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.

 

The more the students do...

As teachers we all seem to agree that the more the students work the more learning that occurs.  Yet we seem to be prepared to lead them step-by-step through mathematical processes, we make them sit and listen to long periods of lecture, we read solutions to homework - we make them sedentary.

So I have been reflecting, planning and working hard to keep them doing math - utilizing the entire 44 minute class period.  Class time is our time for math, I couple that with smaller homework assignments and a constant barrage of "You have to study math" versus assigning problems to grade or check.  But making the class period a power packed period of doing math has been #1!  So no homework grading, lectures are broken into segments with students doing (trying to get to 6 minutes max of me talking).    The goal is to get most of the doing (which is learning) in the class period, where as an instructor I can guide them.

It means not being too helpful though, struggle is okay when guided - when I ride in on my white donkey (budget cuts) to save a student I am most often doing a disservice.  So I constantly remind myself to "be less helpful."

In the end - students need to work more, I need to guide more, "teach" less and I expect better student outcomes. yself to "be less helpful."

Real world consequences? Responsibility? Our job is skills.

If you teach you have heard this from some teacher, "XYZ student does not do his/her work, if they don't do anything what can I do?  And if I do something special, is that fair? Am I really preparing him/her for the real world?  What about responsibility?"

Responsibility? Real world consequences?  Interesting thought, interesting title; let me be clear that High School is not the real world, it is a student world.  And while performance in HS is important, the "direct relationship" between HS performance and job performance is not a guarantee.   I fired a lot of "smart" people who played school well in my previous career.  We shouldn't teach responsibility at the HS level as a pass/fail; we must make sure they have skills, responsibility is second.  (And ever time I hear an employer whine about responsibility - I simply think of supply and demand - pay little, get little.  Interview poorly, get poor hires.) 

We need to try to make sure that responsibility is there, that students understand the difference between HS and the world. But my number one job is make sure my students have enough math to move on outside my walls - I cannot let a student's irresponsibility be an excuse.  That includes the kids who won't play school and do not want to do their work.

I completely believe with students who don't care about their grade that they need more assistance, the world requires them to have a diploma.  When, we teachers, let them fail we are creating a problem and not doing our job.  (Now a disclaimer or point of order, even when we do our job they may fail because the other edge of this sword is not lowering standards.)  We need to make sure, work towards, all students getting the learning done.  Thus the C word, consequences; preferably like the real-world would give.  Cause an F does not motivate them, a zero doesn't, those are not consequences for someone not playing school.

And while HS is their job now, it is not real-world  job.  We can talk about expectations but we cannot treat students who won't play school that school is like a real job.  Cause it simply isn't. 

And why would we want HS to be real-world!  In the world decisions are made more often about money and productivity, not about people - the world will make relationships but only with employees who have made a commitment to the business (and in corporate America that really does not happen).  In school every day can be new with students, chances can be plentiful.  And that is great -- firing and laying people off is overrated and  NO FUN!

So when a student does not work, I work with them.  I don't make it about grades, I make about a skill - about their future.  I also tell them that my job is not to just let them fail - I am suppose to make failing harder than passing!  I make the skill so important that I will pull them from lunch, before school, after school -- from study hall, you name it - I will do it.  And not surprisingly if they get success once and know you care, they start at least doing the minimum.


And if you think that is easy, you are not a teacher.

What Great Teachers Do Differently -- Thoughts on Whitaker's Book

So I just finished reading Todd Whitaker's book What Great Teachers Do Differently (here is a link to a  document with some of the book ideas).  It was a pleasant book to read, it was kind of a gathering of ideas that supported the basic idea that great teachers care about kids; they form a relationships, they do what is best for kids, etc.

But I took away a couple of things for me, that I did not find "common."  First, the idea that great teachers don't make rules based on one to two students or parents.  This meaning deal with trouble directly, not with the entire class but those who need the attention, which I already did.  But more importantly ask yourself what would my best students think - that is a great phrase because that is what the world does with employees too.  If my best students/parents find a note that comes home about a rule insulting - don't send it!   Deal with the 2 of 30 students who are causing an issue.

I already did not have a lot of rules and I preach "fair-ness over equal-ness," meaning each person is treated fairly - that does mean people are treated slightly differently depending on the situation and needs of the student. And that is okay, that is how the world works.  If one student needs attention for behavior, I deal with that one student.  If one student has an issue and cannot do homework for a couple of days, I excuse that student.  The teacher must make the decision and must do his or her best to be fair (NOT EQUAL).

The second thing I took from the book was the reminder that I only control me.  I am the variable in the classroom that I can control.  The teacher can really only change his or her performance!   It is my job to reach out, prod and push these students - to make sure they are doing math each day in my room at least.  And if we (the student and I) can get 45 minutes per day of effort on math - then we can almost always progress through the math requirements for a HS diploma.  Cause that diploma is the ticket to nearly everything in the workplace.  And we don't let 15 year olds make life alternating decisions without pushing them hard, at a minimum, in a positive direction.

Again it is nice read, short -- and makes you reflect on what you are doing in your classroom.

Preparing students is my job, even those who would rather not be students

I see my job as to make sure all the students in my room get enough math to be ready for the world with respect to college and career.  Thus when a student does not want to learn, refuses to do homework, etc I do many things.  One thing is for sure, a student is not "allowed" to sit and take an F in my room.

Not to say every student passes, but I also do not let 16 year olds make life decisions such as "I don't need math." or "I don't need a dipolma."  I simply don't use grades as a motivator.  If a student is motivated by grades I don't have to worry about that student's effort. If he or she isn't, well, then we have to find what does motivate them.

This year I have a few more students who are not too interested in school than usual.  So the last thing I do is use a traditional homework/study/test class setting for those students.  Given the opportunity they would cause disruptions, try to sleep (which I don't allow either), or some other less than helpful thing and simply fail.  Again it is a young adult making a poor decision, my job is to help guide.

And since I believe what I teach is a key to their future success I make it my job to get them to do enough to learn what they need.  That means all kinds of things, students staying before and after school.  Students eating lunch with me (how cool is that - eating lunch with me - the math teacher!).  Adjusting homework so we get what we need - everyone does not have to do it the same.

Now I hear teachers say that does not prepare them for work - for the responsibility.  But school's number one job is to get them the problem solving skills, responsibility is usually something not learned at school - simply punished.  And it is funny, the worst students can often be good employees - saw it many times.  They realize the difference between a job and school and perform as required.

My job is to make school their job - forget grades - grades only prove knowledge by some instance in time, we are after them being ready for the world - that is not a grade thing.

So I keep on pushing, challenging, annoying and some of my students may dare-say harassing them to do their work - but in the end they need the skills and the diploma - and that is my job - to drag them through.

Time outside class - Figuring how to Flip

So as I reflect on how we are going to do homework in the coming school year, It's 2013 shouldn't HS HW look different, I am really trying to figure out how to use a flipped classroom to help deliver content.  I know there is value in doing practice and problem solving during class when I can help guide the students.  I also know a lot of the low level practice can be done outside of the class.  But how much is enough?  What I mean is how much time besides the 220 in-class minutes do I need per week? 

In the past I have asked for 15-20 minutes of outside work 5 days per week, for projects, homework, etc.  - though students tend to procrastinate the projects into 2-3 hour sprints.  And it should be noted that I had already taken daily practice to 4-8 problems that are complete review for practice (I don't assign new content for homework).  So my thought going forward is to keep the 100 minutes per week of outside time (with study halls that is not too much), somewhat tough to pick a number because everyone works at different speeds, but it is a target.

That would allow me to assign about 20-30 minutes of "online" practice per week, 15 minutes of pencil/paper homework per week, 25-40 minutes of project work per week leaving 15-40 minutes for flipped instruction.  That would be about 2-3 videos per week (seems like a lot).  My goal would be 1 video per week, perhaps 2.

The problem is how do you know whether a student watched the video, it would be awfully hard to do practice in class without an idea of the content (students will try to though - asking to be taught the video info in class).  How do you know they watched?  Reflections (google docs)? Notes?  A worked sample problem?  And what do you do with the students who don't watch the videos, is it the same problem as homework?   Remember most students are minimalists, at 16 who cares if you understand, they are just trying to get it done (at least that was how I was).

Currently I make students stay after school to do the work on the same day (see HW FAQ), I treat assigned work like deadline work in the world, and I suppose I could do the same with flipped videos but I still need something to check (a problem, note sheet, reflection, a quiz).  My temptation is to do notes for upper level courses and perhaps a google doc reflection in the trilogy courses (Alg 1, Geom, Alg 2).  I plan to start making some Physics videos soon -- that would be a high level course in my school.  So I would expect to see notes (because the course is open note for all quizzes, tests and exams).  In the trilogy courses I think I will start with the google doc reflection (thanks to Brian Steffen). 

Either way the commitment is made -- math is gonna be different.

Do we really want the best teachers?

As a country we talk about wanting the best people to be teachers, because if we put students first a great teacher makes a huge difference.  Society says that's what we want, the culture says that's what we want. But I just received my contract for teaching next year. And there's a disconnect between what we say we want and what we do.

In my former job in the private sector, you would never think to sign a contract with blank spaces. Yet my teaching contract for next year had a blank spot for salary. And that blank spots' meaning cannot be lost on us and what it implies.  (Also I don't blame the school where I work for the contract I received. They are slave to state funding, they have little choice but to give a contract that the state dictates by their budget.)

It implies that while we say we want the best teachers; we truly are unwilling to do the things that brings and keeps the best people in education.   Unfortunately we really don't want the best teachers, we want smart charitable people. The best typically will go where the rewards are.

In my case I cannot even be rewarded with a guarantee of what my next year salary will be, if I want a job I need to sign it.  Due to how the state does school financing my school cannot even write in the amount that I made this year. How do we expect to attract the smartest and the brightest people to make a real difference?

I was successful in my former job, I was good at my former job. I wanted to teach but it shouldn't have to be charitable. We should want the brightest for education and should be willing to go get them.
 
I hear and read that teachers make the most difference in a student's progress, yet they're the ones we abuse. We do not make teaching a desirable position, and overall we don't respect the position much either.  I find myself more respected than other teachers. People will say "Oh, you're a teacher."  and I reply"Yes, I teach math," and they go"Oh I couldn't do that."  That implies they could teach anything else but math, not everyone can teach.  And to be good at it, and to keep the good people in it, the public sector must treat its best employees like the private sector.

The interesting part is people talk of what 'has to happen in education.' But there really isn't any drive to fix it. It takes great teachers in education to make a difference, and we are not going to attract great teachers.  Overall you get what you pay for, and with salaries and benefits going in free-fall compared to inflation simply means we will get mediocre teachers. (And the occasional few who was simply want to teach no matter what the financial reward.)

I love teaching. But every year, at about this time,  I have to consider the pay and what I could make in engineering, my former career. If the pay for teaching was simply a little more, so I was not constantly struggling, and if the respect a little more, I'm sure I wouldn't make that consideration.  But those things are not there in education presently so every year I think about leaving teaching.

I'm at a loss for how to change the culture and dedication to education of the United States; how we change how we treat teachers. I'm also at a loss for how to put students first, meaning how to get great teachers. If you put students first, and I usually do, they need great teachers. That means compensation for the best, and a contract with a blank spot for pay doesn't make the best want to stay.

"Your job is school." Student reply "I don't get paid." Yes they do....

I have one rule in my classroom.  Our classroom is our workplace.  A workplace itself has a large set of inherit rules that make my classroom run.  I then mention that teaching is obviously my job and their job is learning,  And every year I can count on one student saying "No it is not mmmyyyy job, I don't get paid."  And I reply "Yes, you do."

It leads to a discussion that I allow to happen each day for a few minutes for several class periods and ends with the students receiving their first open ended project.  (I let the discussions occur until nothing new is said).

The assignment is to research what a High School diploma is worth over the student's lifetime.  Then calculate the "pay per hour" to earn that degree.  It is done as an essay, including citing and supporting calculations.

For round numbers there is a 300K difference in lifetime earnings between a HS grad and an non-HS grad.  Then assume 40 hour per week with homework, 38 week per year (rough) and 4 years to graduate.  And you end up with $300,000/(40 hr/wk*38 wk/yr*4yr) = $49/hr.   


And while the students joke about it, I believe it really helps for the students to see the value in HS.

It is just deferred compensation......