About admin

First written in 2012(?): Just how old is this thing??? Back then, during a too-short school year, I taught relentlessly. During evenings and week-ends, I graded, called families and planned lessons. I swerved around patches of glass in the parking lot, the first step in my journey up chipped stairs to a classroom covered in eclectic posters that hid patchy, scraped-up walls. I wrote about beloved students, almost all recipients of free breakfasts and lunches, who were entitled to a better education than they were receiving. In this blog, I have documented some of the reasons behind recent educational breakdowns. Sometimes, I just vented. 2017: Retired and subbing, I continue to explore the mystery of how we did so much damage to our schools in only a few decades. Did no one teach the concepts of opportunity costs or time management to US educational reformers? A few courses in child psychology and learning would not have hurt, either. Vygotsky anyone? Piaget? Dripping IV lines are hooked up to saccharine versions of the new Kool-Aid, spread all over the country now; many legislators, educational administrators and, yes, teachers are mainlining that Kool-Aid, spewing pedagogical nonsense that never had any potential for success. Those horrendous post-COVID test score discrepancies? They were absolutely inevitable and this blog helps explain why. A few more questions worth pondering: When ideas don't work, why do we continue using them? Why do we keep giving cruel, useless tests to underperforming students, month after grueling month? How many people have been profiting financially from the Common Core and other new standards? How much does this deluge of testing cost? On a cost/benefit basis, what are we getting for our billions of test dollars? How are Core-related profits shifting the American learning landscape? All across America, districts bought new books, software, and other materials targeted to the new tests based on the new standards. How appropriate were those purchases for our students? Question after question after question... For many of my former students, some dropouts, some merely lost, the answers will come too late. If the answers come at all. I just keep writing. Please read. Please use the search function. Travel back in time with me. I have learned more than I wanted to know along my journey. I truly can cast some light into the darkness.

Take a deep breath before you legislate

Barely Any Women, Minorities Or Wyoming Residents Took the AP Computer Science Test Last Year
By Jordyn Taylor | BetaBeat – Mon, Jan 13, 2014

Nobody in Wyoming took the AP computer science exam.
The demographics of the 2013 AP Computer Science exam’s test takers have been released, and the results are pretty depressing, tbh.
30,000 students took the AP Computer Science exam in 2013, which is great, because those kids might actually be able to find jobs one day, when everything is made of robots. But on the downside, less than 20 percent of test takers were female, and Hispanic and African-American students accounted for only eight and three percent of test takers, respectively. Ugh.

The rest of the article will tell you that few students in the U.S. take this test. Nonetheless, many issues underlay the above statistics. Schools are attempting to get more girls and minorities interested in math and computer science. The degree to which they fail reflects feminine preferences that are well-researched, as well as social and other factors. The minority picture remains less researched and murkier. While only eleven AP computer science exams were administered in Mississippi, Montana and Wyoming in total, the absence of any female, Hispanic and African-American test-takers in those states naturally sets off alarm bells.

Eduhonesty: Counselors and teachers know the money flows toward science and engineering. In many high schools, most of the math teachers are female. We push girls and minorities toward science, math and technology.

Why do our efforts often fail? Studies document that many girls prefer more social careers, careers that encourage conversation and social interaction. The key word is interaction. Problem-solving for the sake of problem-solving only appeals to a small subset of our students. Most students solve problems for grades and/or praise, working to keep teachers and parents happy. Some of these pleasers may decide to pursue math and science careers for the money.

Here’s the problem no one can solve: Social sciences may not pay well. The job prospects may be bleak. But social sciences are both much easier and more fun to study than math, science or engineering for the vast majority of students. On campus, students know that liberal arts majors have more free time than their engineering counterparts, sometimes ridiculously more free time. More than once, I’ve heard phrases from liberal arts majors like, “yeah, I did all the reading for the class the week before the final,” or even, “I never did the reading. You could pretty much figure out test answers without the reading.” This is true in high school as well as college. Creative writing is much easier than Calculus. Graphic Design is much more fun (for most) than AP Statistics.

What can we do to attract women and minorities to science, math and technology? One idea I favor is loan forgiveness. We need petrochemical engineers. Why not provide better loan rates, along with programs for loan forgiveness, for students who study in these areas?

Beyond that, I hope the government will mostly stay away from this issue. We can provide students with the information they need to make good choices. But in the end, when “Johnny” decides he has too much homework in his chemistry classes and switches his major to Gender Studies, there’s not much to be done. If there were, the paying parents of America have done it already.

Relative to what standard? A hidden trap for bilingual students…

Here is one challenge that complicates the life of bilingual teachers:

Students arrive from poor countries. If they are older, they may end up entering the work force pretty quickly to help out the family. Work is expected.

Suddenly, these kids are making more than their parents in some cases, more than any relative back in the home country. They may be able to buy that beater of a car and the new cell phone without family aid. Aside from the problem for family dynamics that this newfound prosperity poses, it’s hell on the higher education agenda. Why go to college?

These kids at 16 may be richer than anyone they have ever known. They are sometimes running their households by virtue of the fact that they speak more English than their parents. The idea that they should climb the English-language mountain to pay for college may not make much sense to them. As far as they can tell, they have made it already. They put shiny pictures of their cars on Facebook and take smiling selfies with their new phones.

Eduhonesty: Simply put, we have an agenda to sell the poor on educating their way out of poverty. One reason this agenda does not always work has to do with perceptions. I may know that my students technically are living below the poverty line; this does not mean that my students feel poor. Depending on where they have come from, they may even feel relatively wealthy for the first time in their lives.

Fuzzy research

“The great tragedy of Science – the slaying of a beautiful hypothesis by an ugly fact.”

~ Thomas H. Huxley (1825 – 1895) (From bob@LakesideAdvisors.com)

Eduhonesty: If we want evidence that education is no science, all we have to do is notice the number of administrative hypotheses that cannot be slain by ugly facts. The hypothesis did not pan out? The teacher must have done the experiment badly. The children did not improve? The instruction must have lacked rigor. The scores are stagnant? The teacher must have failed to scaffold and differentiate for the different levels of learning in the classroom.

If the teacher points out that almost no student in the classroom can actually read the book the district purchased, he or she may get a lecture on the need for increasing rigor.

Nowadays when I hear the word “rigor,” my mind silently tacks on “mortis.” (Latin: rigor “stiffness”, mortis “of death”) One of the recognizable signs of pie-in-the-sky curricula: Death of learning caused by inappropriate new strategies that incorporate irrational expectations, eliminating the pedagogical flexibility needed to help many students learn.

(If your students are newly arrived in the U.S. and are unwilling to converse because they are sensitive to their language deficits, obligatory activities that require verbal sharing aren’t the best — or even a particularly rational — demand.)

Googledoctopi Attack!!

I am sure this is not merely a school issue. This is a Google Docs issue. To quote Wikipedia, Googledocs “is a freeware web-based office suite offered by Google within its Google Drive service. … It allows users to create and edit documents online while collaborating with other users live.”

Sounds great, right? Often Google Docs is great. I make a PowerPoint presentation. I share it with a group. Presto! Everybody has a copy, right there on their own Google Drive, called My Drive. Interconnectedness takes one more giant leap forward.

Here’s my problem. Teachers share. Oh, do we share. I am buried in helpful files. I am not sure I could teach this many spiffy lessons in four years, let alone the next four months. These new files are obscuring vital administrative files which get lost in the flotsam and jetsam of other people’s desire to be helpful. I try to arrange and organize the files, but how many hours has that taken? And given the number of files I am organizing, how often will I lose files beyond all normal retrieval?

Eduhonesty: I am feeling a little overconnected right now.

English please!

One of my laughs for the week:

I ran into a former colleague, an excellent science teacher. I asked her how she was doing. She’s fine except her district moved her into a different position. She’s teaching English now.

Ummm… I respect this woman greatly, but English is not her first language.

“How’s that going?” I asked.
“I don’t know how to teach no English,” she answered, laughing.

I hope she was being ironic. I pray she was being ironic. The scary part is that I’m not sure.

Eduhonesty: This woman will do at least an adequate job. She’s a hard-working professional who cares about the kids. But this placement is silly. English teachers should be native speakers of the language who have passed a rigorous qualifying test. I’d take nonnative speakers who can pass that same test. I don’t believe my colleague could pass the test I visualize. The same is true for a fair number of bilingual teachers of my acquaintance. The ability to speak Spanish does not prepare anyone to teach English.

Sigh. She ain’t gonna do much harm, I guess. If she don’t know too much hard English, she does know how to use a textbook and present a lesson. She’s actually very bright. I can’t say the same about the people in her district office who were in charge of placing the professionals within their schools.

A last (for now) phone note

If I sound like the phones have taken control of the classroom, I’m exaggerating. My current school mostly has control of those phones. Many schools do. I had to give one and only one phone warning last week and the girl in question immediately put her phone away. Fear of having a phone seized is a powerful deterrent to its use.

But I still want the issue out in the open for discussion. For one thing, the phones go home and kids can then spend their whole afternoon — and sometimes night — on their own personal phone. They are endlessly texting, chatting and playing games. They are tweeting, posting selfies to their Facebook accounts, emailing those selfies to friends, and taking random pictures of snacks, dinners and just about anything else. Where does the homework fit in this picture? When will the reading happen?

Eduhonesty: That last question is the real kicker: When will the reading happen?

We learn from reading. We don’t learn from being taught to read. Almost everybody is taught to read. That education has very little benefit, though, if a kid never picks up a book.

Breaks and block schedules

An hour and half of math is simply too long. We have research that suggests our kids can’t stay focused on math for that long. A few can, of course, but most wander off mentally if the lesson goes on too long.

I like block schedules. I’ve had too many lessons that I could not finish because I needed extra time. I like to finish what I start in the same class period.

Eduhonesty: Nonetheless, I try to work a break into the middle of any block, something physical if possible. I am experimenting with Yoga right now. The kids welcome the break. They are usually much more attentive when we resume class.

Too often nowadays, in the work world as well as the classroom, our sense of urgency seems to lead us to flog the horse until it’s ready to drop. We might do much better with music, carrots and water breaks.

Healthy lunches

The push toward healthy lunches may be having an unintended effect. I have no research. I cannot document a thing. Still, I may be on to something here.

Here is what I know: I am on a diet. I am trying to lose Christmas weight. I bought the school lunch this week because it was perfect. I got a small piece of baked chicken, some unflavored rice, and a choice of fat-free veggies and fruit. Perfect. The whole thing probably wasn’t 250 calories. I’m not sure it was even 200 calories.

Other menu options for the month look equally suitable for my diet. Lean Cuisine could not do better. A nice fresh apple, raw carrots, a cooked vegetable without oil, butter or even salt, and baked, low-fat something-or-another.

Eduhonesty: That lunch was pretty scary. Can an adolescent function on that little food? Especially since they often throw some or all of it away, I am concerned. You have to be on a diet or a bit of a health nut to eat overcooked, unsalted, fat-free green beans.

Are other districts serving similar lunches? I’m afraid they might be. With the government push toward fresh, healthy food, districts are forced to budget to get that fresh food onto plates. I’m sure it’s more expensive than pepperoni pizza. So the district serves one piece of baked chicken. Or one scoop of low-fat, overcooked, whole-wheat spaghetti in slightly-diluted red sauce. The chicken may get eaten, at least.

When I was 15, I frequently ate 500 or more calories for lunch without a thought. I probably needed 500 calories. Most kids need that much food and athletes may need more.

I wonder if we are underfeeding our students in the name of good nutrition?

Rafael’s hammer

We’ll call him Rafael. He did not do a single problem on his last assignment. Instead, he drew Thor’s hammer on the back of the sheet, with lightening bolts coming out of the hammer. The Rafaels make many teachers despair, as they pursue their personal agendas, ignoring the math swirling about them.

I love Rafael. He won’t be in my class next semester and I am going to miss him. I know he’ll miss me too. I don’t think too many people in his world are backing up his plan to make superhero movies. As far as I am concerned, we might as well support our Rafaels. They won’t quit drawing hammers because we explain that auto repair is more practical. I recommend double majors to students like Rafael, emphasizing the need to make a living until the big break comes.

Rafael’s grade will be OK. Much of the time I caught his hammer-drawing efforts in time. He did enough to get by, in the tradition of Rafaels everywhere.

Eduhonesty: I enjoy working with this kid because he has a dream. One of the best parts of teaching is supporting the random dreams that somehow grow up between the cracks of the broken sidewalks in our poor neighborhoods. This kid plans to go somewhere. I’m glad to have had the chance to believe in him.

Games!

We talk to our phones. Our phones talk back. My phone will happily provide me with all kinds of advice and information.

My phone will also allow me to play endless games, timed and untimed, alone and in groups. I gave my advisory a free day and watched as five of them played a game together, each on their own phone, in a mysterious competition with crashing cars. The phones find each other, linking the players together.

Many readers understand this perfectly, of course.

I’m not sure how many readers understand the temptation these games pose, though. I watched as my Jehovah’s Witness, a serious boy who would not accept pagan Halloween candy because of its tainted associations, joined in the game. This boy did homework almost daily. He had been known to read the Bible when he had no work. I watched him smile and laugh as he crashed cars.

I’m pretty sure Jehovah Witness’s mom would not have approved of that day’s activity. I am also sure that this boy has played a lot of group games under the radar. He didn’t ask for any help getting set up.

Gaming does not steal nearly as many minutes from learning as texting does — it’s too obvious — but it’s still a problem. Plenty of one-player game options exist. Students have said to me, “Please, just let me finish the game. I’m almost done,” as if this is a reasonable request. Or, “C’mon, I’m close to my highest score ever!”

Eduhonesty: If we want to improve America’s test scores, we had better begin to ban or block phones. They are too tempting.