Assigned Reading

Julia Steiny points to success at Mt. Hope High School in her Sunday ProJo column. It’s good to see teachers come together, overcome the obstacles, and work to provide what their students need. A physics teachers watching kids taking NECAPs; a literacy coach aware that writing skills in all subject areas are needed for students to succeed; a business teacher willing to incorporate writing instruction in her classroom. Each knew change was necessary.

The school created its own plan called Mt.CAP and got to work, using a professional development day to put their ideas into action.

The success of the teachers at Mt. Hope was the result of decision-making and action within the school community. Teachers determined where a problem existed, and developed a strategy to combat it.

The business teacher, Maureen Gauthier, said, “Ultimately that was the best professional development I’ve ever had, because I learned so much.”

The education bureaucrats, or educrats as they are called, need to allow for more of this site-based decision-making when it comes to professional development. Too often these bureaucrats, whether they be federal, state, or most often local administrators, think they can create the professional development systemwide. They bring in outside “experts” or teachers from other schools who are succeeding in one way or another.

In truth, the best professional development arises from those who know the kids best, the adults who teach them everyday. Principals need to have more power than any ivory tower administrator when it comes to spending professional development money at his or her school. School Improvement Teams should control the time and dollars. The results will be more like the success at Mt. Hope.

I too was listening to Dan Yorke’s show when an East Providence teacher called to oppose a pay-for performance system proposed in that community. She suggested that teachers only work well together when they know they are being paid similarly. She feared teachers would become competitive with each other, and less likely to offer each other assistance. How insulting.

As a professional, I don’t think about how much I get paid when working to provide the best education to the students in my school. I say school because I believe I teach in a learning community, and despite having my own roomful of students, my responsibilities lie with all the children in my school. I assist other teachers, both new and experienced, to help the children of my school, and make it a better learning environment. Many others do the same.

If I were to complain about salaries, I would probably begin with pay based on longevity. My salary is the same as anyone else on the same step, regardless of how committed or successful we are. My salary is also the same as those with less intensive and demanding jobs. I know a lot of good physical education, art, and music teachers. I know plenty of good social workers and enrichment teachers. But it is impossible to argue that these positions are as demanding as that of classroom teachers. Yet union contracts are written so that all positions are equal, and salaries are the same.

There are simply no financial incentives to promote good teaching.

Those of us who are professionals, who know our purpose in schools, work hard to be the best for our kids. Their success is our reward. But we are paid the same as those who are not.

I am absolutely in favor of the pay-for-performance proposal in East Providence. I’m pretty confident it would mean an increase in my salary, and I am certain that it would improve the quality of our instructors.

Just before the school year began, I read a NY Times article about reading workshop.  I implemented reading workshop in my classroom more than ten years ago, after reading Nancie Atwell’s groundbreaking text In the Middle.  Progressive teachers, eager to inspire their students to read, have switched from buying 25 copies of a single book title to buying single copies of many titles.  We’ve filled our classrooms with books of all topics, genres, and reading levels, and have spent weekend mornings reading books that might interest our students.  We introduced students to the concept we adults enjoy: the freedom to select our own reading materials.  Those who understand and implement the concepts of reading workshop see first hand the impact it has on students in the classroom.

Above all else, I take pride in the number of students I’ve helped become readers.  By the time students are in fifth grade, they know how to read.  But the knowledge doesn’t make them readers.  I want my kids to become lifelong readers.  I want them to enjoy selecting books, talking about books, sharing texts with others.  I want students to read because they want to, to discover new authors that excite them and characters with whom they can relate.

I can’t think of a better way to prepare a fifth grader for secondary education than to make him or her a reader by choice.

So when I read the NY Times article, I chuckled.  The Times was only now discovering this “revolutionary” approach that was “catching on”?

What I hadn’t expected was the controversy that followed.  Some disagree with the reading workshop approach.  Critics worry that it fails to provide a common thread among students, or that students will avoid the classics if allowed to choose, or that only gifted students can be so self-motivated.  My experiences as a reading workshop teacher suggest otherwise.

Nancie Atwell offers a video response to the controversy, dispelling the myths put forth by the critics of reading workshop.

I am a strong supporter of the workshop approach, and believe Nancie Atwell is a gifted teacher who has transformed the way we view and implement reading instruction. A bit of anecdotal evidence: a parent once approached me and asked what I had done to her son. She was stunned one day during baseball practice to overhear her son, once a non-reader, talking to another player and fellow classmate, about the book he was reading. The two boys chatted about books while tossing the ball around in the outfield. These fifth graders discussed plot, character, and conflict…on the baseball field…after the school day was long over.

I can’t think of any better measure of success.

I watched with my students the education speech by President Obama.  It was excellent, both in its content and appropriateness for students of all ages.  The sincerity of the president was obvious when he told of the importance of staying in school and working to one’s potential.  His life stories helped students to see exactly what can happen when one works hard to overcome life’s adversities.  And at only 17 minutes, the shorter attention span of younger children was considered.

This speech was not only appropriate, but required of the president.  So many students who fail or drop out of school are in our urban districts, and many are young people of color.  It was the obligation of the first minority to serve in the Oval Office to reach out to these kids.  I suspect, for many of these students, it was the first time they felt a president was speaking to them.  All kids deserve to hear this message, and President Obama did not let them down.

The controversy surrounding the address may have had a positive effect.  The speech contained no real references to any specific issue or ideology.  In a sense it was generic, words all of us could stand behind.  I only wish the president had released the text of the speech earlier, and had not enlisted education bureaucrats to write lesson plans for teachers to use in the classroom.  Those bureaucrats have a knack for spoiling even the most well-intentioned ideas.

Congratulations to President Obama.  He got this one right.

RI Commissioner of Education Deborah Gist, appointed earlier this year, has made public an ambitious plan for the next three years entitled Transforming Education in Rhode Island. Her plan is divided into these five priorities:

• excellent educators
• great schools
• world-class standards and assessments
• user-friendly data systems
• equitable and effective investments

The plan is comprehensive, and to be honest, far more specific than I would have expected. Gist’s expectations are high, serving as a model for the expectations we should have for our students.

There are plenty of interesting tidbits to consider. Listed under educator excellence are these points.

• Educator salary options are structured to promote improvements in student learning and reward effective educators.
• Leaders base tenure decisions on educator effectiveness.

Both are excellent ideas, but union leaders will undoubtedly do what they can to stop such reform.

Great schools include this:

• School systems address challenges with innovative programs and strategies, including school choice, alternate pathways, and virtual learning.

This is good news. It’s important for all in education to realize that not all students will learn in the current public school structure. Graduation rates and standardized test scores make this obvious. We owe it to kids to offer alternatives.

Also listed as a priority is the need to consider how teacher contracts are written by community and labor leaders.

• Local governance and labor leaders establish contracts that support conditions that accelerate student learning.

It is the teacher contract that has created much of our problems in public education. Bureaucrats and union leaders share the blame. Without reconsideration of these contracts, many of the commissioners initiatives won’t see the light of day. Most communities will need to toss the existing contracts, and start from scratch. Strong student advocates must be part of the formulation of new contracts to ensure they encourage, rather than hinder, student learning.

There’s much to digest in the commissioner’s report. She should make it a priority to visit every school district and present her priorities to members of both the school and general communities. For her plan to succeed, the commissioner needs to state her case and enlist the support of everyone. I wish her success; it will not be an easy road.

From coolreformchick at the Edspesso blog:

Telling teachers they should consider engaging students in a dialogue about how President Obama inspires them is ludicrous, not because some may not agree with him, but because it suggests this speech is after all about HIM. To then go ahead and attack people for attacking the speech is like smoking and then getting outraged when someone says they smell smoke on you.

The entire commentary is on the money, and worth a read.

The smog already seems to be lifting over at RIFuture. In a year, Pat Crowley turned the respectable blog into a site with little news, little meaningful discussion, and plenty of nastiness. It was embarrassing to read Crowley’s slop, particularly because he is an official with the RI National Education Association. Besides the hostility, Crowley’s spelling and grammatical errors should have horrified any NEA teacher.

Best of luck to the site’s new owner/editor Brian Hull. Let’s hope he sees the successful RIFuture founder Matt Jerzyk as his model, rather than Crowley.

It seems ridiculous that anyone would object to a speech by the president of the United States to students in American schools. Once elected, he is no longer a politician but a president for the entire country. It’s a unique opportunity for students to hear the president live, speaking directly to them in language they can understand.

But President Obama and his administration made it political, and infuriated parents and Republicans across the country. Suggested lesson plans to accompany the speech included ways students could “help the president”. This despite the administration’s claims that the speech was meant to motivate students to do well in school.

If the president believes it important to address students as the school year begins, he should release a copy of the speech a week in advance, and forget about the lesson plans. Parents will be more at ease, teachers will do fine on their own, and the president can be viewed more as a leader and less as a politician.

Congratulations to Cumberland Mayor Dan McKee, who saw his plan come to fruition with the opening of the Democracy Prep Academy in his town. The 76 kindergarten children from four Blackstone Valley communities are very lucky little ones. Wishing the school great success.

According to the Valley Breeze, Mayor McKee was also named one of “Ten Champions for America’s Students” by the group Democrats for Education Reform. A well deserved honor.

Kudos to the members of the Woonsocket School Committee. The state bureaucrats have for too long tied the hands of cities across RI. Costly unfunded mandates from the state have meant less autonomy for communities, despite locals knowing their schools and their kids best. Cuts in state aid and limits to property tax increases enacted by the General Assembly have further diminished local control. Woonsocket school board members said enough is enough, and refused to hire the additional teachers the state has demanded.

Newly appointed Education Commissioner Deborah Gist threatened legal action against the individual members of the school committee, and loss of license for school superintendent Robert Gerardi. The tenor has become less hostile, as both sides have agreed to meet and seek alternative ways to provide the support demanded by the state. Should be interesting to see how this plays out.