being a teacher – Page 139

This was posted on Edutopia this week – what a thrill

“You know I was worried at first, because she was so old, but it turned out she was really good…” A friend and I are discussing her child’s teacher. Her words resonate with me because I have heard them a lot lately; she was so old…old… and I wonder since when did being a veteran teacher become a negative quality in America?

Rewind to my first year of teaching and how I wished to be a veteran, how I yearned for years of knowledge and experience that could really wow parents and engage the students at such a high level that they would love coming to school every day. Instead, I bumbled my way through, figuring out my style, using the students as test subjects to all my untried ideas and staring wistfully into veteran teachers’ classrooms. I envied their orderly, calm lessons, their seemingly endless project ideas and angles to reach every child. I could not wait to be a veteran.

The Case for Veteran Teachers

Now it appears a new trend has emerged; veteran teachers are no longer “experienced” — they are simply “old,” with every negative connotation of that word. The media and politicians portray these older teachers as stubborn and stuck in their ways. They are labeled static and washed out. The way to resuscitate America’s “failing” education is now to get rid of the veterans and pave way for the new teachers, those with boundless energy, passion and fresh ideas. It’s truly a case of out with the old and in with the new.

But those working in education can see just how flawed this method of thinking is. Those of us who breathe education recognize what these veteran teachers really bring to us all — knowledge, expertise, methods that work, and a deep-seated passion for a job that has done little to reward them. We realize that by creating a bias against experience, we are all losers in the world of education. Now before I forget: yes, there are experienced teachers that do fulfill the stereotype, much like there are new teachers that do. However, the majority of experienced teachers do not.

Thanks in part to the rhetoric of the “reformers,” the anti-veteran bias seems to be taking root in society, too. Now when teachers are searching for work, the more years they have, the less likely it seems that they will get an interview. Some districts say tight budgets are to blame, which as a teacher in Wisconsin I can appreciate, and yet, you would think that a district would spend the bulk of its money on getting experienced teachers in front of our students. Instead, we see a stigma that says the more years of teaching you have, the less open to new ideas you must be. Parents eagerly tell us how they want that new young teacher because he or she will have something new to offer. Students hope for the young teacher because they are sure he or she will be more fun.

Our Most Valuable Asset

So what can we do? Youth is the ultimate desirability in America, and it is warping the educational world as well. Youth now seems to be the one trait that everyone agrees will save our schools. Get rid of tenure, and with it the more experienced teachers, which frees school districts to hire as many brand new teachers as they want. Brand new teachers that also happen to cost less. Brand new teachers that come off as confident and brimming with new initiatives. Brand new teachers that lack the foundation that only years of teaching can provide them with.

I think back now to what I put my students through my first year — and I shudder at the thought. There were the make-no-sense rules just to ensure control, tests upon tests because I thought that was the only way I could assess, and just a small stockpile of ideas to pull from. I had the confidence but lacked experience, and the only thing I knew that would make me a better teacher (besides more years) was turning to my mentors, veteran teachers that shared their knowledge and inventiveness. In those master teachers I saw everything that had drawn me to teaching: passion, dedication, innovation and an unstopping sense of urgency to reach all students.

That is what we’ll be removing from our educational system — experience; because in the view of society, old = bad. So when we dismiss and run out our master teachers, we drain our schools of one of their most valuable assets — knowledge. When we place teachers with experience at the bottom of our respect pole, we set students up to be every new teacher’s test subject over and over, throughout their years of schooling. Yes, new teachers bring new ideas to the table, but so do veteran teachers. How anyone can claim otherwise baffles me.

Thankfully, there are others in our profession who agree with me. Veteran teachers are joining social media such as Twitter to reach out to new teachers. They are blogging about their experience, thus creating a database of knowledge accessible to anyone in need. They are creating networks within their schools, ensuring that new teachers have someone to turn to. They are not being run out of education quietly, and we should all be grateful for that. We are only as strong as the weakest link in our schools, and our mentor teachers are doing everything they can to empower the people they work with. That power transfers to our students.

being a teacher, label, Student-centered

Are You Smart?

November 2, 2011 Pernille Schmidt Ripp

Every day we journal in our classroom, sometimes it relates to our curriculum, sometimes it is to start a discussion. Yesterday I asked my students to answer the question, “Are you smart?” Stunned students looked at me. Then the comments came flodding in…what do you mean…I don’t know….what kind of smart….in fact one student was so flustered by the question that he was unable to journal about it.

Now make no mistake, I knew the question would be difficult and yet we, as teachers, often use the label “smart” to describe students in conferences and on report cards. So can we answer what it means to be smart ourselves?

My students struggled through the journal prompt and today I had the opportunity to read their thoughts. I was blown away by their insight. Many lamented the fact that they did not know which smart I was referring to; was I referring to the school smart or to the logical smart? By smart, who was I comparing them to? They feel smart compared to a 3-year-old but not compared to a teacher. Many kids disucussed that school can make you smarter but one pointed out that it is not the only thing that makes us smart and my heart rejoiced.
Some discussed, again so thankful at their wisdom, that smart is something you grow into, not something you are born with. Some unfortunately compared their smartness to how well they do on tests, and my spirit dropped a little.

In the end, no one student had the same answer but they made me think; how do we define smart? How do we show our students that they are indeed smart? Is their any point in even discussing it with them or should we be focusing instead on the abilities they have; their problem solving skills, their work ethics, their creativity? Do students need to feel smart to succeed? And how do we stop tests from robbing them of their self-esteem and faith in themselves?

I may have asked my students one questions, but they asked many more of me. It was a great day for thinking.

being a teacher, writing

But We Get So Excited….

November 1, 2011 Pernille Schmidt Ripp

We are in the middle of writing boot camp, that back to basics training that my 5th graders all need. They have these incredible ideas just bursting onto their blogs, their journals and anywhere else they write, but they lack the basics. The organization, capitalization, and other things that make readers stumble and lose interest.

So as we go through another lesson on paragraphs and the students correctly put all of the pieces together, I ask them, “Do you all know this?” A resounding “Yes!” greets me. “Well, then why don’t you use it in your writing?” Silence and then this answer, “Well, we just forget because we get so excited…” I smile and move on.

I wonder how many times students don’t show their best work because they are so excited…

assessment, being a teacher, change, Student-centered

Why Giving Second Chances Should be Second Nature

November 1, 2011 Pernille Schmidt Ripp

We have all had the phone call, “Tommy studied so hard but didn’t do very well on the test, is there anything we can do?” How many of us have said, “No, sorry…” I know I used to. I used to be the queen of no extra credit, no re-takes, no second chances. That is until then I realized how this didn’t reflect adult life. In my job I get second chances all of the time. If a lesson doesn’t go as planned, I re-do it or teach it again. I don’t get observed only once to have my teaching career decided but instead multiple times by various people. If we have a bad day, we go back, fix it, and then move forward. Every single day I get to learn from my mistakes. So why is it we are so hellbent on not giving our students the same second chance? Yes, I know that standardized tests have inane rules we have to follow, but nothing else does. We decide the rules and for some reason a lot of the time those rules do not involve allowing students to learn from their mistakes mistakes.

Last year, my students got to fix everything they handed in. Stupid mistakes became teaching moments, sloppy work was enhanced, and gaps of knowledge were filled in. It was certainly more work for me, but what it taught the kids was invaluable; perseverance, dedication, and not being afraid to try something. More learning occurred in my room last year than ever before. And this year is no different, my students give me their best and then we figure out how to learn even more. By giving them second chances, they are proving to me how much they really know, outside of the anxiety, the pressure, and the rigidity that can occur. So why not try it? Give your students back that test and tell them to fix it, give them back their work and tell them to enhance it. Give them another chance to learn.

Be the change, being a teacher, believe, failure, Student-centered

Please Don’t Mark It Wrong – How Our Society Raise Children Afraid to Fail

October 27, 2011 Pernille Schmidt Ripp

Another child stands by me asking for my help, 5 seconds after the assignment has been given, “But I just don’t get it, Mrs. Ripp…” And I ask, because this is the 3rd time today that this child has come up to me immediately into work time, “Well, did you try?” She hasn’t, she is scared, and she admits it readily; “Please don’t circle it. Please don’t mark it wrong.” So upset, she raises her voice, pleads with me as if my circle matters. As if my marker holds the power. And I am stumped because how does a 5th grader get that scared of failing?

The truth is we are doing this to kids, we, this society in pursuit of perfection is doing it to our kids, because it was done to us as well. My daughter, who granted is only a wise two and a half year old is not afraid to fail. She gets frustrated sure, but she tries and tries and then sometimes tries again. We encourage this at home, urging her on, urging her to explore, to pick herself up. Again, again, again. Will she be the child in 8 years that stands petrified in front of me, asking for help because trying seems too daunting?

No teacher or parent tries to make their child afraid of failure. Yet our practices in schools support this notion that failure is the worst thing that can happen. An incorrect answer on a test pulls down your grade, you get enough, and you get an F for failure stamped across it for the world to see. That F means nothing valid, nothing worth reading here, nothing worth. Homework that is meant to be practice is tabulated, calculated, and spit out on our report cards. The child who gets the answer right is heralded as smart, the child who gets it wrong is told to keep trying and maybe they will get it someday.

How we run our classrooms directly affect how students feel about themselves. About how they feel about their own capabilities and their own intelligence. I fail all the time in front my kids, not on purpose, I try stuff and it doesn’t work and we talk about it. And yet, I am not perfect either. I catch myself in using practice problems as assessment, where really they should be viewed just as practice. I praise the kids that get it right and sometimes don’t praise the ones that kept persisting but never reach a correct answer. I don’t alway have enough time to explore all of the options so I guide the kids toward success knowing that some venues will lead them to failure. I shield them from it sometimes because I don’t want to crush their spirits.

We have to stand up for our children and we have to turn this notion around that failure is the worst thing that can happen. Failure is not the worst; not trying is. We have to keep our kids believing in themselves and having enough confidence to try something. If we don’t we are raising kids that follow all of the rules, that never take risks, that never discover something new. And that failure is too big to remedy.

being a teacher, students

Ability Grouping Versus Tracking – What’s in a Name?

October 20, 2011 Pernille Schmidt Ripp

For a while now I have been wondering about the language we use as we group our students. Not so much the labels we use but the method of grouping used. For guided reading, you are supposed to group students at their reading level, which then in turn creates ability groups. This is considered a great thing for teaching students at their targeted levels. And I tend to agree, I do some whole class book discussions but for deeper teaching of reading strategies I like to meet with smaller groups to discuss pertinent strategies with books they can understand. And that according the guided reading is what I should be doing; placing students with similar leveled students or similar skilled students so that they can work at the same task.

For math you can do flex grouping, also based somewhat on ability as determined through pre-tests and personalties, and this too is totally permissible. It allows for smaller groups and different pacing of curriculum, as well as remediation and enrichment.

Yet, if you take away the gentler names and introduce the word “tracking”, then both of these scenarios lose their luster. So I wonder, out loud as usual, is ability grouping really just tracking with a kinder name?

If we ability group in elementary are we setting students on their path for the rest of their academic career or are we indeed teaching them within their zone of proximal development and then spurring further growth? Are we able to group students in such a way that all are challenged at their level without breaking them apart? Can we effectively meet every single child’s needs within in a classroom setting during our instruction time without identifying which skill they specifically need to work on and them grouping them to work on them?

I would love your thoughts on this.