Thank you, Parents!

The school year is wrapping up, and without exception, it has been the most difficult one of my career.

It was not difficult in the sense of not knowing what to do, how to manage the students, or any of the other requisite skills that teaching as a career requires. Rather, it was difficult in the emotional and psychological sense.

For several years now, we as public educators have been under fire. Movies such as Waiting for Superman have deliberately skewed public perception of our schools: their successes, their failures, and most of all, their students and staff.

Through conversations with fellow educators, I know that I am not alone in having felt at times over the past several years demoralized, unappreciated, and overlooked. Through conversations with my students, I am certain that they too have come to feel the pressure of seemingly endless standardized testing; SGOs (Student Growth Objectives) which are purportedly designed to assess the quality of the teacher, but only wind up adding yet another test to the students' schedules; and of myriad other educational initiatives, most of which are not borne out even in the slightest by educational research.

And then the parents heard us.

The parents heard the cries of their children, and the cries of their children's teachers. They have risen up as a mighty force, conquering and vanquishing foes whose fortunes and favors extend far and wide. They have risen up with a primal cry in refute, refusing to allow their children to be treated like so many guinea pigs in the experimental laboratory of contemporary education.

And I thank you for it.

You, parents, have heartened me, and brought me a greater sense of peace and hope. Together, I hope that we can defend the educations of our children, mine included.The stakes are too great for us to do anything else. As I care for my children- in my heart, soul, and self- I am sure that this is how you care for yours.

Together, we CAN and WILL overcome the virulent forces amassed against us. We have already garnered several victories, the last of course being the removal of Cami Anderson from Newark. True, her replacement is no angel. However, the point is made. They can (and will) write whatever they want in education deform-friendly periodicals, but in my eyes, she is gone because of the incredible and intense pressure that students, parents, educators, and community members placed on our lawmakers.

Hooray for us!

And so, allow us to continue to fight the good fight. To be sure, this will be a long, protracted conflict. There is too much money at stake for it to be otherwise. However, we have something on our side that they can never match: our love for and fierce defense of our children. As we care for them, so may we fight together to secure schools which are fit for their upbringing and growth.

Beware the Next Generation

Sometimes it stinks to be right.

Last week, Governor Christie shook things up by insinuating that he would be pulling NJ out of Common Core (CC). Today, John Mooney reported on Commissioner Hespe's apparent moderation of those provocative comments by suggesting that the process of re-evaluating CC would be a "highly deliberative" process, and that the end product may not be terribly different from what is already in place (http://www.njspotlight.com/stories/15/06/03/hespe-justifies-review-of-common-core-suggests-changes-may-not-be-drastic/).

Even worse, Hespe took the opportunity to set the next stage in the course towards nationalization of all standards, and the elimination of local control from that equation. As I'm sure my readers already know, Common Core standards only address language arts and mathematics, which has left the question of standardization across all other subjects open for speculation. Apparently, the time has come to eliminate those questions from the minds of America's parents and their children.

Enter the Next Generation Science Standards (NGSS).

As a teacher, for better or worse I am often exposed to many of the educational reforms impacting our classrooms before they show up on the news, as they are implemented and promoted through professional educational networks before splashing across the front pages of newspapers nationwide. I would like to warn my readers of a new potential threat: the Next Generation Science Standards.

First of all, let's confront the absolute misnaming of these standards. The word "State" is deliberately inserted into the title, but to imply that the states independently generated these standards is disingenuous. Here is a little information on NGSS, from their own website:

"In a process managed by Achieve, states led the development of K-12 science standards that are rich in content and practice and arranged in a coherent manner across disciplines and grades to provide all students an internationally-benchmarked science education." (http://www.nextgenscience.org/development-overview)

So, states led the development of the standards, but the whole process was managed by some group known as Achieve.

Why do I feel like I've heard that name before??? Oh yeah:

As I explained in my last entry, Achieve is a non-profit funded by the Gates Foundation "to support comprehensive benchmarking and review of academic standards and assessments between states" (http://www.gatesfoundation.org/How-We-Work/Quick-Links/Grants-Database/Grants/1999/10/OPP369).

And here they go, yet again...

So, readers, be wary of anything with the title "Next Generation" attached to it- other than Star Trek episodes, that is. This is very likely the same bilk as Common Core being repackaged and resold to address subjects other than language arts and math.

Christie: Rotten to the Core?

On May 28, 2015, Governor Christie announced his grand intention to move away from Common Core Standards and to begin to develop the New Jersey College and Career Readiness Standards.

Wow! Those are really hopeful sounding standards! Were you as excited as me when you first heard this?

Did you also feel, though, like you've heard the words "college and career readiness" before? As an educator, I hear them all the time: in faculty meetings, in emails from administrators, and as here, in the edu-speak of posturing politicians.

Feeling like I had heard them before I decided to do a little digging. Here's what I found:

http://www.achieve.org/what-college-and-career-ready

Achieve, Inc. has been promoting the idea of college and career readiness for several years now. And why shouldn't they? After all, these are worthy and laudable goals that we should all aspire to.

The only problem is this:

http://www.gatesfoundation.org/How-We-Work/Quick-Links/Grants-Database/Grants/1999/10/OPP369

Achieve, Inc. is a non-profit organization sponsored in whole by the Gates Foundation.

And here we go again...

So, while I sincerely hope that Governor Christie means to "return to New Jersey’s leaders... control over the education our students receive and wrest it away from Washington, DC bureaucrats", please forgive me for having my doubts.

I will say, however, that I think it's WONDERFUL that politicians and the private interests they represent are being forced to strategize, re-name, and re-package their failed educational platforms. This is because of US- the people of the United States- who have spoken up against the tyranny of the ultra-rich and their attempts to monopolize and privatize our public schools.

The fight is started, but the fight is by no means won. In a similar story, PARCC recently announced its intention to reduce overall testing time by 90 minutes. Hooray for us! This also appears to be an effort on their part to mollify the justifiably upset students, parents, and educators who are up in arms about the invasion which standardized testing currently poses in our classrooms.

But it is not yet enough. Our STUDENTS matter more than money. Our CHILDREN are not mere data points to be calculated and corrected on a billiard-ball bounce through school. Rather, they are our most precious resource, and their intellectual, as well as creative, social, and emotional developments need to be looked after. And we as concerned parents, educators, and citizens cannot rest until this- and only this- is accomplished.

Bad Move, Bill Gates

On May 5, 2015, a coalition of civil rights groups released a statement decrying the opt out movement which threatens to strike at the heart of the global testing companies (you can read their original statement here: http://www.civilrights.org/press/2015/anti-testing-efforts.html). In a terse, abstruse document which makes Einstein's twin paradox seem easy to understand, the coalition simultaneously speaks out against standardized tests, while criticizing those who have decided that the impact of the current quantity and quality of standardized tests in American schools is harmful to their children, and have therefore decided to opt their children out.

Huh?

Dr. Wayne Au does a great job following the money trail, and it leads back to...you guessed it, Mr William Gates. As Dr. Au explains with penetrating precision, 6 of the 12 groups who signed off on this statement accept substantial donations from the Gates Foundation. An additional 2 receive money from the Walton Foundation, another key mover in the corporate reform agenda (you can read Dr. Au's article here: https://www.facebook.com/SaveOurSchoolsNJ/posts/961331480566679).

There is a distinct, tragic irony in the fact that the world's richest, white man thinks that he knows how to help some of our nation's poorest, many of whom are children of color, to succeed. This smacks of at least a classist, if not a racist mentality. This makes the coalition's statement against the opt out movement even more confounding: why would these important, influential groups choose to defend a wealthy, white oligarch, rather than the children and people upon whom their very mission and founding is based? Well, Dr. Au seems to have answered that question for us already.

This situation is only made more piteous and predictable by the fact that the world's archetypal capitalist has chosen -what else- capitalistic modes and methods to reform the American educational system.

Silly Billy! Capitalism is what created this situation in the first place!!

Perhaps if you had stayed in college, you would have learned about dramatic irony, for you my friend, personify it as well as Oedipus!

But this is not meant to be an ad hominem attack. However, I do hope that it highlights the fact that there probably couldn't be a worse qualified person for the job of reforming our educational system than Bill Gates. He is an enormously privileged, white man who is quite literally the richest man in the world. To drive that point home, Bill Gates' current net worth is approximately 79 billion dollars. Even if a person were to make $1,000,000 a year (which in itself would classify them as superiorly wealthy), it would take 79,000 years to earn the same amount of money as Mr. Gates! To put that in perspective, looking back in time, it would have taken from about the time humans first left Africa until today!

As Mr. Gates seems to demonstrate only too well, that kind of wealth is dangerous. With it comes a kind of social arrogance that seems to place a person above their peers. A person with that kind of wealth can quite literally have anything material that he or she would want.

However, just to remind you, Mr. Gates, there are some things that money can't buy.

It can't buy respect.
It can't buy experience.
It can't buy knowledge.
It can't buy success.

You, my friend, have placed yourself in opposition to parents acting in defense of their children.

Bad move, sir, bad move.

The Hollowing Out of Education

A disturbing and damaging trend is now afoot in America. Little by little, incrementally, the integrity of our schools is being hollowed out.

In an effort to pander to the powers-that-be, such as state and federal departments of education, schools are in danger of placing their scores above their students. So much stress is placed on test scores, NJ DOE report cards, rankings and the like, that the danger of placing these metrics ahead of authentic student improvement has reached critical levels.

The subtlety with which these changes are enacted is also alarming. The rhetoric is thick, and the charm practically oozes off of some of these initiatives. For example, there has been an enormous increase in AP testing. At first blush, this appears to be a great idea, but if we delve beneath the surface, the waters get decidedly murkier. Students are being encouraged to enter AP classes at lower and lower ages. I have seen, for example, freshmen in high school who are already enrolled in AP classes. College Board itself appears to discourage such practices:

 Student performance on AP Exams illustrate that in many cases AP courses are best positioned as part of a student’s 11th and 12th grade academic experience...AP courses are rarely offered in 9th grade, and exam results show that, for the most part, 9th grade students are not sufficiently prepared to participate in a college-level course (http://apcentral.collegeboard.com/apc/public/repository/Appropriate-Grade-Levels-for-AP-Courses.pdf).

AP classes are rigorous and when a student is properly prepared, they provide an exceptional opportunity to experience a college-like educational experience while still in a high school setting. However, by virtue of the fact that they are so rigorous, it is very important for us as community and school members to ensure that the student is ready, lest they should take the class and have a negative educational experience since they are unprepared for the rigors of the curriculum.

Another issue surrounding the incredible expansion of AP classes and testing is the impact of underprepared students on the overall quality of the AP education. Top-notch AP students have reported dissatisfaction with the pace and preparation that some of their AP teachers are providing to them, based on the fact that the teacher is slowing down to include all learners. Teachers report that they are covering less and less, owing to behavioral disruptions and a growing number of underprepared learners.

Of course, every student who enters AP is another potential AP test taker, and we all know how testing companies love test takers, right??

Still not convinced? Perhaps another example is apt.

In my school, there is a serious cutting issue. Some students cut so much that they are in danger of losing their credits. How should a caring, concerned staff confront such an injurious behavior?

Well, the answer is really quite simple, if we follow the numbers. Simply stop counting cuts.

What?! If you felt a spark of outrage and horror flare up inside of you, then perhaps you feel a little like us many days. For tragically, this is how systems sometimes safeguard themselves to the deficit of the learners.

Cutting class is an educationally damaging behavior. If a student is not present, they are not getting an effective education, and the cumulative effects of chronic cutting can be severe. What's more, there are state laws which regulate attendance, and schools that look the other way on cutting and attendance issues are in danger of violating state law. However, this is exactly the trend that I witness in my school.

The same technique has been applied blanketly on issues such as behavior, attendance, and even grades. It seems that some schools have figured out that the easiest way to make problems go away is to ignore them. If only we had figured this out sooner...

Ok. Perhaps I'm being harsh, but I actually believe in the value of education, and of creating as authentic, rigorous, and rewarding an educational experience as possible for all of our learners. I am less interested in how the numbers measure up, and more interested in creating authentic learning opportunities for our students everyday. And this is why I write this- not as an attempt to incriminate schools, though in some cases I find the behavior of certain administrators reprehensible- but rather because I believe that much of this number magic has been spawned by program like NCLB, RTTT, school report cards, and other ranking systems which have placed schools in a hyper-competitive environment, desperate for survival.

I KNOW that authentic reform is possible, even in urban areas, and I KNOW that it definitely does not take the opening of a charter school to do it. I know this because I have seen strong leaders with good rapport with students, staff, and community members do it. Unfortunately, they are hard to come by and I suppose that authentic reform isn't always as flashy or fresh as the latest educational fad. Still worse, it doesn't put wads of money in the pockets of the corporate reformers.

Still, for the sake of our students, I hope that we will all take a step back from the hyper-competitive environment in which we are placing our schools, and rather than threaten, punish, or even close them, seek new, creative, and research-based ways to aid our ailing schools.

Let's Hear it for John Oliver!

On a recent episode of Last Week Tonight, John Oliver tackled the prickly topic of standardized testing. Or rather I should say that he delivered the perfect blend of wit, humor, and devastating statistics which have shaken the testing companies enough so that they have fired back.

Shortly thereafter, Pearson shot back with the perfectly contrived response to such a PR crisis. An attractive African American man, who promotes himself as "a proud product of the Bronx Public Schools" jumped onto a Washington Post blog, and explained how parents who care about the educational experiences their children are undergoing have got it all wrong. Pearson is not the enemy, he argues, but rather the poor, misunderstood multinational corporation that is only trying to make the world a better place.

Seriously? Do we look that foolish?

Based on what I've seen in my classroom, I would guess that the only color Pearson actually cares about is green.

As I have mentioned before, I teach in an urban area. I witness firsthand the impact of the incredible increase in standardized testing which has emerged in recent years. Across my tenure as a public educator, I have grimaced as more and more emphasis is placed on standardized testing, with all of the harrowing woes which accompany such a narrow, misguided notion of educational success. To be sure, the paramount concern of the classroom teacher is determining whether or not their students are learning the material in question, however, the school environment is SO MUCH MORE than this. It is a social environment, in which students interact with peers, authority figures, underclassmen, upperclassman, and all sorts of other human beings. Students have to learn the ins and outs of effective communication and navigate the many diverse personalities which surround them. No amount of technology can supplant this, and in most cases, technology has quite the opposite effect of minimizing the social learning experience.

Schools are vibrant, physical communities where learners and teachers come together towards the common mission of enriching our society and our souls. I am proud to call myself a teacher, or at least I have been. As the testing companies and corporate "reformers" (I much prefer the more accurate epithet "deformers") have pushed forward with their agenda of privatization, their high-minded rhetoric, and their deeply destructive behaviors, I find myself teaching less and less. They talk about rigor in the classroom, but we spend less time now with our students than we ever have. They spout on about preparing students for the world beyond the classroom, but I see school officials who dangerously dilute authentic learning experiences because they are more worried about how they will be rated by state and federal departments of education than they are about the effective education they are offering their learners. I see teachers who are exhausted, overworked, and deeply demoralized by the current educational climate. And worst of all, I see students who are frustrated, angry, upset, anxious, and fearing rather than embracing the learning process.

This is AMERICA! Land of the free and home of the brave! We have to do better! Other countries look to us for leadership. Can we honestly and sincerely tell them that this is the best that we can do? Are we really ok with almost 25% of our children growing up in a state of poverty? Is it really ok that the children of the ultra-rich enjoy private schools that have no worry or fear of Common Core or PARCC, while many public school children have come to dread school? This cannot be the way.

There ARE better, more authentic educational reform agendas out there. Finland has done very well with a sincere societal commitment to the importance of education, proper funding, rigorous teacher training, and a whole host of effective educational practices. Even schools in America do just fine when PISA scores and other international indicators are controlled for poverty. In point of fact, New Jersey public schools have perennially ranked among the best in the nation, so if I may ask, what exactly is it that they are so insistent needs to be fixed?!

To be sure, there is always room for growth and improvement, and sometimes it can be very frustrating to encounter the graduation rates, drop-out rates and other academic indicators emerging from our poorest areas. There IS a crisis in America, but I dare say it is not so much an educational crisis as a social crisis. The divide between the rich and poor only seems to grow year after year. The corporate reformers try to paint poverty as simply an excuse, but I suppose that is very easy for ultra-wealthy white men to do. What do Bill Gates, Sam Walton, or Eli Broad really know about the suffering and devastation which poverty wreaks on the soul? How can they truly place themselves in the position of a teen whose only meal is a free school lunch where the green beans are grey and tomato paste counts as a vegetable? How can they appreciate the life of a student who wakes up early to get their little brothers and sisters to school, then attends school themselves, and then goes straight to a job to help out their family?

And how does the corporate reformer respond to such stresses? By stripping school of its joy and spontaneity, by making automatons out of our children, and creating cookie cutter classrooms that are as lifeless as they are ineffective. Trust me; while teachers may not have all the answers, I can promise you that this is not it.

Christie and Common Core

Governor Christie is a deeply dishonest man.

In 2011, he brokered a deal with NJ pensioners, including teachers, which called for us to make greater contributions to our pensions and to pay significant amounts towards our medical benefits for the first time. I must admit he did this in a very clever and deceptive way, in the sense that gross salaries were not impacted, which likely would have led to far greater resistance. Rather, he left gross salaries untouched, but significantly reduced actual take-home pay.

-Very slippery, indeed.

Christie hailed this 2011 pension reform as his "greatest governmental victory". On his side, he promised to make certain contributions to the pension system. However, Governor Christie has repeatedly failed to live up to his side of the pension reform agreements, and instead of infusing the fund with much needed resources, has borrowed recklessly from them, further endangering the already hobbled system.

Recently, he was ordered by a NJ Superior Court to make the payments that he himself agreed to in 2011. Governor Christie has now stated that the very law that he brokered and signed is unconstitutional, and that as a result he should not have to abide by it.

-Now this level of self-deception simply shocks me.

On the matter of Common Core, here's what he said in August, 2013 at a KIPP Charter Schools educational conference (http://www.nj.com/opinion/index.ssf/2015/02/christies_flip-flop_on_common_core_moran.html):

"We are doing Common Core in New Jersey and we're going to continue. And this is one of those areas where I have agreed more with the President than not. And with Secretary Duncan. I think part of the Republican opposition you see in some corners in Congress is a reaction, that knee-jerk reaction that is happening in Washington right now, that if the president likes something the Republicans in Congress don't. If the Republicans in Congress like something, the president doesn't."

And here's what he said on the same issue recently in Iowa:

"I have grave concerns about the way this has been done, especially the way the Obama administration has tried to implement it through tying federal funding to these things. And that changes the entire nature of it, from what was initially supposed to be voluntary type system and states could decide on their own to now having federal money tied to it in ways that really, really give me grave concerns. So we're in the midst of re-examination of it in New Jersey. I appointed a commission a few months ago to look at it in in light of these new developments from the Obama administration and they're going to come back to me with a report in the next, I think, six or eight weeks, then we're going to take some action. It is something I'm very concerned about, because in the end education needs to be a local issue."

Seriously, is this guy for real??

I am one of those people who trusts her gut. I have watched several interviews of Governor Christie and my take-home intuition is that he is deeply self-deceptive. My basic belief is that if he can be so overwhelmingly dishonest with himself, how is there any hope that he will be honest with other people?

Governor Christie has demonstrated a consistent pattern of dishonesty, intimidation, and bullying over the course of his gubernatorial term. From the aforementioned pension reform debacle, to his radical flip-flop on Common Core, to his federally investigated Bridgegate, there is a consistent pattern of dishonesty and expediency. I for one hope that he goes no further than New Jersey. And I will be very glad when we also are rid of him.

Interruptions to the Learning Environment

It is an incredibly difficult time to be a classroom teacher.

In the past two weeks, I have had an authentic classroom setting for just 2 out of 10 days. The number of external intrusions on the public school classroom has reached damaging and dangerous levels. It is now at the point where we physically see our students for only a fraction of the time that is promised to us. I ask you, how can we possibly educate our students if we do not see or spend time with them??

As a general accounting, in the past two weeks we have had the following interruptions to actual class time:

4 days of PARCC testing
2 days of SGO preparation and testing
1 evacuation drill
1 1/2 day schedule

In every one of these cases, the amount of actual class time has either been drastically reduced or cut altogether. The corporate "crusaders" in education love to cite the Instructional Core (IC) as a linchpin to effective education (you can find my thoughts on IC here: http://njcares4kids.blogspot.com/2015/04/the-student-as-learner.html). Briefly, the Instructional Core states that the three most important aspects of successful education are the student, teacher, and content. Anything extraneous to these three core elements does not have a strong impact on successful classroom learning, and should be minimized.

Consider ALL of the interruptions above which have led to an effective 80% reduction in actual classroom time. None of them pertains directly to the Instructional Core. They ALL fulfill some sort of state mandate or another, but not one of them in acknowledged or even expected to effectively increase student learning. Yet, not only do they persist in education, but year after year, the number and duration of interruptions only seems to grow.

They say they want higher test scores. They say they want a more educated public. They even say that they understand that in order to achieve these ends, teachers need to spend time with their students, supporting students as they grapple with rigorous content. Yet so much of what they DO flies in the face of these statements.

I have something that I want to say, too. If you actually do want higher test scores, a more educated public, and students who thrive and enjoy their education, then please kindly get out of our way, and allow us to do the job for which we trained, and at which we have practiced for years upon years. LET US TEACH!!

The Interpersonal Relationship in Learning

As a career educator, I have the opportunity to appreciate little by little the factors which support successful instruction. It is my goal to constantly reflect upon my practice, and to continue to improve as I develop in the teaching profession. The views I held when I was a neophyte are in some cases very similar to the views I hold now, but in other cases, they are radically different.

As I have aged in the profession, I have come to appreciate more and more the importance of the interpersonal relationship (IR) between the teacher and the student. The IR is at the heart of every other dynamic which occurs in the classroom, and either supports or injures all attempts at learning. If the IR is strong, vigorous, trusting, and nurturing, it supports and underpins a successful learning experience. On the other hand, if the IR is weak, ailing, destructive, or combative, it works directly against successful classroom instruction.

All interactions between the teacher and the students occur through the mechanism of the interpersonal relationship. Therefore, its quality is of the utmost importance in permitting successful instruction.

Most importantly, the positive IR between teacher and students creates a safe, trusting space where students feel secure enough to take risks. These are not physical risks, but rather emotional and intellectual risks. If a student is unwilling to take the risk of being wrong, then there is no opportunity to correct errant thinking. In order to feel comfortable enough to do so, it is crucial that the teacher create and maintain a safe, supportive emotional environment in which ALL students feel valued and defended. This is not easy to do, and requires perhaps 2-3 years of experience at the minimum before the average teacher is able to achieve and sustain such conditions in the classroom. It requires effective but positive classroom management, and even beyond that depends on the personality of the teacher and students involved. It is absolutely NOT necessary that every classroom look identical in this respect, but there will be certain hallmarks of expression, both on the part of the teacher and students, which indicate that it has been achieved.

Some signs that a positive, safe, trusting culture has been achieved include:

-The teacher is respectful of students.
-Students are respectful of the teacher and of their peers.
-There is a sense of calm and productivity in the classroom.
-Students are productively engaged, but also comfortable, relaxed, and happy.
-In discussion or group work, students feel safe seeking support and assistance from their peers as well as the teacher.

As I mentioned previously, achieving this balance and dynamic is NOT easy, and is often the sign of a very well progressed teacher. To be sure, teachers often have a knack for creating the social conditions which are supportive of learning, but actually doing so, year in and year out, even considering different student personalities, abilities, and inclinations, is the sign of a very well developed teacher. This sort of ability cannot be achieved in one or two years, which is yet another reason I take issue with the very alarming trend of populating our most vulnerable classrooms with what are effectively short-term teachers (see post on Teach For America).

There is another very important outcome of a positive interpersonal relationship between the teacher and students. When the teacher does her best to create and maintain positive interactions with each student, it reduces the occurrence of behavioral issues. In any classroom where several students come together, from so many diverse backgrounds and upbringings- some which stress education and others which might even see it as a hindrance- there is the potential for a clash of cultural values which threatens to upend the positive social culture which is necessary for successful learning. It is the teacher's responsibility to be sensitive to all cultures, but also to work tirelessly towards the establishment and maintenance of a positive, supportive, trusting classroom culture which furthers the task of education. As you can imagine, this is no small task, and goes back to why it takes several years at the minimum to master this aspect of teaching.

In a sense, many of the relationship dynamics which describe a healthy parent-child relationship also apply in the classroom, though the parameters and boundaries of the teacher-student relationship are obviously different and distinct. Just as a healthy parent is one who is seen as an authority, but not authoritarian, neither too strict nor too permissive, so this "sweet spot" applies in the classroom as well. A teacher who is too permissive quickly and in some cases irrevocably loses control of her classroom, while one who is too strict loses the interest, care, concern, and regard of her students, turning all interactions into arguments and differences of opinion. Much as with the successful parent, it is the teacher who toes the middle line, being authoritative, but not authoritarian who manages to successfully establish and maintain a positive classroom culture.

Once a positive classroom culture has been created, a shift takes place which I have never seen described in the textbooks. At this point, while it is crucial to maintain the overall positivity and safety of the classroom, it is NECESSARY for the effective teacher to at times challenge thoughts, statements, or behaviors which the teacher views as injurious to the educational process. That is, again as in the case of a successful parenting relationship, a great parent doesn't simply permit their child to say or do whatever they want, but does their best, according to their own beliefs, values, and experiences, to guide their child towards positive behaviors and away from negative ones. As an example, if I am circulating around the room, and I find one of my students off task, it is my job as an educator to confront that behavior (as politely and positively as possible, of course) because in the long run not completing their work will damage their educational performance. Likewise, if I overhear a negative interaction between two students, it is my job to step in and assure that both students have a chance to get their opinions across, but that they do so in respectful language. Not effectively managing a classroom is a sign of an underdeveloped teacher, and can quickly lead to the devolution of the classroom environment, such that the learning environment is impeded.

There are of course many other aspects and uses of the IR between the teacher and student, but I hope this post helps to illuminate some. Even a seasoned teacher will suffer injuries and blows when trying to maintain this positive classroom culture, but perhaps the more important point is the effort towards re-establishing the classroom equilibrium as quickly and as effectively as possible, for it is within this positive classroom culture that students learn best, and that teachers are most successful.

If You Want to Live the American Dream, Move to Finland!

Worldwide, people are cooing over the Finnish educational system, and in many cases, rightly so. Finland, while spending far less money per pupil than many other nations, including the United States, still manages to score far higher on international educational comparisons (e.g. PISA). What are Finnish schools doing that we don't? How have they achieved such elite educational status, while America continues to score far lower in these rankings?

Dr. Pasi Sahlberg has written a thought-provoking book entitled Finnish Lessons, and also lectures widely on the success of the Finnish educational system. Dr. Sahlberg is a native Finn who started as a classroom teacher, but now works most closely with OECD (Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development), which sponsors the PISA tests, while also serving as a Visiting Professor at Harvard University.

Dr. Sahlberg is very candid in his opinions about why Finland has experienced such success, and his answers may surprise more than a few. Obviously, a full treatment of this topic is well beyond the scope of a single blog entry, however, those who discover a deeper interest in the topic may of course refer to his text.

Here are some of Dr. Sahlberg's major points:

-All teachers must attain Master's level training before they are allowed to enter the classroom.

-Becoming a teacher in Finland is in some cases harder than becoming a doctor or a lawyer. That is, the profession of teaching is highly regarded in Finland, and as such , it draws the very best and brightest the country has to offer.

-Finland believes in, and proffers by way of its investments, a deep and abiding faith in the value of public education. The public education system is well funded by all political parties which take office, and this in turn produces and maintains stability in the educational sector.

-Finland seeks to identify students in need of special assistance at early ages, and offers them early interventions aimed at ameliorating or eliminating deficits.

-The Finnish poverty rate for children is the second lowest in the world at 5.3%, while America's poverty rate for children is a whopping 22%. That is, there are over four times as many children growing up in a state of poverty in the United States of America as compared to Finland.

-Teachers are highly regarded professionals in Finland. The public in general trusts its teachers and its schools, and teachers for this reason have a high degree of autonomy, freedom, and choice in determining the best educational strategies to use in a given situation. They are encouraged to be innovative and creative, and to foster that same innovation, creativity, and lateral thinking in their students.

Finland has ONE standardized test which students MAY elect to sit for. It occurs towards the end of their entire educational career (around high school by our standards), which means that students are close to the age of an adult by the time they do so.

-Ironically, Dr. Sahlberg points out numerous times that many of the techniques which Finland has used to create one of the world's most successful educational systems were first described and designed here in the United States.

There are many other points which Dr. Sahlberg makes, and his treatment of the topic is obviously far more thorough, but hopefully this will give readers a very rough and ready understanding of some of the key differences between the Finnish and American educational systems.

I read a funny quote a while back which has acted as the title for this entry: "If you want to live the American Dream, move to Finland". Obviously, this is meant to be taken a bit tongue in cheek, as the ideal circumstance would rather be to build and sustain an educational system here in the United States which would become the envy of Finland itself. It would foster a deep and abiding love of learning, and a life-long curiosity in our world. It would use positive reinforcement and reward based systems preferentially over punitive and punishment-based systems. It would inspire students to learn, rather than force or scare them into it. In short, it would be a system which esteems and embraces the unique gift which a child offers to the world, and it would seek to identify and maximize the special aptitudes of each learner. Children would be highly regarded, yet still understood as learning, and offered effective, supportive guidance in their path towards independence and the successful realization of their goals.

I grew up in the United States. I believe in the United States. However, I have to say that I am very concerned about the direction of education in America, and specifically in New Jersey. I have heard too many stories of children suffering panic attacks, crying and refusing to go to school. WHAT IN THE WORLD IS GOING ON?? How can the rhetoric lie so far from the reality? Children are our most precious resource, and if we do not preserve and sustain their faith in our way of life, then what will become of our country? We MUST invest in our young. We MUST put their welfare above our own. And not just the welfare of our own brood, but that of all children globally. I appreciate that money and resources are not always easy to come by, however, it appears to me to be more a matter of priorities than profits. Finland, for example, is a far smaller and less economically dominant country than America, yet they manage to maintain a far smaller poverty rate in general and as applies to children. It all seems to me to be simply a matter of priorities. And, as with so many before us, we also will reap what we sow.

On Teach For America

As a large, impoverished urban district, we have several Teach For America (TFA) staff members. Many people are unfamiliar with this program at all, and for those who are familiar with it, few have intimate knowledge and experience working side by side with such teachers. Here are my impressions, having done so for several years at this point.

My TFA colleagues are truly an exceptional group of young, bright, and talented individuals. Many of them go on to enter medical school, law school, graduate schools in varying specialties, and other highly acclaimed programs. However, as bright, talented, and promising as they are, my point is already made in the idea that they almost always, without fail, go on to do something else.

For the vast majority of TFA members, teaching is a brief stop on the road of their lives. It is not, and never has been, their ultimate goal. For those few who do stay in the field of teaching, even fewer remain in a public school setting, most electing to join this charter school or that. Hence, one of my main criticisms of the TFA program is that it deeply destabilizes schools that already experience far higher than average instability.

As has been alluded to in earlier articles, the lives of urban students are often rife with instability. Some are combating homelessness; others are teen mothers or fathers; most are living in heartbreaking and soul-crushing poverty. For many of them, the neighborhood school is one of the few places where they can come into contact with trained professionals who will treat them with dignity, respect, and regard. Even more so than in the suburban areas, our students need stabilizing influences, though predictably, they are often the very last to receive them.

Urban schools appear to be the crucibles of the state department of education. Perhaps the thinking goes, "Well, they're already failing. We may as well experiment with this program or that. After all, things can't get any worse, right?"

Unfortunately, I must dissent from this last consideration. Scary and surprising as it may seem, things in urban areas very much can get better or worse. I have seen cases of both in my tenure as an urban educator. And in many cases, this improvement or degradation of school quality runs hand in hand with some new state mandate. My goal here is not to unnecessarily criticize the state department of education, but perhaps to encourage them to proceed MUCH more slowly and carefully in their efforts to reform our largest, most ailing districts.

At any rate, this article is supposed to shed some light on TFA teachers, so back to it. These young people are deeply intelligent and often very, very talented. On the other hand, their tenure is often all too brief, exacerbating a culture of instability which already persists in urban areas. As Ravitch has pointed out, a large study has now compared TFA to non-TFA teachers, and discovered no appreciable difference in the quality of these two groups. That is, in addition to their destabilizing impact on an already unpredictable system, TFA teachers demonstrate no significant benefit over non-TFA teachers. Perhaps this is owing to the fact that TFA provides a paltry six weeks of training before throwing their fresh recruits into some of the toughest classrooms in our country. Perhaps it is the tacit disrespect communicated in thinking that six weeks is adequate to train a teacher, but for whatever reason, while I admire and regard TFA teachers highly as individuals, I don't feel that the TFA program offers anything more than a band-aid approach to staunch the veritable hemorrhaging of educational difficulties which preside in urban areas.

Sincere reform efforts might instead try to recognize, recruit, and SUPPORT teachers who take on the additional challenge of teaching in the urban classroom. They would seek candidates who really wanted to become teachers, and even ideally those who almost felt as though they had a "calling" to work with our nation's most disenfranchised. They would perhaps offer these candidates additional compensations for the special effort which is required to teach in our country's most challenging classrooms. All is all, sincere reform efforts would shift the conversation once again to the idea of education as an INVESTMENT rather than an EXPENSE.

I wonder if you too have noticed the incredible shift in perspective and policy regarding education in our country. When I was younger, education was thought of as an investment in our children, our country, and our way of life. It made sense that if we wanted to see our American way of life perpetuated and enriched, that we would have to invest in raising our children to appreciate the values which we ourselves as Americans hold so dear. Now-a-days, funding education seems to be little more than a dollars and cents game whereby every penny is pinched and budgets are reduced year after year. If nothing else, let us remember that our ideas inform our policies, and our policies enact our goals. If we see education as an expense, then we will constantly be on the look-out for new ways to slash those costs. On the other hand, if we care about our country, our children, and even our way of life, perhaps reframing educational spending as an investment will help us to appreciate the true intent of offering a free, public education to every child.

What Works and What Doesn't in Urban Education

As a teacher with several years of experience in an urban district, I am often asked what exactly is going on in our urban schools. Why do these districts fail, while so many other succeed? What about them is causing the "drag" on performance? In this and several subsequent posts, I will do my best to elucidate what works and what doesn't in urban districts.

Urban schools face problems that suburban schools may not even consider, and if they do, it is almost always on a much smaller scale. For example, I have had several teen parents in my classes, both the fathers and the mothers. When they become parents, these teens are asked to balance the incredible demands of raising a child with their education. In many cases, the young parents must now work long hours after school (if they didn't already before) in order to provide support for their child or children. While I can appreciate that some might be very quick to judge these young people for "getting themselves into this situation", or some other similar line of thought, and I cannot in honesty say that my own thoughts have not occasionally turned there, such an attitude is inevitably counterproductive to any effort to help the teen parent to successfully complete their education. Hence, in my professional capacity, I do my best to stay out of judgement, and instead focus on providing as ideal a condition as possible to help these young parents succeed in obtaining their educational credentials. My reasoning in this process is the result of years of angst and turmoil over what would be the best way to approach such a difficult situation. I am still of the mind that it is much better for a young person to hold off on having children until they are emotionally, financially and in all other ways ready to support a child, however when I have a teen parent in my classroom, that die is already cast. Once the teen is a parent, it is now time to help offer that teenager and their child or children the best possible chance for success in life, and a solid education is part and parcel of that process.

Certainly in a suburban school, there is the occasional scandal where a teen gets pregnant, but I would say that the scale and scope of the issue is completely different. In like fashion, there is also of course the possibility and threat of violence in an affluent, suburban school, however, there probably are not several different and well recognized gangs, some smaller and less well defined, and other with national and even international presences. In urban schools, we see all of this and much more.

My point in bringing up these issues is that urban teachers really are up against a different set of odds than suburban teachers often face. This is NOT an attempt to whine or cast blame. Rather, it is an effort to honestly and clearly provide information regarding what it takes to succeed in an urban setting as an educator. When teens are being awakened 3-4 times a night by their newborn child, or when they live with the constant threat or actualization of violence in their communities, it has a grave and negative impact on their psychology, and in my opinion, fundamentally alters their attitude about the importance of education. There is the old adage that "a hungry child can't learn". I would add to that that neither can a sleep-deprived, homeless, or otherwise endangered child.

Hence, there are social issues that come into play in an urban district that a suburban teacher rarely faces. To succeed in situations where the stakes are so high is in my eyes an admirable endeavor, but admittedly it is harder to pull off, and there are bound to be more times when things don't go the way we want them to. This is no excuse to stop trying, but hopefully it helps to put into perspective some of the differences in graduation rate, drop-out rate, and the like between urban and suburban schools.

Urban children, on the other hand, are children like any others, and as such they are young, full of hope, sometimes naive, and require the assistance of their elders to successfully integrate into society. It is our job as educators to play whatever part we can in helping these young people to find their ways in a world that only seems to increase in complexity and challenge.

The Student as Learner

Educational reformers, both those authentic and inauthentic, are always asking themselves the rhetorical questions, "What factors influence student learning? How can we most effectively invest so that students will have the best outcomes?"

In recent years, the Instructional Core (IC) has served as a rather expedient (if not simplistic) solution to address these questions. The Instructional Core is a diagram which asserts that three criteria above all others influence student learning and growth. Here is a quick image:



As you can see, the three criteria of Student, Teacher, and Content are each placed at the vertices of an equilateral triangle. The assertion of the Instructional Core is that above all else, interventions aimed at one of these three classroom elements can impact performance, whereas anything which is aimed outside of these three elements is extraneous and unlikely to produce improvement.

My issue with the Instructional Core is not that it is incorrect, but that it is relatively simplistic, and even potentially belies a very inexperienced and uninformed author. Each of these three elements is quite obviously a sine qua non of learning. To develop this model, all one has to do is sit back for a moment and consider the question, "What elements are absolutely essential to the educational process, in such a way that if one were removed, it would irreparably damage the process of learning?" I would think that even an unpracticed, yet thoughtful person could probably develop the three criteria listed here. Their arrangement at the three vertices of an equilateral triangle is eye-catching and provides a reasonable visual summary of their equal importance in the eyes of the designer, and the bidirectional arrows show that there is a constant and reciprocal feedback between these three classroom elements.

While a bit simplistic, nevertheless, the Instructional Core is presently a commonly used tool to assess whether a staged intervention is likely or unlikely to have the desired impact, and in the sense that these three elements are absolutely essential to the learning process, we can use it to quickly assess the likely outcome of planned interventions.

In my experience as a classroom teacher, much effort has been aimed at improving the teacher and assuring rigorous content, but the student element has been woefully left behind. Even worse, it is the intervention point which offers the most hope and promise for improvement.

Regarding content, much has been done to address and ensure that the information that is being presented in the classroom is of a high quality and rigor. Long before the introduction of Common Core (which I do NOT think are presently very good standards), the state of New Jersey has had a history of rigorous, demanding educational standards. These standards have been both content- and process-based. That is, the content element ensures that students are learning the basic foundational facts regarding a new topic, and the process-based standards ask teacher to address procedural or learned skills. A student is considered well educated when both content and process based standards have been successfully inculcated in students.

Regarding teachers, could they be any more the focus of attention and effort? After his Small Schools Initiative failed (which at least was targeted in the right place, but perhaps did not address the bigger issues of poverty and inequality), Bill Gates next decided that the reason schools were "failing" was that they were populated with inadequate, ineffective teachers. Thus began a virtual Inquisition of teachers; schools were labeled failing and "bad teachers" were rooted out and removed. No thought was given as to why teachers in the hardest hit areas might be struggling. Could they be fighting against the larger social issues of inequality, inequity, and the soul-crushing weight of poverty on student performance? The answer was an unequivocal "no" from the world's richest man. Poverty is an excuse, he declared, from high atop his ivory fortress. And the irony is not lost on me that a man who is so incredibly influential in reforming our nation's schools never completed his own formal schooling. Perhaps we should at least require that Mr. Gates complete his own undergraduate degree before he is permitted to evaluate the educations of our nation's teachers??

At any rate, teachers have been very heavily investigated as a factor of influence on student performance. However, I do not see this as a great investment of resources. Teachers, by virtue of their position, have necessarily demonstrated the skills to complete university. They often have graduate-level education under their belt. In order to get the job in the first place, they had to undergo a significant interview process, which usually involves at least two interviews, one of which requires a "demo lesson", during which the teacher has to demonstrate their ability to conduct a lesson in front of the decision-makers regarding their position. They are then regularly re-evaluated every year thereafter, to ensure that they are still delivering quality lessons, with the actual expectation being that they will rather improve their ability to do so over time.

Hence, while obviously a classroom teacher should constantly be reflecting on their performance, and adapting and adjusting their lessons as appropriate, I don't see this as an area of fertile growth. Much has already been done to ensure a high quality candidate long before they ever enter the classroom, and these measures do help to keep the quality high.

Hence, the only remaining part of the Instructional Core to be addressed is the Student. We must ask ourselves the most difficult question: What is the student doing to ensure the quality of their own education? I know that many people, professional educators and non-educators alike, will bristle at this idea, but please hear me out for a moment, for I feel that it is the great untapped reservoir of educational change. Professional educators often shy away from addressing the issue of student involvement and engagement. The most common excuse rendered is, "We can't control that, so we're not going to focus on it." Okay, true, we certainly cannot completely control what a students decides to do or not do, but I would argue that as educators, parents, and invested community members we can certainly influence the way that a student behaves, and even how involved they get in their education. And this, my friends, is the linchpin of educational change. More than any other factor, I would argue that the student's involvement and engagement is the most important element of the Instructional Core. In fact, I would argue that the diagram should be redrawn to show the student as occupying a more important role than the other two positions.

Consider a simple thought experiment:

Scenario # 1: Imagine a poor student in a great teacher's classroom. The teacher is widely recognized as an expert in pedagogy and content, and works hard to create exciting, inspiring lessons. Yet the student is not interested. In this case, the student will probably learn little.

Now picture the opposite condition:

Scenario #2: Imagine a classroom in which a truly ineffective teacher is found. The teacher is negative, demoralizing, and even mean to the students. The teacher does little to inspire or awaken any natural inclination towards learning which exists in the learners. Yet, hiding in this classroom is a great learner, a deeply invested student who really wants to learn. What will happen? How will this unfold?

While obviously, a great teacher in the company of great students produces the best results, I would argue that the quiet learner in Scenario # 2 will still learn more than the uninterested learner in Scenario #1. This is obviously more anecdotal than research-based, but I hope it brings home the point that in my opinion, of the three factors introduced in the IC, the learner is by far the most important. And sadly, the learner is also the most neglected in educational reform efforts.

While it may not be comfortable, while we may want to shy away for lack of control, and while it may ask our students to take on the truly challenging task of owning their learning, this is in my opinion as a seasoned classroom teacher, the key which will unlock the educational potential of our classrooms. We should keep assuring that our standards are realistic, but rigorous. We should also continue to insist on high quality teachers, and obviously remove those who weigh down the profession. However, more than any other focus, we must re-direct our attention to the behavior and effort of the learner. For in my estimation, more than any other factor, it is the involvement of the learner which predicts educational success or failure. And as the simple scenarios above hopefully demonstrate, learning is, ultimately speaking, in the hands of the learner. That is, while a society can deeply desire that a student learn, and while parents, teachers, administrators, and all sorts of stakeholders can want this for the student, what the student wants for herself is far more important than all of these other factors.

The Education of a Child

Welcome! This is my very first blog post, so please allow me a moment to introduce myself to the greatest extent possible.

I am an urban educator in New Jersey with many, many years of experience. Regrettably, for my own professional welfare, I cannot share any more than this regarding my identity.

You should know that I care deeply about each and every one of my students.

You should know that I have seem egregious changes to our educational system during the course of my tenure as a professional educator.

You should know that the overall purpose of this blog will be to provide an ongoing commentary on the current state of education in America, and specifically in New Jersey.

And now to the topic at hand:

What constitutes the fair and correct education of a child? We as an educational community ask a lot of parents: we ask them to entrust us daily with their most sacred investment- their child. What, then, as an educational community are we doing to properly, conscientiously, and productively engage students in the process of learning?

The human mind is the single most complex organ known to humankind. It is capable of rationality, emotion, and a whole host of other very advanced processes. By its nature, the brain is designed to learn. From my perspective, people come into life with an innate curiosity that yearns to know more about ourselves and our world. As educators, it is not so much an adding as a taking away: we don't have to do anything to motivate students, but rather we have to remove the bureaucratic, systemic, deeply conditioned obstacles to the intrinsic motivation which is present inside of each student. By doing so, students re-awaken to their natural intellect and curiosity about the world. I am not claiming that this is a quick, easy task: as with so many human processes, it may unfold rapidly and readily, or more slowly. However, my basic assumption as a classroom teacher is that people are intrinsically motivated, and it is our job as teachers to try to remove as many obstacles as possible which interfere with that innate function of the human mind.

Every educational experience in the classroom and in the larger context of a school should promote the purpose of motivating, engaging, and ultimately educating a child. Anything that runs counter to this purpose should be eliminated, as it is an impediment to the proper education of a child.

The quantity and quality of standardized testing in the United States, and specifically New Jersey, has reached epidemic proportions. I have informally estimated that given HSPA (still given to some students), PARCC, Student Growth Objectives (SGOs), and several other corporate intrusions into education, approximately ONE MONTH of instructional time is presently being sacrificed. While any decent teacher appreciates the importance of assessment- and we are very well trained on how to develop our own rigorous, yet realistic assessments- it should be the culmination of the educational process, but NEVER a substitution for it.

What concerns me even more greatly is my preoccupation regarding the motivations of the testing companies in their seemingly unending quest to deliver more and more tests into the hands of our students. It does not escape me that every one of these tests creates a profit point for these companies. I find myself deliberating over whether they are truly, sincerely, and deeply concerned about the welfare of our students, or rather the health and robustness of their own bottom lines.

Beyond this, here are some comments straight from students regarding the recent proliferation of high-stakes standardized tests in our classrooms:


"Taking these tests makes me feel stupid."

"I feel less motivated to learn."

"I used to like coming to school, but now I hate it."

Hearing these comments saddens me deeply. I appreciate their honesty, and I know where they're coming from, but as an educator, I know that WE HAVE TO DO BETTER by our students.

Our responsibility as parents, educators, and community members is to create and maintain vital, robust schools that challenge and support our students to develop and realize their potentials. Anything which interferes with this must be resisted and reduced. Ours appears to be the moral imperative to defend the sanctity and sphere of our neighborhood schools.