Every now and then I hear a teacher say something or read something a teacher has produced and it sends a chill down my spine. While I was reviewing other schools’ AP recommendation processes (I am our school’s AP Coordinator) I came across some statements on some course descriptions that are truly reflective of teaching stuck in the past.

For an AP English Literature course I read “that it is difficult to earn an ‘A.’” This seemed to be stated as a source of pride. Does this teacher take pride in this “fact?” If so, why are they teaching? Yes, AP courses are difficult, but it is the responsibility of the teacher to get the students to where they need to be. Any expectation less than an “A” for all students is just wrong.

“No late papers, work accepted.” Really? Why? Don’t some students take longer to learn than others? I cannot think of a time in my undergraduate work or my graduate work that a professor denied me more time, unless it was an end of the semester project. Isn’t an AP course supposed to reflect a college level course at the high school level?

Of all the statements I read the following was the most disappointing: “Students take responsibility for learning, but I am always willing to meet with students outside of class for help or to look at drafts ahead of time.” So what is the teacher responsible for? Is the only variable in the classroom the student, not the teacher? Is the only job of the teacher to disseminate information to the student and then let the student know if they got it? I actually heard a teacher say this.

Students do not come to teachers to be sized up and sorted into those who can and those who cannot. They come to teachers to learn.

Popularity: 25% [?]

North High School has 18 percent of its population identified as special education. Another large group is identified as English language learners. Then there are the emergent readers who have managed to make their way into the 10th and 11th grade with 3rd and 4th grade reading abilities. And the final 27 percent of students at North have been identified through CSAP and other measures to be able to read proficiently or even advanced.

All of these students have been placed into the same language arts classes. In the January Collaborative School Committee meeting the principal said that no differentiation was taking place in these classes at North.

If differentiation really can work in this incredibly diverse setting, I seek Ed News readers’ help.

In a previous post on Ed News, folks wrote glowingly about the outcomes of differentiation. I am now on a subcommittee of the North CSC to bring differentiation to these language arts classes next year. I am particularly interested in finding success stories that feature low income, predominantly Hispanic, with English Language Learners and middle income students of all colors, learning together in differentiated classrooms of 35 students with one teacher.

Links to published studies would be greatly appreciated.

As a mom of a kid who has advanced skills in reading and who loves all of the kids described above, I am dedicated to finding these success stories and implementing them in this school.

Popularity: 16% [?]

One of my purposes for writing this blog has been to encourage or provoke educators to view their profession differently. As we struggle to reform our K-12 system, teachers have been comfortable  dealing with new challenges through their traditional reactionary approach. It is the “yeah, but” syndrome. “Yeah, you could use student achievement to evaluate my performance, but teachers can only control what goes on in their classroom.” “Yeah, we should use standards based grades, but how is the community going to react?”

I’ve written in the past about how the community at large tends to see teaching as a “calling” versus a profession. I think the community will view teachers differently as soon as teachers view themselves differently. I have run across a passage in a book which I think articulates this concern quite well. The book is called Instructional Rounds in Education by City, Elmore, Fiarman, and Teitel.

In this particular juncture in the history of American education, it is controversial to argue that teaching is a profession that requires high levels of knowledge and skill and that, like any profession, teachers are required to continue to develop their knowledge and skill actively over the course of their careers. The nineteenth-century idea that teaching is relatively low-skill work that can be performed by anyone with a nodding familiarity with content and an affinity for children is alive and well in the policy discourse of the present reform period. Just the suggestion that teaching and school leadership require a deep knowledge of instructional practice and a grounding in professional protocols for bringing knowledge into practice is likely to incite raised eyebrows on the part of many critics of American education. Presently, policy makers and critics lack much understanding of the actual knowledge and skill requirements of what they are asking educators to do. Educators are relatively powerless in this discussion because they are, as a group, active co-conspirators in the trivialization of educational expertise . School organization and culture, for the most part, do not exemplify a professional work environment as the broader society understands it.

This passage captures why I am so motivated to move teachers from their traditional reactionary position. One way to do this is to lead the discussion on how to evaluate teachers. Teachers need to hear and respond to the clamor for reform, especially in the way we view our profession.

Popularity: 16% [?]

The current edition of the Atlantic Monthly Magazine has a fascinating article titled “What Makes a Great Teacher.” Based on data gathered by Teach for America and its 7,300 teachers, TFA has produced qualities it proposes are key to look for in potential teachers.

What Teach for America did differently was to look at the learning taking place in the classroom rather than the the teaching. While some might see this as a semantic sleight of hand, it reflects a necessary change in the evaluation of teachers. No more evaluation of teachers by administrators with a checklist on a clipboard. Are the learning objectives posted? Does the teacher address both sides of the class? Is the teacher in control of the class?

None of these questions get to the learning. What does get to the learning data? In part, student achievement data does. Yes, assessment data should be used in the process of teacher evaluation. But I do not want you to get bogged down in this hot topic for educators. Take a look at the article and the video segments.

Popularity: 6% [?]