As a teacher keep my personal political opinions out of the classroom, but I also feel it is important for all students to question their own beliefs. Too often they repeat what their parents have told them, without the benefit of experience that their parents used to form their own decisions. They need to think for themselves. Interestingly, I spend most of my time defending politicians and policies I disagree with in order to force my students to defend their own positions and think about the other point of view.

The issue of abortion is one I would not normally touch. Not only are the students young and have little real world experience, but it is based in faith. Students do not understand sex, much less the real world consequences. Add to this the gender divide; the boys jump into the discussion ready to tell anyone who will listen what the world should do. This last bit is bad enough during any discussion, but adolescent boys telling girls what to do with their bodies creates a divide that shuts down discussion from the start.

While researching candidates that they would support for the 2008 presidential election several of my female students were heavily influenced by a candidate’s position on abortion. One day my class was being taught by a substitute. As a group researched and talked, three girls suddenly started arguing with another two about the issue. This was not a spirited and respectful discussion, but involved name calling and ended in tears before the substitute was aware of it. Friendships were broken. It was ugly, and the girl who was attacked, normally self confident, was confused.

In response, I designed the following scenarios to get at some of the core issues.

Years before I had bought a copy of moral philosopher Peter Unger’s book “Living High and Letting Die”. In it Unger looks at the issue of poverty and death in most of the world while a few of us live in luxury and excess. In short, if you knew that making coffee at home instead of going to Starbucks saved enough money to save a life for a month would you do do it? It would , but we don’t. Why? Unger offers a series of interesting scenarios that attempt to break down the various reasons (location, knowing the victim, cost to ourselves, victim’s role in their own condition, etc.). I recommend the book, even as the discussion are academic. My students like many of the scenarios (I pick and choose them) and can usually identify the reasons for their choices.

Inspired by Unger, I created a few around abortion. They are not designed to sway students one way or another, but for them to question their moral beliefs without the abortion label. These scenarios take gender out of the equation (so boys have to think about their own choice, not what they think a girl would go through) and the loaded term of abortion. It is about health, lifestyle and the life of another. At the end I put up an encyclopedic entry on abortion, and reveal that the parasite is a child.

When I used it with that volatile group some interesting things happened. Those who were scornful of pro-life abortion positions a week before were adamant about saving another person’s life and scolding about the selfishness of others, even at the risk to their own life. A few of the pro-life students wavered, but appreciated the perspective. The vast majority, who had not really given the issue (or any issue) much thought felt they had a toe hold on the issue.

In speaking with a few students a year later many said revisiting a position made them feel more compassion for those who disagreed with them. They also felt more clear about position they had always held and even felt their position was strengthened.

Procedure

Break the students into three groups. Each group is given one of the three scenarios. One student reads it aloud to his or her group, and everyone in that group writes in their journal for a minute in silence. Then, the discuss it as a group. The group must come to a consensus on what to do.

Have the students come together into a large circle. Have each group read its scenario and then discuss its consensus. They tend not to have a consensus; let people explain the thought process. Move to the second and third groups.

While I wrote Scenario Four and Five I have never used them. They were to explore fault: does it matter if someone has consensual sex or is raped? If I had used them, I would do so after the three groups had presented, but while in the large group. Again, a minute of private thoughts in a journal and then discussion. Move for consensus, which will not be achieved.

The Five Scenarios

SCENARIO ONE

Your doctor tells you that you have a parasite growing in your gut.

For the next year you will feel tired and have a growing discomfort that will disrupt your life and prevent you from doing many of the activities that you currently do and enjoy.  It will probably not hurt or kill you, but it will take a physical toll, hurt you financially and generally disrupt your life and relationships.  Your doctor can schedule a procedure to remove the parasite and you will move on with your normal life.

Your doctor also tells you that this particular parasite produces a chemical that can save another person’s life.  If you are willing to live with the pain and discomfort for one year, he tells you, another person who would die will, instead, live.  At the end of the year the doctor will remove the parasite.

You will probably never know the life you save.

Your Choice: You can have a simple procedure and lead a normal life by next week, or you can disrupt your life and live in discomfort for a year and save a life.

SCENARIO TWO

Your doctor tells you that you have a parasite growing in your gut.

For the next year you will feel tired and have a growing discomfort that will disrupt your life and prevent you from doing many of the activities that you currently do and enjoy.  It will probably not hurt or kill you, but it will take a physical toll, hurt you financially and generally disrupt your life and relationships.  Your doctor can schedule a procedure to remove the parasite and you will move on with your normal life.

Your doctor also tells you that this particular parasite produces a chemical that can save another person’s life.  If you are willing to live with the pain and discomfort for one year, he tells you, another person who would die will, instead, live.  At the end of the year the pain and discomfort will be less noticeable, but always there.  Living with it will change your lifestyle and cost you financially.  Even after twenty years it is something you will live with daily.

Still, you will save a life.  In fact, the life you save will be someone you know.

At this point, if you remove the parasite, no one will know except you.

Your Choice: You can have a simple procedure and lead a normal life by next week, or you can disrupt your life and live in discomfort while saving the life of someone you know.

SCENARIO THREE

Your doctor tells you that you have a parasite growing in your gut.

It will kill you.  For the next year you will feel tired and have a growing discomfort that will disrupt your life and prevent you from doing many of the activities that you currently do and enjoy.  It will take a physical toll, hurt you financially and generally disrupt your life and relationships.  Your doctor can schedule a procedure to remove the parasite and you will move on with your normal life.

Your doctor also tells you that this particular parasite produces a chemical that can save another person’s life.  If you are willing to live with the pain and discomfort for one year, he tells you, another person who would die will, instead, live.  Still, if you do not do the procedure now, you will die.

You will save a life.  In fact, the life you save will be someone you know but are not close to.

At this point, if you remove the parasite, no one will know except you.

Your Choice: You can have a simple procedure and lead a normal life by next week, or you die while saving the life of someone you know distantly.

SCENARIO FOUR

Your friends like to have fun, and part of that is to go to the woods and hang out.

Near your spot is a swimming hole that has been deemed unhealthy.  It is full of parasites that will affect your health and lifestyle.  The local health official has determined that anyone who swims in it has a good chance of getting this parasite.

Still, it’s hot and some of your friends have swam in it to no ill effect.  Still, you know the dangers.  A good friend wants to go swimming, but won’t without you.

You go.  Of course, you get the parasite.

This parasite can save someone else’s life, you are told.  Your doctor lays out your choices: You can have a simple procedure and lead a normal life by next week, or you can disrupt your life and live in discomfort while saving a life.

SCENARIO FIVE

Your friends like to have fun, and part of that is to go to the woods and hang out.

Near your spot is a swimming hole that has been deemed unhealthy.  It is full of parasites that will affect your health and lifestyle.  The local health official has determined that anyone who swims in it has a good chance of getting this parasite.

You stay away.

One night, someone physically picks you up and throws you into the swimming hole.

Of course, you get the parasite.

This parasite can save someone else’s life, you are told.  Your doctor lays out your choices: You can have a simple procedure and lead a normal life by next week, or you can disrupt your life and live in discomfort while saving a life.

The twenty-first century will be about sorting information.

I know this is no great revelation, but it struck me the other day as I was helping a student who knew way too much about Neil Armstrong and Sputnik to put it all together in a single paragraph meant to offer insight into the Cold War. When I suggested that chronological order might be the best, first step he looked at me with no comprehension of what the word meant. When I explained, he could not do it.

In our day, school was like climbing a ladder. We were not exposed to ideas and skills that were not age appropriate, and because schools and libraries were the only source of knowledge–and they help it very tight–knowledge of Indian slaughter and our Founding Fathers’ having slaves did not come out until we first learned the nobility of Manifest Destiny and that “all men are created equal.” In short, we learned when it was felt we were ready to learn. In that way, each rung of the ladder followed logically from the one before it. We were, by college, well rounded and held a common cultural currency.

Those Waldorf and Montessori and John Holt alternative school crowd had always been pounding away at the monopoly, and while 60s radicals get a lot of the blame for destroying common culture our public school system has been quite good at keeping them all at bay. In the end, we all still read Frost and Hemingway, although I am sad that “A Separate Peace” has dropped by the wayside.

Enter the internet. Actually, enter video in the classroom and lots of cable channels at home. Now, first graders learn the truth. Or, a version of the truth, but not necessarily the version of the truth that was given on the bottom rung thirty years ago. So, they come with too much information. My students cannot tell you anything about World War II, but they have amazing amounts of information about Hitler’s private sex life and how the SS was involved in the occult. Heck, “Raiders of the Lost Ark” seems more true and relevant to them than “Saving Private Ryan” or, god forbid, a Cornelius Ryan history.

But I digress. In no way do I mean to be negative, because without this new technology you would not be reading this. This new flurry of information is liberating, because now we can focus on creating meaning and not acquiring facts in a prescribed order.

To the parent of the student I mentioned above, I described his process not as climbing a ladder (old paradigm), but of being thrown into the deep end of a pool. He’s thrashing about, not knowing which way is up, and simply trying to get to the edge. At this point, pointing out his kicking form (i.e., grammar) will not be heard, much less be helpful.

Instead, like any survival expert, we need to advise calm. They need to calmly assess where they are and what steps will get them to the edge of the pool. From there, we can talk about swimming and form.

What does this have to do with Basho? Ah, this new way of thinking is how I got here:

1. I was having coffee this morning, and noticed two old Banana Yoshimoto novels that had been “all the rage” fifteen years ago.
2. Joking where her career went (she was such the hot commodity!), I searched Wikipedia for her and discovered that her father is a famous Japanese poet (and that she’s still very popular; it is me that is out of touch).
3. Thinking his work might be an appropriate for this site, I searched and found no text to post.
4. I did, though, find several mentions to Basho. He kept coming up.
5. My son is a huge fan of the “Magic Tree House”, and in “No. 37 of Dragons something on the Red Dawn” (his words) Jack and Annie meet Basho. About six months ago he shared the book with my wife and me, and we talked about poetry (my wife’s bailiwick) and Asian culture (mine).
6. I had a copy of Basho’s “Travel Sketches”, bought used and never read, which I loaned to my son. He had no interest, but Basho’s smiling face looked up at me as the book kicked around the house wanting to be reshelved.
7. Haiku is one of my least favorite poetry forms, as it is overused. The short length is a distraction from the fact that its restricted length is supposed to drive students to dig deeper with word choice. Instead, their haiku poems just suck.
8. All of this floated around in my head, so that when I could not find a good Yoshimoto poem I felt I could not, at this point, avoid Basho.

Do you see how this random interaction with facts and experiences led me back to Basho’s poetry? And, facing the poems, I found a few that tickled me. The circle of learning is complete, but did not take the form of a ladder.

As teachers, we often want to have students climb the ladder because we can see success clearly and offer support. Learning in the deep end is ugly, and, without measures, many would drown or leave scarred and never go into the pool again. Still, we are so much wiser than our students because we have lived longer and reflect. Time is not a commodity we can afford, yet we need to recreate our own processes as much as possible. They are coming in with much more information than we can imagine. Let’s harness that. Let us mimic the lessons that time gives in those ways we can.

Oh, and here’s the poem. If you want to know more about Basho or how this poem came to be, go here. Or, have students look at the poem with face value. Below the English translation is the Japanese pronunciation.

By My New Banana Plant
Matsuo Basho

by my new banana plant
the first sign of something I loathe
a miscanthus bud!

bashō uete
mazu nikumu ogi no
futaba kana

Truth, there are plenty of cuts to be had before classroom teachers or athletics.  Let’s start with buildings: If student enrollment is going down, why do we have the same number of classrooms?  Close off the worst part of the building for power and heating savings, or rent it out.  Please, notice that this reads like a Rorschach test in that I try to take no position; I see the point of both sides, and, like I said there are other places to cut first.

ATHETICS: FITTING THE MISSION OF EDUCATION?

The case for athletics in complimenting the mission of schools has for years been anecdotal, based around tales from the gridiron and the pages of young adult literature.  Intuitively, people knew it was important.  Later, researchers linked athletics to higher grades and self-esteem, lower pregnancy rates and greater success after leaving school.  Recently, economist Betsey Stevenson of the Wharton School of Business looked at the participation of girls in sports on a state-by-state level to determine if the benefits are indeed a product of participation.  Her conclusion was an unqualified yes.

Still, facing budgets where Vermonters debate basic necessities like health care and maintaining our infrastructure, can schools continue to support athletic programs?  Are the benefits too intangible for the current economic climate?  When the topic does come up, it is more often a sacred cow in the budget that is assumed to have value.

INTERSCHOLASTIC SPORTS: A HISTORY

At the turn of the 20^th century sport was seen as a necessary component in developing a sound body and mind.  Already an important element of private schools and colleges, public schools adopted sports as a way of increasing community pride and of offering another outlet for student energy.  At that time few students went beyond eighth grade before starting their adult life of farming, apprenticeship or general work.  Often, it gave students inclined to drop out an incentive to remain in school and was a carrot to what some considered the stick of academics.

As the century moved forward, families in general and children in particular had more leisure time at their disposal.  Child labor laws and mandatory school requirements kept more students in school.  Technology freed the need for children to help on farms.  A decreasing work day allowed parents to participate in sports, serving as role models.  The rise of professional sports provided further aspirations for students beyond academics and their future careers.  The twentieth century saw the rise of childhood, and with it play and athletics.

Representing schools became an issue of pride, and with that came expectations.  Still, like many elements of education, the cost of travel and uniforms was relatively low by today’s standards.  Traditions formed, and competition on the court saw a competition of costs and dedication.  Vermont has avoided much of the professionalism that comes with rivalries.  The Rutland-Mount St. Joseph and other regional grudge matches are fought by students on the field, with the modest support of their communities, and not through extensive facilities that rival many colleges.  These are contests of pride more than fundraising prowess.

Still, as the rest of the world seeps into Vermont, so does the level of play.  Students have an increased schedule, and participate in additional leagues that travel beyond a sport’s natural season and Vermont’s borders.  Title IX, which mandated equal funding for girls’ sports, has not taken much from boys’ sports but increased overall participation.  Not only have these changes increased the demands on student time and commitment, but also the cost of sports and its place in schools.

WHERE WE ARE NOW

Athletics have grown in size and importance.

While sports provides an excellent opportunity for lessons in working with a group, discipline and the morality infused in sportsmanship, the reality is often not so black-and-white.  Champlain Valley Union High School (CVU) allowed one of its students to play even after being charged for drug possession.  Colchester’s hockey coach is being terminated because of actions some found inappropriate.  Some schools have students sign pledges not to drink or do drugs, but the few actions taken against violators are often appealed by parents.  The pressure to win in the name of the school too often tempers the lessons of fairness and good sportsmanship.

A look at the numbers is revealing.  According to its posted budget CVU expects to spend $566,058 in 2011 on athletics, while about double, or $1,035,955, for mathematics.  Considering the importance of math in the 21^st century—and the fact that every student takes math—the budget priorities seems askew.  Half-a-million dollars is a lot of money each year to spend on a program not essential to the school’s academic mission.  Similarly, Middlebury Union High School (MUHS) has budgeted $558,816 to athletics and co-curricular activities for 2011.  Nearly two-thirds of that is salaries for coaches, advisors, trainers, administrators and officials.  Most schools in Vermont are not as large as CVU and MUHS, but their budgets are often in the same proportion. If you consider that a teacher costs a district $70,000 after benefits the athletic budget of each school represents eight teachers.  As we whittle down budgets, increase class sizes and debate co-pays and dental plans any school with an interscholastic athletic program has this additional burden.

Of course, these numbers are not the entire story.  Within the MUHS budget are non-athletic activities like yearbook and other clubs.  CVU has numerous club sports, like rugby and ultimate frisbee, which are well run but exempt from many of the rules (and associated costs) that guide Vermont Principal Association sanctioned sports. The numbers above come from the proposed budgets, and as such those numbers probably have a bit of flexibility that is not clear from the webpage.  It should also be noted that many schools and specific sports within schools have booster clubs that raise a tremendous amount of money for programs, relieving taxpayers from difficult decisions about new uniforms and lighting fields for night games.  Also, many school gymnasiums and athletic fields are used by town recreation programs and others, in addition to being used for academics.

That said, athletic programs also hide a number of costs.  While most adults enjoy low-key team athletics on town recreation fields or personal pursuits in the gym, schools maintain gymnasiums and athletic fields.  These are the classrooms of P.E., but as Phys. Ed has moved from team sports to fitness to wellness in many schools the facilities of some schools rival the best clubs.  The Brigham decision was meant to equalize education throughout the state, but anyone who has traveled with a middle school team around the state has seen the disparity between facilities.  From gymatoriums—cafeterias where the tables fold into the walls and games are played on linoleum tiles—to multiple state-of-the-art gymnasiums flanked by rooms of exercise machines the disparity is striking.   To compete—the goal of interscholastic athletics—students need to take a bus to another school.  Besides the time spent on busses in rural Vermont, transportation costs money.  The more rigorous the schedule, and more rural the school, the greater the transportation budget needs to be.

Unlike Physical Education and Health, interscholastic athletics are not necessarily taught by a teacher.  In this age of demands for highly qualified instructors, coaches are hired based on the goal of the program.  Some are more instructional while others are hired to run a competitive team.  Lessons on sportsmanship and good, long term health depend on the quality of the coach and are largely unchecked until after an incident occurs.  Their pay is often low and the motivation is a belief in the importance of sports in the life of young people.

Unlike most academic offerings, interscholastic sports are not always open to all students.  For many sports, high schools cannot afford to run their programs without excluding some students.  CVU, for example, has an active soccer program that cuts many aspiring players.  It is in no way alone, as even schools that fail to offer much competition still have large pools of prospective players ready to don the uniform.

Youngsters have options, too.  Many athletes play on teams in addition to their school’s.  Starting with Little League, Pop Warner and various soccer programs, students graduate to Legion  and Babe Ruth baseball and Nordic soccer.  Often, town recreation departments and civic organizations sponsor teams, leagues and summer camps for local kids at various levels.  This is in addition to the public school’s Physical Education and Health programs.  Vermonters also participate extensively in sports not offered by their schools, including skiing, skateboarding and hiking.  And, of course, many kids just play pick-up games in any space available with anyone who is around.

The future of athletics is, for most, personal.  Few play football as adults, yet several schools have added the sport in the past ten years.  Instead, most adults run or go to the gym, yet few schools offer exercise rooms and equipment to its students.  Proposals to change the curriculum, and the costs that go with it for new equipment, are often weighed against what programs would be cut.  Participation in pick-up basketball and league softball is solid, but relaxed and requires a single gym or field and no luxuries.  Our interscholastic programs do not resemble their adult counterparts.  What, then, is the purpose of these programs?

Imagine if someone stood up at town meeting and proposed paying an adult to take twenty kids on a school bus to various museums eight times a year.  While the merit of such a proposal might find an audience, the line item for salary, bus and admission tickets would not.  Yet, basketball achieves this every year because it is already in the budget.  When Title IX was proposed, no one was against the idea of women playing sports, but few wanted to pay the extra costs.  Wrestling money from men’s sports to equalize women’s tore communities apart.  If that same trip was chaperoned by a self-taught art historian and not a teacher, and those twenty students were chosen from fifty that were interested the debate would become even more heated.  The fight many communities have over enrichment coordinators mirrors this.  That many towns have recreation departments with mirror programs, and parents who independently offer such excursions, would sink any museum-group proposal before the citizen proposing it sat down.

SOMETHING TO THINK ABOUT

Athletics have benefits, as Professor Stevenson and many others have concluded.  The young men and women playing do represent schools and communities, and make these institutions special.  The emotional link between a team’s success and the community is priceless.  They are also fun.  Just as jazz band might complement a solid music program, interscholastic athletics is in addition to the regular Physical Education and Health curriculum.  Clearly, it can complement the mission of schools, but so can many programs being cut this year.  Like any program—from Science to English—it is as strong as the individuals running it and the community that supervises it.  As we debate the merits of a music and arts education, it is worth considering the place that interscholastic sports holds in our minds and our wallets.

Currently, educators and politicians are debating changing school as we know it.  Proposals include lengthening the school year by nearly sixty days, going to a calendar of four weeks of school, two weeks vacation, all year long, and cutting back to four ten-hour days a week.  The idea of virtual high schools—offering on-line courses to students—is a hot topic of discussion.  School as we know it is changing.  With all of these changes, for reasons ranging from cost to meeting the needs of 21^st century learners, the discussion of the future of sports will come up.

The debate will be, if anything, interesting.  If sports are about participation, intramurals and its lower costs might fit the bill.  If it is about representing a community, perhaps the focus should shift towards academic competitions like debate teams.  Health issues are dealt with through Health and P.E. classes, and might call for a fitness center decked out with the latest exercise machines instead of a football team.  If interscholastic athletics have a value beyond fun, its advocates need to coalesce their reasons and justify the expense in this age of tightening budgets and academic accountability.

Essential Skills: Tech Ed

Put a student at the controls of a table saw, ask them to hammer a nail, or have them bake a loaf of bread.  Watch them.  For most, you will see apprehension.  Forgetting competence, students today lack confidence in a world that is combining academics with hands-on and can-do.

A lot has been written in these pages on increasing the opportunities students have in attending college.  Area schools, in addition to raising the number of students who attend higher education, have now been tasked with helping students gain acceptance into a higher caliber college or university.  The recent arguments for more Advanced Placement (AP) courses has not been centered around improving  skills or challenging minds—our teachers do well on that score—but on brightening resumes.  If we really want to prepare our children for twenty-first century jobs and provide them with a unique educational experience, perhaps we need to take a moment to recognize our local technical centers and programs.

While more and more high school seniors head off to college with little plan and even less money, more and more businesses are reassessing their needs.  College was once a gateway that either fostered social networking or taught specific skills, such as engineering.  Things have changed.  The workplace today requires a background in problem solving and abstract thinking.  Many companies are looking at skills and experiences on resumes, not college pedigrees.

If we are going to accept that college is not the only path to success, then we need to recognize that the diversity our modern, local technical centers currently offer is a fit just as valid as the college track.  While a generation ago technical education amounted to the mechanics of auto mechanics and pre-apprentice building trade learning, today’s cars, homes and appliances requires extensive technical know-how that is beyond the engineers of that generation ago.  More important, as materials and platforms rapidly change with every new discovery and paradigm, tech students today adapt, retool and continue to learn.  They need to if they are going to survive.

Today’s technical centers are much more than mechanical and construction.  Hannafords Career Center, which takes students from Vergennes, Mt. Abe and Middlebury Union High Schools, has programs in culinary, pre-engineering, video tech, health services and theater.  Those students are producing food at our best restaurants, telling stories in new mediums, and will be taking care of us as we age and need health assistance.  Some students leave high school with a viable skill and join the workforce, while other go to college for more education.

Much of the bias towards college and away from technical education has to do with past perceptions held by our parents, and now us.  Our generation was taught that success was through college, and we continue to pass that prejudice on as we advise our children, students and even our school board.  While our tech ed centers have quietly transformed into twenty-first century training grounds, many advocates for education still see them not as an equal, but the option for those not of college caliber.

If you have children, ask yourself if you would push your child to fit woodshop into their schedule as hard as an AP course.

But taking an A.P. course in a subject of mild interest before getting tens of thousands of dollars in debt for a liberal arts or overly specialized science degree and no plan makes less sense than spending time in Hannaford’s forest program before going to college and having an idea of which direction to go while writing those tuition checks.  Many of us know this, but many others need to rethink their values.  Vermont is home to a great many culinary wizards and master craftsmen who hob knob with professors and wealthy financiers.  Tech students go to college.  The old stereotypes of the technical school graduate are dated and stale.

In earlier generations people could change their own oil, fix the toaster, and regularly made their own clothes.  Children grew up seeing competence.  No more.  Now, programs like “Rosie’s Girls” instills confidence in middle school girls by teaching them to use tools.  Shows on the Food Channel and DIY programs are very popular.  Yet, we do not celebrate our existing programs and those students who access them.  Few non-tech students have the confidence to just try and bake a loaf of bread, and retry until they succeed.  Even fewer have the confidence to sign up for such classes.

If area schools were really interested in what is best for all students, they will mirror the push for higher academic standards with technical ones.  Taking such a course is not a cute hobby, but an essential skill.  Much is made of how the new generation is tech savvy, but their actual abilities to manipulate programs and use computer tools is quite low and their ability to adapt to different programs and solve glitches is absent.  A high school student who cannot drive a nail, bake a loaf of bread or tend a house plant with confidence is not ready to put themselves into debt for a liberal arts degree or take our society far into this new century.

Why Inservice Fails: Professional Development Misdirected
Tom Darling

The way that most professional development (PD) at in-service is created sets it up for failure. This is true in nearly every school, as I have discovered in speaking with a wide range of teachers and educators. As directives and the yearly focus often comes from the state and supervisory union a year in advance (on, in the case of colleges, deans and administrators), speakers and facilitators need to be lined up months in advance. As the in-service calendar is penciled in over the summer it is near impossible to offer a talk that is relevant to the majority of the audience. It has nothing to do with the quality of the presentation, the subject matter, or the amount of hard work that goes into it.

If the current focus of PD offerings is a pendulum that swings with the times and perceived needs of the organization’s mission, it is hitting only a small number of the teachers whose abilities are spread out on its entire arch. In turn, each educator is as a different place in their development, working within their own swinging pendulum. To expect both to line up, and for all of the people in a room on a given half day to all line up is, statistically, quite unlikely.

Think of the audience. They break into two groups:

1. Those teachers who are self aware have already tackled the topic. Those early adopters, and their success, are often what starts the discussion that becomes the mandate. Some teachers have already explored RtI and Responsive Classroom. These folks have websites, blogs, post assignments and their lectures and require online discussions. They were unsatisfied with some aspect of their teaching and did something about it. Reading literature, attending conferences, taking classes and speaking with others is the norm for those teachers. In doing so, they saw solutions and applied them.

By the time an in-service comes around, they are old hands. So, you are teaching to the choir or they have decided it is not appropriate for their situation. Either way, they will get little out of it. At best they will have their time wasted; at worst they will resent the waste.

2. The rest of the teachers do not think they need the PD. It may be that they are focused on other issues, and taking on something new is hard to focus on in any useful way. The PD often seems interesting, but abstract. More likely, they just don’t see a problem in their teaching and so a solution for that non-existent problem is a waste of time. If you take that swinging pendulum image, experienced teachers have watched at least one full swing. They have changed with the first or second passes, and now feel they have a handle on most things. In their mind it is the same old thing with a new name (too often they are correct).

Therefore, if you ask this second group what PD they need you will get a few lame answers. The first is “time”, which really means they don’t want any. The second are suggestions that have either nothing to do with the topic, or would not make a major impact on instruction. These are often pet interests. When asked about literacy or classroom management or technology, they will want something that cannot be provided or something very, very specific. Often, they will shift the blame from what they can control to students, parents, administrators and their peers.

With this in mind, PD needs to fall into two categories.

First, mandatory tasks for everyone. Second, differentiated tasks determined by data.

Mandatory tasks are those that someone above has decided are necessary. For example, everyone needs to have a website. Everyone corrects writing portfolios. Everyone teaches literacy. The message is that our organization is doing this, so people might moan about it but it needs to happen and they will be held accountable. If the presentation is that straightforward, people will at least leave in-service knowing the expectation of what they are responsible for.
Now that the expectations are clear, the uneven application can be addressed.

Differentiated tasks address those who cannot or will not do the mandated task. For example, if the technology people did an inventory of teacher websites it would be clear who could and could not create a website that supports the original directive. Then, using a survey, a differentiated in-service could be developed that helped people with what they needed: Basic technical support, more advanced technical support; a pep-talk about uses and relevance; time to update it…. Those with everything squared away could help those who cannot. By the end of in-service teachers would have the tools they need to succeed. The IT person could then do a follow-up inventory and see who complied. Those who did not (a small group because the directive and outcome was so clear and not open for debate) would fall to the administration.

The fact is that we spend too much time debating things that are mandatory. Fact: NCLB is happening, scores go in the paper and the community wants answers. Fact: People pay a lot of money for their education and expect results.

We know who is falling short. Go to any faculty event and start a conversation about any given topic—student interactions, technology, pedagogy, and the like—and people will dish on those more notorious offenders. No one wants to call them on it, in part because, until recently, data was hard to come by and easy to debate. A high failure rate could show high standards, while a problem with classroom management can be pinned on uneven placement of unruly students or undermining peers. But, we are now collecting more objective data, and the mandate to do better is no longer debatable. NECAP scores must go up; the discussion is no longer why they are low, but what individuals are going to do to fix the holes. The state curriculum goals drive courses, not the whims of the instructor.

As the article “The Big U-Turn” in Education Next states, transparency and data are key to improving results. I find rereading it instructive when thinking about this topic.

It may be worthwhile debating these issues. As a community, we could define a number of things. For example, our common rubric for paragraphs got everyone invested. Once the decision was reached, though, it became a standard that everyone is expected to use and enforce.

I will give you one last reason why this is important to teachers beyond the issue of student achievement: Teachers need to know clearly what they are being held accountable for before it all hits the fan. When I began teaching middle school my content and delivery was more mature than my students could handle. Our administrator at the time made vague comments but tried to respect what I was doing, and a lot of good came from my methods. Still, as a new teacher I was learning. Because I am self aware, I discovered good middle school practice and became a better teacher. Still, for a variety of reasons no one had a clear talk with me about the boundaries of the community. Even a simple black-and-white discussion would have raised my awareness.

So, when a parent raised concerns the administration came down hard. The vice principal who should have spoken to me before said she had concerns for years. Thanks. Now it was too late. Our new principal had no sympathy, as she thought the boundaries clear to any responsible teacher. In many ways it was unfair, and it caused a lot of stress and confusion among the whole middle school. My career nearly ended.

Administrators owe it to teachers to make expectations clear, and give them the tools to meet them. To expect people to be self-aware of the changing sands of education is ridiculous. The administration is tasked with the big picture, sifting through the fads to focus on the movement, identifying goals and helping the school meet them.

We have NECAP data and can track the path of successful and struggling students. We have behavior information. Using technology should be a given. And, we have each other. From this we can discern weaknesses in instruction and classroom management, and help students. But, we are fast approaching the time when we will all be held accountable. NECAP scores and other data is behind held up by parents as a reason to cut budgets and fire teachers. Success is no longer a choice.

Given all of this, we need to use this limited and valuable time in a way that is truly valuable for students and teachers. I know that each in-service is designed with care and intention, but because of the reasons stated above it is not paying off as it should.

I apologize in advance for the various grammar and/or spelling mistakes, as I was entertaining my two sons at the same time. No excuse, but it’s my excuse. I wanted to post it as I posted it there. In addition, something I realized in retrospect is context: I have been looking into very responsive business models, like Total Quality Production, Just in Time Production and The Toyota Way. Clearly, a host of business models will not meet the goal of No Child Left Behind, but the idea of who is the service provider (schools) and who is the client (community), with the student as product, I feel is valid.

Applying the Business Model to Schools
Tom Darling

Too often when people look at business models and education they assume the student is the client. Not so. The community is the client.

Let’s look at public K-12. The entire community buys the product through taxes and has an expectation of the product. The product is the student graduating with a pre-determined set of skills: reading, writing, arithmetic, but also more elusive skills such as citizenship and responsibility. Think of students like a car that we expect to run, stop and do a pre-determined set of things like defrost the rear window.

When public school began that set of expectations was clear–the three Rs–and because schools were local and paid with local property taxes these service providers were pretty responsive to the needs of its clients (the community). Our world is more complex and global, and communities expect our schools to prepare students for every possibility. Public schools also need to be responsive to, and show respect for, the diversity our modern world demands. So, religions, race, gender and other roles, previously simple, are now making complex demands as well. Thus, the demands of the client/community is in flux and a bit muddled. No service provider can meet such vague and changing demands.

Enter NCLB. In defining outcome with clear standards the public schools are expected to teach towards that target. Each year schools are tested, and those results are released to the community at large. As payment has shifted from local taxes to state and federal, those larger entities now assume more of a client/community role and thus demand satisfaction, or withhold payment.

What does this mean for schools? In short, service providers (aka schools) are required to meet the needs of the client/community. The students are merely product. This means that the needs and wants of the students are immaterial other than what makes them meet the expectations of the community. Learning does not need to be fun, and teachers do not need to be liked other than how that succeeds in creating a better product (students will skills).

One problem with looking at students as cars, though, is that some people automatically turn to being “old school” and harsh. But that does not work for all. Let’s remember that NCLB stands for No Child Left Behind. Graduation rates in the past were horrible compared to today, but our economy allowed for students to drop out and still become productive members of the community. Students also graduated with skills far below the standards because they showed up. Now, our client/community expects all students to not only graduate, but to have the skills expected at each grade level. How to get there?

This is where free and reduced lunch, counseling, sports teams and fun come in. What motivates students? What provides the support and motivation required for students to learn? As each student/product is different, schools need to be flexible, but they also need to get the job done for each student. If they do not–if some children are being left behind–then they need to reexamine what they do and change accordingly.

The community as client is not new, but in examining what motivates students and supports them schools have mistaken students as clients, and not products. Our society used to look at students as the children they are, and do what was best for them as a matter of course. At some point schools began to ask them what they thought, and then catered to them. There is an always-moving but clear line between getting feedback and responding versus thinking they (and their parents) know best. Schools are, at best, partners in providing what the client/community deems worth paying for.

Much of the current frustration in education comes from these confused roles. Not all students respond to the traditional curriculum, yet students are clearly not self reflective nor honest enough to determine their own needs. Schools no longer teach, but facilitate, and the debate of what to do with those not meeting standard is complex and frustrating because what works for that shrinking under served product is hard to determine. Their failure also calls into question to experience of the service providers and the client/community that succeeded with past methods. And, unlike a car, we cannot reject it and sell it for scrap. We also cannot reject delivery of students for being defective, but have to work with what comes in the door; at best we can work with our suppliers through early education and nutrition.

Differentiation and Response to Intervention are two basic strategies that service providers are now using. They are a start. Along with programs like Head Start and free and reduced lunch schools are providing services clients demand. But, notice that every solution to schools has nothing to do with the student at that moment, but instead with what skills they walk in the door with (including attitude, tenacity and other elusive skills) and what teachers do with where they are. In looking at students as the product (the car) business models such as The Toyota Way, Lean Manufacturing and organization skills like Getting Things Done suddenly speak to the educational crisis in our country.

I suggest these models are our next step.

This article seems to be focused on the college level. In that case, the client is even more elusive, but I would argue it is the future student. What goals do they have? In ten years, what do they expect from their investment. A job that pays a certain amount? A career? Or simply to be well rounded? Assume the client is future-student, and present student becomes the product while the school remains the service provider. To this end, a survey of alumni might provide guidance.

Now I have students do everything, from cleaning my room to helping with planning out units. Whereas I used to stand up in front of a whiteboard and wave my arms around, I now facilitate. We create projects where they work and I advise. Of course, I structure the unit and hold them accountable, but they are good at constructing authentic ways to learn the goals I set out and managing their time. Instead of my running to the art room, debugging the computers or wondering who wrote on the bathroom walls my students do this. In return, I have time to work with students who really need my help.

What simple lessons provide are a foundation. Reading is essential to everything else a student might do throughout their entire career, yet by sixth grade sustained silent reading stops being a class time enjoy and becomes homework that is not done. Paragraphs are taught in first grade, yet ninth grade teachers need to repeat and repeat this skill. Those lessons can contain great subject lessons (in poetry, for example), but need to be the basis for everything you do.

More important, simple lessons allow you to see mistakes early. A student who cannot write a paragraph cannot write an essay. The ideas of a clear thesis, good evidence, citations, proper grammar, and in-depth analysis are all clear in a paragraph. Mop up those mistakes, and then move to the essay. While such lessons can be dull, by focusing on these basics in the first week you can focus on issues of style and content the rest of the year.

For this reason I am a huge supporter of poetry. Can we expect students to offer in-depth analysis of a novel, play or historical event if they cannot, or will not, venture to guess what Frost meant when writing of that snowy day? How can someone prove a geometric theorem if they cannot tackle a simple poem about a candle burning on both ends?

Simple lessons are easy to organize, grade and provide corrective action for students. Once the foundation has been laid, all of that other stuff can be laid on top of it. You will be surprised how much you can focus on the good stuff once you laid down the simple ideas first.

Yelling is what we do when we have run out of options.

It is really that simple.  Most of our relationship is spent talking, teaching, showing, hugging and being civil to each other.  With him, I find a lot of patience.  When I have the time, we use that time to learn lessons that will last a lifetime.  Except, when there is no way I can stop him from running into the road I use the one thing I have left: I yell.  And he stops.

For many teachers, this is the moment they yell.  In their minds they have made the rules clear, allowed this student to get a drink of water or that one to go to their locker.  A third of the class is not reaching their potential, and a spate of dry ink cartridges has prevented seven essays from making it in by the due date.  Then, someone complains that class is boring.  They want to go outside.  The worst part of it all is that they are only expressing these thoughts out loud because they trust you enough–you have built a relationship and responded to their fair minded criticism–but today someone would not understand that their language offends you, and you are a part of the class and community, too.  So, you blow it.  You are out of options.

IF YOUR WATCH ALARM GOES OFF ONE MORE TIME! you scream at the child who is running towards the busy street of life and is too distant for you to reach.  Or, perhaps, you meant it for him or her, but instead screamed at the unlucky child who put that last straw on your back eight straws after that kid you felt really deserved the warning.  In the end, your tricks all played, yelling was your only option.

Now, with my son, I could have been preventive.  At all times I could have been closer to him than he was to the road.  When our older son was two, we laid down a low stone wall.  In part, it was decoration, but it was also meant to slow him down a step so that we could catch him before he got to the street.  We do have a nice backyard for him to play in.  Life, though, is fraught with danger.  Even had we done it all, another life threatening situation would probably have reared its head.

Prevention is important, which leads to the second reason we yell: to make a point that sticks.

YOU NEVER GO NEAR THE ROAD!

This was not a patient response that treated my son as a partner, but a directive I did not want my child to forget.  This was a non-negotiable rule, and the next time he even thought of doing it I wanted him to wonder if the wrath of my entire six feet-four was worth it.  Perhaps it is the bullying of a child, but if it keeps him from running into the road I weight the ends over the means.

Thus begins the slippery slope.  Even as I try and undo the scare with hugs and a rational discourse about the dangers of traffic and dashing towards it, I know that my child is afraid of me.  While the ends are justified, I wonder if there is another way.

YOU SIT IN THIS CLASS LIKE YOU DON’T CARE, BUT YOU AND I KNOW THAT IF YOU KEEP GOING DOWN THIS PATH YOU ARE NOT GOING TO GET JACK FROM THIS LIFE!  ARE YOU READY FOR THE WORST JOB IN THE WORLD?!  This is a toned down version of what I have said.  I can go longer, into much more personal detail, asking rhetorical questions that make the point: Stop screwing up.  Nearly every child I have said these things too has agreed that it was justified, even as they did not like to hear it.  Still, I know that they were afraid of me.  They have said as much.  And they already knew it.  They knew, before I uttered a word, that what they were doing was wrong.

In the end, the bottom of the slope is filled with laziness.  My younger son is kicking my older son, and while the latter uses his words and is the good big brother it does not stop.  STOP HITTING YOUR BROTHER! I yell from the other room.  It is easier than getting up.  When my older son was four, I realized that much of my discipline was yelling from across the room because stopping the behavior and talking it through was too much work.  As he threw blocks, jumped on the couch, or sang at the top of his lungs a yell stopped the behavior.

At first.  Then, it became noise.  Unlike the road, which worked because of pure novelty and shock of the situation, the ten yelling corrections a day wore off.  Instead, he started pushing buttons.  And yelling.  Now, he yells down the stairs and from other rooms.  We realized, quickly, that we need to get up and correct behavior, and it worked, but the yelling is still with us three years later.

My classrom has not become one of the classrooms that are famous for yelling.  In our high school, one teacher used to stop teaching when the teacher in the neighboring classrooms began his rants.  Knowing that no one was listening to him, he would stop mid-sentence, sit at his desk, and read the New York Times until it calmed down.  Then, the lesson woudl resume.  Having been in that class next door, on the receiving end of the yell, it amazes me that he could have a job.  In fact, he was head of the department, a coach of football and track, and well respected in our community.  Ah, the old days.

Each year I have learned to hold it together a little bit more.  Planning has been very important.  When I have systems in place, and am able to stop my proclivity towards co-dependence (my thought that, this time, they’ll listen), I maintain order because I have options.  Three years ago I took a Responsive Design course, which gave me many more strategies for the good of students and my sanity.  I have, in many ways, the low stone wall in place.  And, at the end of the day, running into the street (in an academic sense) can be a tough love learning experience, as long as you are ready to scrape them off the tar and start fresh the next day.

Know where your yell comes from.  If it is laziness, get some systems, get off your behind, or get a new job.  On the other hand, if you feel you are out of options you need to take a breath.  Then, before you correct or even plan your next lesson, imagine every senerio and what you will do in response.  Be happy with that response.  The next day, play it out calmly.  If you do it right, you are in charge.  The child will not make it out of the yard on your watch.

Love That Dog is a very short book. Inspired by the Walter Dean Myers poem “Love That Boy” it follows a boy who reluctantly reads, writes and eventually connects with poetry over the course of a school year. All of it is told in verse, although like many books written like this I hesitate to call it poetry; more or a proam, or cute formatting. But, as in the case of both of the books mentioned here, it serve the story well.

As a successful book, Love That Dog works on two levels. First, it is funny. As someone who teaches “The Red Wheelbarrow”, Frost and Blake it is a small hoot to hear an authentic child’s voice reacting to these poems. That only goes so far, but it is a short book and so it goes far enough until the reader is almost done. Second, the actual story of the boy and his dog is genuine and heartfelt. The story, as told, is enough of a puzzle to keep the reader interested.

And then it’s done. If this book takes you more than twenty minutes to read you are giving it too much credit. Your students–both struggling readers and high flyers–will love it. An excellent springboard into classic poetry, students writing their own poetry, having literary heroes (in this case, Walter Dean Myers comes to the school) and even satirical writing of one’s teachers, their classes, and their attempts to teach poetry (you cannot but help see your classroom in her depiction of teaching techniques and attempts to encourage writing). I was surprised to learn it was nominated for the Booker Prize and won the Newbery; it’s good, but a bit slight and not really one for the ages.

A much better, meatier work is Shakespeare Bats Cleanup by Ron Koertge. The story of a baseball obsessed fourteen year old stuck at home with mono, it starts with protagonist Kevin Boland flipping through his dad’s poetry book as he tries his hand at it. Over time he starts exploring different techniques, his family relationships and the recent death of his mom.

Describing Shakespeare Bats Cleanup as meatier than Love That Dog rests on two points. First, the life of Kevin Boland is much richer. While dead parents may be a bit cliche (as is a baseball obsessed boy coming to like poetry), there are surprises in the details. The story grows in depth and complexity as one reads it.

Second, Koertge deftly uses the poetic style Kevin is reading about to tell his own story. While using poetry to tell a story of poetry is not brilliance, nor original, Koertge’s ability to make it seamless is. After establishing the conceit of reflecting the poetry read in the telling, reading Shakespeare Bats Cleanup the reader will soon forget Koertge is doing so, even as the protagonist tells you he is doing it. To give Koertge even more credit, the poetic styles he uses compliment the story. While a lesser author might have chosen a more random assortment, here the author matches the style with the story to be told.

That said, Shakespeare Bats Cleanup is not a life altering story, but more of an enjoyable read.

When picking out such books teachers often seem to be looking for silver bullets: that one title that will turn on a poetry switch. That book is a Brigadoon, in that it might exist for any one individual every two hundred years (and then trap you in antiquity!). Shakespeare Bats Cleanup is also touted as a reluctant reader and a “boy” book, too categories that are often used interchangeably. Do not expect that much. I get much more mileage out of “Dead Poets Society” than any single book (of course, a unit of study with great depth is best), but that is more eighth grade than fifth.

Both of these titles will make excellent introductions to poetry and writing styles. They are quick reads, funny and have a bit of depth to them. Like any short story (which is what they are, in truth) they are more of a memorable inoculation than the open heart surgery that marks great novels.