, Teach For America will challenge my students’ beliefs about quality education….but not in a good way.” They may find themselves in a charter school that is non-union and believes in a behaviorist approach to teaching.

“Third, Teach For America denigrates our profession, ultimately harming children in the process.” The claim that great teachers can be forged in five weeks of training makes a mockery of the profession.

He concludes:

“It is past time for young people to stop lining up to “Teach For America,” and there is no reason that my students – who have earned the title of professional teacher through years of hard work – should ever join them. I work with amazing and talented young people, many of whom are passionate about working with our schools’ most at risk children. They can do that brilliantly, and more effectively, without Teach For America.”