Guns in Schools? "Teachers Shouldn't Have to Go to Boot Camp to Teach Romeo and Juliet!"

NOW, the letter I really DID send...hopefully it's respectful and professional. The other was for fun...or for venting.

Dear Representatives McCullough and Shorty:

I’m writing to you and copying to the Education Committees to express my deep and abiding opposition to your proposed bill intending to arm public school personnel.

I’m a career teacher with over thirty years of teaching in Oklahoma, at every level in public education, K-12. I’ve also taught at both OU and SNU. I’m a fourth-generation teacher. I have spent my entire adult life in classrooms, so I hope you respect my perspective.

I believe your motivation for the bill is pure – you want to protect our children. I also believe your solution to keeping students safe is the wrong one.

Many experts emphatically state that liability issues in arming teachers would be prohibitively expensive. The potential for accidents is high. Who will pay the insurance? Who will pay the damages when a student overpowers a teacher and grabs a gun?

Who will pay when a teacher with a weapon, in an attempt to protect students, accidentally injures or kills a student? Who pays when a child is caught in the crossfire? Who pays when an armed teacher becomes a target because of the weapon? Will your bill make provisions to hold teachers ‘harmless’ from any legal action? What about the schools who allow teachers to carry guns? Will they also be held harmless? Will irate parents sue the state instead? Will they sue you?

 I understand the CLEET training your bill requires is more intensive than typically available, but even highly trained law enforcement officers and soldiers make tragic mistakes in the heat of battle. They kill each other. They hesitate and are killed. If this happens to professionals, I guarantee teachers will make more mistakes. And the mistakes will injure children, kill children.

I have spoken to parents of school-aged children who emphatically say they’ll move from the public schools or even from the state if this bill passes and if their children’s teachers carry weapons in the classroom. Parents do not want armed teachers…will you listen to them?

Attacks like Columbine, Aurora, Newtown, were sudden and horrifying. Even law enforcement officers on site would be hard-pressed to respond quickly and accurately in stressful circumstances. I’ll tell you, my school, Norman North, has two armed officers on site, ready to do just that.

When compared to the precious lives of our children, a discussion of cost seems crass and petty. But there will be costs involved with the enactment of your bill. Who pays for the teachers to be trained? Right now our OSDE won’t even pay for training teachers in the new evaluation model which will be used to possibly fire us. Who pays for the weapons teachers bring to school? Who pays for the ammunition? The lock boxes? The holsters? If a teacher brings a personal weapon, does that liability fall on his or her shoulders?

The past few years have made me cynical when policymakers talk about education. My cynical self wonders about this bill…

Why not a bill requiring an armed guard at every school, like Norman North currently has?

Why not enhanced facilities and support for families struggling with mental health issues? With troubled members of their family?

Could the answer be that crass cost element? Could there be an element of ‘solve it cheap’ instead of ‘solve it right?’

Superintendent Kevin Burr of Sapulpa Schools estimates the cost of an armed security guard in every school in Oklahoma to be $15 million.  Are you unwilling to invest this amount in our children and are you hoping enough gung-ho teacher will jump at your offer?

Are you hoping you can then wash your hands of the problem of school violence and school security? Are you planning to say, “Well, we gave those teachers the chance to carry a gun. Not our fault if they killed a student, or didn’t stop the bad guy…we tried”? Are you planning to blame teachers if future attacks aren't thwarted?

Are you hoping to give the appearance of caring about our children, while doing it on the cheap?

Are you hoping parents DO desert the schools so you can label us failures?

Classrooms are sacred places for teachers and students. We create community; we laugh and learn. We celebrate and grieve. We create a climate of trust so learning and teaching can occur, so risks can be taken safely. Guns in this sacred place will not make any of us safer. It will destroy our climate of trust.

One of my former students, in a FaceBook conversation about gun control told me this. I want Nick’s words to be the end of my plea to you.

“Teachers make the commitment to further lives every day they go to work. To ask one to end a life is not only contradictory to their soul, but it would be unfair to MAKE them have to choose.
Post a Marine at the doors, put a cop in a janitor uniform, or something else. I may not have the answer, but I do not think teachers should have to go to boot camp in order to teach Romeo and Juliet.”

The Letter I Won't Send

Representative Mark McCullough and Senator Ralph Shortey, in response to the horrific school shooting in Newtown, are set to propose a bill the the Oklahoma Legislature allowing teachers and administrators to carry guns in school. What I've written here is the letter I WON'T send to them. I've a more measured response I will send, but this is what bubbled up first.

Seriously?? Seriously? Have you just gone around the bend? Are you nuts?? Do you really think this is the Wild West? Have I gone to sleep and awakened in Crazy Town? Merciful Heavens. You really want teachers to carry guns? In school?

You really think the solution to crazed, military rifle-wielding murderers is arming teachers? Let’s see…teachers are responsible for teaching…for generating mountains of data on testing. We’re responsible for students’ test scores. We’ll be fired if test scores don’t increase. We’re expected to align all our lessons to PASS now, while revising them to align with Common Core. We’re supposed to get kids ready for tests that haven’t even been written yet. We’re supposed to do all that, grade, plan, contact parents. 

We’re to continue our own education--at our own expense, buy snacks for our students, provide our own supplies and computer ink. We’re supposed to learn all the new technology in our classrooms, use it, and supervise our students’ use. We’re supposed to create learning climates that respect every child and maximize his or her learning. We’re supposed to be available for after-school meeting and before school meetings. We’re expected to differentiate for every child while simultaneously leading whole class lessons using books that are at or above grade level. 

Teaching is already full to the brim with stress and anxiety…and you want to put a gun in every classroom? Classrooms that contain stressed teachers and stressed students?

We’re supposed to do all that, and tote a gun?

Will I be evaluated on my marksmanship? Will that be part of my value-added measure? “Totes a gun and ain’t afraid to use it?” Will that be a line in my evaluation? Seriously?

Exactly how do you think guns will improve the climate of a school? Do you think third graders, already ‘under the gun’ to read proficiently or be flunked, will smile benignly at the gun at their teacher’s back? Do you think this will, as some have cynically suggested, help with classroom management?

If I had wanted to carry a gun to work and participate in gunfights, I would not have trained to be a teacher. I’d’ve gone into the military…where even trained soldiers often don’t take a kill shot, and too often kill their own troops in friendly fire.

You don’t trust me to be accountable in my classroom. You think because I belong to the OEA I’m a union thug. You choose to pay me far less than other comparably educated professionals. You take away my rights of due-process. You require more and more. You support me less and less. And now you want me to jump at the chance to play gunslinger? 

ARE YOU NUTS??

Pray, tell. Who’s going to pay for the gun training? The weapon? The ammunition? Who’s going to pay for the lock box to keep the weapon away from my students? Who’s going to pay the astronomically high liability insurance? If past experience is any indication, I do believe you will expect ME to pay. 

Again, I ask, ARE YOU NUTS?

Reading All a-Twitter

This week my Reading for Pleasure students have read (no writing -- a fundraiser for our all-school project let students buy days of reading bell-to-bell with no Reading Logs) and talked to each other. They've teased,  recommended books, asked questions of each other.

The have also interacted online with authors of the books they're reading. They've gotten a glimpse of the social power of reading, something they did not believe when they entered my class in August.

So many teens believe reading is a nerdy, solitary activity of people who have no lives and can't interact with others. They don't understand a reader's very real need to talk to someone about a book she love. We can and do talk to each other in each class, but I've always searched for a better way for all of my students to talk to each other about books.

I'm still new to twitter and I know I don't understand all the power of this site, but I've begun using it for my own purposes.

I tell my students my mission in life is to prove to the world how brilliant they are. But I need their help.

I created a twitter hashtag for us to talk to each other about books: #northr4p. I encourage cellphone use during class IF kids will tweet about their books. I retweet each entry, thus proving to the world, at least the world that follows me on twitter, that my kids are brilliant. Students tweet quotes from the books, their progress and responses, and they tweet pictures...of the room, of their books, of them reading their books. They share pictures of their favorite lines in books.

I follow several authors on twitter and will copy the authors on the conversations we have about their books. Ellen Hopkins had a long conversations with Shaylee and me about our favorite characters...it was a rich back-and-forth discussion with a hero. Shaylee told me she tried to explain to her mother how very special it was to talk to Hopkins by asking her how SHE would feel if she could talk to Nora Roberts! Mom got it.

Daniel and I tweeted back and forth in class as he finished MockingJay by Suzanne Collins. We talked about how we felt about the ending, and if it was appropriate. We were in the same room, but having a great conversation. Ryan, who happened to be next door replied to both of us that HE wanted to join the conversation too! Now, my students DO have permission to tweet in class...I doubt if Ryan's teacher knew he was attending one class, talking about another.

Cheryl Rainfield can be counted on to respond with pleasure and honesty to my students. Logan was touched that Rainfield was excited that she'd finished her book.

Recently I attended National Council of Teachers of English and brought home 65 pounds of books. Among the treasures was an Advanced Reading Copy of a book that won't be published until April: Barry Lyga's Game, chilling sequel to his book, I Hunt Killers. Several of us had read the first book and gobbled the second. As we shared, in class, and on twitter, more students became interested in the series and put themselves on the waiting list for Killers. Alas, I only had one copy. JT saw it, with Kylie's name on it and begged to read it during class. He dutifully returned it, and is waiting his turn.

There started a funny running exchange on twitter between one student in first hour, another in fifth, their teacher, and the author. JT exclaimed to the world that I took the book away from him...I replied, copying Kylie and Lyga, telling her to read fast and him to write fast...that we needed the third book. Lyga replied to us all coyly, pretending there won't be a third.

When I got a copy in the mail Friday, I took a picture and showed JT he'll have his own copy Monday. Kylie has challenged him to a race.

Hopkins and I talked last night about text complexity in her books, and our frustration with Accelerated Reader programs that reduce literature to numbers.

Twitter has added an element to my classes that was totally unexpected. Kids talk to each other, to me, and to the authors of their books. Some authors respond; many don't. But we still reach out. The immediacy shows students reading is totally social...that we DO talk about our books, and now that exchange can include the authors who are so generous with their time.

This semester will be over in a few weeks...a new group will come into my class. I absolutely KNOW we will continue talking on #northr4p, now not just across class periods, but across semesters. I know it because former student, now out of school, are tweeting their books to us. This will be my reading community, even after I retire.

National Board, Still Under Attack in OK?

I recently attended a workshop hosted by Education Leadership Oklahoma, the steward in our state for all things National Board. The authors of Teaching 2030 attended, shared their courageous vision of what the profession could look like in the future, and helped us brainstorm our own barriers to that vision, and some steps we could take here.

In attendance were National Board Certified Teachers -- not many of us, since attendance at meetings is such a problem around the state. Schools don't have money to pay for subs, and those that do, don't have subs. Also attending were representatives from Oklahoma State Department of Education, officials from our State Regents office and professors from several university education departments around the state.

Barnett Berry, Jennifer Barnett, and Cindi Rigsbee were enthusiastic and inspiring as they shares the four emergent realities of teaching in 2030: teaching and learning will move beyond the four walls of existing classrooms, there will be seamless connections in and out of cyberspace where teachers and learners meet, pathways into the profession will be differentiated, as well as career pathways, and teachers will invent new ways to lead from the inside of the profession. I'm paraphrasing, because as dynamic as their presentations were, they aren't the story that emerged from my day.

I came with a friend, another NBCT, and all of us NBCTs had ribbons on our name tags -- it's important to my story to know we were easily identifiable.. My friend and I  sat at a table with three other women; one knew my name from a mutual friend in Oklahoma Writing Project. We visited for a moment and then settled in to the presentations. I realized half-way through the morning that all three were from the OSDE. Given the history of this administration's dealings with NBCTs, with ELO, and with our entire program, I was wary...but determined to play nice.

The woman closest to us leaned over during the morning to tell us that her son had had two NBCTs as teachers and they both were "horrible" teachers. After a  moment of stunned silence, my friend and I both asked for evidence (we are, after all, NBCTs, and know how to provide evidence in our profession). She told us one teacher didn't let her son go to the bathroom when he asked, and the same teacher (the other?) was angry that he knew his multiplication facts before he got to her classroom.

Neither my friend nor I pointed out that this evidence does not necessarily lead to the pronouncement of  a 'horrible'  teacher. We probed for more information -- another trait of teachers. What had she done to solve this concern? Had she gone to the principal? Oh, yes. Her righteous indignation by now was clear. She was deeply into the anger she felt.

I asked if the principal had taken any steps...I pointed out to her that if the teachers were truly horrible, the principal has tools at his disposal to get rid of this teacher. In fact, our Superintendent of Public Education is very proud of her new law that strips even tenured teachers of some of our due-process protections. Didn't point that out. I did say that if a principal does not take steps to protect young people from horrible teachers, he is not doing his job.

At that point she bizarrely changed the subject. She proclaimed that soon the 'great equalizer' would be in place in our schools and problems like this wouldn't happen. Her great equalizer? Common Core! By now my friend sat, prudently silent. I could have kept my mouth shut too, but, "We'll see." popped out before I could help it.

I turned my attention to the speakers, but the woman did lean over and tell my friend one of the strengths of Common Core will be the fact that there will be no special education modified tests available for teachers to hide behind.

There is more, but what I learned was in the confidential small group setting later in the day. Suffice it to say, the Oklahoma State Department of Education is no friend or supporter of teachers -- National Board or not. and the representatives feel free to say that -- to teachers.

This whole experience had me reflecting -- another skill in the toolbox of NBCTs. I see two lessons. One, is the deep suspicion, deep distrust, our OSDE has for teachers, and for our NBCT program. I knew that, given the two years of playing with our program, but this is different. This official felt the license to tell two NBCTs that she doesn't believe in our program, that she thinks it hides 'horrible' teachers. She felt completely comfortable talking to us that way. Her message was loud and clear: "teachers are horrible; NBCT teachers are horrible." And this woman works with teachers! How can you truly advocate and support a group of professionals when this is your attitude?

And that led me to my other epiphany. Every teacher understands that perception, to parents and to students, is reality. We've all been trapped in a situation where what a student thought we said or did isn't exactly what we did or said. We've also been victim to the fibs kids will tell parents (or altered perception with them as hero or victim) to avoid an uncomfortable situation at home. We've all seen parents believe every word from their child, and attack us without all the facts. That's part of the job. I get that.

But as educators, as public employees, we must teach every day, aware of how our words and actions could be interpreted. We need to hold ourselves to the highest standard of behavior. If we tell a child he can't go to the bathroom, we need to explain why, and tell when would be a better time. We have to take that time to explain, to respect (yes, even that kid who asks every five minutes, and that kid we know is just bored and wants to wander, and that kid who wants to go create a scene in the bathroom...and that kid...and that kid).

We must be better communicators with parents. We' must anticipate their concerns, their frustrations. We must present ourselves as partners, allies. We must think about how our words can be used against us by angry people. If we accidentally step into a problem, we must use our people skills, those soft skills that benefit us in the classroom, to find common ground with students and parents.

I only have control over the words I say (and write) and the things I do. I cannot control this woman's animosity toward my profession. But I can make sure what I say and what I do in my classroom, and with my parents, and in my community communicates my commitment to my students and their education. I can own my words and actions -- and make sure they make me proud.

I'm closing with the words of my very smart FB friend, Michale. Another skill teachers have is to cut through the noise and focus on what's important: "...then I get to go back to what matters every day and sit on the floor with little people who trust me to teach them...and that is awesome."  

Common Core Headaches

I realize I'm retiring from teaching at the end of this year. I know I'll never have to overhaul my lessons to reflect Common Core State Standards. I absolutely get that this is one thing I could happily ignore -- forget -- leave alone. It will never affect me or the way I teach or the way I interact with my students. And yet, like that old dog who can or can't be taught new tricks, I keep worrying CCSS like a bone. I read books, I read articles. I listen, I attend meetings. I keep trying to wrap my mind around exactly what these Standards are, how they'll change what happens in classrooms, and how they'll make my kids better prepared for 'college and career.'

I've read several books that either inflame me or comfort me. One Size Fits Few by Susan Ohanian fed my passion as she can do -- she is fierce in her objections to Standards that are to be applied to all students with no exceptions. Reading her book left me with mixed feelings, but I was grateful to have this point of view.

Supporting Students in a Time of Common Core by Sarah Brown Wessling has a completely different take on the future of my profession. She is an English teacher and writes directly to other English teachers. Her stance is positive...she knows, as all teachers know, we can do this if we need to.She answers some of my deeply suspicious questions...but they're her interpretation of the CCSS. I am hoping to meet her next week at the National Council of Teachers of English.

On to Text Complexity: Raising Rigor in Reading by Douglas Fisher, Nancy Frey, and Diane Lapp. Text complexity is one of my huge issues with CCSS -- who chooses, how do I force all students to read above their reading level, how do I individualize? The text complexity measure we were first told about was Lexiles, which only measures sentence lengths, so Of Mice and Men and The Sisterhood of the Traveling Pants are seen as equally complex. Really? Then there's the issue of how we are to teach (even though everyone connected to CCSS, to SMARTER Balance, and PARCC, promises the Standards will not dictate teaching methods). The authors of CCSS have declared New Criticism as the only way to teach pieces of literature. At its most radical, New Criticism will not allow historical background, information about the author or the times. It will not allow any personal connection to the piece under study. David Coleman, the self-proclaimed author of CCSS, himself not an educator, shows us a model lesson under CCSS -- a study of 'Letter from Birmingham Jail' with no mention of the reason the author is in jail, what's going on in Birmingham that led to his arrest...nothing. Just jump right into the text and study it sentence by sentence. Does Mr. Coleman really believe we can lead students through this important piece with no context? Fisher and Frey and Lapp talked me off the ledge in some ways, encouraging the reader to believe our professional judgement is still worth something.

I truly seem to be torturing myself. I'll be sitting at home when all this falls onto teachers. All this reading led me to Pathways to the Common Core: Accelerating Achievement by Lucy Calkins, Mary Ehenworth, and Christopher Lehman.  Of all the books I've read, this one is the most exhaustively researched. They included a history of the Standards, an investigation of the authors, and most importantly for teachers, a close, professional reading of the Standards, vertically and horizontally. They have been able to make connections that I believe many of us would miss. Their suggestions are positive and possible. They interpret the Standards and give professional educators the tools to start the work.They debunk another concern English teachers have had about the Standards: longer works -- novels and nonfiction books WILL be an important part of the work of CCSS.

All this reading left me with a particular stance when I read Oklahoma State Superintendent of Public Instruction, Janet Barresi's weekly newsletter entitled "Demystifying the Common Core." Wasn't that what I was trying to do? Learn? Read? Make connections? Define terms? Draw conclusions? Analyze?

The OSDOE recently hosted David Coleman and Superintendent Barresi was discussing the visit. Calkins and her coauthors describe Coleman and one of two people who "have emerged referring to themselves as 'the' authors in their own documents. If that is the case, why was their identity kept secret while states considered the standards" (5)? Calkins shows a connection between Coleman and ACT that predates the writing of the Standards and his current position as President of College Board. He seems to be the driving force behind the New Criticism stance.

If you follow his link and read Diane Ravitch's profile, that makes perfect sense. He sees himself as a classicist...one who thrives on the ideas in texts. He makes the 'classic blunder' (sorry...couldn't resist the pop culture allusion!) many non-educators make of assuming the way HE learns is the perfect way for EVERYONE to learn. Teachers know different. We know, and could have told him, had we been included in the writing of CCSS, that there is no one right way for everyone to learn. Tying teachers' hands with New Criticism will make learning less robust and motivating, not more. I'll bet he loved writing arguments also...and we're now saddled with that as well. Is this really the way to write NATIONAL Standards? From one person's learning strengths?

Coleman is also a part of the PARCC (Partnership for Assessment of Readiness for College and Careers, the consortium that Oklahoma has joined) interpretation of the CCSS, so it's not a surprise he was welcomed to OKC with open arms.

I take deep issue with several of Superintendent Barresi's assertions in her newsletter. She describes CCSS as "a remarkable work of collaboration between Republican and Democratic (sic) governors and education officials." I guess I don't take issue with that statement...it's true. What's missing from that list of author are professional educators. We'll be called upon to interpret and implement CCSS, but we've had no hand in writing them.

She quotes Coleman: "My proposal is that Common Core Standards were created in a moment of crisis." A manufactured one, to be sure.

The statement that made my blood pressure spike, though, was Superintendent Barresi's assertion: "The standards are based on overwhelming evidence that they are effective in truly preparing students for college and career." Not according to Calkins. She quotes a very similar claim from the PARCC draft, and goes on to say, "And yet of the few footnoted studies it cites as the 'significant body of research,' nearly all took place in college or high school; one involved adolescents, one was a paper discussing the debate over the pros and cons of constructivist teaching and another, 'The Role of Deliberate Practice in the Acquisition of Expert Performance'...was a discussion of developing expertise in all fields including physical fitness, which, it turns out, never mentioned close reading at all...None drew from the larger body of research on children's literacy development, a surprising point as half of the assessments PARCC is designing are aimed at elementary school students" (49). So much for that overwhelming evidence. It wouldn't even stand up to the requirements of CCSS. But say it's overwhelming often enough and someone's bound to believe it.

Both Coleman and Barresi believe CCSS will somehow lighten teachers' load, and "give teachers more time to teach and students more time to practice." Not according to Calkins who is very honest about the demands of the Standards, and the still-to-be-known assessment piece. Now fourth graders will be required to compose a minimum of one typed page at a sitting, and fifth graders, two pages. This volume says a lot about the authors' assumptions that elementary students have been taught keyboarding in a very crowded curriculum, and that they have universal access to computers on which to write. The naivete of this assumption is something that could have been explored if professional educators were included in the discussion.

I don't need help demystifying the Common Core! I need professional development. I need answers. I need time to work with colleagues and create our own exemplars. I need time to investigate how CCSS will play out for students.

In a rich Facebook conversation about  CCSS, someone used the analogy of building the plane while it's in the air. I see it differently. Someone else, with little knowledge of teaching or learning, of children's literacy, of child development, 'built' the CCSS. Teachers now must take this mess and repair it, in the air, on the fly. We must interpret, analyze, implement...and we'll be evaluated based on assessments yet-to-be-written. We'll keep our jobs or be fired based on our ability to interpret and implement something we had no hand in writing.

I have one more Common Core book on my stack. I wish I had the self discipline to ignore it and pick up a chick-lit book instead. Probably won't be able to resist. 

Changin' Minds About Reading...one day at a time

I recently read the Pew Report about reading habits of young people and chuckled at the stats: 83% of adolescents and young people surveyed had read a book last year. We as a nation should be pleased that young adults are reading and using libraries. As an English teacher, a reading specialist and a library media specialist, I have a vested interest in encouraging students to read.

My first response to the report was, 'How sad. Only one?' In my Reading for Pleasure class I have my students keep track of their reading -- books and pages, and I would consider it a personal defeat, a Waterloo, if any of my students ONLY read one book during my class, and it's only 18 weeks long. In fact, I just had students report their reading as part of their midterm self-reflections. I wanted them to feel personal pride at their accomplishments, and the Pew report gave me a baseline number for them all to compare themselves to.

As I reported the final-ish (as final as you can ever have when dealing with 155 high school students) numbers...I ended up with numbers from 146 of them. 146 students read 860.9524 books -- in NINE WEEKS! They read 264,585 pages! As I did the big reveal in all of the classes, I asked for drumrolls and students happily complied. If anyone's interested, that's an average of 5.8969342...and a bunch more numbers behind the decimal.

Now, it always surprised people when I tell them not all of my students love reading...at first. I have a survey question I ask at the beginning of the semester and again on the final exam about how they feel about reading...choices range from LOVE IT to HATE IT. I usually compile the information and file it for myself, but this year I tried something different. I gave all my students sticky notes and asked them to write JUST their class period, not their name...and to place it on the white board at the back of my room under the description that best fits the way they feel about reading. I didn't watch them so they could be completely honest. Kids end up in my class for many reasons -- including a forced placement by parents or counselors or special education teachers. I hope my openness to their honesty helps them know I'm happy they're in class and will work with them at whatever their current attitude is.

We watched our chart take form for a couple of days and then I asked the students to observe and write what they see. Many kids identified the five outliers who HATE reading as well as the two who hate it, and noticed they all came from my first and second hour classes. They noticed that the biggest category was 'OK if I choose.' I noticed it looks like a lopsided bell curve, with most answers in those middle categories. I asked then to tell me what this chart says about my job and their jobs. Students saw my job for the semester to be moving everyone forward (to the west from the orientation of my room)...No one expected attitudes to change much, but, students identified my job and theirs for the semester: work together, be positive role models. Share books, have a great attitude. I was proud of how many students took ownership of the task before us -- help everyone leave class in January with a positive attitude about reading. As the grown-up in the room, I knew a positive attitude would also reflect heightened confidence, stronger reading skills, and more reading stamina. That's my secret, though...I tell my students I'm working strictly on their attitudes about reading.

So, last week was the end of the first nine weeks -- midterm. I have a midterm reflection I ask students to complete...I want them to review their goals for the semester, examine their writing about books, and think about their attitude and if it's changing. So, I took off all the stickies and had students recreate our chart about reading attitudes. Again, I didn't look...but in my first hour, one of my students told me he was one of the HATE IT's from the first week, but is slowly (!) changing his mind...he asked could he create a new description: "Mraw" to be placed between HATE IT and hate it...a real victory! He's found a couple of books he likes but isn't willing to fall into books yet.

Next week, I'll have students examine this chart and tell me what stands out to them...I see that movement to the west I need...I see more students now like reading, without the qualifier of 'if I choose.' They've had nine weeks to choose, to abandon, to sample. They've had nine weeks of recommendations from me and from classmates. They've started their 'books to read next' lists. They've been surrounded by books and by people who are reading. They've written reflections of their books and had authentic conversations with me and others about their books.

The distribution is no longer a bell, with more stickies placed in those positive attitude columns. Even my students who entered my classroom in August with surly attitudes about reading have found success and along the way have found confidence. Success and confidence are contagious -- you catch them in Reading for Pleasure.

Now, I need those three outliers to move one more 'category' for the final exam! 

A year-and-a-half ago, I listened to Dr. Barresi's first State School Board meeting. She obviously came into the meeting determined to antagonize members of the Board, and she did. This is the first commentary I wrote about education 'reform' in our state. The images here are still the dominate ones, even though the entire Board has now been replaced by appointees by the Governor. All the posturing and manufactured outrage after that meeting in 2011 set the tone for the bullying behavior of our OSDE and our Superintendent of Public Schools who's trying to privatize the schools. I offer it as the first look at what we've been suffering ever since.

The cartoon and editorial in the Sunday Oklahoman depicts the Oklahoma School Board as a bunch of misbehaving youngsters and Superintendent Barresi as the harried teacher trying to keep order. The details sympathized with Dr. Barresi's attempts to keep her unruly class in order.

I listened to the meeting online, and I have another perspective.

Much has been made of Senator Rozell’s inappropriate remark. 

But, as any teacher or parent will tell you, the person who swings the roundhouse, as he did here,  is not the one who started the altercation, just the one who got caught. So, who was throwing sand and poking sticks? Who started the fight?

Listen to the meeting and you’ll see Superintendent Barresi was not an innocent victim of the mean old Board.

Some of the sand thrown by Superintendent Barresi:

·         Not replying to Board member Gilpin’s requests for information about the proposed members of the Superintendent’s staff, people who worked on Superintendent Barresi’s campaign but have no education training or experience.
·         Appointing people to senior positions in the SDE who have neither training nor experience in education. Superintendent Barresi’s answer was they ‘had worked with educators.’
·         Allowing her campaign aides to work in senior positions at the SDE before the Board approved their hiring
·         Paying these campaign aides with funds from a private Foundation
·         Appointing a woman to the position of Legislative Liaison who will be absent from the job during the most important weeks of the Session
·         Introducing her ‘staff’ and sharing the happy news about new babies before any staff was approved.
·         Increasing the salaries for her campaign aides from the previous staff positions from $75,000 to $96,000.

So, imagine yourself on the playground with another child who threw sand in your face, who poked you with a stick, but only when no one was watching. Then imagine you’re the one who got blamed for the entire altercation. Did you do the wrong thing? Absolutely. Should you say ‘sorry’? Absolutely. 

But what about the sand-thrower? Should she say ‘sorry’ too? Absolutely.  

Happens every day on playgrounds.  Teachers know to look for the child with sandy fingers , dropping a sharp stick.