6 Smart and the Dumb Things They Say(and why that matters)

The setting was Education Nation 2.0 2011 at Stanford University.  Yeah it has been two years,  but this still very much applies today.  So as we look back, think of today. 


"Master interviewer and PBS host Charlie Rose and a distinguished panel of luminaries tackle the tough questions of how to improve our troubled school system and provide a better future for our nation's greatest resource, our kids."

If by "distinguished panel of luminaries" they mean people at least 2x as smart as me, own nice suits and probably read a lot more books, they they are right.  But I am confident I know as much as any of them about the state of education and what will and won't work.  Too bad no members of the TU have ever been described as a "luminaries".  Because we are remarkably average in many ways.But that would make this post too long.  :)




So let's talk participants for a moment.
 

Charlie Rose-"master interviewer"(Charlie is my man...but Chuck appears to have had some Kool Aid somewhere, maybe in the Green Room or on the plane out West.  He all too readily accepts just about everything that is said.  I give him an F for this one.  Too bad no one representing the average teacher was invited.  Maybe they were.  But if they were I suspect they were too busy actually teaching students to show up.


Salman Khan-from the Khan Academy.  I love this guy.  But he is way too smart for average people.  I think he's been in "the bubble" near Gates too long and lost touch.  We've mentioned him before and are not wary what he does, instead by how it can be misunderstood and misrepresented by politicians.  Still, of all the participants, he seems to be the only one to have really tried to help... and has done some work instead of only talking, telling others what to do or writing a book about working. 

Corey A. Booker-Two time Mayor of Newark, NJ who's made plenty of news lately.  He never met a camera he didn't like and is a classic politician from humble roots.  Not faulting him there.  Better man than me.  Seems like a heck of a guy.  But also one who's ideas always trump those of everyone else.  Booker  is very into doing stuff.  Action for the sake of action.  There's a lot of that going around in education. Much of what he says either outrages me or makes me feel better.  He's a wild card.   Like Charlie from It's Always Sunny in Philadelphia.

John L. Hennessy- Stanford University's 10th president and inaugural holder of the Bing Presidential Professorship-(what is that?). As President of Stanford he gets to be on all round tables automatically-at least that makes sense anyway?  What exactly does he know about the average public school classroom in America? 


Kim Smith- CEO of Bellweather Education Partners and one of the original of TFA(yuck) founders.  I am ignoring what she says simply because of that.  Well not all of it actually but I still am programmed for skepticism after a decade and a half of teaching.  My bad. I'm sure she is a great person.

Claude M. Steele-Despite his awesome name, the Dean of Stanford’s School of Education, he is simply way too bright for me to understand fully without visual aids.  I think I rarely beat up on academics for being academics.  But I feel like I want to in this case.   I'll take Remington Steele instead.

Reed Hastings-co-founder and CEO of Netflix.  OK, not sure why he is even there unless someone with actual merit regarding education canceled last minute. Maybe the CEO of Blockbuster backed out?   Netflix?  I mean come on, they want 40% original programming?....even I know that's probably a dumb idea.  But again, why is he there?  Maybe his presence would have been a good chance to suggest they kindly put the stuff online that I like watching.


So some of what they said:
"Frame for us the issues"-Hmmm, so basically tell us what you think is wrong.  Not everyone think r sees things the same and that is good.  But when one group imposes its version as the way it is, not so good.  Ask any teacher to frame the issues  and odds are you'll get a somewhat different response. 
----
"Redefine education before it redefines us."  Wow that is so catchy.  Makes me want to run out and design a school on a CAD program somewhere.  Then throw a bunch of kids inside and walk away. 
----
America's schools are in trouble. Twenty-five percent of American kids drop out of high school. Those that do graduate often are ill prepared for either college or a job. The U.S. Secretary of Education has even mandated: "we have to deal with the brutal truth."
Is the problem money? School administrators? Teachers unions? Parents? There's plenty of blame to go around, yet all agree it's a problem we must address. If we wait, the U.S. will lose its competitive edge, more young Americans will end up in dead-end jobs, and the U.S will drop to second-tier status. -  There is a lot here to break down.  I don't have time.  Some in trouble yes.  If the Secretary of Education says it, it must be true.  no way politics or anything like that would affect judgment. 
----

Designing an education that builds the necessary skills for today's diverse student population is not easy. But there is hope: innovations and innovators that challenge the status quo; research to help us understand how to make the changes; and reformers experimenting with new ways to teach, learn, and run our public schools.
The questions that need answering are complex:

• How do we attract and retain good teachers, especially in math and science?
• What is the best way to hold schools accountable and promote effective instruction?
• What should the role of unions be?
• How do charter schools fit into the overall solution?

-All of that makes sense but ignores the fact that education and schools are full of people.  Many of them innovators.  To imply, overtly or tacitly that innovation has to come from outside is not only foolish but dangerous. Especially when those innovators stand to make large sums of money from gaining access, influence and  and control.

----
Get rid of elected schooboards.-  Yes absolutely, let's remove democratic principles and put for profit or non profit entities in charge of all things...our children.  One cannot be selective in the application of democracy  You are either with us, or waving a red flag and playing soccer with your Che shirt on.   I know the West coast tends to lean left but the fact no one called him on this is worrisome.  To me this is proof that those inside the bubble not only won't get it, but can't. 
----

At the 9:10 mark Corey Booker discusses the "Silence and inaction of the majority of Americans."  he views this as a failure to respond to current conditions.  That is a great point and perhaps he is correct.  He certainly would be in many districts across the nation.  But is this true everywhere?  Are all districts and schools the same?
----

Once again I am left scratching my head at the lack of honest and open discourse and inclusion of others views which may very well be the only chance for successful and meaningful reform. I guess it makes for good TV though. 

It matters because here you have some clearly intelligent and well meaning people whose proximity to the actual classroom and actual students minimizes their awareness.  Yet it is they and others like them who have been entrusted to steer the boat.  They are not sure how it works, how much it can take or how exactly it works.

The TU would like to create a Education Renovation 3.0 , 2013.  It is faster, better and has more memory than the 2.0 version.  The panel here consists of not luminaries but people who work with kids. We probably can't afford a nice stage or TV cameras or a webcast.  But it would though generate local innovation and momentum for positive change, hopefully free of the pitfalls plaguing current reform efforts.    There would be a panel with one or more educational leaders,  concerned parents,  building level administrators, counselors, community members, business people, and policy experts.  But if there was anyone on the stage, the largest number of seats would go to experienced teachers.  The people who face the realities of education firsthand.  These teachers would represent a broad spectrum of communities.  Rich and Poor. Urban and Rural.  And not to be forgotten we would find some way to involve students.  

Fixing Education

“Either fix our schools or get used to failure”

News stands across the country will feature that statement top and center on the November 14 edition of Time magazine this week. To accompany the piece, its author, Fareed Zakaria, hosted a CNN GPS special “Fixing Education” on Sunday evening. In a sick economy, I suppose that another attack on education sells magazines and draws ratings at least, and lessens the economic downturn for someone. Of course in this case, that might be just fine. It turns out that the author has found the magic bullet for building an excellent system of education and turning the American economy around. Quite profound actually, here is the solution:

“work harder and get better teachers”

Why didn’t anyone think of that already? Well, according to the author the answer is very clear. Half of American teachers graduated in the bottom third of their college class. I guess there aren’t enough smart people in education to figure out the “work hard and get better teachers” formula. Mr. Zakaria arrived at this articulate solution to the education problem by looking overseas toward nations that seem to get education right.

He first points to South Korea. American school children spend less time in school than in South Korea (and many other Asian nations.) He uses the 10,000 hour rule described by Malcolm Gladwell in his book “Outliers” as proof-- 10,000 hours engaged in a task for one's skill set to reach 'expert' status. In a stroke of genius, he suggests that if American students just spent more time in school, we would see dramatic improvements in the system.

The second “global lesson” comes from Finland. These sneaky Scandinavians managed to stay under our radar while they built an education empire by selectively hiring the best and brightest as teachers. On top of that, they pay them well and treat them with the same professional respect as doctors and lawyers. They emphasize creative work and shun tests for most of the year according to Zakaria. That’s the second variable in our formula for excellent schools—find better teachers.

This article is so ground-breaking, its impact could spark a revolution. Why stop at education. Imagine the possibilities if this model were applied to other professions. The NFL- if we just find the best coaches and make them practice longer with the team we’ll win the super bowl every year. Investments- if we just find the best and smartest portfolio managers and make them work long hours we’ll get the best returns. Retail- if we just hire the best salespeople and have them put in lots of hours, our profits will skyrocket. Or what about industry- if we just hire the most productive workers and increase their hours, our profits will hit the roof. Maybe our government could even function better if we would just elect the best officials and make them spend more time in session.

I doubt I’ve been too successful in my attempt at humor, but honestly, this article had quite the opposite effect of making me laugh.

Further Reading on the burden
of schooling many children face.



Let’s look first at time. Most American school children spend thirteen years in school, one-hundred eighty days a year, at least six hours a day. Over 14,000 hours in class (not counting homework). This far surpasses the 10,000 hour rule. Personally, my children are involved in athletics that probably account for between 3-5 hours per week averaged over the year. My middle school son just began a weekly commitment to Destination Imagination and I’m sure that as he and my elementary aged daughter get older, their athletic and extra-curricular involvement will increase. They also have church related commitments that equal 3-5 hours a week. My family values each of these commitments as much as education and I don’t expect my children’s “earning potential” to suffer because they don’t spend enough time in school. I would actually think that my children would suffer from requirements that they spend additional time in school beyond what is currently required.

Then what about these “exceptional teachers.” In other contexts, just take sports for example, an exceptional athlete may never reach their potential until placed in the proper situation. Teaching doesn’t take place in a bubble. Current systems for measuring teacher quality focus almost entirely on how well they affect student achievement on standardized tests. Looking to Finland without addressing the fact that children in Finland are taken care of in a near socialist fashion fails to recognize that the highly qualified teachers of the nation are dealing with students who are highly prepared for school by a government system that fully addresses issues of poverty, health care, and safety that are left to the schools to deal with in the United States. In the United States, we’re labeling effective teachers by student test scores. In Finland, they are labeling effective teachers by their training and efforts.

Putting the two together, Zakaria interviewed Bill Gates for the article and news special. Gates and others assert that experience doesn’t have an impact on teacher quality. It would seem that if Gladwell’s 10,000 hour rule was so strict, a teacher would have to practice for ten years before making it to “expert” status.

Mr. Zakaria, I appreciate that you are concerned about the public education system in the United States, but I worry that articles and news broadcasts such as yours do more damage than good. You have limited exposure to the reality of day-to-day education in the United States and your simplistic view of what we can do to fix it reveals the danger of the “arm-chair” administrator to our system.

I teach in a school district with average SAT scores of 556/554/544 (Reading/Math/Verbal). Eighty-Three percent of our graduates pursue higher education. Ninety-three percent of our students graduate on time. The College Board recently recognized us for efforts at increasing access to the AP curriculum while increasing the percentage of students scoring a three or higher on the exams. (81%) Of those, I taught AP to nearly 150 students last year with 90% scoring a three or higher. As an individual teacher and a district, we're doing pretty well.  We also recognize that status quo is not an option and consistently work to improve our effort on behalf of students.

The constant fixation on aggregate numbers paired with stories of great success and great failure at the expense of the commonplace paints an entirely unrealistic picture of what goes on in our nation’s schools every day. It also creates an unnecessary urgency for uniform dramatic change that will kill the success of systems such as mine while attempting to fix the problem of underperforming urban districts. The tagline on the cover of Time—fix our schools or get used to failure—unfairly labels a school such as mine, already demonstrating success and consistently moving toward improvement, as a problem. Instead of recognizing our efforts, we’re scapegoated as the primary obstacle to our nation’s recovery from an economic crisis.

Thanks for the quick fix, we’ll get started on it tomorrow and tell you how it goes. Unless of course you’d like to open real dialogue and acknowledge the diversity of the education systems in the United States and figure out how we target the areas that are failing, develop innovative solutions to consistent problems, and sustain and nurture the systems and teachers who continue to effectively prepare the next generation for a productive life in a global society.

Best and Brightest

My colleague and I write a lot about education reform here on the TU.  It may seem like we oppose much of the current reform. We do.  Not because we are obstructionists.  In fact it is obvious that our nation's education system needs continual improvement and we welcome positive changes.  Less obvious is which if any of these reforms have merit.  The one size fits all systemic changes that are being pushed by major players will do little to affect positive change in the average classroom.  They may in fact do the opposite.  What is certain is that the focus of many of the ideas and measures is the quality of the teacher.   Many profess that an influx of the nations “Best and Brightest” to the teaching profession will do much to fix all that is wrong.
 
Of course there are bad teachers out there and a growing number of initiatives seem focused on identifying and then purging them from the profession.  I have no problem when bad teachers leave.  I have a problem when good teachers leave.  That is happening with greater frequency.  I also have a problem with how these efforts to root out bad teachers affect what I do in the classroom.  Some cite the lack of teacher dismissals as evidence that bad teachers are protected by tenure and that it seems anyone can keep a teaching job. But they forget that many self select and quit. They also underestimate the complexity of judging quality teaching.  It is true anyone CAN teach under ideal conditions.  But there is much facing schools and done by today’s students in those classrooms to prevent such ideal conditions from materializing.  When people realize how hard it can be many there including these Best and Brightest will say in effect “I’m out”, and head for the door.  Knocking many of us regular teachers over as they rush past. But people teaching for the right reasons stick it out.  That should matter.   They find ways to improve or ask for help.  They do a lot more for kids than what happens between the bells. To me it is far more important WHO a teacher is as opposed to WHAT they are. 


As the focus shifts to those actually doing the instruction efforts are made to ensure all students have access to quality teachers.  How could anyone oppose such a thing?  But these efforts to identify bad teachers and standardize curriculum hurt me in a variety of ways.   Couple that with the promotion of common techniques from the edgurus or edupreneurs of the day and you’ve got a tangle of adverse affects. These hurt quality teachers.  Those that have control over what I do see teaching as a science.  Where a variable can be altered and it will reproduce a desired outcome. Those who teach know it is an art.  This disjoint lies at the heart of many issues and is in part a reason why we created this Teaching Underground.  Those who have survived the first few purgatory like years that weed out people in teaching for the wrong reasons or those who do not possess the necessary skills know there are no shortcuts and there are no easy years.

Those promoting B and B talk miss many key points.  Chief among them is the fact you can have all the degrees in the world and still suck.  Drop a Harvard law grad or Wall Street CEO in some of the classes I’ve taught and the kids will sniff them out and eat them for breakfast. Educational success is not a guarantee of success in life.  Especially not the life of a teacher.  I’m proof of the opposite since I am still working despite my unimpressive academic record.    A review of this might lead one to conclude I am unfit for every job. But there is no substitute for experience.  I learned much from mine.  Lessons I will not soon forget.  Lessons that I use daily.  One of those is that even smart people can be dumb and lazy.  Nothing against smart folks joining up, just cautioning that they do so for the right reasons.  That they understand there is no playbook or model for what happens every day.  They better be child-centered and not self-centered or they won’t make it.   Three years does not an expert make.  And to think they’ll remedy everything might be short sighted. 

So take for example Mr. Mortimer Zuckerman.  A bright fella who says in part “America has to rethink how to attract, employ, retain, and reward outstanding teaching talent.”   What Mr. Zuckerman forgets while he pounds away in one of his 4 houses or his 100+ ft yacht, is that teaching at Harvard and Yale and publishing magazines differs a great deal from teaching in a public school.      Teaching is a human endeavor.   What people say does in fact matter.  Calling for more Best and Brightest hurts.   A  Race to the Top and No Child Left Behind continue to have unintended consequences. Throughout, one constant is that we are not all motivated to work harder and longer solely by money.

What else he does in the article does is tougher to discern.  I’m surprised I even picked up on it given I am just a teacher.  He starts with pointing out the “Educational Crisis”…then moves on to criticize tenure and I think the overall nature of our educational workforce lowering the crosshairs directly on teachers. (Allow me to return fire)  Catch phrases like digital learning and concepts like having kids learn by watching DVDs of top teachers reveal that the view from the top is not what I see everyday.   Will it work?  Maybe with a small percentage of our kids who are self motivated.  “In fact, the new methods could reduce the longer-term need for mass teaching manpower”  Really?   Over-reliance on technology is dangerous.  It shouldn't replace teachers, it should empower them.   As good as it sounds having a kid in California watch a teacher from North Carolina using technology ain’t exactly gonna work for a lot of kids, and it doesn’t work for teachers either.  You can’t simply watch a good teacher and then repeat what they do.  Authentic assessment is what many of us do every day.   Intentional or not Zuckerman’s ideas further erode understanding of what good teaching really is and how valuable those people are.  It is not teaching to the test, it is teaching the kid.   There's no rubric for good teaching. 

This simplistic approach to educational issues reveals the divide between those that teach and those that “know” about teaching. Among the most asinine of ideas are many coming from  “reputable” educational researchers who hide behind mountains of data.  Too many of whom inexcusably fail to even talk to teachers in any of what they do.  The Best and Brightest should follow the same path to the profession as the rest of us, not get short tracked.   I frown upon alternative licensure not because I am threatened by it but because it makes a mockery of the requirements and processes in place as part of preparation to become a teacher. Not the least of which is the professional semester or student teaching.  Forgo it and you have no idea what the job is really like.    Kinda like many writing on education reform.

Those who seek to break down some of these regulations and “judge” teachers objectively put all of us who care about quality teaching in peril. Would we do the same for doctors and pilots?  They often blend anti-union and anti-tenure ideas and propose annual contracts.  Remember the origins of tenure.  Without tenure I might be less likely to take risks, take on a student teacher, share ideas, be innovative or take on some of our more challenged kids.  You cannot on one hand stress the importance and impact a great teachers then totally discount everything they say.  We do not choose our “clients” and we are subject to a slow erosion of our autonomy within our workplace  But still many teachers endure.

Best and Brightest talk does much to demean those of us who labor every day to help kids learn.   I know many great teachers whose SAT scores eliminated them from the most prestigious learning institutions.  But they know their craft well and in front of kids they transform into the most brilliant professional you’ll ever see. These three simple words subtlety imply we who are teaching are not smart  Sure I was just happy to get into college and I work with some of the folks who taught me when I was in High School.    I can only imagine what they think of me and purposefully avoid asking what I was like in High School.  But I do ask them how I can do better on occasion.   I am not the best at much of anything and I am smart enough to know I am far from bright.  Still I know a good teacher when I see one.

I’ll even admit I might be counted among the bad teachers by some measures.   Some of what I say here may sound a bit "holier than thou" but it is only meant to awaken the common sense among us.  I don't give much advise on investing or campaign strategy.  But I’d advise people who don’t face 14 year olds each day listen none the less.  Let’s not get hypnotized by the sheepskin shingle on someone’s wall and instead measure WHO people are as much as WHAT they are.  Listen to the professionals in the job when they say things are bad ideas.  Absolutely look for the best teachers we can but do not exclude those who can excel at the job because they didn't end up at an Ivy League.  Let’s remember that these efforts here to identify and remove those who are not good teachers do much to impede and frustrate good teachers.   As a result I have seen too many join those exiting on their way out the door.  In part since they can no longer excel and enjoy the profession and teach the kids the as they once did.  Ultimately this Best and Brightest approach might leave us worse off than we were are now.   Making the job of those of us who are crazy enough to endure for the right reasons harder.  Whatever the case it doesn’t help us teach the kids we’ve got much.