Assigned reading

Your assigned reading:

Andy Rotherham on "Why Chicago Matters"

 In practice the city gave a lot of ground on key issues to get kids back in school. Sure, in 2014 thirty percent of teachers evaluations will be based on how much students learn. But that’s state law in Illinois! It’s illegal for the contract to do less. Evaluation results will not be especially consequential anyway. Mediocre teachers can keep their jobs year after year and the great teachers in Chicago will not be protected during layoffs, which will still be determined largely based on seniority rather than effectiveness. It’s unclear meanwhile how the city is going to afford the 17 percent raise it committed to – especially at the same time Chicago’s teacher pension fund is nearing insolvency.  The city won on some issues, too, by protecting principal autonomy and maintaining a sensible policy on guaranteed jobs when there are layoffs because of the downsizing everyone can see coming. But, overall it’s hard to see the agreement as anything but a substantial victory for Lewis and one that will resonate far beyond Chicago.

Robert Pondiscio on "Hobson's Choice" 

  It would be ironic to be in the business of education and have little faith in parents’ ability to make an informed choice—or to correct course if that choice proved untenable.  My personal bottom line, speaking only for myself, is that choice is an intrinsic good.  I like exercising school choice for my child and I want you to have the same options.  And let’s face it, education is fundamentally coercive: you have to educate your child.  Some latitude in how you go about it is to be encouraged. 

Dana Goldstein on David Colman as "The Schoolmaster"

But what has proved most controversial is Coleman’s unilateral vision for American students, of college as the goal and a college-prep curriculum as the means. In public education, a new reform is always coming down the pike. Longtime educators develop a healthy cynicism about which grand policy ideas will trickle down to classrooms and which will sputter during implementation or simply go out of fashion. But David Coleman’s ideas are not just another wonkish trend. They have been adopted by almost every state, and over the next few years, they will substantively change what goes on in many American classrooms. Soon, as Coleman steps into his new position as the head of the College Board, they may also affect who applies to college and how applicants are evaluated. David Coleman’s ideas, for better or worse, are transforming American education as we know it. 

Scattered thoughts -- Cowboy Troy faces a retention crisis

Andy Rotherham at Eduwonk makes seven interesting points about the Chicago teachers' strike. This one stood out: 

This is a clash of values.  This Ed Trust statement calls out the teachers union for low-balling expectations for kids. It’s a good illustration of how underneath the posturing and rhetoric and the substantive disagreements Chicago is really about what kind of school system they city is going to have – the old kind, which was a quasi-jobs program or the new type where performance and execution matter most. In that way the strike is an important national moment.

Realizing that for many, many years, public schools were as much about the adults' employment as anything is critical to understanding why we find our system in its current shape. 

****

Sara Mead makes a great point about teacher quality within schools:

First, policy conversations about equitable teacher distribution tend to focus almost exclusively on teacher distribution across schools, and how to get more effective teachers working in high-poverty schools. That's important. But research suggests that most of the variation in teacher quality occurs within rather that between schools. There is also evidence that the kids who most need good teachers tend to get the short end of the stick when it comes to within school teacher distribution--exactly the opposite of what we want to have happen. If we're serious about ensuring effective teachers for all students, we need to engage issues of teacher distribution within as well as across schools.

My experience in schools before my current one, especially when I taught in a large, district high school in Philly, backs this up. My class assignments during my rookie year were OK, but many other first-year teachers I knew were given classes with unusually high numbers of repeaters or just students with reputations as difficult to teach. 

Combine this with a salary structure that lowballs younger teachers and one can see why half of all teachers quit in the first five years.  

****

Per all of the twittering about MNPS playing chicken with the state, I kept thinking about this one hit wonder:

This isn't a political statement. I just wanted an excuse to post a Cowboy Troy video.

The importance of the mundane

Sorry for the hiatus -- I still haven't mastered this whole "teach, blog, and have a life" thing. Not that I haven't been writing. I just find that many of the things I've written but not published are half-formed ideas or fully-formed duds.

No promises about what I do publish, either.

Anyway, a vignette from today and the realization it inspired:

******

I've started directing a play after school with a cast consisting of students from the charter school where I teach and a district school. They've got a stage; I like directing, so it works out. It's a good group of kids. They get along with each other and are committed to doing the amount of work it takes to put on a play. As a director, I can't ask for more.

They often talk about the differences between their respective schools. I note that aside from its use as an adjective, the word "charter" is rarely mentioned. Their focus is on more mundane matters like: 

"The lockers in this (district) school are really big."

"Really?"

"Yeah, we have these little cubbies in our classrooms."

"Like an elementary school?"

"Well, our school used to be one."

"Is your school small?"

"Yeah, kind of. But it's not an elementary school."

That was the end of the analysis of the differences between a charter and a district school.

Just another reminder that on a practical level, kids don't care about too much about these macro ed policy fights. They're more concerned with stuff like who their teachers are, how much work the teachers assign, and if the school offers the extracurricular activity they like. And, oh yes, where they'll put their stuff during the day. On a deeper level, of course kids pick up on academic rigor and school culture, but the average kid will struggle to articulate it. 

This isn't to say the big policy fights don't matter; they do. It's just that it's so easy to lose sight of how children perceive schools. 

It's up to adults, of course, to shape a student's perception. However, all of us in this education game still, in the end, must operate within that perception. 

In other words, the final question of every ed policy decision should be how this impacts students on a day-to-day level. 

*****

On a different note, this is a good time to plug the clip of my dream high school play, courtesy of Rushmore. 

Why, yes, it is on my bucket list to direct a play that requires pyrotechnics and outfitting a student with a flamethrower.

"Also, you'll find a pair of safety glasses and earplugs beneath your seats. Please feel free to use them."

Luck and the purposes of public education

Education reporter Peter Merrow is making a lot of sense: 

Are are we also polarized about the purposes of public education? I am not sure whether we are polarized, indifferent or excluded from the conversation, but we have a real problem. The goal of school is to help grow American citizens. Four key words: help, grow, American, citizen. Think about those words:

Help: Schools are junior partners in education. They are to help families, the principal educators.

Grow: It’s a process, sometimes two steps forward, one back. Education is akin to a family business, not a publicly traded stock company that lives and dies by quarterly reports.

American: E Pluribus Unum. We are Americans, first and foremost.

Citizen: Let’s put some flesh on that term. What do we want our children to be as adults? Good parents and neighbors, thoughtful voters, reliable workers? What else?

Merrow hits a lot of good points in the whole article. You should read the whole thing. I don't disagree with anything he wrote above. That said, I've got some footnotes about the role of luck and what public schools can do about it. 

 On "Help": Schools aren't going to take the place of families. However, we are charged with educating the students we have. These kids -- through no fault of their own -- may come from broken families, from impoverished households, from parents working two or more jobs, from caregivers who value education but were never able to acquire one themselves. As a result, we have two options: 

Option #1: We can shift into blame mode. We can search around for a villain -- poverty, parents, politicians -- and talk about how educators can't really do anything until that villain goes away. 

Option #2: We can do the best we can to compensate. For kids who lack stability at home, school can be an oasis of calm. Teachers can't replace parents, but I see every day the power of a school where each child is known by each adult. I've also worked in schools where that didn't happen. Anonymity is the first step towards falling through the cracks. 

On "Grow": Merrow is exactly right. The only thing I'd add is that we should have multiple measures, subjective and objective, to chart the "two steps forward, one back." As the fifth norm on a poster in my classroom states: "It's OK to make mistakes as long as you learn from them." In my experience, the difference between functional and dysfunctional schools is that the former uses data to pinpoint where the mistakes are, then does something about them. The latter does neither. 

Accountability isn't the enemy. It's the inertia that results in its absence. 

On "Americans": I agree one hundred percent. Our schools are the fuel of our democracy. This is one of many reasons that I agree with both Michelle Rhee and Diane Ravitch -- teaching should be a top-tier profession in the U.S. and teachers should be compensated as such.

** As Basher in Ocean's 13 asked, "Do you know what Chuck Berry said every night before counting 1, 2, 3, 4?"

 

On "Citizens": My only addition to Merrow's list is that our schools should help each child reach his or her full potential. The tricky thing about teaching is that it's impossible to know what that is. Thank God that my future wasn't based on what I did as a 14-year-old. (The Fifth Amendment excuses me from giving details about this and, hopefully, my parents have forgiven and forgotten. Or at least, forgiven.) 

Now, as a teacher of 14-year-olds, I have to balance holding students to high expectations and being understanding as they inevitably fall short some of those expectations. We teachers can't hold a grudge, even with the kids who require near-constant coaching.

The problem is that for too many kids, particularly those trying to break out of poverty, the mistakes they make as adolescents haunt them for the rest of their lives. This, to me, is the worst thing about poverty in the United States -- it's life with not much of a safety net. 

To create the citizens we want to have, it's incumbent on us -- especially those of us born into stable families, secure incomes, and a predictable path to an education -- to use those privileges to help others who weren't so lucky. 

Because that's the thing -- luck plays a bigger role than it should in determining whether a child becomes who he or she is capable of being. 

Luck decides who a kid's parents are, but the the idea behind public education -- beyond facilitating the development of "good parents and neighbors, thoughtful voters, reliable workers" -- should be to offer a children an opportunity and a choice to determine who they'll be. 

Public education will never entirely compensate for the advantages and disadvantages of who one's parents are. This doesn't mean that we shouldn't do a much better job than we're doing now.