How About Common-Core Aligned Sports in Schools?: Better Eat Your Wheaties!

_________________________________________________________________________________

_________________________________________________________________________________

_________________________________________________________________________________

So, what if your baseball game isn't exactly the Big Leagues?  The Common Core challenges us to lift the academic bar to a higher level.  Why not simultaneously lift it for school sports as well?

A Glimpse at the new Common-Core aligned standards for sports in schools, democratically developed and soon-to-be tested for 3rd-8th graders:

Want to join Little League?:  Basic Common-Core Level of Proficiency in Baseball  

How about Pee-Wee Soccer?:  Basic Common-Core Level of Proficiency in Soccer

The other Futbol:  Basic Level of Proficiency in Flag Football

JV:  Basic Level of Proficiency in Basketball

If we don't have standards, then what?  No standards?  But with them, look how high we can all soar!   It's time to raise the bar!  Better have another helping of those Wheaties though!

 

Did Granddad Go the Way of the Dinosaurs?

Do you remember "Granddad Learns About the Common Core"?   Granddad was schooled, albeit an insulting, stereotypical rendition of a doltish granddad, supposedly representative of an anti-Core contingent.  Maybe you even saw the video before it was hastily removed by "the user."  I watched it two times in total disbelief, trying to make sense of it without success before it was vaporized by better sense. 

In the spirit of doltish propaganda, here's a new video for "the user" to upload:

Ob-La-Di, Ob-La-Duh!

Three or four years back, I first heard that some brainy trust was thinking we needed a test for this and a test for that, a test for everything.  Everyone needs to be accountable.  And, accountability can only be measured through tests.  I hear the same from some circles today.

Sometimes, I just wish I could teach a grade that is not tested high-stakes style and one for which I am not asked by my A.P. to give uniform assessments, quartlerlies, mid-terms and finals that interfere with my instruction.  I used to love teaching U.S. history, but now our students must take their Regents at the end of eleventh-grade, as opposed to the old schedule, calling for testing in twelfth grade.  We must spend over a month prepping.  The students take the U.S. History and Government without the benefit of a semester of U.S. government.  The basics are crammed into the history class, allowing students one additional chance to pass in senior year, if necessary.  It's testamania gone wild to the detriment of the curriculum.

I love teaching ninth-grade history.  Not only do I have a fondness for my ancient ancestors, but there is no Regents for which I must spend a month and a half at hard prep.  Still, I must administer a string of department-wide assessments.  I would rather make my own tests throughout the year to better reflect my own teaching.  I think I could quite happily teach only ninth-grade classes, if it could just be, but I think I will always be drafted to help prep at least some kids for their Global History and Geography Regents at the end of the tenth-grade year.  It makes sense to me, but I doubt that "the powers that think they be" would ever consider just letting teachers teach and calling in Stanley Kaplan to help kids specifically prep for tests.  

I saw how Farina recently spoke of the necessity of teaching social studies in the lower grades even though the subject is not tested. And, I love the attitude.  Alas, I wish it could be so.  But as some teachers seemed to indicate, what is not tested will hardly be taught in this world of high-stakes, Common-Core aligned testing accountability.  Students will focus on their reading and math in the hopes of elevating scores.  Social studies will figure somewhere along with science as a second-tier subject.  So, when students reach high-school, we are supposed to assume that they have been aligned to a framework which may in reality be meaningless.  

Have you ever asked yourself if the people who favor these endless batteries of high-stakes tests are themselves accountable?  And, if so, is it by a test?  When was the last time they took a test?  Ob-la-di, Ob-la-duh!  "Life goes on, brah.  La-la, how the life goes on..."

Is There No Cure for the Common Core?

If you're a teacher, perhaps, you have been feeling sick of late.  Perhaps you have been sick more than usual.  According to a recent article in the NY Post, teacher absenteeism has been on the increase.  Could it be caused in part by ed. "reform"?

If you're not living with it now, I'm sure you have memories of the common cold.  It might have made you mildly sick, but for an awfully long time.  The sore throat, runny nose and watery eyes may have lingered for far too long.  No matter what medicine you took, you probably couldn't quite kick it.  Time eventually took it down.  

Well, so, too, with the Common Core.  The cure seems elusive.  Certainly its proponents seem largely unfazed by mounting pressure, parental protest, apparent pedagogical inappropriateness at points and student grief.  The Core may mutate; it may re-brand itself, but it will not so easily be cured.  And when you complain, what do the "reformers" say?  Take two tests and call me in the morning!

Who Can Really Opt Out of the Educational Chain Gang?

NCLB reformers held the mistaken belief that all children could be made proficient by decree by 2014.  The Core set that goal even further out of reach by upping the definition of proficiency.  Now, it seems hardly anyone will be "proficient" these days.  In the Race to the Top, teachers and students alike are running their heads into walls.  The divide between the academic "haves" and "have nots" will widen. Yet, the drive for test-based uniformity will bring down the most proficient students.  Their minds will be restricted in an educational chain gang of test prep.  Even if students opt out of the tests, they cannot opt out of the test prep.  

So, who can really opt out of this academic chain gang?  Only the kids of those reformers who have wisely opted out by another name.  They have sent their kids to fancy private institutions that buy into none of their own "reformy" junk.  Their kids and their kids alone are freed from the chain gang of incessant prep and the potential humiliation of repeated failure.  Convenient, isn't it, when you and your children don't have to live by your own ideals?

"Schoolhouse Rock" Meets "Jailhouse Rock"?: On Trying to Be a Farina-Like Fourth-Grade Teacher These Days

I read the recent article which describes NYC Chancellor Carmen Farina's fourth-grade interactions with the author, Jonathan Lethem.  She was his beloved teacher.

The article is charming.  It goes a long way to show how much our world has changed.  Farina allowed children to read in a well-cushioned and comfortable box.  It was painted as a highly innovative practice.  I'd love to see the eyebrows raised today if a teacher discussed that practice during PD.  It would probably appear as yet another cover story in a local paper chastising teachers.  

Farina also kept a "small collection of 'forbidden books' that included works by Judy Blume that students had to request to borrow."  I would love to see how that would go over today.  Do you remember the Coney-Island principal who ranted against teachers trying to let children sing "Proud to be an American" and carry American flags at a year-end ceremony?  Imagine with such a supervisor today how many letters might be put in a Ms. Farina's file for simply defying authority, whether appropriate or not.
  
Furthermore, the Chancellor invited students to her home in the Poconos to listen to Elvis records.  Today, this might seem even more satanic than it was in the eyes of some 1950s ultra-conservatives.  It sounds potentially like "Jailhouse Rock" to me.  We are repeatedly warned these days not to establish contact with students outside of school, including even via Facebook.  It is all in the name of preventing potential accusations of professional impropriety or in the worst case scenario, pedophilia.  I understand the concerns and I heed the advice.  I would be stupid or naive not to do so.  We are living in a very different age.  Yet, I sadly realize how much has been lost.  I realize that for teachers today there is the need to prep for tests and a prima facie assumption of guilt, for most anything else could be considered as pedagogical impropriety.  If tenure goes out the door, things will be so much more for the worse. 

Prepping for Tests Aboard the U.S.S. Common Core?

As I occasionally remind my classes there will be a 2016 Common-Core aligned social-studies regents.  Without any commentary from me, my tenth-graders breathe a communal sigh of relief.  They will be the last class to face the traditional Regents.  I strongly recommend they focus on passing in 2015.

My ninth-graders know I am making some changes this year.  I cut ancient Egypt from four lessons down to two.  I fear the mummies may be undone.  I'll throw in a lot of spiffy maps showing trade connections.  We'll try to somewhat reduce our western bias, but there are those of us who will not so easily be parted from Greece and Rome.  

At any rate, as we take on the monumental task of trying to prepare students for a test manufactured for failure, I am left with one overpowering image in my head.  We're goin' down and fast.  

Are the "Reformers" Making You a Better Teacher?

The current spate of ed. "reform" will never make teachers better at their trade.  If teachers lose tenure, we won't see improvements.  Instead, we will see many highly qualified persons turned off by the degradation of the profession.  There will be more brown-nosing accompanied by the very real fears that one unqualified and reckless administrator could wreak untold havoc upon an entire system. 

Have all the observations made teachers better at their trade?  If anything, APs may have become better, albeit grossly overworked, by observing so many teaching styles; teachers could benefit from the same.  Given the current method of observations, teachers are put on edge.  Many scurry to invite their supervisors in for six (now four) observations, all planned using elaborate technology and resources, generally not yet workable on a daily basis.  So, what happens on all the other teaching days?  Typical lessons, effective, but usually without all the bells and whistles.   Teachers have not become more effective, either in name or in practice.

Contrary to making teachers better, "the reformers" have forced teachers to focus more than ever upon prepping students for tests designed to take no prisoners.  Teachers will prep despite the hopelessness of the task.  After all, no one wants to lose his or her job or be among the causes of a school closure.  Teachers and students will charge and fall, or rather fail.  

I suppose in some ways all this school reform nonsense has made me think more about what I value in teaching and in learning.  I've more clearly defined these things, in order to defend them, the essence of my career, my calling.  My Core is not "Common."   Their Core is antithetical to the heart of my profession as well as my being.  It's now time to pull this reform into reverse, make its backup lights shine bright as the "beep, beep, beeps" follow it into oblivion.  

Lesson Plans Cannot Be Collected In a "Mechanical or Routinized Manner"

If you see any actions like those pictured in the images above, please know that that the UFT and DOE have jointly declared them inappropriate!

Wouldn't It Be "Loverly" if Robots Taught Children?

Might there not be some advantages to having robots teach school children?  To begin with:

10.  Human beings won't have to make kids suffer through Common-Core test prep anymore.  

9.  If the teacher tries to break up a fight, the teacher probably won't be hurt much.  I saw one online comment responding to whether it should be that robots replace teachers:  

"Whoever thinks it should is utterly stupid to be honest. If a fight breaks out in class like it has many times in my current school, are the robots going to let out sleeping gas to stop the fight? Its a silly thought."

Actually, the point about a robot releasing "sleeping gas" seems anything but "silly," given the situation described at the school.  One just needs to know how to ensure that there are no negative side effects and that only the perpetrators are targeted.

8.  The robot can double as a scantron machine and spit out test scores with a vengeance.  If students ask the teacher for their current grade, the robot will have an answer in a millisecond rounded to the ten-thousandths place, serving to only further confuse the student.

7.  If a robot demands more pay, he can easily be replaced by another robot.

6.   The robot may literally be able to have eyes on the back of his head.

5.  If the robot has to sit through hours of PD, he can run his head into a wall without suffering permanent brain damage.

4.  If a kid curses the robot, he can reply, "That does not compute."

3.  If a kindergarten student begins to cry in class, the robot can soothe the child by telling him that he, too, misses his "mom-my."  

2.  If the lessons get too dull, the kids can practice their technical skills by disabling the robot.  

1.  Since robots don't have feelings, they probably don't give a gosh darn that their students have been programmed to fail.

PD's Illusions

I've looked at PD from Both Sides Now.  From up and down and still somehow.  It's PD's illusions I recall.  I really don't know PD at all...

I had an opportunity to vote against PD last June.  I did.  I lost.  I lost time with my students and I gained the opportunity to OD on PD.  I might pick up a few meaningful ideas along the way.  Let me not be overly pessimistic or close-minded.  I once enjoyed a group work lesson on teaching the DBQ essay through the help of a bunch of highlighters and several pages of handouts.  I'd have to think carefully before using part of my teachers' choice on highlighters though.  I need board markers more.  

From a practically utilitarian standpoint, PD outcomes rarely, if ever, merit the time spent.   I'm still growing in my profession, but not primarily through PD.  I find the implications of so much PD in our new contract somewhat insulting.  It seemingly implies teachers are struggling.  I would willingly deed over all and any PD to ed. "reformers."  Then, they might learn about age-appropriate learning, "differentiation," how to awake and sustain a child's desire to learn and how to meet children where they are--rather than shoot above their heads and watch the fallout.

I'm sure PD looks different in different schools.  I'm sure it looks very different from department to department.  In my department, PD has come to mean puzzling over the 9-12 NY State Common-Core aligned framework and trying to press on with even more test-based uniformity.   The new framework jumbles up topics from their previous order and adds an overriding focus on trade networks.  The original idea seemed to be that we would rewrite our old framework during PD, realign it with the State's latest dictates and put ourselves in a position to teach to the new test which we all know our students will not stand a prayer to pass if the Common-Core-aligned Algebra Regents is any indication of things to come.  The only problem is that it seems we should be paid at the rate of $42.82 per hour for writing curriculum.  I don't doubt some would do it for free if it could only relieve them from the more mind-numbing PD.  

On a lighter note, here are some of the handouts I found most meaningful from PD in ages long past--when I was once the new kid on the block.  I picked this up at a conference in Brooklyn, I think, probably twenty years ago.  

Hint:  #1 is Sandbox.  (I have four more of these pages.  When I was a new teacher I used them with the kids when blizzards reduced our ranks.)  In case you're having trouble, here's an easier one.  Add a few dollar signs and you can't possibly miss it:  

                                           

The two pages above show initial drafts of Franklin Roosevelt's a "Day of Infamy" speech.  It's way cool.  The suggestion was to show students there is no shame in editing there their work.  Even the cream of the crop do it!  If I saved a handout, it indicates the PD had at least some value, I think.

This page is not from PD, but given to me on an average day by a colleague.  I get some of the best stuff when I'm least expecting it.  Who knows, but some of it may even be tailored specifically for the Common Core!

Is Grandpa Really Behind the Anti-Common-Core Movement?

We once heard Arne Duncan blame "white suburban moms" for the backlash against the Core.  They just can't accept that their spoiled children with fluffed-up egos should be failing.  NY State Ed. Commissioner King accused "special interests" of manipulating parents.

We have also been told that the Tea Party controls the anti-Core movement and they, of course, must be mad as hatters.

In the latest, most unexpected turn, it seems that Grandpa is really to blame for the conspiracy to take down the Core and deprive our children of their natural right to prep for tests in the face of imminent failure.  Don't go looking for the video though.  All traces of it seemed to have been erased from public record, most likely due to the insulting and idiotic nature of the propaganda.  Was whoever created it Common-Core aligned and college and career ready?  I shiver to think so. Would that all blunders--like the Core itself--could be so easily deleted!

It must be too obvious to say that kids suffer through the Core, parents and teachers detest it and you wouldn't like it either if you and your kids had to suffer through it, too.  It'd be too obvious to accept that it's a bad idea and move on before the electorate rebels.  No, there must be conspirators at work.  

Who ever do you think will turn up next when the need arises to find yet another set of conspirators responsible for the ever-mounting anti-Core campaign?

What, If Anything, Stands Between You and Highly Effective?

What doesn't stand between a teacher and a rating of highly effective these days?

An AP's interpretation of the Measure of Teacher Practice (or MOTP) can stand between you and highly effective.  It counts for 60 points.  Witness how widely scores can differ in districts; compare Scarsdale with Pleasantville.  In the worst case scenario, vindictive administrators have left you in the land of ineffective or developing.  But even if your administrator is not vindictive, you may suffer if your administrator buys into Danielson's mantra that the realm of highly effective can only be visited.  It is not permanently habitable.  Could it be that there is not enough oxygen for the brain there?

Perhaps you teach in a discipline in which perfection is almost impossible.  Math teachers have more experience giving out grades of 100%.  After all, what else can you do if all the problems are all right?  In disciplines that rely upon essay writing, like my own, it's rare to find a 100% paper.  So, I'm guessing that teacher scores of 60 might come more easily from APs used to teaching in disciplines in which perfection is more likely.  Without a MOTP of 59 or 60, it seems highly effective would be out of reach for most teachers given student test scores.  

Perhaps your home life stands between you and a rating of highly effective.  You may be a most excellent teacher, but there are components of Danielson that called upon you to contribute to your school community (Domain 4).  Perhaps you have a young family and cannot find the time to coach a team, attend conferences or run a school program.  Perhaps you did some of these things when you were younger, free of familial obligations.  Perhaps you have no interest in any of these things.  Perhaps you prefer teaching in the classroom.  Perhaps that's why you became a teacher.

Perhaps it is the scores of your students which stand between you and highly effective.  Perhaps your MOTP made it into the highly-effective range, but student test scores bounced you down some steps.  Is it your fault?  Most certainly, yes, but only in the sense that you are a scapegoat.  Imagine the joy when the Common Core tests stand like guillotines mounted on the scaffold of most disciplines.

Will merit pay ever work?  Wander back to Rheeland in D.C.  It will bring out the worst in people.  It will breed sycophants, corrupt bargains and mass cheating among the greedy, desperate and immoral.

Should you let your rating define your professionalism?  No. Should you work harder to achieve the near impossible if you're not already there?  No.  What might you do?  Look hard at your students and inside yourself and ask, "How am I doing?"  Talk to your colleagues and share ideas.  Be honest and the data you find will be far more meaningful to you than any electronically generated statistical garbage.  You know what?  You may just be highly effective.  They just might not know how to measure it!

A Limited, One-Time Offer

Next year it appears our history students will be asked to take a Common-Core aligned history test.  I've heard the opinions of parents and math teachers about the 2014 Common-Core aligned Algebra tests.  In 2014, students took both the Common-Core aligned regents and the more traditional version.  It's no surprise that students who scored in the high nineties on the traditional version ended up with a Common-Core grade in the seventies.  Although I'm betting even native English speakers had trouble, I heard that the wordiness of many problems made the test especially hard for those who may know the math, but not the language.  

So, what will be my tactic for preparing ninth-grade students for the Common-Core aligned 2016 Global History and Geography Regents?  Should I start giving tests designed to fail students despite the fact that I learned my first year teaching that this is academically negligent?  Should I start overwhelming them with readings that even an English-born student might find obtuse?  Should I shock them into an Oxford-educated-level of vocabulary and focus on word power over the the impact of historical events?  Should I flood them with facts to close down young minds? 

I didn't become a teacher to make children hate school.  Did you?  I will teach much as I have always taught, trying to pull the critical issues that are still with us today out of ages long past.  I will try to remember the things that have stuck with me over the years and aim to convey the type of lessons that instead of reinforcing failure provide the majority of students with the real possibility of success.

Just as the evaluation system in my school seems to ensure that most of us will always be rated merely effective, the Common-Core tests will ensure that the majority of my students fail.  I could kid myself into believing that I'm working hard to help my kids pass or earn a highly-effective rating, but I know the cards have already been stacked against us.  I won't buy into that system--even if it's on sale for a limited, one-time offer.  

Parental Outreach vs. Data Outreach

Two periods a week, I am asked to engage in parental outreach.  I have always engaged in parental outreach.  In and of itself, this is not a problem.  I am a parent.  I understand the need.  

I've now set the groundwork for contacting parents.  I made a phone book of numbers.  I've checked which parents have e-mail addresses on Daedalus.  Far too few are available for quick and easy mass e-mailings.  So, I drafted a letter and printed 163 copies to suggest that parents who are not signed onto Daedalus might do so. 


Although I have no problem with contacting parents, I do mind the data entry now being asked of me.  Last year, I logged my contacts on paper and handed it in as an artifact.  This year, I have been told that I need to log all my parental contacts onto the Daedalus computer system as well.  It is an additional step and it makes me uneasy on several counts.  First, I will spend half my parental contact time logging in contact data, rather than figuring out which parents to contact and actually contacting them.  It may also be in violation of my contract.  Most importantly, in my opinion, I don't like creating data files on students which, for all I know, may forever be enshrined somewhere in cyberspace.  If some kid is negligent in his homework in my class for a time, it isn't a matter that I want recorded for all time--either as a teacher or as a parent.  Parental Outreach?  Yes.  Data Outreach?  No!  

Will an Object at Study Remain at Study?

We all know people usually do best at the things they enjoy doing the best.  It's funny how it works sometimes.  Practicing questions on dry readings in preparation for Common-Core tests may turn off the most active young minds.  Yet, let those same minds wander into the library and pull out books of their choice and you will be amazed.  The kids can't wait to return.  You soon have experts on dinosaurs, marine biology and veterinary medicine in your midst.  And, if you pay close attention, you may actually learn a few things.    

Given it was Sunday and the one day to devote almost exclusively to the things I want, I asked my girls to do a little math with me after lunch.  Two out of three were fine with that.  My oldest, however, told me she could only stomach fractions.  All went well until I pulled out the multiplication flash cards.  Then, the elder's dread set in.  A nine-year old who takes on Agatha Christie novels with an incredible thirst, closed her mind down and walked away.

In the later afternoon, we did crafts and cooking.  My "middlest" wanted to make a bracelet out of charms from her  bottle of Wonderstruck.  My oldest created a new recipe for "egg pancake" with a special ketchup sauce.  My youngest took a piece of ribbon and, using her lanyard string, made it into a necklace which she promptly placed over my head.   

Then, I left the girls to their own devices--as any parent probably learns to do more and more as the children age.  It turns out they elected a sensei from their midst and began a martial arts class for the American dolls gifted to them.  Given their net worth, I was praying for no injuries.  We soon found white and orange ribbons for their belts.  

After dinner, I told the girls we'd do some science experiments--online.  My oldest pointed out that video games (which she loves as much as the next kid) are not experiments.  I told her I had a great site with cyber experiments, so great that I will attempt to use it as I teach Galileo's part in the Scientific Revolution today.  She was incredulous.  

So, we rolled cyber cannonballs down inclined planes to see that distance equals the square of the time (excepting a constant that needs to be added equal to the rate of acceleration resulting from gravity) and that the "square of a pendulum's period varies directly with its length."  Can I explain all the implications of these equations to my daughter?  Don't think so, but it doesn't mean I can't awaken her interest!  I was pretty interested myself.

As I saw my oldest rush to click the release and drop buttons, I watched her surprise as some of the "common-sense" answers were proven wrong.  I remembered the moment when I learned that a brick and a feather will fall at the same rate given a vacuum.  Don't ask me to try dropping both of them on my feet in a vacuum though, maybe on the moon!

The most amazing part of the day occurred when my oldest blurted out, "Can we do more math related to 'physical science,' Mom?"  I then realized what I think I always knew.  My oldest doesn't hate math per se.  She hates the way in which she is being forced to interact with it, overwhelmed by a mass of work to be completed against the backdrop of a ticking clock, a swinging pendulum figuratively hitting her on the backside.  I'll try to find ways to make math more fun for her, but I am no Newton.  I already know she loves cooking with fractions.  Now, that I know she has an interest in physics, it's time for me to remember that an object at study just might remain at study--if truly interested!  

Will Option Four "Float Your Boat" This Year?

The D.o.E. approved a fourth option which promises to greatly ease the observation load for APs this year (as the CSA, or Council of School Supervisors and Administrators, would have it).  Since it amends our teacher contract, the UFT had to approve it--which naturally makes me wonder why the UFT could not have pushed for something like this in the original contract.  Just how bare is the cupboard when the UFT comes to the table?  Or, could it be that leadership is out of touch with the sentiments of its rank and file?  At any rate, this fourth option, only applying to teachers rated effective for the 2013-2014 year, seems to have the potential to reduce some teacher as well as AP stress.  Yet, no one seems to know much about it, excepting the fact that it exists.  Any wrinkles are probably still being worked out as we speak.   I had that sense with the observation system last year as well (witness the introduction of "outside evidence").

We do know the option involves four informal observations though.  I suppose it merits further analysis, but unless you feel your boss is out to get you or you are out to get your boss, it seems you'd be a fool to prefer the option of six informal (Option Two) over the new option of four informal observations.  

Option One, the option of one formal and three informal, still remains.  I choose this option last year.  I could tell you that I write lessons with a beginning, middle and end, and it seems absurd to burst in upon part of it and try to evaluate the entirety (and I really do feel this way), but to tell you the truth, I rolled the dice last September with a little help from an old friend, an odd number for Option One and an even number for Option Two.  Fate took its course and I was pleased with the results.  Now, if only effective teachers, who seem to be the vast majority of us (with near 700 ineffective and 4800 developing), could be given the option of one formal plus one informal as equal to the new scaled down Option Four.  But, alas, it was not meant to be--yet.

Then, of course, there is the special option for the highly effective teachers, Option Three.  It includes three informal observations and three instances of "intervisitation" with colleagues.  I met a highly effective teacher the other day from another department in my school.  I was glad to find these people actually do exist and understand why and how.  It seems his AP was not adverse to dealing out a MOTP of 60.  I congratulated him on being perfect. 

Given student test scores, if teachers did not get a MOTP around 59 or 60 at my school, it would be impossible to get a highly effective rating.  Some teachers invited in the AP for all observations.  Some were miffed they fell a point short of highly effective.  And, others like myself chose the formal and trusted the informals to fate.  I was pleased to have my AP wander in during a lesson on Samurai.  That's pretty much the spirit I've been trying to keep these days, leaving aside the seppuku, of course, for adverse ratings.  

In our department, I'm guessing that if any teachers were rated highly effective, they received it for taking on a load of administrative duties by running a school program, rather than for teaching prowess above and beyond all colleagues.  If that's what highly effective means, I'll traditionally teach, save any extra time largely for my family at home and settle for effective.  When it comes right down to it, if there is a Greatest Rater of Them All, I'd be pleased to explain myself in a life-end conference.  

Welcome to the U.S.A., Common-Core Style

I spend a fair amount of time these days looking over the new NY Social Studies high-school "framework."  Ancient Egypt mysteriously disappeared from the course of study.  Naturally, I was horrified, especially given that ancient Egypt was spiritually and physically built for eternity.

The curriculum was formed with the assumption that students will have already learned about ancient Egypt in the earlier grades.  And, I'm sure this will be true of the students who were schooled exclusively in NY.  Of course, a great many of our students are foreign born and many are more recent arrivals, not all from Egypt.  They may not be familiar with the knowledge and/or skill set assumed at each grade level by the architects of the Core.  The lack of Egypt in the curriculum is probably the least of their worries.  Caramba!

I read at Diane Ravitch that 97% of foreign-born students failed the Common Core NY state tests.  If we judge teachers purely by student test scores, then it seems the worst teachers work predominately with the newest arrivals to our country.  

Obviously, one set of standards is not working for all.  Will our foreign-born students ultimately prove to be failures in their new country?  I greatly doubt it.  But are we giving them that impression and may some believe it?  I believe so.  So, Welcome to the good old U.S. of A., Common-Core style!

The Expansion of a "Public" School With a Very Limited and Specially Chosen "Public"

It seems four more charter schools will be co-located with New York City Public Schools, two belonging to Ms. Moskowitz.  

In my mind, behind the glamour of some spiffy charter-school statistics lies a secret often well kept by the media.  Charters enforce a much stricter set of disciplinary codes and practice selective admissions as well as frequent suspensions, ultimately culminating in high student attrition rates.  In addition, they may gear their curriculum almost exclusively towards state test prep.  Witness the very poor performance of eighth-grade Success Academy students on NYC High School admissions tests.  Not one student passed.  If nothing else, this should prove that it's not a school of geniuses with non-unionized Wundermeisters.  They prep for one set of tests...and sometimes it's the wrong one!  

They have no magic formula.  It is not a longer school day or calendar year that gives them "the edge."  It is not teachers without tenure, overworked, overburdened, driven to resign after a year or two.  It is not the new PCB-free light bulbs or snazzy carpets--although I'm sure these amenities do not hurt.

I would have no issue with providing charters with public space so long as they follow the rules of public schools and answer to the people, rather than to profiteers or "privatizers" who are further segregating society.  Charters are only truly public schools in the overactive imaginations of moguls like Moskowitz and the media and politicians who seem to stand blindly beside her and her merry band of millionaires.

If the Success Academy wishes to banish so many students and send them back to the public schools--and still call itself a public school and accept public dollars--then, it seems, the least it can do is accept students that the public schools send Success Academy's way.  We could set up an exchange program.  Enough of educational segregation!  Truly public schools ought to do more to integrate children of diverse skills and diverse backgrounds.   

Perhaps Eva should rename her "public" schools given their mission:

School of Any Academic or Behavioral B.S. and There Goes Your Right to a Public Education At Success Academy!

School of Let's Prep Again for the State Tests and, By the Way, Here's a Barf Bag!

School of Ha, Ha, Ha, Move Aside You Public-School Kids and Take Your PCB-Laced Bulbs With You!

So, What Should I Teach About Today?

Don't really care if it's in the world history portion of the Common-Core-Aligned, Social Studies 9-12 Framework for the month of September or not...

The Record, Bergen County, N.J., (c)2001

Highly 'Fective (Applying The Rolling Stones' "Satisfaction" to the New Danielson-Based Evaluation System)

Given the release of our teacher evaluation scores last week, I thought I would re-post this piece written last January.  With the incorporation of MOSL scores, the formula seemed to make it nearly impossible for even teachers with some very high MOTP points to obtain an overall rating of "Highly Effective."  

Highly 'Fective (Based on The Rolling Stones' "Satisfaction")

I can't get no Highly 'Fective
I can't get no Highly 'Fective
'Cause I try and I try and I try and I try
I can't get no, I can't get no

When I'm writhin' in my desk
And that man comes on the P.D. day
He's tellin' me more and more
About Danielson's twenty-two domains
Supposed to trigger in me ungodly pain

I can't get no, oh no, no, no
Hey, hey, hey, that's what I say

I can't get no Highly 'Fective
I can't get no Highly 'Fective
'Cause I try and I try and I try and I try
I can't get no, I can't get no

When I'm preppin' for exams
And a man comes in and tells me
How hard the tests can be
But he can't be a man 'cause he doesn't teach
To the same darn tests as me

I can't get no, oh no, no, no
A hey, hey, hey, that's what I say

I can't get no Highly 'Fective
I can't teach no good elective
'Cause I try and I try and I try and I try
I can't get no, I can't get no

When I'm walkin' round the school
And I'm doin' this and I'm grading that
And I'm tryin' to aid some kid
Who tells me, Teacha, better not come back for awhile
'Cause my homework ain't in that pile

I can't get no, oh no, no, no
A hey, hey, hey, that's what I say

I can't get no, I can't get no
I can't get no Highly 'Fective, no Highly 'Fective
No Highly 'Fective, no Highly 'Fective
I can't get no

The Midas Touch Gone Bad--Yet Again

There is a singularly glaring oversight on the part of educational "reformers."  

They have their heart set on evaluating students and their teachers at every turn, but have they ever been evaluated?  They start with the assumption that they have the ideal models and that they are beyond question.  They work with the assumption that they have the right to judge everyone, yet not be judged themselves.

But what if their assumptions are wrong?  What if they fail by my standards, by your standards, by the standards of most teachers?  What if they fail by most parental standards?  And, what if they ultimately fail even by their own standards?  What if they have the Midas Touch gone bad!

Will No One Here Get Out Alive?

The NY Post carried a story entitled, "City teacher retirements drain $180M fund set aside for retroactive raises."  I'm not as surprised that the fund would be drained as I am surprised that anyone would be taken by surprise by the huge upsurge in teacher retirements.  Given that one has to work through 2020 in this era of educational deformity to gain one's full retro, I'm surprised that more teachers did not retire.

When I think about the teaching profession, increasingly I fear there will come a day when "no one here gets out alive."  The stress is so much greater today.  Teachers have become scapegoats for educational reformers.  First, Michelle Rhee blamed teachers for the persistence of U.S. poverty.  Now, there's social scientists, blaming teachers via VAM.  The five times a week, for forty minutes, in which we interact with some students, is supposed to outweigh the rest of their lives.  If students don't do well on high-stakes test, teachers must surely be the ones to get the boot.  Kiss retro goodbye, and, now, as if things are not already bad enough, maybe even the due-process rights of tenure.

Teachers currently live under conditions of greatly elevated stress.  There was always stress from teaching, particularly for persons new to the profession.  How could trying to help sometimes near 170 students academically and emotionally, each with his or her own issues, interests and concerns, every weekday not be the potential source for some stress?  And, I suppose this is why many people would like to criticize teachers for the easy life without ever actually considering working the job themselves.

Now, the stress outside the classroom far outweighs all that.  We are continually bashed by the media.  Facing micromanagement and an overabundance of observations, teachers are no longer treated as professionals.  No matter the years of fine service, they cannot be trusted.  Someone may pop in at any moment, pull out a pen and start furiously taking notes about every word spoken, as directed from above.  It is wholly unnatural.  It causes undue stress.  Stress often exhibits itself in physical ways.  Ironically, it seems to be the teachers who take their work most seriously who suffer the most.  They are perfectionists, overly self-critical and overly worried.  And, I am worried that teacher health issues will be on the rise.

So, will we all be around in 2020 to claim our retro?  You know as well as me.  It's a long way off.  Some will quit for greener pastures.  Some will gracefully retire rather than plow on through fields of stress.  Some will surely suffer at the hands of their students' test scores and future school closures.  And, yes, some of us will meet untimely deaths for one reason or another, but the stress sure as "heckers" doesn't help.  My advice:  develop a sense of humor about it all as fast as you can!

And, as far as our retro goes, we've been told by Mr. Mulgrew that it is not a God-given right.  If the money runs out, or the next contract is negotiated without it, who is to say that our pockets won't be turned inside out and empty?

Teacher attrition rates are already abnormally high in this era of educational deformity.  Who wouldn't want to get out alive, take the money and run, if possible?  Do you know the greatest shame of it all?  Experienced teachers are leaving in droves, teachers who love the classroom, but just can't stand the politicization of it.  It is no longer the profession for which many of us signed on ship.  After all, who really wants to be the instrument for inflicting test-based torture upon children?  Sad to say, but for many teachers given this age of educational deformity, retirement cannot come soon enough.  

For Immediate Release: The Common-Core Version of the Barrowford-School Letter

Over the summer, I read a BBC story about a British educator who wrote a letter which went viral (based on the ideas of a U.S. blogger) to reassure students at the time their high-stakes test grades arrived.  I intertwined what seems to be the philosophical attitude of David Coleman, "chief architect" of the Core, that people "don't give a shit" with extensive passages copied from the Barrowford letter to imagine how the Common-Core version might read.

The Common-Core Version of the Barrowford Letter

Please find enclosed your 2014 Common-Core NY State test results. You demonstrated huge amounts of test prep and tried your very best, but failed bitterly, during those tricky two weeks.  Keep in mind that these tests always assess all of what you need to know (in this case, what most of you do not know) in order to be college and career ready. The people who create these tests and score them do not know each of you..., nor do they wish to.  Actually, they "don't really give a shit about what you feel or what you think."

They "really don't give a shit" that you speak two languages. And, they REALLY, "REALLY don't give a shit" that you can play a musical instrument or that you can dance or paint a picture.

Don't kid yourself for one moment that they "really give a shit" that your friends count on you to be there for them or that your laughter can brighten the dreariest day. They don't know, nor do they care to know, that you write poetry or songs, play or participate in sports, wonder about the future, or that sometimes you take care of your little brother or sister after school.  What bullshit!

They "don't give a shit," and neither do any of us, that you travelled to a really neat place or that you know how to tell a great story or that you really love spending time with special family members and friends.   It would behoove you to be prepping for tests instead unless you wish to continue to appear moronic.   

They do not know that you can be trustworthy (but tell me, did you think to cheat on the test?), kind or thoughtful, and that you try, every day, to be your very best... the scores you get will tell you something, basically, that most of you suck.

So enjoy your results and remember there may be many ways of being smart, but when push comes to shove, you better summon your inner grit and get your ass in gear, 'cause nobody's going to give a shit about you if you can't pass our tests!  Have a nice day!

Just Who Benefits from Educational Uniformity?

The Common Core standards seem to harm the highest performing students as well as those academically below them.  If I am among the 65% failed by the Core in New York State this year, the standards have surely hurt me.  Rather than trying to gradually ease me to a higher level, I and my friends have suffered through shock therapy in order to be labeled as abject failures.  Ironically, a good many reformers put their own children in private schools, shielded from the Core.  Thus, their children need never learn the sad fact that most of them are probably also abject failures.  The standards fail the rest of us.

If I am among the 35% who passed, doubtless, I'm happy, but how do I feel about all the test prep that frames so much of my academic existence?   The tests actually hold me back.  My mind could be stretched further, but so much time has been wasted on pointless test prep to which I and my classmates are subject.  We are bored out of our wits.  The high-stakes standards have failed us, too.

Is it possible that there is some small segment of the population benefiting from the standards?  I spoke with a teacher the other day who told me how happy she was that her child's teacher was implementing the standards by preparing kids to do better on tests.  I mentioned that some learners did not work well under timed pressure and that life is not all about tests.  She disagreed.  So, we agreed to disagree.   

It seems teachers at every level have been asked to sacrifice creativity for uniformity.  In the past few years, we have had uniform "assessments," quarterlies, midterms and finals.  The tests overlap only imperfectly with the scope and depth of topics and ideas covered by any single teacher.  But, I guess, in that way they mirror state tests.  Usually most students pass these tests although there is a sizable contingent that fails.  At the same time, these tests hold back the highest-performing kids.  And, that's a shame.

The fact that we need to focus on tests and test prep greatly limits our ability to teach a rich curriculum.  We are responsible for prepping at just the time when we could be concluding the term with in-depth studies of current events and fun and rewarding projects.  If students are benefiting from the Core, I would be hard-pressed to find many.    

Laocoon and his Sons Attempt to Wrestle the Common-Core Snake

To Dream the Impossible Dream--And Then Hold Teachers Accountable

Educational reformers seem to share two basic conflicting goals.  They wish to hold all students accountable to a set of high standards at the same time as they seek to raise graduation rates.

When I first began teaching, it seemed the social-studies standards were sensible.  Although many students could not meet them, they were offered an alternate path to graduation.  In the event that they failed the Regents, they could take the less challenging RCTs (or Regents Competency Tests) and hope for vindication in another form.  For a time, a local diploma was offered for students who approached the grade of 65, but fell short.

During the Bloomberg era, schools felt particular pressure to find alternate paths to graduation for students who failed their classwork.  "Credit recovery" became increasingly popular.  Stats improved, but unfortunately at the expense of solid academic performance.  Student skills, for one reason and/or another, seemed to take a dive.  

Within each classroom, teachers face the same conflicting goals. As standards are raised, failure rates also increase.   The State must somehow balance its desire for high standards with its desire for increased graduation rates.  We cannot have the best of both worlds, although in a vacuum detached from realities of the classroom and society, reformers may wish it so and hold others accountable for the failure of their idealism.   In my opinion, it's nice To Dream the Impossible Dream--but don't blame teachers when you wake up to reality.

So, How Do You Know It Was a Good Day?

Most New York City teachers met with their classes for the first time yesterday.  It was a day to set guidelines, create the organization necessary for a smooth and productive year and learn some names.  So, I'm ready to go tomorrow--at least until a handful of new students pass through my door.  

I'm pleased with the day.  There were no surprises.  These usually turn out to be bad things at the high-school level.  Not a single student stood up and pointed their finger at me to ask how come they got stuck in a classroom with a merely effective teacher, instead of a highly effective one.  Everyone was civil.  

I have reason to believe that it will be a good year.  You might ask me how I know.  It's probably just a feeling--and a feeling that in and of itself tends to make that feeling a reality:  La Vie en Rose.  If you're looking for something more concrete, I did have three students in three separate classes ask me which supplies need to be purchased for class.  I don't ever remember this happening before.  

A vision flash before my eyes.  It looked something like this:

  
Deja-vu all over again.  I relived my kids' grade 2, 3, and 4 supply list.  I felt wholly inadequate before my high-school students.  I was tempted to tell them to acquire 1 box of crayons (48 count Crayola), 4 large glue sticks, 1 box of classic markers, 1 black Sharpie regular point, one black Sharpie fine point...and so on and so forth until I reached the twentieth item.  I could have added a cherry to the top by asking students to label all their markers, scissors, etc., with their name.  I resisted.

So, what did I tell them?  I told one class about the amazing class lists required at some elementary schools that help ensure learning is truly fun and relatively painless.  I did not tell my classes to get markers though.  I asked them to have a notebook in one form or another with a section designated exclusively for history notes.  I told them they would probably want loose-leaf paper for homework because I would collect it regularly.  I also told them that they will need a pen every day and a pencil for multiple-choice sections of tests.  Looking on the bright side, I was happy that I did not need to ask my students to purchase a test-prep review book...yet!

Whose Standards Will It Be?

Merryl Tisch reported the other day that the NY Regents will consider allowing high-school students to choose four areas of proficiency for State tests, obtaining grades of  65 or above, instead of the current five in place since 2012 for graduation (Global and U.S History, Math, English and Science).  Students could opt out of their fifth exam by replacing it with an assessment in some subject matter more relevant to their interests or strengths.

At initial glance, it seems ironic.  Tisch offers some leniency at the same time as the State is "raising standards" to the point of failing 65% of NY's 3rd-8th grade population via the Common Core.  I would actually prefer that the Regents first offer some leniency to children of more tender years.  By the time a kid reaches high school, the Common Core may already have led to academic slaughter and much gross psychological damage.

If I were to consider Tisch's proposal in a vacuum, I'd be more likely to find it favorable.  In the days of yore, high-school students could get a local diploma, as opposed to the Regents diploma, with a 55 or above on their exams.  It seems that this plan--which seemed to work well for many years--is no longer on the table.  Given that, I would like schools to favor students' interests or strengths.  After all, how many of us utilize most of what we learned in high school later on in life?  I don't foresee using much of what I learned in high school again until my girls begin to ask dreaded questions like "Mommy, can you explain the Kreb's cycle to me?"  

I think Tisch must guard against students naturally taking the path of least resistance though.  Looking back, if I knew there were no repercussions, I would probably have chosen tests in the two histories, English and Living Environment (old-time biology).  But without that option, I took Regents in math, foreign language, Earth Science, Chemistry and Physics.  Because I had to, I became a little scholar.

I hope any new system encourages kids to take on a broad array of challenging subjects, but I also hope it allows those who do not take tests well or lack interest in one subject or another to move on in life.  After all, some kid may not be good in Global History, but he may possess technical skills that might be the envy of many a scholar.  And in the end, I need the services of an electrician, but the electrician may not need the services of a history teacher. 

The one thing that leaves me really uneasy is that these reforms are being hammered out at the same time as teachers are being hammered by other reforms.  I envision scenarios where it might help or hurt the evaluation of teachers.  I foresee that many students may take one exam, let's say Global, and blow it off, knowing full well that they'll opt for an alternate assessment in another subject area.  So, they'll be all smiles, marching along to get their diploma.  Nice, right?  Nice, that is, until the following September when I get my HEDI score clearly proving my ineptitude!  I could be forced to march out the door, no smiles, just more "standards" concocted to fail teachers.