The Original, No Substitutes

Being out of the classroom is a pain. The initial pain is writing lesson plans. While subs should be able to come in and pick up where you left off (they do have the same certificate as other teachers) it rarely works that way. I also like to be detailed so that I can eliminate confusion- what to do, materials to use, when, and why.

Since I've been out for 2 weeks, I had more detail I my plans than usual. I also have less of an idea where my kids are at this moment. What was covered, how well, in what depth, etc. my guess is that there is an email I. My inbox with some loose approximation of those things above. But I'm not going to check my email today. Not while on my last day of leave, and not with the knowledge that I'll likely get frustrated with where we are. It isn't meant as a slight on subs, but is often the reality.

Many districts are moving in the route of having more uniform materials and sequencing. The theory is that kids should get the same from one school to another. But everyone knows it is the teacher that makes the difference. They bring knowledge and style that can help kids succeed. Likewise, an inability to adjust or think on your feet can make a big difference in the opposite direction. Tomorrow I'm back, and the kids get the original...

Running and Teaching

Long distance running is my hobby outside of work. I run more than most, which is to say that I put in 70+ miles a week. I run even more during the summer, largely because of the time on hand but also because it is time to build up for a marathon. The parallels between my hobby and my career are uncanny.

The most obvious is the amount of time needed to be successful. Long distance running is built on one's aerobic capacity, your ability to process oxygen. How do you improve that? You do it by running, and running lots of miles. Teaching is the same, both in preparation and in actual work. You really can't be effective without doing your reading, getting to know your kids, assessing to find their strengths/weaknesses, and learning new practices (amongst many other items). Shortcuts rarely work out in either of these, leaving you underprepared for a race or underserving those you are teaching.

Both of these activities require patience. A few weeks back I was struggling with a hamstring issue that was causing my hip and IT band to rock out of alignment. The frustration was consuming, if for no other reason than the fact that no one wants to run in pain. Instead of throwing in the towel I needed to continue with exercises to strengthen my quads and hamstrings as well as using a foam roller every night to roll out the knots in the muscle. Similarly, teaching requires patience in spades. Your instruction may not work out the first time. You'll need to reflect on what is going on, what isn't working (and why), and make alterations. Teaching rarely is an instant gratification career, leaving you waiting for the big leap forward.

Planning is integral to the success of both activities. If you aren't clear what you are teaching, when you plan to teach it, and how you'll know if they got it then you're in trouble. Does that mean you won't change that plan? Absolutely not. Changes happen because of student interest, success of lessons, district initiatives, and countless other issues. But it is difficult to succeed without knowing where you want to go and how you plan to get there. My preparation for Chicago (and every marathoners preparation) is similar. I can't just go out and run hard everyday, or run a bazillion (that's a lot!) miles each week. I need to know what I want to hit on race day, and where I've already been. From there I can start to tailor a plan to hopefully get me to the race, and ultimately the finish line, where I want to be.

Lastly, neither activity allows for you to rest on your laurels. Any achievement you get is fantastic, but has little bearing on your future trajectory. Why? Stopping running (injury and rest aside) brings about an almost immediate loss on fitness. Others continue to train as well, bring about new challenges to where you've been. Even trying to simply maintain where you are is difficult. In teaching you'll find that new kids will always walk through the doors with new personalities, challenges, weaknesses, and strengths. New initiatives and practices will come up that you'll need to develop fluency with. The second you stop working and learning is the second you begin to slip backwards. Just because you were a distinguished teacher in the past doesn't mean you'll continue to be that way forever. You need to keep working.

What Makes a Great Teacher?

We are at Spring Break. Hooray. Breaks are welcomed, not because it is a chance to go on vacation but rather because it is an opportunity to recharge. My current plan is taking Saturday-Wednesday off from all things school, then spending at least one day in the classroom and another doing some planning/grading. How am I doing so far? Pretty good, blog reading aside.

In cleaning out my google reader, I stumbled upon a response to this article in the Atlantic Monthly. As a whole, I'm not really sure where to start. In the big picture, I think articles like these are written for educated people who wonder "what has gone wrong with our schools?" I'm not sure the motives of the Atlantic piece. Is it to make teaching seem accessible to anyone might consider a career change? Is it trying to advocate for a larger economy of scale for programs like Teach for America or KIPP? To be honest, I'm not sure what the motives are.

I'm on record as thinking that those programs (toss in most, if not all, charter schools and the Harlem Children's Zone as well) are not replicable on the broader scale. Using economic terms, which business people can relate to, you would seem to make a good thing great by increasing the economy of scale. You have less of a cost if you expand it to a broader audience. Have those programs had success? In some cases they have, their statistics bear that out. I say "their" because there has been one independent study of teacher efficacy in TFA (showing better math scores than public scores, but negligible gains in reading). Are they as successful as they are purported to be? No.

Keep in mind that charter schools (not TFA) have total control of their population, and have the ability to skim off those students that are low achieving for academic or behavior reasons. Do they say that they do this? Yes and no. In many cases they say that you can be asked to leave the program if you don't abide by their rules, which is essentially a blanket excuse for skimming without actually saying it. Ahhh but where do those "troubled" kids go? They dropout or they end up in public school, exacerbating the disparity. Each kid taken away from the charter school means fewer students in the equation for statistical purposes, while adding one to public schools makes the percentage look a few percentage points worse. In addition, the shelf-life of a TFA or KIPP teacher is typically 3-5 years. A revolving door of teachers is NOT what our public schools need. In my next post I'll look at the micro issues in the article.

Buzzing

Twitter and the blogosphere are all abuzz about an opinion piece (letter) entitled Why I Left Teaching Behind. The letter is an interesting read, particularly for someone that is entering year one of teaching. I can't debate the merits of the letter since it is her rationale for leaving, but I can't say her rationale is anything I haven't heard before.

Teaching is an odd career choice because of its position in society. The paradox goes as follows: it is always mentioned as one of the keys to our society, but it is treated as though anyone off the street could do it. Teachers are seen as integral to our societal success, but it is "so nice" or selfless to have chosen to teach.

I'm excited about the chance to teach a variety of different things each day, week, month, and year. I'm excited about seeing a myriad of different learners, and helping them succeed. I'm just plain excited, even if I don't know what grade I'm teaching... or where I'll be teaching.

Buying Stock in Futures

The joys of summer. It is a great time to have a summer job, particularly one where you sling coffee beverages to folks and have little responsibility. I'm caffeinated, I'm happy, and I get to talk to a variety of people (I'd say wide variety, but most are corporate/business types). This is the perfect time to relax a bit, let the pressure of the past 2 years release. This is the first time in 2 years that I am not working and going to school, doing each in a part/full time capacity (it worked out to a 40-10 split as far as hrs roughly). Work, at current, is a nice respite.

But I'd like to start getting ready for the year. Where do I start though? Normally I'd start digging through the curriculum sets, and seeing how the year is typically laid out, thinking about potential adjustments. This year I'd want to start setting up my classroom, as it would give me a head start- and extra hands from my wife (who has to setup her classroom too) and her family. But I can't really do that either. So what to do?

My plan right now is to start going through some of the books on my bookshelf about reading/writing/math instruction. I also want to go through some bigger picture stuff too. My wife has a book she is borrowing from her principal called Results Now, which I think I might read as well. I'll also start to go back through some of the Starred blog postings and see what other teachers have been doing (or are/were thinking). At least that's a start...

Thanks For Sharing

NYC Educator had a comical story today following Jay Matthews' (WaPo ed blogger/correspondent) ways to fix schools without spending a dime. Matthews' article was on the heels of Nicholas Kristof's op-ed in the Sunday New York Times. I certainly don't mind reporting about education. One thing that I learned while an undergraduate political science major was that too few people are participating in the discussion. Without discussion you end up with only a few people having their ideas being pushed, and it becomes a government of the priveledged, not one of the people (changing government is a whole different story).

My issue with Matthews and Kristoff is that they aren't really pushing great ideas. Charter schools, calling parents with kind words, and good pedagogy aren't going to make a dent in education. For one, while charter schools are all the rage they aren't shown to be the great education savior that is being pushed. They aren't a magic elixir, and pushing them to the public only further dilutes public faith in restoring public schools. Why help public schools when you can go to the magic charter school that cures everyone?

The shame in all of this is that Matthews and Kristoff write for large metropolitan newspapers. Others actually read their writing, and may start to drink the Kool-Aid. Why do we have to have people who aren't teachers, and have never experienced teaching, telling everyone what needs to be changed about teaching and education?

Where We Differ

A friend of mine posted a link to Nicholas Kristoff's Sunday Op-Ed in the NY Times. It was titled "Our National Shame" (registration required for the NYTimes... you can try bug me not), with the crux being that education has supplanted health care as the great American crisis. I don't dispute Mr. Kristoff's claim that we need to shift our focus from health care to education, nor that we should be fighting the war on poverty through education. Where I disagree is with his, as well as Arne Duncan and many others', assertion that charter schools (like KIPP) are the solution. The case can, and has been, made that charter schools have results that are no better than public school results. Additionally, the results of programs like KIPP (which certainly are laudable) fail to mention the number of drop-outs from their program, or the struggles of their graduates when they leave the regimented confines of the program (there are two links I am missing, but will find!).

Additionally I always struggle with talk about education and "good teaching." Kristoff mentions "good teaching" and how studies show that "good teachers" make the difference in education. Duh? Would you expect anything different?! Where I am confused is what writers, such as Mr. Kristoff, define as good teaching? What is good pedagogy to you? Everyone says that they want good teachers, and everyone thinks we have agreement, but I am not sure that we have the same believes about what "good" actually is. Good to you might be 100% direct instruction with worksheets related to the great tomes of knowledge our students should know. For me it would be cooperative learning groups where students are constructing knowledge around problems that are kids can relate to. What is good teaching to you?

Are Kids Widgets?

I've been thinking about kids, schools, factories, and widgets. I believe all kids can achieve. Do they develop at the same rate? No. There are many factors influencing their development. Should we hold schools and teachers accountable? Yes. The big question for me is what do you tie that accountability to? Is a teacher a bad teacher if their kids don't do well on a standardized test? Some would say yes. Personally, I disagree, as students are not widgets.

Isn't testing just like the quality control testing in factories? What happens when factories find a widget that doesn't meet their standard? They toss it, or perhaps sell it for less as a damaged/flawed version (typical with appliances... think the ones with the small ding in the side). For schools? We tell the kids that they have failed, or are a failure, and go through stages of closing schools. This makes me think of the government closing a factory because it is polluting too much. In the case of schools, it is as though the government is saying that the schools are producing a bad product that harms the environment.

The challenge ahead is changing the climate surrounding education. We need to move away from thinking of students as widgets/ovens/vacuum cleaners/TVs/cars/candy. They can all achieve, but jumping over the same bar at the same time seems incredibly silly. Worse so is then taking out our anger on schools for this failure. Additionally, how can we change our perspective from one that is penal to one that is positive?

Broad Student Teaching Reflections

Student teaching is a bizarre netherland. You are a teacher, but you aren't. You are an observer, but you are an active participant. You enforce rules but don't set the rules of the game. You are constructing knowledge internally, but acting like an empty vessel to be filled externally. It isn't your place to give feedback, but you might have some to give based on your newfound learnings/understandings. Just some odd observations about the concept of student teaching.

The implications of the last of the points is interesting when extrapolated to peer-to-peer review in the salary ladder (something Washington is considering). I see the inequity of having teaching make the same at each tier: some are far better quality teachers than others, some do more work than others, but they all are compensated the same. But I am not so sure that moving to having peers review each other advances the field. Doesn't that create a popularity contest like prom king and queen? If I were reviewed by 3 peers, 1 of which I don't jive with, how can I be sure I am getting a fair review? Maybe it makes sense in a post-racial, post-political party future we have tried to enter, but I don't see it. I think the process discourages peer constructive feedback... ugh.

Mr. Hanson, what is texture? Like, feeling?

Today was science for our 1st/2nd grade kiddos. In a nutshell, our goal was to learn that we can use properties (details) to describe things. We took our super duper describing skills to 4 different foods: oat cereal (cheerios), split peas, sunflower seeds, and macaroni.

How did they do? Awesome! We had some kinks (read further), and we didn't have enough time. Science has been pushed from a 45 minute block to a 30 minute-ish block at the end of the day. Can we do some of the work? Yes, but it makes the exploration, sharing and closure all very confined.

Kinks? After going over that we use all but one sense in science, our sense of taste, we had someone push the boundry. I am not so sure who has touched the materials, as they come from the district, so the issue is more one of safety than anything. Other kinks? Well I went through words that we could use for our describing (shape, color, texture, etc) but then failed to follow through and say exactly how we would get there... hence where the title comes from!

Alas the responses were awesome. We had descriptions like greenish, half-moon shaped, like a C, soft, smooth, bumpy, sounds harder than the others, like a bridge, felt cool, holey... Plus I had responses from just about everyone, and everyone was engaged.... Success! I just need more time...

There's No Whining In Teaching!

I'm a distance runner. I run marathons, and run everyday. While running isn't always enjoyable, I've learned to tolerate the act, believing that the hard work will ultimately pay off in becoming fitter (and a faster time). I put quite a bit of time in, often over 10 hours per week in running along (not counting stretching or icing), and it certainly isn't easy. I've tried going the route of running less, cutting corners a bit, but it hasn't worked for me and I just ended up irritated for my own stupidity. I could complain about the work I need to do, but it isn't worth it. I've moved myself to a place where I understand the problem before me.

Running? On an education blog? Thanks for sharing, right?! Well I see the two as highly correlated. In our learners we need to move them to a point where they are interested. If they aren't interested, we get stuck on the complaining. "But we already read that?" and "Do we have to?" are familair refrains. Moving learners to a point where they want to learn, and are engaged in the process is very important.

I think about this in the context of teacher education as well. Whether aspiring teachers (like myself), or professional development, people need to be invested in the process. Teachers need to be actively engaged in their own learning, otherwise why are we doing it? Who does it help to go through the motions or to simply "show up"? No one said teaching would be easy. We don't want to reinvent the wheel, but we do want to push the profession forward. When will the leap happen to a place of active engagement?

What I Learned!?

I learned that I really like science and math. I find them to be easier to wrap my brain around, maybe because they are concrete. These content areas also happen to have guides that give me concrete examples of what can be done. What gets me is following along without making the necessary adjustments to get the lesson to work in your classroom.

I learned that I want my kids to read for pleasure. I need variety in my reading block of time, and I want kids to be practicing reading books that they want to read. Reading can go in many different directions, and can also be structured in a myriad of ways. I have some ideas for how I want to structure my literacy block.

I've learned that you need to be ready for anything, including teaching the next lesson in the series. I made the mistake of getting a project started in writing, but not thinking of step numero dos. What is the next step in the how to writing? I got them started, I got them engaged... Now what?!

Piggybacking... I've learned that the teacher's job is never done. I've photocopied the writing from our writer's workshop, and am going to make a determination of where the students need to go to have a how-to book that works.

Monday marks the first day that I will submit my Memoir Monday to Two Writing Teachers. You don't get better at teaching writing unless you practice it yourself. I can't wait!

How to ask good questions?

I find it understandable that I am not yet adept at asking grade-level appropriate questions. "How did the board balance with the fulcrum off-center?" would fall into the above category. "What did we learn about balance?" would fall into the category of vague and obtuse. I'm not sure I find anything more frustrating than failing to really phrase a question that can be grasped by students at a myriad of levels.

The next question is how do I develop a lesson with questions that will hammer away at the essence of what I am teaching? I think I need to be more attentive to the concept, and actually talk through some of the questions in some of these initial lessons. For balance, that might have been asking questions that lead to the big idea of finding a balance point.

• What did you notice about the beam when the fulcrum was in the middle, and the 10 cubes were all at the end? Did it balance?


• Why do you think it didn't balance?


• How did you move the fulcrum to make it balance?


• What do we know about the weights on each side if the beam is level?

I was excited when one of the 1st graders pointed out that the side that was shorter (with all the cubes) was the same weight as the long side (see the image above from my science notebook). I am not so sure I really helped him along to make it happen though. Is 1 of 24 a good percentage? Right. As I said to one of the kids, science is confusing and that is ok. Today was more than enough evidence that I need to improve my questioning, and build that into my planning.

Engaging Lessons

I am only teaching sporadic lessons during this quarter, and tomorrow I get a chance to tackle science and math. In truth, I tackle science every Tuesday with our kiddos, but this is my first foray into math. The lessons couldn't be more different.

The Seattle School District uses the Everyday Math curriculum set. It is a highly recursive curriculum, and tomorrow I am introducing Turn-Around Facts for the first time (5.10 of the 1st Grade guide). I looks like the lesson is 3/4 whole group, which will have it's plusses as far as bringing forth discoveries about patterns in the facts, etc. To some degree there is a level of comfort in the sheet with the facts that the student needs to fill in. But is that really engaging? Isn't there a better way?

Fast forward about 2 hours and I'll be in science. We are working with the concept of balance, and more specifically how weight and position affect balance, not to mention the position of the fulcrum. It is a 45 minute block (too short, I know!) that seems to run out too quick. The kids are engaged, and the only real struggle comes in teaching kids how to be partners with others (particularly those not their best friends). There I struggle more with having effective whole class discussion in a limited time than having an effective lesson. If only I could intermingle the best parts of each of the lessons.... there is still time!

(note: credit to penywise at morguefile for the above photo)

Back to basics!

I am convinced of one thing: blogging can be an integral part of teacher development. Why is that? Well, for starters blogging (at least for teachers about education) forces teachers into the public sphere. Remaining behind closed doors, operating in the vacuum of our respective buildings, doesn't promote input into your practice or pedagogy. If we keep our doors closed, and our ideas locked inside, then we aren't able to benefit from feedback that could help us evolve. Why do we need to evolve our practice and pedagogy? Well, the world is constantly changing and we need to enable our learners to be a part of it in the ways that they will eventually see fit.

For me, as a teaching candidate, blogging is a way to reflect. It keeps me thinking about education, and provides an opportunity for my ideas to be scrutinized. You can't be afraid of the criticism; just take a deep breathe and let it in. I didn't realize how much I missed blogging until I wasn't doing it. Old blog posts on a collaborative blog can be found here.

Be well.