I made the video below as part of an online portfolio that can be shared with principles, department chairs, and other administration as I begin searching for a teaching position. Enjoy!
Tuesday, November 25, 2014
Monday, November 24, 2014
Job Insecurity
Well, its over. I'm finished with student teaching and catching up on several blog posts that I've been meaning to write. Keep checking back, there will be more coming.
I may have had somewhat of an epiphany. I think we all can think of teachers we have either worked with or had when we were students that are cynical and pessimistic about the average student's willingness to work hard. I've come up with at least one explanation for why this happens. As I look back, it is safe to say that teaching is a unique job in many ways. One way is that there are very few options for scapegoats when things go awry. There were times when students performed very poorly on tests or quizzes. As I thought about this problem, I realized there are only two explanations: either I didn't teach well, or the students didn't care and work hard. In this way, teaching brings out one's insecurities.
Is there a better way of doing this? Why didn't I think of that response in the moment? Are the students understanding what I am saying? Could I be explaining it differently that would make more sense? How are all the other teachers explaining it? Am I reaching all my students? Should I give more grace to these students or get tough on them?
Many times there is no way of knowing for sure. Many times, you go with your gut and hope for the best. Student teaching affords you a great asset - a gifted, experienced teacher to answer those questions, verify you are doing things correctly, and correct you where you aren't. I won't have that safety net next year.
When grades go down, its either me or them (or maybe a combination). Its incredibly uncomfortable to think its me, but it most likely is. There are things I could have been more clear about. There are topics I could have made more engaging. There are connections to the students' everyday lives I could have made. When students don't learn, that means you failed. No one likes to think they failed. No wonder there are teachers out there with negative views of students. Its a lot easier to think of your students as lazy, unmotivated, uninterested, and immature than it is to think of yourself as ineffective.
I may have had somewhat of an epiphany. I think we all can think of teachers we have either worked with or had when we were students that are cynical and pessimistic about the average student's willingness to work hard. I've come up with at least one explanation for why this happens. As I look back, it is safe to say that teaching is a unique job in many ways. One way is that there are very few options for scapegoats when things go awry. There were times when students performed very poorly on tests or quizzes. As I thought about this problem, I realized there are only two explanations: either I didn't teach well, or the students didn't care and work hard. In this way, teaching brings out one's insecurities.
Is there a better way of doing this? Why didn't I think of that response in the moment? Are the students understanding what I am saying? Could I be explaining it differently that would make more sense? How are all the other teachers explaining it? Am I reaching all my students? Should I give more grace to these students or get tough on them?
Many times there is no way of knowing for sure. Many times, you go with your gut and hope for the best. Student teaching affords you a great asset - a gifted, experienced teacher to answer those questions, verify you are doing things correctly, and correct you where you aren't. I won't have that safety net next year.
When grades go down, its either me or them (or maybe a combination). Its incredibly uncomfortable to think its me, but it most likely is. There are things I could have been more clear about. There are topics I could have made more engaging. There are connections to the students' everyday lives I could have made. When students don't learn, that means you failed. No one likes to think they failed. No wonder there are teachers out there with negative views of students. Its a lot easier to think of your students as lazy, unmotivated, uninterested, and immature than it is to think of yourself as ineffective.
Thursday, November 6, 2014
What's the Point?
Every now and then, and especially when you've been doing something for a while, its good to come back to the question, "Why are we doing this in the first place?" I have been mulling over this question recently when it comes to grading policies. I have two examples of the same problem:
1. Test Retakes. We allow students to retake their tests (if they get a D or F) to raise their grade on that test up to a 75%. In order to retake a test, students have to fill out a Google form, come in for help to go over what they missed, and then make time on a certain day to retake the test. However, we have begun to think about requiring students to complete and show us all their homework for the entire chapter before retaking the test. This would likely increase the students' work load if they want to retake a test (since their homework is daily, but only collected occasionally).
My concern with this is that, due to the increased required work, students will opt out of retaking tests, thus keeping their D or F grade. Megan pushed me to consider what the point of the retake is in the first place. Are we simply trying to give the students more points and higher grades? Or are we trying to get the students to learn the material? If the emphasis is on learning, then increasing the workload may be a good idea. The work is what causes the learning. If the emphasis is on points, then lets just let them retake it as much as they want to get more points. But why try the test again if you haven't learned any more of the concepts that you were missing in the first place?
2. Every section (i.e. chapter), students are required to take all the concepts from that section and explain or show how they all connect together into one coherent "big picture." The students almost unanimously hate doing this, and quite frankly, I hate grading it. Its always terrible, and the students complain about the grades they get. It has turned into "point-grabbing," where students are just doing it to get it done and get the points. They don't see the purpose in it because they don't really understand how all the concepts of the section are interrelated. Their idea of a connection is that we talked about temperature on two different days, therefore, those two lessons are connected. We have been grading them with points, but now we are shifting to only making it worth 1 point - you either did it or you didn't, and then giving feedback on how they can deepen their understanding of the concepts.
I spent several minutes today trying to get them to see that this requires a shift in mindset. They have to shift their thinking (and so do I) from getting a certain grade to learning the material. If they learn the material, the grade will be good. In talking about this connection sheet, they said they aren't going to do it because now it isn't graded, which shows that they are thinking about the points rather than the learning. To quote Megan, "Its not about the points, its about the learning."
This is a difficult paradigm shift for both myself and my students. All we've ever known is points. Get as many points as possible to get the good grade to get the good GPA to get into the good college to get a good job. Nowhere in that line of thinking is growth.
I think the more we can get our young people to have growth as their goal, rather than reward, the better off we will all be. Growth often requires discomfort, hard work, and error, which is why we shy away from it.
1. Test Retakes. We allow students to retake their tests (if they get a D or F) to raise their grade on that test up to a 75%. In order to retake a test, students have to fill out a Google form, come in for help to go over what they missed, and then make time on a certain day to retake the test. However, we have begun to think about requiring students to complete and show us all their homework for the entire chapter before retaking the test. This would likely increase the students' work load if they want to retake a test (since their homework is daily, but only collected occasionally).
My concern with this is that, due to the increased required work, students will opt out of retaking tests, thus keeping their D or F grade. Megan pushed me to consider what the point of the retake is in the first place. Are we simply trying to give the students more points and higher grades? Or are we trying to get the students to learn the material? If the emphasis is on learning, then increasing the workload may be a good idea. The work is what causes the learning. If the emphasis is on points, then lets just let them retake it as much as they want to get more points. But why try the test again if you haven't learned any more of the concepts that you were missing in the first place?
2. Every section (i.e. chapter), students are required to take all the concepts from that section and explain or show how they all connect together into one coherent "big picture." The students almost unanimously hate doing this, and quite frankly, I hate grading it. Its always terrible, and the students complain about the grades they get. It has turned into "point-grabbing," where students are just doing it to get it done and get the points. They don't see the purpose in it because they don't really understand how all the concepts of the section are interrelated. Their idea of a connection is that we talked about temperature on two different days, therefore, those two lessons are connected. We have been grading them with points, but now we are shifting to only making it worth 1 point - you either did it or you didn't, and then giving feedback on how they can deepen their understanding of the concepts.
I spent several minutes today trying to get them to see that this requires a shift in mindset. They have to shift their thinking (and so do I) from getting a certain grade to learning the material. If they learn the material, the grade will be good. In talking about this connection sheet, they said they aren't going to do it because now it isn't graded, which shows that they are thinking about the points rather than the learning. To quote Megan, "Its not about the points, its about the learning."
This is a difficult paradigm shift for both myself and my students. All we've ever known is points. Get as many points as possible to get the good grade to get the good GPA to get into the good college to get a good job. Nowhere in that line of thinking is growth.
I think the more we can get our young people to have growth as their goal, rather than reward, the better off we will all be. Growth often requires discomfort, hard work, and error, which is why we shy away from it.
Monday, November 3, 2014
Parent v. Teacher
Parents and teachers share something in common: They both want what is best for the student. What do you do, though, when the parent and teacher completely disagree on what is best for the child?
I have come across a case like this in one of my classes. One student, we'll call him Charlie, is consistently on the verge of failing. He often is distracted by his phone, other students, or is content to simply sit and do nothing rather than work on the task at hand. He rarely comes prepared for class. He is a nice kid, and he is intelligent, too, but he just doesn't seem to care about how well he does in school, let alone chemistry. We think that he needs to show more effort and initiative, and that we can be more diligent about checking in with him, but that he is placed in the right class.
However, the parents disagree. They see that he is failing and have initiated a request to move Charlie down to KI (Key Ideas) Chemistry, a lower level class. This logic makes sense: Charlie is failing general chemistry, so let's move him into a class that goes at a slower pace with more supports so that he can keep up. The administration has really dragged their feet, though, since we believe that moving Charlie will not be beneficial for him, and therein lies the rub. The parents have become quite frustrated with this - and rightfully so. If I thought my kid needed to be moved to a different class, and the administration would not respond, I'd be very frustrated. Parents should have the say over their children's education, shouldn't they?
At the same time, teachers and their administrators should have strong input. They are, after all, the professional educators in the situation, and they see how the student interacts with the material on a daily basis. The teachers and administrators also have a deep understanding of the situation - they know exactly how the KI and general classes compare. In this case, KI would be worse for Charlie - he doesn't need more cognitive support at a slower pace - he needs to put in some work and apply himself. He would have the same problem in KI.
What do you do, then, when teachers and administration completely disagree on what is best for the student? Both parties want to do what is best for the Charlie, but they view the solution in polar opposites. This one has not yet been worked out. We are pushing for extra support (like daily check-ins) in the meantime to keep Charlie on pace. We'll have to wait and see what the outcome is.
I have come across a case like this in one of my classes. One student, we'll call him Charlie, is consistently on the verge of failing. He often is distracted by his phone, other students, or is content to simply sit and do nothing rather than work on the task at hand. He rarely comes prepared for class. He is a nice kid, and he is intelligent, too, but he just doesn't seem to care about how well he does in school, let alone chemistry. We think that he needs to show more effort and initiative, and that we can be more diligent about checking in with him, but that he is placed in the right class.
However, the parents disagree. They see that he is failing and have initiated a request to move Charlie down to KI (Key Ideas) Chemistry, a lower level class. This logic makes sense: Charlie is failing general chemistry, so let's move him into a class that goes at a slower pace with more supports so that he can keep up. The administration has really dragged their feet, though, since we believe that moving Charlie will not be beneficial for him, and therein lies the rub. The parents have become quite frustrated with this - and rightfully so. If I thought my kid needed to be moved to a different class, and the administration would not respond, I'd be very frustrated. Parents should have the say over their children's education, shouldn't they?
At the same time, teachers and their administrators should have strong input. They are, after all, the professional educators in the situation, and they see how the student interacts with the material on a daily basis. The teachers and administrators also have a deep understanding of the situation - they know exactly how the KI and general classes compare. In this case, KI would be worse for Charlie - he doesn't need more cognitive support at a slower pace - he needs to put in some work and apply himself. He would have the same problem in KI.
What do you do, then, when teachers and administration completely disagree on what is best for the student? Both parties want to do what is best for the Charlie, but they view the solution in polar opposites. This one has not yet been worked out. We are pushing for extra support (like daily check-ins) in the meantime to keep Charlie on pace. We'll have to wait and see what the outcome is.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)