Final Post: Slow Down, Reflect More!

      Dear Jane Doe*, (this would be directed to my ELA department leader)

I wanted to ask you for your support for a massive curriculum revision for our ELA department. I know this is only my fifth year teaching, but after being at Harper Creek for four years, I am noticing that many of our students often fail to see that what they are learning is accumulative; English needs to grow year by year.  I feel that our students often look at their core English classes as these hoops they must jump through to get to graduation rather than the building blocks they will need to grow intellectually in life.

What’s worse is that many of our students don’t seem to care about how they are growing year from year; I feel like their learning is rarely a celebration or a reflection of how much they are developing as readers and writers.  I feel like our core English courses and current curriculum have become all the same: we are all frantically reading through 4-5 classic pieces of literature, writing too many boring timed essays, and giving a multiple choice exam at the end of the semester .  I feel like we are all on a high speed train that has to cover so much ground, and you, me, our department, and our students are so stressed out that it is easier to “jump through these hoops,” rather than slow down and take the time to pause, reflect, and connect our learning unit to unit.

I feel like our kids have picked up on that too.  We are seeing more and more students accept that D- or 60% because at least it is passing—for them, that’s one hoop down.  We are seeing more students who are willing to cheat around our reading and writing expectations rather than take the time to sit down and really learn them.  I have seen this every semester when we go to read some of our core texts like The Great Gatsby or 1984.  I know you have seen the same things with Hamlet and Frankenstein. I also know you have seen our students become good at “faking” the class discussions and quizzes. It is so frustrating. I also know both you and I, and so many of our other department members, have resorted to reading most, if not all, of the books aloud in class—because, hey, at least then we know they are reading.

So, now that I have inundated you with the woes of our day-to-day classroom, I want to share with you some solutions I think will help…two in particular. Brace yourself because what I am suggesting will probably anger some of our department members: We need to change our curriculum by cutting down our classic literature novels by 50-70% and initiating electronic portfolios as an ongoing final assessment from English I-English IV.

I have been reading William E. Doll Jr.’s work (2009) and his idea of “richness”(p. 268) in curriculum creation and have wondered just how deep and rich our curriculum currently is. I believe that trying to barrel through 4-5 pieces of literature, like we are currently doing, is creating a type of surface learning that, as our beloved Kelly Gallagher (2009) would say, is “ a mile wide and an inch deep” (p. 10). I feel like we can’t truly invest in the books we teach because we just don’t have the time. So instead we teach them shallowly while also trying to teach them grammar and ACT and paragraph organization and choice reading and writer’s notebooks and…well you know how it is.

I believe we need to cut down two and maybe even three books from our curriculum and instead focus on shorter literary readings and nonfiction, choice reading, reader’s/writer’s workshop and  “soft skills.”  And yes, when I heard the phrasing “soft skills” I was anxious because I thought that might mean “soft lessons,” but I learned from a poll done in 2013 that many “Americans say U.S. Schools should teach ‘soft’ skills,” such as “…critical thinking, creativity, communication...” because they are “necessary for future success in higher education and in the workplace” ( Lopez & Calderon, para. 8). The poll also highlighted skills like “how to set meaningful goals” and “how to collaborate” (Lopez & Calderon, chart 1 ). 

Don’t get me wrong, I love literary analysis, and I still think we need to focus on teaching students reading strategies, especially with classic literature, as well as writing techniques and grammar, but I also think we need to help our students with how they are communicating in today’s very diverse technological world. We need students to think creatively about English as well as set goals beyond “reading chapter 2.” I believe that initiating electronic portfolios and making these portfolios an ongoing project from English I to English IV would be a great investment for our students.  By decreasing our required classic novels from 4-5 to 2-3 a semester, we would have more time to discuss the way students would organize their electronic portfolios and teach them writing genres beyond ACT (like blogs, personal narratives, letters, etc.).  I also would love to see students use a website like Weebly to create these portfolios to be an authentic place for students to reflect and celebrate their growth as they learn reading and writing strategies in all four English classes.

Just imagine if a student made a Weebly electronic portfolio their freshmen year and was able to revisit it in English II, English III, and English IV and build on what they are learning every year?

Now this is not something that will happen overnight.  It will take some significant professional development hours and experimentation, but I think it is worth it.  We need more time, so we need to consider cutting down the shallow reading we are currently doing.  We need more depth, so we need to show students that learning does not exist in a vacuum. We need more richness in our curriculum, so we also need to consider authentic and meaningful ways of reflection and celebration—like a Weebly electronic portfolio.

I would love to discuss this with you more and begin to plan how to share this information with our department and curriculum director.

Aren't you tired of watching so many of our students jumping through hoops? I know I am.

Sincerely,

Amber Rutan

P.S. Please refer to the following links which will show the electronic portfolios I am  currently implementing for my creative writing and AP Literature class:

http://mrsrutanhchs.weebly.com/

http://mrsrutanhchs.weebly.com/2013-2014-fall-spring-class.html

http://mrsrutanhchs.weebly.com/2013-fall-class.html

References:

Gallagher, K. (2209). Readicide: How Schools are Killing Reading and What You Can Do About It. Portland, Me.: Stenhouse Publishers

 Lopez, S. & Calderon, V. (2013). Americans Say U.S. Schools Should Teach “Soft” Skills. Gallup Poll. Retreived from: http://www. gallup.com/poll/164060/americans-says-schools-teach-soft-skills.aspx

Doll Jr., William E. (2009). The Four Rs—An Alternative to the Tyler Rationale. From: A Postmodern Perspective on Curriculum. New York: Teachers College Press. Reprinted D.J. Flinders & S.J. Thornton (Eds.). The Curriculum Students Reader (3^rd ed.).

Theme 5: Final Reflections

It is easy to see black and white here.  Literally—we often see the white paper and the black bubbles of the multiple choice tests.   It is also easy to pick one side, and zealous stay on that side and see nothing but the good, or the bad to this very complex issue of standardized testing and national curriculum—but you can’t. Or rather, you shouldn’t.

These issues will never be as simple as black or white, rather there is a gray area—and I mean a huge gray area—that needs to be considered.

I know I picked one side originally when I first thought about these issues, but we can’t try to classify the issue as entirely good, nor entirely bad.  I need to see the merit of both sides, even though that may be creating a great big hazy gray fog. 

The point is rather to appreciate this gray area as a balance.  I do believe having a national curriculum could create more accountability as well as diversity to our current curriculum. I know Common Core asks ELA teachers to explore several types of writing—like narrative and informative writing, vs. what too many teachers are focusing on—which is ACT inspired persuasive writing.  So in that respects, I see the value in CCSS.  I also believe that standardized tests give us quick and convenient feedback.  But there has to be a balance where these tests and standards don’t go too far one way or another.  We need to embrace the gray area, and find a creative way to mix the black and white together.  

Theme 5: Standards, Measurements, and Testing

Greed and Power.

Those two words seem to be the slogans for education today.   I have always know there is big money in education, and with the constant whisperings of the “school budget” with “staff layoffs” and “school resources,” you can’t help but know that money has been the fuel for our education system for a long, long time.

It’s a constant threat and pressure point; I feel like our schools are in saucepan on stove burner which is set to high, and every school district is waiting for that moment for the water to boil and overflow because there is too much to pay for, and never enough money to support it.

I did not—in my embarrassingly naïve way—realize that the greediness of the education system was also deeply intertwined with the fact that the standardized tests  we use and are so tightly bound to are also part of a “new and lucrative market”( Hoff, 24) for publishers.  I felt myself get slapped across the face when I was reading because I never put 2 and 2 together. I just realized that using tests like the ACT is very profitable for some people.  Sure, it is destroying the ambition, diversity, creativity, and passion of our children in the classroom, but hey…as long as someone is making money, what’s the real harm?

Excuse my sarcasm, but isn’t greed one of the seven deadly sins?  When has greed ever been positive or constructive?

My fear is that this type of greed is a political, social, and economical giant.  It is something that cannot easily be destroyed or changed.  And after doing our first four units, and learning that school is a basically another place for “big business,” I am worried about if this greed will ever change in American education.

It was also eye-opening to read that a “national curriculum is a mechanism for the political control of knowledge” (35) and how you could see that “in the top down curriculum…teachers and students have little recognized power” (Sleeter and Stillman, 43). I have always liked the idea of the Common Core Standards, but then I realized that it really does take the power away from me as the teacher, and worse—the students.

Students seem to have little say or choice in what they want to learn.  We have clearly seen that with what they must read, what they must write, and how they must demonstrate what they learn—which is through these standardized tests.

This idea of students and power has made me think about the attitudes of our students—they know they don’t have power or control over their educational surroundings, so they do one of two things: they resist and rebel; thus becoming those “disrupted, problem children” or they become apathetic and quit trying.

So is this what our educational system has come down to? A power struggle over money? A system where our students and future generations are nothing more than bodies to control and squeeze money out of? It makes me wonder what other deadly sins our schools will be willing to commit next.

Resources:
Here are some comics I thought would help add some humor to this my somewhat dark and tense discussion!

Theme 4: Final Reflections

We need to start thinking about our curriculum creation in relationship to an educational buffet, especially a buffet of the past verses the buffet for the future.

Currently, our students are led to this buffet with so many choices, and no directions. Very few things are labeled, food choices are mixed and matched in stomach-turning ways. The buffet changes every year, and for many of our students it feels like none of the same food appears as they go from freshmen to senior English.  And the worst of it, is the timing…students are rushed into the room, told to grab and eat on the go.  They might enjoy the food at one station, or might want another “taste,” but there is no time.  And thus, the meal ends and they go home with a devastating belly ache.

Things need to change.  This buffet needs continuity; that continuity should start with their freshmen year and builds up unit by unit, and more importantly semester by semester.  Students need to see that the lessons in English are not in a vacuum, and there needs to be more recursion.  There also needs to be more richness to the lessons and to do that we need to slow down.  Students need the chance to browse, sit down, and really digest the curriculum that is served.  We also need to think about choice—and maybe this is more for upperclassmen—and letting the students pick their own  reading so students can see they are also a part of curriculum creation. 

We all know “fast food” is not good—yet why are we still teaching a “fast food” curriculum?

Theme 4: Curriculum Creation

This week’s theme made me think about the curriculum we teach in relationship to eating out at a buffet.  Most of us agree that when you eat at a buffet, you take your time. You explore the choices, pace yourself by perhaps starting with the salad bar, and moving onto the main courses.  I think about curriculum today in the same light, but instead I feel like I have arrived at a buffet counter and I have two minutes to eat and get out. Where is the time to mosey and explore the different food options? Where is the time to browse and explore the different lessons in curriculum as well as decided which “food” choices are going to be the most “tasty” and beneficial, and worth going back up to for more?

Doll’s discussion of “richness…and a curriculum’s depth” (268) as well as his thoughts on “recursion” where “curriculum segments, parts, sequences are arbitrary chunks that, instead of being seen as isolated units, are seen as opportunities for reflection” (269) made me think about this idea of the curriculum buffet in relationship to two classes I am currently teach: creative writing and English IV.

My CW class is much more relaxed and is a curriculum that definitely builds unit on top of unit—it’s the relax buffet eating that we enjoy, where we carefully look at the strategies and options for writing/reading and those lessons are makes up the key curriculum we  go back up to for “more.”  More in the sense that we take the grammar, voice lessons etc. from the poetry unit and apply it the narrative unit, and then onto fiction. Everything has this fluid, easy progression, and the best part is the learning and experimentation I have seen every single student done this semester.  I would argue a huge part of that is because we are not bogged down by a pacing guide or tightly packed calendar, and also kids see the common threads in every unit.

English IV—well—that is a completely different story. We have been rushed. We also tried narrative like my CW students, but the lessons for narrative were in direct competition with the reading of The Great Gatsby, which was completely disconnected, and now we are on 1984 and doing research and…AUGGHHH…it is like we have thrown the salad bar, main courses, and desert all on one plate and are trying to eat it all in a few minutes time before the bill arrives.  

The richness and recursion that I clearly connect to and have seen in my creative writing class has create a room where learning is engaging and important; it has made me realize that I really need to step back and revise all of my classes to incorporate all four of Doll’s “Rs” in every classroom, as well as consider Tyler’s discussion of “educational experiences” and how they are “effectively organized” (1) so kids see that lessons from one unit still bear relevance to another.  

In the end, kids know when they have time to sit down and “digest” the curriculum verses when they have to hover it down—and that really does shape, and break, the learning experience.

Resources:

So this resource moves in a different direction to my response and addresses some new thoughts I have about school boards based on the NY Times article.  Below is a link to a website that discusses who and what type of person should run for the NY State School Board. 

NY State School Board

I know there is merit in having schools boards (like new perspectives, community involvement), but I am now wondering if the people on these school boards have the proper ethos and credibility to decide what a school should or shouldn't do.  No where on this website does it say if these people need to have a background/experience in education...and it somewhat scares me because there is an educational expertise that is needed when creating the curriculum in our schools. Also, I can see how different school board members might push some of these dangerous "hidden curriculum" items that are hurting our schools.

Theme 3B: Final Reflections

What is humanity?

Starting with that question might be the first step to better integrating the controversial curriculum that is emerging in our world.  However, defining humanity as one thing, and one thing only, is something we must be careful of as well as the hidden curriculums (like church, politics, etc.) that might diminish the humanity of others.  

It seems this discussion of humanity connects back to citizenship; social lessons are just as much a part of the curriculum as the textbooks we teach, or the standards we follow.   But these social lessons are something that I know I need, and in ways, have been trying to teach, but they seem very vague in my own district—it makes me realize that I need to find out where my own school stands on issues of multicultural learning as well as on the discussion of LGBT community.

I look at my district and realize that many students are still surrounded by these restrictive “bubbles,” and the first thing I need to ask myself is why?  I feel many parents want to protect their children from the harsh lessons of life and protect the youth and innocence of their teenagers before they are swept away into adulthood. And in many ways, that is justifiable.

However, sometimes these bubbles are created out of ignorance.  Some of that ignorance is based on the misunderstandings of culture, sexuality, and so on…

So in order to stop this ignorance, these bubbles must be broken, or rather expanded in some way—and we could start doing that by the social lessons we teach in our schools.

Theme 3B--What Should Schools Teach? "Controversial Curriculum"

(Just a reminder, I teach high school students)

When it comes to our students, we need to help them find a safe and enlightening education. We need to help burst the “bubble” that often isolates our students from the very real world. Life is filled with some hard lessons.  Sadly, we only make those lessons harder by ignoring them and leaving it to “after high school” or “at home” to figure out.

Both of the overall issues —the idea of multicultural learning as well as the gay community and culture—are lessons we need to teach. As stated in the reading by. Thornton, there is something called “ethnic content” and it “should be used to help students learn that all human beings have common needs and characteristics, although the way in which these traits are manifested frequently differ cross-culturally” (362).  The key phrase here is “all human beings”— gay, straight, black, white, male, female, and so on—all have “common needs and characteristics” and every one of American’s students deserves respect and support because every child in our classroom is a human being. 

Not to get side track here, but it burns me to hear the ways people judge and try to deem one type of humanity as being superior over another, especially when it comes at the devastating price of a child’s life because there are people who feel that being gay or being Hispanic is not part of the true human condition.

When it comes to what we teach, the ultimate lessons need to be focused on ways to promote student safety and help students see outside of their sometimes overly remote bubble (I love the idea of lessons of citizenship here).

Thus, enlightenment is crucial here.  After reading about Arizona, I could help but reflect back on my own school district. I work in a district that is mostly white, mostly suburban/rural, and mostly Christian.  I have noticed that the minorities in our school are as limited as the curriculum we teach.  We read mostly “white European dead guys” and I am afraid that the bubble my students live in is only exacerbated more by the “bubbled literature” we are teaching.  We do read books that show some of the racial issues of the past with civil rights, but we are lacking deeply—what about Native American literature? Or Hispanic? And the real hot question—what about homosexual writers or issues?

The stereotypes that we see our students use can only be fixed if we enlighten them, and help them see there is much more out there, but it needs to start at a younger age and the lessons need to be fully supported and encouraged in every classroom.  Now, I know, just thinking about my own school district, that there would be parent outrage, but can those parents look the school in the eye and say it is okay to let a 13 year old hang himself because of our currently limited curriculum?  

It proves that the only way to break these bubbles (especially, if the parents won’t) is for the schools to...because with enlightenment hopefully we can create  a safer school environment. 

Resources:
So I went more in the direction of good resources we could use to teach some of this controversial curriculum and I just taught this very intense, but very awe-inspiring slam poem called "To This Day," to my English IV students.  The poem deals with some tough issues with bullying:

I also added the name of an author that could help us break away from that "bubble literature" and move towards more multicultural learning.  His name is Sherman Alexie and I love his writing as short mentor text lessons.  I have only shared his work with my creative writing students, but I think every student should read him at least once before leaving high school.

Sherman Alexie Biography

Theme 3A Final Reflections

It appears that the system of education is a mixed bag and brings up my earlier observations about finding a healthy balance between the past educational systems and the present and even future methods of teaching.  To completely dismiss and call our old educational system as poor, ill-managed, or completely outdated is an extreme claim.  Yes, it has outdated features, and yes, it has qualities and methods that are serving a generation that is no longer in today’s 21^st century classroom, but there are some ways we were taught in the past that are still worth incorporating into our own classrooms today. 

Still, one of the most critical arguments about education is how do we structure our time and the actual “look” of the school year, and especially the school day?

 Is the block schedule of one core class every 90 minutes the best?

Or is it a more liberal schedule with a mixture of all the cores together?

Ultimately, there is no easy answer to those questions, but there needs to be more research and experimentation to find out.  Alternative methods of schooling like apprenticeship-style teaching could be the answer, but it feels like there are very few schools out there trying it.  For me, it is still a question of quality over quantity.   Right now, I worry most schools are feeling the pressure of quantity and that is overshadowing any chance of change.  But it is still important to remember that change doesn’t mean changing everything about education, sometimes a small focused change can make all the difference. 

Theme 3A: "What Should Schools Teach? Unconventional Teaching and Schooling

After reviewing this past week’s themes, I can’t help but think about my favorite hobby—scrapbooking.  Now, it is true that as soon as I get done typing this post, I will be going to my first scrapbook retreat of the year, so I my mind is a little preoccupied, but the readings connect.  I swear.

After reading through Eisner’s article, he mentioned the way our schools are scheduled and I instantly thought about my district’s 81 minute, one semester blocks.  Eisner brilliantly noted that the time table most schools employ has created an unintentional lesson and has taught some of our “students not to get too involved in what they do because to become too involved is to court frustration when time runs out” (95).  I completely agree and see it in my own classrooms.

In a way it is ironic: Here we are complaining about how our students can’t focus for a long duration of time, and yet in a way, we are to blame because we are shuffling students from class to class on a very strict time table. 

And this really does connect to my love of scrap-booking.  I only scrapbook when I know I will have the time to work on it.  It is not worth my energy to get started on a scrapbook page if I know I will only have 30 minutes to do it, and do it well.  Now granted, this is a hobby, and there are some vital differences between school curriculum and my sticker obsession, but I can really see this conflict with my own students.  I want them to workshop on papers in class, but by the time we go over the notes, and get students on computers, I can always see a group of them stop working and they will often tell me, “I only have 15 minutes left, so why bother?”

Now I know this is a teachable moment, and I do see the value in the time frames we are giving students and how it can teach punctuality, but this week’s readings make me think about the quality vs. quantity of learning our students get within our current education system.

In the videos by Mulgan and Mitra, we saw new different explorations of school structure, and it makes wonder instead of rushing through all of these required classes everyday for 81 minutes and moving them onto a new semester and even more classes, what if we slowed down, got more specific, and ask students to take the time to really hone in on something and do it well?

I know I can craft beautiful scrapbook pages when I have the time to sit down and do it, and I have gotten a lot better since I first started, and that was mostly due to the collaboration of other scrappers like myself.  Is there a way we can do the same for our students? It’s a huge, complex question, but it does make me wonder… 

10/7/13: So I completely forgot to add my extra resource on this issue--so here it is! I found the NEA's take on the block schedule and enjoyed reading the pro/cons especially being a teacher who works on a block schedule already.  I also liked reading about the trimester plan and have never seen that schedule before.  I am curious what schedule teachers prefer the most or what schedule the majority of our schools use to date.

Block Schedule

Theme 2: Final Reflections

We are living in a rapidly changing world, and our students are the same.  The momentum in which things have been changing appears only to be getting faster as new technology and the internet continue to gain influence in our society.  You have to think, when you were younger the web wasn’t around, and yet today, the children that come into our classrooms were born into a world where the web was as natural to their lives as water is to drink.

It sparks some very important questions:

What should we be teaching our students?

And how can we change the curriculum of the past to better fit the students of the future?

Technology is a large part of the curriculum question, but the even larger concern is how to still keep the integrity of the past lessons and methods of education.  It has been one of the most important questions I ask myself on a day to day basis because of the “great English works” I am suppose to teach.  The best answer I can come up with is this: I believe that my curriculum should be changing and evolving every year.  While I still believe in “great works,” I believe more in the literacy lessons that will best serve my students.  It is not all about the technology, but the rapid evolution of technology is a great parallel to the rapidly changing word of humanity, and yet the evolution of our public school curriculum is still not keeping up. 

It is something that needs, actually, has to change…and soon.

Theme 2: The History of Curriculum in the United States

“I do know that for the sympathy of one living being, I would make peace with all. I have love in me the likes of which you can scarcely imagine and rage the likes of which you would not believe. If I cannot satisfy the one, I will indulge the other.” 

When I first read this line from the great classic Frankenstein, I couldn't describe how beautiful the words were.  I was in awe. It was one of those moments when I realized how much I loved English and appreciated my ability to read.   Two years later I was reading the same line out loud to my own students and…nothing. Nothing at first, then groans, and thus began one of the most painful moments of my teaching career.

I have come to realize—and this may offend some English teachers out there—that the great works that we have been smashing down our students’ throats as a part of the traditional English curriculum is not doing our students any favors.  William H. Schubert discussed the “intellectual traditional” curriculum and how it can be “found in great works” (p. 170).  However, I have to disagree.  Trust me, I am an avid supporter of the classics like Shelley, Shakespeare, etc. (in certain context and classes) but I have seen a curriculum of great works that have destroyed the love of reading for our newest generations of readers.  We know there are other reasons why students don’t read (like new technology), but when I taught the English III curriculum (which is heavily influenced on the need to teach complex texts to prepare for the ACT),  it was devastating to see student after student say, “I hate reading.” 

I find myself thinking more like a “social behaviorist” when it comes to the curriculum.  Specifically, I agree that teachers need to “re-make curriculum in every generation by asking what successful people do, and more importantly what they need to know in order to do it” (p. 3-4).  For instance, I have been using more mentor texts by great writers—old, but also new—and having my students look at how those writers successfully write and what creative methods (grammar, sentence structure) they use.  I have also been talking more about reading strategies and how  students can find choice books students they will enjoy, with the belief that someday they will find the confidence and stamina to tackle some of those more difficult,  but great works (like Shakespeare).

I have learned that the “early decades of the 19^th century school curriculum” was “linked to the names of books read” like “Caesar or Virgil” (p.185-186) is something we still do today. But why?  Our students have changed, as has the economy and culture.  Some kids should, and will, want to read these great works, but most students just need to be taught strategies that will help them with literacy rather than trying to rush through 5-6 full length "classic" novels that have been part of the curriculum for decades. Maybe it is time to make a change.

Additional Resource:

I have discovered that this book by Kelly Gallagher called Readicide is a great fit into all this issues about what we teach and why.  While it may feel like this book is just for ELA people, it still hits on topics related to using textbooks and what we want our students to read--in all disciplines.



Readicide on Amazon.com

Quotes from the book Readicide

Theme 1: Final Reflections

I have come to really realize that the world of education is a very complex, multi-layered mammoth that has good, bad, and everything in between. At first, one can’t help but wonder—it has taken decades to create today’s public education system, so will it take just as many decades to revise and change it?

If there is any place to start, it is with citizenship. The lessons that come with citizenship could help offset some of the biggest issues many of us teachers face in the classroom—like attendance, turning in homework/assignments, and respect. But, the problem is the lessons of citizenship have been pushed under the rug as schools are trying to incorporate other conflicting goals and aims. By moving citizenship out of the shadows, and expanding beyond the social studies classrooms, perhaps we can change education for the better. I know at my school students do get a “citizenship grade” which is ranked 1-4, but when it appears on the report card, it has no impact or importance—in fact, it is located, in tiny font, on the bottom of the page where students and parents can easily overlook it.

Along with citizenship, we might need to look at the way we have create a “one curriculum fits all.” Students need to see that there are other options for learning that can fit what they want to do in life beyond high school. But, are they really seeing this now with our current education system?

Theme 1: Conflicting Notions of the Purposes of Schooling

I would argue there is one phrase and one phrase along that can instantly makes part of teacher die inside (sorry for the dramatics, but I know this happens to me a lot) and that phrase is: Standardized Testing.   The phrase itself can cut your soul, raise your blood pressure, and yet it is one of the most common phrases in the educational world.  

I was pleasantly surprised to see that both Labaree and Noddings argue the damage that standardized testing has created, as well as explain the history from which this ugly education giant emerged.   I always wondered why standardized testing became the common practice and although I knew it stemmed from the idea of economy, I didn’t realize that it is pushing a fatal form of equity for our students.  Personally, my students are testing for the at least ACT 3x in school before they take the real deal in March.  The results—the kids don’t care.  They don’t try.  They are exhausted and apathetic.  And who can blame them.

This also goes along with Noddings’ claim of how schools “value only academic achievement” (p. 443) and how this related to the bigger issue of economy and well as equity.  I don’t want to argue that one job is more academic than another, because I think that there is a set of “academics” that is uniquely different for every job field out there.  For instance, I may have a well versed English academic background, but my knowledge of car repair or computer designing is zilch.  Noddings made me realize that our definition of “academic” has been skewed and too many people think that job fields such as car repair or beauty school are not academic.  But the fact is they are. Especially because the definition of academic is related to education, or getting an education within _______.  As long as a student is learning, and being educated on how to become a mechanic, or a beautician, they are being academic—but in a different way.

The problem really is our school wants to give every student the same education (thus, the same standardize test).  We want all of our students to be the same type of academic; therefore, we have created a set standard of what academic is with core classes like English, Math, Science, and Social Studies.  My school has electives, but they are not consider “academic. ”  Even the term “elective” tends to diminish their integrity. The kid taking choir, parenting, or culinary arts is not consider as “bright” as the student taking AP Literature or Biology.

It all comes back to this statement: “Everyone needs to equal.”  But the truth is that is not possible.  While tracking is another dirty word in education, I think the idea of offering different career tracks, with different academic classes within those tracks is a better idea, and could help this huge economy crisis schools get blamed for.  I know there are valid dangers with tracking, but students are different.  Students also will pick different careers, and they need an education that matches that.  Maybe then we will see more happy students at school.  Maybe then, we will see less students drop out because they don’t see the value in “learning this algebra that they will never use again.” 

Resources:

If you have never seen this video by Sir Ken Robinson, it touches on so many of the issues that we have read about in the two articles this week.  I love his discussion of the economy and how education reform is constantly revolving around the economy issues.  It also touches on the idea of teaching cultural identity to students, much like Labaree's article talked about schools teaching citizenship to our students.  I also think this helps add onto another consequence of keeping the old educational systems, and the issues of tracking, and who is "smart, academics" vs. who is not. 

 Another discussion brought up is the idea that kids have lost their creative vibe, and I think that connects back to the concerns about if are students are happy from Noddings, as well as students who think that "what matters most is not the knowledge they learn in school but the credentials they acquire there" (p. 56).  Too many of our students have learned how to "play" school, or play the educational system. Also, too many students are unhappy because they don't have the chance to be creative, or explore other creative fields of learning.  There is so much great stuff in this video, I could keep going, but you need to watch it for yourself.

Harrison Bergeron Full Text

This is the English teacher in me, but I had to add this fictional story about "making everyone equal."  The consequences remind me of what has happened in our school systems and the fact is the way we view and incorporate equality into the school systems is actually doing more harm and good, just like what we see in this story. 

Introduction

Hello! This is my first post to blogger, EVER, and I am excited because I am going to try this for my AP Literature and Composition class also so this will be great extra practice.

My name is Amber Rutan and I am about to start my fifth year of teaching at Harper Creek High School in Battle Creek, MI.  I am also in my 3rd semester of the MATC program. I will be done this upcoming summer and have learned so much with the classes I have taken so far.  I am doing a concentration in technology which has been so helpful in my own classroom and it has pushed me to discover new technologies, including blogger.  I am taking TE 818 to get me closer to graduation and to get some more insights on teaching.

I have taught at two high schools since I graduated at Western Michigan University in 2009.  I did one year at Battle Creek Central and then got my position at Harper Creek and have been there ever since.  I teach English and the classes I teach (and love!) are AP Literature and Composition, Creative Writing, and English IV.

I lived and work in Battle Creek (Cereal City USA, and yes, you can smell the cereal cooking throughout downtown), but I moved  20 minutes south to Union City a few years ago when my husband and I bought his grandma's old Victorian home.  We have been fixing it up, stripping wallpaper (ughh!), restoring hard wood floors, and painting.  We are currently working on two rooms right now, and I am wondering why I started such a big project as school is starting back up!

My husband's name is John and we will be married for two years this October.  We have two children, well sort of, I call them my children--a dog named Edgar and a cat named El Diablo or Debers.  I will attach pictures, especially of Edgar because he is my dog-child and I talk about him way too much.

When I have time, I like to be lazy, hang out, watch movies, and sail on my Dad's boat.  The summers have been pretty crazy these last two years with home repairs and classes, but I have been able to relax on Lake Michigan and watch my DVR here and there.

 Edgar

 Debers

 John and I