today's lesson: what teachers make

I entertained the thought of writing about technology in the classrooms for this last post. 

About how we need less testing and more assessing. 

Considered making a list.

"Things that make a good teacher," I would call it.

Or maybe persuading the world that we need all students to study the "great books."

Go back to the basics.

That will solve everything.

I thought about talking about the fabulous blog, Edweek.org where most of my inspiration comes from.

I almost wrote about teaching English in middle and high schools.

Reading and writing specifically.

I had started writing on the controversial topic of sex education in schools.

Then deleted that and wrote about why I am passionate about education.

And itching to teach so bad that my fingernails are hurting.

(That is why I have spent the last three years of my life in Rexburg, after all.)

Instead, I thought I'd leave you with this.

What Teachers Make, by Taylor Mali.

He says it far better than I ever could:

He says the problem with teachers is, "What's a kid going to learn
from someone who decided his best option in life was to become a teacher?"
He reminds the other dinner guests that it's true what they say about teachers:
Those who can, do; those who can't, teach.

I decide to bite my tongue instead of his
and resist the temptation to remind the other dinner guests
that it's also true what they say about lawyers.

Because we're eating, after all, and this is polite company.

"I mean, you¹re a teacher, Taylor," he says.
"Be honest. What do you make?"

And I wish he hadn't done that
(asked me to be honest)
because, you see, I have a policy
about honesty and ass-kicking:
if you ask for it, I have to let you have it.

You want to know what I make?

I make kids work harder than they ever thought they could.
I can make a C+ feel like a Congressional medal of honor
and an A- feel like a slap in the face.
How dare you waste my time with anything less than your very best.

I make kids sit through 40 minutes of study hall
in absolute silence. No, you may not work in groups.
No, you may not ask a question.
Why won't I let you get a drink of water?
Because you're not thirsty, you're bored, that's why.

I make parents tremble in fear when I call home:
I hope I haven't called at a bad time,
I just wanted to talk to you about something Billy said today.
Billy said, "Leave the kid alone. I still cry sometimes, don't you?"
And it was the noblest act of courage I have ever seen.

I make parents see their children for who they are
and what they can be.

You want to know what I make?

I make kids wonder,
I make them question.
I make them criticize.
I make them apologize and mean it.
I make them write, write, write.
And then I make them read.
I make them spell definitely beautiful, definitely beautiful, definitely beautiful
over and over and over again until they will never misspell
either one of those words again.
I make them show all their work in math.
And hide it on their final drafts in English.
I make them understand that if you got this (brains)
then you follow this (heart) and if someone ever tries to judge you
by what you make, you give them this (the finger).

Let me break it down for you, so you know what I say is true:
I make a goddamn difference! What about you?

today's lesson: the skinny on BYU-I's dress and grooming standards

Well, it would appear that the recent "Skinnygate" scandal has finally put little old Rexburg on the map.

A usually quiet and secluded private university in Eastern Idaho has been making national--and international--headlines this week since the campus newspaper, the Scroll, published an article about the testing center's dress and grooming standards reminder.

Students were outraged to read that a college senior who went to take a test just before the center closed was denied because she was wearing skinny jeans. A sign was then posted at the testing center that read simply, "no skinny jeans," according to the Scroll article.

However, this does not reflect the entire university. Nowhere in the dress and grooming standards does it specifically reference skinny jeans. It does, however, ask students to refrain from tight or form-fitting clothing.

A poll posted this week on BYUIcomm.net stated that 70% of students do not believe wearing skinny jeans is in violation of the dress and grooming standards, where only 10% indicated they are not acceptable.

My opinion? Less rules. More obedience. It's as easy as that.

Wanna read more about the scandal?

Click  one of the links below.

1. University's issue with skinny jeans goes national.
2. Brigham Young University-Idaho says Skinny Jeans not Banned
3. BYU-Idaho responds to testing center policy on skinny jeans
4. BYU-Idaho to ban skinny jeans?
5. The skinny on a supposed jeans ban at BYU-Idaho
6. BYU-Idaho office allegedly bans skinny jeans--then overturning the decision

Rexburg on the map now? Firmly.

today's lesson: education of the whole child

Mind, body and brain...how about an education of the whole child? Now there's a thought.

I was thrilled to stumble upon this article by Jane Isaacs Lowe in which she discusses the ever-present issue of the limitations on what schools can do. Yes, the education of the whole child is ideal, but how much are we capable of? Students spend a significant amount of time at school and we simply cannot only be responsible for their knowledge on just the subject matter.

Schools across the country are finally taking note of this, and numerous studies have been released that show these factors to be equally important in the education of a child. Many schools are partnering with non-profit organizations focused on the mental, physical, and emotional health of young people.

Lowe also pointed out that our students cannot focus when their mind is elsewhere. How can we punish a student for zoning out because she is worried about the fight her parents had the night before? Why would we force the memorization of times tables when he can only think about how hungry he is? What do we do when they didn't sleep last night because of the fear of crime in their neighborhood?

This is a concern I have had as I am about to embark on a journey in the field of education. In fact, I was just talking to my professor yesterday on this very same issue. We can study until we have the textbooks memorized, we can teach one hour lessons in front of our classmates, we can learn every tried and tested principle there is...but can we put it into practice on an unfocused child?

As a future teacher, I have this intense desire to know the whole child. What goes on at home, what goes on in the hallway, what goes on in my classroom. However, I am slowly realizing the impossibility of this as I will be teaching close to one hundred different students per day. When I expressed my concern to my professor he replied,

"We can only do what we can do. We try our best, make mistakes, and move forward with our teaching."

Good advice. Do our best. Make mistakes. Move on.

today's lesson: they must be doing something right

School officials want better education for their students. Better opportunities. More involvement and more agreement. Better test scores, fewer tests. More excitement, less complaining. School officials seem to want to have it all and do it all-- all in the name of education, of course. Why then, can they not seem to agree when it comes to how (and where) students learn best?

If you have been a long-time reader of this blog, you may remember a post a few months ago about charter schools. I questioned whether or not they were as fabulous as America is making them sound. The answer?

Not so much.

Madison School District  Superintedent Geoff Thomas expressed his concerns about charter school education in a Pre-Professional Conference at BYU-Idaho this October. He feels that much of the motivation behind starting a charter school is the amount of funds it receives for such a small number of students and teachers. He also mentioned that the majority of charter schools in Idaho are not outperforming public schools.

However, according to a recent article posted by The Associated press on Edweek.org, more than 2 million students are now attending charter schools across the US. It also stated that more than 500 new charter schools opened during the 2011-2012 school year.

Are those numbers screaming success to us?

Perhaps. They must doing something right.

Perhaps the country is heeding President Obama's encouragement in 2009 to embrace educational opportunities by increasing the number of new and innovative charter schools across the country.Or maybe the one-on-one instruction students receive daily is yielding these results.

Whatever the reason, charter schools seem to be working their magic on students. And parents and teachers are loving what they see.

today's lesson: what it takes

A very special set of skills. That's what it takes to be successful in today's world of technology, outsourcing, and computers that are scary smart.

Just what does this special set of skills entail, you ask? Yep. You guessed it. Students simply must be one step ahead of the game if they hope to succeed (or even stay afloat) in today's job market.

Heather Singmaster outlined these skills in her article by stating the cold, hard facts. "As more routine jobs can be done by computer or outsourced, the advantage will go to workers who can analyze and solve problems, recognize patterns and similarities, and communicate and interact with other people, especially those who do not share the worker's culture."

What we are doing simply isn't enough. Still, the question remains: how do we as educators prepare students for the ever-changing and ever-intensifying world of work? Can it be done?

The answer is yes. We need more teachers with fresh minds and new knowledge. Those who can quote Shakespeare and navigate Photoshop at the same time with ease. The answer is not in harping on our students to study more or take more tests. The solution lies in the learning environment created by the teacher.

Teachers with new, innovative approaches to teaching are more likely to get students excited about learning. And if that can be done, than a major feat has already been accomplished. There are few students in today's world who are uninterested in technology altogether, and even fewer who will be marketable employees without it.

This isn't a back-to-the-basics movement. Increased testing will not prepare them for college. Jumping on the "students are lazy" bandwagon will not give them the confidence they need to succeed.

As educators, we hold the most valuable opportunity at our finger tips each and every day. We can change lives. We can be the change we want to see in the world. Pardon me for going all Ghandi here, but it's true.

We must make our classrooms a sanctuary from "boring." Since when is knowledge boring? Students have been given this notion from generations past, but it is our obligation to change this misconception. We have to freshen our approach, and step up our standards. We have to jump on that computer and learn what we need to learn. We have to balance the old with the new, the good with the bad.

We simply must prepare them. It is our job. Our responsibility. Our passion.

today's lesson: what no-testing schools could do for our kids

In all schools we have ISATs, SATs, ACTs, ELAs, writing assessments, and reading comprehension exams. In all schools we have frustrated teachers, satisfied teachers, students both bright and not-so-bright, deadlines, goals, structure—to some degree. Finding room for all of the above seems to be the impossible paradigm.

One school in New York tried something unheard of and utterly shameful to education in this day and age…a “No Testing Week.” Not a single test was issued to a single student for an entire week. The result? Happy teachers. Happy students. A reminder of the difference between testing and assessing. A reminder of how the American education system can be great.

On that same week, the principal of the school received a letter from the New York Board of Education outlining the new testing days that were to take place in the school. For two days, two hours each day, third through eighth graders would take timed tests that would assess their knowledge over a plethora of subjects. Yadda, Yadda. Sincerely, those who “care” about our students.

How ironic

Not surprisingly, the school was a little disheartened. Peter DeWitt wrote in an article that “for one week it felt like we won. Students and teachers were engaged in real learning, where every moment that surrounded them was an educational opportunity.”

Then they returned to reality. The issue here is not whether or not testing should be completely eliminated in the public education system, but rather, how far is too far when it comes to testing. How much is too much? When do we stop caring about our ranking in the world and start caring about individual student’s needs?

“No Testing Week was a time to reflect on why we teach children and get a better understanding of what truly matters in education. Teaching all learners, regardless of whether they are a 1,2,3 or 4 on a high stakes test, is why we entered the profession in the first place,” wrote DeWitt.

The issue continues to swirl in and out of every school in the U.S. and the answer is nowhere to be found. “Moderation,” some say. “Elimination,” shout others. “Education,” I say. Education. Let’s focus on the students and not on their scores.  Let’s get back to what really matters, shall we?

today's lesson: drawing the line

Parental involvement is always welcome, and even embraced in the public education system. It is especially welcomed as there seems to be less and less of it these days. However, when it comes to parents donating hefty funds to their child's school, where do we draw the line?

In Walt Gardner's article, "Drawing the Line on Parental Involvement," he points out that by allowing parents to donate funds to only their child's school, we are creating a two-tiered education system--one which separates the affluent from the poverty-stricken.

While donated funds do indeed take some schools to a higher level of learning, the schools in poorer areas of the country do not feel the same benefits. In fact, many fall behind because of a lack of textbooks, proper teachers, and classroom materials.

In an effort to regulate donations, the government has stepped in. Gardner writes:

"This disparity is on display in California in the Santa Monica-Malibu Unified School District, where PTA donations have amounted to more than $2,100 per student at Point Dume Marine Science Elementary School in Malibu, compared with only $96 per student at McKinley Elementary School in Santa Monica. To comply with past court rulings, the school board is considering centralizing fundraising. Donations would be placed in a districtwide non-profit, which would then distribute the money evenly among all schools"

So where do we draw the line here? How do we tell parents they cannot use their income to help their student's school? With so many budget cuts and setbacks surrounding education, it is difficult to turn the money down. However, we must remember that every student counts. Not just those who are fortunate enough to live comfortable lives.

California's school board's consideration sounds reasonable. Why not pool the money and then distribute it evenly? Parents have the innate sense to care for children. Whether or not every dollar of their donation specifically benefits their student should not matter. Every child deserves access to a quality education.