There are always more than two roads that diverge in a woods. Robert Frost was partially right. In the 21st century, there are several roads than an individual can take and I am thinking about the power of having options and the benefits for making such a decision.
I CHOSE to spend my spring break working with school and teachers, including interviewing several for the 2013 summer institute for the Connecticut Writing Project. It is amazing to me to learn that in some districts teachers are given choice of best practices to implement with students and how they, in return, offer CHOICE to their students. Middle school teachers who are given more options with their curriculum are reporting, for example, that their students read 30 to 40 books a year. How does this happen? Well, they cultivate a culture of readers and are given options of building libraries and supporting a wide variety of readers. In other schools, however, teachers are mandated to teach particular books at particular times of the year and they share that their student do not read, they are losing their zest for teaching, and they feel stifled. I'm curious how it is that we are not doing research on this phenomenon. I am far more likely to engage with readers who have read a wide variety of books than those who are forced to read one book in which they cheat to get through it.
Herein lies the paranoia about the Common Core.
It is not that students are reading more in schools that provide choice (that is phenomenal). It is not that the teachers in the schools that are encouraged to teach more choice are more motivated and energized to come to school everyday. It is that some leaders of some schools feel it is better to limit what it is that students are learning and who stifle possibilities that disrupt education. That is my Thursday conundrum. How does such leadership get fostered? How can the counter stories be highlighted and celebrated?
I learned that listening to students and encouraging them to do their best work is best practice. Yet, I'm seeing the movement to a particular set of texts with particular curriculum goals being policed in some districts. I'm not sure that is the answer.
We have a lot of conversations still needing to be had. Choice is central. Teachers deserve to have choice, as professionals, for what will work best with students, yet they enter the profession at a time when they are told, 'No, we mandate that you do this." Has anyone looked at whether or not such mandates work? Hmmm, I think that is the wave of research that is needed next (although all the experts I read would side that more is much better than less).
Poor students. If they get into a program that hinders their education - which I'm afraid is more normal than not - then they are being stifled to reach the skills they need. Shame on us for not speaking louder to counter such practice.
I CHOSE to spend my spring break working with school and teachers, including interviewing several for the 2013 summer institute for the Connecticut Writing Project. It is amazing to me to learn that in some districts teachers are given choice of best practices to implement with students and how they, in return, offer CHOICE to their students. Middle school teachers who are given more options with their curriculum are reporting, for example, that their students read 30 to 40 books a year. How does this happen? Well, they cultivate a culture of readers and are given options of building libraries and supporting a wide variety of readers. In other schools, however, teachers are mandated to teach particular books at particular times of the year and they share that their student do not read, they are losing their zest for teaching, and they feel stifled. I'm curious how it is that we are not doing research on this phenomenon. I am far more likely to engage with readers who have read a wide variety of books than those who are forced to read one book in which they cheat to get through it.
Herein lies the paranoia about the Common Core.
It is not that students are reading more in schools that provide choice (that is phenomenal). It is not that the teachers in the schools that are encouraged to teach more choice are more motivated and energized to come to school everyday. It is that some leaders of some schools feel it is better to limit what it is that students are learning and who stifle possibilities that disrupt education. That is my Thursday conundrum. How does such leadership get fostered? How can the counter stories be highlighted and celebrated?
I learned that listening to students and encouraging them to do their best work is best practice. Yet, I'm seeing the movement to a particular set of texts with particular curriculum goals being policed in some districts. I'm not sure that is the answer.
We have a lot of conversations still needing to be had. Choice is central. Teachers deserve to have choice, as professionals, for what will work best with students, yet they enter the profession at a time when they are told, 'No, we mandate that you do this." Has anyone looked at whether or not such mandates work? Hmmm, I think that is the wave of research that is needed next (although all the experts I read would side that more is much better than less).
Poor students. If they get into a program that hinders their education - which I'm afraid is more normal than not - then they are being stifled to reach the skills they need. Shame on us for not speaking louder to counter such practice.
No comments:
Post a Comment