It's June.
If I were at work (which I'm not currently for 2 reasons: A. I'm on maternity leave, and B. I've been suspended and continue to await a decision by the district as to whether I'll return next year), I would be excitedly--and frantically--bringing the semester to a close. Papers and final projects would be done (or nearly done). I'd be directing my students to check the online system for final exam preparation materials. Administration would be pressuring teachers to pass their borderline students, while students who had slacked all semester would be approaching me at the 11th hour trying to seek out non-existent extra-credit assignments. You know, standard June behavior.
Next week would be finals. Next Friday, graduation.
But I'm not there to deal with that stuff right now. I'm home with my family.
But June is June. To me, it's the 'end of the year.' And time for reflection.
This year, I have more to reflect upon than normal.
In an obvious sense, I can reflect upon the fact that I started this year super excited and happy and flexible and hopeful. Then I got a particularly malicious group of students (again, no, not ALL of them, but evidently enough to strip the lustre from the positive feelings above) who decided to make it their business to try to ruin me. But that's not what I feel like reflecting on right now. (Some people have charged me with being too negative, but they are wrong.)
Instead, I'd like to reflect on my absolute favorite teaching memory. Why is it in my head now, you ask? Because the student involved is graduating next Friday and will be heading to his first choice college in the fall (for which I wrote him a stellar recommendation letter sharing this very memory!)
In order to appreciate this story, though, it's important to have a little context, so I'm going to provide it first.
Paper-writing time is always one of the worst parts of teaching (and taking) English class. In a general sense, students don't like to write--especially on academic subjects--and feel overwhelmed by the process even before it begins. They sort of psych themselves out right up front, which is a shame. I'd attempted to make the process as painless as possible by pairing the paper with the short story unit (which students tend to enjoy more than other units, probably because the stories are more modern), and by making the essay prompts directly follow the topics we'd specifically discussed in class. Further, I had broken down the essay into several parts (after painstakingly reviewing all of the writing process and a sample essay with them): thesis statements, outlines, quote selection, rough draft, final copy. I offered conferences for their thesis statements, their outlines, and their quote selection.
How this typically ended up playing out, then, was that students would sit down with me for their thesis conference and would have something vague ready to go, and would expect me to fill in the blanks for them. I'd turn this tactic around and ask them leading questions to get to the basis of what they wanted to express, and then they would, in fact, end up writing their own statements. Sometimes they resented this, but a lot of times it worked well. The outlines and quote checks were a little more sketchy. Some students did exactly what they should've done, and had questions ready for me when we conferenced (which is the idea of the conference), and things went well. But more often, there would be parts that were good and parts that were off base, or parts that were not even completed because they'd saved the task for the last minute and run out of time. I'd point out the issues that needed work, and would offer suggestions or ask questions of them so they could realize how they could fix the problems, but, more often than not, between the early drafting process and the final copy, the papers didn't undergo much change. It was so frustrating because it seemed an issue of laziness much more than inability, especially as the review time was there.
Now, with this particular favorite memory, the paper process was, in large part, progressing in a similar fashion as I've just described. We were in the outline stage. The way I had them outline, though, was in complete sentences AND with textual evidence, so, in large part, they would sort of already have their paper written if they completed this stage correctly. If completed properly, they would have put a good deal of time into their outlines.
One of my male honors students came up in turn for his conference. He was a relatively quiet but creative kid, and one who would only participate sporadically in class discussions. He had his entire outline completed as assigned, and it was substantial. He said something like, "I've been working on this and it's pretty decent, I think, but you mentioned something in class recently about the potential supernatural element in the story. I've been thinking about it -- can you tell me a little more about that?"
I was shocked. In a good way. I was so excited. Someone was listening! Someone was interested in something I'd said! Yahoo!!! So I happily explained the supernatural element as he'd requested, and he excitedly interjected a few things as they were occurring to him as I talked.
Then he said, "Wow. This is cool. Would it be ok if I changed the direction of my paper to this, and went home tonight and made a new outline to show you tomorrow?"
Would it be ok for a student to willingly scrap his entire 1st effort in favor of one that he was interested and excited enough to want to explore instead???!!! Hells yeah! I was blown away.
And what's more, he DID it. He went home that night, reworked an entirely new outline with textual evidence, and brought it to me the next day for review. We conferenced again, and he turned the outline into a fully-realized paper for the final deadline. Was his paper the best I'd ever read? No. But it was good. And it was the result of genuine interest and effort, and one of the truest displays of learning and enthusiasm I'd ever seen to that point, and since then, in fact. It was an absolute treat to read.
It was a breath of fresh air. It was so delightful to me as an instructor to be able to have shared an idea that sparked a student's interest and made him want to think about it some more. It was an example of why so many teachers do what they do each day. It was what school is supposed to be about. It was magnificent.
While I wish that these moments were far less rare, I'm still thrilled and touched to have been part of that incident, and will be forever grateful to that particular creative, funny, and enthusiastic young man for showing passion about ideas.
After this incident, he seemed a bit more outgoing in class, and would sometimes stay after for a moment to chat about something I'd said that day. He continued to stop by my room to chat the rest of last year, as well as this year before I left. Like I said, I even wrote him a letter of recommendation and shared his happiness at getting admitted to his first-choice college.
I wish there were more students like him, and I wish this memory wasn't as exceptional as it is. Regardless, though, I hold it close to my heart and, this June, I wish him and the other students who were kind and who tried and who were willing to work, all the best in the future. Congrats to the grads!
Tuesday, June 7, 2011
Monday, June 6, 2011
New Flavor for Food Network Star Season 7?
Last night was the much-anticipated season premier of The Next Food-Network Star. (What? I was much-anticipating it!)
I've been a fan since the show's inception. However, it seems like Food Network might be trying to tweak its usual recipe for the 7th season, and I'm not sure I'm a fan of the new flavor.
Star is pretty standard fare for reality tv talent search: in their case, they're looking for a person who has cooking chops, is likeable, and marketable from a brand perspective. They also want someone who brings something different to their tv lineup table. (If you'll excuse all of the cooking puns.)
As the seasons have progressed, there have been--as with any talent search--some successes and some fizzles. Amy Finley of season 3, for instance, never reached star potential on Food Network. (Interesting fact for you non-Star watchers: Finley was actually NOT the chosen winner. The original winner was some ex-Marine guy who ended up having some disqualifying characteristic which the show evidently didn't know about until after naming him the winner. Thus, Finley was given the top spot in the manner of Miss America's first runner up, what with Mr. Star being unable to fulfill his duties and all... I'd been a fan of Finley's for most of the season and was happy to see her end up with the win. However, when I saw her show air, it was really quite bad. She didn't have the star-power needed to hold viewer attention; her show was actually boring to watch. Which is probably part of the reason you no longer find her on the Food Network.) Then there's the biggest former Star: Guy Fieri of season 2. You'd know if you read my old blog (before I took it down at the height of Bloggate 2011) that I feel that Guy is over-exposed. He may be a good cook and a fun dude, but he is involved with waaaaaay too many things: TGIFriday's stuff, several shows on Food Network, host of "Minute to Win It." It's just too much for me. I say, sometimes less is more.
There has also been the emergence of the cooking show contestant archetypes: stay-at-home mom who has to prove herself among the "classically trained" cooks, gourmet chef showing his mad cooking skills, foodie-turned-cook, food blogger, ethnic cook, health-nut, former overweight cook who discovered food can be healthy and wants to share, good cook who sucks on camera, bad cook who's good on camera, obnoxious guy, pretty gal... you know what I mean. Everyone is filling a role, beyond just filling their rolls. (Couldn't resist that one!)
Over the years, the challenges have gotten tougher, and the parade of the biggest names on Food Network has gotten more regular, like Bobby Flay as host, and Alton Brown as guest director there to be borderline rude to the contestants. (Seriously, Alton, you could tone it down just a smidge; they aren't professional tv stars yet!) But one thing has remained pretty much the same: most of the contestants have been likeable in some way. Even the obnoxious or weird ones (think Adam Gertler or Tom Pizzica, neither of whom won the show but both of whom now have shows on Food Network) had us rooting them on because they were goofy and fun-loving. Oh sure, there were the occasional double-crosses and lies and slimy behavior situations--some incidents with Debbie Lee of season 5 and Paul Young of season 6 come to mind-- and the occasional 'tude--like from Brianna Jenkins of season 6--but, again, most of the contestants seemed like nice enough people. I've always assumed that this was purposeful on the part of Food Network because, after all, how are you going to successfully market someone who all of your viewers know is a jerk? It would probably be difficult.
But, it seems, something is shifting now.
Maybe it's because reality tv dominates the airwaves now, and the competition is more fierce, and people are tuning in to such trash as the Real Housewives or MTV's Real World (which has grown more and more disgusting as the years progress, though I haven't watched it in years and am basing my contention on clips I see on The Soup), and Food Network is just trying to keep up with the times. But of this season's hopefuls, I found myself thinking last night, there were several personalities who seemed out of place with the normal crew. There were archetypes missing from the contenders (the stay-at-home mom, for instance, though perhaps they don't need her anymore since she won 2 seasons ago...). There were, quite regrettably, new ones that really have no place on this show, and I think it's to the detriment of both the program and the network as a whole that they were even there.
Take, for instance, the 1st casualty of the season: Howie. He is a radio personality who was trying to break into tv. He is not a cook. He said as much himself, and then proved it over and over again in the challenges. He even said to the judges that he was a novice. Um, I'm sorry, but who wants to watch a cooking show hosted by someone who, it's very possible, knows even less than they do about cooking? Not I! He clearly had no clue what he was doing, and was a drain on his team (at least, that's how the show's editing made it seem.) In the team challenge, his teammate Jyll had to find him bowls, ice, utensils; had to help him heat oil; had to instruct him on, it seemed, all counts. But when it came time for judging and his teammates didn't have anything to show for themselves since they'd been busy helping him, he said nothing. Before the elimination, when Jyll approached him about how much she'd helped him, he didn't thank her or apologize--he tried pointing out the things he felt he had done and made it seem like she'd done little for him. At elimination, he tried the same tactic. Thankfully, the selection committee saw that he didn't have the cooking chops and cut him, but I couldn't help wondering how he could have even made it to the taping round. Had there not been any better contenders among the audition video entries than him?
Next, there was the obnoxious dude (who is doing double-duty this season as the gourmet chef who thinks he's a food god), Chris, who tried to buy a 6-pack of beer on his team's trip to the market to get their supplies for the challenge. Did I mention that he was planning to use part of the team's food budget for this purchase? And was trying to pressure one of the teammates into not buying a more expensive chocolate for her dessert so that he could get the beer? Well, he was. One of the contestants remarked early on that Chris seemed like a frat boy. That was an accurate description of him. He also tried to start crap with one of his teammates (the ethnic cooker, if you were wondering) about her spicy sauce. He tried pulling rank and saying he wouldn't serve something that would burn the judges' mouths. She had to argue in favor of the bold flavor as it was her cooking type and her contribution. (It was served; the judges enjoyed it.) His brand of obnoxious and his argumentative nature do not seem like they'll become endearing as time goes on. They will merely become more annoying.
Most notably, however, in unlikeable characters, was a woman who, I think, must have gotten lost on her way over to the Mob Wives taping. A short, dark-haired middle aged woman, Penny showed up in a garish, fuzzy vest-like abomination and animal-print stilettos. Then she took an immediate, catty, and unbecoming dislike to the younger, tall, blond, former-model Alicia. She even remarked that Alicia was tall and blond and her opposite. It seemed quite obvious that she hated Alicia on sight simply because of her appearance, as though jealous of her. Then, in and among her time trying to over-sell her "sexy" food concept (which, also, really doesn't have a place on Food Network), she proceeded to be, well, a real bitch to and about Alicia for the rest of the episode. Penny made snarky comments about Alicia's cooking abilities, was argumentative at the market because Alicia needed "too many" ingredients for her meal (which the judges loved, by the way), was mean about the dessert concept Alicia had come up with for their team, and even appeared to try to sabotage it by letting it boil after being asked to make sure that it didn't. From the look of the previews, it seems like this won't be the last of the cattiness from this chick. I'm not saying I'm Alicia's #1 fan --though, really, she seemed quite harmless and, so far, likeable enough--the animosity coming from Penny was uncalled for, and made her seem like a villain.
As I said before, I don't know exactly why Food Network has decided to go this way in their casting for season 7--perhaps they're trying to stay up with the trends--but I really wish they wouldn't. I was further distressed by their preview montage which advertised more clashing behaviors and incidents coming up this season. Why this new approach? They should really leave the spice and intrigue and trash to the other shows and just concentrate on what has made them successful in the past.
The thought that this shift might be the new norm for this show leaves a bad taste in my mouth.
I've been a fan since the show's inception. However, it seems like Food Network might be trying to tweak its usual recipe for the 7th season, and I'm not sure I'm a fan of the new flavor.
Star is pretty standard fare for reality tv talent search: in their case, they're looking for a person who has cooking chops, is likeable, and marketable from a brand perspective. They also want someone who brings something different to their tv lineup table. (If you'll excuse all of the cooking puns.)
As the seasons have progressed, there have been--as with any talent search--some successes and some fizzles. Amy Finley of season 3, for instance, never reached star potential on Food Network. (Interesting fact for you non-Star watchers: Finley was actually NOT the chosen winner. The original winner was some ex-Marine guy who ended up having some disqualifying characteristic which the show evidently didn't know about until after naming him the winner. Thus, Finley was given the top spot in the manner of Miss America's first runner up, what with Mr. Star being unable to fulfill his duties and all... I'd been a fan of Finley's for most of the season and was happy to see her end up with the win. However, when I saw her show air, it was really quite bad. She didn't have the star-power needed to hold viewer attention; her show was actually boring to watch. Which is probably part of the reason you no longer find her on the Food Network.) Then there's the biggest former Star: Guy Fieri of season 2. You'd know if you read my old blog (before I took it down at the height of Bloggate 2011) that I feel that Guy is over-exposed. He may be a good cook and a fun dude, but he is involved with waaaaaay too many things: TGIFriday's stuff, several shows on Food Network, host of "Minute to Win It." It's just too much for me. I say, sometimes less is more.
There has also been the emergence of the cooking show contestant archetypes: stay-at-home mom who has to prove herself among the "classically trained" cooks, gourmet chef showing his mad cooking skills, foodie-turned-cook, food blogger, ethnic cook, health-nut, former overweight cook who discovered food can be healthy and wants to share, good cook who sucks on camera, bad cook who's good on camera, obnoxious guy, pretty gal... you know what I mean. Everyone is filling a role, beyond just filling their rolls. (Couldn't resist that one!)
Over the years, the challenges have gotten tougher, and the parade of the biggest names on Food Network has gotten more regular, like Bobby Flay as host, and Alton Brown as guest director there to be borderline rude to the contestants. (Seriously, Alton, you could tone it down just a smidge; they aren't professional tv stars yet!) But one thing has remained pretty much the same: most of the contestants have been likeable in some way. Even the obnoxious or weird ones (think Adam Gertler or Tom Pizzica, neither of whom won the show but both of whom now have shows on Food Network) had us rooting them on because they were goofy and fun-loving. Oh sure, there were the occasional double-crosses and lies and slimy behavior situations--some incidents with Debbie Lee of season 5 and Paul Young of season 6 come to mind-- and the occasional 'tude--like from Brianna Jenkins of season 6--but, again, most of the contestants seemed like nice enough people. I've always assumed that this was purposeful on the part of Food Network because, after all, how are you going to successfully market someone who all of your viewers know is a jerk? It would probably be difficult.
But, it seems, something is shifting now.
Maybe it's because reality tv dominates the airwaves now, and the competition is more fierce, and people are tuning in to such trash as the Real Housewives or MTV's Real World (which has grown more and more disgusting as the years progress, though I haven't watched it in years and am basing my contention on clips I see on The Soup), and Food Network is just trying to keep up with the times. But of this season's hopefuls, I found myself thinking last night, there were several personalities who seemed out of place with the normal crew. There were archetypes missing from the contenders (the stay-at-home mom, for instance, though perhaps they don't need her anymore since she won 2 seasons ago...). There were, quite regrettably, new ones that really have no place on this show, and I think it's to the detriment of both the program and the network as a whole that they were even there.
Take, for instance, the 1st casualty of the season: Howie. He is a radio personality who was trying to break into tv. He is not a cook. He said as much himself, and then proved it over and over again in the challenges. He even said to the judges that he was a novice. Um, I'm sorry, but who wants to watch a cooking show hosted by someone who, it's very possible, knows even less than they do about cooking? Not I! He clearly had no clue what he was doing, and was a drain on his team (at least, that's how the show's editing made it seem.) In the team challenge, his teammate Jyll had to find him bowls, ice, utensils; had to help him heat oil; had to instruct him on, it seemed, all counts. But when it came time for judging and his teammates didn't have anything to show for themselves since they'd been busy helping him, he said nothing. Before the elimination, when Jyll approached him about how much she'd helped him, he didn't thank her or apologize--he tried pointing out the things he felt he had done and made it seem like she'd done little for him. At elimination, he tried the same tactic. Thankfully, the selection committee saw that he didn't have the cooking chops and cut him, but I couldn't help wondering how he could have even made it to the taping round. Had there not been any better contenders among the audition video entries than him?
Next, there was the obnoxious dude (who is doing double-duty this season as the gourmet chef who thinks he's a food god), Chris, who tried to buy a 6-pack of beer on his team's trip to the market to get their supplies for the challenge. Did I mention that he was planning to use part of the team's food budget for this purchase? And was trying to pressure one of the teammates into not buying a more expensive chocolate for her dessert so that he could get the beer? Well, he was. One of the contestants remarked early on that Chris seemed like a frat boy. That was an accurate description of him. He also tried to start crap with one of his teammates (the ethnic cooker, if you were wondering) about her spicy sauce. He tried pulling rank and saying he wouldn't serve something that would burn the judges' mouths. She had to argue in favor of the bold flavor as it was her cooking type and her contribution. (It was served; the judges enjoyed it.) His brand of obnoxious and his argumentative nature do not seem like they'll become endearing as time goes on. They will merely become more annoying.
Most notably, however, in unlikeable characters, was a woman who, I think, must have gotten lost on her way over to the Mob Wives taping. A short, dark-haired middle aged woman, Penny showed up in a garish, fuzzy vest-like abomination and animal-print stilettos. Then she took an immediate, catty, and unbecoming dislike to the younger, tall, blond, former-model Alicia. She even remarked that Alicia was tall and blond and her opposite. It seemed quite obvious that she hated Alicia on sight simply because of her appearance, as though jealous of her. Then, in and among her time trying to over-sell her "sexy" food concept (which, also, really doesn't have a place on Food Network), she proceeded to be, well, a real bitch to and about Alicia for the rest of the episode. Penny made snarky comments about Alicia's cooking abilities, was argumentative at the market because Alicia needed "too many" ingredients for her meal (which the judges loved, by the way), was mean about the dessert concept Alicia had come up with for their team, and even appeared to try to sabotage it by letting it boil after being asked to make sure that it didn't. From the look of the previews, it seems like this won't be the last of the cattiness from this chick. I'm not saying I'm Alicia's #1 fan --though, really, she seemed quite harmless and, so far, likeable enough--the animosity coming from Penny was uncalled for, and made her seem like a villain.
As I said before, I don't know exactly why Food Network has decided to go this way in their casting for season 7--perhaps they're trying to stay up with the trends--but I really wish they wouldn't. I was further distressed by their preview montage which advertised more clashing behaviors and incidents coming up this season. Why this new approach? They should really leave the spice and intrigue and trash to the other shows and just concentrate on what has made them successful in the past.
The thought that this shift might be the new norm for this show leaves a bad taste in my mouth.
Tuesday, May 10, 2011
Updates
Some readers have requested updates, so I carved out some time to write this post. I probably won't have time to go into as much detail as some of my old posts, but I did want to oblige the askers.
I've been remiss in my blogging of late because I've been thrust back into the throes of infant-rearing. I'd forgotten the toll it can take on one's day-to-day accomplishments. This time, though, as I also have a 3 1/2 year old, it's even more challenging to get things done.
I count it a productive day if we can manage to get out for lunch, an activity we enjoy to get us out of the house.
I'd like to break from my narrative to give a shout-out to a delightful eatery we discovered toward the end of my pregnancy called the Corner Bakery Cafe. I can say that one positive of the whole blogger scandal is that we stopped going to Panera. At first, this was a big disappointment as Panera used to be a favorite haunt of ours, but after everything blew up with the blog thing and I'd been suspended from work, it felt awkward going there because our local Panera is often a favorite haunt of many of my students who, I'm sure you can understand, I didn't really feel like running into whilst dining. In any event, we decided to try this other lunch spot since it was close to my OB's office (and, at the end of pregnancy, you're pretty much going to the doctor for checkups all the time) and, well, the rest was history. We've barely been to Panera since!
The Corner Bakery Cafe is owned by the Rose Group (you may know them as the owners of Applebees--I recognized the name since, back in the day, I worked at Applebees for about a year). The concept of the eatery is similar to Panera and Cosi. It has soups, salads, sandwiches, and pastries--the normal fare. (This place also has pasta offerings, though I've never partaken.) You order at the main counter and are given a number to bring to your table and they deliver your meal to you. Beverages are self-serve. What sets this spot apart from the other two, my husband and I agree, is that, first, it's always immaculately clean. At both Panera and Cosi we frequently have to wipe the table ourselves and self-bus. And the bathrooms...not always so much. But at CBC, the staff are always wiping, sweeping, shining, and bussing, and the bathrooms are clean. When I'm out to eat, this makes me feel good. I figure that if they are taking this much care with the front of the house, the back--where food is stored and prepared--is probably pretty clean too. Second, the food is consistently good and of an appropriate temperature. At Panera, on the other hand, the soup is frequently on the cool to lukewarm side. On one visit, my husband went to make them aware of his not-hot soup, but there was a line of patrons in front of him doing the same. Panera's response: "There's a microwave over near the coffee." They were sending customers to nuke their own soup, rather than fixing the problem in the back! Good customer service, Panera! We've never had an issue at CBC. Third, the food options are expansive and a little different--they use fresh and fun ingredients like jicama, poblanos, avocados, and green chiles in their sandwiches. And their bread is delish, too, so these other ingredients are going on a solidly tasty base.
All in all, Corner Bakery Cafe is a lovely destination serving breakfast (like made-to-order egg sandwiches, french toast, and the like), lunch, and dinner, with fine ingredients, good service, and consistent quality. Do yourself a favor and check them out if you have one nearby. You won't be disappointed!
Hopefully you'll excuse my little Corner Bakery Cafe commercial there, but when I mention "lunch" now, I think of that place--it's almost Pavlovian!--and I've been meaning to blog about it now for a while.
Moving on to other updates.
Bloggate Update:
So far, for those people who follow the developing story, there's been no movement with the case. I'm currently on maternity leave which followed my paid suspension time. (To clear up any confusion that exists out there regarding maternity leave--at least at most places of employ--it's UNpaid. You are allowed by law up to 12 weeks of time off whereby the company will hold your job under Family Medical Leave Act (FMLA). But this time is unpaid. Some women cannot afford to take the entire 12 weeks, so may take less time. This is, of course, a personal decision.) In my case, before the whole blog business erupted, I'd already been approved for all 12 weeks of FMLA leave--which would take me to the beginning of June--followed by an unpaid leave of absence for the rest of the school year. Thus, lest people think I'm still collecting a check, the only time for which I was being paid under the terms of my suspension was Feb 9-Feb 28. The rest of the time has been unpaid. This little cushion of not issuing me checks, I suspect, is part of the reason the district can drag its feet on making a decision regarding my work status, and why I've heard nothing from them since Feb 9th when I was unceremoniously escorted off the premises. I've heard and read statements they've made about me, but they haven't contacted me at all. And so we wait.
If you check out the May issue of "Philadelphia Magazine" (about which I've been in the process of writing a post, but which I haven't yet published on here), there's a feature article about me and my story. I think it's pretty fairly reported and does a good job outlining the situation. It even mentions Panera--so we've come pretty much full-circle here! Ha!
Family Updates:
My newest daughter is now 6 weeks old! She's doing well, a mean case of baby acne and excessive gassiness notwithstanding. (Anyone know if there's anything to do about baby acne besides leave it alone? It looks terrible!) Unfortunately, she has some baby acid reflux so is on medicine for that. We tried other routes first, but it's the only thing that seems to work. We even tried taking her off of it, but the problems returned. So for now, welcome to the world--here's a pill for your problem. I wish I knew some homeopathic or American Indian-type remedy for her issue (because you know they had some way to cure indigestion!) Alas. Mercifully, though, she's pretty much sleeping through the night--thanks to swaddling. Without it, she woke herself up pretty often flailing about. Now, even though she does not enjoy being put into her baby straitjacket, er, swaddle, at bedtime, she sleeps comfortably for long stretches. Yay!
My 3 1/2 year old is a great big sister. She hasn't displayed any signs of jealousy or no-longer-an-only-child annoyance, so we're happy about that. I do think she wishes the baby would just grow up and play with her, though. haha. Otherwise, she's at the stage where she fights naps (even when she NEEDS them!) and exerts her will. You know--she's 3.
It's tough having two at once--someone should have warned me. Ha ha!
Education Reform Updates:
Despite not being in school, I'm still a card-carrying member of the teacher's union. There have been a rash of anti-union and education-funding-cuts reform movements of late, and it has been horrifying to watch. It has also been strange to watch because I'm still a teacher, but feel like I'm watching from the sidelines now because of my standing with the district. Nevertheless, I've been sending letters to my state representatives regarding various education issues (vouchers, furloughs, funding, to name a few) in solidarity with other union members.
I've also been reading with interest several thought-provoking articles written about education -- this April 30 NY Times piece "The High Cost of Low Teacher Salaries," and EducationVotes' "Teacher Takes on Educator Bashing in Provocative EdWeek Post" which cover some points I've made in my posts in the past or that should be considered as well. Check them out. It's a sad situation that the budget cuts are taking such a toll on the system as a whole.
As I said, I'll write more as soon as I have time. Or if/when I hear anything from the district. Stay tuned!
I've been remiss in my blogging of late because I've been thrust back into the throes of infant-rearing. I'd forgotten the toll it can take on one's day-to-day accomplishments. This time, though, as I also have a 3 1/2 year old, it's even more challenging to get things done.
I count it a productive day if we can manage to get out for lunch, an activity we enjoy to get us out of the house.
I'd like to break from my narrative to give a shout-out to a delightful eatery we discovered toward the end of my pregnancy called the Corner Bakery Cafe. I can say that one positive of the whole blogger scandal is that we stopped going to Panera. At first, this was a big disappointment as Panera used to be a favorite haunt of ours, but after everything blew up with the blog thing and I'd been suspended from work, it felt awkward going there because our local Panera is often a favorite haunt of many of my students who, I'm sure you can understand, I didn't really feel like running into whilst dining. In any event, we decided to try this other lunch spot since it was close to my OB's office (and, at the end of pregnancy, you're pretty much going to the doctor for checkups all the time) and, well, the rest was history. We've barely been to Panera since!
The Corner Bakery Cafe is owned by the Rose Group (you may know them as the owners of Applebees--I recognized the name since, back in the day, I worked at Applebees for about a year). The concept of the eatery is similar to Panera and Cosi. It has soups, salads, sandwiches, and pastries--the normal fare. (This place also has pasta offerings, though I've never partaken.) You order at the main counter and are given a number to bring to your table and they deliver your meal to you. Beverages are self-serve. What sets this spot apart from the other two, my husband and I agree, is that, first, it's always immaculately clean. At both Panera and Cosi we frequently have to wipe the table ourselves and self-bus. And the bathrooms...not always so much. But at CBC, the staff are always wiping, sweeping, shining, and bussing, and the bathrooms are clean. When I'm out to eat, this makes me feel good. I figure that if they are taking this much care with the front of the house, the back--where food is stored and prepared--is probably pretty clean too. Second, the food is consistently good and of an appropriate temperature. At Panera, on the other hand, the soup is frequently on the cool to lukewarm side. On one visit, my husband went to make them aware of his not-hot soup, but there was a line of patrons in front of him doing the same. Panera's response: "There's a microwave over near the coffee." They were sending customers to nuke their own soup, rather than fixing the problem in the back! Good customer service, Panera! We've never had an issue at CBC. Third, the food options are expansive and a little different--they use fresh and fun ingredients like jicama, poblanos, avocados, and green chiles in their sandwiches. And their bread is delish, too, so these other ingredients are going on a solidly tasty base.
All in all, Corner Bakery Cafe is a lovely destination serving breakfast (like made-to-order egg sandwiches, french toast, and the like), lunch, and dinner, with fine ingredients, good service, and consistent quality. Do yourself a favor and check them out if you have one nearby. You won't be disappointed!
Hopefully you'll excuse my little Corner Bakery Cafe commercial there, but when I mention "lunch" now, I think of that place--it's almost Pavlovian!--and I've been meaning to blog about it now for a while.
Moving on to other updates.
Bloggate Update:
So far, for those people who follow the developing story, there's been no movement with the case. I'm currently on maternity leave which followed my paid suspension time. (To clear up any confusion that exists out there regarding maternity leave--at least at most places of employ--it's UNpaid. You are allowed by law up to 12 weeks of time off whereby the company will hold your job under Family Medical Leave Act (FMLA). But this time is unpaid. Some women cannot afford to take the entire 12 weeks, so may take less time. This is, of course, a personal decision.) In my case, before the whole blog business erupted, I'd already been approved for all 12 weeks of FMLA leave--which would take me to the beginning of June--followed by an unpaid leave of absence for the rest of the school year. Thus, lest people think I'm still collecting a check, the only time for which I was being paid under the terms of my suspension was Feb 9-Feb 28. The rest of the time has been unpaid. This little cushion of not issuing me checks, I suspect, is part of the reason the district can drag its feet on making a decision regarding my work status, and why I've heard nothing from them since Feb 9th when I was unceremoniously escorted off the premises. I've heard and read statements they've made about me, but they haven't contacted me at all. And so we wait.
If you check out the May issue of "Philadelphia Magazine" (about which I've been in the process of writing a post, but which I haven't yet published on here), there's a feature article about me and my story. I think it's pretty fairly reported and does a good job outlining the situation. It even mentions Panera--so we've come pretty much full-circle here! Ha!
Family Updates:
My newest daughter is now 6 weeks old! She's doing well, a mean case of baby acne and excessive gassiness notwithstanding. (Anyone know if there's anything to do about baby acne besides leave it alone? It looks terrible!) Unfortunately, she has some baby acid reflux so is on medicine for that. We tried other routes first, but it's the only thing that seems to work. We even tried taking her off of it, but the problems returned. So for now, welcome to the world--here's a pill for your problem. I wish I knew some homeopathic or American Indian-type remedy for her issue (because you know they had some way to cure indigestion!) Alas. Mercifully, though, she's pretty much sleeping through the night--thanks to swaddling. Without it, she woke herself up pretty often flailing about. Now, even though she does not enjoy being put into her baby straitjacket, er, swaddle, at bedtime, she sleeps comfortably for long stretches. Yay!
My 3 1/2 year old is a great big sister. She hasn't displayed any signs of jealousy or no-longer-an-only-child annoyance, so we're happy about that. I do think she wishes the baby would just grow up and play with her, though. haha. Otherwise, she's at the stage where she fights naps (even when she NEEDS them!) and exerts her will. You know--she's 3.
It's tough having two at once--someone should have warned me. Ha ha!
Education Reform Updates:
Despite not being in school, I'm still a card-carrying member of the teacher's union. There have been a rash of anti-union and education-funding-cuts reform movements of late, and it has been horrifying to watch. It has also been strange to watch because I'm still a teacher, but feel like I'm watching from the sidelines now because of my standing with the district. Nevertheless, I've been sending letters to my state representatives regarding various education issues (vouchers, furloughs, funding, to name a few) in solidarity with other union members.
I've also been reading with interest several thought-provoking articles written about education -- this April 30 NY Times piece "The High Cost of Low Teacher Salaries," and EducationVotes' "Teacher Takes on Educator Bashing in Provocative EdWeek Post" which cover some points I've made in my posts in the past or that should be considered as well. Check them out. It's a sad situation that the budget cuts are taking such a toll on the system as a whole.
As I said, I'll write more as soon as I have time. Or if/when I hear anything from the district. Stay tuned!
Saturday, April 30, 2011
Philadelphia Magazine Feature Thoughts
The May issue of "Philadelphia Magazine" has a feature article about me.
I liked it and found it to be a pretty accurate depiction of what's been happening--certainly a more complete picture than other media sources have reported in the past, which I appreciate.
I was particularly interested to read the parts of the article dealing with what was coming out of my school, both from the principal and from some unnamed colleague. (As it were, I've been pretty completely cut off from school goings-on since February 9th. Not even my school "friends" feel comfortable talking to me in large part. The one or two who will chat try to keep things as non-work-oriented as humanly possible. I can't help but wonder if they were told not to talk to me. What is the school going to do if people talk to me? Fire the person for communicating with me? Think that by talking to me in any capacity means that the other person agrees with my every thought and action? Sorry, but that's absurd. But again, it makes me wonder what was said behind closed doors about this whole affair... but I digress.)
In reading the article, I found it particularly ridiculous to hear the principal describe the school as "almost utopian." Haha! Sorry, but NO place is perfect or ideal. What followed that statement was information that last year the school had a 99% graduation rate and that 94% of those kids were college bound. While I am in no way trying to discount these statistics or take away from the accomplishment of anyone involved, these facts alone do not perfection make.
Graduating and going to college--while good and admirable--cannot be counted as the mark of high esteem and success they once were. Most students (particularly those who can afford to pay for it), go to some form of college these days; they almost have to go in order to be marketable for a job. And check the stats--colleges are having to do more and more remedial work with incoming freshman students than ever before. Just because students are graduating and going off to college doesn't mean they are college-ready. Nor does it mean they will be a success; further, there are plenty of life paths that do not include college that will result in successful individuals. Thus, citing those stats does not mean perfection is present.
Nor does a degree--from high school or college--mean that someone is a good person. Their degree, in fact, may be the only positive thing he or she has going. (Consider, for instance, some of the nasty, disgusting comments (also quoted in the article) that were made by some of the students at this "almost utopian" place, or any of the stories of frustration I or any of my silent colleagues have encountered.) Yeah, it's so nearly perfect I could cry.
But in pointing out this bit of absurd diction on the part of the principal, I will note that as much as the school is FAR from a utopia, it is also hardly dystopic. It's a normal school with some normal problems, which, in itself, is a problem (see previous posts regarding the state of education today). But to try to act like the situation is otherwise is just sad and lame.
Also sad and lame was the claim that he "couldn't imagine an educator would feel this way--and then post it with such vitriol." What utter bollocks! Maybe he can't believe I posted it, but he can certainly imagine an educator feeling this way. First off, he was a teacher before he was an administrator; he knows what goes on. Second, he has also made comments behind closed doors as an administrator that have been critical about both students and their parents, as well as other staff. So the faux-surprise and holier-than-thou ruse that someone having a bad day could feel negatively about something pertaining to her job and then make negative comments about it to her friends was just, well, laughable to read.
I was also interested to see some comments from an unnamed colleague who remarked that it's a shame that, "when we want to scapegoat why schools aren't what they should be, we pick on people who have the least responsibility."
I think this mentality is part of the problem with education. Students DO have some responsibility in why schools aren't what they should be today. While they aren't solely responsible, they should shoulder a good deal of the blame. Yes, there are definitely some idiots making the rules and setting up the system to fail. But if ALL students made it their business to care a bit more and take their job as students more seriously, the system would also function better because there would be a demand that it do so; the people at the top would need to make a better go of it. But since so many people who should care don't (i.e. parents, students), it makes it easier for the people in charge to muck it up.
It seems that students are more concerned about the perception of themselves than about their actual behaviors and actions. Those students who were personally offended by my few frustrated postings about students (MANY of whom, I found it interesting and sadly amusing to note, had mis-identified themselves as the specific "target" of comments I'd made in a general sense, which is rather telling in and of itself) wonder if this is how teachers view them. Part of the animosity I've encountered has been because students allegedly now have a complex about the fact that others are thinking things about them, and how they are viewed. (What a concept!)
But to that I ask: why is that a problem? Shouldn't we ALL be concerned about how others view us and keep that in mind as we make decisions about our actions? I think it's a good thing that they wonder. They should wonder. Maybe it will help some of them not to spend class time twisting paperclips into the shape of people having sex or feel that it's appropriate to come up to a teacher after she's called home and brag about how they weren't punished at home for their behavior. Maybe then school could actually focus on what matters: learning.
Maybe this situation will be a learning experience for everyone involved.
I liked it and found it to be a pretty accurate depiction of what's been happening--certainly a more complete picture than other media sources have reported in the past, which I appreciate.
I was particularly interested to read the parts of the article dealing with what was coming out of my school, both from the principal and from some unnamed colleague. (As it were, I've been pretty completely cut off from school goings-on since February 9th. Not even my school "friends" feel comfortable talking to me in large part. The one or two who will chat try to keep things as non-work-oriented as humanly possible. I can't help but wonder if they were told not to talk to me. What is the school going to do if people talk to me? Fire the person for communicating with me? Think that by talking to me in any capacity means that the other person agrees with my every thought and action? Sorry, but that's absurd. But again, it makes me wonder what was said behind closed doors about this whole affair... but I digress.)
In reading the article, I found it particularly ridiculous to hear the principal describe the school as "almost utopian." Haha! Sorry, but NO place is perfect or ideal. What followed that statement was information that last year the school had a 99% graduation rate and that 94% of those kids were college bound. While I am in no way trying to discount these statistics or take away from the accomplishment of anyone involved, these facts alone do not perfection make.
Graduating and going to college--while good and admirable--cannot be counted as the mark of high esteem and success they once were. Most students (particularly those who can afford to pay for it), go to some form of college these days; they almost have to go in order to be marketable for a job. And check the stats--colleges are having to do more and more remedial work with incoming freshman students than ever before. Just because students are graduating and going off to college doesn't mean they are college-ready. Nor does it mean they will be a success; further, there are plenty of life paths that do not include college that will result in successful individuals. Thus, citing those stats does not mean perfection is present.
Nor does a degree--from high school or college--mean that someone is a good person. Their degree, in fact, may be the only positive thing he or she has going. (Consider, for instance, some of the nasty, disgusting comments (also quoted in the article) that were made by some of the students at this "almost utopian" place, or any of the stories of frustration I or any of my silent colleagues have encountered.) Yeah, it's so nearly perfect I could cry.
But in pointing out this bit of absurd diction on the part of the principal, I will note that as much as the school is FAR from a utopia, it is also hardly dystopic. It's a normal school with some normal problems, which, in itself, is a problem (see previous posts regarding the state of education today). But to try to act like the situation is otherwise is just sad and lame.
Also sad and lame was the claim that he "couldn't imagine an educator would feel this way--and then post it with such vitriol." What utter bollocks! Maybe he can't believe I posted it, but he can certainly imagine an educator feeling this way. First off, he was a teacher before he was an administrator; he knows what goes on. Second, he has also made comments behind closed doors as an administrator that have been critical about both students and their parents, as well as other staff. So the faux-surprise and holier-than-thou ruse that someone having a bad day could feel negatively about something pertaining to her job and then make negative comments about it to her friends was just, well, laughable to read.
I was also interested to see some comments from an unnamed colleague who remarked that it's a shame that, "when we want to scapegoat why schools aren't what they should be, we pick on people who have the least responsibility."
I think this mentality is part of the problem with education. Students DO have some responsibility in why schools aren't what they should be today. While they aren't solely responsible, they should shoulder a good deal of the blame. Yes, there are definitely some idiots making the rules and setting up the system to fail. But if ALL students made it their business to care a bit more and take their job as students more seriously, the system would also function better because there would be a demand that it do so; the people at the top would need to make a better go of it. But since so many people who should care don't (i.e. parents, students), it makes it easier for the people in charge to muck it up.
It seems that students are more concerned about the perception of themselves than about their actual behaviors and actions. Those students who were personally offended by my few frustrated postings about students (MANY of whom, I found it interesting and sadly amusing to note, had mis-identified themselves as the specific "target" of comments I'd made in a general sense, which is rather telling in and of itself) wonder if this is how teachers view them. Part of the animosity I've encountered has been because students allegedly now have a complex about the fact that others are thinking things about them, and how they are viewed. (What a concept!)
But to that I ask: why is that a problem? Shouldn't we ALL be concerned about how others view us and keep that in mind as we make decisions about our actions? I think it's a good thing that they wonder. They should wonder. Maybe it will help some of them not to spend class time twisting paperclips into the shape of people having sex or feel that it's appropriate to come up to a teacher after she's called home and brag about how they weren't punished at home for their behavior. Maybe then school could actually focus on what matters: learning.
Maybe this situation will be a learning experience for everyone involved.
Friday, April 8, 2011
5 Products Every Pregnant Woman/New Parent Should Buy
IT has been a long time since my last post, and that's because I am a new mother again (for the last time. I'm not a good pregnant person.) Yippee. With the exception of having gone full term plus a few extra days and being completely uncomfortable waiting endlessly to go into labor (and, of course, having to actually give birth--owee!!) the labor and delivery process went smoothly and I delivered a healthy baby girl at the end of March. Whew.
WHILE the issues with education are absolutely still on my mind (particularly as, no, I still haven't learned my fate with regard to my blogging situation, and I've been watching in horror as bill after bill is being proposed or passed limiting teacher and other union rights--some of which will definitely cause further destruction to our already-troubled education system), I've been thrust full-force back into the world of new parent, and I have other things on my mind as well. In addition to which, my blog was always about my life overall, so I'm going to branch back out and cover all sorts of topics, including, but not limited to, education issues.
WITHOUT further ado then, I'd like to share a list of products that pregnant women and new parents should be sure to purchase. If you aren't expecting, I'm sure you know someone who is, and thus this list is for you, too, as you'll be a hero to a new parent when you give one of these gifts to them.
FOR THE PREGNANCY--
1. Snoogle Total Body Pillow ($59.99) While, yes, $60 is exorbitant for a pillow, this is an item I passed on during my first pregnancy. I opted for a standard $12.99 body pillow because I couldn't reconcile myself to spending $70 on a pillow (the cost has dropped a bit in the 3 years since I was last pregnant). However, this is one of those instances where you get what you pay for. The body pillow did jack squat in helping me sleep. See, I'm a stomach sleeper. However, when you're pregnant, that isn't really an option for obvious reasons. My second choice is my back, then my right side, then my left. Medical people and pregnancy books recommend that women sleep on their left sides during pregnancy, and not on their backs or right sides (something to do with pressure on main arteries and major organs). The Snoogle is a long, thin pillow that's shaped a bit like a C. It runs down the length of one's body and fits well between one's legs and/or under one's growing belly. It helped me get some sleep at a time when sleep is not easy to come by. For that reason, I love it and felt that it was worth the expense in the long run.
One thing that should be noted, though, is that the pillow doesn't come with a pillow case. That's an extra $19.99-$26.99. THAT was more than I was willing to pay for such a thing, so I didn't get one and just used the pillow itself. It worked out fine for me, though the pillow did get little beady fuzzies on it from being used so much. If that bothers you, by all means get the (ridiculously overpriced) pillowcase. I just couldn't do it.
2. Maternity Belly Band ($24.99-$29.99, depending on brand) When I was pregnant with my first daughter, I joked that I wished that I could hire someone to stand under my stomach and hoist it up so it wasn't weighing me down so much. Then I discovered this belly harness at Babies R Us. It's a thick band that velcros around one's back and serves as a harness under one's stomach, much in the style of someone standing under there holding it up! It offers both back and stomach support. It was my absolute favorite purchase during my first pregnancy. I did try to use it the second time around, but it didn't work as well for me. I have 2 theories as to why: 1. The harness was old and stretched out. Perhaps if I'd bought a new one it would have been more sturdy. 2. I carried a little lower and was HUGE much earlier, so maybe there was just too much of me to hoist upward. Regardless, though, I do swear by this product. Boppy makes one called Boppy Support in Style Maternity Band that looks pretty close to the one I had (which I can't find online but it was MOM brand).
FOR BABY--
1. Triple Paste Diaper Rash Ointment ($8.99 for 2oz tube; $28.99 for 1lb tub) One of the best diaper rash creams out there. While it's more expensive than Desitin (more than double the cost, in fact), it works a lot better. I've used it for both of my babies and any redness clears up overnight with its use. Worth every penny!
2. Diaper Genie II Elite Diaper Disposal System ($34.99-$39.99; refills $19.99/3 pack) We had the regular, non-elite Diaper Genie system for our first daughter. I actually blogged about that system in my old blogs. Basically, you would put the diaper in the pail, shut the lid, twist a few times, and voila!--diaper gone. When you empty the container, the diapers resembled a sausage roll what with the twisted, individually-wrapped diapers. The problem with this system was that it smelled like someone crapped on a powder puff--emptying the thing was pure torture and the nursery always smelled bad. When we found out we were having another baby, my husband and I both agreed that, while there were many things we were going to re-use that our first daughter outgrew, we were definitely going to 'splurge' on the updated diaper disposal system. So far--for the first 2 weeks anyway--we've found the upgraded system to be so much better. The sausage roll is gone, the sickening powder smell is gone, the smelly nursery is gone. And it's easier to empty. While I know that this is something that could change with time (perhaps, after all, it's still too new right now), I'm quite pleased with the new pail.
3. Dr. Brown's Natural Flow bottles ($12.99/2 pk glass; $54.99 BPA Free Deluxe 10-bottle Gift Set) With our first daughter, we used Playtex Ventaire bottles. They sucked. They leaked out the bottom and the neck, and had the worst nipples in town. My poor baby would suck and suck and not get any formula because the hole wasn't big enough; we ended up having to use a pin to open the hole more so she could even eat. HORRIBLE. So, again, we knew that the bottles would be another product we would replace and upgrade for the second baby. The Dr.Brown's bottles appealed to me because I wanted to try glass bottles this go-around. However, in shopping, we found that glass bottles are hard to come by and that there were no good multi-pack purchase options on them. A big part of the reason I wanted to go glass this time was because of the dangers of BPA in the plastic. However, I found that most bottles are now BPA free anyway (as are Dr.Brown's) so I was willing to compromise and try the deluxe gift set listed above.
The idea behind Dr. Brown's bottles is that there's a valve that vents any air to the bottom of the bottle in an effort to help reduce spit-up, colic, burping, and gas, and that creates a vacuum-free system that more closely resembles breastfeeding. My first daughter routinely spit up after eating. My new daughter who is using these bottles almost NEVER spits up. She burps a lot less, too. These are great bottles for what they're designed to do. The nipple is the right flow, the food doesn't come out too quickly or too slowly, etc.
My ONLY gripe with them is cleaning them. There are 6 pieces to each bottle: the bottle itself, the valve, the vent, the nipple, the cover that holds the nipple in place, and the cap. The valve and vent require a special little brush tool (included) to clean them. Therefore, it can take me up to 30 minutes a day to clean bottles and prepare formula (the bottles are actually dishwasher safe, but because I have to clean the valve and vent by hand, I just do the bottles at the same time so all of my pieces are ready at once). But the trade-off is worth it to me; these are a solid product.
Hopefully my baby product endorsements will help steer you in the right direction if you're shopping for pregnancy/baby supplies. There are tons of products on the market, so recommendations are definitely a good way to weed out the good from the bad.
Now, if you'll excuse me, it's feeding time once more!
WHILE the issues with education are absolutely still on my mind (particularly as, no, I still haven't learned my fate with regard to my blogging situation, and I've been watching in horror as bill after bill is being proposed or passed limiting teacher and other union rights--some of which will definitely cause further destruction to our already-troubled education system), I've been thrust full-force back into the world of new parent, and I have other things on my mind as well. In addition to which, my blog was always about my life overall, so I'm going to branch back out and cover all sorts of topics, including, but not limited to, education issues.
WITHOUT further ado then, I'd like to share a list of products that pregnant women and new parents should be sure to purchase. If you aren't expecting, I'm sure you know someone who is, and thus this list is for you, too, as you'll be a hero to a new parent when you give one of these gifts to them.
FOR THE PREGNANCY--
1. Snoogle Total Body Pillow ($59.99) While, yes, $60 is exorbitant for a pillow, this is an item I passed on during my first pregnancy. I opted for a standard $12.99 body pillow because I couldn't reconcile myself to spending $70 on a pillow (the cost has dropped a bit in the 3 years since I was last pregnant). However, this is one of those instances where you get what you pay for. The body pillow did jack squat in helping me sleep. See, I'm a stomach sleeper. However, when you're pregnant, that isn't really an option for obvious reasons. My second choice is my back, then my right side, then my left. Medical people and pregnancy books recommend that women sleep on their left sides during pregnancy, and not on their backs or right sides (something to do with pressure on main arteries and major organs). The Snoogle is a long, thin pillow that's shaped a bit like a C. It runs down the length of one's body and fits well between one's legs and/or under one's growing belly. It helped me get some sleep at a time when sleep is not easy to come by. For that reason, I love it and felt that it was worth the expense in the long run.
One thing that should be noted, though, is that the pillow doesn't come with a pillow case. That's an extra $19.99-$26.99. THAT was more than I was willing to pay for such a thing, so I didn't get one and just used the pillow itself. It worked out fine for me, though the pillow did get little beady fuzzies on it from being used so much. If that bothers you, by all means get the (ridiculously overpriced) pillowcase. I just couldn't do it.
2. Maternity Belly Band ($24.99-$29.99, depending on brand) When I was pregnant with my first daughter, I joked that I wished that I could hire someone to stand under my stomach and hoist it up so it wasn't weighing me down so much. Then I discovered this belly harness at Babies R Us. It's a thick band that velcros around one's back and serves as a harness under one's stomach, much in the style of someone standing under there holding it up! It offers both back and stomach support. It was my absolute favorite purchase during my first pregnancy. I did try to use it the second time around, but it didn't work as well for me. I have 2 theories as to why: 1. The harness was old and stretched out. Perhaps if I'd bought a new one it would have been more sturdy. 2. I carried a little lower and was HUGE much earlier, so maybe there was just too much of me to hoist upward. Regardless, though, I do swear by this product. Boppy makes one called Boppy Support in Style Maternity Band that looks pretty close to the one I had (which I can't find online but it was MOM brand).
FOR BABY--
1. Triple Paste Diaper Rash Ointment ($8.99 for 2oz tube; $28.99 for 1lb tub) One of the best diaper rash creams out there. While it's more expensive than Desitin (more than double the cost, in fact), it works a lot better. I've used it for both of my babies and any redness clears up overnight with its use. Worth every penny!
2. Diaper Genie II Elite Diaper Disposal System ($34.99-$39.99; refills $19.99/3 pack) We had the regular, non-elite Diaper Genie system for our first daughter. I actually blogged about that system in my old blogs. Basically, you would put the diaper in the pail, shut the lid, twist a few times, and voila!--diaper gone. When you empty the container, the diapers resembled a sausage roll what with the twisted, individually-wrapped diapers. The problem with this system was that it smelled like someone crapped on a powder puff--emptying the thing was pure torture and the nursery always smelled bad. When we found out we were having another baby, my husband and I both agreed that, while there were many things we were going to re-use that our first daughter outgrew, we were definitely going to 'splurge' on the updated diaper disposal system. So far--for the first 2 weeks anyway--we've found the upgraded system to be so much better. The sausage roll is gone, the sickening powder smell is gone, the smelly nursery is gone. And it's easier to empty. While I know that this is something that could change with time (perhaps, after all, it's still too new right now), I'm quite pleased with the new pail.
3. Dr. Brown's Natural Flow bottles ($12.99/2 pk glass; $54.99 BPA Free Deluxe 10-bottle Gift Set) With our first daughter, we used Playtex Ventaire bottles. They sucked. They leaked out the bottom and the neck, and had the worst nipples in town. My poor baby would suck and suck and not get any formula because the hole wasn't big enough; we ended up having to use a pin to open the hole more so she could even eat. HORRIBLE. So, again, we knew that the bottles would be another product we would replace and upgrade for the second baby. The Dr.Brown's bottles appealed to me because I wanted to try glass bottles this go-around. However, in shopping, we found that glass bottles are hard to come by and that there were no good multi-pack purchase options on them. A big part of the reason I wanted to go glass this time was because of the dangers of BPA in the plastic. However, I found that most bottles are now BPA free anyway (as are Dr.Brown's) so I was willing to compromise and try the deluxe gift set listed above.
The idea behind Dr. Brown's bottles is that there's a valve that vents any air to the bottom of the bottle in an effort to help reduce spit-up, colic, burping, and gas, and that creates a vacuum-free system that more closely resembles breastfeeding. My first daughter routinely spit up after eating. My new daughter who is using these bottles almost NEVER spits up. She burps a lot less, too. These are great bottles for what they're designed to do. The nipple is the right flow, the food doesn't come out too quickly or too slowly, etc.
My ONLY gripe with them is cleaning them. There are 6 pieces to each bottle: the bottle itself, the valve, the vent, the nipple, the cover that holds the nipple in place, and the cap. The valve and vent require a special little brush tool (included) to clean them. Therefore, it can take me up to 30 minutes a day to clean bottles and prepare formula (the bottles are actually dishwasher safe, but because I have to clean the valve and vent by hand, I just do the bottles at the same time so all of my pieces are ready at once). But the trade-off is worth it to me; these are a solid product.
Hopefully my baby product endorsements will help steer you in the right direction if you're shopping for pregnancy/baby supplies. There are tons of products on the market, so recommendations are definitely a good way to weed out the good from the bad.
Now, if you'll excuse me, it's feeding time once more!
Thursday, March 17, 2011
The Relevance of the New Reality: Where Have All the Thinkers Gone?
Earlier today, my friend who keeps me in my news, sent me a link to the following article from The New York Times. (You should really get yourself a friend like this--she reads a ridiculous amount of news in the form of magazines, newspapers large and small, blogs, and the like--and then sends me links to anything that may be relevant or interesting to me: vaccination information, day care scandals, organic foods, wine and book reviews, education nuggets, etc. Basically, if the blogging teacher had been someone other than me, my friend would have sent me the link to the story! She's really very thoughtful and it's a fun way to spark conversation.)
J. Steinberg's 3.16.11 article "SAT's Reality TV Essay Stumps Some" (www.nytimes.com/2011/03/17/education/17sat.html) discusses how some versions of the most recently administered SAT had an essay question dealing with reality television which, apparently, caused some students a lot of heartache. According to the article, the prompt included the question, "How authentic can these shows be when producers design challenges for the participants and then editors alter filmed scenes?"
The article also points out that this (and all) SAT questions "are preceded by an explanatory statement -- 'These shows depict ordinary people competing in everything from singing and dancing to losing weight, or just living their everyday lives' -- as well as an assertion: 'Most people believe that the reality these shows portray is authentic, but they are being mislead.'" The intention is to supply students an opportunity not only to demonstrate their writing skills, but also to give them what they need to answer the prompt, regardless of their interest or knowledge on that particular subject.
What struck me, in particular, was this statement: "This particular prompt, Ms. Garcia [executive director of the SAT program] said, was intended to be relevant and to engage students."
More and more, there is a move to make things relevant and engaging to students. Relevance IS important because it does lead to buy-in and engagement, which, in turn, leads to happier students and, in theory, greater achievement because they care about what they're doing. However--and this is something that has bothered me for years--NOT EVERYTHING is going to seem relevant or be engaging to all students. Sometimes in life, things are boring. Sometimes, we're asked to work with ideas we could give two craps about and just wish would go away. We still have to do these things. Sure, we can complain about them being boring or pointless or dumb, but they still have to get done, and done to the best of our abilities. That's life.
But I've noticed in the past 2 years or so that the move in education is so much more toward the dog-and-pony show, and not enough the reality that not everything is going to be fun.
For one thing, students come in to class and expect to be entertained all the time. They want movies, technology, group work. They hate having to read, think, or be creative. Lectures are boring. Background information--which, ironically, may in fact point out the relevance of the lesson to their lives--becomes a perfect time to catch up on calculus homework or some ZZZs.
It isn't that there's anything wrong with movies, technology, or group work. They can be great. That is, if they are being implemented because they are legitimately the most effective way to cover the information. However, let's face it, there's a lot of work that leads up to the effective use of those other things. How can you have a lively discussion about a piece of literature if you've never read it in the first place? How can you dissect a pig if you don't know where to cut and what you're looking at? It's the "boring" background work that sets up the relevancy but that students seem to so resent (and, in turn, ignore and complain about.)
Students aren't the only ones expecting a show--administration wants the dog-and-pony show, too, that often takes place when teachers are observed.
Teachers are routinely observed by their administration to make sure they are doing what needs to get done and keeping up with district standards and implementing best practices and the like. It could be likened to performance reviews in the corporate world.
In theory, when admin drops in to see a lesson, these lessons should be the normal day-to-day type. However, particularly in announcing their date in advance, there's an expectation that something interesting takes place on that day. (And, frankly, if that isn't the true expectation, it's the PERCEPTION, and thus what teachers do out of fear that if they don't, they'll be negatively viewed.) Therefore, even though there are those lessons where teachers have to just have students reading a section or practicing 20 math problems on their own, those are not the lessons administrators want to see. They sometimes say that they're ok with those types of lessons, but since they have to take notes on the visit, they are decidedly not ok with those types of lessons on those days. So teachers have to plan 'fun' lessons even for the administrators for those days. It isn't that the teachers never do these types of lessons, but it's like they have to break out the good china for their guests those days. The expectation is that the good china will be used.
These "expectations" lead to another trend I've been seeing more and more in the past couple of years, which goes back to something not covered deeply in the Times article but which, I suspect, is part of the issue: students expect something specific and classically academic and are very thrown and/or put out when given a choice or asked to think more creatively.
When I was in school, it was a treat when a teacher assigned a project that had choices. For instance, in one English class I had, we were given a 1-page list of options for how to demonstrate our knowledge of the information. We could write a paper, create a brochure, make a movie or skit, write a book or song, give a speech, make a poster, create a board game, draw a comic strip... you get the point.
As students, we were invigorated by the options and the products were usually great because we felt that relevancy as we worked and had that engagement with our product. (We also appreciated the choice.) Some people still went the "standard" route and wrote papers, of course, because that's how they best expressed themselves, but the option was refreshing.
In my first year of teaching, I had students create a newspaper (with several smaller writing samples dealing with multiple topics) instead of writing a formal essay on one over-arching topic. Some students really struggled with this task because it was outside-the-box for them. Some curricula allow for this type of assignment movement, while others do not, so as I started teaching other levels, the obvious opportunities to offer these other choices seemed to dry up.
As the years went on, though, and particularly after I'd taken a really interesting continuing education course on assessment types and strategies, I made an effort to try to vary assessment types to appeal to different styles of learners and to add that originality and creativity to assessments.
I've noticed, though, that in the past 2 years or so, students (for the most part) do NOT find these options refreshing; rather, they seem stressed out by them. Sure, there are still some students who love having a choice, who think that any option that allows them not to write a formal paper is awesome. (Just as some students in the Times article found the reality tv prompt, "a welcome respite.") But more and more, like the student in the article who wanted to cry, they see the other options as exhausting. Create a song? Create a board game? Too much work.
More and more, they OPT to write the paper. (And, trust me, it is NOT because paper writing is how they best expressed themselves...) The rest is just too tiring.
Even when I had students write in a daily journal and assigned a "free write" (for which they could write about whatever topic they wanted to discuss), they complained about it. "What? I hate free writes. I don't know what to write about. Can't you just give me a topic?!"
[They also HATE anything subjective (unless, of course, they earn an "A" on the task; then it's ok and nobody ever questions it as an unfair or mentions it as a potentially subjective assessment.) If it isn't multiple choice or matching (especially with a word bank), they want no parts of it. How are they supposed to study for it? How can I as teacher deem an answer right or wrong? How can I award partial credit? Why that amount and not more? It's not faaaaaaiiiiirrrrr! If it isn't black and white, it tends to infuriate them.]
The struggles and stress students seem to feel at being asked to think creatively or discuss unexpected or subjective subjects is disheartening. So it's really no great surprise to me that some students are having such difficulty with a more "fun"-seeming SAT prompt.
All of this might lead one to set about to answer a similarly phrased prompt: How authentic can these "relevant" tasks be when school systems attempt to design challenges for the participating students and then students cannot alter their set ways of thinking? Or, dare we say, cannot think at all?
J. Steinberg's 3.16.11 article "SAT's Reality TV Essay Stumps Some" (www.nytimes.com/2011/03/17/education/17sat.html) discusses how some versions of the most recently administered SAT had an essay question dealing with reality television which, apparently, caused some students a lot of heartache. According to the article, the prompt included the question, "How authentic can these shows be when producers design challenges for the participants and then editors alter filmed scenes?"
The article also points out that this (and all) SAT questions "are preceded by an explanatory statement -- 'These shows depict ordinary people competing in everything from singing and dancing to losing weight, or just living their everyday lives' -- as well as an assertion: 'Most people believe that the reality these shows portray is authentic, but they are being mislead.'" The intention is to supply students an opportunity not only to demonstrate their writing skills, but also to give them what they need to answer the prompt, regardless of their interest or knowledge on that particular subject.
What struck me, in particular, was this statement: "This particular prompt, Ms. Garcia [executive director of the SAT program] said, was intended to be relevant and to engage students."
(However, despite the attempts at relevancy and engagement levels for students, some of them still complained. One student is quoted in the article as saying, "I kinda want to cry right now" and another as remarking, "I don't watch reality tv at all so it was hard for me. I have no interest in reality tv shows..." What they don't seem to realize is that watching reality tv is not necessary in having an opinion about it. And ironically, most people have stronger opinions on matters they know even less about, and that rarely stops them from weighing in!)
More and more, there is a move to make things relevant and engaging to students. Relevance IS important because it does lead to buy-in and engagement, which, in turn, leads to happier students and, in theory, greater achievement because they care about what they're doing. However--and this is something that has bothered me for years--NOT EVERYTHING is going to seem relevant or be engaging to all students. Sometimes in life, things are boring. Sometimes, we're asked to work with ideas we could give two craps about and just wish would go away. We still have to do these things. Sure, we can complain about them being boring or pointless or dumb, but they still have to get done, and done to the best of our abilities. That's life.
But I've noticed in the past 2 years or so that the move in education is so much more toward the dog-and-pony show, and not enough the reality that not everything is going to be fun.
For one thing, students come in to class and expect to be entertained all the time. They want movies, technology, group work. They hate having to read, think, or be creative. Lectures are boring. Background information--which, ironically, may in fact point out the relevance of the lesson to their lives--becomes a perfect time to catch up on calculus homework or some ZZZs.
It isn't that there's anything wrong with movies, technology, or group work. They can be great. That is, if they are being implemented because they are legitimately the most effective way to cover the information. However, let's face it, there's a lot of work that leads up to the effective use of those other things. How can you have a lively discussion about a piece of literature if you've never read it in the first place? How can you dissect a pig if you don't know where to cut and what you're looking at? It's the "boring" background work that sets up the relevancy but that students seem to so resent (and, in turn, ignore and complain about.)
Students aren't the only ones expecting a show--administration wants the dog-and-pony show, too, that often takes place when teachers are observed.
Teachers are routinely observed by their administration to make sure they are doing what needs to get done and keeping up with district standards and implementing best practices and the like. It could be likened to performance reviews in the corporate world.
In theory, when admin drops in to see a lesson, these lessons should be the normal day-to-day type. However, particularly in announcing their date in advance, there's an expectation that something interesting takes place on that day. (And, frankly, if that isn't the true expectation, it's the PERCEPTION, and thus what teachers do out of fear that if they don't, they'll be negatively viewed.) Therefore, even though there are those lessons where teachers have to just have students reading a section or practicing 20 math problems on their own, those are not the lessons administrators want to see. They sometimes say that they're ok with those types of lessons, but since they have to take notes on the visit, they are decidedly not ok with those types of lessons on those days. So teachers have to plan 'fun' lessons even for the administrators for those days. It isn't that the teachers never do these types of lessons, but it's like they have to break out the good china for their guests those days. The expectation is that the good china will be used.
These "expectations" lead to another trend I've been seeing more and more in the past couple of years, which goes back to something not covered deeply in the Times article but which, I suspect, is part of the issue: students expect something specific and classically academic and are very thrown and/or put out when given a choice or asked to think more creatively.
When I was in school, it was a treat when a teacher assigned a project that had choices. For instance, in one English class I had, we were given a 1-page list of options for how to demonstrate our knowledge of the information. We could write a paper, create a brochure, make a movie or skit, write a book or song, give a speech, make a poster, create a board game, draw a comic strip... you get the point.
As students, we were invigorated by the options and the products were usually great because we felt that relevancy as we worked and had that engagement with our product. (We also appreciated the choice.) Some people still went the "standard" route and wrote papers, of course, because that's how they best expressed themselves, but the option was refreshing.
In my first year of teaching, I had students create a newspaper (with several smaller writing samples dealing with multiple topics) instead of writing a formal essay on one over-arching topic. Some students really struggled with this task because it was outside-the-box for them. Some curricula allow for this type of assignment movement, while others do not, so as I started teaching other levels, the obvious opportunities to offer these other choices seemed to dry up.
As the years went on, though, and particularly after I'd taken a really interesting continuing education course on assessment types and strategies, I made an effort to try to vary assessment types to appeal to different styles of learners and to add that originality and creativity to assessments.
I've noticed, though, that in the past 2 years or so, students (for the most part) do NOT find these options refreshing; rather, they seem stressed out by them. Sure, there are still some students who love having a choice, who think that any option that allows them not to write a formal paper is awesome. (Just as some students in the Times article found the reality tv prompt, "a welcome respite.") But more and more, like the student in the article who wanted to cry, they see the other options as exhausting. Create a song? Create a board game? Too much work.
More and more, they OPT to write the paper. (And, trust me, it is NOT because paper writing is how they best expressed themselves...) The rest is just too tiring.
Even when I had students write in a daily journal and assigned a "free write" (for which they could write about whatever topic they wanted to discuss), they complained about it. "What? I hate free writes. I don't know what to write about. Can't you just give me a topic?!"
[They also HATE anything subjective (unless, of course, they earn an "A" on the task; then it's ok and nobody ever questions it as an unfair or mentions it as a potentially subjective assessment.) If it isn't multiple choice or matching (especially with a word bank), they want no parts of it. How are they supposed to study for it? How can I as teacher deem an answer right or wrong? How can I award partial credit? Why that amount and not more? It's not faaaaaaiiiiirrrrr! If it isn't black and white, it tends to infuriate them.]
The struggles and stress students seem to feel at being asked to think creatively or discuss unexpected or subjective subjects is disheartening. So it's really no great surprise to me that some students are having such difficulty with a more "fun"-seeming SAT prompt.
All of this might lead one to set about to answer a similarly phrased prompt: How authentic can these "relevant" tasks be when school systems attempt to design challenges for the participating students and then students cannot alter their set ways of thinking? Or, dare we say, cannot think at all?
Thursday, March 3, 2011
It Starts at the Top
I am so disgusted right now.
I cannot believe how many teachers have contacted me sharing similar issues and concerns as those I've recently outlined. (This is not what outrages me. I'm glad they're sharing. What is so ridiculous is the commonalities between stories that indicate the deep issues our system faces.)
Teacher after teacher has written in to say things like, "Wow. Your story could have been my own" or "As another teacher who has suffered XYZ, I know where you're coming from..."
Teacher after teacher has written to say that they are now former teachers or have moved to private school or have faced disciplinary action for speaking up.
Teacher after teacher has written to say how they are being undermined and chastised any time they don't "yes" parents, students, and administration to death.
WHY IS OUR EDUCATION SYSTEM SO WARPED? Why are these stories so much the norm and yet the situation is not being fixed but is spiraling more and more out of control???
We live in a country where education is a right. That's fantastic... in theory. However, as with most "rights," there is a point at which we fail to recognize them as something that probably came about as a result of some struggle by someone who came before us, or as something that someone else--at home or abroad--would kill (or die) to enjoy. Rather than appreciating what we have, we take it for granted.
(Case in point: women's voting rights. Women hoped and dreamed and suffered and fought and worked for this right. Yet it's (disgustingly and sadly) not at all uncommon to hear female students today remarking casually, "I can't be bothered with politics. Voting is for boys." Waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa????!!!!)
Other countries in the world value education. They value hard work. They realize that education is the key to larger success. The more they learn and know, the more success their countries (and they themselves) will enjoy in future. Education is an investment into the greater good of humankind. Teachers are valued and respected. Administration oversees the cooperation between school and home. Parents push their kids to be great. Students push themselves to bring pride to their families and countries.
Our own great country, though, has lost its way on this point.
Here, funding is cut. Programs are eliminated. Class sizes are increased. Meaningless testing is revered. Teachers are peons and whipping boys for everything that's wrong. Administrators work for parents. Parents pass the buck to schools. Students pass it farther.
Teacher after teacher has remarked to me, "I just want to reach the kids. I want them to understand the material and to appreciate the lesson." My own goal as a teacher is that I want students to leave class knowing more than they did when they entered, to ask questions, to seek the answers, to think and to try.
But there's usually a 'but' that comes after the statement of the teacher goal. Things like:
*But there's too much other work to do (chaperoning duties, conferences, meetings, grading)
*But they won't listen (students, parents, administration)
*But they won't even try
*But there's no support
*But when I point out the issues, I'm scolded or ignored
*But I'm just too tired to fight anymore
I've spent a lot of time talking about some of the problems with student mentalities today, with parental disengagement and heaping on the teacher blame. But let's face it: if the people at the top would demand more of parents and students and would support their trained staff, maybe these other issues wouldn't spiral so out of control.
Nobody is saying leadership is easy. I'm sure that administrators are being pulled in all directions--they need to answer to voters, school boards, the public, the government, etc--but if there was an expectation from the onset that the learning and functioning of the system was the number one priority, I think everything would run a lot more smoothly for all.
To begin with, people who know nothing about education have way too much say in education.
These people, usually elected officials, read snippets of "the latest" in educational research theories and fancy themselves qualified to make idiotic, counterproductive proposals that will affect the rest of the world. (Come to think of it, this is not necessarily unique to education; government itself can be largely uninformed about much of what they decide. But I digress...) Many times, these theories are financially motivated, and do not consider other important factors or possible solutions.
Bureaucrats come up with their supposed money-saving ideas and push them through the system. They strive for uniformity and high performance, but aren't willing to back that up with anything that means anything. Instead, they try to impose merit pay, curb worker rights, force mass firings, and other ridiculous nonsense in efforts to push the blame off of their own poor choices and onto someone else's shoulders, and act like they're doing the system a big favor. They pass all of those stresses onto the guy below them. Here's what you have to do, school districts. Now do it (even if it makes no sense).
Then the district big shots have further theories on how to make ill-informed decisions a reality and how to please their public (wouldn't want to have to raise taxes or anything), and they pass those along to the building administration.
The building administration mucks things up the rest of the way. Most (if not all?) building administrators started as teachers. At a glance, one would think this would be a good thing for teachers. But somewhere along the way (within 2 years, typically) administrators forget what it was like to be on the front lines. They start "drinking the Kool-Aid" and things go to hell.
Suddenly, their main intent is to avoid pissing anyone off, (by "anyone," of course, I mean the school board, superintendents, parents, and students; nobody else really matters) and to keep the customers happy. (Parents and students learn quickly that this is how things run. And then they exploit it.)
Teachers are told the policies du jour of the school. Sometimes, those policies are even explained. Sometimes, there's an illusion that teachers even have input into them. But that's really just an illusion. Because when teachers try to have input, that usually means that there is bound to be some contention over things and suggestions of how to improve the proposed policy or concerns over issues that may arise, and then the time for teacher input promptly ends. Enough talk; let's move to action! Administration really doesn't tend to like to hear anything that isn't "positive."
So teachers try to make sense of these mandates and carry them out. But, from several accounts I've heard from other teachers, when they encounter confusion or seek administrative clarification, they are told to use--wait for it--their "professional judgment." (There's a laugh!) So they use said judgment, only to encounter some complaint, and then they are promptly called in by the administration for discussions of how they misinterpreted something or should have handled it differently. The administration's half-baked ideas are purposely vague because they don't know how to tell the teachers how to implement them (since, perhaps, they weren't so well-considered as they first seemed and that extra input WOULD have been useful), so what happens is that they leave things undetermined and go back and try to correct problems after the fact.
What a shitty way to run things.
Do we go to restaurants and tell servers: "Hey, take a look at me and guess what I'm in the mood to eat. Use your professional judgment since you know the menu. But if you guess wrong or bring me something I'm allergic to, you're not getting a tip!"? What? That's ridiculous? Exactly.
Teachers, though, are routinely left the unwilling participants of a guessing game that usually ends badly for them. So many teachers say, "Look, just tell me what you want me to do and I'll get it done. But don't make me guess what you want, or tell me one thing one day and then change your mind the next day. And if you say you trust my professional judgment, TRUST IT!"
What does this all amount to? Well, frankly, administrators are an unnecessary step in the education process, like some needless middle-management. They're so concerned about answering to their bosses that they forget what it was like to be in the trenches. Instead of listening to the troops and backing them up, they bark orders from behind closed doors and end up appeasing the other side. They're only creating more turmoil in being removed from the day-to-day of the process.
Education is supposed to be about teaching and learning and bettering society and affording our citizens the opportunity to be and contribute something to society.
If the people at the top would keep that in mind and get their heads out of their asses; if they would take a good, hard look at the glaring deficiencies of the system as it exists; if they would tell parents, "Get it in gear, people, and do your jobs at home and sit down with your kids at the end of the day and help them with their work and listen to the suggestions coming from school"; if they would tell students, "Hey, you're lucky to have this opportunity to learn and we expect you to try and to think and to respect and appreciate the system so you can give back to it later"; if they would put a little more stock into the professional opinions and suggestions of their educators; if they would stop trying to make everything about a bottom line and privatization and big business, THEN we would be on our way to making a change that matters. THEN good teachers wouldn't have to quake in fear at telling the truth, speaking up about reforms that would help, or leave the profession altogether, but could actually reach their goals of making a difference in their students' lives and molding young minds.
But it starts at the top. And, sickeningly, until the mentality shifts up there, nothing is going to change for the better.
I cannot believe how many teachers have contacted me sharing similar issues and concerns as those I've recently outlined. (This is not what outrages me. I'm glad they're sharing. What is so ridiculous is the commonalities between stories that indicate the deep issues our system faces.)
Teacher after teacher has written in to say things like, "Wow. Your story could have been my own" or "As another teacher who has suffered XYZ, I know where you're coming from..."
Teacher after teacher has written to say that they are now former teachers or have moved to private school or have faced disciplinary action for speaking up.
Teacher after teacher has written to say how they are being undermined and chastised any time they don't "yes" parents, students, and administration to death.
WHY IS OUR EDUCATION SYSTEM SO WARPED? Why are these stories so much the norm and yet the situation is not being fixed but is spiraling more and more out of control???
We live in a country where education is a right. That's fantastic... in theory. However, as with most "rights," there is a point at which we fail to recognize them as something that probably came about as a result of some struggle by someone who came before us, or as something that someone else--at home or abroad--would kill (or die) to enjoy. Rather than appreciating what we have, we take it for granted.
(Case in point: women's voting rights. Women hoped and dreamed and suffered and fought and worked for this right. Yet it's (disgustingly and sadly) not at all uncommon to hear female students today remarking casually, "I can't be bothered with politics. Voting is for boys." Waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa????!!!!)
Other countries in the world value education. They value hard work. They realize that education is the key to larger success. The more they learn and know, the more success their countries (and they themselves) will enjoy in future. Education is an investment into the greater good of humankind. Teachers are valued and respected. Administration oversees the cooperation between school and home. Parents push their kids to be great. Students push themselves to bring pride to their families and countries.
Our own great country, though, has lost its way on this point.
Here, funding is cut. Programs are eliminated. Class sizes are increased. Meaningless testing is revered. Teachers are peons and whipping boys for everything that's wrong. Administrators work for parents. Parents pass the buck to schools. Students pass it farther.
Teacher after teacher has remarked to me, "I just want to reach the kids. I want them to understand the material and to appreciate the lesson." My own goal as a teacher is that I want students to leave class knowing more than they did when they entered, to ask questions, to seek the answers, to think and to try.
But there's usually a 'but' that comes after the statement of the teacher goal. Things like:
*But there's too much other work to do (chaperoning duties, conferences, meetings, grading)
*But they won't listen (students, parents, administration)
*But they won't even try
*But there's no support
*But when I point out the issues, I'm scolded or ignored
*But I'm just too tired to fight anymore
I've spent a lot of time talking about some of the problems with student mentalities today, with parental disengagement and heaping on the teacher blame. But let's face it: if the people at the top would demand more of parents and students and would support their trained staff, maybe these other issues wouldn't spiral so out of control.
Nobody is saying leadership is easy. I'm sure that administrators are being pulled in all directions--they need to answer to voters, school boards, the public, the government, etc--but if there was an expectation from the onset that the learning and functioning of the system was the number one priority, I think everything would run a lot more smoothly for all.
To begin with, people who know nothing about education have way too much say in education.
These people, usually elected officials, read snippets of "the latest" in educational research theories and fancy themselves qualified to make idiotic, counterproductive proposals that will affect the rest of the world. (Come to think of it, this is not necessarily unique to education; government itself can be largely uninformed about much of what they decide. But I digress...) Many times, these theories are financially motivated, and do not consider other important factors or possible solutions.
Bureaucrats come up with their supposed money-saving ideas and push them through the system. They strive for uniformity and high performance, but aren't willing to back that up with anything that means anything. Instead, they try to impose merit pay, curb worker rights, force mass firings, and other ridiculous nonsense in efforts to push the blame off of their own poor choices and onto someone else's shoulders, and act like they're doing the system a big favor. They pass all of those stresses onto the guy below them. Here's what you have to do, school districts. Now do it (even if it makes no sense).
Then the district big shots have further theories on how to make ill-informed decisions a reality and how to please their public (wouldn't want to have to raise taxes or anything), and they pass those along to the building administration.
The building administration mucks things up the rest of the way. Most (if not all?) building administrators started as teachers. At a glance, one would think this would be a good thing for teachers. But somewhere along the way (within 2 years, typically) administrators forget what it was like to be on the front lines. They start "drinking the Kool-Aid" and things go to hell.
Suddenly, their main intent is to avoid pissing anyone off, (by "anyone," of course, I mean the school board, superintendents, parents, and students; nobody else really matters) and to keep the customers happy. (Parents and students learn quickly that this is how things run. And then they exploit it.)
Teachers are told the policies du jour of the school. Sometimes, those policies are even explained. Sometimes, there's an illusion that teachers even have input into them. But that's really just an illusion. Because when teachers try to have input, that usually means that there is bound to be some contention over things and suggestions of how to improve the proposed policy or concerns over issues that may arise, and then the time for teacher input promptly ends. Enough talk; let's move to action! Administration really doesn't tend to like to hear anything that isn't "positive."
So teachers try to make sense of these mandates and carry them out. But, from several accounts I've heard from other teachers, when they encounter confusion or seek administrative clarification, they are told to use--wait for it--their "professional judgment." (There's a laugh!) So they use said judgment, only to encounter some complaint, and then they are promptly called in by the administration for discussions of how they misinterpreted something or should have handled it differently. The administration's half-baked ideas are purposely vague because they don't know how to tell the teachers how to implement them (since, perhaps, they weren't so well-considered as they first seemed and that extra input WOULD have been useful), so what happens is that they leave things undetermined and go back and try to correct problems after the fact.
What a shitty way to run things.
Do we go to restaurants and tell servers: "Hey, take a look at me and guess what I'm in the mood to eat. Use your professional judgment since you know the menu. But if you guess wrong or bring me something I'm allergic to, you're not getting a tip!"? What? That's ridiculous? Exactly.
Teachers, though, are routinely left the unwilling participants of a guessing game that usually ends badly for them. So many teachers say, "Look, just tell me what you want me to do and I'll get it done. But don't make me guess what you want, or tell me one thing one day and then change your mind the next day. And if you say you trust my professional judgment, TRUST IT!"
What does this all amount to? Well, frankly, administrators are an unnecessary step in the education process, like some needless middle-management. They're so concerned about answering to their bosses that they forget what it was like to be in the trenches. Instead of listening to the troops and backing them up, they bark orders from behind closed doors and end up appeasing the other side. They're only creating more turmoil in being removed from the day-to-day of the process.
Education is supposed to be about teaching and learning and bettering society and affording our citizens the opportunity to be and contribute something to society.
If the people at the top would keep that in mind and get their heads out of their asses; if they would take a good, hard look at the glaring deficiencies of the system as it exists; if they would tell parents, "Get it in gear, people, and do your jobs at home and sit down with your kids at the end of the day and help them with their work and listen to the suggestions coming from school"; if they would tell students, "Hey, you're lucky to have this opportunity to learn and we expect you to try and to think and to respect and appreciate the system so you can give back to it later"; if they would put a little more stock into the professional opinions and suggestions of their educators; if they would stop trying to make everything about a bottom line and privatization and big business, THEN we would be on our way to making a change that matters. THEN good teachers wouldn't have to quake in fear at telling the truth, speaking up about reforms that would help, or leave the profession altogether, but could actually reach their goals of making a difference in their students' lives and molding young minds.
But it starts at the top. And, sickeningly, until the mentality shifts up there, nothing is going to change for the better.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)