A Place at the Table

I don't need any new kitchen knives, but when a former student or kid from church calls and asks to come do a knife demonstration. I warn them that while I won't buy another knife, I am happy to let them practice their presentation on me and offer them a critique on their sales pitch. So every summer I watch and am asked to evaluate just how effectively those fine knives can cut through rope with a single stroke and how powerful those all purpose kitchen shears must be to cut a penny in half. And while I watch, I wonder: When and why would I need a kitchen knife that slices rope? We almost never have rope for dinner? Under what circumstances I would I cut up my spare change?

Still, it's a smart presentation design because the focus is on the tools, not the skill of person doing the demonstration. This makes sense, because while the knives are really are high quality tools, the college age sales representatives bring more enthusiasm than knife handling skill to the process. In fact, I can vividly recall the night that night Amy came to do the demonstration. While she cut the rope with a single stroke, she also managed to slice open her finger. She bled all over my kitchen table; she nearly pass out; and it took us half an hour to get her bandaged, cleaned up and calmed down.

These home demonstrations that are designed to evaluate the efficacy of kitchen knives can provide insight into why teachers are a bit skeptical of the accolades heaped on some of the new teacher evaluation systems by education reformers. Excellent tools are important; but sometimes it's important to make sure a tool is appropriate for the job. And, no matter how good the tool and how well intended and highly motivated the user may be, the outcome is still dependent of that individual's knowledge and skill. Ttwo new teacher evaluation scenarios have received a great deal of media attention lately have been Washington, D.C. and New Haven, Connecticut, so let's take a look at those. A spokesperson for DC schools says,

What saves IMPACT is that it's clear for both teachers and evaluators. . . . There is no way a teacher can say, 'I don't understand how they expect me to plan lessons.' It's all there: setting ambitious and measurable goals, aligning each lesson with content standards, communicating goals to students." Allan Odden, a University of Wisconsin educational leadership expert, said IMPACT was "sophisticated, well thought through and, if executed well, will represent one of the most rigorous systems in the country."

Sounds like a good thing, but the Washington Teachers' Union is wary of IMPACT. Why? Because, the Washington Teachers Union has limited confidence in the skill of the those who will use the tool and have what seems to be legitimate concerns that a good evaluation tool can, and might be, used inappropriately. Some would say that unions are just like that-- resistant to accountability and protective of their least effective members. But while WTU is locked in a bitter battle over teacher evaluation with D.C. Chancellor Michelle Rhee, it's sister AFT affliate represents teachers in New Haven, Connecticut where

The politically savvy American Federation of Teachers has decided that it is better to get in the game. In New Haven, the union has agreed in its new contract to develop an evaluation system in collaboration with the city. Secretary Duncan praised the agreement lavishly.

So what's the difference? It seems to me that the issue is not so much the instrument, but the credibility of the evaluators and a degree of trust that the evaluation results will be objective and that the outcome will be used appropriately. Here''s what my good friend, Renee Moore, who works in Mississippi, where there is no union collective bargaining for teachers recently sat on a panel for the Forum for Education and Democracy's Capitol Hill briefing. Renee said that

My comments focused on what I believe are two closely related reasons why we do not have quality teachers for all students, particularly for those in high needs, high poverty areas: ineffective teacher evaluation and weak professional development/support..... The true culprit appears to be the what passes for teacher evaluation in most places. Apparently, we do not have systems that accurately identify teacher effectiveness or the degree of that effectiveness. Rigorous evaluation systems would not only identify quality teaching, but give each teacher a realistic, timely assessment of his/her work, identifying areas or strength and weakness; thereby, guiding professional development and support needs.

This is why teachers submit themselves to processes such as National Board for Professional Teaching Standards assessment, even when they have to pay for the process out of their own pocket and receive no additional compensation for this validation of their expertise. That's why it's frustrating when an editorial on the New Haven contract in the New York Times cautions that,

School reformers were excited to hear that New Haven planned to take student performance into account in its teacher evaluations. But they uttered a collective "uh-oh" upon hearing that the details -- including how much weight would be given to student performance -- would be hashed out by a committee that includes teachers and administrators.... Political leaders, school administrators, parents and everyone else who cares about improving education in this country will have to keep a close eye as this effort moves forward.

Now that confuses me. Does the writer really believe that teachers are obstructionists who have no stake in advancing teacher quality? Did he do his investigative work and ask teachers what they thought? Or did he just parrot what some school reform pundit told him?Teachers are regularly accused of just caring about the money and protecting their own jobs, but let's not forget that there's serious money to be made in school reform; and in order to get press, prestige, power, and a paycheck as a reformer, you need to frame the problem and come up with a solution and teachers are an easy mark. But after the children, who pay the highest price for all the adult bickering, teachers have the most to lose. Yet,

Teachers, it turns out, are tougher on each other than anyone else, That's one of the lessons of Toledo's 25-year-old peer-review program, in which veteran teachers sift out the timid, disorganized, or otherwise unfit. Today some 70 NEA and AFT districts--mostly in California, Connecticut, and Ohio--use the approach. Teachers, least of all it seems, want to share the lunchroom with someone who can't hack it in the classroom.

I believe most teachers value meaningful assessment of their practice, and a well designed and thoughtfully administered evaluation can be the cutting edge tool to accomplish that goal. When that evaluation comes from peers, it sets a level of expectation for all participants, it creates an opportunity for meaningful professional sharing and growth, and it empowers skilled classroom practitioners to become part of the answer and gives them ownership of their profession rather than hired labor. But, teachers have a legitimate concern that best cutting edge evaluation tool, when placed in unskilled or unbiased hands could turn out to be nothing more than a blunt object for teacher bashing.

Posted by Susan Graham at 11:24 PM | Permalink | Comments (1)

Recently, as I sat in the waiting room of the dentist's office, my past flashed before my eyes. On the table across the room, there was a magazine that held pictures which so titillated me as a child I could still recall details from them as adult. Unfortunately, the little kid in the red t-shirt was faster; he beat me to the Highlights Magazine and I got stuck with a six month old Newsweek. I went to the chair having never had a chance to linger over the hidden objects picture puzzle.

Way back in the day, Weekly Reader and Highlights were my favorite periodicals, so I was curious to see if they still even vaguely resembled the editions I remember. After further investigation, I'm happy to report that both are alive and well, in print and online. I'm even more pleased that Highlights looks almost exactly like it did half a century ago when I was eight years old -- complete with my favorite, the hidden objects picture puzzle. And do you know what? It's still a darn good feature.

The instructions for the hidden object puzzle are simple. You are given a list of items to find that are "hidden" in a very busy line drawing. From a metacognitive perspective, it's an interesting task. You have to deal with lots of input into the working memory while searching for critical information. You know what to look for, but if you visualize, you run the risk of constructing false knowledge. If the list says, candlestick, which candlestick is the right one? A saucer and thumb-loop kind? Tall? Short? Decorative? Simple? To draw on your recollection of multiple images of candlesticks while searching the puzzle is actually pretty complex. Of course, you could always peek at the isolated pictures on a back page, but I always thought that was sort of cheating.

Last week, TM featured a story on Highlights Magazine's State of the Kid survey. The sample was composed of about 850 survey respondents who self-identified as Highlight readers, which presents an obvious bias, so it may not have been the most sophisticated research tool, but I'm guessing the results may still be representative of the general American kid population. The survey tells us that kids worry about school, they wish they had more time to play, they have to do chores, they value their friends, and many would like to have more of their parents' attention. But the most interesting question and response came in the wrap up:

"What should grown-ups know about being a kid today?"--[it] elicited some perplexing results. The top two responses, which comprised more than 50 percent of the total, were "Being a kid is hard" (28.9 percent) and "Being a kid is fun" (21.3 percent).

Now see, that's not a mystery to me.Why? Because if someone asked me "What should policymakers know about being a teacher today?" I would probably say, "Being a teacher is highly complex and incredibly demanding, but being a teacher is rewarding and fulfilling." I guess that's just a fancy grown-up way of saying "It's hard, but it's fun."

It's not unlike answers teachers offered in another survey for another day. We'll talk about Teaching for a Living: How Teachers See the Profession Today next week. Meanwhile, if you too have a hankering for a good old Highlights hidden pictures puzzle, they're now available as an iPhone app!

Posted by Susan Graham at 12:26 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

The Wall Street Journal headline read Obama Wins a Battle as a Teachers' Union Shows Flexibility. The story went on to say that

A showdown between the White House and the powerful teachers' unions looks, for the moment, a little less likely.

and

Under pressure from the Education Department, the country's two powerful teachers unions, Ms. Weingarten's AFT and the larger National Education Association, are already budging in ways that were previously unthinkable.

and

It is also noteworthy that the AFT seems almost as pleased with New Haven as Mr. Duncan.

The implied take away message? The self-serving bad guy teacher unions who are corrupting American education were wrestled to the ground by the Education Department good guys saving the little kids of New Haven. The surprise was that AFT, which is portrayed as the loser, didn't protest losing. The implied question: Was it because maybe union representatives knew in their heart they deserved to lose?

The Education Week headline read Teacher Contract Called Potential Model for the Nation and went on to say

This week in New Haven, Conn., the local teachers union agreed, in a 21-1 vote, to changes widely resisted by unions elsewhere, including tough performance evaluations and fewer job protections for bad teachers.

Here are some of the issues addressed by the new contract:

A committee of union representatives, district representatives and parents will make recommendations on the best ways to measure student growth. It will consider growth in test scores, as well as other measures of achievement.

A similar committee will develop a teacher-evaluation system capable of distinguishing among four levels of performance.

A peer-assistance and -review program will be developed for veteran teachers.

A schoolwide performance-pay program and a career ladder for teachers who take on additional responsibilities would be developed.

Student-growth information will be used to rank schools into three performance tiers.

Tier I and II schools would be allowed to waive certain contract provisions with the approval of teachers and principals in those schools.

Tier III schools will be reconstituted with new leadership and staff members. Teachers will have to reapply for their jobs, and principals will select the teachers to be hired. These schools would also be freed up from most contract provisions.

The take away message seems to be that stakeholders are working together to develop multiple criteria assessments, to compensate the highest performing teachers, to support struggling teachers, to acknowledge that school success is a joint effort, to give successful schools autonomy and to broaden unrestricted restructuring of ineffective schools. There is a modest 3% annual salary increase.

These are two stories about one event with divergent messages. The Journal saw a battle with winners and losers. EdWeek saw consensus among stakeholders. There is agreement that teacher quality is the critical factor in student success. The question is whether cooperation or coercion is the most effective way to achieve that goal.

In terms of readership, Education Week is a David to the Wall Street Journal's Goliath. The Journal has apparently decided that if good teachers are the missing link, then practicing teachers must be the weak link. We see evidence in another Journal editorial, How Teacher Unions Lost the Media, where Whitmire and Rotherham propose that
.

..in the past it was difficult to measure teacher performance. But now, as a result of data collected under No Child Left Behind provisions, it is easier to figure out which teachers are succeeding. "Data and results are challenging an industry that was traditionally driven by hope, hype and good intentions," says Jane Hannaway, the director of education policy at the Urban Institute. Ms. Hannaway argues that in the long run these emerging databases may be the most important dividend of today's school accountability policies.

While Ms. Hannaway may dismiss hope and good intentions, teachers are expected to profess unquestioning allegiance to the mantra that "all students can learn if we set high expectations." Surely that is a statement of hope and good intentions. And doesn't the phrase, No Child Left Behind, smack of Lake Wobegon hype when it implies that all children should, can, and will achieve at the same level?

I'm pretty sure that the majority of successful teachers put a pretty high value on hope and good intentions. What parent would want their child to be in a classroom that lacked either? On the other hand, teachers often resist the push toward "data-driven instruction" because they understand that data is only information -- not answers. Its dependability is relative to the validity of research questions, designs, and conclusions. Data may reveal that students who use mechanical pencils outperform those using #2 pencils on standardized tests. It is possible, based on that data, to conclude that mechanical pencils are a critical factor in student learning. Acquisition of mechanical pencils could be promoted as a school improvement initiative.

Test score data is an "easier" way to measure teacher performance, but easier is not synonymous with more reliable or more informative. New Haven set a new standard in contract negotiation because there was mutual respect and cooperation that addressed the contribution of teachers as colleagues, as leaders, and as part of the decision making team. Teachers don't resist accountability, but they do resist inappropriate and inequitable measurements of teacher performance.

"It's always been hard to get rid of bad teachers," says Linda Perlstein, public editor for the national Education Writers Association. "But now people are realizing it doesn't have to be, especially at a time they're hanging onto their own jobs with their fingertips."

Yes, and it's always been hard to recruit and retain good teachers. And it's going to be harder still when teachers are vilified as the problem even as they are being identified as the solution. Scapegoating teacher unions and teachers may be easier for the media than to really "figure out which teachers are succeeding," but it is a simplistic response that lacks journalistic integrity, snuffs out hope, and it makes it pretty clear that good intentions matter less than flashy headlines.

Posted by Susan Graham at 2:13 AM | Permalink | Comments (1)

Earlier this week I sat in a professional development class with teachers from across my district. One of the best things about this sort of event is getting to spend time with other teachers talking about our classrooms and our practice. My elbow partners were a good friend from my own school and an elementary teacher who is one of the most intentionally positive people I've ever met. Of course there was the obligatory "ice breaker" where we paired and shared bits about ourselves both professionally and personally. For the "something I like to do for leisure" response, Jacke smiled and said "I like to clean and I'm really good at it." She laughingly admitted that she might be a little obsessive/compulsive about it, but that cleaning gave her a sense of control. "Of course,"she added "my kids at school make a pretty big mess of the classroom. Sometimes it bugs me, but hey, it's not my room, it's theirs."

I've thought a lot about who classrooms and schools belong to in the last week of so. I thought about that each morning when my seventh graders, who are working on a project walked into the room, got out their supplies and quietly and efficiently took care of business until it was time to clean up.The classroom was their workplace and I was there as an on-site consultant and that's about as good as teaching can get. Good teachers know that the classrooms belong to the students who populate them because the children have taken ownership of their own learning.

Because I live in the shadow of Washington, D.C. I've thought a lot about how of the current problems in DC schools is about power struggles among adults who ought to know better. There's a mess in too many of the classrooms of DC schools; but the kids didn't make it. It's a mess made by grownups who can't seem to move beyond power struggles that continue to spin out of control, creating a vacuum that sucks the life out of everyone involved and leaving lost opportunities. Like Thing One and Thing Two, the grown ups dabble in this and that and then whoosh out the door leaving the kids behind amid the mess.

Michelle Rhee, who has been chancellor for just over two years is determined to fix D.C. schools. She is a firm believer in the importance of the classroom teacher and has made it clear that she'll do whatever she has to improve the quality of education in a system that is heartbreakingly dysfunctional and that is laudable. But as she closes schools, and fires principals and teachers her decision making process lacks transparency; she displays a tendency to be dismissive of any dissenting opinions; and she often seems unnecessarily rude and almost intentionally combative.

The Washington Teacher's Union maintains that its members have been committed to student learning in DC schools for a long time and that Rhee has an agenda of removing career teachers and replacing them with Teach for America and New Teacher Project short termers who are true believers of her philosophy and bargains at the bottom of the salary scale. They point out that the years and layers of administrative problems in DC schools were not of their making. They argue that there has always been a procedure in place for dismissing incompetent teachers but administrators were negligent in implement those policies. They question why Rhee invested in an extensive new IMPACT teacher evaluation tool but dismissed teachers without any clear criteria. While WTU makes no apology for the making the welfare of its members their priority, the interests of members are poorly served by protecting incompetency. At the same time, there have been too many instances where union representatives have protected adults at the expense of children and have been distracted from their professional responsibilities by political gamesmanship.

I'm not so naive as to think the chancellor and the union are going to walk hand in hand into the sunset, but they should be allies. They do, after all, share a common goal of education children and they both risk loss of face and control through lack of cooperation that results in student progress. Instead there is accusation, disparagement, disrespect, disruption, disillusionment, and damaged lives. . I don't pretend to know whether the DC budget crisis was contrived; if the teachers who were dismissed were removed with good reason; if the WTU is being obtuse; if Chancellor is acting in good faith; or if the City Council and the mayor are manipulating the situation. But I do know this much, McKinley High School students have learned some rather disturbing lessons this week:

"You always hear stories about how dirty politics is. Now I have some personal experience."

"It just seems like everybody was trying to make themselves look better."

"The more you get into power, the less you take responsibility for your actions."

"Im tired of always being somebody's pawn or guinea pig."

Maybe the policymakers could use a little professional development lesson.

"Hey, it's not your classroom, it's theirs."

Posted by Susan Graham at 2:25 AM | Permalink | Comments (1)

I walk my last class back down the sixth grade hall at 2:40 and if I really hustle I can go to the bathroom, gather up a set of papers to grade, and still make it to the back stairwell before first load bus riders are dismissed. For the next half hour or so, I'm on hall duty, monitoring the departure of the eighth graders. Every teacher knows that supervision is an integral part of teaching. From the time they get off the bus to the time they go home, we keep a close watch over our kids at my school coming and going and in between.

But at the end of the day, we load them on to the bus and send them home to empty houses and apartments. Far too many of our children spend long, unstructured afternoon hours without a grown up around; and while Hollywood cashed in on the idea as hilarious, there is actually nothing funny about the number of middle school students who go Home Alone. Education Week reported that

Roughly 15 million school-age children are left unattended after school--up from 14 million in 2004, says a report released Tuesday by the Washington-based Afterschool Alliance.

One might surmise that most of these children are economically disadvantaged, but they are not. It seems dealing with the latchkey child issue is an equal opportunity problem for working parents. On Sunday, I read the confession of a Washington Post staff writer who shared the dilemma of what to do about the after school supervision of her own middle school son. At eleven he is too old for day care, but she realizes that he is still rather young to face the afternoon alone. Her situation is not unusual. Parents who have always been thoughtful and careful about childcare arrangements are often stymied when their children reach middle school because most after school care is designed for elementary age children.

Often with great concern and guilt, parents grudgingly give their middle schoolers a key, make them promise to call the minute they get in the door, and send them home alone. But research indicates that

The afternoon hours are the peak time for juvenile crime. In the last 11 years, juvenile crime has increased 48%. The Carnegie Council on Adolescent Development found that 8th graders who are alone 11 hours a week are twice as likely to abuse drugs as adolescents who are busy after school. The Council also found that teens who have sexual intercourse do it in the afternoon in the home of boys whose parents work. Unsupervised children are more likely to become depressed, smoke cigarettes and marijuana and drink alcohol. They are also more likely to be the victims of crimes. When home alone latchkey children generally watch television, eat snacks, play with pets and fight with siblings.

While most parents would prefer their children be supervised, finding an after school care solution for older kids isn't easy. According to the Afterschool Alliance, parents want their kids to enjoy the program, for it to be conveniently located, and for it be affordable, in that order. But middle schoolers don't enjoy being supervised unless it is by choice and unless it is purposeful supervision. As a result, there is a huge demand for after school sports, performing arts, tutoring and enrichment classes that are delivered as an extension of the school day. Because, what could be a more convenient and what could be more economical than supervision than just having them stay at school for some structured activity?

While some argue that in house afterschool programs distract from the educational mission of school; others support an extended day as a viable tool to enhance student learning. But an extended day makes heavy demands on limited school resources and requires thoughtful design. Of course it is expensive. It has logistical complications. But perhaps most problematic is staffing. If the kids stay at school, who will be there with them? Most teachers sincerely care about their students, but they also care about their own children and a twelve hour day, regardless of compensation, is just not realistic.

Even if there were unlimited personnel and unlimited funds, in-house after school programs are not the answer for all middle schoolers. What about those adolescents who don't make the team or don't want to be in the band or drama club or yearbook staff or any other organized activity offered at school? What about the child who is not an extrovert and who really needs quiet time after six hours at school? What about the one who needs some help with homework? What about the twelve year old who goes home to the responsibility of caring for younger siblings? What about the one spends the afternoon alone, locked inside, because the neighborhood, where there are lots of latchkey kids, is a breeding ground for bullying and peer pressure?

I wouldn't want this to get around, but I sort of enjoy afternoon hall duty. Secretly I love watching the spontaneity of kids who laugh too loud and act a little silly. They jump down the last three steps or break into run the minute they hit the door; and even when I have to say, "Hold it down!" or "I heard that!" or "Go back up the stairs and come back down again and this time walk, please!" I envy their boundless energy. I admit savoring the gossipy "OMG, Mrs. G, you will not believe.." or "Guess what I made on my Algebra test?" or "I am going to be so busted!" as they confide the thrills of victory and the agonies of defeat of early adolescence.

In the back stairwell, I keep a watch out for anger, anxiety, tension, and over-excitement because thirteen-year-olds may look like young adults, but they are still children on the inside. They lack the maturity required to self regulate without any support and it is often an unfair burden to transfer onto their shoulders. After seven hours of constant structure and supervision, being turned loose to go home alone is often it's more freedom than they can handle. Sometimes they need a grownup as a touchstone with whom to connect with on the way out the door because sometimes freedom's just another word for nothing else to lose. And I worry, that when their home alone, some of them are in danger of losing it.

Posted by Susan Graham at 1:39 AM | Permalink | Comments (1)

The headline reads, More 'Progress,' Less Play-Doh. An area superintendent wrote kindergarten parents explaining that the school system

"...is committed to providing each child with the essential skills and knowledge he or she needs to succeed. Fulfillment of this goal must begin at an early age. The kindergarten curriculum is designed to engage children in the learning process, provide them with a sense of accomplishment and help them understand the value of what they are learning."

Translation: The essential skills and knowledge that 5-year olds need are not going to be found in finger paint, puzzles, the home living center, or outdoor play. But a daily dose of test prep will help them succeed, giving them a sense of accomplishment. Boy, if that won't make a little kid understand the value of what they are learning, I don't know what will!

Closer to home, another school system has parents up in arms about recess. A school scheduling consultant was brought in to help tweak elementary school performance. His advice: squeeze in a little more test prep by cutting the unstructured recess for 3rd, 4th, and 5th graders in half, down to fifteen minutes. Thirty minutes of free play, twenty minutes for lunch, and two bathroom breaks a day at five minutes each is an inefficient loss of of time on task. For a 9-year old, preparation for life long learning may look a lot like a life sentence. Even prison inmates get yard time.

Our poor kids! We're running them ragged without ever letting them go outside and run around. However, there's now research that indicates that maybe we could maximize performance by having them run more. Better yet, having them run faster! In a real world flashback to The Secret of NIMH, there is a new study that indicates that structured "running can push intellectual development." In Taiwan, researchers found that mice that exercise on little mouse wheels seem to think more than those who do not get physical activity. Furthermore, experimental mice that are put on tiny little treadmills that force them to run harder and increase their rodent exertion rates demonstrate still greater thinking activity. The conclusion: "Allow a laboratory mouse to run as much as it likes, and its brainpower improves. Force it to run harder than it otherwise might, and its thinking improves even more."

I didn't take time to investigate exactly how mouse thinking was quantified. Nor did I check to see if the researchers have any interest in qualitative research regarding what the mice thought about. But it did occur to me that someone somewhere is likely develop a new education initiative to have kindergarteners training for marathons to ensure that no child is left behind physically or intellectually.

The problem is that you can collect data to drive almost any decision for school. Basing it on data isn't enough, the data have to be viewed in context. Now if the premise is that life is a rat race and the responsibility of public education is to ensure that no child gets left behind in that rat race, then this is the kind of data that should drive instructional decision making. On the other hand, if the beginning premise is that educating children involves nurturing their physical, emotional, and social development as well as their intellectual development, then a clearer perspective might be gained from looking at an overview of data from an ERIC Digest titled Recess in Elementary School: What Does the Research Say?

• Experimental research on memory and attention (e.g., Toppino, Kasserman, & Mracek, 1991) found that recall is improved when learning is spaced rather than presented all at once. Their findings are compatible with what is known about brain functioning: that attention requires periodic novelty, that the brain needs downtime to recycle chemicals crucial for long-term memory formation, and that attention involves 90- to 110-minute cyclical patterns throughout the day (Jensen, 1998).

• Much of what children do during recess, including the sharing of folk culture (Bishop & Curtis, 2001), making choices, and developing rules for play, involves the development of social skills.

• Inactivity, according to research cited in Waite-Stupiansky and Findlay (2001), is associated with the tripling of childhood obesity since 1970, accompanied by increases in health problems such as high blood pressure and high cholesterol.

• If children do not have the opportunity to be active during the school day, they do not tend to compensate after school. Experimental research found that children were less active after school on days when they had no recess and PE classes in school (Dale, Corbin, & Dale, 2000)

Ah, but it's just not as good of a sound bite as:

Allow a laboratory mouse to run as much as it likes, and its brainpower improves. Force it to run harder than it otherwise might, and its thinking improves even more.

Pushing kids harder, physically or mentally, might get short term results because, as legendary marathoner Clarence DeMar put it, many will "run like hell and get the agony over with."

It's not a bad idea if you think life is a rat race, but it's no way to treat our children.

Posted by Susan Graham at 1:14 AM | Permalink | Comments (2)

"Gov. Haley Barbour says there's nothing wrong with encouraging some Mississippi high schoolers to aim for skill trade training instead of a university degree."

This is the opening sentence of a recent Associated Press article that got a lot of play last week and I'm wondering why this story is attracting national attention. I have a hunch some people take umbrage to the governor saying:

"When we tell kids they ought to go to universities who shouldn't, we set them up for failure."

There's reactive sort of bristling that asks, "What, do you think they can't cut it in college?" Well, the reality is while almost all students say they plan to go to college, only 28 percent of young adults currently hold a college degree and there has been little change in that number since 2000. It is unlikely that there will be a dramatic change in that number anytime soon. "And just who do you think shouldn't go?" you might be thinking. Well, actually, the answer is pretty simple. Probably any young person who can't clearly articulate why he or she wants to go to college, what he or she has expectations of accomplishing during a university education, and what they expect to have to show as a return on investment at the end of four years of college.

That may sound a little harsh. Shouldn't a young person take time to explore options? Isn't that what college is all about? Maybe---but if asked why they want to go to college, most young people will quickly reply, "Because I want a good job and in order to get a good job I need a good education." When asked how one defines a good job, I'd bet you my planning period that almost every single student would mention MONEY. And that's why Gov. Barbour is right.

I looked at the College Board's college cost calculator and the average cost of a year of a year of education at a four year in state college is $18,326. Assuming an increase of about 5% each year which is not out of line with the current trend, today's high school freshman can expect to spend just under $100,000 if he or she completes a degree in four years. So yes, when we tell young people they ought to go to college without helping them develop a clear idea of what they are going for, we do set them up for failure and for debt and for personal disillusionment. I can think of no other circumstances where adults encourage someone too young to rent a car to spend $100,000 without a clear understanding of what it is they are purchasing and how that purchase can benefit them.

Here's why Mississippi's career pathway program makes sense:

"Mississippi's relatively new high school redesign program lets students choose coursework based on their career interest. So far, the program is in 39 of the state's 152 school districts, said Mike Mulvihill, associate superintendent for vocational education and work force development at the state Department of Education."
Mulvihill said every student in the program gets a solid academic base. However, he said some students will take all academic courses during their high school career, while others will take a mix of academics and vocational courses. The pathway starts in the 7th-grade. Along the way, students build portfolios, take aptitude tests, and work with counselors to decide their route, he said.
"Some students will aim for professional careers that would require a college degree. Others may decide to become blue collar workers, such as auto mechanics, which would also require technical literacy," Mulvihill said.

I like the idea of a pathway. A path has a direction and a purpose, but, in my mind, a path is as much about the journey as it is about the destination. Unfortunately, far too many people seem to think of pure academics as the high road and anything career oriented as the low road. As one Mississippi representative and former teacher put it:

"Vocational training is for the ones that do not want to pursue careers that will require a degree, but they still need their basic education."

You know--those kids. There it is again: that mindset that implies that when learning is connected to production it is meets a minimal threshold of "basic education." But the career path framework that Mississippi is attempting to implement goes straight to the top of Bloom's Hierarchy as curriculum wraps around the analysis and synthesis. Research shows that learning that is linked solving real world problems results in increased motivation, comprehension, and retention. Learning to do simply makes more sense from a theoretical as well as a practical perspective.

But people take umbrage because, asone Mississippi principal points out,

Every parent says "I want my child to go to college."

That is what they say, but is that really what parents mean? Or do they really mean they want their child to have economic security? Would they still feel as strongly about college if they knew that of the 18 year olds who enroll in college less than half ever complete a degree program? Would research that indicates that students who are enrolled in a blend of CTE and academic courses tend to out perform those in either a straight CTE or a pure academic strand influence their thinking?

College versus Career and Technical Education is a straw man argument and we are doing our young people a disservice when imply that college is the only way to win. No student should be denied the access to an education that prepares them for college. Neither should a student be discouraged from seeking an education that prepares them to enter the workforce with marketable knowledge and skills. We limit their options and we stunt their opportunities when we make it an either/or situation. We owe it to give our young people both academic knowledge and workplace skills. It might be a little more work, and it might be a little more expensive, but it's a path worth pursuing.

Posted by Susan Graham at 12:10 AM | Permalink | Comments (3)

On Friday I was reading The Washington Post, and although I don't usually spend much time in the sports section, this headline got my attention:

How to Measure $100 Million of Impact

Since my job is to impact student learning, I was intrigued by the idea of paying one person one hundred million dollars for his impact on playing a game. While I didn't know anything about Albert Haynesworth, he clearly represents a very big investment for the Washington Redskins. I was particularly interested when I discovered that Haynesworth is a defensive tackle.

Now if you didn't know anything about football, the fact that he's a defensive tackle might not mean anything to you. But if you know just a little bit, it may seem like a really bad idea because it is unlikely that Albert Haynesworth will ever score a single point during his entire football career. In fact, he's not even expected to help his team make forward progress, and everybody knows that you win the game by scoring points. So why is he the highest paid man on the field?

His teammate running back Clinton Portis, who does carry the ball and who does score touchdowns, says the other players don't have a problem with Haynesworth's pay, even though Rick Maese of The Washington Post writes, "...his true contribution will be difficult to measure with statistics."

*******************************************************

On Sunday I was reading The Washington Post and as I as reading the editorial section, this got my attention:

Old School in Virginia: Instead of making outdated promises, the gubernatorial candidates should be promoting education reform.

Since I'm pretty invested in promoting education reform myself, I was intrigued by the idea that both candidates seem to have almost identical education reform planks in their platforms. I have to admit that I thought maybe they had been listening to those of us who are out there on the front line, because they agree that Virginia teacher salaries ought to meet the national average.

The Post argued

"Much of the debate has focused on whether the state can afford to do so much and on which candidate would come up with the money. But they both have set the wrong goal. There are more effective ways to improve teacher quality..... Far better use of scarce public dollars is to encourage meaningful reforms, such as linking teacher pay to student test scores so that effective teachers are properly rewarded...."

That sounds sort of like saying, "Hey, we need to reward those guys in the offensive backfield because they're the ones who score points. Never mind about the offensive linemen or the defense because they don't bring in any high scores." When teacher compensation is tied to test scores, how does one "properly reward" the special education teacher who works with autistic children? How is the contribution of the band director who inspires and motivates students going to be measured? What about the vocational teacher whose students leave school with less than amazing GPAs and SATs, but who graduate with highly marketable skills and a job with benefits? Professional teachers, just like professional athletes, know that the contribution of a colleague isn't necessarily assessed by points scored.

The editorialist at The Post nails it when he says, "Low salaries discourage people from entering, and staying in teaching." But he fumbles when he claims "systems don't compete nationally for teachers." Yes, we do; Virginia school systems are forced to recruit all over the country because we do not produce enough teachers to fill our empty classrooms.

When professional sports teams invest enough to run a school system in a single player, they do so because they feel it is necessary to spend big bucks to recruit top talent. When Wall Street investment firms tanked, we were told that they still needed to pay huge salaries and breathtaking bonuses to retain "talent." Teachers don't expect to get rich, but they do expect to be able to support their families. Virginia ranks seventh or eighth in the nation in average income, but comes in 31st on the list of states' teacher pay. Isn't it a little disingenuous to say that money matters in recruitment and retention of talent when staffing the boardroom and the locker room, but isn't a factor in the classroom?

******************************************************
On Monday I was reading The Washington Post and the front page headline got my attention:

The Season Starts, but the Questions Persist

The Redskins lost their season opener to the New York Giants 17-23. The offense didn't do so hot. Defense did okay and Haynesworth play solidly, but had no spectacular plays that were game changers.The Post says "The temptation can be to draw hard-and-fast conclusions about how a season will turn out based on one Sunday afternoon in September....." It sounds like a call to postpone accountability when adults play a game for stratospheric salaries. Armchair quarterbacks care about their team, give them the benefit of the doubt, and hold the players in high regard. I think most education pundits really do care about school; so I wonder why they are quick to draw hard-and-fast conclusions about our schools, and to be so dismissive of the teachers who commit their careers to children?

Before Sunday's game Albert Haynesworth said "I can't sit here and say we're going to win every game or whatever. What I can promise [is] that I can do my job, and I'm pretty good at what I do. They just expect me to play my game and play how I play and that's about it. That's all I can promise."

I know how you feel, Albert.

As the school year gets started I'm just saying, "As a teacher I can't say that all children will become proficient in all areas or whatever. What I can promise is that I can do my job and I'm pretty good at what I do. I wish they just expected me to teach the kids and to teach the way I think works best and that's about it. That's all I can promise."

Posted by Susan Graham at 1:10 AM | Permalink | Comments (7)

Our neighborhood Labor Day picnic ended early because here in Virginia, the Tuesday following Labor Day is the first day of school. The teachers and the students and the parents all needed to get ready for tomorrow.

Meredith, Ophelia and I were talking about what to wear on the first day of school. Meredith is going into 2nd grade and that's easy. She'll wear pink because it's her absolute favorite. Ophelia will be starting her first day of middle school and she is sweet, smart, beautiful and nervous because not only will it be her first day of middle school, she'll be a new girl since her family arrived here in July. She has been planning The Outfit for weeks. That’s typical. Back to school outfits for middle school are sufficiently newsworthy to rate half a page of print and two full color photos in Saturday’s Washington Post because

Of all the challenges for girls entering the sixth or seventh grade -- new building, new kids, new rules -- there is none so daunting as The Outfit.

Sandra Markus, a professor at the Fashion Institute of Technology in New York explains,

Fashion is not what defines a boy and doesn't define their pecking order in school. For girls -- I hate to say it -- it's all about what they are wearing.

Personal appearance is part of my curriculum, and I’m always fascinated with the response of sixth graders to a personal appearance activity we do. Working in groups, the students get a set of six pictures of age-group contemporaries gleaned from the back to school clothing ads. They also get six gender neutral names and six one- paragraph first person narratives.

Each narrative description mentions something about family; a hobby or sport; friends; some thoughts about school; other kids; what the teacher seems to think about them; and, finally, a goal. I set the timer and my students have five minutes to match the pictures, the narratives, and the names. The discussions are intense with kids up on their knees, pointing, grabbing, eye rolling, and that "huhhhh" sound of disgust that middle schoolers do so well.

Usually, when the timer goes off, the teams are pretty confident that they’ve got everyone sorted out correctly. I let groups offer their answers to who’s who, responding with nods and “Okays." Inevitably, there is is disagreement among the teams and consternation when I refuse to tell them right combination of image, narrative and name.

That’s when I ask, “So how did you know that the student in Picture 1 and the description of Student B were actually Morgan?”

“Well, because........” and then you can literally see the wheels turning in their heads as they begin to realize that they have assigned personality, school success, family relationships, friendships, outside interests, future goals, and even a name — all with no information other than an image. Is it fair? Of course not! Do we all do it? Absolutely!

Judging, sorting, and rejecting people based on appearance lies at the heart of the school uniform discussion. Do we change who we are by changing what we wear? Maybe. Some believe that conformity in dress will mitigate problems at school. That’s why in

Plainfield and Newark, districts that have long battled gang activity, low test scores and truancy, (school leaders) have latched onto the uniform idea, hoping to improve the academic and social climate in their public schools.

Does a polo shirt and khakis improve performance? School administrators and some parents believe that "The kids won't be focusing on clothing, they'll be focusing on their books."

Hummmm….maybe, but I wouldn’t put all my school improvement eggs in a polo shirt and khaki basket. Will a navy blue blazer and a four-in-hand tie turn a fifth grader into a future Ivy Leaguer? Certainly the prep school styling that some charter schools adopt is an compelling visual reminder of high expectations and the message that school is serious business. But at the end of the school day, when the blazer comes off, the weight of poverty, struggling families and competing pressures are going to still be sitting on the shoulders of some of those children.

But enough about the kids. I still have to make a final decision about my own outfit. I really like my black dress,but you know I’ve had that awhile and it would be nice not to show up in the same old same old. I have this cute new green dress, but it’s sort of more spring than fall looking. So maybe I’ll wear that new khaki outfit. Of course it could get hot and I’d be out there sweating on the bus ramp and that’s literally not cool. I think I'll stick with the black but with a big trendy necklace that sort of makes a statement. Which leaves one issue on the table: sandals or closed toe shoes? Maybe I ought to wait and see what the weather is going to be in the morning.

So many decisions and really, what difference does it make? Well, a lot actually. It matters because tomorrow, as I greet kids in the hall, they are going to form an opinion of me and my class and they will base it on how I look. And no matter how hard I try to remain neutral, I’ll be sizing them up based on their appearance as well. Like it or not, that first encounter will establish the baseline for our interaction.

You never get a second chance to make a good first impression.

So I just hope I have a good hair day!

Posted by Susan Graham at 10:43 PM | Permalink | Comments (2)

The headline reads Flu Strategists See Schools on the Front Line. There seems to be little doubt that children represent the most vulnerable demographic group for H1N1 influenza virus. Estimates are that we will see the beginnings of a flu outbreak in October and while there is less concern about how deadly “swine” flu may be, there is more concern about the pandemic potential of a viral infection for which most human immune systems have no defense at this point.

One group that is taking H1N1 influenza seriously is the U. S. Centers for Disease Control. A race is on to produce enough vaccine in time to inoculate all school-aged children. One concern is that because the initial round of H1N1 proved to be less severe than expected, some people will not take this fall’s expected outbreak seriously until too late. Another is that many people will refuse the vaccine because of anxiety about unanticipated side- or long-term effects. This is not an unrealistic concern since it has been reported that in Hong Kong, one of the most densely populated places on Earth, only about fifty percent of healthcare workers indicate that they will take the N1H1 flu shot.

While not addressing the issue of health care workers, U.S. Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius offered this plan for those children who may be in the greatest need of protection

We anticipate using schools as partners to make sure that we reach out to kids who are a priority population to get the vaccination.

“Using schools as partners”--it may be just an unfortunate choice of words or maybe I’m coming down with something that makes me cranky, but it seems as if “asking schools to partner with us” might feel a little more collaborative than “using schools as partners.”

Public education is often called on to assist with emergencies, and since schools are often the most approachable and accessible locations, it is both reasonable and responsible to use them for information dissemination and as staging sites or command centers during a crisis. But just as educators may not fully understand the constraints of other agencies such as CDC or Homeland Security, some of the recommendations they have put in place for public education may not align with the reality of what schools can do. The CDC webpage suggests action steps for schools that include:

• Remind teachers, staff, and students to practice good hand hygiene and provide the time and supplies for them to wash their hands as often as necessary.

• Clean surfaces and items that are more likely to have frequent hand contact such as desks, door knobs, keyboards, or pens, with cleaning agents that are usually used in these areas.

• Move students, teachers, and staff to a separate room if they become sick at school until they can be sent home.

• Have Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) such as masks available and ensure the equipment is worn by school nurses and other staff caring for sick people at school.

• Conduct active fever and symptom screening of students, teachers, and staff upon arrival at school.

• Find ways to increase social distances (the space between people) at school such as rotating teachers between classrooms while keeping the same group of students in one classroom, moving desks farther apart, or postponing class trips.

If you don't spend your day in a school, these might seem reasonable, but if you are a teacher you wonder: Did the people over at CDC not know that only affluent school systems can afford to have a school nurse at every school site? Did anyone think through the logistics of screening the temperature of 1,000 middle school students as they all arrive within a period of thirty minutes? Was no one aware that in many schools, sick students wait for a parent in the front office where they are watched over by the school secretary who can’t answer the phone while wearing a surgical mask? Did someone have a plan for how an overcrowded school should go about implementing social distancing? Can't anyone imagine what a challenge the most basic precaution, hand washing, presents when students are housed in trailers without running water?

Granted, some of these Suggested Actions are intended for a situation where a mild outbreak is evolving into a possible epidemic; and certainly we all need to make adaptations when there are unusual circumstances. But simply put, public health and crisis relief is not our job. We are responsible for student learning, and while we may be willing and able to assist the Department of Health and Human Resources and the Department of Homeland Security, we are accountable to the Department of Education; and the DOE’s mission is to "promote student achievement and preparation for global competitiveness by fostering educational excellence and equal access." Holding a press conference outside a DC elementary school just as children arrived for their very first day of school, Secretary of Education Duncan said

As the school year begins, I'm concerned that the H1N1 virus might disrupt learning in some schools across the country.

In order to minimize disruptions, DOE has provided resources on its website including Preparing for the Flu During the 2009–10 School Year Questions and Answers for Schools. You might want to read the details for yourself, but Secretary Duncan summed it up at the press conference, suggesting that

…..schools should evaluate what materials they have available for at-home learning. The latest guidance provides more details on methods schools could use, such as distributing recorded classes on podcasts and DVDs; creating take-home packets with up to 12 weeks of printed class material; or holding live classes via conference calls or "webinars."

While some teachers have access to wonderful technology resources, not all students have access to a computer, broadband internet, or a cell phone. It is suggested that teachers should maintain regular telephone support or email support for those students who are housebound; but there is no advice for how a high school teacher can meet the needs of 120 students during five classes and make arrangements to tutor 30 or so homebound students.

Printed packets of work were another suggestion, but if schools cannot provide their teachers with access to technology, it’s unlikely that they can provide resources for instructional packets that cover 12 weeks of work. While people outside the education sector are often shocked to hear that teachers in some schools may be limited to one box of paper and 2,000 copier clicks a semester, it is surprising that DOE is not aware or did not consider this sort of limitation. But then again, perhaps they did know since the website does suggests that in between taking temperatures, calling parents, finding substitutes, and preparing packets, educators should consider soliciting local businesses and community groups for resources.

It is a compliment that public schools and the teachers in them are perceived as such effective and resourceful partners. It is a disappointment that so many parties are quick to offer directives on non-instructional initiatives without seeking the input from those of us on the “front lines” who will be expected to implement them. It is a conundrum that some stakeholders want to partner with public educators even as they complain that we are not performing up to standard on our primary mission. It is a bitter pill to swallow when schools and teachers are expected to continue to do more and more with less and less.

Actually, Secretary Duncan, I’m feeling a little queasy. It might be the flu. Could someone from your office come cover my classes for up to 12 weeks while I recuperate?

Posted by Susan Graham at 12:35 AM | Permalink | Comments (3)