Cracking the Code: How Testers Language Means Nothing

As a teacher of Ancient World History, one area I find interesting about the period of study is language.   Thousands of years separate civilizations and written language offers a window affording us a glimpse as to the way things were for people who have long since disappeared.  When a language is "lost" to time or cannot be translated, a great deal of misunderstanding exists.   Often some catastrophic event or mysterious demise brings on such a void.  Sometimes it is geographic distance which separates cultures and prevents mutual understanding.  Only about 60 miles separates my school from the decision makers in our state capital of Richmond but it might as well be a million.  The gap between us is wide indeed.  I think they might even be on another planet.

My students have taken this year's SOL test.  I tried to prepare them as best I could for this test that I have never seen.  I can''t prepare them for receiving their scores and not knowing what they missed.  Somewhere in the language of the test and the scoring there exists a disjoint which results in a process devoid of much value.   This test requires a Rosetta Stone in order to decipher what exactly is measured and how. Far worse, without having seen the test or any of the questions, it is impossible to judge its merits fairly, point out flaws, or seek clarification.  The secrets of the test are even more mysterious than the language of the ancients. 

Why do we place such a degree of legitimacy on the tests when it is clear they inherently lack legitimacy?  How can anyone be allowed to make a test like this and get away with not being more transparent to those that are judged by it?  Is the quagmire of documents, forms and numbers designed purposefully to deceive or misdirect?  One is left to speculate.

We have explored these issues in several previous posts on the TU. See Bottom, Truth, Fact, $#!%,  Flux among others.  There are so many things wrong with the tests themselves and the way they are used that for those not directly involved in today's schools it is difficult to comprehend.  Painfully evident is the reality that testing  is leading us to a place where a growing number of common sense people and countless educators know is bad. A representative in the state legislature of Indiana, Randy Truitt voiced some of this in a recent letter  to his colleagues.  

Imagine the opportunity to sit with a leader of the society like the Maya or Easter Island and simply ask..."What happened?"   If I had the same opportunity with the folks at Pearson and the state DOE I'd do my best to dig deep.  My conversation would ask among other things what exactly are you trying to accomplish? 

I'd begin with a printout of "raw" scores.  What makes it raw is how you feel when you try to figure out what these scores mean once they are scaled(I usually say chapped not raw).  This year is no exception. From VDOE website "the raw score adopted by the Board to represent pass/proficient on the standard setting form is assigned a scaled score of 400, while the raw score adopted for pass/advanced is assigned a scaled score of 500."  That makes perfect sense except when you look elsewhere on the site.

So never mind the 53/60 cut score above since my students who missed 7 questions (53/60) only received a 499.  I would bet that very few students and even fewer parents would have any idea where the 400 and 500 delineations come from.  Aliens perhaps?  Apparently that will remain a mystery.

The vagueness there is surpassed still by what the teacher responds when a kid asks, "what did I miss?"  All I can offer is the kind of imprecision usually reserved for an ancient text translation or interpretation.    "OK Johnny... it is obvious, you missed four in both Human Origins and Early Civilizations and Classical Civilizations.  The Classical Civs questions had something to do with achievements of a person, architecture, role of a key person in a religion, and a figure's accomplishments.  Not sure what ruler, where they were from or what you didn't know.  But what is important for you to remember is that although there were more questions in the HOEC category(thus in theory they each had less value), you again are mistaken because in fact, you only got a 31 scaled scores versus a 32.  You got a 394 so you failed.  Just do better.  Make sense?  No?  Good." 

After consultation with our legal department(each other) and careful inspection of the Test Security Agreement we all sign we elected not to include an actual copy or portion of the grade report.  The rationale being that we need paychecks and both have families to support.  How sad is it that teachers are scared to question the validity of a test by referencing the actual test or results from it?

If we had included a copy of this student's actual score report you would have seen:

(1)Reporting categories contain vague language like "idenitfy characteristics of civilizations" to describe question that the student answered incorrectly.
(2) category A had 11 questions of which the student missed 4.  Category B had 10 questions of which the student missed 4.  The student's scaled score for category A was 31, for B 32, with no explanation of why question in category A are are given greater weight.
(3) The scores, grade reports and feedback is clearly not useful to improve student or teacher performance with specifics as to where weaknesses exist.

Imagine that conversation with a student who fails and trying to help them.  We are asked to "re-mediate" which I would imagine means we target areas where the student has weaknesses.  That is a much tougher task without knowing where exactly they are weak.  I can understand not wanting us to teach to the test.  How about teach to the kid?  

I and my students are judged by a test which in no way serves as a tool to improve my teaching.  How on Earth are we to try to do better next year?   Those that devise such an approach remain as distant as any of the cultures my students are required to learn.  What's more is they manage to encrypt any relevant information in such a way to make it utterly meaningless. 

The numbers and stats derived from massive student testing across the state serve little more purpose than to send the message that policy-makers and testing Corporations like Pearson want to send.  When scores are too high, standards are raised.  When scores are too low, standards are lowered.  Neither the Department of Education nor Pearson are able to state in clear language an objective explanation of how scores are calculated and why certain cut score choices are anything less than arbitrary.

The twenty-first century process for holding American students, teachers, and schools accountable should not prove more difficult to translate than Ancient Hieroglyphics.

No Pearson..."Thank You"

Khaaaaaaaaan! Academy

Shatner is clearly not a fan.

The future of education involves technology.  No one disputes this.  Less certain is how that technology will and should be utilized.  If you are savvy enough to locate this post then you have most likely heard of Khan Academy.  If you haven't then you need to watch the 60 Minutes segment linked below.  Everybody who's anybody in education including Bill Gates and everyone in the media seem to be falling in love with the potential of what Khan academy might mean for the future of our schools.  I'm in love too.  I love the simplicity and usefulness of Khan's videos.  But as a Star Trek fan and teacher, I am wary since Khan was formerly managing hedge funds and also has ties to Bill Gates. I, like Captain Kirk, approach the unknown carefully.  I wish I could say it is because I am smart.  It's not. 


Khan's emergence is nothing short of amazing and it illustrates how the internet has redefined our world and access to knowledge.  When I watch some of his videos I get sort of hypnotized.  They are great.  His intellect shines through; even just hearing his voice and seeing his illustrations you realize how capable his mind actually is.  But they are videos.   A lot of folks seem to forget this. To describe them as better than lecture is like saying DVDs are better than VHS.   It is a logic that is hard to argue with I suppose.

The brilliant Sal Khan seems to best understand how to use this as a resource.  He stresses the non-profit approach and that to me is a profound fact.  The technology use is meant to free the teacher up to help kids.   These videos have tremendous potential to achieve quick concise conveyance of knowledge and empower teachers to do more.

Yet as the phrase "flipping the classroom" shows, there are potential issues with implementation.  Please forgive me and other teachers for pausing and thinking but we do so with cause.   Maybe we are wary of how powerful people are drooling over this approach to learning.  Resources such as Khan's are perceived by decision makers as more than they can possibly be.  Another latest greatest thing.   You hear the phrase "the future"...that alone makes me cringe a little.  What will be the implications of all this?  I couldn't pretend to know(actually I could but won't). 

Some issues that arise:
Should all students everywhere access the same uniform version of the same set of information?  Is that a good thing?  (I get annoyed I can't ask questions or get simple clarification.)   There are few if any teachers working to develop this stuff...from what I can tell.  Some cite the "gamification" of math skills as they work to earn "badges."  It'd be better to tie that into the reliance on standardized testing as a whole.  I could go on, but I am a busy man.  Google for yourself,  but as always be mindful of the source.  You can't trust everybody as you can trust the TU.

For now, all I know is that I have used Khan's videos with my students as well as for myself.  Maybe he could put all these videos on one of those new laserdisc or something?

Bush on NCLB- Ten Years Later

Time Magazine, January 23, 2011.  Andrew J. Rotherham gives us George W. Bush in his own words on the tenth anniversary of "No Child Left Behind."

Bush: "So I'm pleased with the progress and concerned about efforts from people in both parties to weaken it."

Rotherham: "What do you think is driving those efforts?"

Bush: "Some on the right think there is no role for the federal government in education.  Some on the left are saying it's unfair to teachers--basically, union issues.  People don't like to be held to account."

Both parts of Bush's response define a clear divide among first, left and right politics regarding education and second, the yet-to-be-labeled opposing sides in the education reform debate.

First, if we could make policy with all of our biases on the table, perhaps everyone would understand each others goals a little better.  But, I have a hard time accepting policy decisions made by those who have limiting the government role in public education as their primary goal.  What better way to pull the government out of education than to convince the American public that money spent on public education is money wasted?  If successful in this effort, any number of agendas are guaranteed (vouchers, school choice, private/public charters).  I gravitate away from conspiracy theory, but when those who wish to undo the system play a vital role in making policy for the system, bad things are likely to happen.

Second, I do like to be held accountable.  It makes me a better person.  I learned long ago that one of the best ways to avoid bad practice is through openness.  Letting others in on what's happening in the classroom.  Parents, administrators, peers, all serve to hold me accountable for what I do.  I don't like thinking that I've been doing something ineffective, but I do appreciate knowing that I've done it versus continuing to fail without ever realizing it.  This statement indicates that Bush begins with the understanding that I want to teach in the shadows, without any oversight or input into my work.  If you believe that I'm this type of person, then you probably don't respect me enough to listen to my professional opinion.

I don't think Bush or any of the corporate reformers want to be held accountable.  It's like when your zipper is down, or you've got food on your face.  I like a person with the courage to let me know so that I can avoid further embarrassment.  I suppose some people prefer to go through the evening not knowing any better.  Instead of listening to feedback (they'd prefer to call it complaining), corporate reformers prefer to demonize the source of the feedback-- teachers, who stand behind protection of their unions in order to protect themselves from having to do honest work for honest pay.

How have we devolved to this national narrative that teachers who care enough about children to spend hours of time with them for average pay are the one's who are holding our children back while profit driven reformers and corporate educational companies pushing for more testing and accountability are the great hope for our public school system?

(I recommend this great reply from John Spencer's Education Rethink to the Time article that accompanies the interview)

Economists Prove Teachers Matter

The headline reads "Did You Have  Good Teacher? Expect to earn More as an Adult."

This conclusion was drawn from a research study conducted by three Harvard and Columbia economists that definitively connect career earnings to a student's access to a good teacher in grades 4-8.  So they have essentially proven something common sense says is true.  Teachers matter. 

Of course they do. There are good ones, and then there are some not so good.   Just as there are good ways to use research and some not so good.  The basic problem I have with this research is they define a good teacher by using student test scores alone.    If the same was done in my or any other school I am 100% certain that data would be misleading. We don't all teach the same level and thus not all the same kids with the same learning needs.  They might not have the same goal in mind.  By such logic it could be argued that to some degree, the students we teach define us as teachers.  So what remains unclear despite this study is how to best measure quality. 

Such an approach using testing to identify "good" teachers assumes cause and effect.  It is then parlayed into the dreaded Value Added Measurement of teacher effectiveness.   Nevermind all the other factors affecting kids during their incredibly complex development and education.   Consider if it is possible that students who already do better on tests are more likely to find success in school, get into a better college and eventually get a higher paying job.  Does evidence suggest students from higher socioeconomic levels do better on tests, thus better in school, thus generally earn more money than their peers?  Do the student goals differ?  College admission is a goal.  But who do we hold accountable when goals are not met? 

The TU asks why it is that economists have all this time to study education?  Might they be better served to study something closer matching their background...say, our struggling economy?  Maybe some educators should spend some time studying our economy and drawing some equally obvious conclusions and then suggest some changes.  Maybe they could even prove economists matter...?

The problem is not necessarily with the research itself, it is how it will probably be used.    I can foresee this evidence used as rationale or justification for an increased emphasis on the validity of Value-Added Teacher Evaluations.  And those teacher evaluations will rely disproportionately on student data from testing.    Decision makers and politicians beholden to the appearance of taking action and doing something in our perceived education crisis will likely fail to make reasonable changes from such research and instead use it to justify a call for kneejerk and potentially harmful changes. They do not mean harm they just lack sufficient understanding of all that is involved in education. 

Numerous videos are  included along with the New York Times article and they do much to reinforce the notion that our schools are failing.  I am increasingly frustrated by media and their lack of objectivity on education.  Instead of presenting a balanced view of reality, they(and NBC)  fall prey to the gloom and doom model to attract attention and readers.  This undermines public confidence in our schools and has become a self fulfilling prophecy.  The video at one point references the low grades the public assigned when asked to grade our public schools to illustrate this point.  

If using such data driven decisions were a sound approach then we should follow suit with other public institutions.  Shall we start with our political ones and remake them all in a flurry of reform?  I suspect that course would meet greater and more organized resistance and be deemed unwise.  The video continues on and mentions that among teachers  “there's growing frustration that those skills can't be measured by a test. standardized tests are an accurate reflection of a student's achievement. 60% say those tests determine what they teach.”   Subjective(using real people) as a component in measuring things isn't flawed enough to justify swinging the pendulum too far the other way.  Teachers know that.  If they didn't they'd make course recommendations solely based on how kids score on a test or only assign grades based on tests. 

The increasing role of data in teacher hiring, retention and evaluation does something that few other human endeavors do.  Rely on data more than people.  The problems with VAM(Value Added Models) in such a process is described as either smart or dumb by  Bruce Baker (a guy way smarter than anyone at TU)who said there were 3 main flaws with this approach.  You don't even need to understand what he's saying to figure out he seems to suggest flaws with VAM.

• The first error is a deterministic view of a complex and uncertain process. 
• The second common error becomes apparent once the need arises to concretely measure quality
• The third error is a belief that important traits are fixed rather than changeable 

Here are some things to consider which help put this study in proper perspective.

• •  The difference cited in a lifetime amounts to $4,600.  Over 20 years that's about $225 a year, $19 a month, $4.75 a week, or less than a dollar a day.   What if a student had a great teacher but chose a more service oriented profession with less potential for earnings...hmmm?  Let's take for example...maybe a job like...TEACHING!  Economists would be the ones to qualify worth solely by income.  Hearts of stone those folks. 
  • Kids with good teachers have a .5% greater chance of going to college.  So if a bad teacher taught 200 kids and an good teacher taught 200 kids, the good teacher would send 1 more on to college. 
  • A classroom with $266,000 increase in career earnings.  If I taught a class of 30 kids who worked for 30 years that'd be about $295 difference for each of them. 
  • Robert H. Meyer of the Value-Added Research Center  is quoted as saying “That test scores help you get more education, and that more education has an earnings effect — that makes sense to a lot of people.”  The problem with that is clear to an educator.  A system that relies too heavily on testing in determining the fate of our kids.  Most of the nations(Finland for example) that outperform the United States on international tests do not share this test heavy approach. 
  • The link between teacher performance and student test scores while statistically proven, is not ironclad.  Using this data in such a way has the potential to undermine the collegial and supportive professional environment among teachers and disrupt and discourage peer support.  The effect would hurt all students and counteract any gains, real or perceived.  In short it won't matter who you hire, it will undermine our profession.
  • “The message is to fire people sooner rather than later,” Professor Friedman said.  WTF?  So a new teacher with less experience who needs time to develop as a professional and master their craft should be fired?  What about the teacher who is asked to teach a different curriculum each year?  One who is stricken with illness for a lengthy period of time health problems?  That seems like sound reasoning... huh?  The way to strengthen education is to fire people.  Did you hear that message?  In other words...blame the teachers. 
  • Is it possible as suggested by someone who questions the validity of such research that value added is simply the only financially practical way to tell the difference between teachers?  "Observations or videotapes of classroom practice, teacher interviews, and artifacts such as lesson plans, assignments, and samples of student work" are all financially prohibitive as they'd take too much time and money to effectively implement.  To me it is simple...you know a good teacher when you walk in their room...and yes that is a subjective measure.  But so is measuring learning.  Standardized tests are more objective but we'd be foolish to place any more weight on them than we do already.
  • There is another group who has growing influence on education policy I am wary of, Pyschometricians. They contend that a test is only valid if it actually measures what they are supposed to.  I haven’t seen a test, nor would I want to, that can measure how good a teacher someone is. 
  • Whether it is John Keynes or Adam Smith, economics is a "dismal science" that essentially amounts to theory.  Kinda like education theory. I read some of the comments on the article and they seemed more soundly based on the real world.
  • Are similar data heavy measures applied to similar things?  Like:  Our curriculum, online classes, charter schools, would they be welcome in private schools since education is education ...public or private?  Or could the same conclusion be drawn from how far back a kid sits in a classroom, how fast they finish a test, or whether or not they're a student-athlete? 
  • "But controlling for numerous factors, including students’ backgrounds, the researchers found that the value-added scores consistently identified some teachers as better than others, even if individual teachers’ value-added scores varied from year to year."  Anyone bother asking why it varied?  

  
  The study simply confirms what we already knew.  The question before us is how or if that is useful.  Let me be the 10,000th person to tell you that over-representing the value(pun intended) of Value Added is unwise.  We have begun to employ this approach across the nation in a sweeping tide that shows little sign of turning back.  We've seen the damage such a tide can do when it advances too far unchecked. What is even more frustrating is we seem to be spending more time, money and resources to develop, justify and advance  these methods all for what at can at best be described as a minimal return.   Thus pushing the tide even farther and doing untold damage.

  
  

  So the study found out that teachers matter.   Teachers matter a lot and all this data shouldn't.  Perhaps a study showing parents matter would be equally useful.  Allow me to briefly respond to the research after what has grown into a lengthy post.  "Well ...Duh!"  I'll restate what I find the most fault with about all of this, it is that data driven reform attempts to replace what throughout history has been the skilled art of teaching with some sort of exact science.  In our effort to continually educate and develop the human mind we are forgetting we still dealing with people and we cannot do the job alone.  Funny thing about people and their behavior is that more often than not they find ways to defy scientific explanation.  

  
  

  Value-added is an oxymoron if ever there was one. 

It Was A Good Day

Friday night, riding home with two kids in the car looking back on a day well spent.  I'm pretty sure it's not what Ice Cube had in mind when he rapped these lyrics in 1992, but today, "I got to say it was a good day."

The best part about teaching doesn't always happen between the bells.  As I drove home from our high school's homecoming football game Friday night I couldn't help but smile at the preceding five hours of my life.  Here's a run down:

I left school five minutes early because I had to go to Chic-Fil-a.  Student organizations were having tailgates before the game, and my ninth grade leadership class participated.  None of my students could drive to pick up the sandwiches so I had to do it.  Organizing a tailgate doesn't seem like a big deal, but I dare you to get twenty-five 13-15 year-olds to plan one.  One of my freshmen took the initiative to contact Chic-fil-a to ask if they could donate sandwiches for our tailgate.  They gave us forty, free of charge.  I was pretty happy about the free food, but I also appreciated the initiative of the student took to get the sandwiches donated, and she wasn't even able to attend the tailgate.

Tailgates were fun.  One of the few events that teachers can enjoy with their students, not a typical chaperone experience where teachers have to "manage" students.  Lot's of food, games, and about five or six hundred teenagers doing what teenagers like best, being together.  My sixth grade son was able to join in on the fun with a few of his friends as well.

The game didn't go as well on the field, but two former students stopped by to talk at one point.  One of them wants to be a dolphin trainer, and she's going to college in Florida to pursue that career.  She said thanks to me because she's finding so many of her classes easier this year because of what she learned in my Psychology class last year.  It's not the first time this has happened, but whenever a student shows genuine appreciation for what you've done in their life it makes you appreciate yourself better for what you do.

My TU colleague sat behind me at the game.  Two current students sat with him.  They spent the better part of the game just talking.  I joined in from time to time, but by this point, my youngest, four years old, had joined me and I spent much of my time chasing him.  It's still refreshing to relate to students in an environment outside of the classroom.  In a location where both of you have gathered by choice.  As much as students struggle with seeing teachers as real people, teachers too often fail to see the real people behind the "student" sitting in their classroom.

By halftime, I'd promised the four year-old that we would leave as soon as the homecoming kind and queen were crowned.  We moved down the bleachers closer to the fifty yard line.  As I sat waiting for the court to come onto the field, a parent recognized me.  She started telling me how much her child enjoyed my class and how she appreciated all that her daughter was learning in the class.  A short and concise conversation, but one that further encouraged me in what I do.

The homecoming court walked onto the field.  Seniors arm-in-arm with the special people in their lives.  Some chose parents to escort them out, some chose teachers.  A surprising number of them had parents who were their teachers at our school.  One student had his seven younger siblings walk onto the field with him.  Another glimpse of the reality of students' lives that often fails to make it into the classroom.

In the end, a young man and young woman, both of whom I teach were crowned King and Queen.  Two young adults with exceptionally kind personalities and excellent work ethics, whose acheivements in the classroom, in sports, and in other organizations stands out, were given the honors.  It made me happy to see them recognized by their peers.

A four year-old can only make it so long at a football game, and the outcome of the game was pretty certain (and unfavorable).  My sons and I departed, stopped on the way home to return Chic-Fil-a's warming bag, and drove home for the night.  On the ride I asked my oldest, "so what did you think?"  His only reply, "I had a great time tonight!"

I have to say it was a good day.

The Digital Bandwagon

Tim exits his mom's car and flips open his phone to begin textting. His Ipod blaring as he weaves his way through the halls barely avoiding collisions with others whose eyes are also glued to tiny screens. He rounds the corner and enters my room. He puts his phone away and removes his ear buds and plops into his seat. He takes out his Netbook and frantically checks his E-mail and Facebook before the bell.  He next logs in to begin the lesson for the day using Edmodo and begins working pausing occasionally to check twitter feeds. So Tim has done a lot this morning but he hasn't done one thing, spoken directly with anyone.  Is Tim your son in my class? Probably not as things aren't that bad but we better keep an eye on Tim and his classmates.

Nothing is as attractive or as marketable for schools as digital technology. My neighboring local district is spending more than $2 million to provide each student in 6th-12th grade with Windows based tablets. The adoption accompanied by a flashy new acronym, the Blended Learning to Advance Student Thinking(BLAST). Most schools are increasingly investing in technology as a key improvement strategy.  One to one is coming. 

One to one is the educational jargon meaning that each student has his or her own computer. School divisions, and thus public taxpayers, are pouring funds into equipping students with the latest and greatest digital resources. Smartboards, Promethean Boards, LCD projectors, laptops, Ipads, Computer Labs, Instant Poll Clickers, Software Applications and Information Management Systems and the dizzying amount of unseen infrastructure needed to make them function are sucking up cash like a vacuum. But as decision makers barely pause to reflect on these investments it might be prudent to consider them a bit more.

I think having access to such tools is great for both kids and teachers. Where would I be if in the 1980's Apple IIe hadn't appeared and allowed me to learn LOGO?   (Probably in the same place)  Technology is a great asset in education.  I love computers and what they allow schools to do.    What they are not is a guarantee that learning and education will improve. Soldiers in the military can be more effective with the best weapons. Teachers too can multiply their impact with new tools. But both must know how to integrate them to do their job. Another way of thinking about it is you don't just pass out bazookas. (OK a bit of a stretch but I liked the phrasing) Schools should both pilot technology and also prepare the majority of teachers to utilize such tools. If they don't then they are eye candy and do little to substantively improve what's already happening.   

Technology adoption is more complex that it appears. Worth remembering is that these tools don't stay "new" for very long and as an example that little Apple IIe far outlasted its usefulness.  Equal access across divisions with disparities in funding might expand gaps in resources. The big business side of the adoption process shows when company salespeople court officials and saturate them with information like a DC lobbyist.

Contracts have become big money, and often cut out of the loop are the ground level educators. We (in our division) experienced this firsthand last year with a little disaster called Gradespeed.  Another complicating factor important to remember is that in addition to large up front costs there are also a continuing expenses as long as the school supports a product. Wear and tear, maintenance, infrastructure upgrades, required support personnel all can be unseen costs. What happens 3 years down the road when kids complain that computers are too slow because they take .3 seconds longer to connect?

Technology constantly changes how we operate.  It can motivate some kids in ways other approaches seemingly cannot.   Many are pushing hard for state of the art technology to completely transform our classroom.  As it does we might be wise to remember we can pay in other ways for this blind faith in technology.  A recent NY Times article stated "Even as students are getting more access to computers here, they are getting less access to teachers."  Not a good thing.  

There is a reason we still drive our own cars instead of using onboard computers.  There are social consequences since these things that are meant to connect us can isolate us as well.   Within the classroom, I know once a kid has a computer on their desk nothing you say matters. With the young sometimes technology contributes to a decline in civility.    Many wonderful teachers in the classroom struggle to keep pace with the changes and I pride myself on integrating the newest technology into my instruction, sometimes not pausing to consider the unintended consequences.

• Am I spending more time on the computer and less time interacting face to face with students?
• Are kids disconnecting from each other?
• Are we blurring the line between real engagement and entertainment?
• Does the outcome justify the expense?

There's much to consider with this panacea.

With this in mind it might be interesting to watch this story unfold and think a little more deeply about all that it affects.

Playing The Education Game

Last year I had 132 students. I was shocked when I had to fail 128 of them after they took their final examination. Only four of my students were good enough according to the standards that I set for my class, so I had not other choice than to fail all of the rest. I hope they learn a lesson and do better this year.

Some of them are very bright, they just didn't master all of the material of the course. Some of them struggle at home and I know they don't have the best support. Most of them would surprise you. You'd never guess they were failures by talking to them. They are articulate and hardworking. I bet they could even succeed in college. Too bad they can't meet the standards of my class.

Does this frustrate you? I find it frustrating. If this scenario were true, there are only two possible interpretations. 1) I am a terrible teacher and need to be removed from the classroom; or 2) The standards and assessments are unreasonable and need to be adjusted. It is that simple. I am either expecting too much or I'm not adequately preparing my students to meet appropriate standards.

The state of Virginia recently released Annual Yearly Progress data for each of its 132 divisions. Only four divisions met AYP. Across the state last week, cities and counties watched their local news to hear about more failure from our public school systems. Politicians and educrats continue to make a mockery of the institution of public education. The only rational reaction to a figure like this (128/132) is to abolish the horrible failure that is public education or get real and admit that our metrics for measuring student, teacher, and school effectiveness are inadequate.

Responding to the media, Albemarle County Public Schools spokesperson Maury Brown said, "we don't think that the worth of a single child or teacher or school system should be measured by a standardized test." Assistant Superintendent Billy Haun said, "we know as a division where we are. I can’t help how the state has chosen to look at success.” As a division, the county achieved 91% pass rates in Reading and Math. Yet for 2010-2011, Albemarle County has failed.

We can't have it both ways, the numbers are meaningless or they're not. As long as administrators hold pass rates up to their teachers and make judgments on teacher effectiveness at the school level it's hard to defend that our divisions shouldn't face consequences from the state and federal government when pass rates don't meet expectations. Individual educators and divisions alike could benefit greatly if testing data could inform decision-making, but data has become the point of education.

Looking back in frustration and ahead with hope, the second part of the quote from Billy Haun might be the most important part of the story.  Can we help how the state (and even the federal government) has chosen to look at success?  I don't know the answer to that question, but I believe that we need to try.  Otherwise we're just spinning our tops and playing games with the students who depend on us.  If these metrics are accurate it's time to stop playing safe and abolish this public education and start all over again.  If they're not, then let's stop pretending and start acknowledging the quality work produced by principals, teachers, and students every day.

We may not believe that that the worth of a single child or teacher or school system should be measured by a standardized test, but how do we uphold that belief with action?

*quotes taken from the Charlottesville Daily Progress, 8/11/2011

Teaching and Fishing

Among the things I enjoy most are spending time with my family, teaching and fishing. The only one that allows me much time for reflection is fishing. I was on the James River recently with my fishing mentor and guide. A rugged sort of man and his steely eyes rarely break from the waters surface as the river slowly carves its way between the rounded knobs that direct its path to the Ocean. He's probably forgotten more about fishing then I'll ever know. Our trips take an entire day and can be grueling if you are not ready for them. You have to rise before the sun, endure the triple digit heat, make 4-5 casts a minute for 11 hours, and sometimes dodge horrific thunderstorms to stay alive. But rowing down the river that helped spawn America trying to catch something that doesn't want to be caught is a place I really enjoy being.

We take our fishing for Smallmouth Bass pretty seriously.

He talks very little while guiding but when he does he's either yelling at me like an old school coach for letting a fish escape or sharing insights only gained from countless hours spent fishing. He's taught me a lot about the river, the land and life. On a recent blazing June day he was working hard trying to put me on some fish and his efforts granted me an opportunity to reflect as I scanned the river picking my spots. I thought a lot about the past year teaching, how tough it was and how without times like this to decompress I don't think I'd make it.

During our break for lunch we got to talking and soon our discussion turned towards my job. I mentioned at times recently working in a school was not so fun and that in a perfect world I might have what it takes to be a fishing guide. As scary as it sounds I am not certain I'd have enough patience to let others fish while I watched. Not considering that the river might be an equally tough place to work I allowed myself to compare the two jobs as I sometimes do. Guess what, here I go again. Resting on the bank in the shade that day I think I decided fishing guide might be one of the jobs that is as tough on you mentally as teaching. Stay with me.

Guides have to balance a lot of things. Maneuvering the boat among the rocks, choosing bait, bringing supplies, finding the right presentation are among the countless things affecting whether or not they are successful. As good as they are, a guide must accept that many things beyond their control play a role in catching fish. You might be the best darn fisherman in the world and still get thwarted by some external thing. The weather, changing water conditions, and fishing pressure can derail all your efforts. Some forces working against you are so powerful and complex they defy comprehension(the recent Fish kills are as scary to me as some education reform). But the most important factor in catching fish is the skill of angler you are guiding.


You can have all the ingredients in place. Right rod and reel, right bait, water, weather, fishing the perfect spot, with a huge bass just sitting there ready to bite. You can do everything right and it is still up to the person holding the rod to get it the fish to the boat. With a smallmouth that is never easy. So here is where guides and teachers share some things. In the case of teachers it is ultimately up to the student if they are going to be successful.

Teachers, like guides, have a huge impact on their "clients". There is abundant research to support the claim that teachers can profoundly impact a child's success. No such research exists in the fishing world but it is not needed. Feedback is immediate. A good guide can make or break a trip and the quality of the experience even if the fish don't cooperate. But really great guides, like mine, don't just make a difference on that day. They equip you with skills and knowledge that will serve you well into the future and you'll use the rest of your life. They make you better.

As a teacher I hope I have that same impact on my kids but after working hard, doing my best for them and trying to make them better I accept that when push comes to shove it is up to them. Sure testing provides some timely feedback but when that kid walks out your door for the last time...it's up to them. This week I took a buddy who doesn't fish as much as me out on the James. There was a boat in front of us, hitting some of the holes I knew held fish. Every bite they got was one we didn't. After about an hour and some adjustments I dialed him in on some solid fish and he did OK. I shared the satisfaction of him landing a few big ones and also the defeat when some of the bigger fish took advantage of his lack of experience.

So I did OK as a guide on this day but conditions were pretty easy. We had a great time on the river. Time will tell if I made my buddy a better fisherman. At the very least I tried to impart some of what the river and my guide have taught me. I was reminded that you need knowledge, skill, some luck, and a whole lot of patience to make it as a guide and sit there while someone else catches all the fish. But perhaps more importantly you need to be willing to accept you cannot control everything. I deal with this reality both on the river and in the classroom. The idea that as good as I am it is not all up to me might be tough for some, but maybe that's part of what makes my job and my hobby so rewarding and keeps me coming back for more. Though I will admit the paycheck and the monster fish don't hurt.

We Are Never Alone in the Classroom

I came across a site recently authored by a teacher who shares our effort to raise awareness about what is happening in education as we see it at the classroom level. His perspective is different and he has it tougher. Much tougher.

Among the provocative posts this one makes me stop and think, especially since our nation doesn't like to talk much about socioeconomic issues in general.
http://www.teach4real.com/2010/04/24/the-elephant-in-the-classroom/

As refreshing as it is to hear from someone this honest who works in a classroom, it is also unsettling. I also read this and found it equally unsettling.
http://www.nydailynews.com/opinions/2011/06/19/2011-06-19_schools_will_never_fix_inequality.html