I want to do something. I want to be involved in improving education in the United States. I want to, specifically, improve education in impoverished urban areas. Why? Because my ability to think is what I cherish the most. I want everyone to have this. Without people that can think for themselves, we're fucking donezo. Climate change, economic meltdowns, you name it, we need need thinkers. To get us to the 22nd century in one piece.
I'll work a twelve hour day and all I want to do is go home and read education blogs.
So call me names. I'm white. OK. I went to college. Yes. It was Ivy League. My parents went to college too. I grew up in the suburbs. Call me what you want. Overpriviliged asshole. Fine. Maybe I don't belong here. What are the options?
1. "Just teach" Work in a traditional public school. Develop an ulcer. Be a grain of sand in a whirling storm. Stand tall with the union. Fight for seniority rights. Know, in my heart of hearts, that I'm "doing right by the kids" and that I have a pension and I've sided with labor, the good guys. Always feel powerless. Never feel respected. Never make enough money. Sit in union meetings and hate myself because all anyone wants to talk about is minutes in the day, not failing students. Feel successful every now and again. Maybe become a principal. Spend my time forcing out senior teachers to fix my budget. Make more money. Fudging numbers. Causing teachers to hate me.
2. "Go 100% charter" I've done it for a few years. Whole-heartedly renounce collective bargaining. Stay in the charter world. Feel respected, feel powerful. Make more money. Be a media darling. Feel successful every day. Feel like shit because I'm on the wrong team, I'm privatizing what should be a public entity. Feel like shit because lots of kids don't make it through our schools. Feel like shit because despite all of our extra money, numbers-fudging, and autonomy, public schools are still compared to us in the media and demonized, unfairly. Maybe become a principal. Create a school some kids and the media will love, but in my heart of hearts, I know is a sham.
3. "Fucking leave" Do something else! I don't belong here and I never did. I have the wrong mentality. The wrong background. The wrong everything. If you can't stand wholeheartedly in one of these camps, there's no place for you. Get out!
4. "Policy wonk" Go to ed school. Get a PhD. Spend the rest of my life writing about what's wrong with charter schools, what's wrong with district schools, and die happy knowing my conscience is clear. At least I didn't fuck anything up. I didn't do anything real. I didn't walk the walk.
Not expecting an answer. I just don't feel optimistic about any of them.
Thursday, February 24, 2011
Sunday, February 13, 2011
TFA20 - Opening Plenary
Finally found the time to collect my thoughts from the TFA 20th Anniversary Summit, and I must say, if nothing else it was inspiring. It feels good to be reminded that it's OK to "still be a teacher" and to know that, as annoying as TFA may seem at times, its alumni are frequently dedicated, caring people who think about the issues that matter. Well, maybe not every issue that matters.
It was also interesting to get a sense of the current TFA philosophy and I must report that an organization that once (six years ago) felt pro-teacher and that at least tried to stay out of political issues is now pro-"leadership" and has a distinct ideological (pro-charter) slant.
Saturday began with an opening plenary that felt like a high school pep rally in an airplane hangar, complete with rock music and a raucous crowd.
Kaya Henderson, a TFA alumna who has taken over the reins of DCPS, introduced the summit (following a performance by the Ballou High School marching band). She also hinted at the tenor of the day, stating in no uncertain terms, "This is the revolution that we all dreamed about." From there the alarmist histrionics would only increase in urgency.
Wendy Kopp was next. In describing the nature of the alumni force, she dropped an interesting fact bomb: "1500 of you alumni are teachers". Well let's think about that. The total number of alumni was repeatedly stated to be 20,000. 1,500/20,000 = 7.5%. So 7.5% are still teaching. Not the number that gets tossed around in the media.
In her opening address, Wendy established what would be the refrain of the day: (1) we have solved the achievement gap, the recipe has been found, and (2) there is a moral imperative for drastic action, rather than slow, careful change. "We have created 'transformational schools' that make this work sustainable. We know what these schools are doing, and it is not elusive," she said. Later she added, "Incremental change is not enough, we need transformational change."
Immediately questions popped into my head: What is the evidence that any school works? Unsaid all weekend: the evidence is always proficiency rates on state-written assessments. Bunk. It's too easy to test-prep, it's not college readiness, it's not critical thinking. Also, so much evidence shows that real school change is gradual. It has to be gradual. I felt like throwing a copy of The Teaching Gap at the stage. But Kopp would not be the last to demand sudden, explosive change.
Walter Isaacson of the Aspen Institute (what?) then introduced a celebrity "yes!"-panel of edustars that quickly started sounding like Gucci-wearing versions of Karl Marx. First up, Joel Klein had the audacity to channel the Cairo protestors, asking, "Is this our Egypt moment?" He made the pertinent claim, "Each one of you out there, insist that every school is one you would send your own kids to." Fair enough. But couldn't end without echoing Kopp: "We need radical change."
Klein was followed by Dave Levin. The original KIPPster intoned, "We know it's possible. Revolutionary schools exist." He would close: "What will you do to serve the revolution?"
No edreform panel in 2011 would be complete without Michelle Rhee. She began with a proclamation, "We know what works," referencing quickly KIPP and the Harlem Children's Zone, before warning, "Not everyone is going to like us. We need to be aggressive." Oh shit!
HCZ's own Geoffery Canada would be next, stating breathlessly, "I never thought this moment would come." I have a ton of respect for Mr. Canada, and his presence on this panel, for me, legitimized a lot of the summit. I started to think if Geoff's here and Geoff's behind this, then I am too.
Probably least well-known was the last to speak, John Deasy, new leader of LAUSD. Apparently his resume includes work for Prince George's County and the Gates Foundation. "This is a courage issue," he said. "We will not allow rules or regulations to put great teaching in peril."
I kept waiting for one of them to bang his or her shoe on the table.
A lot of the rhetoric I agreed with: "We must professionalize teaching," (Klein); "This is the hardest work on the planet. It's also the most important," (Levin).
But I am ready to deepen the conversation. In addition to the unspoken assumption above (increased test scores = increased everything good), another big assumption is always that "transformational schools" teach kids that are "the same" as their counterparts in the same districts. Are they? Is a poor kid is a poor kid is a poor kid? When Klein says, "Give those same kids a great education, and the outcome is different," what does he really mean? In what sense are the kids "the same"? What "outcome" is he referring to?
When John Deasy says, "Look, we happen to be people of privilege, so what? Our students are not. We are violating our students' rights," what rights is he referring to? What is the purpose of schooling? What rights are guaranteed to in our public school system? Could we ever agree? This is still the question that matters.
It was also interesting to get a sense of the current TFA philosophy and I must report that an organization that once (six years ago) felt pro-teacher and that at least tried to stay out of political issues is now pro-"leadership" and has a distinct ideological (pro-charter) slant.
Saturday began with an opening plenary that felt like a high school pep rally in an airplane hangar, complete with rock music and a raucous crowd.
Kaya Henderson, a TFA alumna who has taken over the reins of DCPS, introduced the summit (following a performance by the Ballou High School marching band). She also hinted at the tenor of the day, stating in no uncertain terms, "This is the revolution that we all dreamed about." From there the alarmist histrionics would only increase in urgency.
Wendy Kopp was next. In describing the nature of the alumni force, she dropped an interesting fact bomb: "1500 of you alumni are teachers". Well let's think about that. The total number of alumni was repeatedly stated to be 20,000. 1,500/20,000 = 7.5%. So 7.5% are still teaching. Not the number that gets tossed around in the media.
In her opening address, Wendy established what would be the refrain of the day: (1) we have solved the achievement gap, the recipe has been found, and (2) there is a moral imperative for drastic action, rather than slow, careful change. "We have created 'transformational schools' that make this work sustainable. We know what these schools are doing, and it is not elusive," she said. Later she added, "Incremental change is not enough, we need transformational change."
Immediately questions popped into my head: What is the evidence that any school works? Unsaid all weekend: the evidence is always proficiency rates on state-written assessments. Bunk. It's too easy to test-prep, it's not college readiness, it's not critical thinking. Also, so much evidence shows that real school change is gradual. It has to be gradual. I felt like throwing a copy of The Teaching Gap at the stage. But Kopp would not be the last to demand sudden, explosive change.
Walter Isaacson of the Aspen Institute (what?) then introduced a celebrity "yes!"-panel of edustars that quickly started sounding like Gucci-wearing versions of Karl Marx. First up, Joel Klein had the audacity to channel the Cairo protestors, asking, "Is this our Egypt moment?" He made the pertinent claim, "Each one of you out there, insist that every school is one you would send your own kids to." Fair enough. But couldn't end without echoing Kopp: "We need radical change."
Klein was followed by Dave Levin. The original KIPPster intoned, "We know it's possible. Revolutionary schools exist." He would close: "What will you do to serve the revolution?"
No edreform panel in 2011 would be complete without Michelle Rhee. She began with a proclamation, "We know what works," referencing quickly KIPP and the Harlem Children's Zone, before warning, "Not everyone is going to like us. We need to be aggressive." Oh shit!
HCZ's own Geoffery Canada would be next, stating breathlessly, "I never thought this moment would come." I have a ton of respect for Mr. Canada, and his presence on this panel, for me, legitimized a lot of the summit. I started to think if Geoff's here and Geoff's behind this, then I am too.
Probably least well-known was the last to speak, John Deasy, new leader of LAUSD. Apparently his resume includes work for Prince George's County and the Gates Foundation. "This is a courage issue," he said. "We will not allow rules or regulations to put great teaching in peril."
I kept waiting for one of them to bang his or her shoe on the table.
A lot of the rhetoric I agreed with: "We must professionalize teaching," (Klein); "This is the hardest work on the planet. It's also the most important," (Levin).
But I am ready to deepen the conversation. In addition to the unspoken assumption above (increased test scores = increased everything good), another big assumption is always that "transformational schools" teach kids that are "the same" as their counterparts in the same districts. Are they? Is a poor kid is a poor kid is a poor kid? When Klein says, "Give those same kids a great education, and the outcome is different," what does he really mean? In what sense are the kids "the same"? What "outcome" is he referring to?
When John Deasy says, "Look, we happen to be people of privilege, so what? Our students are not. We are violating our students' rights," what rights is he referring to? What is the purpose of schooling? What rights are guaranteed to in our public school system? Could we ever agree? This is still the question that matters.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
