Reviving the "Reading Wars" for Political Gain, Dr. Barresi?

Now I'm just mad...really mad. Dr. B has wandered into my turf, reading education, and she's saying some really stupid extremely uninformed and unhelpful things. I am a reading specialist, with a masters in secondary reading. I've taught 39 years, in library, English, elementary, special education (where 75% of my students were not misidentified). I've taught every grade K-12 in some capacity. That introduction hopefully will give credibility.

We all make sense of our world through our stories. That's just who we are. So it's not surprising that Dr. Barresi, who had two sons who struggled with reading, would make sense of reading education through their experiences. I get that. And on behalf of my profession, I sincerely apologize for the fact they didn't get the kind of education they needed in our schools. Her sons needed a phonetic approach, even into middle school, it sounds like...that's an unusual story, but a valid one.

But, our own story blinds us to the fact that others have stories that are just as real and just as valid, and that is what Dr. Barresi has done...she's blinded herself to others' stories.

I share my stories here: I was taught to read at the height of the 'see and say' movement--lots of memorization and repetition. Who can forget: "Look, Jane. Look. Look. Look. See Spot. See Spot run"? This approach was accidentally the exact right approach for me. I'm a visual learner who liked memorizing. I thrived.

My son? He learned, mostly through phonics. And another happy occurance. He's a strong phonetic learner. Sounding out words made great sense to him...much more than to me sometimes, sitting next to him. And guess what? He grew up to be a musician.

My daughter? Another non-phonetic learner. Her school believed in an eclectic approach to beginning reading...phonics, memorization, and, yes...gasp...whole language. What a gift this reading program was for children. It allowed every reader to find his strengths. It allowed every child to find her success. The teachers honored every child's story. But she still had that mom-volunteer who read with her every week who asked, without fail, "Well, can you sound out yet?" Laurie was trained to say, "No, not yet. But that's ok. I can read."

I share stories just to show you we all have 'em. And 30+ years teaching literacy to students has taught me to value and respect every one. NOT just my own.

Eight years at the elementary level, teaching remedial readers taught me that every third grader can read...maybe not at level, yet. But they all read. Dr. Barresi and other critics blithely label kids who don't read at level as 'nonreaders'. I won't call this a lie...but a blazing untruth. Dr. Barresi recently told a group of Republican voters that a third grader who scored 'Limited Knowledge' on one standardized test was two grades below level...gasp...Ummm. Not so much. A child scoring 'Limited Knowledge' could have missed 'Proficient' by one question. ONE. 

Okeducationtruths pointed out in a recent blog, 'Limited Knowledge' is the difference between one and eight correct questions on a test, one day in April. If eight questions on one test mean two grade levels, there's something inherently wrong...with the test. Not the third grader.

As a remedial reading teacher, I learned to honor each student's unique story and strengths. In my eight years as elementary remedial reading teacher, I only saw one upper-elementary nonreader. But, man, could that little guy give me letter sounds. "Cuh-Ahhh-Tuh...Duh-Oooh-Guh." Trouble was, no one helped him see that was only step one. Phonics alone actually handicapped his ability to make sense out of print. We set him up with books on tape, and lots of seeing the words (visual) and hearing the words (phonics) and repetition (that see-and-say). And we had a reader! He read his first book to anyone and everyone. He read with expression and confidence. We honored his story and we helped him find his reading voice.

In my 25+ years in secondary, I used that same eclectic approach...books, lots of them. An authentic audience for reading and for thoughts about reading. Time dedicated for practice. Writing with reading. I did not go back and reteach phonics. That would be counterproductive. Most struggling secondary readers are non-phonetic learners like me, like my daughter. To force-feed more phonics would have been the wrong professional decision. But some might well need that extra dose, now when their brains are ready to process. 

I did meet one secondary non-reader. He had been 'homeschooled' by a very tired grandmother who was not up the challenge of an energetic boy who, frankly, did not want to learn. This guy came to us at 14, essentially illiterate. The first ever in my career. We started a program of phonics in isolation (Cuh-Ahh-Tuh) and lots of easy books with word patterns and predictable stories. We were dealing with attitude problems and behavior problems, self-esteem, probably some serious special education issues, and reading problems. As with my first example, this young man disappeared from our school before we could properly diagnose his difficulties and address them systematically, just as we were learning his story.

There's an old saying, 'If you only have a hammer, every problem looks like a nail.' It fits here. Untrained folks see every learner as a mirror for their own experiences. They think everyone learns the same way they did. They know what worked for them, and they make that leap that it's good for us all. 

A student, a learner, who doesn't follow their trajectory is a nail who must be hammered into submission. and that will have high costs to the child in the future. We tried that. It didn't work.

What wise educators have learned is our kids are not ideological nails -- they're learners. And if we don't have a full tool box of lots of research-based approaches and ideas to use as needed, we will not reach every child.

Learning to read is as individual as learning to talk...Seldom will a first grade teacher (now kindergarten) have two students who learn the identical way. She's got to be versatile, knowledgeable, well-trained. She must be observant and reflective. She must listen to parents and their concerns and their stories. From that comes the teaching and the learning.

In her remarks, she says, “I’m now finding out … University of Oklahoma believes in Whole Language. So they’re teaching Whole Language.” The use of the evil "Whole Language" boogey man was purposeful...it recalls the ideological 'wars' between two competing approaches. Whole language was seen as the progressive (read liberal) approach to teaching reading, while phonics was the traditional (read conservative) approach. Dr. Barresi was talking to a group of Republican voters, and she was deliberately evoking distrust of academics, of learning that looks different from their own stories, and of those 'liberal teachers.' While it seemed to come out of left field, it was purposeful and divisive. She wants to discredit not only the universities that produce our teachers, but our teachers as well.

And a hat-tip to OU for giving its students another tool to use in teaching beginning reading, along with all the other tools, including phonics, phonemic awareness, word families, context...we could go on and on. Of course we want young teachers who have been well trained to approach all kinds of learners.

So, Dr B. whole language is not the spawn of the devil...it's a tool in the toolbox of a well-educated teacher. For some students, this focus on the whole, on making sense, is perfect. We use real books, magazines, newspapers. We use students' own writing. We celebrate initial steps into literacy. No experienced, professional teacher of emergent readers uses only this approach. It's not sustainable for everyone. But phonics as the entire approach is not the answer either. Many of the stuents in our classes are like me and my daughter...we try to sound out, and it becomes a mush. Much better for us to try to figure out what word makes sense in the sentence...and move on.

I circle back to the idea of stories...we each have one. We're all the heroes and heroines of our own stories. They make sense of the world for us. They are precious.

A teacher in a class of 18 (20? 25?) students knows he's dealing with that many stories. That many back stories -- as well as parents' and grandparents' stories. That many ways to make learning happen. This is the truth non-educators don't grasp. We, as their teachers, tried to honor their stories as we taught. At the same time, we were also responsible for the stories of every other student in their classroom. To assume there was only one story, to impose ONE theory or reading and teaching will invariably leave someone behind...leave someone out. Maybe that's what happened to Dr. Barresi's sons. I was lucky as a mom, and my children got the tools they needed. I used that observation in my own classroom all those years, and tried to teach every student to his and her strengths.

Dr. Barresi, please listen to the dedicated educators in your state. We have thousands of student stories to share. 

Vexatious! To the Max!

I have been watching in dismay as Oklahoma's A-F school grading system has exploded in our faces. Scores were released to districts, changed, changed again, and again, and again. Schools sat helplessly as their grades jumped up and down, right in front of their faces. When educators began questioning the grades, a real donnybrook broke out.

Policy makers spoke with arrogant disdain, blaming and threatening schools and educators: it's schools' fault; we'll cut your funding if you don't stop pointing out problems.Both our Superintendent of Public Instruction and Governor have responded with venom and a bad word. Grades like A-F are 'easy' to understand, the 'reformer's tell us. Everyone know what an "A" is. Well, maybe not. When the formula is so complex that the OSDE spent a week changing, rearranging, lowering, grades, must not be so simple. But that's their mantra. Easy-to-understand. Just hard to manipulate to get the grade they want, I guess.

I have read everything I can (yes, I am a reading teacher!). I read the OU/OSU report pointing out the inherent weaknesses of this, our second attempt to grade schools on test scores.This report, by research scientists from our two major universities, peer reviewed, has been dismissed by our leaders, because they 'don't believe' the foundations and the findings. Methinks they don't understand how education research works. Not a surprise, since neither our Governor nor our Superintendent is an educator.

 I've read the blogs of my very smart teacher friends, here and here and here and here and here and here as they dissect the mind-boggling intricacies of the rules and the monumental failings of our policy makers. I'm so grateful for their insights, and so confused, even after reading them.

Not being smart enough to write a proper critique of the system, I have come back to my own territory of asking why?

Why are policy makers going to this ridiculous extreme to 'hold schools accountable?'

And why are we misusing standardized tests to do something they are not designed to do?

The stars aligned this morning as I read the front page of our local newspaper. We have a 'Word of the Day,' and today's was 'vexatious' -- "troublesome, annoying...legal action instituted without sufficient grounds and serving only to cause annoyance." There is is. There's the answer to my first question...kinda sorta.

This rule, I absolutely believe, is designed to deflate grades for schools, to frighten parents who are traditionally happy with their neighborhood schools. If grades are artificially low, parents may panic and charters, online schools, parent triggers, and vouchers may be more attractive. Our current Superintendent of Public Instruction is on record as supporting charters and vouchers. Her proposed budget includes a 300% increase for Charter School Incentives, and only 4% increase of the school formula, money available to all the public schools in the state. Last year, cut scores on the Biology End-of-Instruction exam were lowered drastically, above the recommendations of the educator committee whose job -- they thought -- was to set the cut score. They made their recommendation, left, and were horrified to see their recommendations were ignored. It seems as if data is being manipulated, and money is being invested in line with our leader's priorities.

We fought last year's Parent Trigger bill, but we know it will reappear. DDS Barresi, our Superintendent, is enthusiastic about vouchers...but if the A-F can show dismal results of even strong suburban schools, perhaps support for her projects will increase.

So, in my mind, there's the 'why A-F?' To give the false impression that public schools are failing. How sad the push is coming from the Superintendent of Public Instruction. Shouldn't she be the elected leader protecting and advocating for our schools?

On to my second question, and the one that vexes me the most.

Why do we use/misuse/abuse standardized tests to torture out 'grades' that show whatever the manipulators of the numbers want them to show? Why do policy makers continue to ignore evidence that test scores are not, never have been, never will be, designed to evaluate teachers, or grade schools, or flunk our students.

Every adult has taken tests. We all did, we know what it feels like to sit and fill in bubbles at school. I think this fact works against those of us who are fighting the current testing climate. The tests we remember were not high stakes. The high stakes tests we have taken were choices -- ACT or SAT to get into college, GRE to continue into graduate school, professional exams to enter medical school or law school, tests to show proficiency in a chosen field of endeavor. We were not subjected to the battery of tests our kids are, with the consequences attached.

I've read numerous books about school reform, and two of my go-to books are The Myths of Standardized Tests and Reign of Error. I returned to these for evidence.

Standardized tests are a snapshot in time. They are not an accurate picture of learning, of teaching, or of achievement. They do not predict much more than a student's performance on her next test. But they're cheap to administer and score and report and they give the appearance of scientific measures. The authors of Myths quote Larry Barber: "More than once, I explained to legislators...as clearly and simply as I could, that standardized test scores were just too haphazard a measure to tell...whose school was better...in short they were a waste of good money that could have been better spent in interesting and innovative efforts to improve instruction...but no one wanted to hear that." Policy makers love tests...the tests they never took, the tests they'll never be held accountable for. The tests they gleefully pay for, instead of investing in our classrooms.

Test scores seem to have the veneer of 'objective' measures. So, policy makers love to use them, and say they're measures of learning and teaching. That's the foundation of A-F -- hold schools 'accountable' for learning by testing our kids. And testing. And testing. Tests do not measure learning. They do not predict learning. They predict the score on the next test.

Ravitch tells us, "The over reliance on and misuse of testing and data have created a sense of crisis, lending credibility to claims that American public education is failing and in decline...more testing does not make children smarter. More testing does not reduce achievement gaps."

It seems like even committed educators have stopped arguing that we are abusing the intent of the tests, as we also abuse our kids. I want that to be our call to action. No more high stakes tests. Period. Go back to the practices of our childhood: tests as one piece of information in a student's permanent file. One number that represents performance on one day, and will predict performance on the test next year. That is the proper place for standardized tests, not ruling education policy, flunking third graders, denying high school graduates their diploma, evaluating teachers, grading schools.

Until schools can be fairly evaluated based on their demographics, their instructional program, co-curricular programs, parent involvement, equity and access, and the well-being of our students, we must resist, both the use of high stakes testing, and the results of high stakes testing. We must trust parents to know what happens in our schools. We must strive for real school improvement, real professional learning, real student learning. Won't find any of that on a test.

Book Review: REACHING AND TEACHING STUDENTS IN POVERTY by Paul Gorski

Sometimes books find us at the right time, and become part of our ongoing conversations in many ways. This is one of those books. I've talked to NBCTs about Gorski's discussion of equity, and I've shared quotes in conversations about the recent cuts to the SNAP program. This is an important book for all educators to read and think about. It's important for citizens to become informed, not with the narratives of 'my sister's friend was on welfare...My mother knew a woman on welfare who had an iPhone' They do NOT help us educate our students. They do NOT help us assist parents in overcoming the opportunity gaps that keep their children from succeeding.

If we really care about all students' education, we must read and discuss this book. We must shift our own thinking, and look carefully at how we structure our schools and our parent outreach. No longer is is all right to say, 'Well, we had Open House -- those parents just don't care about their children.' We must be honest about our own contributions to the barriers many parents suffer.

"...low income people face innumerable inequities in and out of schools. These inequities regarding access to everything from adequately funded schools to playgrounds to prenatal care have nothing to do with poor people's cultures and everything to do with what Jonathan Kozol called the 'savage inequalities' of schools and society. We, as a society, give low-income youths less access to educational opportunity, healthcare, nutrition, and other goods, and then blame the outcomes of these inequities on their 'culture of poverty.'"

Not an easy read...not a feel-good read. This challenges the reader to look closely and deeply at some assumptions and stereotypes we may bring to our work with kids from low-income families. 

Gorski takes us step-by-step from a shattering of the myth of the 'culture of poverty.' He is careful in his title to not talk about kids OF poverty, but kids IN poverty. Not an accident of word choice...a deliberate choice of a careful practioner.

We as educators must confront our own biases, well-meaning as they may be. We need to develop an new kind of literacy...equity literacy. We must push back against those soft-bigotry statements: Poor parents don't care about education; they're lazy,drug-addicted abusers who can't communicate and obviously care little about their children.

It's important to turn this around. Achievement gaps can be explained by examining OPPORTUNITY gaps...those resources most of us take for granted that poor families don't have..healthcare, prenatal care, dental care...living and working conditions that are safe...recreation opportunities, with money and time and transportation NON-issues...community and social services access...affordable childcare...enrichment opportunities...a society that validates our efforts. Poor families, because they may be working two or three low-paying jobs, with little free time and no disposable cash, do NOT have these opportunities to support their families.

We think of their inabilities as deficits, but we must stop...they are barriers to opportunity. Poor families have just as much resiliency as others when we help dismantle the barriers.

So, how do these gaps affect families' ability to thrive? Preschool, schools with adequate funding and resources such as libraries, shadow education (those ACT prep classes and tutoring and camp activities WE offer our own kids), support services, high expectations, WELL-PAID, CERTIFIED, EXPERIENCED TEACHERS (not 5-week wonders from TFA), higher-order, challenging curricula, the opportunity to include parents fully in their children's education. What are the barriers? TIME and TRANSPORTATIOM, a LIVING WAGE, to name a few.

Gorski lists the ineffective practices in schools: cutting arts and music programs, direct, scripted, instruction, tracking of students, and charter schools.

He tells us what works: Arts programs, high expectations, higher-order, student-centered pedagogies, movement and PE, relevancy in the schools, teaching everyone about biases, analyzing materials for bias, and my favorite: LITERACY ENJOYMENT!! Woohoo!

"The most powerful strategy is to create cultures that promote reading enjoyment...literacy instruction should not focus solely on reading or writing mechanics. More to the point, tho, it means that we ought to find ways to foster in students excitement about reading and writing even when they respond reluctantly at first… 1. Institute literature circles 2. Provide reading material options that align with stated interest of students 3. Use a variety of media…that engage students actively and interactively 4. Incorporate drama into literacy instructions."

I love the chapter entitled 'THE MOTHER OF ALL STRATEGIES" and I concur...building relationships IS the mother of all. Relationships with our students and relationships with their parents. It's not enough to set up conference times and then smugly say, 'well, we offered time for these parents to come to school. They must not be interested.' That's the same as the teacher who says, 'Well, I taught it, the students didn't get it.' I hate both of these messages...they point back to that deficit mindset. We need to ask ourselves how hard we tried...did we take into consideration work schedules, transportation, childcare? Did we really do everything we could to invite parents who may have negative feelings about schools? Did we truly show our value for them and their children? Were we creative in our problem solving, or did we simply shrug and blame the parents?

I've had a couple of conversations with professionals about 'those parents' who don't care...and I'm learning to offer alternative ways of thinking about the facts in a gentle push back. Which leads to the last chapter: SPHERES OF INFLUENCE...what IS my sphere? What can I do?

He suggests we do our job with sensitivity and respect...that is our sphere, but he says, "...when we do anything, anything at all, to push back against the defunding of schools or the underfunding of education mandates and to resist the imposition of corporate-style accountability and high-stakes testing, we are also advocating, whether we know it or not, for low-income students. Of course, we also are self-advocating, which is an added bonus."

He offers advocacy goals: preschool, community agency access, smaller classes, ongoing PD for teachers, access to healthcare, PE, arts and music. Surely every one of us could choose ONE of these issues to become advocates for.

Important book...I read it twice, once highlighting, the second, collecting all those quotes for reference later. Would make great reading for our legislators who continue to chip away at the few support systems poor families have.

What do Parents Want?

I was reading a blog this morning by the Goddess of YA Literature, Teri Lesene, about the NEA brochure, cheerleading for CCSS...an 'everything we want you to know about CCSS whether it's true or not' kind of a brochure. After critiquing the brochure, she latched onto one line and reflected:

     "Here, to me, is the biggest flaw of the NEA brochure and more:

     "Ask any parent or educator what they want more for their student(s), and this is what they'll say: "I want      them to be successful'

     NOPE. I want them to be happy. I want them to love themselves. I want them to treat others with                respect. I want so much more than for them to be successful as measured by Coleman and Rhee and            their cronies."

You see why I love Teri's voice.

And, I can't help being snarky. I just finished reading Diane Ravitch's Reign of Error, and was in awe of the precision of her writing -- the message was strong, and the writing was flawless...she would never have allowed the grammatical mistake in the NEA statement: "Ask any parent what THEY want?" Sorry, NEA...agreement still matters. "Ask parents what they want" or "Ask any parent what he or she wants." Educators must not be sloppy writers.

Well, unlike NEA who assumes, I asked. Several years ago, I compiled their answers, and am eager to share -- maybe NEA needs to read this too -- what real parents want for their children. I think they'd agree with the Goddess as I do.

"My students are precious to me; but they are treasures to their parents. These parents send us their children with hopes and dreams, with aspirations that go far beyond a test score or a GPA. Parents know what their children need, but now I see a gap between policy makers’ expectations, and the fierce dreams of parents.  I fear schools are letting our parents and our students down as we respond to the policymakers’ demands.

At the beginning of each semester, I ask my parents, ‘what are your dreams and hopes for your child in this class, and beyond?’ Reading their answers gives me insight into what parents value for their children and expect from me.

Parents want their children to achieve, to succeed, to work hard, and to challenge themselves academically. A thread of high expectations for authentic achievement runs through my parents’ messages.  

• ·         I hope she finds her fit in high school and apply herself
• ·         I hope she learns the importance of a good education
• ·         Hard work really does pay off
• ·         She will continue to expand and enjoy reading
• ·         To remember the more he reads, the better he writes
• ·         I wish she would read more historical based fiction
• ·         I yearn for her to read those great classics that we grew up reading
• ·         I am excited to hear about the books he reads this semester as he expands his vocabulary and mind
• ·         To continue her excellent academic accomplishments and be happy as well

Also, finding a love of learning and life-long literacy.

• ·         To learn the joy of reading again
• ·         I hope she recaptures the love she had for school as a young girl
• ·         That she’s bold and brave in going after her dreams
• ·         I hope she will broaden her interests and try books outside her usual choices
• ·         I want her to have a real passion for reading
• ·         I hope she develops a love for reading…and will be open to new interests
• ·         I hope that he will continue to read for pleasure as an adult
• ·         To learn to choose reading as a leisure activity
• ·         He’s not a huge reader of fiction, and I love it when he finds fiction that interests him

And  learning to become productive adults:

• ·         My hopes are that he has a wonderful…career that fills his life with happiness
• ·         I expect him to make a difference in the community and the world
• ·         I want her to find out what inspires her
• ·         We want him to find himself in your class.
• 
  

Only one mother mentioned standardized tests. Her son performs well academically and athletically. He wants to attend college and begin a career in sports physical therapy. But, despite his grades and work ethic, he must perform well on ONE test, in order to have that opportunity. His mother understands his entire future rests on that score:  “He has the ability to attend college but first must score well on the ACT and SAT.” Her fervent wish is for that one test, that one day, to reflect her son’s potential, even though his grades and on-the-field performance have already done so.

Parents, if we ask and then listen, are eloquent about the future they want for their children and they know achievement must be measured in many way, with tests being one measure. Bureaucrats love tests and the scores they generate. They want students and their teachers to be distilled into a score. Parents know better. They know we need to educate their children, not for a test, but with a focus on our students’ futures as productive citizens, readers and writers.

Policymakers love to talk about ‘raising the bar’ which usually means making tests harder. My parents know our students have much greater challenges ahead than one test, one day. My parents expect me to help our students learn for a lifetime of achievement. A simplistic focus on test scores does not serve any of us.

When will policymakers listen to parents and teachers and realize we are accountable for achievement far more precious and complex than a test score?"

Reign of Error -- a Review and a Hearty, "Thank You!"

Where do I begin? I think I must start with Ravitch's previous book, DEATH AND LIFE OF THE GREAT AMERICAN SCHOOL SYSTEM. I knew a bit about Ravitch, and her previous support for NCLB, and I was eager to see what had changed her mind. I remember reading the book, quite literally talking back to the pages: "We TOLD you so! We KNEW this wouldn't work!" When the law first passed, I stood toe-to-toe with friends who tried to convince me that this was going to be a good thing. I was unmoved. I was right.

So, to see Ravitch, a scholar, an historian, explain why she reversed her position, was a lesson in being a reflective practitioner, someone who made decisions from evidence and had the courage to step back from a position and say, "I was wrong." That is huge. She became my role model immediately.

I follow Ravitch's blogs, I watched her agonize over taking a position on Common Core. She made her thinking visible; she wrestled with big issues right in front of us. I see her champion students and teachers every day. I see her putting her reputation on the line for us all.

This book also had me talking back; but now I was yelling, "Yes! Thank you." Thank you for meticulously collecting education research about the current reform fads. Thank you for showing when there is and is not evidence. Thank you for annihilating 'reformers'' hunches about what should work. Thank you for presenting me with evidence I can easily use when I talk to my own policy makers who side with the 'reformers'. Thank you for solid recommendations of what WILL work in schools. Thank you for including my favorite: wraparound schools.

Thank you, from the English teacher, for creating a work of beautiful prose...impeccable grammar and usage...all those old-fashioned usage rules that most writers, even professionals, ignore...perhaps to make their work more accessible. Ravitch's prose is towering, respectful to the intelligence of her audience. She will not create a sloppy sentence just to talk down to readers. She lifts us up with her words. This book would be more than worthy of the kind of close reading David Coleman values -- for the sheer beauty of the construction of paragraphs and passages. There is a power here that often transcends the subject, to become poetry.

I read this book, underlining and writing notes...making connections. Wish I'd've counted the number of times the Gates Foundation was mentioned in the same sentence with the Broad Foundation and the Walton Family Foundation...the usual suspects are all there. their fingerprints create a nasty film over everything. I kept writing 'hunches' in the margins as Ravitch showed, time and again, no education research was utilized in 'reformers'' pronouncements. I made connections among her points and my own observations about life in Oklahoma Schools. Sad connections. I bristled it with stickies at lines I would want to revisit. 

Then, I reread, typing up some of the lines I thought would be most useful in my work educating my Legislators about their failed policies. Seven typed pages later, I had created a mini-REIGN OF ERROR, portable and quotable. I've already shared quotations with friends looking for evidence about the wrong-headedness of TFA and Parent Trigger...these will rear their heads again in the next Legislative Session, and we're armed with facts to fight them.

I will be treating this book as the reference gem it is...using the content to fight hunches with facts and evidence; countering mushy hunches about what might work with strong, research-based recommendations for changes in our schools.

She sets out her purpose for writing this book on the first page: to answer four questions. Is American education in crisis? Is American education failing and declining? What is the evidence for the reforms now being promoted by the federal government? What should we do to improve our schools and the lives of our children? She delivered!

And if that wasn't enough, she showed herself to be a meticulous scholar with nearly 25 pages of charts and graphs in the appendix, over 30 pages of notes for the chapters, and an index of nearly 30 pages. The scholarship is there. And it dazzles the reader willing to read and learn. 

So, from "I told you!" to "Yes, thank you!" in two important books.

Then, I reread, typing up some of the lines I thought would be most useful in my work educating my Legislators about their failed policies. Seven typed pages later, I had created a mini-Reign of Error,  portable and quotable. I've already shared quotations with friends looking for evidence about the wrong-headedness of TFA and Parent Trigger...these will rear their heads again in the next Legislative Session, and we're armed with facts to fight them.

I will be treating this book as the reference gem it is...using the content to fight hunches with facts and evidence; countering mushy hunches about what might work with strong, research-based recommendations for changes in our schools.

She sets out her purpose for writing this book on the first page: to answer four questions. Is American education in crisis? Is American education failing and declining? What is the evidence for the reforms now being promoted by the federal government? What should we do to improve our schools and the lives of our children? She delivered!

And if that wasn't enough, she showed herself to be a meticulous scholar with nearly 25 pages of charts and graphs in the appendix, over 30 pages of notes for the chapters, and an index of nearly 30 pages. The scholarship is there. And it dazzles the reader willing to read and learn. 

So, from "I told you!" to "Yes, thank you!" in two important books.

My Name is Claudia and I'm a "Managed Teacher"

“A book is meant to be read, but to haunt you, to importune you like a lover, or a parent, to stick in your teeth like a piece of gristle” —Anatole Broyard

Blogs can do the same. My friend Nancy Flanagan wrote a piece months ago that has haunted me, and forced me to examine my career with new eyes. I’m eternally grateful. She wrote about ‘teacher management,’ the fake invitation to educators to work toward education policy. She gave examples of teachers in her home state being manipulated by the press or policy makers. Manipulated by using the teachers’ good name, reputation, integrity, credibility, to support the policy makers’ point of view.

This struck home for me as I looked back on 39 years of teaching, working with education leaders, trying to make a difference in the bigger world outside my classroom. I came to the ugly realization that I’d been managed plenty of times, and I was able to see once I became vocal, my worth as a managed teacher disappeared, as did ‘opportunities’ to participate in the work outside my classroom.

It went like this: principals needed a group of teachers to go to a conference, participate in professional development and share with the faculty, serve on this committee or that committee. The teachers asked to do this were teachers who had strong reputations in and outside their classes. They had that credibility with their peers. They were known to work hard for positive changes in the profession. I was honored to be included in this group, active and vocal for the changes and reforms my bosses were pushing…Outcome Based Education? I was there. Learning Styles? I came back and did workshops. Reading in the Content area? You bet. Ruby Payne? I was a trainer. Blue Ribbon application committee? I did the writing. Student Leadership Groups? I was the sponsor. I’ve written here about reform fatigue, but didn’t understand it for what it was: manipulation fatigue.

One of my principals knew the right button to push: “Claudia, the kids need you to do this.” And I was sunk…didn’t matter how busy I was, the kids needed me.

Then, after I got vocal about education reform, found like-minded friends online and in professional groups, those opportunities began to dry up. I was actually invited by our State Department to be part of a cadre of teacher-trainers to barnstorm the state giving presentations on Common Core – I was going to reserve my concerns and see if I couldn’t learn to love CCSS. Well, I heard from a friend who worked in the SDE that people read the programs, saw my name, and had a great laugh. I’d been highly critical of our new Superintendent, and had shared my criticism far and wide. My friend laughed at the idea of the new Superintendent having to introduce me at the conferences as a presenter. I contacted the woman who invited me…managed me…used my credibility and integrity to bolster the reputation of the conferences, and sent her some of my public writings. I gave her the opportunity to ‘uninvite’ me if she felt my presence would harm her standing in the office. I was uninvited.

Those other opportunities to be a teacher leader – read ‘manipulated teacher’ – began to dry up. Other teachers were invited to go to this workshop and that one. This conference and that conference. It wasn’t until I read Nancy’s blog that I realized my usefulness to reformers and education leaders who have to play nice with reformers was at an end. I’d damaged myself in their eyes by being opinionated, loud. I hadn’t played nice. I’d spoken up. And the price I paid was no more invitations.

I saw those invitations for what they really were…an attempt to legitimize reforms with my name and my reputation. Shoring up their plans with my and other teachers’ credibility. Ours were the friendly faces that allowed the salesmen to get in the door. They pretended to be equal partners with us, but they were using us.

I know why I jumped at these ‘opportunities’ and I can guess other teachers felt the same. I loved my job. I didn’t want to leave the classroom, but I wanted to contribute to the profession. I wanted to continue to learn, to share what I’d learned with my students and my colleagues. The way to do that, I felt, was to participate in those ‘teacher leadership’ opportunities. I could lead from the classroom. I could make a contribution to my profession, I could be a teacher leader while staying true to my commitment to my students.

I was played. Big time. I stood up for New Math, for Multiple Intelligences, for OBE, for Framework of Poverty. I played the good soldier. And as each of these fell out of favor, or was repudiated, my credibility took a hit…but I plugged along.

Until I didn’t.

I see now, with the wisdom of hindsight, how slick the manipulation was…how I wasn’t a partner, a leader. I was a pawn. I was the token teacher…the classroom practitioner who lent my good name to someone else’s projects. I was the frontman...the face of the trusted neighborhood teacher, know my many in the community. And I was left holding the bag when these ‘someone elses’ lost interest, got distracted by the next shiny, new idea.

As I look at the current landscape, no longer a manipulated teacher, I see the next field of play: Common Core. Anthony Cody proved without a doubt that teachers were frozen out of the process of creating the Standards. We weren’t important enough to be partners at that point in the process, but teachers are being beckoned into the process of implementation. ‘Reformers’ are holding seminars, conferences, state and national meetings. Teachers are being invited to planning sessions for CCSS. They are invited to prepare presentations for other teachers – to be the face of Common Core. Even though we had no hand in the writing or the planning for Common Core, now the ‘reformers’ need us. Now we have to take the mess and make it work in the classroom. Now teachers are being included…uh, managed…to implement.

Too often teachers who are invited into the process end up taking the blame when this reform, and that one, bomb. Reformers seem to be severely ADD, and can’t stay with an idea long enough to give teachers…and teacher leaders…enough time to make things work. And too often when this happens, teachers are the ones blamed for the failure.

I fear for my friends who are being managed; I hope they enter this bargain with strong skepticism, and an escape plan. I know ‘reformers’ are using them, using their credibility, their integrity, their passion for their profession, to hawk CCSS. I know my friends will be in the classroom, with students, long after the 'reformers' have pointed fingers and left for greener pastures.

So, what's a teacher supposed to do? These 'opportunities' often come with great opportunity to learn, to return to the classroom invigorated by new ideas. I would never suggest teachers turn down these invitations. Only go into them forearmed with the truth that our ultimate motivations are very different. They want to manipulate us; we want to find something important to take back to our classrooms. They want to turn a profit; we want to turn a student's heart and mind.

My beloved National Board and National Writing Project have been bought and paid for by Pearson and Bill Gates. Does that mean I stop participating in these two worthy projects? Never. It just means I approach with the knowledge that someone may be trying to use me. Since I know that, I can choose not to be used. I approach these encounters with my own goals, and, remember what that blow-hard, Polonius said, 'To thine own self be true."

One of the many reasons I treasure my profession is the friendships and relationships I've forged. One such treasure is my friend, Michale Gentry. She has taught two of my granddaughters, and we have one more who needs her. Michale has a way of seeing the big picture, and the little one framed therein. " Reformers can steal advanced degrees, stipends, titles, programs, funding, public school reputations...but no one can take the joy or the good, deep, authentic and creative spin we put on whatever lesson, reform,program, class, or piece of the big machine we touched. Going forward, we'll be wiser...think of all we've learned."

We learn when we participate. We choose where we lend our name and integrity. We must look carefully at these partners and keep our own name and integrity intact through these endeavors. 

I was lucky to leave the profession with only minor scars from my run-ins with teacher managers…I hope for my younger colleagues don’t suffer any more than I did, and that their eyes are opened to the dangers sooner than mine were.

Nancy’s final paragraph is important:

"Way too much of what passes for dialogue and scholarship around teachers' professional work has been managed, packaged and sold as authentic. It's not teacher leadership or advocacy. It's slick marketing, using the friendly faces of teachers."

"Is it a Test?"

As a grandma, I'm extremely lucky to have three of my four Grands close enough to spirit them away from their parents when I want to. Yesterday Katie, the first grader joined her Papa and me on a trip to a local arts festival.

On the way up, I reminded her that each of her sisters had chosen a special 'Me and Nana' activity, and she still had a choice coming. The big girls asked to attend a 'wine and palette' make-and-take lesson. For a fee, up to 60 'artists' sit before a palette, follow the leader's directions and create...if not a masterpiece, at least an identifiable picture. There are free nibbles as well as wine and soft drinks available. Haley, my oldest granddaughter felt enough self confidence to actually disregard the teacher and do her own thing...I followed the leader slavishly and produced something different -- and frankly, not as exciting. Ashley and I will paint our sea turtles later this month.

Katie had first said 'no' to the idea of doing a painting class, so we were just thinking of other ideas for some fun time together.

Then, she tentatively said she might like to do the painting class, but, "Is it a test? Will they pick the best ones?"

I was bowled over...I caught my breath and did not cry. That was why she didn't want to do the class...she, as a first grader, already feared being tested, judged, even in creative endeavors. 'Is it a test?' echoed in my head all day. Is it a test? Would the 'best' pictures be praised and others ignored? Would we feel like failures if our painting weren't chosen? Will others think we're not smart enough, or talented enough? Will we be embarrassed in front of others for our work?

I assured her that in this class, we all did our best, that nobody's work looked exactly like the teacher's work, and that was OK. We played with paints, we giggled at our work, and we had a good time. She looked at me skeptically...even this young not ready to trust...not ready to take a risk.

I've spent years now railing against standardized tests...high stakes standardized tests -- here and here and here and here. I've read books  and more books and articles. I've written. I've talked to others.

One boss told me I was fighting a losing battle, 'That train's left the station." Nothing can be done. High stakes tests will be with us and we have to learn to live with them. We have to live with the devastating results: children retained in 3rd grade, students refused high school diplomas even though they have successfully completed coursework, teachers given poor results on evaluations, schools given bad 'grades'. Just live with it...try to nibble at tiny, cosmetic changes to this testing culture, but knuckle under to the concept that tests are appropriate measures of children or teaching or education.

In that moment, looking Katie in the eye, hearing her insecure little voice ask, "Is this a test?", I knew I couldn't knuckle under. I couldn't let her go through her school career living in dread of the next test, and what that test would mean. I know high stakes tests in our public schools is a bankrupt policy, one that will not help teachers teach, or students learn.

I hear others say, 'Well, we had tests too. Standardized tests have always been with us. Nothing wrong with tests, I survived them.' These folks are under the assumption that the testing our children endure is identical to the testing we had AS children. Nothing could be farther from the truth. We took tests one day, forgot them, and had results show up on permanent records that no one looked at. Those tests were, properly, one piece of information about our school career...a piece of information that held no undue sway on our careers. That is the proper place for testing.

Those of us who went on to college might take the SAT or the ACT, as a choice. We could choose to prepare on our own, but weeks of school time were not devoted to test prep. Yes, there were high stakes tests in our lives, but they weren't mandated as they are now.

That culture is a trip through a nostalgic past that no longer exists. Now even first graders are worried, "Is this a test?"

Until parents and teachers and administrators can turn around this sick worship of the almighty test, until we can take back the $1.7 billion from the testing industry, until we really listen to that tiny voice in the back seat, our kids will suffer.

The train may well have left the station, but I'm NOT on it, and I'll find another ride. My ride will include authentic measures of learning, reading, talking to others about what you're learning. Katie and I will go to one of those painting classes, and I will tell her, as every teacher should, learning is the fun and adventure of trying something new.

NO TESTS ALLOWED.