The Buffer

Schmoker writes about the "buffer" that surrounds public education. What I'm interested in knowing is, how do you define the buffer and how do you work around it or do you shelter yourself in it? Is the buffer from teacher to teacher, between you and the adminstration, or between the outside world and you?



The next thing I'm interested in knowing is how do we deal with those that aren't engaged? Its easiest to ignore them, isn't it? But then are we truly doing our jobs? And what can we do about students that aren't engaged in our lessons?

Reflections on Chapter 1 The Buffer

I just finished the first chapter. There's a lot to think about. The first idea that speaks to me is the idea of the buffer that keeps educators from seeing the "system" as it is. Teachers have been encouraged to teach behind closed doors; administrators do not go into the classrooms often. Many do not even travel the halls between classes. We are using peer observations and feedback to counter this isolation, but I wonder how many of us take the observation requirement seriously. We often just collect signatures. The second idea that speaks loudly, and is related to this idea of isolation, is that every school has a number of in-house experts who can teach us a lot about teaching and learning. But these sources are often overlooked or ignored. Our common planning should help us use the expertise we have. Unfortunately, that time is often co-opted for other tasks. How many of these other tasks could be done in other ways?

The last thing that struck me was the statistics regarding the "ineffectiveness" of our schools, especially where minority students are concerned. These students already come to school with the deck stacked against them--parents who are very young; single parents; poverty-level households, on free and reduced lunch, or from language-minority homes. It is our job to teach them. I believe that all children can learn, and learn well; I believe that it is the teacher who facilitates that learning. We have to be more creative, though, about how we reach those students for whom traditional methods of teaching don't work.

The author does point out that "students read only a fraction of what they need for intellectual development. And they seldom write. Even fewer are ever truly shown how to read critically or to write effectively" (Citing Allington, Graff, and Olson) (17). So how have we turned students off to reading and writing? Are the incentive programs that we use--Accelerated Reader, the end-of-year party for students who read their "baker's dozen"--effective?

So, the upshot of this chapter is that we need to take a long, hard look at the institution of teaching and learning in our school. It won't necessarily be a pleasant look, either.