Here is a series of articles concerning things that happen in education. My intention is to think of ways to solve problems as they roll around in my mind. You are free, of course, to agree or disagree with my thoughts; I do not intend to be disrespectful or offensive to anyone.
October 22, 2009: “Specials”
After all these years, a term has settled at our school. The term is refers to Art, P.E., and Music classes as “specials”. I tend to call these classes Art, P.E., and Music instead. These classes are called “special” while the room where we learn Math, Reading, Science, etc., is called the “regular” classroom? Doesn’t that seem to stress that those subjects are more important than the core subjects? Those subtleties can affect people’s perceptions.
__________
October 8, 2009: Cramming for the Test
How are things out there in Educationland? Can you see the real world from there?
Reality may actually be getting lost in our educational bubble these days. Blame No Child Left Behind (NCLB), Standards-Based Lessons if you want. Blame the federal mandates, the state requirements, or the local answers to such if you would like. The reality is this: the art of education seems to be losing to the science of education.
These days, if you aren’t following the latest extreme trends of constant data collection and evaluation, you are considered to be a quality teacher – but where is the consideration of the chemistry and overall morale of the classroom? Where is the consideration that every class is not created equal? Those things should still make a difference in America.
While we get trapped in the thoughts of we must compete with the international community, we lose sight that we are already the freest, most advanced nation in the world. We lose sight of the idea that some other nations track their students into mandatory trades at early ages, that they have higher suicide rates, that poverty rates are higher within their borders. Something about America works when there is supervision, but local control. By that I mean education seems to work better in our area when the federal government keeps its distance (Missouri was headed in the right direction before NCLB.); it is more effective when the state gives local districts more control over the way they spend money; and it is more competitive and beneficial when the district considers that every school needs to be treated differently. I suppose this idea can even be considered at the classroom level – that the professional educator inside the classroom is the best judge of methodology and material for his or her students in most cases.
That doesn’t mean there is no supervision at any level – just more trust and respect for the soldiers in the trenches. Educationland could be swallowed, chewed, and spit out a soggy lumpy mess across this country if someone with authority doesn’t finally stand up among the masses and say we’ve had enough. Everything about education doesn’t need to be fixed 100% of the time. It’s time our elected officials stand back, take a microscopic survey of the requirements and the responses to those requirements, and make an honest assessment of all of it. Teachers and students, the soldiers on the front lines, are usually professional and conscientious enough to make the kind of adjustments needed without being force-fed and choked out at the same time.
__________
July 9, 2009: Tech du Jour?
We were just dismissed from this morning’s technology workshop about social networking. I know there are teachers out there using Facebook, Twitter, and other social sites with students and for professional development contacts, but I tend to think that a lot of these “tools” are just the tech fad of the moment.
I signed up for today’s training because I wanted to know if there was something I’m not seeing, but have yet to see why I need a new “tool” to do some of the things I already do. I was honest when the presenter asked what I was thinking and I told her that I already have things set up to do many of the activities that Twitter and Facebook address.
For instance, we have discussion groups on our class website. Students may ask me to sign them up on the Hoggatteer Forums, and they may post remarks. This is safe for students and I still have control over them. We are also on Gaggle so students may email, blog, and chat in a safe environment, and again, I retain control over the conversations and posts. These are all great tools and can achieve all the things that I can see as useful on Twitter and Facebook.
As for professional development applications, that’s just not how I’m wired. I don’t like to sort through what someone else suggests is useful; I’d rather find my own materials and ideas. Besides, I don’t need to follow anyone and I don’t want to be followed – That just seems weird! – and I don’t need to know every mundane detail about someone.
Many of the teachers now have Facebook pages, and the crazy things about it is that they talk about what they see or read on each other’s Facebook. I sit and listen to a point, until I finally get frustrated; I made a rule at the end of the school year that if it’s on Facebook then it must stay on Facebook, but if they want to communicate with human beings, they can talk to each other. Rather than post on a site for people to read, they can just talk to those people – especially if those are the things they’re talking about anyway.
They tell me it’s a great way to keep in touch with people from their pasts, but I’ll tell you, there may be a reason why those people are in your past. I don’t need to be in touch with most of the people from high school. If they were close friends, I could have kept in touch with them through the years. It’s not that I’m not interested; it’s just that I would rather focus my attention on the people I’m closer to now. Remember what Pumba said in The Lion King: “Keep your behind in the past!”
__________
June 26, 2009: Enabling Bad Habits
I’ve attended three of my daughter’s kindergarten assemblies, this summer, and I’ve discovered that it’s hard to keep my teacherness aside. It happens in our own school as well. I get frustrated when I see another teacher who watches the stage and not her misbehaving students. I get frustrated when I see students blatantly breaking the dress code. For that matter, I get frustrated when I see teachers who do not dress professionally too.
I really believe – and I’m not wrong here – that establishing some standards at younger ages will help students as they mature. The more a student is allowed to be tardy, the more a student is allowed to dress provocatively, the more a student is allowed to slack on homework or other assignments, the harder it is to break those bad habits.
I don’t fault primary teachers for being loving, empathetic, compassionate, fun-loving, and energetic, but I do wish some of those things did not come at the sacrifice of solid procedures and serious study practices. I was highly appreciated and loved when I taught first and second grades, yet I was still able to stick to some of these principles. That’s not to say that it’s easy, but I know it can be done.
__________
May 23, 2009: “This Ain’t NASCAR”
There are appropriate times for appropriate behaviors – like whistling and hollering at a dignified school assembly. When I arrived at Cecil Floyd in 1995, I was impressed by the respectful dignity of our assemblies. The applause was appropriate and the yelling was shunned.
In 14 years, the customs have apparently changed. The changes are being brought about by the parents who talk throughout the awards presentation and cheer aloud for their own children crossing the stage. As much as one might be led to believe that such actions are positively supporting our students, they are really misleading students to think those behaviors are appropriate without regard to the circumstances.
I once coined the phrase that headlines this entry. My high school writing teacher, Mr. Kennedy, used to say, “This ain’t no disco.” It meant the same thing – that there are certain behaviors that should be squelched at certain events.
__________
April 27, 2009: Weakest Links or Stronger Chains
The word equity describes a trend in larger school districts in which multiple schools exist. The concern of administrators is typically described as this: students are transient within the district, moving from school to school throughout the year. These students, they contend, are instructed by one teacher in certain areas and often moves into a new classroom where the new teacher teaches the same thing. The student, they say, gets the same instruction twice and inevitably misses out on something else.
I understand that. I understand the concern and the logic. However, it seems that individuality and creativity are often compromised by the solution offered by administrators. Their solution is to try to make all schools the same – not only in suggesting all teachers be on similar topics and the same time (and often suggesting that they teach them with the same methods), but also by only allowing schools to offer the same amenities and programs.
This does not always work. I would point out that schools must have individual personalities. Those personalities make schools unique and allow a school to shine.
In our district, some schools are more technologically-rich than others, perhaps due to teacher initiative; some have better playgrounds due to grants being written; others have reading coaches from the community, organized by the district; still others are allowed to attend special trips to Silver Dollar City or Worlds of Fun.
Our school is well-known for our December craft show which brings in about half of the funds for our PTO. Our school is also twice as big as the other schools.
The problem is this: when our school or our PTO want to pay for something special – some particular program or initiative – we can’t always have the permission to carry on. The reason given is that other schools don’t have the same opportunities (Read: equity). Does that mean that we can only have or do what everyone else is capable of having or doing? One, that means no school can ever be more than the weakest link; and two, that means a lot of the things other schools have really need to spread to ours.
Again, I understand the intention of equity, but intention is not always what is best for a school. I would rather see initiative rewarded and challenges met. That means that schools are made equitable by reaching to the strongest link rather than held back to a weakest link. Stronger links will make a stronger chain when we all pull together!
Please understand that my analogies are not meant to indicate that any school has less potential than any other. My “weakest link” metaphor is meant as a tool for illustration. Indeed, all of our schools have the potential for great achievement, but only when allowed to have their own personalities.
__________
April 1, 2009: Spring Pictures and Lawn Mowers
Why, during our mandatory state testing, do we inevitably have the same struggles for sanity? Today, all 600+ students in our building had their spring pictures taken. They had to choose from five possible poses in the photos, which caused the lines to take longer than usual. The biggest problem with the operation is always the fact that there is no scheduled time for the sittings. Our turn finally came 10 minutes before lunch, which put time at a premium.
Then, like clockwork, the mowers started their incessant hum. We can predict, every year, when the first grass cutting will be: the first day of state testing. It is inevitable. Why, after we get it hammered to us to minimize distractions for students during this week, does the maintenance department get left out of the loop on that memo? It’s almost funny.
So many times, these extra distractions and time out of the classrooms could be avoided with a little logic and better planning. It all comes down to a communication gap that we must continue to try to close.
__________
November 14, 2008: I Want to Teach
Sure, you go in knowing you will face discipline issues, paper grading, and lesson planning, but there is a number of things that they don’t tell you about when you enter the teaching profession.
For instance, the constant assessment and the number of hours spent in the classroom on testing is, at times, excessive. Simply put, it takes hours upon hours from teaching.
Paperwork necessary for special education students and the assessment of these students, at times, takes time from the teacher. This is time that could otherwise be utilized by planning and preparation, or grading.
Then there are the little things. These are the things that appear small and quick, but when piled up with all the other little things, they are the mountain a teacher must climb in order to get back to the job. These may include, but are not limited to, the passing out of notes from various sources, answering requests from counselors, principals, literacy specialists, and parents or parent organizations.
While we are all in this together, sometimes a teacher feels overwhelmed by the little things. Many times, a teacher just needs to teach. To do the job they hired him for. To define his title. While we all have good intentions, some of those intentions are only half-realized due to the sheer volume. I would rather dig deep than wide, doing what I know I am good at, but this is not always possible when I have to wade through so much red tape for some people while jumping through hoops for others.
Sometimes it feels like I have to “play the game”, and that’s not a healthy way to look at the career. Play the game? Should that be the mantra we chant when we are dealing with the lives and futures of our students. I believe our children deserve more than just a part-time teacher. I would rather give them all the attention I can and leave out some of the testing and other distractions that get thrown our way.
I just want to teach and leave the peripheries to the, well, peripheral.
__________
November 8, 2008: Kiddos
There is a growing trend in our fair city for teachers, principals, and counselors to call students kiddos. “We’re doing this for the kiddos,” they’ll say. “I need this information about your kiddos,” or, “Let me know how your kiddos do on this project.” I don’t know what has sparked this trend or why it seems to be expanding, but it doesn’t make sense. Why call children kiddos? It would be easier to just call them kids. I, of course, prefer students. Or even pupils (though I’m the only one who uses that word any more. At any rate, I refuse to call them kiddos.
Unless they start calling me an adulto.
__________
November 7, 2008: School Store
The concept is a good one, but the execution loses its purpose. The school store should primarily supply the opportunity for students to get school supplies they need. A secondary purpose is to collect funds to be used for our school.
It seems that most of the time my students spend their money in the school store on items they don’t need. In fact, many of the items offered are only in the display case because they appeal to kids and will bring in a larger profit. These are the same items that get in the way of learning – the scented pencils packaged in tubes, the fuzzy erasers, the car-shaped pencil sharpeners. Now I find myself picking up pieces of these items from the floor, constantly reminding students to put the items away and to stop playing with them, and finally telling them to take the items home.
In this sense, many items in the case are actually hindering education in my classroom instead of enhancing it.
__________
November 1, 2008: But the Kids Like It
“It was a fun activity. It wasn’t educational, but the kids liked it.” So?
“I think we should do [such and such] because the kids’ll really get into it.” Why?
“We should have [silly hat day, inside out clothes day, crazy socks day].” For what reason?
How often do we excuse ourselves from the educational process because it isn’t fun? How often does an educator avoid a lesson or a set of lessons because s/he doesn’t think the students will “get into it”? In fact, don’t we often increase the number of distractions in the school setting and actually make education more difficult for both student and teacher?
Whether we call ourselves, teachers or educators, facilitators or tutors, we must acknowledge that our primary job is described in our title. It is to teach, to educator, to facilitate, and to tutor; it is not to organize “fun” activities solely to entertain students. No, the fun comes in the learning. Students interests are piqued when they “get into” the meat of a lesson, when they make connections with the real world, with their lives, and with their futures. Students have “fun” when they are allowed to “put together” their knowledge and skills collaboratively with their peers, parents, and teacher.
They enjoy education when they face a challenge, meeting it dead on with the “weapons” of battle, and conquering it. Only when they can look at their achievements can they truly understand their accomplishments.
__________
October 21, 2008: Beware Endorsements
From time to time, teacher unions make political endorsements – either for a particular candidate or by taking a stand on a specific issue. This election cycle is no different. The general public may not realize that these groups do not speak for all educators. Please do not believe that just because a union gives its opinions that it is representative of all (or even most) teachers. In fact, in Joplin, no teacher association represents a majority of the teachers, and even within those associations educators may disagree on the best candidates or the best ways to vote on issues.
Before us in this election cycle is a proposition that lifts restrictions on casinos in Missouri. This proposition is touted as being good for education, but citizens need to weigh their choices carefully. There is a lot to this proposition that is sitting in the background. Please read it carefully before you vote for or against it.
I have found that when money is earmarked for education, other monies that already feed our schools are redistributed outside of education. The new money comes in – usually at a lower rate than what was promised – and the old money disappears. Consequently, education ends up being used as a pawn for somebody’s pet project.
Amazingly those pet projects are often in questionable company. I find it peculiar that education has been used as a pawn for the tobacco, alcohol, and gambling industries. Isn’t it interesting that these claim to be such supporters of education?
The bottom line is this: if you plan to vote, learn about the issues and candidates. Then, vote your conscience. Whichever “side” or candidate wins, we will all have to live with the winning concept or person as a part of our lives.
__________
October 20, 2008: Criticism Versus Negativity
I learned a very important lesson when I was in my high school speech classes: criticism is a good thing. With the many experiences I’ve had with criticism, I conclude that this is true. However, with some people today, any critique of a program or a person, of an action or an idea, is considered to be negativity. These days, if someone doesn’t have something nice to say, they are asked to keep their thoughts to themselves.
However, I tend to disagree that meaningful criticism is negative. Don’t count out an individual’s ability to dissent. Don’t discount a person’s ability to question the authenticity of information or the methods of research. Only by asking questions and challenging purposes and ideas will we be able to make informed decisions and reinforce our beliefs. That, friends, is important.
In fact many great leaders became great because they did this very thing. I do not want to be limited by a group leader merely because s/he does not want to be challenged, and I do not want to limit the thinking of my students for the same reason. Although criticism may be taken as negative, or even cynicism at times, one must seek its design, purpose, and intention. And then, one may find a catalyst for personal, professional, and even spiritual growth.
__________
September 20, 2008: Handicapping Children?
I often wonder how far people will go in handicapping children these days. It seems that with autism on the rise in the world, that the autistic agenda is driving education. That’s not to say that autism isn’t an authentic disorder, but much like cancer, autism is now the catch-phrase for all kinds of developmental problems.
I recognize that every autistic person is different, and I’ve hosted a few in my classroom. One had a minutely limited vocabulary and often yelled out in class. Another was in the gifted program and was prone to violently “melting down”. Still another was satisfied with just sitting and frequently refused to try new things. There has even been a student who tended to eat items, including library books.
No, I recognize that autism is a very real and a very serious problem, but along Attention Deficit Disorder (ADD) and Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD), autism is often the label we place on children when they are having difficulty in the classroom. I would never question the cases that have darkened our classroom door, but I often question whether we should use those labels in prescribing “solutions” or making “excuses” for other students.
Case in point: the teachers in our building often support and promote “sensory” solutions to hyperactivity or lethargy. We often subscribe to the belief that kids must be stimulated in order to sit still, focus on a lesson, or in a nutshell, generally behave. Nowadays refusal to eat new foods is considered a sensory issue – the body rejecting the texture of a food due to the senses. Today, grinding teeth is considered to be a sensory issue – the body craving deep pressure in the mouth.
Is this really the blanket that we want to use to cover all of these children? Are we overreacting? Instead, might some of these problems be merely bad habits? Could some of these students overcome a bad habit and live as normal as his or her classmates? I wonder if we give these students (and I’m not saying all of them) sensory tools, are we feeding the fire? Are we nurturing and reinforcing a bad habit that could simply be overcome? Do we too often reach for “coping mechanisms” instead of finding a “cure”?
I’ve met parents who seem to want their children to fall into these categories – ADD, ADHD, and even autism – and I’m not sure why. Perhaps to receive benefits of some sort, though I’m not sure how these work. Maybe to gain some sympathy or let them off the hook for the poor behavior choices of their children, though I would hope not. I would prefer to try other methods first, just to see if the “sensory” issues of a particular child could be dealt with in such a way that would allow the child to function more normally in the future. That wouldn’t be trying to force a square peg into a round hole. Or would it?
Perhaps a square peg isn’t perfectly square. Perhaps with a little sanding around the edges, a square-ish peg could learn to fit in a round hole – not because we want cookie-cutter kids, but because I want well-behaved kids. Every one of us needs a break now and then. Some of us do better work when we’re standing up or when we’re belly-down on the floor. We all need to stretch from time to time. We need to take restroom breaks, and snack breaks, and breaks in general. But do we all need to chew on rubber necklaces or sit on giant rubber balls?
It may be that a child can’t sit still because he hasn’t ever been required to sit still. It could be that a child doesn’t listen because she hasn’t been taught how to listen. Granted, these children may have an authentic case of ADD, ADHD, autism, or worms of some sort, but I’m just not buying that we should handicap them all with “lap buddies” and scooter boards. I would hope some of them could learn to drop the velcro vests and the weighted blankets. I would think some of them grow out of their need for special lighting and swinging from the ceiling or squeezing through padded rollers. And I pray for the eradication of all of these disorders that are affecting a frighteningly increasing number of children.
__________
September 19, 2008: Grade Level Meetings
From time to time, the district has scheduled “grade level meetings” for teachers in elementary school. These meetings are meant to be times when teachers from like backgrounds may share and collaborate with one another – and not just with other teachers in our own buildings. This, however, is often not what we do when given the opportunity. For years, I have tried to explain this to our administrators, but it doesn’t seem to have had any effect.
I was the fourth grade teacher leader for these meetings during two years. I quickly learned that either the principals who oversee the group would attempt to take the meetings from me to promote their own agendas or they would leave it completely to me to make up the presentation with little or no input from them. I, of course, preferred the latter, but there has to be something in between these two extremes.
Our current teacher leader is a good friend of mine who teaches in another building in the district. She is a hard worker who could lead the group in a collaborative manner if given the opportunity, but it appears her authority to do so has been stripped by the current principals in charge. We spend more time getting into groups based on some gimmicky method or other than we do actually working in our groups.
For example, today was a day for students to be out of school. Teachers began our day in these grade level meetings. For a full hour and thirty minutes (literally), we spent time listening to our two principals telling us what changes the district is now imposing on fourth grade teachers. During this time we were also told that the tests we had just put student numbers on had to have the student numbers put on in a different manner. We were told that each 10-digit number, along with its unique set of bubbles, had to be erased and re-entered in a different location. For each student. For each test. Two tests per student. And yes, I said an hour and thirty minutes. This was not a good way to start a meeting.
After this, we were treated to three teachers from other buildings sharing teaching methods with the group. This was what the grade level meetings were designed to be! These teachers gave us some terrific tools that could be used in our classrooms, and I’ve already though of how to do just that.
However, this was such a small part of our meeting that it left me wanting more. For the remainder of the meeting (35 minutes to be exact), we used 20 minutes getting into groups (based on some inessential criteria) and 15 minutes to think of ways to improve test scores in particular areas. Read that again: 20 minutes to get into the groups and 15 minutes to work. More time to group than to work – now something just isn’t right about that.
My friend, the teacher leader, is by no means to blame for the agenda or its execution. I just wish she would be given the opportunity to lead these meetings and not have them hijacked from her. I know things can be better than this. I don’t write about it here in order to whine and complain – I know it could be interpreted like that – but to work on a solution. I already have an idea I would like to pitch to our administrators that could help keep these meetings from floundering out if control and keep them working progressively for our district.
__________
September 2, 2008: We’re Spending Your Tax Dollars
There are times when I feel that there is some waste in my profession. We do our best to distribute funds fairly. We also want those dollars to be spent in ways that will increase learning the most. That doesn’t always happen. I’ve sat in many workshops and meetings and wondered how much the district is spending to pay every person in the room.
The same goes with earmarked monies that come into districts across the country. I am not impressed with the “good intentions” of whomever put the regulations on these monies. Title 1 and Professional Development money are two of the most deadly culprits of this.
For example, our school is provided with thousands of dollars for professional development. Every year, a committee deliberates on how to use the money to train the teachers, and every year, the committee tries to spend every dollar.
Sometimes I wonder if we could achieve more by giving those same teachers some time to do the jobs they already have instead of funneling them all into a one-size-fits-all workshop. The same people who want teachers to differentiate to accommodate students with different learning styles want to present the same thing to all teachers in the same ways – with no differentiation – and the bottom line is that often means we all end up doing someone’s pet project or solution-of-the-week.
__________
August 29, 2008: A Pendulum and Some Magic Paper
I, along with most educators these days, struggle with this idea of constantly assessing students with prepackaged reading fluency and reading comprehension tests. These are not state- or nationally-mandated assessments, the district spends good money for them, and a great deal of classroom (Read: “teaching”.) time is spent administering them.
The latest in a series of these “this’ll fix all our woes” testing programs to hit Joplin is the DRA2. This is an extensive assessment that takes considerably more time to administer than any of its predecessors. I remember the days when I could teach instead of cramming teaching in between tests. Those were the days, by the way, that I actually saw more progress in the state test scores for my students. Those were the days when teaching (and learning) was more interesting and more fun. Those were the days of creativity and forward thinking.
In these times, with pressures from the state and from No Child Left Behind, district leaders and, in my opinion, misguided gurus, strongly encourage every teacher to “be on the same page”. Now I have no problem with having common goals, but being “on the same page” seems to have taken on a whole new meaning in education. It now means I have to read and follow scripts written by someone who wants to sell thousand-dollar boxes full of paper (tests, instructions, and DVDs). It means I have to follow the same script as all the other teachers in the school, in the grade-level, and in the district. And frankly, it is stifling to the out-of-the-box teacher I have always been.
This all comes at the same time that the technology department wants to see more “constructivist” lessons, authentic instruction, and active, student-driven, real-life presentations. Perhaps now you can see my struggle. While it has often been declared that there is a pendulum that swings from one extreme to another in this business, I don’t think it has ever swung so sharply in two ways at the same time. Who would have even imagined such a thing possible?
How do I teach in this way and still follow a script? It is, of course, impossible. And common sense dictates that taking time from the class to assess the class means I’m not teaching the class for that time. It simply means I have less time to teach the growing amount of “stuff” the state and district requires me to teach. It is an ongoing struggle that is imposed on all teachers.
My solution: grab that pendulum the next time it swings my way and tie it off with a steel cable! It’s been swinging way too fast lately, and we foot soldiers at the front all recognize the obvious: that we aren’t even being allowed to try ideas for long enough to determine whether or not they work. We can’t even stick with a bad idea for long enough to see that it’s bad before some other smooth-talking “expert” sells us another box full of magic paper.
__________
July 16, 2008: Trained Monkeys
I’d like for some people to realize that their methods of teaching do not work for every teacher. I myself have trained many groups of teachers, or at the very least shown them what works for me in my classroom. The difference is that I would never expect or inflict my teaching methods on someone else. It’s very likely that they wouldn’t work very well. So instead I encourage people to take the parts that will work for them and infuse them into their own lessons.
These days people (educators) seem to want a script provided for them. They tend to want to make every classroom teaching the same things at the same times using the same words. That is not only unrealistic, it’s ridiculous.
Teachers have different personalities, and their teaching should reflect this. They also have different chemistry with their students, and their teaching must reflect this. Give some a script, and they can make it work for them (I would question whether they are actually teaching or if the material is doing the teaching, but they make it work nevertheless.). Give me a script, and things fall apart. That’s not me. It ties my hands and restricts my creativity.
That’s what has happened in the last two or three years. I’ve felt my hands being tied, and classes have suffered as a result. Attempting to be professional, I’ve done what I’ve been told, tried the methods that have come down the turnpike (the programs that some people have bought into hook, line, and sinker), and they haven’t become my own. These methods don’t fit my personality, the class knows it’s not genuine, and our chemistry doesn’t work.
There’s a fine line between doing what you’re being told to do and doing the things that have been proven to work. Which is really more professional – teaching students and getting mediocre to poor results by following someone’s script, or teaching students in ways that work and getting great results, flourishing kids, and happy parents? I know my answer.
__________
July 15, 2008: Teachery Gimmicks
Here’s another one along the same line. Have you noticed teachers who try to make everything gimmicky? What I mean is this: it’s not good enough for them to tell the class to cross their arms, they have to say “buckle your seat belts”; it’s not good enough to tell students to stop talking, they have to tell them to turn off their radios; it’s not good enough to say, “sit cross-legged”; they have to say, “Criss-cross applesauce” (Now really, what does that one mean?). Everything is a gimmick.
I believe students in elementary school can do things when they are asked to do them. It’s kind of a waste of my and their time for me to have to explain all of my little secret code words and phrases; it’s a waste of time to keep repeating those phrases until they figure them out; it’s not the way the “real world” operates; and it’s confusing for kids. Besides, I wouldn’t appear the slightest bit genuine trying these things.
So, you don’t have to worry about Mr. Hoggatt asking the class to give itself a literal pat on the back or telling the class to “give them a round of applause” and clapping in a circle. We won’t be doing the weird chants just to get their attention. I don’t want to hear another person tell me that they do these things just because “the kids really get into it”, either. My bottom line is this: the kids can really get into the actual material they’re supposed to be learning, too, if a teacher will get into it and promote it as excitedly as she does these little gimmicks. The material might actually have meaning outside the classroom as well.
Where do I want to focus my time and energy as an educator? How about on the actual educational material and processes? Kids understand gimmicks are gimmicks. In the fourth grade, they already know how hokey some things are, and they recognize when someone is just trying to be cutesy just to get their attention. I have more respect for my students than to not recognize that.
__________
July 14, 2008: They Won’t Know They’re Learning?
I’ve heard it every year. A teacher or a trainer will inevitably say, “If you make it fun enough, they won’t even know they are learning.” I propose that if a student does not realize he is learning, he isn’t learning properly. I believe that a student needs to “feel” the process of learning in order to appreciate it and want to learn more. However, I do realize this is a difficult thing for a teacher to accomplish for a class.
Many times, when a teacher makes that statement – that making a class fun so students won’t know they are learning – there is actually no learning, only fun. The learning becomes secondary or it doesn’t exist at all. In fact, I’ve seen teachers directing activities that have little to do with the learning process – all with the intent of making it fun.
Instead, I strive to make learning interesting, intriguing, and satisfying. At times that means it’s also fun and entertaining, but in the end it is a process that is felt – like growing pains – and appreciated. It is likened to climbing a mountain – if it isn’t difficult it isn’t much of an accomplishment, is it? If it doesn’t come with a cost, it’s not worth as much. For education to have value, I must set things up so students will go through the process of learning, wrestling with material and struggling to work within a group of their peers; I must not make it fun for fun’s sake.
__________
July 13, 2008: All On the Same Page
By now, you know I don’t do things to things just to go along with the crowd. It’s not that I’m not a team player; it’s just that I never wanted to be like everybody else. It’s interesting, though, how many times professional development leaders and teachers want their classes to “all be on the same page”, and if you’re not, you can be instantly classified as a trouble maker or a party pooper.
I really think this is true among elementary teachers who tend to have cheerleader flashbacks. They forget they are adults and can make their own decisions, that they don’t have to go along with a crowd. They go along more often than you would expect. And they often do it under the guise of “being team players”. Strangely enough, they even use the same subconscious bully-style tactics that our peers tried to encourage underage drinking, drugging, and sex. They may say you’re not cool, or they may just dismiss you as a loser. Luckily, that kind of pressure never worked for me, and I’m here to tell you it doesn’t bother me.
That doesn’t work well with my personality. I would feel like a lemming if I just went along like they expect me to. I have never followed the crowd and don’t expect to any time soon. The way I look at it is this: I try to teach my students to think for themselves – why wouldn’t I want to do differently? Going along with the crowd or being a unique individual – which do you want for your child?
__________
July 12, 2008: Make It Richer
Here’s another thought: people have told me that it’s OK that a student won’t perform a certain skill due to not being developmentally ready for it. That’s all right as a general statement for most students, but not for every student. Being a certain age does not mean you must always be held to the average! A student may indeed be at that level or even below average, but that does not mean all students are. In fact, some are more than ready to move on, and I think it’s wrong to hold them back to match the rates of their peers.
That being said, I do not like the idea of moving students into other grade levels, where they are not physically matched by larger kids and their interests may not compare. I prefer, instead, to make their experiences richer. Additionally, I find that most of these students still lack other skills and need to construct those foundations before trying to build higher. For example, they may lack the ability to communicate their thoughts or work socially and cooperatively with others. Perhaps they need help reasonably explaining their answers. In such a case, it becomes an added responsibility of parents and teachers to help them find the tools to lay those foundations and dig deeper into their interests and strengths, being careful not to push them to the breaking point.
But don’t tell me they can’t do something because of their ages. Some can do things despite their ages.
__________
July 10, 2008: We Must Reinvent the Wheel
July is the month of professional development for some teachers. I have been a mentor for technology training, this week, and I am taking a couple of classes myself in the next couple of weeks. Inevitably, in one of these trainings, someone – a trainer or a participant – will say something about not having to “reinvent the wheel”. Now, I’m sorry, but that statement is a symbol of laziness to me.
First, not reinventing the wheel means someone wants to use someone else’s work instead of coming up with his or her own. And second, if no one ever reinvents the wheel, how will our cars ever get off the ground?
Do you understand this last question? What I mean is that if we keep training students to make cars the same way cars are already made, then cars will always be the same. Not with better fuel efficiency. Not more aerodynamic. No more headroom or cargo space. And they’ll never fly like they did in Back to the Future or The Jetsons. I believe all the great inventors, explorers, and leaders in the world were people who “reinvented the wheel”.
And it really bothers me when educators use that phrase as an excuse to steal material from other people without changing it at all. I won’t say I don’t use suggestions or materials from other teachers or researchers, but I always alter it when necessary in order to make it fit with my own teaching personality. In short, I try to reinvent the wheel almost every time I set out to create a new unit or event for my classroom. When it works, it’s amazing.
