Smart Teachers in Stupid Schools
By Christine D'Amico, MA Elementary Ed
I'm sitting in yet another meeting for staff development on the common core curriculum. This meeting is for Special Ed Teachers, the Special Ed supervisor for the district is talking about "hotspots" – "And one of the "hotspots" as you know, is that our students must tell us where they are academically and how they intend to move to the next level." I raised my eyebrows and made a face in her direction. "What?" she questioned, "We're all professionals here, and do you have something to add?" "Not really" I replied, "No, I insist, you obviously have something on your mind and we'd like to hear it." "Look" I stated firmly, "I don't know many adults who can tell you where they are academically and how they expect to get to the next level, no less children, no less special needs children! Now, the kids can tell you what they like to do and what they don't like to do, but to ask them to present their academic portfolio on the spot is simply not appropriate. The professionals in the classroom must discern and administer efficient methodologies to teach the kids and get them to the next levels; this should not be a concern of the students." We're seated in a big square table; the other teachers are all within my sight. As I look around seeking support, most remain mute not daring to question the status quo, only one strong dynamic teacher nods her head feverishly in agreement and asserts "Exactly!" "Well," maintains the supervisor, "This is what is coming down the pipe all our kids have to be 'proactive learners'." "Yes, well," I quipped, "it's simply not appropriate." "'Proactive learners'" I rolled my eyes thinking, "These people love to use phrases that have snappy ideals with little meaning in the classroom."
The conversation went on to other "hotspots" which made no reference to real scientifically based practices in the classroom, the pressures from above to conform to these requirements are thus thrust upon classroom teachers. Yet another meeting with lots of form and little function while newer teachers do not dare question authority for fear of reprisal and senior teachers object behind the backs of these supervisors - tired of ridiculous meetings promising lots of something delivering nothing. Thus the "Much Ado About Nothing" merry-go-round of pedagogy rolls on.
So how did we get here in our schools and what happens to teachers who really are innovative and question the status quo? First a little history of American Education - American education in the early 1900's was designed to teach students academics: phonics, reading, writing, math, American history, world history, world geography, American geography, science, grammar, art, art history, literature, poetry, students were taught directly and systematically and they were assigned memorization and recitation of important documents. Students in the early 1900's had a course load that was full and diverse. High school graduates during this time had a broad education which was well grounded in academics. There was no illiteracy problem because these students were taught to read phonetically. Their knowledge base was probably better than most college graduates today. Then, along came John Dewey, who said that schools needed to be more sensitive and progressive. "Schools should be places where we can build a new political order, teaching students to think critically and be open minded." This is progressive education. A new era emerged for education.
Teachers were then encouraged to forego academics and put more of a thrust on progressive paradigms such as working cooperatively and learning by exploration rather than rote. A new emphasis on bolstering self-esteem by changing the grading system emerged. New teaching models came into the classroom, out went the memorization of facts and phonics, in came a new pedagogy that was implicitly based called "Constructivism" - "We learn through exploration and we learn to read in the same way we learn to speak." This became the mantra of pedagogues. Group learning, group seating, grading with rubrics, collaboration, open classrooms, schools without walls, cooperative learning, multiage approaches, whole language, the social curriculum, experiential education, and numerous forms of alternative schools all have important philosophical roots in progressive education.
Though the progressive educators end goal for students has always been critical thinking and a highly educated diverse population, their methodologies lack rigor and scientific backing. Without phonics directly and systematically taught in our classrooms, illiteracy soared. First came the "Look-Say" method (remember Dick and Jane?) later came whole language, which outlawed phonics in any way, shape or form in the classroom. Illiteracy rates skyrocketed and though there has been some pushback from parents and educators, these trends remain in place. We are now down to basically teaching three subjects in school, reading, writing and math. The methods employed in the classroom are so inefficient that we have to spend lots of time on these disciplines. What could be taught efficiently in Kindergarten and First Grade is drawn out for years. We can't fit in other disciplines because our students can't handle the rigor. If you can't read, write and spell, you simply can't handle lots of other subjects.
In contrast, students who were educated in the early 1900's with traditional classrooms had many subjects and were able to handle a full course load. These graduates had more knowledge and were therefore better critical thinkers than those who are now subjected to progressive education. In fact, progressive pedagogy produces the exact opposite of its goal and in the face of science, which backs direct, systematic, rigorous instruction progressive educators remain married to their paradigms. Our schools are infiltrated and infected with this disease called progressive education, when in fact there is nothing progressive about it! The progressive model is backwards, it is not helping our students really acquire the knowledge they need to become strong, smart citizens and is forcing the entire system to crumble.
Progressive educators in universities (like Columbia Teachers College) sit around thinking up ways to create curriculum which orbits around their paradigms. College professors follow the curriculum without question; therefore new teachers are indoctrinated in these methods. These methods grab hold of schools and school districts like parasites and because we only have a precious few hours in school with our children, much of these time-wasting, inappropriate pedagogical approaches result in lower academic achievement in our students. These people experiment on our students and teachers with their poorly written curriculum. Many teachers who are under strict orders to use these time-wasting procedures are distraught that they cannot use scientifically based pedagogy in their classrooms.
Progressive educators would like to promote a more democratic society advocating greater equity, justice, diversity and other democratic values, yet their methodologies do just the opposite, with "Fuzzy Math" and "Whole Language" causing lesser privileged students who can't afford tutoring to fall way behind. NYC has 70% of its student population in this category. Imagine how devastating to the morale and sense of self-esteem the use of poor curriculums can have on a child's psyche. These students subjected to these methods grow to believe they can't do anything; they are labeled as special needs children and become distraught that they are not mentally capable of becoming educated. Many are just pushed through the system because there is no where else for them to go. Progressivism which is trying to enforce some kind of social agenda, rather than purely impart knowledge, is causing many students to fail and teachers to become distraught and despondent.
What do teachers who refuse to follow the leader do? Many shut their doors and pull out the curriculum they know works. I know of teachers who, when whole language is being implemented by the district, will use their phonics programs undercover. Teachers will set up look-outs in the hall to see if supervisors are coming and drill students in what to do should a supervisor show up. I have had my students open their "readers" and put in the phonics books I'm using inside. "If someone comes you take the book slide it in your desk and pretend you're reading." I've instructed.
In NYC, the high school teachers in one district staged a protest at the district office against the use of the Teachers College method in their classrooms. These teachers were told to conform to the method or else be punished. The UFT chapter leader who headed up this protest ended up in the Rubber Room with charges of insubordination. He was despondent, demoralized and depressed; worried that his very career would be ended. This brave leader persevered and was restored to his position in school with the charges dropped. The high school teachers won their battle and were told they could use their own methods in their classrooms.
One time during a summer school program, I brought my own personal reading kit (worth $2000) up four flights to my New York City classroom and bought all the kids their own workbooks at a cost of over $250. I did this because the summer school materials were so poorly written and so benign I knew they would not make a dent in the minds of these students who were already anywhere from two to five years behind in reading. In fact, the summer school materials were junk magazines created by some publisher who had a contract with the district. When the summer school district superintendent and principal came into my classroom to observe my students obviously using a multi-sensory method, singing phonics songs, spelling in groups, reading in groups and writing I was questioned, "Why aren't you using the mandated program?" "I would challenge you to think about your choice of curriculum for these students, these kids need a powerful program to get them up and running. I have always gotten high test scores with this program." Later behind closed doors, the principal sternly rebuked, "How dare you confront the superintendent in front of me!" And so it goes, smart teachers with smart innovative programs that actually are proven to work "get it". I was punished severely by that principal for speaking out, who wrote me up and even removed me from the classroom. Yet, my students outscored their peers that summer.
Another teacher who had gotten high test scores repeatedly using her method of spelling and vocabulary enhancement in her classroom was told not use her method as "spelling has nothing to do with reading." (which is a flat out lie)? So, she used the methods enforced by the district. When she was called into her supervisor who was questioning her test scores she said, "Well, I used your methods, I did exactly what you told me to do, so you can turn around and look in the mirror because that's the person who caused these low test scores." After that, she decided to leave the classroom and become a cluster teacher because, "There's just too much pressure on classroom teachers to do the wrong thing." Sometimes smart teachers can't take it anymore and just abandon ship.
In math, if the district brings in a fuzzy program, smart teachers buy their own books, use the programs they know work and close their doors. They speak out against the ridiculous choices made by the district and refuse to use their programs. Some teachers are disciplined for not following the requirements while others can get away with creating their own programs. I don't use the mandated math program in our school; it's the most confusing program I've ever seen. I look at the Core Knowledge requirements and follow it, creating a program for my Special Needs kids. After all, if the math program doesn't make sense to me, it won't make sense to First Graders! Common sense, please!
So, what is a really smart teacher? Smart teachers want to teach using scientifically sound curriculums that work and never fail, even the slowest learners. They want to use what we know about the brain and learning in their classroom curriculum. (Did you know that teachers are never taught brain science in their education training courses? Imagine and these are the people who are working with the brain all day long!) Innovative teachers want to access the entire brain using multisensory curriculums. These teachers want to empower their students with as much knowledge as possible. They look at the whole student, their home life, their diet, their support systems and they have compassion and love in their hearts for each one. Smart teachers encourage and expect the absolute best, yet they make things easy by using direct, systematic, explicit curriculum which clearly lays out expectations and produces measurable results. Smart educators want to learn about what works, these are teachers who will pay their way to conferences which enhance their own teaching so they can impart knowledge in the best most efficient manner in our schools. These are the teachers who will go the extra mile again and again to help their students succeed.
Too often people, especially within institutions, dig their heals in deep into their own paradigms whether correct or not, in order to protect their territory, their status quo, their own need to be right. In education and our schools this is a most egregious offense because, at stake, are the futures and lives of the children we serve. We can no longer afford to remain stoic in our mindsets, and although cloaked with lofty goals, the progressive educational movement in the United States has created a pedagogical mess, which must be untangled and common sense must prevail.
Smart teachers, who are bold and use common sense, must take a stand, and speak out against the common trends in academia to waste time and dumb down our classrooms. We want to produce bright students who have much knowledge and can think critically. You can't put the cart before the horse; the ability to think critically only comes with much knowledge and understanding of many disciplines. Smart teachers in stupid schools still produce well-educated students; we just wish the schools would get on board!