Divergent Teacher

Are you a divergent teacher leader?  I am and I bet you are too!

I am finally getting around to reading the Divergent series by Veronica Roth and I am fascinated by the rigidity of the society she describes.  It would be very hard indeed to be identified by one strength area and then be pigeonholed and have to live your life surrounded by others just like you.  So much for "variety is the spice of life"!  

The article "A 'Divergent' Path: Tips on Becoming a Teacher Leader" by Cheryl Redfield (linked here) describes  connections that can be made between the concepts Ms. Roth writes about in her novel and the ways that teacher leaders use their talents and skills every day as leaders.  Which of Ms. Redfield's five divergent qualities do you find in yourself?

Struggle Power

Are you familiar with the principle of "productive failure"?  I read the following  article on a blog I follow:  Bigger Gains for Students who Don't Get Help Solving Problems.  What a cool idea... let kids struggle and figure out stuff on their own!  We want to do what 's best for our students, but what if what is best is to allow them to struggle?

The article discusses students working on math problems, but the concept transcends the content.  

 
Americans don't like failure.  How many times have you heard, "Failure is not an option"?  Too many American parents don't like to see their children struggle and they go to great lengths to protect them from any sort of struggle, pain, or disappointment.  I wonder what might happen if we were able to shift our paradigm to accept that struggle produces growth.  It's that butterfly thing... if you don't allow the butterfly to build its strength as it struggles to escape its cocoon, it may be never strong enough to fly.  If you want to read more about Western v. Eastern cultural perspectives on struggling click here.  They are quite different.

Edison's view of failure.

Embrace Discomfort!  I served on my district's science curriculum committee for many years and I brought that phrase into our work as our group struggled together to incorporate the Next Generation Science Standards into our own thinking and into our course structure and curriculum maps.  We both experienced and embraced a lot of discomfort, let me tell you!

The article I referenced brought many educational connections to mind as I read.  Struggling to put something together without help isn't just something husbands do because they don't like to read directions, it's a critical component of constructivist theory (Piaget).  When you make meaning on your own it is deeper and longer lasting.  I think back to a student teaching experience I had (shout out to District 112's awesome Angie Lawrence) with a levers and pulleys lesson.  Students "explored" (edu-speak for play) with the various pieces and constructed things that could lift other things.  They gave each of the pieces of their structures a name and all the groups shared with the big group what they did and what they called it.  Only later did we "teach" the basics of a lever and pulley system.  The learning was actually deeper for students because they'd already had hands-on experience with the pieces and understood the basics of how the systems worked.

When students have to struggle with something that is truly beyond them, when they cannot make progress on their own, they may simply shut down and stop trying.  The opportunity to learn is lost.  This is where the notion of "scaffolding" comes in.  Expert teachers and coaches know their students well and understand where their zones of proximal development lie (Vygotsky).  These teachers are able to provide the appropriate amounts of help and encouragement that give the students just enough of what they need in order to keep going.  Students combine what they learned through their own struggle with the scaffolding the teacher provides and they move forward in their learning.

Growth Mindset brings all of these ideas together (Dweck).  When you have a growth mindset you see struggle as an important part of learning.  In fact, you may see learning itself as something that only happens when you engage in struggle.  When you have a growth mindset you come to see failures the way Edison saw them, as opportunities for learning.  When you have a growth mindset you understand the power of the word "yet".  "Yet" speaks to possibility.  "I don't know it... yet."  "I can't do it... yet."  "Yet" implies that whatever it is, it's on a continuum and I'm moving toward it.

As teachers, we often talk about setting up our students for success.  How about setting up our students for struggle?  If we understand that struggling leads to learning, then let's create the kind of learning opportunities for our students that allow them to struggle successfully.  In doing so, we will make sure that our students - like the butterfly - are strong enough to fly.

Backseat Teachers

A friend sent me a very thought-provoking  blog post recently about teachers.  In "The Teachers", the Sarah Blaine chronicles her own experience as a teacher.  It was short.  However, what she says about her decision to become a teacher and then leave the profession is compelling.  But what she further says about what those who are not educators think they know about teaching should be required reading for the very people who won't read it.  You know them, they're the ones who "know" what teachers do.

Oh for the love of SCIENCE!

When exactly did it become socially acceptable to reject science?  Why does a certain political party, closely aligned with and bolstered by a particular religious ideology, not only reject science, but spend time, effort, and a whole lot of money trying to convince the general public that some scientific evidence is bogus?

"Global warming is a hoax."  "You can't believe in evolution and the Bible at the same time".  This kind of stuff is seen on TV and read in newspapers all the time here in the United States, but you don't see it as much in other countries.  To me, it begs the question,

"What is the connection between anti-science rhetoric and statistics that show American students falling behind students in other parts of the world when it comes to science?" 

I just don't get it.  I can understand how the oil, gas, and coal industry would be upset to say goodbye to their huge profits as people turn to renewable, cleaner forms of energy.  And I can understand how politicians who are in the pockets of the oil, gas, and coal lobby would continue to do their bidding against what seems reasonable in terms of conservation, sustainability, and reducing the use of fossil fuels.  But I don't get why religious people fall in line with the climate-change deniers. 

It's probably because I am more of a big picture person when it comes to spirituality.

There are plenty of reports out there that offer a variety of reasons why American students are falling behind students in other countries when it comes to STEM subjects.  Frankly, most of them blame the American educational system, or blame teachers, but consider this for a moment.  

Science is the first discipline in that acronym.  With the huge push toward STEM in American education in recent years, why would the U.S. lag behind?  I wrote a blog post about the PISA results in which I tried to offer some perspective after the U.S. found itself in the middle of the pack.  Good old American ingenuity, creativity, entrepreneurship are not tested on the PISA.  Along with Diane Ravitch and others, I believe that because of this we should take the overall results with a grain of salt, but again, what about the science part of STEM?

We want - even expect - American students to lead (or at least be competitive) globally when it comes to STEM, yet I think schools and teachers are hindered by the anti-science folks in our midst.  These people are actively working against us.  Turn on FOX for a moment and you will hear politicians and religious leaders vehemently denying the science that supports climate change and global warming.  In another segment you will hear someone trying to convince listeners that the "theory" part of the theory of evolution means "kinda, sorta, maybe like a guess".  Add this to the fact that many of the companies that supply textbooks to schools all over the US are located in Texas which seems to be a hotbed of anti-science folks.  Many schools are now using online or web-based text resources, but if the same people who were responsible for publishing the print-based resources are in charge of the web-based ones, whose views are being represented?

Science cannot tell theology how to construct a doctrine of creation, but you can't construct a doctrine of creation without taking account of the age of the universe and the evolutionary character of cosmic history."

~ John Polkinghorne  ~

I really resonated with the blog post linked here: Science, Religion, and Climate Change: The Dangerous Corruption of American Education.  I don't have any problem accepting  science and believing that somehow God has a hand in it.  My husband is an Episcopal priest and teaches theology at the University of St. Thomas.  His classes include a wide variety of students, many whom have no Bible knowledge at all and some who have fundamentalist evangelical backgrounds.  Many of the latter are taught to believe the Bible word for word and have absorbed enough of what they heard from the pulpit to think that the earth is only 6000 years old.  UST is a Roman Catholic institution, and my husband spends time with students in class discussing the official Roman Catholic stance on evolution: that it is  possible to accept the theory of evolution and believe in the Bible.  

That's pretty much how I think about it too.  If the world began with a big bang, why not believe it was God who said Go?  Scientific evidence supports the theory of evolution, why not believe that this all fits into God's grand design.  If the earth is a gift from God, why don't we want to take better care of it?  When scientific evidence is pretty clear that human behavior is causing climate change, why are there people who deny it and work against science?

It shouldn't have to be "all or nothing".  I accept scientific evidence for what it is, and I believe in God.  There is harmony here.

The Heart of a Teacher

"Oh! I could NEVER do what you do!"  If you are a teacher you have heard this before.  Somehow, despite all the misconceptions that teaching is a "cushy" job, people understand that there is something different about teaching as a profession.  Indeed, there is something different about teachers themselves.  It's our heart.

 

A colleague in my facilitative community at Saint Mary's passed away last week, and she was well known for her big teacher's heart.  Carol Erickson was a teacher for 43 years, and I was privileged to know her toward the end of her career.  My abiding memory of her is how passionate she was about teaching as a calling and how she loved Parker Palmer's work, especially his book, The Courage to Teach.

Frankly, it does take  courage to teach, and even more so in today's world, where everyone from parents to politicians feel free to  let fly and blame teachers for all that is wrong with society.  But that is fodder for a whole other blog post, and my own personal experiences are heavily weighted in the "feeling valued and supported" side of things.

I truly believe that the very best teachers, the ones we remember and tell stories about, are the ones who teach because they are called to teach.  They cannot imagine themselves not teaching.  Their identity is teacher.

The media tells us daily that classrooms are full of "bad" teachers.  "Unions protect bad teachers..." "If only we could get rid of bad teachers..."  American students are falling behind because of bad teachers..."  These are flat out lies.  Unions ensure due process.  Competition for jobs in education is so high that a bad teacher will not last long in the classroom.  And as for American students falling behind - well I could go on and on about the connection between parents/families and academic success, and the need for free preschool and so on, but again, that is more fodder for another post.

Like many teachers I know, I am a teacher because I am an Educator.  It is the essence of who I am.  It is in my blood.  It is my calling.

It took me twenty years to begin my formal journey as an educator, but I got there.  

In high school I knew I wanted to be a teacher.  We took this ridiculous "Kuder Occupational Interest Survey" and I must have been having a bad day because the survey told me I would be happy as a floral arranger, court stenographer, or bank teller.  If you know me, you are laughing now.  No disrespect to successful people in those fields, but REALLY?  When I told my guidance counselor about my plans to go to UW-Madison and be a teacher she shook her head and said, "Oh no, that won't do.  You aren't cut out for teaching.  And besides, there's a glut of teachers now."  So I didn't do it.  I didn't go for it.  I spent a year floundering in the nursing program ("Your father is a doctor and your mother is a nurse.  Wouldn't you like to be a nurse?") before I switched my major to Sociology, a field I enjoyed and had some interest in.  When I worked in retailing I found a way to teach as I managed the staff in my department, and later wrote a "curriculum" to train staff with the kind of product knowledge they needed to sell fine china, crystal, and gifts. Later still, I found my need to teach fulfilled by working with middle and high school young people as a youth minister.

When I had the opportunity change the course of my life, some twenty years after I'd allowed myself to be talked out of following my heart, I followed it.  I went after it.  I became a teacher.   It took a lot of work to manage family life and school, but I persevered and drank in the learning.  The foundational child development and educational pedagogy courses I took provided me with a deep knowledge base that continues to inform my work with learners of all ages.  I'd had a career in business and youth work, and I could have taken the "Teach for America" path into the classroom, but I am glad I didn't.  A six-week "boot camp" is not an effective alternative to a degree in education.

I taught middle school and loved it!  It was where I was meant to be.  I geeked out about science and math all around us and worked my tail off helping kids be as excited as I was about learning anything and everything.  It was exhausting and fulfilling, and I was determined to be the best teacher I could possibly be.  I earned my M.Ed. with Saint Mary's University in a learning community where I discovered the power of collaboration, and I've been blessed to be an SMU facilitator myself, now having worked with over a hundred M.Ed. and other adult learners.

Right now I am out of my own classroom for three years serving as an instructional coach at one of the high schools in my district. It is a privilege to work with teachers who care deeply about their students and are passionate about their content areas.

My former colleague Bob Downs coined the phrase that became the name of this blog.  He would shout, "Let's go change some lives!", pump his fist, and high five us just before the bell brought students into our classrooms.  He understood the transformational impact that teachers can have on their students.  So did Carol, my colleague from SMU.  So do countless other teachers who love children and have the courage to teach.  So do I.

"Taught by Finland" - I highly recommend this blog!

I came across a wonderful blog recently and plan to read it regularly.  

Taught by Finland is written by Tim Walker, an American married to a Finnish woman, who is a public school teacher in Helsinki.  He offers a unique perspective about the differences between the public education system in Finland and in the U.S.  

Anyone that knows me and knows my political viewpoints might understand why I find the following statement by Walker particularly compelling, ""My wife is Finnish," he explained, "and we have a small child with another on the way. We decided Finland was a better place for us to raise a family."  While certainly the social service infrastructure (health insurance for all, maternity leave, etc) is appealing, what I am learning about their educational system is leading me to ask questions about our own.  

Balance and perspective are the two most significant words that come to mind when I read Walker's posts.  Finns require regular breaks from curriculum for their students and teachers, which is something I've always thought we just don't do enough.  Packing up and walking to the next class is not the kind of break the Finns have in mind.  Rejuvenation and refreshment are the goals for the short breaks.  Read more of Walker's insights in his post, "Classroom Shock".  

As an instructional coach I am committed to helping teachers become experts at their craft and maximize their natural gifts in the classroom with students.  As this happens, student achievement naturally increases.  My district created  coach positions like the one I have as a component of the new Teacher Development & Evaluation program required by the state.  While I believe in the power of reflection, goal-setting (or better yet, commitment to "systems"), observations, and coaching, I do not believe that teachers should be ranked (see the recent Microsoft about-face about employee ranking) because this assumes a bell curve approach rather than a focus on growth and development.  Read more of Walker's thoughts about teacher rankings in his post, What do Finnish Teachers think of Teacher Rankings?   In it he addresses both ranking and standardized testing as means of teacher evaluation.  Take time to read the comments posted below this blog entry.

There are a lot of really good educational blogs out there, and I enjoy learning new things and seeing different perspectives.  As I look ahead to the new year I would like to be sure and make time to do more professional reading.  What are your favorite blogs?

PISA test scores? Wait a minute!

I read the following on Diane Ravitch's blog: "Let others have the higher test scores. I prefer to bet on the creative, can-do spirit of the American people, on its character, persistence, ambition, hard work, and big dreams, none of which are ever measured or can be measured by standardized tests like PISA."  I respect Ms. Ravitch for her credentials.  For a long time she supported standardized testing, teacher accountability and school choice.  After serving as an assistant secretary at the U.S. Department of Education during the Bush administration and as a member of the National Assessment Governing Board that supervised national testing she had an epiphany about teaching, learning, and assessment.  She realized she had been wrong.

PISA is the Programme for International Student Assessment.  This year's test results are in, and American hair is on fire.  "Stagnant!" declared NPR and other news outlets.  

But is our position in the middle of the pack truly something to be alarmed about?  I don't think so, and here's why.

A test is a snapshot on any given moment on any given day.  A test like the PISA (try it for yourself here) only measures things that can be measured - questions that have a right and wrong answer.  A test like this cannot measure creativity, critical and innovative thinking, problem-solving abilities or people skills. 

It's little wonder that US scores rank behind those of Asian countries.  First of all, many of those countries simply do not include scores of all students. Special education students are not tested (and may not even be in the schools), neither are those who are not proficient in the testing language.  In the US, we test them all (special education students and students who do not have proficiency in English) and include all their scores, even if (in my opinion) is is not appropriate to do so.  To compare our scores as if they were apples-to-apples is a flawed comparison at best, and should push readers toward a careful analysis of the testing sample.  Secondly, the type of educational environment in Asian countries that produces the high test scores is one that is not likely to be embraced in the US.  Regimented learning, long school days, pressure from parents and stressed out students may be a stereotype, but it comes from recognizable and identifiable characteristics of the educational systems in those countries.

Think for a moment about the 21st Century skills that students need and that we hear so much about.  Employers are looking to hire people who have them, and teachers are being evaluated on how they teach them, but are they - CAN they - be assessed or measured on a test like the PISA?  Leadership, ethics, accountability, adaptability, personal productivity, personal responsibility, people skills, self-direction, and social responsibility all appear on the rubric I use when I observe teachers in their classrooms as their instructional coach.  You will notice that these skills are NOT content in and of themselves, yet they are critical components of success in life and success in employment.  These are "soft skills" and as far as I know, there is no standardized test for them.

Let's return to Diane Ravitch's thoughts about standardized tests in general, and the PISA test specifically: "We measure whether students can pick the right answer to a test question. But what we cannot measure matters more. The scores tell us nothing about students’ imagination, their drive, their ability to ask good questions, their insight, their inventiveness, their creativity. If we continue the policies of the Bush and Obama administrations in education, we will not only NOT get higher scores (the Asian nations are so much better at this than we are), but we will crush the very qualities that have given our nation its edge as a cultivator of new talent and new ideas for many years."

Click here to read Ms. Ravitch's entire post.