The Great Educator

It is becoming more and more difficult to ‘reach’ kids and to teach kids.  It’s not the fault of the student, the parent, the community, or society.  I believe we all play a part in the education of students and we all play a role in the success or failure, but generally there is not one person to blame.  It cannot be a blame game as in the story of Puff who had all the magic.  Blaming got them stuck in state of unsuccessful stagnation.

Our children are products of commercialization.  This poses problems for our teachers, but it can also serve as a tool.  Everywhere our students go, they are bombarded with various types of advertising to partake in a product.  It could range from a telephone service to chewing gum.  They see it in bathroom stalls, on the sides of buses, in the hallways, on tv, at any sporting event they attend, the list could go on and on.  As Giroux pointed out in his article, we are no longer promoting a democracy of citizens, but a democracy of consumers.  But as educators and schools, we will do almost anything for these companies just to get a little assistance in our underfunded institutions.  Don’t want to buy book covers?  Well, I bet there is a company that will sponsor as long as their product is splashed across the front.  Need additional curriculum to address electricity in you science classes?  There is a local electric co-op that would love to help you as long as you add their logo to your curriculum.  These companies have professionals that make their materials more exciting and stimulating, appealing to our kids.  One positive aspect of commercial involvement is that we can learn…learn from their success.  Teachers should take ideas of what gets kids excited and engaged and incorporate those strategies into their lessons.  We live in a different era; all educational stakeholders must embrace that, rather than avoid it.  We will leave our workplace less frustrated, tired, and drained, all the while mumbling “those darn kids!”  It is not our kids, its our society.

Saying all of that, I believe we must focus on creating and stimulating citizens, rather than consumers.  Promotion of choice, involvement, and participation is fundamental. Integrating these skills in lessons is not easy, but with practice it can become routine.  Mr. Giroux mentioned in his interview that our society rewards those that embrace cookie-cutter curriculums, but we all know all of our children are not formed out of the same mold!  How can educators combat this ideal that has been forced in our schools?  I believe teachers must teach what is required and expected, but adapt based on the student and community needs.  In their spare time (ha!), teachers can actively promote and support reform for our schools.

I recently shared an article with my staff that described the work day of a CEO in a multi-billion dollar corporation.  His day was grueling and the success of this company hung on his minute by minute decision-making and democratic formation of his company.  The interviewer asked him to take a local standardized mathematics test that the 5^th graders would be facing that year.  Guess what….he failed the exam!  Success is not measured by a test and all of our students will not measure the same at the end of the day, but each has a talent.  It should be our goal to uncover those talents and guide these students to a path that will prepare them for society…not a test.  I enjoyed Giroux’s point that the tests we are administering are fit to measure the height of trees, not the measure of a child.

Social Diversity

While watching the third part of Country Boys, I realized the impact that our cultural hegemony has on some of our students.  In the documentary, it was not an overt example, but I took notice of the new, white male, clean-cut, director of the school.  He was discussing the upcoming graduation ceremony that Chris was going to take part in.  The director was asking Chris who might attend and the importance of delivering the invitations.  When Chris commented that his mom, grandmother, siblings, dad probably would not or could not come, the director was very nonchalant in his response as he urged Chris to just tell him mom and grandmother and surely they would attend.  He did mention being able to assist with transportation.  The director never considered the real life circumstances that transpire in this family.  Could Chris’s mom be fired from her job if she took off?  Is there no operating vehicle in this family?  Is it really likely that Chris’s dad could show up drunk and vomit in the audience?  Could Chris initiate a fight with the new boyfriend?  Is this event really important to anyone in this family?  I would probably be just as guilty as the new director in not considering any of these questions because these events really don’t go on.  Or do they?  We have instilled in our society and transfer into our students that the norm is a white-collar dad, with a stay at home mom who celebrate events such as graduation.  The family has two fairly new vehicles with a family dog and everything is bright and cheery in the home.  Drug and alcohol issue are taboo and family disputes are rare.  Do I think the director feels that Chris has a perfect life?  Of course not, but I don’t think that we as educators truly understand the struggles that students face, even in something as small as arriving to a graduation.  While transferring this cultural hegemony of “the way things should be”, we sometimes overlook and ignore the way life really can turn out and situations that some of our students have come from or currently live in.  This example was very miniscule in the big scheme of cultural hegemony and hidden curriculum, but it really stood out to me while viewing the documentary.

Schools have transformed from the idea of teaching how to read, write, and count.  Educators are responsible for shaping beliefs, values, and morals.  Is this the right thing to do?  Probably not, but it naturally happens.  Especially since schools began as institutions that instilled religious moral values.  I believe we must present information, provide available solutions and outcomes, but we must ultimately let the student’s make their own choices.  As Dewey said, “schools are only one agency of socialization”.  Students are going to absorb cues from their parents, friends, television, magazines, etc.  One example I was involved in a couple of years ago happened when President Obama was going to address the schools.  I have never experienced such uproar from the community in their obvious dissatisfaction with this decision.  Parents were concerned that the president would indoctrinate their children.  We did not air the address at school, but I understand some people’s opposition to the address.  However, the one’s I don’t understand are the parents who allow their children to watch R rated films or help their parents with their latest drug deal, etc.  But, again I respect their decision, but question whether their children receive indoctrination from other sources as well.  I support the message of President Obama so I assume this means I support the hidden curriculum that is present in schools.  With that acknowledgement noted to self, I do strive to consider all characteristics and backgrounds that children come from or are exposed to in every interaction that I have with students.

As educators, we must be very careful when educating a diverse population.  Often, we assume that students share our feelings, experiences, backgrounds, as in the David School example.  Educators don’t go in knowing everything there is to know about our kids, but we must strive to gain a deeper understanding every day, every year of our children.  Cultural pluralism is so vital to the success of our efforts.  We must truly know our students before we can truly reach them and ultimately teach them.  If it takes extra work on our part or developing alternative strategies, then that is part of our jobs.  We have chosen a career that is responsible for educating a rapidly changing environment.  I think one successful way of achieving this is to present concepts from different cultures.  When teaching reading strategies, it is beneficial to incorporate readings that pull from various cultures.  Everyone in the class is learning about each other, while gaining valuable skills.  Assimilation has been a huge mistake on the part of many educators, but sometimes we unintentionally try to replace cultural norms.  For example, we teach kids to make eye contact with adults, everyone they come in contact with.  It shows confidence and attention.  Professor Wilson brought up in his interview that many inner-city youths are taught not to make eye contact because of potential dangers.  We must not assume that everyone grows up knowing this or practicing it.  I believe that we must prepare students to be successful in society, but also be sensitive to various backgrounds and situations.  Don’t teach that your way is the only, but maybe your way might be appropriate in situations and the student’s way in others.  This scenario can be transferred into our role as educators in the preparation of our youth for a world outside of school.  If nothing else, we are preparing student’s to be decisive, democratic citizens who can take the lessons and information provided to them and make choices that will benefit their lives.

School Reform

School reform is a touchy, passionate subject because most everyone is directly affected in one way or another and most everyone has an opinion.

School reform should begin with those closest to our children.  Parents, teachers, school administration, community members, and students should have direct part in creating and implementing school reform.  If these educational members do not have a voice in reform, it is very likely that it may not occur.  Why would we not involve the practitioners in the process?  Our local, state, and federal officials should provide the vehicle and the support for making educational changes.  Our government should provide the resources, but with flexibility so that educators can provide the optimum learning environment for our children.  When our state and federal government strong-hands its way into educational decision-making, it forms a resentment among educators and generally an extraordinary amount of unnecessary initiatives, followed by an extraordinary amount of paperwork.

A reform example that supports these ideals is that of the Small School Workshop.  This organization is composed of educators wanting to make a difference and promotes the importance of the ‘small school’ and the benefits of small learning communities on student education.  This organization prides itself on a unique program, not one that has a pre-determined schematic approach.  What is important to note is that this reform effort works with the direct stakeholders—the students and the teachers.  This effort blossomed from an individual who recognized the benefits of the small school.  Working in both rural and large urban schools, I also see the positive benefits of learning communities.  The small-school approach is a prime example of amazing reform that could flourish with support from state and federal entities.

The David School has taken cues from the ideals of the small school environment for at-risk youth.  Rather than a business, the David School is a community.  Based on the recordings from students meetings with administration, it is apparent that students are heard and have a voice in their future.  Instead of the adults making all the decisions, the students and parents are involved in the process.  For example, when Chris was in trouble for providing substances to other students, he and his mom were also engaged during the conversations about his future.  It is obvious that the staff at the David School know their kids, know their problems, and are involved with their destiny.  Why would they not be the stakeholders in reform for these students?

Abandoning the belief that the government should guide these decisions would be controversial and doubtful that it would ever occur because education is a national platform.  In our society, education is fundamental and stirs the highest emotions.  The question must be raised though, “Would educators ever testify as experts in the oil business or experts on foreign relations?”  Of course not!  Why is it still okay for politicians to pose as experts in what is best for our students?  Controversial…I think so!!!

Gender Equity

Who is that man, posing so bravely as a soldier dedicated to service during the Civil War?  Wait….is that a woman?  Actually, it is Frances Clayton, a woman who served in the Missouri artillery and cavalry during the Civil War.  She is disguised as a man so that she could serve her country during times of battle.

As a young woman in the 21^st century, the strife that Frances Clayton endured or the resolutions made during the Seneca Falls Declaration are near unfathomable to me.  It is also difficult to relate to some of the current articles that discuss discrimination of female students because I cannot recall a time where I have felt bias based upon my gender.  I have been fortunate to be raised as an American citizen, experienced a successful education, moved up the ranks quickly in my profession, and gained respect during my tenure as an administrator.  I have been very lucky….the opportunities appear endless.

With that being said, gender discrimination was obvious in early America and other countries.  It is still present in many areas, even in the good ole’ USA.  However, research does show that the gaps between girls and boys have been significantly reduced in academic areas and achievement in schools and continuing education.  For example, “The Silent Gender Gap: Education Week 11/17/99” article outlined a four year study conducted by the Educational Testing Service where data from 400 different tests were analyzed.  The study concluded that the gender differences were very small and gaps have been increasingly reduced over the past 30 years.  In her article, “The Myth that Schools Shortchange Girls”, Judith Kleinfeld stated that females lag behind in two academic subjects, science and mathematics.  Males struggle with reading and writing.  Since this article, the gap continues to become smaller.  For example, I examined the AEIS reports for Boles ISD.  In tow consecutive years, females and males scored within one percentage point of each other in mathematics.  In science, males outscored females, but the prior year, the scores were reversed.  In reading and writing, the differences were negligible in both subjects for both years. 

Schools have been successful in transitioning away from grouping students based on gender, nationality, social class, etc.  We are no longer under the ideals of Charles Eliot, who had a ‘creative’ way of defining equal opportunity for all.  In the 21^st century, individualized attention and instruction is based on the needs of the student, rather than their gender, race, or socioeconomic background. 

Rita

When I think of a principal of a school, I envision a strong leader of faculty, but also a leader of students.  In the current state of education, it is difficult for an administrator to focus on students because of the growing amount of accountability that administration and teachers are facing.  Often educating the ‘whole’ child is thrown to the wayside and the attention and focus is placed on achieving positive results on a standardized test.  However, educating the ‘whole’ child and obtaining educational success is possible; Rita Martinelli has the vision and the characteristics of a leader who could hurdle the obstacles and win the ultimate prize!

If Rita Martinelli were placed in the David School as an administrator, I believe the common vision would stay intact, but Ms. Martinelli would implement some revisions and encounter some challenges.

Ms. Martinelli is highly focused on viewing her campus through a social justice lens.  It would be vital for her to extend this perspective to her staff.  Some of the staff members at the David School seemed attuned to the unique needs at the David School, but not all of them in the video appeared to have a sincere interest in the outcome of students’ progress.  The students of the David School would benefit if the staff attended social training that instilled an understanding of these children and to explore strategies that would reach this unique group of high school students.

The David School did not appear to have a character education component intertwined in the curriculum.  There was an obvious lack of outward respect between the students and the staff.  While this may be a strategy used so that students feel comfortable in this environment, the David School students will ultimately have to concede to common social norms in the workplace.  Rita Martinelli would implement a program to teach reciprocal respect and social skills to promote a positive learning environment.  The program would mirror efforts that Ms. Martinelli utilized in her classroom.

Ms. Martinelli will face several challenges at the David School.  Her background includes working with at-risk students in the classroom, but Rita’s administrative experience was primarily with high-achieving, upper-middle class students.  She will be faced with a different type of student, parent, and community at the David School.  Rita possesses the drive to learn and mold her awareness which will ensure her success at the David School.  Rita’s flexibility was evident in her days at Wilson as a teacher and an administrator. 

At the end of the day, kids are still kids and most respond to a kind and nurturing environment that considers the social problems that students face and their various demographic backgrounds.  Rita will be successful because she is cognizant of these differences and takes the initiative to make favorable changes or create programming that fosters a tolerance for diverse environments.