For the second semester faculty book study, we are going to examine Results Now by Mike Schmoker. Your first assignment--read the introduction carefully. Schmoker lays the ground work for several discussions.
Choose one "golden line" from Schmoker's introduction. Quote the line and then discuss it in a few sentences. Why is this important to you? Why is this controversial to you? Why does it ring true/false? Really examine your choice and check back often for other thoughts!
Happy reading!
skip to main |
skip to sidebar
The difficulty lies, not in the new ideas, but in escaping the old ones, which ramify, for those brought up as most of us have been, into every corner of our minds.
~John Maynard Keynes, English economist
~John Maynard Keynes, English economist
15 comments:
There are two lines from the introduction that really stick out to me. One is Roland Barth's quote--"Improvement 'takes recognition of and moral outrage at ineffective practices.'" The other is "educators in overwhelming majorities have agreed that there is indeed a yawning gap between the most well-known , incontestably esssential practices and the reality of most classrooms."
I think that in order to be outraged at ineffective practices, we first need to recognize what they are. It is hard to be a truly effective teacher. It is hard to be so introspective as to recognize what we are and are not doing. However, it is only this reflection and introspection that will lead to change in public education. And change has got to come soon if we expect to exist in the future.
The quote that I really thought was interesting: "...the single greatest determinant of learning is not socioeconomic factors or funding levels. It is instruction. A bone-deep, institutional acknowledgment of this fact continues to elude us."
Why is this quote important to me? Instruction seems to be overlooked so many times. We go to professional development and meetings after meetings and when is instruction talked about? It isn't. We go to college to be teachers and to get certified. But, we can always use help, suggestions, etc. This book even showed how one teacher was just very organized and set out the expectations for the students, and he was successful. He didn't do anything extraordinary. He just knew how to reach his students.
Is this quote controversial? Yes, because I don't think you can pinpoint just one "single greatest" factor as the determinant of learning. What about the great teacher who has a student that sleeps in class because the student has 2 jobs after school to help pay for bills because their parent can't work? No matter how we use instruction to teach this student, will it work? I know we may overlook instruction as a problem, but I don't think its the ONLY determinant of learning. What about family living? What happened to the value of education in the home? Lack of parent involvement? Could that be the single greatest factor?
I do think the quote has validity. Instruction may not be the single "greatest" determinant but we do overlook instruction sometimes. I believe that's because we are expected to already know how to teach. Most teachers are qualified as "experts" in their subject area, but that doesn't translate into being a good teacher. Some teachers don't change with the times, either. What worked 15 years ago, may not work today. Students change. Our strategies need to change too. What worked for one class, may not work for another. We can always use some fine-tuning so as I continue to read, I'll see if I can personally pinpoint instruction as the greatest factor of learning. Maybe it is, but there are just so many other factors to consider, too.
Interesting quote, "The question is not,Is it possible to educate all children well?but rather, Do we want it badly enough? Being in education for over 30 odd years, I can honestly state, I have always wanted it "badly" enough. Each and every day I came to school prepared and motivated with high hopes of reaching and challenging each and every student. I have seen many teachers come and go, they too appear to want it "badly enough." Yet we have not always seen the student success we had planned and worked for. Why? Instructional methods? Student motivation?
The second "golden line" that I felt very interesting was, "Instruction itself has the largest influence on achievement." What are we saying to our students when classroom instruction did not prove successful, yet obtaining carnegie untis and progressing from grade to grade by sitting in front of a computer does?
Maybe a tuff pill to swallow, how bad are public schools? How many teacher are ineffective? What are the answers?
Maybe the answer is self recognition and reflection but do most teacher want to recognize they have to change? In the introduction the medical profession was pointed out to be very ineffective in the early 20th century and systemic change had to come swiftly in order to save lives. From my point of view change must come to our educational profession. Not only in how subjects are being taught but the American philosophy behind public education. Do I agree with everything I've read from the introduction, NO. Do I agree the authors intent is "not to discourage but point out" remains to be seen. Hopefully by the time I finish I can reflect on what I can do to become a more effective educator.
"Effective teaching is quite different from the teaching that is typically found in most classrooms" (Odden and Kelly, quoted page 1).
When I first read this quote, I said, "ouch!" Like, Frances, I've been teaching a LONG time--going on my 28th year in the classroom. I have seen programs that are supposed to make my teaching more effective-from Madeline Hunter's PET to cooperative learning to teaching/learning with technology and now "best practices." I have attended the best practices seminars for several years, and I think the practices are very sound. However, when I return to the school, I am instructed to abandon the "best practices" for efficient practices in the name of getting studenst to pass the high stakes tests by which schools are graded. It is easier to teach to a formula rather than to teach students the messy work of thinking. I think sometimes, we merely give lip service to effective teaching. It is much easier to use the same methods, the same tests, and the same lesson plans year after year.
My eyes kept going back to these four words "...experts are among us." It is so true. Look around us here. There are 3 that instantly come to mind who have success not only in student achievement but also in student relationships. The kids refer to these teachers as "best they've every had". We can learn from each other! DH your thoughts on the peer observations on the Lit Diva blog were spot on...maybe we should be required to observe those in our shcool/dept who have the successes.
I loved it when the author used the quote "its about teaching, stupid." Also, "teaching needn't be exceptional to have a profound effect; continuous commonsense efforts to even roughly conform to effective practice and essential standards will make a life-changing difference for students across all socioeconomic levels."
I think that sometimes we get so involved in looking at the cultural backgrounds of our students and making excuses for why they aren't successful that we forget our purpose - to find ways to reach all students and make them learn! In other words, use what we know of their cultures and reach out to them accordingly instead of making cultural disadvantages become a crutch.
I believe that a major overhaul of the system needs to occur, but that there are many things we can do within the current structure of our schools if we use our commonsense. I have long been a supporter of mastery education instead of "seat time" required education. I'm a firm believer that technology reaches some kids who don't succeed in traditional classrooms. I believe in sharing our successes instead of trying to be the one teacher who is successful while putting down those teachers who play a different game...
At NHS we need to quit pretending to use learning communities, data teams, and common planning time. We too often use this time to complain about our students instead of focusing our efforts on how to improve instruction.
One big thing that I got from the introduction is that we could be doing so much more in the time we have. I am as guilty as anyone of wasting precious time but I think we all need to make concerted efforts to really focus on instruction during all our common/data/faculty meeting times...
I have been frustrated by the lack of attention to common planning time as well. Since taking over one of the English 3 sections, I have been working with a good team. We do meet together and we have a consistent "syllabus". However, I am concerned that often our common planning time is co-opted for other purposes, whether it is administrative, or otherwise. I was angry that one of our sister high schools used their common planning time in January for parent-teacher conferences while we at NHS stayed late to have ours after hours.
And I'm not sure what the data teams are all about--I don't know how to analyze data and what to do with it once we've analyzed it! (Maybe that has something to do with the fact that I am NOT number/mathematical/arithmatic oriented at all!) I'm sure I'll have more to say on this later.
I liked the quote on page 4 under "From Brutal Facts to World-Class Schools": "As Collins writes, greatness can be achieved without increasing the number of hours we work." This struck me because time management has always been a weak area of mine.
As I observe my own teaching and that of others over the years, I often question "are we teaching smart?" Many times I have seen teaching smart in myself and others, and all too many times I have seen fillers such as half a period on a DOL lesson which was to last 5 minutes as an opener, or way too much of an elementary language class being spent on spelling homework.
In today's society where we have individual data on student's abilities and mastered skills at our fingertips, why do we so often group them all together and administer the same assignment to all. Differentiating based on skills and learning styles takes time to implement (and so we often return to our comfort zone - myself included), but when we do reach out to this level, the motivation level of students increases and the actual act of teaching becomes more fulfilling. Students become facilitators to other students.
I don't know if differentiated instruction can be done in the same amount of work hour time that we currently spend. Initially, it will require more time, but as we develop a comfort zone with results based teaching and school decision making, I believe we will be able to do the job in the same amount of time with far greater results and with far more reward as a teacher.
Our major obstacle may not be time, but the willingness to become more of a coaching profession where we are eager to have a peer work with us to improve our teaching. We have got to become open to constructive criticism if we are going to grow. If you are not getting the data or results you want, reach out and ask others to observe and help you implement new methods. It has only been near the end of my career as an educator that I finally felt comfortable in this zone and it was the most rewarding experience. Working as a true learning team where you coach each other and look at data together can make such a difference in the lives of children.
I dont know that I agree with the Barth when he says "the single greatest determinant of learning...is instruction." I have a real problem with that. There have been so many times that I have seen students fall behind in class because they work two jobs to support their family. Just yesterday, I had a long conversation with a student that confided that she basically raises her two youngest siblings and feels depressed and tired all the time. She hasn't has a real sit-down meal in two weeks. There is so much more to teaching than just instruction. And sometimes instruction ISN'T the most important past of teaching. I feel like you have to understand where your students come from to truly understand their mannerisms in the classroom. Undsertanding this can help enourmously.
I do, however, like that Barth recognizes that improvement does take a "recognition of and moral outrage at ineffective practices." There is ALWAYS room for improvement!
The quote that really got me was "Teaching needn't be exceptional to have a profound effect; continuous commonsense efforts to even roughly conform to effective practice and essential standards will make a life-changing difference for students across all socioeconomic levels" (9).
I think that this is usually easier said than done. Just because you're given the right tools doesn't always mean you know how to use them. Perhaps in faculty meetings, instead of going on and on about test scores, we should be discussing ways of effectively instructing our students. Because, honestly, instruction isn't the only thing happening in classrooms. There's teenage drama, overworked kids, class clowns, and smart alecs all vying for the teacher's attention at exactly the same time, and sometimes, it's impossible to get around to every student to see exactly where their confusion in the instruction is taking place. As some of the others on this blog have noted, instruction isn't the only factor involved inside the classroom.
On the other hand, instruction does and will make a big difference. We just need to determine what these "commonsense" practices are and implement them TOGETHER. If only one person does it, then we are working against each other, which defeats the purpose entirely. As Schmoker points out, our professional development needs to actually develop us professionally, not pretend to do so for accountability's sake.
"Stick a good person in a bad system, and the system will win every time." I think this is very true for all professions. If their is guidance and follow up on the guidance we would be more affective. So often we throw new teachers in classrooms that are set up for failure. We often forget about checking on the new teachers and find it uncomfortable to monitor other teachers. We have to get over this uncomfortable feeling and start observing and learning from others. If you look at sports you can see a player from one team get traded to another and instantly becomes a better player. I think the same thing can happen with teaching. Your system is a key part of your success.
Quote: "A brutal fact is that the culture of schools and school leadership militates against their ever learning from each other, despite the certain and enduring impact of such collaboration".
When I really get to thinking about it, I don't know how the other teachers at NHS teach and what their classrooms are like. I don't know what works and doesn't work for them in their classrooms, with our kids. Visting many different classrooms was one of the best parts of going through my certification program. I feel I learned so much from it. But now that I'm in the thick of things, a school's culture only allows a few visits each year to classrooms during instruction time.
So why does the administration choose to send us away, sometimes hundreds of miles away, to professional development seminars or conferences in order to learn best practices? Why do I have to listen to some "expert" tell me how to teach MY students and what will work well with THEM? Do they even know about the population I serve? Oftentimes, why do we look outside our school instead of inside our school for resources?
All of us at NHS are expert educators and use some effective practices everyday. Unlike the experts at the conference, we know OUR population and what will work with them. I am sure that someone at NHS is already doing, in some ways, the actually strategies I will learn at the conference.
Post a Comment