merit-pay

Here is my comment to a Fox News article regarding merit-pay for Florida teachers,

"I am a teacher and gasp, for merit pay. However, I propose merit pay be based on observations, performance matrices, goals met, and a rubric evaluation by fellow co-workers, admin, students, parents, school board, and self, to truly develop a picture of the teacher. Evaluations should not be just a one-day only snapshot or biased "I didn't like you" perspective as exists in unionized schools today.
We need to rid of last out, first in. I have been a victim of this policy three times! After that, I left unionized schools (I paid my dues and was not represented because I was not tenured) and gladly entered a non-union, at will position in a charter school. I finally am recognized for my accomplishments and have worked my way "up the ladder" instead of being penalized for my opinion and need to challenge the education / unionized system.
We cannot and should not base merit pay on standardized testing. You cannot apply just one set of quantitative logic (yearly standardized test) to qualitative data (people) and base everything on that- statistically, such logic is invalid. Also, tests are based on IQ and the eugenic idea that other races and lower classes are dumb and inferior as proven by these exams, so to ensure the average and below people stay where they're at and don't challenge the system.

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/03/17/florida-governor-sign-teacher-merit-pay-legislation/#ixzz1H55Z9ReM

I wonder why so far I seem to be the only one to propose a logical solution. Perhaps everyone is so wound up over "no, that's anti-union" and "don't base it on tests" that no one has thought, well, what should we do?

Psst.. remember, don't teach too well, or else....

From Thomas Alexander's 1919 book "The Prussian Elementary Schools"
"Frederick the great as many of his successors adopted the policy that it was unwise to educate the lower classes too well for he felt that it tended to make them dissatisfied with existing conditions. The king wished for the youth to be regulated according to the needs of their later occupation and position in life. By limiting their education, it was practically certain that the boys and girls of the lower classes would be compelled to follow the same occupations which their parents followed. Prussian kings had always desired that all their subjects belonging to the lower classes be educated to a certain extent and in “such a way” that they be content with their appointed lot"

And what system did we model most of our education after? Ding ding ding, correct, Prussia! And that whole achievement gap thing....this system promotes it. A free education for all, but (on purpose) not a very good one. One that brainwashes them into servitude, under the guide of a world-class education, and the idea that our friendly government is giving us an education, something many countries go without. Be careful what you wish for. And I have a feeling most educators are well-intentioned and don't even realize they're perpetuating the institutionalization of such a classist, racist, eugenic-friendly, maintain the status-quo model.... as discussed in some of my previous and forthcoming posts.

Time for Positive

Two shoddy-quality pics from my poetry slam, mentioned below. Child's face blurred for privacy. And no those are not wine bottles.


I realized many of my posts are educational and informative (that's the purpose) but kind of...a "downer", bitter, cynical, or what have you. So here goes a happy positive post! And then back to the grind....

Last year I was asking my 9th graders who was going to go to college. I realize it is not for everyone so I'm not one of those P-16 type of teachers, but I am still pretty gung-ho about college. Anyways, perhaps 3 or 4 hands rose in a class of 28 students. I then asked why the rest weren't going, letting them know I wouldn't lecture them to persude them to go. That made them open up, and a few were wanting to join the military, one said he wanted to be a drug smuggling coyote (for which I visibly scowled) and the rest said something along the lines of, "I'm too poor" or "I'm Mexican". What what what?

So this inspired me to do some lesson changes and give a lesson on colleges, scholarships, and budgeting.

I went to scholarships.com and showed it to my class and told them, "even if you don't want to go to college, humor me and just research three scholarships and tell me about them. Maybe you don't want to go but in your research you may find the perfect scholarship for your friend!" They all went on and a bunch were pleasantly surprised....they could get free money for being "poor" or "Mexican". One student giggled about a LGBST (is that the proper acronym? The lesbian, gay, etc one...) scholarship and I told the class, if you don't "fit" the scholarship, you can still be persuasive enough to convince them to give it to you, for example if you apply to the LGBST and just show your tolerance and acceptance of all people, perhaps you'll be rewarded. For the rest of the year my students excitedly told me about the scholarship emails they received.

Then we visited some website that I forget, which helped you select your "dream college" by narrowing down your desired region, majors, population, etc. One girl really really wanted to go to a college in Alaska, much to her friends chagrin who picked a college in Washington state. It was kind of fun to listen in on their banter.

Then I decided to make a complex lesson plan (which I can't find anywhere! I lost it!) where they picked from a matrix, a career, college, (had them "pay" the average full price tuition, to promote my scholarship lesson), a job, car, home, insurance, etc etc etc and see if they were in debt at the end. They were excited to use their cell phones (banned at our school) as calculators since for some reason our math room was devoid of any, and to work with friends to problem solve on the activity. I had students "rooming together" to save money, a student "living sustainably" to cut down on costs, and a few students lost in debt and in the math, but still learning as they went. One of my more "at risk" students had the most "fun". When I called the end of class (my school doesn't have bells) she said "aww man, is it really time to go? I was having fun!" That was such a highlight for me to hear that!

Another time we did a huge unit on poetry. The culminating activity was to make a pretty poetry poster of their own compositions, and to present one in a "poetry slam". They were hesitant at first....I have to write something? And present it in front of people? So I decided to be the guinea pig and read a poem I had written in high school myself....a sappy poem I was embarrassed of, and they could see it in my blushing face. That broke the ice. That afternoon a few students, a fellow teacher, and I set up our Poetry Slam cafe. We strung Christmas lights through the wire book racks, laid down a table cloth, told them to bring in a mug if they wanted beverages (we're a "green" school so this would cut down on disposable cups), brought in cookies and tea and hot cocoa, and set a stool on "stage". My students looooved the poetry slam. I even got students, on a rotating schedule, to rate their peers on their presentation, a la American Idol style.

I do not teach this year but my past students still say we need another poetry slam...and to bring more cookies this time around.

What Students Want

I was administering an essay test which asked something like, write to your principal regarding how to improve school.
I received many of the usual things... "no uniforms", "tastier lunches", "nicer looking facilities", "cleaner bathrooms" as well as things I expected but not in the quantities received.

Students wanted more extra-curricular activities, and more clubs. They actually seemed to want to be part of the school culture! They complain in person about our long hours and "stupid school" but in reality they want our school to offer more, which would mean longer hours as well.

They want small class sizes, Luckily most of our classes are small, 20 and under. Therefore they may hate how our teachers are "strict" and "see everything we do or say" and "bug me too much" but they actually like that when they know their voice won't be heard by their peers.

They want teachers to treat everyone fairly and not put certain students on pedestals. They also don't want teachers who yell, are cruel to students, who pick on students, or who bring a cranky attitude to the workplace.

Last year we had what...80% of our staff not rehired as they were either not fully credentialed or were ineffective in the classroom. Those teachers met secretly with the students to have protests, disrupt class, call people derogatory terms in the board meetings, etc. This made for a hostile, chaotic environment where the students became friends with the soon-to-be-gone teachers and were vengeful towards all others.

And yet...in their essays many said that teachers should not be friends with students because they should be teachers.

I was expecting insight on lesson delivery, difficulty (or lack thereof) of lessons, over-testing, etc and to my surprise and disappointment I did not see that. However, what I did read was interesting and I think all teachers should do it, and allow students to be anonymous (as this essay did) so that their opinions could be heard but they would not be judged.

Socialism in our Classrooms? Yes.

From one blog to another...
http://www.missourieducationwatchdog.com/2011/03/teaching-socialism-to-grade-school-via.html or in its original version, http://www.theblaze.com/stories/socialist-mantra-hidden-in-grade-school-chants/

Basically tearing the preamble a new one, stating that all those rights are provided to, and the responsibility of, the good old government of the USA.

Bow to your master, the king, the government, my little Prussian-American school children. Believe what the books and teachers tell you, they're the experts...

I am too disgusted and infuriated by this bastardization of a document I hold so dear...I just have to stop blogging about it because I am rendered speechless with anger.

CAHSEE errors

As I was administering the CAHSEE (exit exam) last week, a student called something to my attention which I find ironic and humorous as did he. One of the questions contained a grammatical error. I do not recall the actual question but it was a was/were confusion, for example "this sentence were lengthy". You'd think a state exam, testing the high-school proficiencies of students, would check their exam before publishing it, to make sure it was high school level and free of error.
Maybe the exam "meant to do that to see if you're paying attention".

Houghton Mifflin, prescribed automaton education and then some

By now you may notice Houghton Mifflin and I are foes; mention of H.M. leaves a bad taste in my mouth. It's not that other textbooks are necessarily better, just that my experiences with HM have been anything but positive.

Do excuse me for any repetition of previous post content. I have probably 100 post ideas in my mind, a few dozen half-composed on my laptop, and a few dozen already posted and it is hard to keep it all straight. When my mind gets going, it doesn't stop.

RESEARCH BASED- If HM Reading First programs are research based, I live on the moon. (Actually I live in a neighborhood called Valley of the Moon so perhaps my analogy should change.)John Hopkins University did a study of the validity of research (statistical validity of the effectiveness/effectiveness claims) and guess what? HM did not appear in their list. Perhaps their research is invalid (i.e. "a study of three students proves... or, our own independent research done by our own people proves....) HM claims their program is scientifically-based. The progressives, many educational pioneers, and eugenic-supporters wanted to manage the population through science-based methods. Leave it to the experts, who use science (often racially and class biased via test scores and junk science) to tell you what to do. And based can mean, well, based....have you ever watched a movie "based on the true story" where only about 10% is actually based on the true story? So is HM "based on science...well....kind of...."? Well I do know this "science" is based on Prussian reading methods of "whole language" which I will explore momentarily. If only I could recall what I just did with my notes from my HM Reading First training, which stated learning modalities are a bunch of hooey, among other "gems". If I find my notes, there will be a post!

"WHERE DID YOU LEARN TO TEACH?" Yes, I was once asked this. During my first year of full-time teaching, my administrator actually asked me this. I am not self-righteous or vain but really? I was asked this because I would not follow the HM scripted curriculum to a "t". I would occasionally deviate as I saw fit because, well, I did go to school to obtain a credential and I did learn about learning styles, pedagogy, Piaget, etc. In fact, in my program we had to create an entire unit of 10 lessons without using/referencing a textbook. So suddenly here I am in HM hell and have to throw out everything I learned and "trust" what the textbook tells me? I spent $15,000 on a credential, only so I could have a piece of paper that tells me, follow the textbook? Why even teach? I could just have one of my more proficient readers come and teach the class. Heck I could outsource the book to India, have then orally transcribe it, and play the tape in class while I read the newspaper, paint my nails, go out for coffee.... Where did I learn to teach? Somewhere where they TAUGHT ME TO TEACH. Not to become some automaton slave to the textbook company.

PRUSSIAN SYSTEM OF READING: ORWELLIAN NEWSPEAK

The volkshulen(see my Prussia post) initiated a reading program, one that arguably taught not to read, or at least not very well. If you’re an educator, you have certainly heard about the “whole language” verses “phonics” debate to teaching reading, and have probably concluded that neither is effective but a combination of both, with a little more focus on phonics, is best… or so the research says. The whole language method originated in Prussia and was brought to America by none other than Horace Mann. Since Mann began “teaching schools” (such as those at the University of Chicago or Columbia) for teacher training, he ensured “whole language” was the only method used to teach how to teach reading. In addition, the reading programs in both Prussia and America encouraged age/developmental level appropriate sight words and prescribed vocabulary and sentence length. Such practices continue today in America, as can be seen in the Houghton Mifflin reading series and likely other textbooks as well. One can argue (myself included) that this could be part of “dumbing down” education. I might be going out on a limb here, but controlling language is like “newspeak” in Orwell’s 1984, which would be and was exactly the purpose in Prussia doing so.

UNABLE TO READ ON THEIR OWN I recall as a child having "SSR" or "DEAR" (Silent Sustained Reading/ Drop Everything and Read). An avid reader, this was the only part of school I really liked, and was probably the only part of school where I had choice and control over what I was to learn. unable to read on own. So of course Reading First/HM, or at least the school I was at, rid of that completely. I even asked why we went to the school library, if students did not have SSR. I also inquired why they not only were denied SSR, but why every story/textbook chapter etc was to be "read" to them on a CD instead of my reading to them, or, imagine this, they read it. I was told "the program dictates they be read to, and in Language Arts they can only do HM lessons, no supplementals such as books for pleasure. Besides, they can't read on their own, they don't know how". So we were not allowed to teach them to read independently, or even encourage it. Sounds like Prussian control to me. And they wondered why their test scores were pathetic? Conspiracy theory nut job (me) says: if they read on their own, they might learn, and learn beyond the bounds set forth for them, and they could be a threat to the system.

MY ACTUAL EXPERIENCES: I do recall mentioning these in a previous post but here I go again....word for word from my own prior post, "In the 2004-2005 school year, I taught fifth grade in Montclair, CA at a Title-1, Program Improvement, Reading First school. The student population was low SES (100% free lunch), with over 75% ELL students (in my class of thirty-some, I had one native speaker and two FEP). As many schools have experienced, we were under pressure from NCLB to raise test scores and implement recommended programs in a regimented manner to assure success. I gained many valuable perspectives from this job, as I sometimes felt powerless to teach when I had to be on the same page at the same time as the next door teacher, and had to teach word-for-word from the textbook. Certainly, low SES students whom are more likely kinesthetic learners (not to mention the language barrier interfering in linguistic activities) will benefit from a spelling lesson where they discover the patterns, similarities, and differences and then categorize them accordingly- in place of the rote-learning lesson where I as the teacher dictate the spelling terms and write them on the board in the proper categories! Oh my…I was much too innovative and wanted to change the system to help the students as that’s why I became a teacher! Besides, my brain was chock-full of ideas from my credentialing classes which taught me great differentiation skills and motivational activities "
I recall the spelling-lesson moment. Here I was to write the week's spelling words on the board in columns under the pattern(i.e. ed or ing endings), tell the kids the pattern, hand out a worksheet. I was to point to the A i sfor apple B is for ball posters to help them recognize the beginning sound of the word (I never used those posters but they made a decorative wall border). I recall rather dramatically the hum of the not-so-cool air conditioning, the buzz of a fly, the sleepy mid morning sun seeping through the tiny slit windows, and this sweltering stillness. My class was behaving (and being one often told to better control my classroom, this was a golden moment)...they all stared blankly at the board and no one peeped or shuffled. I knew better- this was not a golden moment where I'd finally managed behavior. This was a crux of scripted (Prussian) curriculum- control. They were like drones, almost hypnotized, they were so disengaged. I HAD to save them. With precious seconds ticking away, I dashed to the printer, printed out a few copies of the words, and like a magical fairy complete with a wand, I pranced around passing out scissors, words, and tape and shuffled my students into groups. They were to, get this, find the pattern. On their own. I felt like a rebel, disregarding the silently screaming words of the teacher's guide and forging my own path of resistance. I felt liberated. The students actually talked about the lesson and worked cooperatively. My goofiest boy (of whom the school had lost hope in) decided to tape the words to his shirt and laugh while shouting out the pattern. It was the most fun I'd had in a most boring curriculum. And I was hardly the rebel I felt I was since I was still using the curriculum, the newspeak vocabulary/spelling words. I got in trouble for this. I was never sent to the Principal's office as a child but I sure made up for it.

I also recall a HM math lesson on averages, mode, etc. My class just wasn't getting it, so I spent an extra day reviewing division concepts. My neighboring 5th grade teacher confronted me and ratted me out for being a page behind her class. I was then reprimanded by the principal for "teaching division, a 4th grade standard, to 5th graders". She was not so keen to my comment that if they didn't know the 4th grade standard, they surely couldn't master the 5th.

Our classrooms were to be prescribed clones....like the song, "little boxes made of ticky-tacky and they all look just the same". One wall for spelling words which remained up all year and had to be a certain size and placement. Another for vocab and pre-assigned pictures to represent them. Another for those ABC posters of which spelling and vocabulary also go under. I spent hours a week "decorating". (A book by Thomas Alexander called The Prussian Elementary School echoed my "all look just the same" classroom. See my Little Boxes post) I even got written up for having a word which was velcro-ed to the wall cut a little crooked- instead of a 90 degree corner it was say 100. I am not kidding about being written up for a crookedly cut word. In my "improvement plan" (HR lingo for "you're fired") it said "sloppy classroom."

Also, I had noticed in our little clone classrooms that they were devoid of student work, which depersonalizes the classroom, as well as making it...not praiseworthy. I always remember the pride I felt when my work was displayed on the wall. It is such trivial nonsense, but I liked it. I was told that there was no room for student work (true) and that it might look sloppy or contain errors, and students without their work up would feel bad. I cheated the system the system yet again, or at least circumvented it by having my students work on making posters for the story themes, or writing the spelling-pattern headings for my stupid (did I say that out loud) spelling wall. And surprise surprise I got written up for that because one student wrote "co-operation" instead of "cooperation". Any word-nerd may know, Co-operation is acceptable especially in British English, but that is besides the point.

And quick mention of Elwood Cubberly who was editor of many HM textbooks of his time, and he directly influenced many educational policies and methods still in operation today.

Although anyone who knows me will say, wait, you work with Data Director (part of HM) and student data and assessments and yet you're claiming all these things are evil? Yes. Keep your friends close and your enemy closer, know your enemy, and take it down from within.

But yes I am my own worst enemy...using HM DD. dialectrobly opposed to ability testing but oh well. know your enemy, keep your enemy closer.