Principal Wanted: No Experience. No Problem.

Administrators and School Boards take plenty of beatings from teachers.   My experience with both has been mixed but I don't have any complaints beyond the norm(their experience with me might be described in much the same way).  Mostly because I understand that even though we have the same goal in mind for students, we see the day to day realities of education differently.  I am sympathetic to their plight and certainly would have much tougher time without their support.  That said there are the more and more individuals entering leadership roles I don't tend to appreciate.

Want to be Principal?  No Teaching Experience?  Not a problem.

They are usually teachers, administrators or other "educrats" who are focused on getting somewhere instead of focusing on doing the job here and now.  They seem to be serving in their position only because it serves a vehicle for self advancement.  We all know the self promoting appearance over substance type who are slicker than a barber shop shave.   The private sector is not immune from the same thing but that doesn't make me feel better.   In education they seem be more disruptive.  The movement of these individuals into administrative with little consequential experience in subordinate  roles brings a cascade of unfortunate consequences for just about everyone else.

They radically change policy to provide a feather in their cap to trumpet in advance of the next move. They forgo the measured approach for the sake of expediency and instead angle and network to ease their ascension to a "higher" job.   Their consistent lack of understanding of why a teacher makes a decision or  frequent miscommunication due to the absence of been there before wisdom becomes troubling.  Simple time proven methods are swept aside as a byproduct of the lack of experience.  The unwillingness to tackle long term chronic problems that might plague schools might be another side effect.    When they do they meet skepticism from teachers concerned about what's behind such measures.  This is only natural given teacher confront too many individuals such as this who devalue their efforts.  And then there is the inability to fully comprehend all that is involved in teaching and learning and inability to provide the necessary support for students and staff.   Instead of looking around for where to help out and make things better , these folks are looking up and where they want to go. One repercussion of this is the "bad" teacher rhetoric.  A get out of accountability card by throwing problems onto teachers.  This is less likely if individuals have taught.   It is just easier to work with someone who understands your job.  Working with people who have reached higher levels because they do a good job makes a huge difference and we ned more of them, not the opposite. 

Which is why I was puzzled the Charlottesville School Board voted to amend the division requirements for becoming a principal.  Essentially they have removed the requirement that a principal have classroom experience.   The Virginia Department of Education still requires that principals have at least 3 years experience as licensed instructional personnel.  Charlottesville's requirement now reads: "The Charlottesville City School Board, upon recommendation of the superintendent, employs principals and assistant principals who hold licenses as prescribed by the Board of Education."  The state changed the wording back in 2007(?) to allow for individuals to be principals without teaching.  Not to say these folks can't accomplish anything or do good, many do both. 

So it is perhaps a stretch to say that this will really change much.  If anything it might even allow for some outstanding guidance counselors, instructional coaches or other staff to serve as principals.  I might say that if those individuals were serious about being great principals they might entertain the idea that they need classroom experience somewhere along the way.   Even so one reality is that when someone leaves the classroom to administration or some other role their view on things instantly changes.  That's OK.  Different perspectives are helpful so long as both sides can understand where they other is coming from.  In the back of most teachers heads they think "We disagree, but this person knows what it is like."   If they haven;t taught, they might think something a little less accommodating. 

I am troubled by the prospect of working with or for someone who has never been an actual teacher at some point.  I could throw out metaphors about car salesman or pyramid schemes but that would miss the point.  Principals serve in a multitude of roles.  They are educators, role models, supervisors, organizers,  problem solvers and the list goes on.  Above all they are leaders.  In the eyes of this teacher those best able to lead in education must work with teachers and those best able to do that have been teachers themselves.  

Another Accidental Racist?

"This small black person represents us before we learned all the information about it and the big gold person is how he feels after we've been enriched with all the knowledge."

Racist or Innocent?

I haven't been able to find a full story about the event depicted in the video below, but it appears to be a presentation to the Martinsville City council by a group of students from the Piedmont Governor's School about a recent survey they conducted with local residents. They created some type of "story quilt" to represent their learning. As the students presented, Sharon Hodge, the only black member of the City Council, stopped them after the comment above. After asking for clarification, she expressed her feelings of offense at the portrayal.




We're just a few weeks removed from the all the news surrounding Brad Paisley's collaboration on "Accidental Racist" with LL Cool J. Critics especially cut the opening lines of the song in which Paisley tries to justify his "confederate flag" shirt by claiming he only wears it because he's a fan of Lynard Skynard.

Likewise, I doubt the students creating the quilt intended to offend anyone by using a small black figure to represent ignorance. Does that excuse the action?

The council lady goes on to defend her actions in an interview with a local news station. She points out in the video the lack of diversity in the group- all white with all white teachers. She also mentions that only ten percent of people interviewed by the students were black in a city where the population is over forty percent black.

She clearly states that intent is not the issue.

And it isn't when it comes to racially sensitive issues. Whether I mean to offend or not doesn't change the offense. In a diverse public education system this is an ever present problem.

In the comment section to the video above, at the time of this post, only one comment supported the councilor. User name- mhairston. Anyone familiar with the Martinsville area would recognize the last name and why it is significant that it is the only supportive voice. The area has a deep history with race. Growing up white in Martinsville, I was largely unaffected by issues of race. The older I get, the more I realize how much I missed out on the meaning of race because of my skin color. I imagine the lives of black, white, Asian, Latino, etc., are all affected by race in ways that different ethnic groups are not aware of, making the risks of "accidental racism" all the more likely.

As teachers, we respect and love all of our students. We carry our own "ethnic baggage" complete with preferences and prejudices just like anyone else. But, we serve a population of students bringing all their "baggage" on the trip as well. I'm sure that somewhere along the line I've crossed the line unintentionally, but I hope that I've been able to build strong enough relationships to grow in my understanding and respect of those who are different from me.

In the end, we're all the same underneath the skin. But human interactions are skin to skin and race isn't something that can just be ignored.

I think for a white person, without understanding the history of race in the area AND without understanding the current racial experience of others it would be easy to shout this council lady down for calling out an innocent student. But, I can understand why she might find "a little black guy representing ignorance" offensive.

What do you think?

The Public Good

The narrowing conduit of online information rarely offers much more than amusement or duplicitous thought but on occasion it surprises me with a carefully articulated statement that gives me pause.  Such was the case with something I read back in December.  It contains echoes of what any decent well informed teacher might say.   

While I stumbled across it back in December, I must have at some point thought it useful, as while cleaning out my E-mail drafts this week, there it was.  I had apparently pasted the text there in an effort to reference it later.  It was dated December 17th, three days after the events in Newtown.

The full post was title "The Everyday Heroism of Our Nation's teachers" by Jessie B. Ramey.   I recall thinking differently about the post at the time but the part that gave me pause more than a month later was this exerpt:

"When I look at our public schools, I do not see a security crisis (though surely schools ought to have a security plan and follow it). I do not see a crisis of bad teaching (though we surely ought to be offering “bad” teachers some assistance, and helping others to exit the profession when teaching is not their right life choice). I do not see a crisis of radical teachers or greedy teachers unions.

We surely have a crisis of gun control and mental health services in this country. But the real crisis in public education is about a lost belief in the public good. It’s a crisis of faith in the common good served by our schools. The forces of privatization feed on that lost faith, insisting that we close more neighborhood schools and hand others over to charter management companies, that we introduce more competition and choice, that we hold teachers and schools “accountable” for low student test scores by punishing them. It’s that lost faith that allows legislators to slash education budgets and forces school districts to eliminate music and library programs for our kids. When we stop believing in public education as a public good, we allow our public tax dollars to flow to private schools and giant international corporations while we demand more and more tests without asking if our students are really learning anything.

When I look at our schools, I see teachers heroically trying to teach our students – without the resources they need, with mind-numbing canned curricula and prepping for high-stakes testing forced upon them, in classrooms with ever larger numbers of kids." 

Well said Jessie. 

On my later reading I took her comments a bit out of context.   It affects the message of what the author intended.  But that phrase public good called out to me both times.  The concept of public good seems lost in the debate about education reform(and arguably much else).  Private interests seem to be pushing us to look right past one of the main aspects of our entire education system.  The fact that it is public.  That ought to mean something.

Public schools have grown into one of most important public institutions.  They are a reflection of our local communities and enrich them in countless ways.  The same is true of private and religious schools.  This Public Good is a pillar of democracy.  Public schools, public parks, public libraries, public museums, public hospitals, public colleges, are all struggling to maintain quality as government finances are strained.  

George Mead once said

"To be interested in the public good we must be disinterested, that is, not interested in goods in which our personal selves are wrapped up."  

Adam Smith would disagree.  But surely they'd find common ground on the concept of the mutual benefit to society of certain public institutions.  I don't know that I'd go farther than Mead and say something like teachers don't care about money, but I would strongly suggest that many of the forces driving the dialogue affecting the public good, our schools are motivated by something far from a common good.  Headed by selfish groups, not moral individuals, they see schools as an untapped source of revenue and money.   Even in public/private partnerships they seek to cash in on the declining of support for public goods and substitute their interests for our own.  The growing tide where people seek private alternatives for schools, hospitals and the like is a bad sign.  But our civic institutions should not be for sale.  

Our schools and the public good should not be proprietary.  They are OUR schools after all and no one should own them.  Public monies intended to serve the public good should not be diverted to private entities seeking to benefit from this deterioration.    It is often  appropriate to pay a private company to perform work or provide services that benefit the public.  But privatizing public schools strays far from that.  The practice threatens to degrade one of our most important social institutions in the name of profit.   The social fabrics woven together in a local school are essential for a functioning democracy.    Jumping ship and abandoning the schools in favor of digital substitutes, networked classrooms or corporate managed testing plants is an abrupt and seismic change.  

The combined effort of private profit driven groups and ill-informed reformers are re-shaping the way we prepare our children for the future.  They advocate teaching in a manner that does little for the public and much for themselves.   The Common Core illustrates this point.  Not because the standards are necessarily bad.  But ask where the push is coming from.  Is it the public?  Or groups that would benefit from having one set of standards across the nation?   That could be measured with one test.  Taught with one set of curriculum materials.  They insert themselves and remove society as a whole from directing our public schools.  Marketing this cause undermines public support for schools, and potentially,  a school's ability to function and serve, you guessed it, the public good. 

 Any school that doesn't adapt and change amidst the revolutionary changes of the 21st century is indeed ill performing.  But that is a far cry from justifying the school closing, online course laden,  charter pushing, part time teacher exclusionary educational world being crafted in the wake of such change.  If we indeed are indeed to succeed together in the future we need leaders who have not forgotten the value of the public good.  We further need those that willing to 

What Does a Good Education Look Like?

Ever given any thought to that question?  Both members of the TU  were fortunate to receive a good education during our youth, I think.  This was not an accident.  It took hard work from parents, educators and even us.     Stepping back to gain a wider view might be helpful since we are all trying to provide the best for our young people.   We here at the TU have kids in public school, we teach others kids in school and obviously have what we feel is a well informed opinion.   But the phrase "good education" can be nuanced by people for a variety of reasons.  It can mis-characterized,  exaggerated, twisted, falsified, and fabricated so that other purposes may be served. Still I don't think you "get" a good education, you are given an opportunity and then earn it.

When describing a good education people use many differing phrases.  Many of these fail to frame the subject with any degree of specificity.  Instead the terms used glow with ambiguity and define things in a more general sense.  That's not necessarily a bad thing and allows for flexibility.  Effort by many to quantify and replicate what they see as a good a "good" education has produced the opposite result. This may in part be a symptom of only working towards a defined outcome.  It is OK that that phrase has a different meaning to different people and it is more about a process.  With so many buzzwords in the lexicon of education today a quick dialogue on the subject is worthwhile.   It can't hurt to enumerate some things that characterize what our schools should be about.  So let's do so from the point of view of a parent asking for things from a school for their child.


School: "Hi there!  Welcome to our school.  What can we do for you?"

Parent: "Well I have a 9th grade child starting school here tomorrow and would like to make a few requests for things I want for my child."

School: " Go right ahead."

Parent: "First off, my child is very special and I'd like them treated as such.  Just like when I sent them off to Kindergarten I want them to feel safe, loved and gain a sense of independence.   I want them treated as a unique individual with has access to caring and trusted professionals who have a say in the school.  I 'd like my child provided with a rich varied learning diet that imparts key knowledge and skills needed by any well informed  individual.  Preferably emphasizing the normal core subjects.  They'll need math and science, english and of course, history.  Throw in some other languages for good measure.  I'd like them to develop an active and healthy lifestyle so they'll need some physical education classes and also health.  I'd like to stress that they learn to read and write well.  The approach in all of these classes should be innovative but not too far removed from solid trusted foundations. They should learn to think critically about subjects and get to explore things that interest them.   I want them to view their education as an investment in their future, whatever that may be. 

Learning about all of this should help them gain a sense of their own identity.  I want them to develop curiosity and creativity.  Exposure in the arts and music certainly would help with this.    These pursuits should allow my child to grow in non academic ways and have an appreciation of art and music, even if they themselves do not have an talent for them.  I'd like my child to have access to the types of technology that aid us all in the modern world.   I want them to see technology as a powerful tool and not a shortcut.    The school should be well funded so it is not wanting for what it needs.  My child should be given the opportunity for a rich discourse on subjects and learn more than just about it and instead experience it.   

Beyond academics, my child needs to learn to work with others as part of a group.  Whether that is through cooperative projects, on a sports team, club, or in some other fashion I want them to establish positive relationships.  They'll need the skills to become a good communicator.   I want them to learn about leadership and respect. I'd like my child to be nurtured and supported when they need it and I also want them challenged and learn the value of hard work.  I know it won't all be smooth sailing so they'll need to be able to handle conflict and work through it.    They'll need to learn to persevere through adversity and disappointment and learn how to respond to and learn from to failure.  I'd like the school and teachers to be open in communicating things with me so I may aid in all of this.

I want my child to have an equal chance to pursue excellence.  They should learn about honesty and integrity.  I want them to be proud of their work. I want them to learn about  responsibility, dependability and If they don't thrive as much as others I still want them to be safe, happy and know that people care about them.    I want them to learn to be the best they can be.  Beyond themselves, I'd like them to learn to recognize their role in the school, local community and  develop personal responsibility to themselves and all those those around them.   In the end they will want to contribute positively to their community through what they learn.

These are all things I want.  I know it is a great deal to ask.  I just want my child to have a chance at a good education"




Fact is there are many ways to answer that question.  Love to hear input from others beyond this hastily compiled version.   Please feel free to share in the comments.

Be Careful Little Mouths What You Say (or don't)

Depending on the story, a Virginia teacher either removes, deletes, or outright bans the word God from the song “We Are the World” before elementary school students are allowed to perform it in concert.  All of the reports I’ve seen point to this as one more example of the public school system and its employees attempt to indoctrinate and secularize students. (It’s time for the secular social exorcism to stop) Online reports not only attack the system, but single out the teacher for reproach.  Ms. Flaherty is portrayed as intentionally removing this lyric with some type of ulterior motive of subverting the religious belief and identity of her students.

I want to offer a different possibility.  I bet that every public school teacher, k-12, who teaches science, social studies, or the arts has dealt with the tricky situation of allowing matters of faith and belief into the classroom.  Matters of faith and belief are more than just a style of clothes, taste in music, or the sports we like.  For most humans, matters of faith and belief are a part of our identity.  In a school, this is true for the students and also the teachers who teach them.  Outside, it is true of myself and most everyone I interact with daily. 

For this reason, matters of faith and belief cannot be suppressed.  Any misguided attempt by "authorities" to regulate against expressions of faith and belief will fail, and any misguided ideology that assumes faith and belief are systematically squelched is wrong.  Faith and belief walk through the doors of our schoolhouse by the droves every morning with every human body that enters.

That faith and belief are being intentionally removed from school is an inaccurate perception of the fact that any one person’s specific expressions of faith and belief are not given a special place of prominence over others.

In one year, I taught both Ancient and Modern World History.  At the beginning of each course I had to deal with parent complaints.  In ancient World History we began with pre-history and learned about the fossils of Cro-Magnon, Neanderthals, and other early humans.  To the religious parents I was a heretic, forcing kids to learn these things that don’t fit their expression of faith and belief.  In Modern World History we opened with the Reformation.  Once again, I handled parents who didn’t think it was appropriate to present Martin Luther’s view that salvation of the soul comes from the grace of God.

To one set of parents I was a secular humanist indoctrinating their children and to the other I was acting more like an evangelist than teacher.

I sympathize with Ms. Flaherty at Broadus Wood.  Full disclosure, I don’t know her personally, but we work in the same county.  She is also my daughter’s music teacher and I’ve been listening to my daughter sing and practice this song for the last three weeks, long before this story broke. 

I’m guessing she is young.  I’m also guessing that she knows how quickly people jump to the attack when they perceive you are treating their children inappropriately.  I know that she teaches at two schools, each about as far apart in the county as possible, perhaps more than a forty-five minute drive away from each other.  Holding part-time work at two different schools, she probably isn’t sure whether her job is secure for next year; if it is, she has no reason to think she will be at either of the same schools next year.

The kids need to perform for their parents.  She chose a song.  Hoping to avoid criticism and/or parent discontent she made a choice.   

It is not a religious song.  No indication in the song implies that the use of the term God means anything other than a generic, religion neutral god that would not offend the numerous performers involved in the song or the consumers and donors who might give money in response.  Several sources also critique the teacher for choosing the “We Are the World 25” version for Haiti instead of the original including the line “as God has shown us, by turning stone to bread.”

That line stuck out to me the first time that I heard the song in 1985!  As a Christian I appreciate its alteration.  It seems to reference Jesus time of temptation in the wilderness.  During a period of fasting, Satan tempted him.  “If you’re the son of God, turn these stones to bread.  You are hungry after all.”  Jesus refuses, while the allusion in the song would appear to reverse this bold resistance to temptation.

Unfortunately, the temptation to attack a teacher, for making a choice in which right or wrong depends on the particular constituent group you’re asking, was not resisted.

A secular work, not intended to praise or promote any particular faith or faith in general.  A single word, unnoticed by most until a controversy is created.  A teacher made out to be on the frontline of the public school conspiracy to indoctrinate the children of America to a godless liberal ideology.

She's just trying to help a group of children make a joyful noise.  

As for me and my house, our faith is taught in the home.  We participate multiple times a week in a community of faith to instruct and teach our children.  We send them into the world, thankful for their exposure to diversity and differing opinions that they might engage their minds, hearts, soul, and strength.  We play our role as parents and trust that our faith in God, the example we set in our lives, the prayers that we pray over our children, and the instruction they've been provided in our home and church will shine brightly in their hearts as they "work out their faith" growing into adulthood.

What Would Jefferson Do?

The absence of the word "god" from a school choir song will not diminish the presence of God in the life of my daughter any more than its addition would somehow make it stronger.

(What is the role of faith in schools? I've addressed the question from the other side of the schoolhouse door at YouthWorker Journal and Wild Frontier)

Say Something

Lloyd Dobler would say something.

If you don't, someone will.  This truism could be applied to countless scenarios but fits well the field of public education.  Fact is that there are plenty of folks out there saying stuff about education. The media, politicians, reform leader profiteers, philanthropists are all weighing in.  Most of their ideas do not originate or even consider input from teachers.  Some of these folks are more celebrity than educator.   While some know what they are talking about, there is no shortage of poorly informed ideas. 

Teachers are fond of keeping their views within our classroom walls though on occasion we pass along articles to each other originating from those that are critical of those within our profession.  Some of that criticism fuels our fire to improve.   What teachers and public schools face in today's climate though is a different animal entirely.  Getting down to brass tacks there are those out there doing and saying things harmful to teachers and teaching and it is incumbent upon teachers(and others) to speak up.

Like just about everyone else out there teachers tend to think they work really hard.  Avoiding this debate, what is agreed upon is that the teaching profession is a tough one that has a habit of wearing people down.  Lots of good talented people quit.  Not all teachers are saints.  But they are not robots either.  No great teacher goes through lessons in a mechanical manner detached from their surroundings.  The simple act of teaching involves giving.  Most people can only give so much.  Famous for what some call "whining", teachers might deserve some criticism for our self-pity.   But it is out of necessity in an effort to find support among shared hardship.  It is also true that unless you teach, you just cannot understand all the job involves.  Those who did so for 3 years on their way to getting credentialed up to administration simply can no longer comprehend like those knee deep in a classroom.  The camaraderie and awareness of what teachers need gets lost in translation, differing priorities and perspective.

These differences are magnified when discussing the contrast between those trying to shape education and those working in it.  The average teacher rarely engages directly in policy making,  choosing instead to dutifully labor in the calling they love.  This may no longer be possible given the assault on the profession.  Ill informed individuals along with powerful and self interested groups have set sights on remaking the "school" dynamic in a way more beneficial to business and their own ideological principles.  The battle front for this has been the media and in the legislature.  Nationally, at the state level and locally much is being done to undermine faith and support in one of our most significant public institutions,  the public school system.

He is a "General" after all.

The voices rising against pubic education often cite international comparisons, test data and carefully select facts to convince scores of people that in fact little is being done right.  They can be convincing, especially without response.  Unions and other education advocates have proven unable to match their volume or effectiveness or have abdicated their responsibility to maintain their influence.    They instead end up as targets themselves and are named as among the chief problems with the system.  There are causes for concern.  But we are leaving the enumeration and resolution of those to people far from the schoolhouse door.  Its analogous to entrusting military policy in the Middle East to an arms manufacturer or maybe the Surgeon General.  Or a large school system to a magazine publisher...nevermind.

The future for our schools is far from certain.   What is clear is that if substantive and effective changes are to occur teachers must speak up.  Their views and experiences must be the bedrock of the future.  As virtuous as any voices may seem if they are not formed with the thoughts of the simple teacher in mind, they are flawed.  Until such time as this occurs it is only natural that things head in the wrong direction.   The course will be guided solely by carefully selected data or knee jerks. 

Teachers must be advocates for their students and schools on a broader stage.  They must educate themselves and voice their views at a level equal to that of the philanthropist billionaires, well connected lobbyist, high minded edupreneurs and opportunistic politician if policy is to be well informed and beneficial.  The debate needs balance, reason and common sense injected.   So get informed.  Take action.  Speak up.  Now is the time for all good teachers to come to the aid of education.  If they do not, a disproportionate degree of influence will remain in the hands of the privileged connected few who lack expertise and perspective to really know what is good and what only sounds like it.

The Commonwealth of Virginia, Brought to You By Paramount

Here's the sound bite: "Tweety Bird and Scooby Doo shouldn't be making the educational decisions in Virginia."

I don't know, maybe we should give it a try, but for those who don't know-- for many years, Virginia law has prohibits schools from opening before Labor Day without a special waiver.  The law is affectionately called "The King's Dominion Law" referring to the pressure from Virginia tourism for government support by keeping a supply of tourists and employees available in the summer months.

This year, Gov. McDonnell wanted it repealed.  The bill was killed in the Senate.  It still has a chance in the House, but it would have to then go back to the Senate.

One thing I appreciate about this law is its honesty.  No one argues or puts up the front that it is good for students.  The tourism industry clearly states that it's about them, and money.  No legislators voting to pass on the repeal try to justify what's good for the kids, this is "sunshine government" at its best.

On the other side, over half of Virginia school districts already start before Labor day despite the law.  Repealing the law would free districts of the burden of applying for waivers and also allow more flexibility in the school calendar, perhaps opening the door to year-round alternatives.

Either way, it looks like Scooby wins the day.  Hey Florida, how much clout does Mickey have?

Buying The Lie

These are the stakes.  This is what we have to deal with.  The public education narrative has been high-jacked and an increasingly large proportion of the public believes the lie.  This is just a small example, but a recent report about school budget struggles in Albemarle County, Virginia provoked the following reader comment:

The U.S. spends more per child and more per capita on education than any other country. Yet we rank any where from 14th to 25th out of 75 countries in math, reading and science according to the International Student Assesment report. So, apparently throwing more money at the issue is not the answer. The money NEVER makes it to the children and the teachers who deserve it, just the beauracrats in the front office and the teachers unions.

I know this isn't NYC, D.C., or Chicago.   And the "Charlottesville Newsplex" is just a small media outfit serving a small city that could hardly claim to have a suburb.  These facts make the story even more important.  Across the nation, the public opinion is swayed by the loudest and most prominent voices that are selling the public this idea that public education is failing because of bad teachers and unions.

I don't know where the statistics quoted come from, but the "teachers unions" comment stands out the most in this geographic area.  1) Virginia is a right to work state- there is no "teachers union."  2) The supposed "teacher union" here is funded by teacher contributions, not county budget. 3) I can't speak with certainty, but it would surprise me if even half of the teachers in our county (and Virginia) even belong to the "teacher union."

Yet somehow, in little Albemarle County, an run of the mill media consumer believes that our budget shortfall is somehow tied to the problem of "teachers unions."

I don't know how familiar some of our readers are with Virginia, but growing up in southwest Virginia furniture and textile country in the 1970's and 80's, Union was a dirty word-- to employees and factory owners alike.  Unions exert little to no influence on Virginia politics, business, and society.  If that's true in the private sector, imagine what it means for the public.  I'm not taking a pro or anti union stance here, that's just how it is in Virginia.

I'm disturbed by how easily this comment reflects a public perception, colored by national media coverage, that unions are a part of the problem even when they are COMPLETELY UNRELATED to the problem at hand.  It doesn't matter which side of the reform debate is winning online.  In real life, the debate is nearly over, and America is buying the lie.

Diane Ravitch at NCSS 2011

“If enough people care, the public may learn the course is not wise, not reform and backed by no evidence.  Public Education is a precious resource that must be preserved and improved for future generations.” 

-Diane Ravitch, NCSS 2011

Diane Ravitch is a voice of reason and sanity in the politically charged and reckless world of education policy and so-called reform.  The Teaching Underground had the privilege of hearing a lecture from Dr. Ravitch at the NCSS national convention this weekend in Washington, D.C.

Conventional wisdom might brand her “anti-reform,” but in reality the term educational reform has been high-jacked and turned into “testing, accountability, and choice” at the exclusion of meaningful reform seeking appropriate ways to “develop qualities of heart and mind and character to sustain our democracy for future generations.”  The Teaching Underground is ready to steal the term back and label Diane Ravitch as the voice of true reform in American education.

After hearing Ravitch’s talk we jokingly said to each other, “she stole all of her material from the Underground.”  Since our arrival in the blogging world in October 2010, we’ve learned that every challenge we’ve faced at the local level is rooted in the national education landscape.  Like Ravitch, our primary hope is that people would care, and by caring, the public will learn that our present course of educational policy in the United States often guised as reform is really no reform at all.

Ravitch’s lecture at the NCSS Convention centered around a dozen or so questions.  (I was typing fast, if you were there and see that we missed a question let us know.)  Below are the questions Ravitch addressed.  We've included a few links to related posts on the Teaching Underground.  Feel free to offer your reactions to the questions, and if you were at the talk, let us know what you thought.  We'll post about some of these topics in the months to come.

Are we in crisis?
-one of the very first posts on TU: Are We Failing?

Should public schools be turned over to private management?

Why not have a free market of choices for parents and students?
-these two questions were addressed in our post Breaking the Public Schools

Should public funded schools be allowed to make a profit?
-in April we discussed The Education Marketplace

Should teachers get a bonus for higher test scores?

Will test scores go up if teacher evaluations are tied to them?

Should student test scores ever be a part of teacher evaluation?
-each of these three questions remind me of the post Why You Should Care

Should NCLB be reauthorized?
-among other posts addressing NCLB, here is 2012 or 2014

Will Race to the Top transform?
-it will certainly transform something, here's a post on NCLB Waivers and Race to the Top

Should teachers and principals have professional training?

Will competition improve schools?

Basic Ideas of Education...I mean democracy

Once upon a time before NCLB, I actually taught government. Then I was told I didn't.  Just that simple(in a related twist Turner was told he did).  The details of why are lost among the recesses of my mind but I was  reassigned and not because of anything I did.  It was a result of NCLB language.   As a younger teacher it takes time to build a library of resources. Thus I relied heavily on the textbook in those days.  So maybe I didn't meet the term "highly qualified" by my degree when I started but what new teacher ever does?   I thought 6 years would have earned me that label.  I was wrong.

Cleaning out the room last summer I came across some of the materials I used teaching government once upon a time.  I recalled working hard to convey to all my senior students key ideas about our great nation.    Liberty, Freedom, Opportunity and all the other cool stuff that makes us who we are as a country.  It reminded me that I struggled with the constantly changing landscape of the politics.  Elections made it hard to keep up with the faces and names.  I learned quickly to steer the focus of my students to the bigger ideas of our democracy.

One thing I constantly stressed with my kids back then was that they mattered.  Once they turned 18, and even before, they could make a difference.  Their voice, their wallet, their time and of course their vote were all ways to make an impact.  I tried very hard to instill in them a sense of political efficacy.  Beyond that I tried to convey that there is a common set of beliefs that somehow weaves us all together as Americans.   As I examined an old notebook of mine and weighed its fate, some of the materials caught me eye.

One section I had written said:
Basic ideas of Democracy
    1. Worth of the individual(respect all people, make sacrifices for group: like taxes)
    2. Equality of all persons(does not mean all have same abilities, all should have an equal chance      and same under law)
   3. Majority rule, minority rights(usually make correct decisions, must listen to minority)
   4. Need for compromise(blending of different views, important to freely express ideas)
   5. Individual Freedom(everyone given freedoms but they must be limited, complete freedom would result in anarchy, democracy balances freedom and authority)

That pretty much sums up a great deal of what this country is about.  Oh and the fact that we are awesome...that part I left out.  As I sat my mind wandered to how I would deal with today's political climate if still teaching government.  What a challenge I thought.  Or is it?  Politics certainly enters my classroom discussion from time to time.  With 9th graders you have to tread a little lighter than with 12th graders.  I'd describe the grasp of politics for most of them as knowing just enough to be confused or dangerous.  But I sense they also share a love of our nation coupled with a growing dislike of the political tensions within the government running it.  Left or Right it doesn't seem to matter. 

These thoughts of our government segway nicely to thoughts about education.  We live in a nation that sees fit to place the important choices in the hands of those farthest from the classroom, farthest from the students, farthest from the parents and farthest from the impact of those decisions.  To paraphrase JFK "the very word secrecy in a free and open society is repugnant."  This approach has come to symbolize our country’s educational management in many ways.  Small numbers of people with a great deal of influence.  Dissent is dismissed or silenced not welcomed.  The idea of questioning things and being able to ask questions and get answer is intertwined with independence is the seed that made this nation strong. Within our many of our nations school systems that idea has been stifled and confined by a desire to control or micromanage, much to the detriment of our children, our schools, our profession and our future.   Top down decision have become the norm.   Nationally there has always been concern about ceding too much control to those at the top and the practice is reserved for extreme crisis.  Existing or manufactured that seems to have been the case in education. 

There are a handful of professional endeavors as noble as to teach the young.  That is not to say teachers are in any way better than any other member of our society.  But is an acknowledgment that they perhaps best understand how to educate. Why is it then the financing, structure, and curriculum of our schools is controlled by those who no longer work in a school?  As flawed a model as there ever  was.  

Our democracy allows for each of us to find his or her own path and pursue it as we see fit.   Pity it does not allow some of these same freedoms within our schools. I guess there's good reasons for this.  But it could be argued that schools are now operated by the ill informed who do not visit, ask or experience before making decisions. Who follow the reform of the hour with no accountability as to the result.  Who make decisions without enough concern or understanding.  Subject to be  misinformed either intentionally or out of ignorance . 

Our schools are not political capital..  They are not an intellectual laboratory.  They are not static.  They are not perfect. They are not all truly failing.  And most certain of all most people in them think they are not currently being well led from the top.   Failure here lies with anyone who does not recognize the value of allowing our schools to create their own identity, community and pursue it to best serve their own kids.  

What all that venting reveals is I have a low sense of educational efficacy.   Surely I make a difference with my kids.  But it grows increasingly more difficult to do so as well as I used to. 
Whether it be new testing, curriculum, value added, compensation practices, treatment of longtime employees, resource allocation, over-reliance on technology, a disconnected leadership structure, poor evaluation systems, promotional practices, privatization of public school funds, reform policies in general, they are woeful when compared to what could and should be done. In short it just seems a lot going on here is contrary to much of what is on the list above.

Watching Chaos

I admit my attention span is short and I'm tired of hearing or using the word Occupy.  But I don't tire as easily when discussing or informing my views on education.  It is in this context that the following video becomes relevant.  Imagine if you will entering a classroom where the teacher is disengaged, irrelevant and unresponsive to student needs.  Then compare that to what occurred at a Panel for Educational Policy(PEP) meeting in New York recently.

Is what we are watching a response by a public that sees leaders as disengaged, irrelevant and unresponsive?   Has education reform become too reliant on Top Down decisions in pursuit of desired outcomes?  How are these top down decisions being perceived by stakeholders?     Are the few creating a process that ignores the voices of many that could affect lasting and positive change?    Will this closed process engender support or further alienate decision makers?   Is this approach consistent with the ideals of democracy?  Shouldn't we expect more from our leaders?  





Love to hear some comments after watching.

How Much is Too Much?

Let's dismiss for a moment all the academic things schools do.  I suggest this since I admit readily that kids learn as much  (perhaps more) about life outside of my classroom as in it.  I strongly believe that the rich nature of the experiences that kids encounter in school best enables them to succeed and thrive.

But, that is not why schools exist.  Schools were created to teach our young people what society determines they need to know.  For better or worse, this is how students and teachers are measured.  If a kid does not "get" what they need, the school shares an increasing amount of the responsibility.

In recent years the pressure has grown to maximize what kids learn.  Few would argue with the idea that we should try to teach all kids more.  What sometimes goes unnoticed is the price paid for such efforts and uniformity and even volume.  NCLB was clearly motivated by efforts to better serve populations that were traditionally underserved in public schools.  But it turned into a monster that must be fed. 

It’s not as much about what is taught as it is about what is measured.  We grew so eager to measure what kids learn that we’ve made the measurement the point.  With so much additional focus on testing, something has to go to make room.  Trying to keep good, fun, quality learning becomes a greater challenge by the day.

So, something’s gotta give.  There is just not enough time.  We could go to school every day all year. The problem would still exist.  

 Time has come today

Young hearts can go their way

Can't put it off another day

I don't care what others say

They say we don't listen anyway

Time has come today

Those are prophetic words indeed.  I see the relationship of these words to education as we continue to fit more and more into a full glass.  The constant is not the length of the school day or calendar, it is the fact kids are people.  More accurately they are young people.  They need time for themselves.  They need to decompress.  They need downtime. 

Each year it seems we ratchet up the pressure on them to do more to the point where the phrase joyless childhood might even apply to some.  Though I think of Chinese schools first with this description, I hear more and more from anguished parents and students who are reaching the breaking point.   

Most conversations about time come back to the topic of how much time students spend on homework.  I am aware that homework now consumes a significant portion of my students’ lives.  They have trouble finding the proper balance.  For too many it amounts to spending too much or none.  I always laugh at how we now control their access to sugar, fried foods, websites and the like but don't seem to recognize or seek to help them choose an appropriate course workload.

So how much is too much?  With 9th graders it is among the most commonly asked question. 

Our division moved from a schedule of seven periods to eight periods two years ago.  Is this too much?  Who knows, but is certainly has become for a number of students.  Maintaining high standards and continuously increasing achievement with a greater volume of coursework conflicts with some basic notions:  We want kids to enjoy school so that they choose to participate, we want kids to develop a love of learning, we want kids to be kids and have the freedom to explore a diversity of opportunities outside of the school environment.

A recent article from the Atlantic puts a focus on how much this emphasis on quantity and volume of instruction might impact our children.

"Since about 1955 ... children's free play has been continually declining, at least partly because adults have exerted ever-increasing control over children's activities," says the author Peter Gray, Ph.D., Professor of Psychology (emeritus) at Boston College.  

Even in the form of additional opportunities and offerings, educational requirements are adding to the ever-increasing adult control of children’s activities.

The article concludes by saying:  

   

When parents realize the major role that free play can take in the development of emotionally healthy children and adults, they may wish to reassess the priorities ruling their children's lives. 

Perhaps it is not only parents who need to reassess priorities.

  

This article on "Play" of all things helps keep things in perspective.  

http://www.theatlantic.com/life/archive/2011/10/all-work-and-no-play-why-your-kids-are-more-anxious-depressed/246422/

Who to Trust? Teachers or Rupert Murdoch

In reading a recent TU post one might presume that we support or encourage protests and similar anti-authoritarian behaviors. While free thinkers, the TU is rather conformist most of the time and color in between the lines more often than not, especially professionally. We do enjoy a good Youtube riot video as much as anyone and there's plenty of videos of the protest in NYC and elsewhere.   But that's about as close as we like to get. It took a while to arrive at my point but I am heading towards proving that the TU in some ways sees things from ground level(below ground actually) and perhaps more accurately.  We are closer to education than most folks who talk about it.  That is simply something you cannot dismiss in the conversation about education and its future.  We are deeply concerned for the future of our schools.  We are not alone.

Rupert Murdoch has had a lot to say recently on this subject of education and seems to want to move his company closer to it.    He is a smart fella but I think on the subject of education...I might be smarter(I'll pause while you soak in that statement).  His view is blurred by his business mindset and motives and the highlight reel experience he no doubt receives when he visits a school.  Think for a second about why he is starting to talk a lot about education all of a sudden.    My view is blurred by where I work.  You know, in a school with kids.  Its a pretty good school and despite its shortfalls it ends up turning out some pretty amazing young people.  So who has a better feel for what's going on?   One of the most powerful men in the world, or me?  He got shouted down at a recent speech by some folks perhaps as frustrated as we are with the current direction of many reforms.  I can only speculate on their motives.   I think because they resent a lot of current change and he makes a convenient target.  I've been shouted down too(most often by an irate teenager).  I guess that's where the comparisons end.

Did he deserve it?  Well I think he shouldn't expect people to ignore who he is.   Based on his record,  we should be at least suspicious of his motives.  Those people(if they were teachers) probably got all "protesty" because we in teaching are now hypersensitive to people telling us how it should be.  Especially people from the business or political world.   I like to think if Murdoch spent a day with the average American teacher he'd realize a few things.  Not the least among them is that teachers know how it really is better than anyone else.  This that idea classrooms and the teaching in them have not changed 50 years is more than a slight misrepresentation of fact.   Of course someone must guide kids through their education...they are kids after all.  The classroom dynamic has not been as fluid as in other sectors of society like our economy and that is not all bad.  I know TU''s resident thesis man(Steve) could more successfully counter his points but I will attempt to do so none the less. This is not because we feel threatened and want to attack or justify our point of view over others(though deep down that may be why).  It is in the hope that it will foster a greater understanding of what we see as part of the problem. 

To begin, WTF?  My favorite acronym as an expression of disbelief.  (To maintain our PG rating I'll explain it as What's That For?)  Hey Rupert Murdock...WTF?  Are you living in a bubble?  How dare you try to simplify everything and reduce the mission of our schools solely to an academic pipeline of global employees.  Schools aren't companies.  The goal is not profit.  The goal is people.  That alone pokes some big hole in Murdoch's bucket.  Harlem Success is great.  Many charter schools are great.  No doubt so are the schools you mention in your speeches.  But before we go dismantling one of the most significant social and cultural institutions anywhere in the world let's give some forethought to the potential consequences.   Let's also not do so because people like Murdoch have convinced us they are all "failing." Instead consider how current top down changes are hampering efforts to do quality work in our schools. Many reform attempts have led to regulation  and "improvements" that have buckled some pretty great things schools did. Many of my colleagues will admit we do not feel the quality education we are providing today is not exactly what it was even 5 years ago. 

I will admit some of my objections to his and similarly framed ideas were originally based on their potential impact on my profession.  But with careful consideration I object on a far deeper level.  The idea that learning can be so easily manipulated and controlled is a dangerous one.  If I learned anything as a teacher its that things are usually more complex than they appear.    Demanding more from everyone does not equal an increase in quality output.   Programs and results may at first appear valuable and look good on paper, only to yield under closer examination or when implemented.   I have seen this firsthand with numerous online learning programs. 

The intent to profit should never be a consideration in our decisions on education.  But it has crept in slowly and as such we should place more scrutiny on reform ideas that involve public funds to private enterprise.  One approach being pushed from the Murdoch camp is to use technology to remedy our ills and make things better.   Education is far too complex a process to digitize and then plug a child in to some software.  That is information, not education.  Standardized test may show acquisition of knowledge but what has been lost?  Hard to tell as most modern measures of learning are subjective.  What's being measured?  How? Under what conditions?  Using a test?  Are the measures fair and equitable?  What's the wisdom in that?   Bottom line is this:  What motivates Murdoch and Newscorp is clearly making money.  What motivates teachers is what is good for kids. 

At 6:20 he starts to lay out main ideas.


Specifically Murdoch contentions are that "The Key is Software" and we can do better by creating a "More Personalized Education."     I wasn't as sure about his 3rd point since he is boring but it seemed to be simply using analytics to give kids access to limitless resources catered to best suit them. Thus they wouldn't be stuck learning at the same pace. I suspect it was something about how asynchronous education is the key.   Sounds great.  Who could argue with those ideas?  Me.

Distance Learning, Virtual Classrooms or whatever they go by have obvious advantages.  I sat so far back in one survey class in college it could have been considered distance learning.  I've also taken a few real ones and they served their purpose.  Can't say I learned a great deal that stuck with me though.  Their growth in recent years has been exponential.  Driven in part by the spiraling costs of higher education. While quite different in business approach and market, for profit higher education like the University of Phoenix illustrates how such an concept has supporters and detractors.  I remember a piece PBS did on Michael Clifford a while back that I found very informative.

But do not mistake access to information for a learning community.  There are problems with the any technology. On the front end there are always going to be kinks and bugs or issues with the transition.  Is the infrastructure in place in many of these locations to support the volume of traffic?   There are issues with the access, maintenance and reliability.  These will be less significant as schools integrate more and more digital resources over time.  The trend is for high ranking administrators and those at the top to view technology as the perfect solution.  It becomes a symbol for a "quality" education.  Teachers and learners more often think that while useful, these experiences are no substitute for face to face interaction.    In business terms a shift in this direction would be akin to expecting online shopping to replace brick and mortar schools.    Over reliance of technology can be problematic.  Forgive me for not trusting a billionaire but is it truly cost effective in the long term for our society?  This Education Marketplace mentioned by my colleague what's being sold here?  I fear it is our future. 

Once we are reliant on these technologies and systems, who controls the curriculum and any needed shift?  Who is held accountable for the quality?  A test might tell you whether a kid "learned" but what if they didn't?   Experience tells me that the under-performing kid in a traditional classroom might encounter even more issues in a virtual one.  Not all kids are motivated or mature enough to go this route.  One of the biggest hang-ups with our neighboring district's BLAST initiative has been parental approval and sign-off.   These issues were unforeseen by planners.  Not so for those with daily interactions with the learners and their parents.  We see things.  One advantage to synchronous learning is that it allows students to collaborate and support each other. This builds a sense of community with their peers, teachers and school.  Skilled individuals can yoke this and use these communities as a source of motivation and pride(just read the last post if you don't understand).  One can create online communities.  Its just that they not the same.  Part of the equation maybe but not the answer.  They should not be elevated to anything more than just a tool to help improve education.
 

Should computers replace people in learning?  In a normal environment computers are usually powerful tools.  The one thing schools are not is normal.  In this landscape teachers and people are more reliable than technology.  When problems occur I trust people.  When kids act up you need people.  When a kid needs encouragement and support you need people.  Murdoch is wrong to think that companies or software can do better with all of our children.  Most young people are significantly more dependent on adults than what those who don't deal with them everyday think.  They need people they know to help guide them.  Children need adults to learn from and they need relationships with these people to apprehend their world.  I don't really want to send my kids to an Apple store for their education and that seems to be the promise being extended here. We should approach with caution the Walmart of Education mentality as the cost vs quality balance should be important but shouldn't tip too far towards reducing costs.   A "one stop select what you want digital world of learning" isn't that far off.  But it would be a sad shell of what we could do. 

Is our nation doing as well as it can?  Certainly not.  But I don't so much worry about that.  Parents don't worry about that.  We worry about our own kids in our own communities.  I worry about how ideas hatched by those who don't teach real people could affect what we are all trying to accomplish.  Comparisons to Asia or elsewhere are thus less relevant to most of us normal folks with our feet on the ground.  Murdoch and others explain away the difference in achievement as simply a product of the school and education.  All responsibility lies with the schools.  Well when no one else takes on the responsibility for kids schools I guess should.  But be careful about how then you judge the result.  

Murdoch's Motives
I am more than a bit curious about why Mr. Murdoch has turned his attention to the plight of poor schoolkids.  We are after all talking about the same guy, head of Newscorp responsible for the British phone hacking scandal. A ruthless corporate pirate with billions to show for his efforts.  But also a charismatic convincing guy and if I wasn't a teacher I think I'd listen to what he had to say.  That thought frightens me.    He lists examples of innovation and suggests and path to the future.      Enter "his company" as a medium to access this.  See the problem? 

I think Murdoch thinks of education as a cash cow.  I just have an ideological problem with the idea that knowledge is proprietary.  And make no mistake that is the backbone of this idea Murdoch is talking about.  Competition instead of collaboration.  For profit and education...those two concepts are irreconcilable.  When push comes to shove Return on Investment will be factored in above learning when decisions are made by businessmen and not educators. 

Even more disturbing is how people can misrepresent what is taking place.  It has become a cyclical blame game where the most influential carries the least blame for under-performance. I suspect no one is entirely correct in what they think is happening since most views are either too global or too local to know the reality.  I know that some kids just aren't learning.  I'd argue about why.   Here's more reasons to be wary of Murdoch.  What works in some places won't work or even be able to be replicated everywhere.  Education is only as important as any individual thinks it is. 

Where do we agree?
Schools have to adapt, change and improve.  Technology will and should be part of this.  Too many kids aren't getting what they need.  So we can and must do better.  But it doesn't start at 5 years old or end when they graduate or even end when the bell rings to dismiss for the day.  It doesn't simply entail giving them access to knowledge.  Technology will never replace a teacher.  It is a tool and in the right hands empowers individuals to do and become more.  Both student and teacher.  It can also alter things in unforeseen ways.  At my 4 year old's soccer game this weekend I watched at least 3 parents engage with their I-phones  more than their kids.  Sad.  Does Murdoch throw this little tidbit in his speech about "human capital" and teachers to disarm us or does he really mean it?   Who knows.  All I know is that if the choice is that every kid is indeed a valuable and unique individual.  To truly educate a kid you have to get to to know that kid.   All I can do is try to remember that on a daily basis and whenever and wherever I can try to inject some sanity into the conversation about how we ought to be teaching our kids.

In a future post maybe I'll attempt to knock Bill Gates off his educational pulpit.  Whatever the subject the one thing I think the TU prides itself on is the ability to conduct civil discourse.  Disagreements today seem so polemical that the ability to talk freely with someone who disagrees seems a lost art.  Especially when they stand to realize we are right.  :)

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.

Quick Roundup and Apologies

Sticking with the current events theme of some recent posts, there continues to be a great deal of conversation about the Occupy Wall Street movement.  More of that in a second. The TU was at the annual "Making Connections" conference held by our division at one of our local High Schools. We indeed connected with our fellow educators and  in an usual occurrence ate lunch above ground.  Bad news is that Harold Camping has revised his previous prediction.   Just when you thought things were looking up, we learn we are all doomed once again.  

In an conclusion that can be described as equally relevant, Newt Gingrich appeared on Face the Nation and commented...

"We have had a strain of hostility to free enterprise and frankly, a strain of hostility to classic America starting in our academic institutions and spreading across this country," he added. "And I regard the Wall Street protests as a natural outcome of a bad education system teaching them really dumb ideas."
Comments from to 5:10




As a member of this bad education system let me be among the first to apologize for anything else I am responsible for.  I'd add that Mr. Gingrich does better job as the former House Speaker than he does as an analyst on things, especially education(Dennis Hastert would never throw me under the bus like that).   I can certainly be criticized for some things I have done or have not done as a teacher but I think one would have to stop just short of blaming me(or any teacher) for this protest.  For the record I support free enterprise and don't want to share any wealth, especially mine.  But there is plenty of evidence socio-economic level is something that impacts education(I agree).

Speaking for myself I do believe that the government should when necessary compel our citizens to act in the best interest of our nation and not always for themselves.   The debate comes begins when we discuss how to best go about that.   I start with the  Constitution,  a brilliant creation of mankind that attempts to balance the needs and rights of both individuals and society as a whole.  Does a darn good job I might add.    This is among the dumb ideas we teach.   (Not among these is the idea that the Congress can "ignore" Federal Judges as Mr. Gingrich later stated. )

We asked around and what follows is a list compiled by experts on the events of the past year that can in fact be traced to actions of the TU.

(Feel free to add a comment with what you've done over the past year that you are either sorry for or proud of.  Funny or not.)

Oprah Retires

The Arab Spring

Jonas Salk invents the Polio Vaccine(we read this on the internet so it must be true)

Brette Favre Retires(again)

 The Miami Heat fail to win the NBA title(healing Cleveland's wounds)

The Text Neck Institute is Founded(yep...it's real    http://text-neck.com/   )

Rebecca Black's Friday becomes less popular

 

The NFL Lockout Ends