In the reporting and commentary on the jailing of two women for feeding cats, almost all the disdain and vitriol has been directed at the police. This is misplaced and wrong.
Thoughts of a veteran teacher and administrator on subjects from teaching and learning to curriculum to school governance to life as we know it.
In the reporting and commentary on the jailing of two women for feeding cats, almost all the disdain and vitriol has been directed at the police. This is misplaced and wrong.
I was listening to a commentary on a recent congressional "debate" reducing school violence after the Uvalde tragedy, and as could have been predicted, one of the speakers made a comment along the lines of "the left does not want a genuine solution they only want to remove all of our guns". Sadly, too much of the discussion focused on reaction to violence rather than prevention, and to fortress approaches, but that is for another day. What struck me about the "debate" was that no successive speaker appeared to have listened to the earlier speaker had said.
During my weekly coffee with a former colleague, I found was, at least initially, misunderstood. I am not against ESL ("English as a Second Language", aka E2L) provision, but the way it is designed and implemented. Let me explain.
Several years ago I was Prinicipal of a new school and as we were trying to build our reputation, I regularly checked our presence n the media and social media. One day, I discovered that the school had been listed on Wikipedia (what is the verb for this? described? listed?), although the entry included several errors of fact such as number of rooms or hours or location, all easily-verifiable.
Interesting coffee-chat yesterday with a former colleague yesterday. She told me of a public school district where the board had banned "critical race theory" (CRT) which immediately lead to a 50% drop in teacher applicants to the district. I don't know how accurate this is, or even where it apparently occurred, however four things stood out.
I have commented before on boards messing things up, and how invariably they do the same thing. They involve themselves in the running of tthe school, or in other words they insert themselves into operational matters. Boards have three responsibilities or roles only : they set overall strategic goals and direction: they approve the budget, especially long-term (ie strategic) and infrastructure; and they hire and supervise the Director. Anything else is problematic, and a slippery slope to disaster.
Another group of teachers has been caught cheating with respect to their students' tests and were subsequently arrested. I don't know the details of this specific case, nor do I know why these people did what they did, but I do think we should look at some of the possible reasons because this seems to keep happening.
For years, I have been saying that music makes a child's brain bigger. Apparently, music also makes his/her brain live longer. This is another reason why music should be a core subject, at least in elementary school.
I had an interesting coffee morning the other day. Well, the coffee was pretty usual but the conversation was interesting. A former British Prime Minister has proposed eliminating terminal assessment, aka as final exams, in favor of continuous assessment. Many of his arguments are country or culture-specific, but the exam v continuous assessment topic is an important discussion.
Like any educator, I am following (or at least trying to follow) the major parties` positions on K-12 education. While those particular bones have plenty of meat, and some significant differences between them, there is one underlying truth to which both subscribe. Rs and Ds alike adhere to the same principle that there exists a body of knowledge, of "facts", which students should acquire. Much of the disputation in K - 12 education revolves around this body of knowledge, and the problem is that this view is wrong.
As I was reading, and being prompted for, an earlier piece, my eye was caught by a nearby headline about customers of a restaurant complaining about its menu. Apparently they went to a restaurant, either because they liked it or because they had heard good things about it, and then complained becasue it did not have the menu they wanted. This reminded me of two experiences of my own, one concerning homework, the other recess.
A few days ago, I was consulting to an independent school on income streams and of course, one of the things we discussed was tuition income and fees. Serendipity being what it is, this story then appeared "in my feed", as the youg`uns say, and raises several issues, one of which I would like to discuss.
Apparently, an increasing number of schools is advertising for teachers anonymously. The name of the school, and perhaps even its specific location, is not mentioned in the advertisement, and the application email address is generic and secretive, for example "Teachers2022@free.email.account.com". This is not a good thing for the sector, the school and its team and any prospective applicants.
Some years ago, I was Principal of a new private school and of course we had no history or reputation to go on. This time was also the zenith of online reviews, both in terms of the number of forums and in terms of the number of reviews posted. Our school was doing a good job, enrolment continued to grow despite the GFC, our reputation was golden. Except. We did have a few negative reviews and herein lies the tale.
I was sent this piece about a school in England banning physical contact between students from a governance overreach perspective, but I can understand why the school implemented the policy. After all, touching is not always healthy.
Some months, ago I commented on two mediocre hiring events. I recently heard that a month or two after my piece, one of the two was quietly let go. The group apparently kept him for two years, initial contract?, but enough was ultimately enough. Two years of salary and other costs were wasted, but more importantly, two years of academic progress and success were denied to students.
smh
Further reading
https://teaching-abc.blogspot.com/2021/09/updatemediocre.html
https://teaching-abc.blogspot.com/2021/02/mediocre-hires.html
I was sent this story about a New Zealand engineering college where 80% of its students failed a standards-based examination. While I think that the situation may be a little murkier than it appears, and the reporting does not answer all my qurestions, it does raise two interesting points. Firstly, should a licensing body have a minimum standard for registration, a "bar" if you will? Secondly, who is responsible if an individual fails to meet that bar?
A school near me has just held its "anti-bullying week" and the phrase, "lipstick on a pig" comes to mind. Such a campaign may raise awareness, but it will not change behavior.
We've all seen them, we've possibly all used them, especially at pre-school and elementary levels. But are classroom star charts a good thing?
By star-charts, I mean the list of names with a star or check-mark showing who has done their chores or who has read a book or who has had perfect attendance this week. But do they really reward success or good behavior? Or merely compliance? Do they encourage competition, and healthy competition at that? Do they motivate? Or are they just "name and shame" in another guise?
I've been reading several discussions and reports of studies about students starting G1 or returning to G1-3 who lost certain development or who never achieved it because of two years of disruption due to Covid. I can't find where I noted them right now, but as soon as I do I will post the links below.
I was a loud opponent of No Child Left Behind, ("NCLB·" or nickleby) prior to its introduction, post its introduction and today. My principal complaint is its contentions that all the problems with US public education were clearly the fault of teachers, that they needed a big stick and that this big stick should be testing.
When I say book burning, I do not mean literally mean the immolation of tomes, although in a wider sense this is included. I am referring to current moves to remove specified books from libraries and from schools, and again by extension certain authors and certain ideas. And when I say "the" problem, I do not mean that we have one and only one, but that there is one sine qua non.