Beyond the Hard Truths of Teaching

I have been trying to get myself motivated to start blogging about education on a regular basis once again.  I am going through my education files and while doing so found this article by Marvin Chachere that closely mirrors my feeling about teaching.  


Click here to learn more about Mr. Chachere  a retired teacher and University of California administrator who played saxophone in his youth with a New Orleans jazz band and died June 17, 2010 after 82 years of life.

BEYOND THE HARD TRUTHS OF TEACHING 

Marvin Chachere

EARLY ON in my teaching career I learned that most principals, superintendents, and deans don't worry much about fostering student learning. 

I'm not sure precisely what they do worry about or even what interests them. Perhaps it's management itself. matching means to ends. Or maybe it's simply tranquillity, • school that's run smoothly. At any rate, teachers and managers have little in common. 

When I taught college. I told my students each semester, quite bluntly. that their institution wasn't organized and run primarily for their learning. I reminded them that they'd worked hard to gain admission. only to be hassled in registration lines. circumscribed by course requirements, intimidated by term papers and exams. categorized by grade points. 

My message, of course. was a truism: Wanting to know something is a necessary precondition for leaming it. "How many of you are here to learn philosophy?" I'd ask. Everyone. (It was an elective course.) "How many of you would be here if this course offered no credit?" No one. 

Students know the difference between learning a subject and going through the motions because they need the credits. Indeed, if a student really wants to learn, he doesn't need good teaching, and if he doesn't want to learn, the best teaching is useless. You can't force anyone to learn anything, unless you're an army sergeant teaching a recruit to fire a rifle. You may tell others what to learn, but this carries no force. Students recognize their rights in this very clearly, and they can easily reject your teaching. 

By now you may be thinking that if I had any self-respect [ should have long ago sought other work.  But for me it was precisely by recognizing these realities and struggling. with them in my own mind (if not in faculty committees, board meetings. and teachers' unions) that I found nourishment as a teacher. I enjoyed teaching and I stayed with it, but not to invent methods for jamming Iearning into the minds of unwilling students. If I wanted reform at all. it was in how I saw my job. Gripped by cynicism regarding my superiors and futility regarding my charges. I still struggled to see teaching as noble work. 

My efforts weren't completely successful, but they brought satisfaction. Once I decided to Iet the managers and policymakers get on with their work, whatever it may be. I was free to get on with mine. By concentrating on the conditions of my students their real and supposed reasons for being in my class, their interests and abilities, even their joys and sorrows. I sought to reform my thinking, to neutralize the negative forces. In other words. I sought the essence of teaching: to stimulate, inspire, animate and arouse another.

" The main job of the teacher is to convey enthusiasm. A teacher isn’t a purveyor of intormation, a guide to the realm of ideas, ambassador of culture, a certifier of students' achievements, or a  guarantor of good. paying jobs. Even less is a teacher concerned with development of a students' character and good citizenship. The only goal that's worth pursuing is to inspire your students with a love of your subject. Any other outcome, however honorable, is incidental. 

This is simplistic, you say. All teachers try to get students interested in their subjects-and good teachers succeed. My point may be simple, but it's not simplistic. It carries three practical consequences, each affecting the improvement of teaching. 

The first consequence is that you acknowledge your students' individual likes and dislikes even as you continue to show them how they can become enthused about what you're teaching. Realize that some students just don't like math, history, literature, science, or whatever. In recognizing individuality, you recognize reality. 

The second consequence is that there's no subject for which studentls' enthusiasm is unworthy or unwarranted, not even basket-weaving. Let me quickly add that I don't propose teaching something just because students will sign up for it-a Bruce Springsteen seminar? But interest in one thing may lead to interest in other things; basket-weaving isn't unrelated to geometry, to physics, to history. Any student who shows you enthusiasm about anything at all has displayed a certain capacity. Good teaching implies the ability to exploit that capacity. find ways to put it to use, and transfer it, if possible to your subject. 

The third consequence follows from the simple essence of teaching. You can’t arouse enthusiasm for a subject unless you've mastered it. The more you learn the more ways you have for arousing students' interests, and the better your teaching will be. Mastery is far more important than methods. Methods follow mastery, not the other way around. Students will be quick to see your enthusium. and if it sterms from mastery they may catch it. 

That's all you can hope and work for. And it's enough. ~ 

National Standards

Websites for Learning
Funology has all kinds of acitivities for kids ages 5-8!!
Time for Kids - A powerful teaching tool, TIME For Kids builds reading and writing skills and is easily integrated across your curriculum, including social studies, science and math.
Discovery Kids is based on the Discovery Channel and has many interesting science and and nature activites and information.

Articles to Read
Differentiate Don't Standardize by Nel Noddings
"What do advocates of national standards expect to accomplish? Unless the ends sought are both significantly important and feasible, we should turn our attention to problems that are truly pressing, such as reducing the number of high school dropouts and curbing youth violence."
Debunking the Case for National Standards by Alfie Kohn
"I keep thinking it can’t get much worse, and then it does. Throughout the 1990s, one state after another adopted prescriptive education standards enforced by frequent standardized testing, often of the high-stakes variety. A top-down, get-tough movement to impose “accountability” began to squeeze the life out of classrooms."
We've Always Had National Standards by Diane Ravitch
"Most educators believe that the United States has never had national standards in education, but this is not correct. Without any action on the part of the federal government, we have indeed had standards in the past, and we have them now. They were not written in a document, nor are they now, but they are real nonetheless."
College and the Workforce: What 'Readiness' Means by Catherine Gewertz
"As the standards movement has evolved, one of its key questions has shifted. Instead of simply asking what students should know and be able to do to complete high school, educators and policymakers are now asking what students need to master to be prepared for the higher-level demands of college and career."
Teachers' Letters to Obama by Anthony Cody
"The overwhelming message is that, although we supported President Obama as a candidate and continue to have hope today, we do not feel heard by this administration, and have grave concerns about many of the actions of U.S. Secretary of Education Arne Duncan."
Educational Delema: Rigor v Relevance by Tom Vander Ark
"I remain committed to the idea that we can build rich instructional systems around fewer, clearer, higher standards--systems that incorporate content-embedded assessment (e.g., score from a learning game), performance assessment (e.g., essays and projects), adaptive assessment (e.g., quick online quizzes), as well as summative assessment--that promote rather than detract from engaging personalized learning experiences."

Thoughts from Yrisarri
In a mobile society standardized education seems an essential ingredient for success.  The big question is how do we standardize instruction across a vast population with diverse needs and wants?  Should all students in our public schools be studying the same thing at the same time? Are national standards a limiting factor to one of our national strengths ie: creative thinking? Will national standards prepare all students for their future? Will national standards cause teachers to become little more than technicians for a program? Will national standards solve our education dilemma? Do we truly have a dilemma?

These questions and more come to mind as I follow the debate on implementation of national standards for our schools.  My primary concern really comes down to the question of how we view our children.  It seems like we are experiencing another top down educational reform by people who are not cognizant of the true needs of our children.  Seldom are children mentioned as something other than a statistic to be manipulated by reform so that our national interests will be served.

If there is an educational dilemma it is based in my observation that many students see no connection between what they learn in school and what they perceive to be needed for their future.  By and large our students are not motivated to learn, and those who are learn to pass the tests.

I believe there have always been standards in our schools and that those students who desire to go to college are able to acquire what they need to succeed in college from their high schools.  Those students who did not wish to go to college have had various options during high school to pursue their perceived needs.  But, high school has not provided a well-balanced curriculum that provides for intellectual, physical  and emotional growth.  Without this balance we are sending our young people to confront life with only part of the skills they need.

Our emphasis has historically been on the intellectual side of the balance scale and today we have inactive kids who have a difficult time getting along with others who are different from them.  I believe that if we are going to create national standards they should be geared around developing programs that decrease our need for prisons,develop healthy and inquisitive young adults.

It is time we reorganize rather than reform education.  Instead of spending our time developing programs that have students lock stepping through an education, we should develop and organize our education system to allow for individuality and creative thinking.  A caring system that values the individual will cause more students to be motivated and prepare themselves for their futures.

There is agreement that we have a problem in particular with keeping our kids in school and that problem manifests itself around the end of childhood and the beginning of adolescence.  Why don’t we address the problem at that level?  Most of the information needed for further learning is in place by that time in our children’s education.  Why not graduate our students from mandatory education at age 15?  If they have learned the information that our society deems necessary for understanding our society we should acknowledge it.  In New Mexico we have a pass or fail test given to students at 15 testing that type of knowledge.  Why should a student go on if they can pass that test?

After graduation, with basic knowledge for living in our society in place, let students choose what they wish to study for, college, business, vocation, military, or paraprofessional work.  As the Australian's call it, let us develop a useful tertiary education system from ages 16-20.  They can all be rigorous programs that teach all students workforce skills at the same time.  Aren’t workforce skills the ability to understand that you must be on time, you must focus on your work, you must take responsibility for what you do?  Reading is not the problem in our youthful workforce; it is attitude!

While my idea is not perfect and perhaps not workable, let us use the strength of America, creative thinking, to solve our problems.  Let us work together to identify the true problems and then create local solutions to those problems.  If we continue the path we are on we will only do more of the same, continue to create students as products rather than individuals whose futures are in their hands not ours!