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.

Scary Estimate by a Sped Teacher

Walking to the gym beside a new special education teacher, she tossed off this observation:

“I spend about 60% of my time doing paperwork and 40% giving instruction. I hoped there’d be less of that here (than in her old school) but it seems to be the same.”

We commiserated over government paperwork demands, a real burden in bilingual education as well.

Eduhonesty: At a certain level, those government paperwork demands begin to impact instruction. Time spent preparing mountains of paperwork cannot be given to planning future instruction. After a long day of paperwork, many teachers just grab an appropriate or semi-appropriate lesson off the internet, minimizing preparation for the next day since the present day is pretty much gone.

Following our natural talents

A computer once beat me at chess, but it was no match for me at kickboxing.
~ Emo Philips.

We work relentlessly to get our bullies into line. We don’t always succeed.

Eduhonesty: Kids are like plants. Plants grow toward the light. Kids grow in the direction of their most likely successes. Unfortunately, for some kids, their best chance of success is in a fight on the bus.

Or at least, that’s how they see it.

Einstein’s right but…

“Imagination is more important than knowledge.”
~ Albert Einstein

Eduhonesty: True, but imagination works better when there’s knowledge to back it up. You can visualize a car without understanding a car, but you can’t build a car until you understand a fair amount of physics, materials science, metallurgy and chemistry.

Exit tests and Constitution tests

The Illinois Constitution tests are exit tests. Students must pass tests on both the U.S. and the Illinois Constitutions in order to pass on to the next grade. (They take the tests during different years.) Retakes are allowed, but passing is required.

I got most of a Civics class to meet me in the library in the evening to study for their constitution test. I frankly love Constitution tests because motivation levels are so high. After-school study sessions may get nearly perfect attendance. Students don’t need to be reminded to take or highlight notes. They stare attentively at new information displayed in front of the class.

Eduhonesty: The threat of failure is a wonderful motivator. We should use it more often.

 

Exit tests

One of my paraprofessionals told me that he had gone to school in Honduras. In Honduras, students did not pass third grade if they could not pass the third grade exit test. Fail the test, you repeat the grade. Period.

I like the idea.

Eduhonesty: Pundits keep demanding that teachers be held accountable. That’s fine — at least, when rational standards are used to judge those teachers — but we also need to hold students accountable. Right now, it’s often all on the teacher to produce academic results. I believe this is part of the reason why we have so many passive, undermotivated kids. When failure is not an option, kids know they won’t fail.

Not failing is NOT the same as succeeding, though — not by a long shot.

Failure is not an option?

Teachers are told not to enable students. “They need to learn to do their own work. Don’t rescue them all the time.”

And if they are not doing their own work?

In these times when teachers are also told that “failure is not an option” we have a real problem. No work is not allowed to result in failure. No work is not supposed to result in rescues or enabling. The only acceptable outcome is a student who is doing their own academically-acceptable work.

This situation led the second largest school district in Illinois to propose a grading system for this school year that started at 50%. If you did no homework at all, you had a 50%. The following is taken from an email about this change:

Concerns About the New U-46 Grading Policy
It is very concerning that many U-46 stakeholders may not be fully aware of the implications of the new grading policy which is to be implemented this fall, or the ultimate negative effect it will have on the overall quality of the education of our students in this district.
The first topic of concern is that people may not realize how drastically some grades will be inflated when all low scores are bumped up to 50%. Under this new grading policy, a student could conceivably get a 70% C- average on half of his assignments, and still pass the class without even completing any of the other half of the requirements of the course. Understand that the average of 70% and 0% is 35%, which is what this student earns. However, when all of his zeroes are inflated to 50’s, he passes with a 60%, the average of 70% and 50%. In this case, the student’s average increased by 25%. It is crucial that everyone is fully aware of the fact that hundreds of students who would have earned failing grades in the 30’s, 40’s and 50’s, will now pass their classes under the new policy this fall. [For evidence, please refer to the May 2013 Grading Committee Report PowerPoint, Slide 27, which shows what happens when a student with a 28% has all of his low grades changed to 50’s. In this example, though the student’s average is increased by 24.5%, he still gets the failing grade he deserves with a 52.5%. A similar student, however, with just a couple more passing scores, can pass the class with a percent in the 30’s. With only 3 passing scores out of 12, a student could receive credit for the class.] Students who have demonstrated such low competency should not receive credit. The commonly accepted minimum competency accepted in this country has been 60% for over one hundred years. Why should U-46 lower that minimum competency expectation to 35%?

Eduhonesty: Madness. Complete madness. When I left off, the Superintendent was backtracking furiously. I doubt that the district made the change to this grading system, but if they didn’t, the reason was that some teachers raised holy hell about the plan. Originally, this scheme and a similar version were presented for a vote — without the option of continuing the traditional grading system. The idea behind the 0 = 50% idea was that students would not become discouraged and quit. Teachers were also expected to accept all late work up until the near end of the grading period for the same reason.

Reality: Some kids don’t work. Phone calls to parents or guardians don’t change the situation. Even afterschool tutoring sessions don’t get the work done, at least not consistently. Trying to get around this fact by stripping away the penalties for late work, while giving half-credit for no work at all, will not solve the problem. For one thing, many students will then copy returned papers belonging to their friends. Cheating is already endemic in our schools. For another, those students who find a “C” or lower acceptable will then do LESS work since that 50% makes it possible to nail the “C” grade with a fair number of missing assignments.

I’m sorry, but failure HAS to be an option. Why do we have illiterate and innumerate high school students? One reason is that we kept passing these kids when some of them had done almost no work. Rewarding students for doing no work, a schlock job, and/or late work will not benefit our students. I don’t see how anyone benefits, except for a few administrators who don’t want to explain failures to parents or other administrators.

 

Bunkum

From http://nepc.colorado.edu/newsletter/2011/02/us-department-education-big-winner-2010-bunkum-awards:

“The Bunkum Awards each year acknowledge reports on education issues from think tanks and other sources that represent the worst of the worst when it comes to research quality. Past winners have been lauded for their shoddy methods, evidentiary cherry-picking, and tendentious reasoning.”

I suggest reading all the bunkum awards, but here is one of my favorites:

The ‘Plural of Anecdote is Not Data’ Award. Our first award went to the Reason Foundation for its report Fix the City Schools arguing for “portfolio” school districts and citing improvements in student achievement in New Orleans in the post-Katrina era. The report relied overwhelmingly on attention-grabbing anecdotes yet ignored reasons unrelated to the portfolio approach – such as the massive exodus of low-income children from the city, plus a significant increase in resources – that could explain those improvements.

That’s the problem with so much educational research. People with an agenda pick the “facts” that support their position. They ignore facts that don’t. Worst of all, I suspect they sometimes don’t even recognize that those counterexamples matter.

I have been told repeatedly in the past few years that research supports not penalizing students for turning in late papers. They should be allowed to turn in their homework pretty much any time before the end of the grading period, because then they will at least do the work. That research points out that this no-late-penalty system results in students doing better in school.

Help! Of course student grades improved when we let them turn in a bunch of junk at the end, pushing their overall average up. But how much more do they know than before? Especially since a great many of them just borrow friends corrected papers and copy the work, I suspect they learn little or nothing much of the time. The research says we kept them from giving up. Well, we did that too. But what did we really teach?

Eduhonesty: I think we taught students that you can behave irresponsibly, even dishonestly, and the world will let you get away with it. The world may even reward you. That’s what we taught. I’ll be interested to see how that approach works out in the work world. I expect a number of these kids to be stunned when they are told to clean out their desks. I can just hear them stuttering, “But I was going to turn it in next week!” as they are escorted off the premises of their former jobs.

Technology may not always be our friend

They look up answers that they barely read. They cut and paste the answers into documents they barely edit. They even copy whole essays off sites designed for that purpose.

If our students were using pen and paper, at least they’d have the reinforcement from writing what they copied.

A small subset of our students are using technology to avoid learning — and some of them are doing it rather successfully. I caught one student this year because about two-thirds of the way down his essay, I saw the word “whom.” Up to that point, I had been impressed. But I knew the kid and that kid was never going to use “whom.” I put a line from the essay into a search engine. A site offering essays popped up. I put in a line from another part of the essay. The same site popped up. If he had changed just a few words, he would probably have gotten a high “A” instead of a “0”, though.

Food for thought as so many bureaucrats and administrators leap on the technology bandwagon: I’m honestly not sure but we might get as much learning from hand slates and chalk if we subtracted the cheating.

 

Eduhonesty: Technology allows for plagiarism in particular, as well as other cheating. To prevent this dishonest behavior, a great deal of monitoring is required. In many places, this monitoring is not happening. Our already overloaded educators don’t have time to check the originality of all the work they receive. Sometimes there’s no way to check. A quick phone search during a test or quiz can slip right by. Students today are linked together 24/7 and help from friends in cyberspace has become part of the academic landscape.

 

On a more somber note…

I’m going to throw in a News Tribune article about a young woman who committed suicide by stepping out in front of a semi truck here because it deserves to be shared in its entirety:

Teacher’s suicide stuns school, spurs colleagues to speak out

School board surprised by allegations of workplace bullying and fear

January 01, 2012|By Becky Schlikerman, Chicago Tribune reporter

On Thanksgiving, a grade-school gym teacher parked on the shoulder of Interstate 80/94 in northwest Indiana, got out of her Mercury SUV and walked in front of a moving semi truck.

The 32-year-old’s suicide shocked the tiny Ford Heights school district where she worked. In the days afterward, tension grew amid conversations by co-workers about what had happened and questions from the Army veteran’s parents. The turmoil peaked during a crowded meeting in December, when some teachers and school board members clashed.

The suicide note that Mary Thorson left centered on frustrations at the school, and her death spurred some of her co-workers to speak out at the public meeting.

Teachers described an atmosphere of fear and intimidation in the two-school district, where little things snowballed over time.

“We don’t feel like we can speak out because we have been intimidated,” teacher Rose Jimerson said at the meeting. “We have signs all over the building about anti-bullying. … Our staff gets bullied.”

Co-workers and friends said in interviews that Thorson was deeply upset by her job and was worried she was on the verge of being fired. She had been suspended in April after allegedly striking a student and again a week before her death, records show. The second suspension was for allegedly cursing at a student, a co-worker said.

Even some of those close to Thorson acknowledged that it’s difficult to pinpoint why anyone commits suicide, but her death opened wounds in the district. School district officials have vowed to work on healing with new channels of communication.

School board members and the administration expressed sorrow over Thorson’s death but also surprise at the way some teachers described the work atmosphere.

At the meeting, board members denied the allegations and asked why no one had come forward with such concerns.

“If you guys would have come and brought allegations and we didn’t address it, then you would have every right to say what you need to say,” Board President Joe Sherman said.

Thorson, known as Coach T, left behind a handwritten, six-page note in her SUV. Other than one paragraph in which she apologized to her parents for the hurt her death would cause, the rest of the note was exclusively about Ford Heights School District 169.

Thorson’s parents agreed to share the note with the Tribune. In it, Thorson wrote, sometimes rambling, about the plight of children in the poor school district and the lack of resources and discipline. She also wrote about the school’s leadership and said teachers were not taken seriously.

“We must speak up about what’s going on!” The note concludes: “This life has been unbelievable.”

Thorson had started her teaching career after an eight-year stint in the Army Reserve, where she attained the rank of specialist and served honorably, said Army spokesman Mark Edwards. She joined in 1998, just out of high school, to help pay for college, said her father, John Thorson.

Thorson was the first in her family to graduate from college, getting a diploma from Western Illinois University in 2005. She worked at schools in Chicago and Bellwood before taking a job in Ford Heights at Cottage Grove Upper Grade Center in 2008.

A lot of sympathetic teachers in my district discussed this incident when it occurred. Teachers in underperforming schools frequently face that kind of stress, as outsiders demand fixes for troubles that no teacher can control. Children can’t learn unless they are in school, for example, but when parents don’t send those children, a teacher’s options are limited. That teacher may still get slapped in a review for the chronically absent students’ test scores.

 

Eduhonesty:  That teacher had been suspended after allegedly striking a student and suspended again shortly before her death for allegedly cursing at a student. I can’t speak to the truth of those allegations. I can tell readers that certain students try to provoke these responses. They may spend an entire class period trying to get the teacher as angry as possible in hopes of making that teacher do something stupid. Sometimes kids do this for sport, especially in our underperforming and urban schools. A kid who is failing his classes and plans to drop out has little incentive to behave. If the teacher sends him to the Dean, he gets out of class. That’s a win for a student who did not want to be in class in the first place. If the teacher doesn’t send that student out, but just looks steadily more harried and upset, that’s a win, too. Administration may provide little help. I have a referral form here for a student I sent out for talking. It says, “this is a classroom management issue.” The first time that student talked, that was a classroom management issue. The tenth or fifteenth time might have been. But by the time I wrote that referral, I was looking for some help. I wasn’t surprised not to get it, though.

Part of the problem is an idea sweeping through administrative academia: Administrators now are told that students need to be kept in the classroom if at all possible, since they cannot learn if they are not in the classroom. Professors who have never taught in a public school point out that removing kids from the classroom necessarily deprives those kids of opportunities to learn. But little attention is given to the impact of chronically-misbehaving students on the classroom, as they steal learning minutes from other students. Five minutes here, five minutes there, and pretty soon these students have taken hours from their peers, a fact that some of these miscreants find funny.

Why are there bully posters in all our schools? Because there are bullies in all our schools. The sad fact is that sometimes teachers are bullied, too. I hope the kids who kept pushing Mary Thorson’s buttons on that day have learned something from what happened. I’m selfish enough to hope they have a few nightmares, too.

Arming teachers is a bad idea

The first paragraph of an article from http://news.yahoo.com/ark-ag-schools-cant-arm-teachers-staff-204340761.html:

LITTLE ROCK, Ark. (AP) — Arkansas school districts can’t use a little-known state law to employ teachers and staff as guards who can carry guns on campus, the state’s attorney general said Thursday in an opinion that likely ends a district’s plan to arm more than 20 employees when school starts later this year.

Sanity prevailed here. Even in these scary times, arming teachers is a foolish plan. Remember that first-year, New York teacher who threw herself down the stairs, trying to avoid a second, bad classroom review? Remember the man who shot himself to death in his own classroom, planning for students to find his dead body? And while a Google search on “teacher attacks students” mostly returns articles about students attacking teachers, there are a few sobering stories of students being kicked, punched and even shoved into walls and lab tables by instructors. I remember one frustrated little woman, a first-year teacher who took a student’s electronic device, hurled it to the floor and stomped it into pieces, breaking the thing into tiny shards of plastic and metallic innards. I had no clue what the device had once been. That teacher left after her first year and I doubt she’s still teaching. Many equally fragile teachers remain in the classroom, though.

To be blunt, I want to say that if you arm teachers, one of them –somewhere, someday — is going to shoot up a school for sure. Teaching is far more stressful than postal work. Add to that the fact that we are not vetting our teachers for mental health. Employment applications don’t check to see if an applicant is half a bubble off plumb — or just plain bananas.

I recently filled out a number of those applications. They want to know if I am behind on student loans, if I have been convicted of crimes other than traffic tickets, if I am delinquent in child-support payments, if I have ever been accused of child abuse, if I am in the Sex Offender database, etc. But no one has ever asked  about my sanity. My mental and physical health history are mostly off-limits by law, as they are for job applicants all across the country. The district isn’t even supposed to ask me if I am married or have children.

If a district feels the need to put a policeman on site, that makes sense, but guns should otherwise be kept out the school. Period.