Good versus Great - Making tough decisions.....

Had my great friend (thanks Mary!) send me an article on how good teachers become great.  I am always looking for the great activities, the best, and those are done at the expense of good things.  Knowing what not to do, I believe, is as important as knowing what to do -- because there simply are not enough minutes.

I found the post great because it started talked about perfect lesson plans, bulletin boards and binders.  The title said great teaching - and that is my goal - and I don't do any of that.  Ugh!  It was talking about all the things I skip to put time on authentic tasks that make students ready for what lays beyond my walls.  But then just about when I was ready to scream - it pivoted about how students need opportunities - authentic tasks.  And how much of the good teacher tasks must be skipped to be great (whew...) ---  saying: "In fact, becoming a great teacher requires that much of the good teacher code be broken." 

Think of all the things that can suck time -- Having perfect lessons, or the best hall passes or having all the right forms and binders prepared....    Heck those are things I often make the office ask for twice (cause a lot of stuff they ask for they just file, and most of the time - they ask once and not again).  Doing TPS things just takes more time than it is worth.  Uhhh...yeeahh...

Making things happen takes time but I think great teaching is letting students go (it was the number 1 thing in the article) - and that does not take as much time.  But I think that is hard for us as teachers.  Control can seem like a precious commodity, but in the end it is in the student's best interest to put them in control.  And success is nice but a lot more can be learned in failure and revision (for us teachers too).  

And the results are undeniable once you put students in control.  For years I have assigned projects using ideas and software that I have not done.  I think I could - but I am after end results, students can figure out details to create things (assigning a 3D house in Google Sketch Up is the largest project - I can barely draw a prism in Sketch Up). 

I plan to focus my upcoming reflections on how important minutes are in my classroom.  Not just for me and my time, but more importantly, my students time.

 

Okay versus Great, planning is key

So I have entered my 10th year of teaching (how I am not sure, actually I cannot believe 10 years has already pasted, but that is another topic for another day), and most educational "people" would say that those years make me better.  And that I agree with - so as I prepped for the first week of school - prepared my room, my google classroom (my virtual room), and many details with the telepresence course I teach - I decided to use my daily plans from last year for the first 3 days.   I am always thinking about ways to skip good to do great - reusing did NOT result in great.....

So this experiment I ran with planning just did not work.  I felt under-prepared, it took me 10 minutes to plan 3 days by "re-using" (copying) last year's plans.  I typically would take 90 minutes and I now know with certainty that I must give that time and thought to each week.  It is a combination of planning and reflection, where reflection of how to teach and reach the students is my driving consideration.

So the plan was there, but the reflection was not.  It kept me from having the insights, often when planning I think about misconceptions, vocab, common errors - when I just reused the opening days I missed those thoughts and thus felt like I was chasing my tail during the lessons (FYI - I teach the very first day -- I do "class" stuff, like rules, etc later -- we have math to do!).

So even though I have more experience, shortening planning time is not a trade of good for great.  Planning time is a requirement of great.

What I control

Lately I have been doing a large amount of reflecting on what I control in a classroom (working from Whitaker's 14 things great teachers do ).  I cannot control what a student does outside my door very easily, heck, it is hard to control them within my room (from a desire to learn perspective - from a classroom management perspective I do okay).

I control myself, the relationships I make, the passion I bring to the room.  If my class is boring whose fault is that!  I know math can be dry -- but I don't have to be. I control my room, my relationships and expectations, the projects we do, and what the students find important.

I cannot control others in the building, or other schools, or in the community or in the state legislature, I can only make sure that I make an environment where my room is a sanctuary of learning the math skills the world requires of today's students.  I try and create a place where we do things the students need to know to succeed - sorry Smarter Balanced Test.   Where students don't strive for an artificial grade but for real skills, real problem solving - skills that will allow them to succeed beyond the walls of my school.  I don't teach math for students to play school but to gain the ability to be successful outside the walls of my room.

Those are the things I control.  And everyday I know I have to approach my room with a desire and fire.  What we do within my room is greatly important.  We work hard to skip merely good and go for great.

I control that.

Digital means lasting effects....

Today I received an email from a teacher who left our district over 5 years ago and ran across our Math Rap from last year (done by our math team in 1 period of PreCalc).  It was nice because he took the time to drop me note about it.  That really shows the power of youtube and other things, it is a great way to tie people together across schools, across real geography (he is now states away).  I had not heard from him in the time previously so it really was a professional connection.

Now the video/the idea is planted somewhere else to see and be considered.  Whether you think it is good or bad, you need to think about it (reflection is a mother isn't it!).  I slowly see "my library" expanding on media and hopefully seeing some more comments and hopefully new thoughts. 

It reaffirms my belief that change needs to be continous.  Meaning slow progress on making each course better -- whether thru the use of technology, or taking chances and truly reflecting on what works (and doesn't) and making improvements.  As each thing is recorded, created, posted or whatever we are making a log of reflection.  Also it starts to make a lasting culture for the school and district....

The big programs -- NCLB, Race to the Top, etc. don't focus enough on creating the cultural change needed in the classroom for true improvement.  I am now recommiting the "good" to only try and do "great."

Is Algebra Necessary?

So on July 28th the New York Times ran an article titled "Is Algebra Necessary?"  by Andrew Hacker and it posed the question of the necessity of Algebra on non-STEM students.  It also stated the dismal statistics on how Algebra or being unprepared for college Algebra cripples a large portion of college students.  But really I think what the author is talking about, though stated as a fairly radical idea, is not wholly off base.  It is just a sign that we, math teachers, are not spending enough time with applications while teaching Algebra/Geometry/Algebra II -- the college prep trio.

The author talked about teaching the consumer price index (CPI) and more ideas, I think ideas like this are absolutely required and need time in our college prep trio.  I already have added loans to Algebra 1, computer programming (through Alice) & 3D drawings to Geometry, and stocks/retirement planning to Algebra 2.  (Note I think I will stick CPI into Alg 2 retirement planning -- just "stealing" another idea).  But these projects come at a cost -- there are topics in each course that receive less time or are put off until Pre-Calculus that many neighboring schools do in the trio. 

Some examples of items I delay would be - no coverage of the quadratic formula in Algebra 1 (solving through factoring and simply squares only), no matrices in Algebra 2 (especially Cramer's rule -- a horrible short cut for a weak math student - just memorize this - no need to think..), limited conics in Algebra 2, limited proofs in Geometry, etc.  The list could go on and on.   But we are only armed with 180 days and must make tough decisions as math educators.  The common core does not set grade level or class level targets for 9-12 (unlike K-8) meaning that we have to make the best system that creates students prepared for their world.  While remembering that in our world problem-solvers are required, singing the quadratic formula isn't.....

I think too many teachers have now become test scared.  I don't cover a lot of subjects yet testing-wise my district is doing fine -- meeting the standards, which really doesn't prove much.....   Except many schools around me do "cover" everything and are not testing as well as my school.  Why?

I think the projects I am developing and refining create students who attack problems and are more persistent than students who get the "coverage."   So on power-tests they can use what they know and work their way through many problems that had limited to no-coverage in the trio.  (These skills are really the common core mathematical practices!)

I think it is this question, "Where are the applications?" that the author is asking about in the article.  Algebra is necessary, period.  But how much, at what point in the trio, how the curriculum is arranged, the speed of coverage and demands of mastery are the questions.  If you want to see what projects I do see the google docs below (realize these are not-every complete and change constantly each year)

Algebra 1 Loans

Geometry Alice

Geometry 3D House

 Algebra 2 Stocks