New Terrain

At 24, I'm old enough to truly understand the value of an excellent education. But I'm also young enough to realize that (many) kids don't go to school only to learn. They go to school to socialize. (Admit it. You don't remember the finer points of Dr. Chase's knockout social studies lesson on Cameroon. You remember the finer points of Kevin from Spanish class.)

So isn't it a disservice to students when we take away key opportunities to learn how to socialize appropriately with their peers? I thought my colleague was joking when she mentioned this article over lunch: "Va. School's No-Contact Rule Is a Touchy Subject."

But no, it's for real.

Appropriate touching is an inevitable part of personal and professional socialization. I high-five, hug and shake hands all the time. People would think I was weird if I didn't. Or at least unfriendly. By banning appropriate touching along with the inappropriate, we are silently teaching our children that all human contact is bad. Far worse than that, by not taking time out to teach acceptable behaviors and problem solving skills in school, we're cultivating a generation of people who will lack these abilities in society.

Also, check out what blogger and psychologist Dr. Helen has to say about this rule.

Posted by Jessica Shyu at 6:39 PM | Permalink | Comments (3)

As a 22-looking-like-15-year-old teacher starting out two years ago in my own classroom teaching middle schoolers, some of whom actually were 15, it was tempting to use the "buddy" motivation system. I don't look tough. The "No smiling 'til Christmas" rule was dumb. And back then, I had no strong classroom management backbone. I just wanted to be the nice, friendly teacher who everyone liked and therefore behaved for. My lessons were going to be fun, I was going to teach math with different countries as monthly themes. They were going to love me.

Needless to say, the super nice teacher approach didn't survive long. Nor did the monthly themes. I soon learned that I needed to be firm and that my time was focused on lesson planning and grading. Not integrating theme units. At least not yet.

I still got along well with most of my students, but not all of them. There was one eighth grader, "Natasha," who refused to speak to me. She always maintained an angry glare at me during lectures. At one point, she nodded when I asked if she didn't like me personally.

I was reminded of Natasha the other day when I read a study published by the Hoover Institution. It said that in low-income schools, parents prefer putting their students in high-performing teachers' classrooms. In more affluent schools, where high performance is likelier the norm, parents request teachers who offer the most student satisfaction.

Natasha was definitely not a satisfied student. But after awhile, I stopped feeling hurt. The girl learned. Her original IEP goals focused on subtraction. By Christmas, she had memorized her multiplication facts, and was working on multi-operation equations. It was incredible. So what if she still didn't speak to me?

But once she graduated from middle school, she kept coming back. She would loiter around and help with the Art Club. She would cut papers. She still wouldn't talk to me really. She just kind of tagged along.

A few weeks later her mother dropped by and mentioned how much of a difference I made in Natasha. Even though high school was a tough transition, Natasha was able to go into inclusion pre-algebra and be ahead of the class. Her confidence increased and she became more comfortable with her other classes too.

I was taken aback. In my first-year confusion, I had assumed that even though Natasha learned tremendous amounts, she would never really appreciate me, because she didn't like me. Luckily, I was wrong. We may not have had a lot of fun during the school year, but she made incredible academic gains. And it was those gains that took her far and brought her back.

This study by the Hoover Institution is yet another reminder that while no matter how impoverished or under-educated families may be, they still want the best for their children. What they didn't mention was that even though some of them might not realize or articulate it, students want the best for themselves too.

Posted by Jessica Shyu at 10:27 PM | Permalink | Comments (1)

Teach with examples. Offer real-life scenarios. Use visuals if appropriate.

Less than two weeks ago, I made my official transition from Teach for America corps member to program director by helping usher in almost 100 energetic and committed new teachers to the Rio Grande Valley. On their second evening in the sticky heat of South Texas, I helped facilitate a discussion with a small group of new teachers on their roles as leaders in the community. One of the points we discussed was the organizational theory of change.

The theory is two-pronged: In the short term, it means teachers will work hard to make changes in their classrooms and work to invest others around them about ending educational inequity. In the long term, it means continuing to invest others in this goal and to work toward closing the achievement gap no matter where your professional path has taken you. The plan is for everyone, TFA or not, to work toward this shared goal.

My group of teachers got it. But what impressed me more were their ideas on how to convince non-Teach for America teachers to join the movement. They brainstormed ideas on motivating whole communities and convincing people that educational inequity could be closed—starting with their own parents. These new corps members even imagined sending TFA coffee mugs to all alums so that it could perhaps spark many a discussion on educational inequity around office water coolers.

So it made me cringe when I read the Post’s piece on D.C. Mayor Fenty’s pick to lead the District’s public schools, Michelle Rhee. Teach for America as an insurgency? World domination? Sure, many TFA alums are emerging as leaders of schools and other sectors. But to me, the point isn’t to take over the system. The point is to energize everyone to take over the system together.

It also turns away from the less advertised goal of the organization: The only way the achievement gap will be closed is if more and more people join in the cause to demand better teachers and administrators, to tutor kids after school, to provide good jobs for parents, and to clean up neighborhoods. But to suggest that Teach for America will take over and fix everything shifts the responsibility away from the rest of the community.

P.S.—I’m also not so impressed by the article’s portrayal of Teach for America’s apparent disdain for traditional teacher prep programs. There are good ed programs, there are bad ed programs, and there are simply amazing ed programs out there. Who would have thought Western New Mexico University's Gallup branch has an incredible special education masters program?

Posted by Jessica Shyu at 8:51 AM | Permalink | Comments (3)