Racial equity is important, but it doesn't trump the right to excel

 James S. Robbins is another voice of sanity in the education debate.

The intellectual nadir of the attack on achievement is the emergence of “ethnomathematics,” which seeks to “dismantle racism” by promoting notions such as math not being objective and deemphasizing the focus on getting the “right answer.” The Oregon Department of Education promoted a professional development course on Equitable Math Instruction, and the California draft Mathematics Framework document promotes these concepts.

 

This strain of thought would have the practical effect of giving those students who struggle with math a moral justification for not getting any better and notifying those who are gifted that there is probably something wrong with them. If this framework spreads, it could condemn a generation of children to irrelevance in science, technology, engineering and math fields, where the right answer is not a matter of opinion.

Contrast the ethnomathematics message with the inspirational subject of the movie “Hidden Figures.” That film lauded the contributions of three African American women working for NASA in the early 1960s, using their superior math skills to support America in the Cold War space race while overcoming segregation-era institutional racism. This is the type of uplifting math story that kids of color need to hear, not divisive nonsense about how having to “show your work” is inherently racist. 

We need more sanity.

The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation - Contributing to the Dumbing Down of Math Education.

 I found this article a few days ago, and I was going to post a short diatribe, but you know how it is. You get busy. Time gets away from you, and moves on. Time cares for none of us. The article is from Fox News about a teacher program in Oregon that "seeks to undo 'racism in mathematics.'"

An ODE newsletter sent last week advertises a Feb. 21 "Pathway to Math Equity Micro-Course," which is designed for middle school teachers to make use of a toolkit for "dismantling racism in mathematics." The event website identifies the event as a partnership between California's San Mateo County Office of Education, The Education Trust-West and others. 

Part of the toolkit includes a list of ways "white supremacy culture" allegedly "infiltrates math classrooms." Those include "the focus is on getting the 'right' answer," students being "required to 'show their work,'" and other alleged manifestations.

"The concept of mathematics being purely objective is unequivocally false, and teaching it is even much less so," the document for the "Equitable Math" toolkit reads. "Upholding the idea that there are always right and wrong answers perpetuate objectivity as well as fear of open conflict."

The ODE, led by Colt Gill, confirmed the letter to Fox News. ODE Communications Director Marc Siegel also defended the "Equitable Math" educational program, saying it "helps educators learn key tools for engagement, develop strategies to improve equitable outcomes for Black, Latinx, and multilingual students, and join communities of practice."

Here is a link to the Dismantling Racism workbook. Going through it, I learned that "worship of the written word promotes 'white supremacist thinking' and is one characteristic of white supremacy," which apparently is rampant in American society.

• if it’s not in a memo, it doesn’t exist 
• the organization does not take into account or value other ways in which information gets shared 

• those with strong documentation and writing skills are more highly valued, even in organizations where ability to relate to others is key to the mission

Another characteristic of white supremacy is objectivity.

• the belief that there is such a thing as being objective or ‘neutral’ 

• the belief that emotions are inherently destructive, irrational, and should not play a role in decision-making or group process 

• invalidating people who show emotion 

• requiring people to think in a linear (logical) fashion and ignoring or invalidating those who think in other ways 

• impatience with any thinking that does not appear ‘logical’

In the toolkit, entitled "A Pathway to Equitable Math Instruction Dismantling Racism in Mathematics Instruction" we learn that teachers should

DESIGN A CULTURALLY SUSTAINING MATH SPACE 

• Use culturally relevant, antiracist pedagogy, practices, and curriculum. 

• Cultivate mathematical identity so that everyone can see themselves as mathematicians. 

• Adapt homework policies to fit the needs of students of color. 

•Recognize and name the mathematical successes of students of color, and teach them to recognize successes in themselves and others. 

• Intentionally integrate physical movement in math classes. 

CENTER ETHNOMATHEMATICS 

• Recognize the ways that communities of color engage in mathematics and problem solving in their everyday lives. 

• Teach that mathematics can help solve problems affecting students’ communities. Model the use of math as a solution to their immediate problems, needs, or desires. 

• Identify and challenge the ways that math is used to uphold capitalist, imperialist, and racist views. 

• Teach the value of math as both an abstract concept and as a useful everyday tool. 

• Expose students to examples of people who have used math as resistance. Provide learning opportunities that use math as resistance

There are 82 pages of crazy.

Teachers already have enough to do in the classroom without adding another layer non-educational indoctrination replacing teaching and engaging in the further dumbing down of American education, especially when so few high school graduates currently are proficient in math.

Making this even worse is that this program was paid for by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.

A radical new push to purge math curricula of allegedly racist practices like showing your work and finding the correct answer is bankrolled by one of the nation's most prominent nonprofits: the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.

The Gates Foundation is the only donor mentioned on the homepage of A Pathway to Equitable Math Instruction, a group of 25 education organizations whose curriculum states that asking students to show their work and find the right answer is an inherently racist practice.

Over the past decade, the Gates Foundation has given upward of $140 million to some of the groups behind Pathway, whose antiracist resources are the basis for a new teacher training course offered by the Oregon Department of Education.

The Education Trust, a California-based group that promoted the September release of Pathway's antiracist "toolkit," has received $86 million from the Gates Foundation, including a $3.6 million grant awarded in June.

Teach Plus, another group dedicated to creating an antiracist culture in K-12 schools, has received more than $27 million from the Gates Foundation. The group's board members include former Democratic congressman George Miller and Obama-era secretary of education John King Jr.—who is also the president of The Education Trust. 

I wonder, with these new obstructions to math education being added in Oregon, and which will surely be added to other states' math curricula, how many potential Microsoft employees will have their math skills hobbled to the point where they have no chance of performing the tasks necessary to work creating the next generations of computers, programs, phones, and other high tech gadgets. 

Bad Education

 The Philadelphia public school system has decided that it's just not that important to teach children to read or do math. Other lessons are more important.

In practical terms, it is unclear how these “antiracist” programs will translate into academic outcomes. The gap between rhetoric and reality at schools such as William Kelley is almost beyond comprehension: the vast majority of the ten- and eleven-year-olds marching for the utopia of “black communism” can barely read and write. Rather than come to terms with the pedagogical failure of Philadelphia public schools, however, educators have shifted the blame to “systemic racism” and promises of “revolution.”

Based on current data, and the percentage of black students who graduate college ready, nobody can say the people responsible in Philadelphia don't know what they're doing. They're doing it on purpose, and they should all be removed from their positions.

We know however, that there will be no repercussions, and Philadelphia students will continue to be victimized by a school system that prioritizes politics over education.

Turn & Talk / "Antiracist" Grading Starts with You

 The reason behind this blog is so I can rant and rave about why American public education is in such a sorry state. It saves me from annoying my wife and from stopping strangers on the street to listen to my great, terrific, stupendous ideas for improving American education.

These days, rather than merely letting things get worse, there are people actively working to make things worse. It's as if they're working toward reducing the number of children who, upon graduating from high school, have actually gotten an education that will enable them to function in society, get a job, and be able to learn and pass on the hard lessons learned from thousands of years of human civilization. Maybe "No Child Left Behind" was an empty slogan, but now were seeing the tacit promotion of - all children left behind.

Part of that promotion is "antiracist grading." I'd never heard of it before, but after reading this article, I think some alleged experts are stretching their alleged expertise into a Bizarro world.

First, I want to challenge the assumption of your question—the term "fall behind" is a social construct. This idea of where a person should be is not a naturally occurring thing. We know from child development psychologist Jean Piaget that all people develop differently and grow at different paces.

And yet, we do know that there is a certain body of knowledge that a person needs in order to navigate life. Yes, children grow and learn at different paces, but the current Covid-related dependence on online school is slowing down the learning process for a large number of children.

Instead of the absurd focus on and twisting of grading practices, how about moving that focus to teaching children to read? While you're at it, throw in lessons on writing and spelling. If you have time after those lessons, some math couldn't hurt. When I say "math" of course, I'm referring to teaching children how to DO math; computation and all that jazz.

One thing we understand from Universal Design for Learning is that there are multiple ways a kid can express their knowing. And so if you know 2+2=4, one way you can express your knowing is by writing it. Another way you can express your knowing is by discussing it. A third way is by creating a model that shows it. A fourth way is by illustrating it and a fifth way is by performing a play. But in too many schools, only one way is considered legitimate. So if you write it, you get an A and that's it. There might be 100 kids in the school who know 2+2=4, but if only two of those kids can write it, then only two of those kids will receive As. That is profoundly discriminatory.

Maybe I'm taking this argument too literally, but being able to express an idea succinctly so that others can understand it would signal that a student understands the concept. In the case of math, to me, that means being able to do the math. If you can write a play showing that 2+2=4, you can certainly figure out the equation.

The second thing I would eliminate is the ideology of transactional gratitude. In most academic spaces, there is a silent pact that teachers make with students: I will agree to teach you well if you demonstrate to me that you are thankful for it. And if you do not demonstrate to me that you are thankful for it, I will withhold quality teaching from you.

This is just insulting to every hard-working teacher who tries to reach every student in spite of all of the roadblocks set up against proper teaching. "Antiracist grading" seems to me to be one more roadblock. 

The soft bigotry of anti-racist expectations, by Ian Rowe

 Yes, black kids can achieve and meet expectation in public schools. They can do as well as white kids (not that white kids are doing that great either) and Asian kids. But not if we hold them to lower expectations in the name of "antiracism." 

Despite these facts, school districts across the country are adopting the narrative that racial disparities in academic outcomes pose today’s greatest educational challenge. Such tunnel vision towards problems is usually accompanied by an equally narrow vision towards causality. These educators are reinforcing the flawed belief that every racial disparity must be due to white supremacy and systemic racism, regardless of other factors like declines in stable families or lack of school choice, which may play a far more powerful role in impeding the development of children of all races. The resulting “anti-racist” policies are becoming the unintended, modern day version of the soft bigotry of low expectations.

I taught in a district where requirements were slowly lowered over the years until they were meaningless. When I left, students were allowed to turn in any assignment for full credit up until the last week of the term. Parents repeatedly asked for lists and new copies of those missing assignments, which were usually still not turned in. We were not allowed to give zeros on assignments that weren't turned in. Students had to be given 50%. And of course, nobody was allowed to be retained even at a parent's request, because the research says . . . 

Racism is not the cause of current disparities. For more information on that subject, I strongly recommend Thomas Sowell's book "Discrimination and Disparities."

And as Ben Shapiro once said on a related subject:

San Diego Unified Holds ‘White Privilege’ Training Sessions For Teachers

 Don't expect American public education to improve. Here is another reason why the majority of American public school students will continue to graduate with little or no reading, writing, math, or critical thinking skills.

On Thursday, an exclusive report on leaked documents revealed that the San Diego Unified School District was holding training sessions where teachers were told of their “white privilege,” that they were racist, and they were part of an oppressive white power structure. Not only are the teachers told that they must acknowledge their “privilege” and embrace “antiracist” ideas, they are instructed to “teach others to see their privilege.”

Christopher Rufo of City Journal reported what he had discovered in the leaked documents. “SCOOP: San Diego Unified School District is forcing teachers to attend ‘white privilege’ training, in which teachers are told ‘you are racist’ and ‘you are upholding racist ideas, structures, and policies.’ The leaked documents from the training session will shock you,” Rufo wrote in a series of posts.

Teachers can't teach if they aren't being trained to teach. Unless things change radically, look for the next generation to be even less skilled than current graduates. Next, students will learn how to humiliate their teachers - instead of learning useful skills.

Read the whole article and weep for what will be coming next.

No girls, parties, cellphones: California's prison inmates are getting bachelor's degrees

Why didn't somebody think of this sooner? It should be implemented nationwide.

Arrowood is one of the beneficiaries of California’s policy to provide face-to-face higher education classes in almost all of its prisons. Prisoners were restricted to correspondence courses until a law passed in 2014 allowing in-person classes. That year, the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation reports, the number of successfully completed college classes jumped to 13,301 from the previous year’s 5,725. 

By 2017, about 4,500 prisoners were enrolled in community college with tuition paid for by taxpayers through a state financial aid program, up from zero prisoners in 2014. While other states have some prisons that offer in-person education, California is the only state offering classes in nearly every prison, taught by educators from nearby colleges, for credits that can transfer and count toward degrees. 

And the program's benefits go beyond the prisoners who are released. Some of them will never be released, but they and their families still reap rewards.

Allen Burnett, 45, was arrested at 18 and convicted of aiding and abetting in a murder, and was eventually sentenced to life without parole. He bounced around seven prisons before landing at Lancaster, where he became part of the book group with Arrowood. 

He earned an associate degree through correspondence courses and eventually joined Cal State LA’s first cohort. He said the lessons he’s learned in class have helped defuse situations with fellow prisoners. “There’s so much segregation here, the slightest thing can turn into an issue,” he said. 

His efforts were an inspiration to his 40-year-old sister, who went back to college herself. But he’s most proud of the impact his education is having on his stepdaughter Zion Holmes. 

Holmes was born after Burnett was arrested, but he built a relationship with Holmes through visits and phone calls. They played Monopoly during visits, although “it was hard to have those little moments” together because every phone call is recorded, said Holmes, now 19. But when it came time to decide where she wanted to study, she asked for her stepfather’s advice. 

His eyes water when he recounts their conversation. He told her how caring the staff at Cal State LA was and promised her if she went there, there would always be someone on campus who was looking out for her. 

Today she’s a sophomore at Cal State LA, while Burnett is eight classes short of graduating. “There’s an emotional connection,” he said. “We talk about end-of-semester stress.” 

“He’s a lot more studious than I am,” Holmes said. Her stepfather, an early riser who’s up at 4 a.m. most days, got A’s in both of his classes last semester. “I haven’t done that … yet,” she said.

Education is never wasted. The only thing needed to be added (as the article suggests) is remedial  education for prisoners who need to start closer to the beginning.

Not Even Pretending to Teach Anymore

Y’all. We have 160 presenters with more than 65 students as young as 4th grade! This is a space that will nourish all those in attendance! #DecolonizeEd #AdvanceEquityNow #Education4Liberation pic.twitter.com/pjUvrJY0eL

— Natalie McCabe Zwerger (@Natalie_Zwerger) June 2, 2019

Y'all, we have another generation of students who will not learn to read or write effectively. But now we know who to blame. Take names.

Statistics on Fatherless Children

From "The Fatherless Generation" come these statistics. They're from 2010, but they are still valid.

Statistics

• 63% of youth suicides are from fatherless homes (US Dept. Of Health/Census) – 5 times the average.

• 90% of all homeless and runaway children are from fatherless homes – 32 times the average.

• 85% of all children who show behavior disorders come from fatherless homes – 20 times the average.  (Center for Disease Control)

• 80% of rapists with anger problems come from fatherless homes –14 times the average.  (Justice & Behavior, Vol 14, p. 403-26)

• 71% of all high school dropouts come from fatherless homes – 9 times the average.  (National Principals Association Report)

Father Factor in Education – Fatherless children are twice as likely to drop out of school.

• Children with Fathers who are involved are 40% less likely to repeat a grade in school.

• Children with Fathers who are involved are 70% less likely to drop out of school.

• Children with Fathers who are involved are more likely to get A’s in school.

• Children with Fathers who are involved are more likely to enjoy school and engage in extracurricular activities.

• 75% of all adolescent patients in chemical abuse centers come from fatherless homes – 10 times the average.

Father Factor in Drug and Alcohol Abuse – Researchers at Columbia University found that children living in two-parent household with a poor relationship with their father are 68% more likely to smoke, drink, or use drugs compared to all teens in two-parent households. Teens in single mother households are at a 30% higher risk than those in two-parent households.

• 70% of youths in state-operated institutions come from fatherless homes – 9 times the average.  (U.S. Dept. of Justice, Sept. 1988)

• 85% of all youths in prison come from fatherless homes – 20 times the average.  (Fulton Co. Georgia, Texas Dept. of Correction)

Father Factor in Incarceration – Even after controlling for income, youths in father-absent households still had significantly higher odds of incarceration than those in mother-father families. Youths who never had a father in the household experienced the highest odds. A 2002 Department of Justice survey of 7,000 inmates revealed that 39% of jail inmates lived in mother-only households. Approximately forty-six percent of jail inmates in 2002 had a previously incarcerated family member. One-fifth experienced a father in prison or jail.

Father Factor in Crime – A study of 109 juvenile offenders indicated that family structure significantly predicts delinquency. Adolescents, particularly boys, in single-parent families were at higher risk of status, property and person delinquencies. Moreover, students attending schools with a high proportion of children of single parents are also at risk. A study of 13,986 women in prison showed that more than half grew up without their father. Forty-two percent grew up in a single-mother household and sixteen percent lived with neither parent

Father Factor in Child Abuse – Compared to living with both parents, living in a single-parent home doubles the risk that a child will suffer physical, emotional, or educational neglect. The overall rate of child abuse and neglect in single-parent households is 27.3 children per 1,000, whereas the rate of overall maltreatment in two-parent households is 15.5 per 1,000.

Daughters of single parents without a Father involved are 53% more likely to marry as teenagers, 711% more likely to have children as teenagers, 164% more likely to have a pre-marital birth and 92% more likely to get divorced themselves.

Adolescent girls raised in a 2 parent home with involved Fathers are significantly less likely to be sexually active than girls raised without involved Fathers.

• 43% of US children live without their father [US Department of Census]

• 90% of homeless and runaway children are from fatherless homes. [US D.H.H.S., Bureau of the Census]

• 80% of rapists motivated with displaced anger come from fatherless homes. [Criminal Justice & Behaviour, Vol 14, pp. 403-26, 1978]

• 71% of pregnant teenagers lack a father. [U.S. Department of Health and Human Services press release, Friday, March 26, 1999]

• 63% of youth suicides are from fatherless homes. [US D.H.H.S., Bureau of the Census]

• 85% of children who exhibit behavioral disorders come from fatherless homes. [Center for Disease Control]

• 90% of adolescent repeat arsonists live with only their mother. [Wray Herbert, “Dousing the Kindlers,” Psychology Today, January, 1985, p. 28]

• 71% of high school dropouts come from fatherless homes. [National Principals Association Report on the State of High Schools]

• 75% of adolescent patients in chemical abuse centers come from fatherless homes. [Rainbows f for all God’s Children]

• 70% of juveniles in state operated institutions have no father. [US Department of Justice, Special Report, Sept. 1988]

• 85% of youths in prisons grew up in a fatherless home. [Fulton County Georgia jail populations, Texas Department of Corrections, 1992]

• Fatherless boys and girls are: twice as likely to drop out of high school; twice as likely to end up in jail; four times more likely to need help for emotional or behavioral problems. [US D.H.H.S. news release, March 26, 1999]

Census Fatherhood Statistics

• 64.3 million: Estimated number of fathers across the nation
• 26.5 million: Number of fathers who are part of married-couple families with their own children under the age of 18.
  Among these fathers –
  
  • 22 percent are raising three or more of their own children under 18 years old (among married-couple family households only).
  • 2 percent live in the home of a relative or a non-relative.
• 2.5 million: Number of single fathers, up from 400,000 in 1970. Currently, among single parents living with their children, 18 percent are men.
  Among these fathers –
  
  • 8 percent are raising three or more of their own children under 18 years old.
  • 42 percent are divorced, 38 percent have never married, 16 percent are separated and 4 percent are widowed. (The percentages of those divorced and never married are not significantly different from one another.)
  • 16 percent live in the home of a relative or a non-relative.
  • 27 percent have an annual family income of $50,000 or more.
• 85 percent: Among the 30.2 million fathers living with children younger than 18, the percentage who lived with their biological children only.
  • 11 percent lived with step-children
  • 4 percent with adopted children
  • < 1 percent with foster children
  Recent policies encourage the development of programs designed to improve the economic status of low-income nonresident fathers and the financial and emotional support provided to their children. This brief provides ten key lessons from several important early responsible fatherhood initiatives that were developed and implemented during the 1990s and early 2000s. Formal evaluations of these earlier fatherhood efforts have been completed making this an opportune time to step back and assess what has been learned and how to build on the early programs’ successes and challenges.Whilethe following statistics are formidable, the Responsible Fatherhood research literature generally supports the claim that a loving and nurturing father improves outcomes for children, families and communities.
• Children with involved, loving fathers are significantly more likely to do well in school, have healthy self-esteem, exhibit empathy and pro-social behavior, and avoid high-risk behaviors such as drug use, truancy, and criminal activity compared to children who have uninvolved fathers.
• Studies on parent-child relationships and child wellbeing show that father love is an important factor in predicting the social, emotional, and cognitive development and functioning of children and young adults.
• 24 million children (34 percent) live absent their biological father.
• Nearly 20 million children (27 percent) live in single-parent homes.
• 43 percent of first marriages dissolve within fifteen years; about 60 percent of divorcing couples have children; and approximately one million children each year experience the divorce of their parents.
• Fathers who live with their children are more likely to have a close, enduring relationship with their children than those who do not.
• Compared to children born within marriage, children born to cohabiting parents are three times as likely to experience father absence, and children born to unmarried, non-cohabiting parents are four times as likely to live in a father-absent home.
• About 40 percent of children in father-absent homes have not seen their father at all during the past year; 26 percent of absent fathers live in a different state than their children; and 50 percent of children living absent their father have never set foot in their father’s home.
• Children who live absent their biological fathers are, on average, at least two to three times more likely to be poor, to use drugs, to experience educational, health, emotional and behavioral problems, to be victims of child abuse, and to engage in criminal behavior than their peers who live with their married, biological (or adoptive) parents.
• From 1995 to 2000, the proportion of children living in single-parent homes slightly declined, while the proportion of children living with two married parents remained stable.

So yes, part of the solution to today's educational failure does lie with absent fathers.

Diversity First—Education, Whenever

Over the past few generations, school has become less and less about education, and more about all kinds of other things. Even so, teachers, administrators, government officials, schools of education, and parents all insisted that no, children are in school to learn. When they graduate, they're supposed to be able to function as intelligent adults in an increasingly complex society. Graduates are supposed to have the tools they need to earn a living, vote intelligently, raise a family, and entertain themselves. They should be able to read, write understandable prose, and know enough math to shop, manage their finances, read a graph, and know when their being snowed by government officials or other shysters trying to part them from their hard earned money. It also doesn't hurt if they know enough science and history to catch a glimpse of how the world works.

That's what everyone pretended. Now, in New York, they've stopped even pretending.

Mayor Bill de Blasio’s school-integration task force just dropped its initial report—a multilayer cake of mostly impenetrable social-justice jargon, interspersed with a dangerous idea or two, and with a dismaying lack of emphasis on the enduring value of teaching children to read, write, and do numbers. In fact, the report represents a significant victory of show over substance, establishing “diversity” as the principal goal of public education in New York City while exiling accountability—teacher accountability, parent accountability, student accountability—to the ash heap.

In its willingness to sacrifice function to form, the School Diversity Advisory Group’s initial report (a second is expected later in this school year) is a classic example of an old trope—to a hammer, the world looks like a nail. As panel member Matt Gonzales told the New York Times: “The idea of a good school versus a bad school is based on narrow assumptions [including tests and attendance].  We wanted to shift the narrative about how we measure school quality. Good schools are integrated schools.”

Or, as the report itself puts it at one point, “the use of exclusionary admissions screens . . . which judge . . . kids on behavior, test scores, and other biased metrics, is the biggest contributor to . . . segregation.” Get rid of “biased metrics,” in other words, and— presto—the problem is solved. But good luck educating children in an environment where behavior and other quantifiable performance standards are deemed an objective impediment to progress.

That's what it's come to. The best and brightest will no longer be allowed to excel. Everyone must be equal, even if that equality leads to a Harrison Bergeron society.

Classroom Technology Will Not Fix Our Schools

Here is an article I wrote. We're looking for public education to improve in America. But currently, there is a lot more money to be made off of educational failure than there is from educational success. So which way will that steer things?

Over the years, I debated my school’s Title I teacher on the effectiveness of phonetic reading instruction. He favored the previously mentioned “workshop” model. His standard argument was always, “the data show . . .” But he was never able to produce any data.
I however, do have the data. I have a copy of the Report of the National Reading Panel, which was released in 2000. The section on phonics instruction begins on page 89 of Chapter 2. Here is a summary of the executive summary: systematic phonics instruction works.
Of all the reasons for not adopting a low-tech phonics programs, the main reason just might be the lack of financial incentive. There are minimal profits in pencils and paper. Rather than putting out real cash on the latest in expensive technology and child-calming medication, a few boxes of sturdy writing implements, some lined paper, and vast amounts of challenging literature (not the usual trivial fare fed to kids who are struggling because they haven’t been taught correctly) is all that students need to learn to read, write, and spell.
If public-school officials decided to stop spending money on failure, I’m confident that American entrepreneurs would be able to develop ways to make money creating and promoting educational success. Changes would have to be made, but if someone is clever enough, there is always a way.
Until the decision is made to stop subsidizing failure, the cost of that failure will continue to rise.

Our New Promethean Boards

The Promethean boards were installed in our rooms last week. Today we were given a few hours training on them.

I haven't yet touched the board in my room. I wasn't sure if it was ready and I had no idea what it could do our how to do the things it could do. Besides, I've seen them at other schools in the past, and we've had a portable one for years. While they looked interesting, and there were technologically advanced things I watched teachers do on them, they seemed kind of cumbersome. They were interesting, but not really impressive.

But after our training today - Wow! They've made some major technological advances in the past few years, and these babies rock! They are giant touch screens. They are monster-sized tablets. They are computer monitors. They are computers in their own right with thousands of available educational lessons and apps. You can also download things from your classroom computer or your phone onto your Promethean board. Students can work on it from their district-supplied laptops.

Teachers can use them to create and give lessons and tests, show static and moving displays, play educational videos, and probably do lots more stuff that I'm not even aware of yet because I just learned about them today, and we only spent 2 1/2 hours at the workshop.

My new Promethean board is bright, and shiny, and new, and computerized, and I can't wait to get back into my classroom to begin exploring all the  things this baby can do. And all those things I've been saying over the years eschewing classroom technology because it hasn't ever and it won't ever enhance student achievement - forget it all. I've changed my mind. These are the greatest educational tool since avocado toast.

Hmm, that was not just a mixed metaphor, it was a mixed-up metaphor. What I meant was, due to the incredible "cool" factor of the Promethean board, I want to be wrong. I want this computerized behemoth to actually lead to greater student achievement. That would make my life and the lives of my students so much easier and more pleasant.

I know that students will be much more engaged because we all become much more engaged looking at a computer screen than we do looking at paper.

However . . .

I also know that this will be another educational boondoggle. Nobody would ever try and convince us that putting a young athlete in front of a computer to play Madden NFL will improve his football skills. That only comes form lots of hard work in the gym and on the field. That's how academic achievement works too. Pick up that pencil. Apply it to the paper. Get those hand and arm muscles moving and sending messages to the brain.

When that pencil wears out, get another one. Make sure there are stacks of paper. Work hard.

Remaining hypnotized in front of a computer screen is still not the way and never will be the way students learn. Will the educational establishment ever learn that lesson?

Why Teachers Suck

This is only part of it.

4. … because of expectations from a broken society.

Teachers no longer simply teach their subjects.  Our schools are now responsible for raising children.  Not many kids learn basic “life skills” and attitudes at home, so we expect teachers to do what moms and dads won’t (or can’t).  Oh, and they’re also supposed to make sure the kids get fed.

Too many schools now have food / toiletry / clothing pantries for kids whose homes can’t provide basic necessities.  These are run by volunteers … and teachers, of course.

We ask teachers to teach, feed, clothe, and parent our children, but refuse them the resources, support, and time to do the job.  Instead, we shame them for not saving our fractured society.

“Not only are schools and teachers expected to fix all of society’s ills, we are also expected to turn out a fantastic product,” Susan says.  “It would be nice if it could be remembered that we are working with human capital, not with a product whose outcome we can control completely.”

And therein lies the biggest key to understanding why teacher’s suck …

Our teachers end up parenting a lot of kids, and that role comes with a costly emotional and psychological investment.  Teachers are often caring for students who are functioning orphans—and they do it for countless kids.  While they’re teaching their preps, answering emails and phone calls from angry parents, trying to ignore what some yahoo has said about them on social media, and filling out an insane amount of hoop-jumping documentation to help some politician get re-elected, they’re also trying to get the girl who’s been raped into counseling, making sure the kid out of rehab stays clean and on track, and trying to tenderly engage that discipline problem who’s now living on the streets because his parents are both in jail.

There is so much more.

Every High School Principal Should Say This

Watch. Listen. It makes sense. Really.

Why Aren't Schools Hooked on Phonics?

You must read this article in The Metropolitan. Why? I wrote it. It may be the most important article I've ever written. It may be the only article I've ever written. But it does raise some very important points regarding elementary education.

Children don’t need expensive computer labs fitted with colorful computer programs and websites that “make learning fun.” Children need a good sharp pencil, lots of paper, and a teacher who has learned and therefore can teach the phonetic structure of English.

Here’s why. Phonics is the beginning of reading. It’s learning the sounds that the letters make, both individually and in combination with other letters. Some students, especially those whose parents read to them frequently, can usually do this with little phonetic instruction. Those children coming from poverty and a lack of household literacy usually can’t. We know that. It’s been documented and re-documented. And yet until recently, almost all big time reading programs ignored phonics in favor of “balanced literacy”, formerly known as “whole language.” Teachers began in the middle with sight words and were taught that phonics doesn’t work.

Since the “balanced literacy” name change, phonemic awareness has become a piece of beginning reading instruction, which is kind of “phonics lite” with no expectation that teachers know and understand English on a phonetic level. How can teachers teach what they don’t know? Even Common Core, which does have some phonics requirements doesn’t truly address the issue since teachers are not trained to teach phonics and don’t know enough phonics to be effective.

Walter Williams agrees with me. There is no "right to literacy." He expresses it from a different but still valid (since he agrees with me) point of view. Yes, I am a Walter Williams fan. I have been for a long time, and I would be even if he didn't agree with me on this matter. Below is a taste. You can read the rest yourself.

In terms of per-pupil expenditures, the state does not treat Detroit public school students any differently than it does other students. According to the Michigan Department of Education, the Detroit school district ranks 50th in state spending, at $13,743 per pupil. This is out of 841 total districts. That puts Detroit schools in the top 6 percent of per-pupil expenditures in the state. Discrimination in school expenditures cannot explain poor educational outcomes for black students in Detroit or anywhere else in the nation. Let's look at routinely ignored educational impediments in Detroit and elsewhere.
Annie Ellington, director of the Detroit Youth Violence Prevention Initiative, reported that 87 percent of the 1,301 Detroit public school students interviewed in a survey last year knew someone who had been killed, disabled or wounded by gun violence. According to an article published by the American Psychological Association, 80 percent of teachers surveyed nationally in 2011 had been victimized at school at least once during that school year or the prior year. Detroit public schools are plagued with the same problems of violence faced by other predominately black schools in other cities.

Read more at http://jewishworldreview.com/cols/williams101216.php3#TgxYrkqGz2XHqfVl.99

The Right to Literacy

Some Detroit Michigan students are suing Governor Snyder “charging that the State of Michigan has violated their right to literacy.” Right to literacy? How? Who is ultimately responsible for a person’s literacy? Even if a teacher is forced at gunpoint to teach children to read, will they all learn? Will they even show up to class? Detroit Public Schools has a truancy problem with almost 50 percent of its students chronically absent. Can’t learn if you’re not there.

And education is not something you’re born with or can be given to you. It’s something you build or develop – or not. Going deeper, how does one have a right to the gathering of knowledge, the cultivating of ability, the development of skills? There is no right to an education. There is only a responsibility to get an education, to work for an education, to teach your children so that they will value education and work for their own.

As the Talmud says, “Anyone who does not teach his son a skill or profession may be regarded as if he is teaching him to rob.” (Talmud Kiddushin 29a) Teach them as much as you can so that when they are not only ready but willing to do the difficult, sometimes tedious, but always rewarding work of learning.

A right? No. No one can give and no one can take away an education. There is only on way to get one: work for it. Spend the long hours at study or practice. There is no “magic bullet.” There are no short cuts. Turn off the TV, the video games, Facebook, etc. Pick up a book, a pencil, paper, and get busy. Do you have any books in your dwelling? Or do you spend your money on expensive gym shoes and electronic toys? Put your money where your “rights” are.

Can teachers and schools help? Absolutely. But don’t mistake going to school for getting an education, even if that school is a big time university. Millions have gone to school without getting an education. Some have spent their school days actively fighting against getting their own, and interfered with others who wanted to learn, thereby robbing them of needed learning. You may have met some of these idiots. Can they be sued for infringing on my children’s rights? (Of course, mostly my kids were in AP courses and didn’t have to deal with the idiots. The one class my one child had to take because it was the only one that fit into her schedule that wasn’t AP and that had some of the afore mentioned idiots, left her repeatedly angry until she figured out how to ignore them.)

Ray Bradbury said in a 2013 interview, “I didn’t go to college, but when I graduated from high school I went down to the local library and I spent ten years there, two or three days a week, and I got a better education than most people get from universities. So I graduated from the library when I was twenty-eight years old.” Entitlement? Doesn’t sound like it to me. It’s funny how people who actually achieve something in life don’t wait for it to be handed to them because they’re “entitled” to it.

Eric Hoffer, another great mind who, rather than demand that he was entitled, worked as a longshoreman as he wrote his philosophical tracts. He too, spent many hours in the library and reading outside of the library. From his biography on The Eric Hoffer Project, “Through ten years as a migratory worker and as a gold-miner around Nevada City, Hoffer labored hard but continued to read and write during the years of the Great Depression. The Okies and the Arkies were the “new pioneers,” and Hoffer was one of them. He had library cards in a dozen towns along the railroad, and when he could afford it, he took a room near a library for concentrated thinking and writing.”

So go ahead and insist that you have a right to an education. Attack the government with lawsuits. Give statements to the newspapers. Protest. Seethe. Scream. Stamp your feet. Hold your breath until you turn blue. You will still be ignorant. Or you can pick up a book. Meet with friends to read and discuss the same book - not some trivial best seller, but maybe a classic or two. Explore the questions that have baffled mankind since the beginning of rational thought. Attach yourself to people who have the knowledge and skills that you want to learn. Then you can start your education.

Dorothy Sayers on Education - 1947

I had planned this blog to be all me, me, me, nothing but me. I'm the one who's been teaching in an urban district for the past 27 years. I'm the one who's watched and fought against the district slide further into failure year after frustrating year. I'm the one who decided to start this blog. But then I found this piece by Dorothy Sayers from 1947. It's long. It's scholarly. It's worth reading. I've reproduced a snippet below. I'm not going to waste anyone's time by critiquing or commenting. Go read the whole thing. It's worth it.

Is not the great defect of our education today--a defect traceable through all the disquieting symptoms of trouble that I have mentioned--that although we often succeed in teaching our pupils "subjects," we fail lamentably on the whole in teaching them how to think: they learn everything, except the art of learning. It is as though we had taught a child, mechanically and by rule of thumb, to play "The Harmonious Blacksmith" upon the piano, but had never taught him the scale or how to read music; so that, having memorized "The Harmonious Blacksmith," he still had not the faintest notion how to proceed from that to tackle "The Last Rose of Summer." Why do I say, "as though"? In certain of the arts and crafts, we sometimes do precisely this--requiring a child to "express himself" in paint before we teach him how to handle the colors and the brush. There is a school of thought which believes this to be the right way to set about the job. But observe: it is not the way in which a trained craftsman will go about to teach himself a new medium. He, having learned by experience the best way to economize labor and take the thing by the right end, will start off by doodling about on an odd piece of material, in order to "give himself the feel of the tool."
Let us now look at the mediaeval scheme of education--the syllabus of the Schools. It does not matter, for the moment, whether it was devised for small children or for older students, or how long people were supposed to take over it. What matters is the light it throws upon what the men of the Middle Ages supposed to be the object and the right order of the educative process.
The syllabus was divided into two parts: the Trivium and Quadrivium. The second part--the Quadrivium--consisted of "subjects," and need not for the moment concern us. The interesting thing for us is the composition of the Trivium, which preceded the Quadrivium and was the preliminary discipline for it. It consisted of three parts: Grammar, Dialectic, and Rhetoric, in that order.
Now the first thing we notice is that two at any rate of these "subjects" are not what we should call "subjects" at all: they are only methods of dealing with subjects. Grammar, indeed, is a "subject" in the sense that it does mean definitely learning a language--at that period it meant learning Latin. But language itself is simply the medium in which thought is expressed. The whole of the Trivium was, in fact, intended to teach the pupil the proper use of the tools of learning, before he began to apply them to "subjects" at all. First, he learned a language; not just how to order a meal in a foreign language, but the structure of a language, and hence of language itself--what it was, how it was put together, and how it worked. Secondly, he learned how to use language; how to define his terms and make accurate statements; how to construct an argument and how to detect fallacies in argument. Dialectic, that is to say, embraced Logic and Disputation. Thirdly, he learned to express himself in language-- how to say what he had to say elegantly and persuasively.
At the end of his course, he was required to compose a thesis upon some theme set by his masters or chosen by himself, and afterwards to defend his thesis against the criticism of the faculty. By this time, he would have learned--or woe betide him-- not merely to write an essay on paper, but to speak audibly and intelligibly from a platform, and to use his wits quickly when heckled. There would also be questions, cogent and shrewd, from those who had already run the gauntlet of debate.

Creating Monsters

I wrote this near the end of last school year. It went up on my Tumblr blog, which I'm not going to link to because it isn't about education. Yes, I was frustrated, not at the kids, but at a few of the parents. It is the parents who create the monsters.

Hello parents. How are your children doing in school? Does your child complain that their teacher picks on them? Does your precious flower always seem to get caught by the teacher doing things that other kids get away with - according to your precious flower? Are you convinced that the teacher has it out for your lovely snowflake, because you know - you are absolutely certain - that all of those other students are doing the same things and being ignored? Are you positive that you are the only parents who have to leave work and take time to shlep over to the school because your innocent babe is sitting in the principal’s office? Are you getting tired of the repetitive phone calls and demands to come to the school because it can’t be all and entirely your beloved jewel’s fault? Are you convinced that your tiny sweetness is (almost) never like this at home? Do you consistently let the teacher, the principal, and anyone else who will listen, know that you have no idea where this alleged misbehavior is coming from, and the school had better stop messing with your misunderstood genius?

Well guess what - being an elementary school teacher in an “urban” school district, I am qualified to tell you that you are full of shit. And you are creating a monster. Chances are that the teacher gave your snookums more chances than anyone should have to give an intelligent child to straighten out the idiot behavior. And your poopsie took advantage of the teacher’s not wanting to call you, in order to become a bigger, more disruptive, more self-serving idiot. Kids will do that, you know. They know what they can get away with. They also know if they will be punished and how severe the punishment will be. They are able to judge whether the upcoming (if it’s coming or if it’s just talk) punishment from mom (most likely) or dad (if there’s one around) is worth it compared to the fun they get to have cutting up in class and hampering everyone else’s education. Yes, your little chickadee has you, and the teacher, and the principal, and the entire system figured out. That few minutes of yelling, screaming, and scolding from you is worth it in exchange for a few days or weeks of goofing off, harassing students and teachers, throwing tantrums, and being a general nuisance. It’s small payment for some solid, long-lasting self-entertainment. Go ahead. Throw in a “whooppin’ ”. Who cares? Certainly not your puppy-dog-eyed sweetheart. Or sure, there will be crying and yelling along with some tears, but only for a few minutes. Once it’s over, it’s back to being an asshole. Because young Norbert or Norbertella knows that after one round ends, the next one begins. And that means it’s time for that next round of many more days or weeks of troublemaking fun.

And that’s for the young scholar whose parents pretend to care about education. If you really think that your miniature intellectual’s teacher has the time or the inclination to single out your kid, you are a dumbass. And you are creating a monster, who, because they will, thanks to you, develop no marketable skills, will want to live with you, in your house long into their 20s and 30s. They may even want to have you raise their children while they go out and party with money that they will demand from you. And you, idiot that you are, might not even then be able to figure out what went wrong.

Keep in mind that your child’s teacher wants your child to do well in school, if only for the simple, selfish reason that the more the students learn, and the better they do in school and on the dreaded standardized tests, the better the teacher looks. Then there are the teachers who want your wee beastie and the rest of the class to succeed because that’s why they went into teaching. Either way, success is better than failure, and it benefits everyone, especially your youthful, emotional cripple. And rather than battle teachers in order to protect your fragile, pampered babe from the emotional distress that comes with the continual concerted effort that one needs to build an education, it is in everyone’s best interest for you to side with the teacher. Release your child from their protective hothouse. Let your child grow up to be a productive member of society rather than a parasite on you and on all of us. Stop creating monsters and leeches. Stop increasing the dependent class. We’ve got enough of them. Allow your miniature Tasmanian devil the chance to grow as a human being. Let them develop the tools they need to win their own personal struggle. You owe them that.

Please Allow Me to Introduce Myself

            Back when I was a new, young, naïve teacher, I assumed that it was in the best interests of everyone involved; teachers, administrators, teachers’ colleges, publishing houses, and the government that students succeeded. Over the last 27 years, I’ve learned how wrong I was.

I don’t want to be wrong. I would rather think that everyone who says they are concerned with American education really was concerned with American education. But they’re not. They’re concerned with keeping their jobs, with making more money, and with establishing a reputation (which leads to more money and prestige). Whether they do it consciously or through rationalization, they’re invested in failure.

            It’s failure that brings in the big money from government and from charitable organizations. It’s failure that allows crusaders to crusade and bring out their NEW! and IMPROVED!! resources and curricula for school districts across the country to adopt (especially the “urban” districts with classrooms full of children being raised by single mothers, grandparents, foster parents, or nobody)*. It’s failure that allows each generation of “gurus” from Columbia Teacher College to ride to the rescue with this generation’s child-centered, research-based, data-driven method that the nation’s teachers must learn in order to insure this generation of students graduate with even lower skills and knowledge than the previous generation, which graduated with fewer skills and less knowledge than the previous generation, which, etc. Of course, that’s not how they phrase it. We’re supposed to ignore the reality of the past 80 or so years and concentrate on the soothing buzzwords; “child-centered”, “progressive”, “data-driven”, “researched-based”, “higher order thinking skills”, etc.

And even though each generation is less knowledgeable and less scholastically competent than the previous one, none of the Columbia College gurus, textbook publishers, or politicians are ever held accountable, nor do they pay any price for their failure. It’s the students who pay the biggest price, and it’s the teachers and administrators who are held accountable (sort of**).

It’s the teachers who are mandated to put the latest rehashed theories into practice by using the methods foisted on them by the teachers’ college. When these methods fail, as all of them have, the method must not be questioned. The method, after all, is flawless. It’s research based, for heaven’s sake! It can only be the teachers’ fault. They did something wrong. I was hounded and threatened once until I allowed a carpet to be put in my classroom because Lucy Calkins insists that the class be given mini-lessons on the carpet. How can they have a mini-lesson on the carpet when there is no carpet?

And then there are the new bureaucratic paper work requirements. We need data walls, written daily objectives for all to see, lesson plans with differentiation, depth of knowledge, 5 Ds (or something like that) and daily common core standards. All of this new and improved paperwork will, of course, lead to greater student achievement because . . . because . . . because we are told that it will.

I’ve been a teacher in a small “urban” school district for the past 27 years. In that time I, like every other teacher, have been subjected to everything that has come down the pike. Before things became completely regimented and tightly conformed, I was allowed to learn and teach a phonetic language arts program for a very limited number of years. My students actually learned to read and comprehend what they read. I was able to read Shakespeare with fourth and fifth graders. I will be writing about these experiences and about things that are happening today in “urban” education. Stay tuned. There is a lot to write about, and I will get to as much as I can as often as I can. Comments are welcome.

*Notice that I didn’t refer to “minority” children. Skin color and ethnicity have nothing to do with their academic struggles. They are struggling because of poor and selfish choices their parents made and continue to make. You bet I’ll have more to say about that.

** Yeah, accountability, another post