Culturally Responsive Teaching

This is a subject that is extremely important to me because it affects my students - English language learners. It has been my experience that a fair number of mainstream teachers are un- or under-prepared to teach immigrant students. As Villegas (who is one of the best professors I have ever had!!!!!!! She's here at MSU!!!!!!!) and Lucas point out in their article, immigrant and minority students are in our classrooms and their numbers are continuing to grow. Because of the dramatic increase in the numbers of these students, teachers need to be better prepared for how to meet their academic needs. It isn't only the ESL teacher who is responsible for educating them. We all need to seek to understand the backgrounds of these students and not think of them from a deficit perspective. Teachers need to model acceptance of different cultures and diversity within the school and they need to acquire some knowledge about second language acquisition so that they can appropriately adapt or modify their instruction.

Caring, Community, and the Teaching Profession

I liked that these three articles were grouped together with the case study about Michael because they really all deal with tightly interwoven threads of education. Without a doubt caring is central. Teachers must care about their students and must teach students to care about life. Administrators have to care about both students and teachers. A community with its own distinct culture is built within each classroom and school and throughout the years a teacher's professionalism is at the heart. When teachers are in what Lynn terms their preservice, induction, competency building, and enthusiasm and growth stages, teachers seem to REALLY care about their work. However, it's unrealistic to expect that there will be no dips in enthusiasm as teachers get burnt out or deal with personal problems. If a genuinely caring community were formed, maybe these teachers in their frustration, stability, or wind-down cycles could be nurtured enough to help them return to a more positive mood about their work. I think its unrealistic to expect an older teacher to have the same stamina and energy as a 23 year old, but I think they might add a different texture or layer of fabric to the mosaic of the school community. The thought of every teacher being in a nearly manic state is freaky. The reality and beauty of life is that everyone is unique - and a calmer - but still caring - demeanor isn't by definition negative. Michael's vice principle should take a little of the advice from the articles we read this week and look at the bigger picture.

Comprehensive School Reform

Erlichson's article discussed three aspects of CSR: 1) it's history & timeline in NJ, 2) why it failed, and 3) what is needed for it to succeed. Ultimately Erlichson identifies reasons for its failure: flawed model selection process; lack of linkages to state policy (NJCCCS); lack of time and resources; lack of support from the district, state, and model developers; and lack of school autonomy. With all of those challenges, it's really no wonder why so many people feel disappointed with CSR. It seems that the glue that might hold an initiative together was missing. Teachers as key stakeholders were not "engaged in the process." Several of Fullan's chapters have reminded us of the need for buy-in. After all, wouldn't CSR be considered an attempt at changing school culture? Change is a process not a product and apparently CSR was lobbed onto failing districts without anyone even calling out, "heads up!" As an outsider, it looks like the state and districts scrambled to select a model without having the time to really know what they were buying. Finger-pointing at this point isn't useful. The important issue now is fixing the problem. Erlichson identifies strong district leadership that works with teachers and principals as a key factor in achieving success. Isolated decision-making is a recipe for failure. Also, since this is a state initiative, a more collaborative working relationship with state workers is necessary. The state has a responsibility to to provide resources and develop capacity-building processes in these districts. (that's beyond the scope of this blog.) With all that said, nothing will change unless the culture of the schools changes and the schools feel some degree of ownership.

Teacher Leadership & Change

Tom's news article showed an example of teacher-centered change, but is teaching utopia possible. I always find it interesting that we hear of these few miracle workers who manage to get a group of teachers together to proactively work on something they feel passionate about: their teaching, but then quickly reflect on our own district situations and say it could never happen. The union mentality seems pervasive. Why do we allow people who work at this job as if it were an hourly labor position to have so much control? I remember feeling little interest in staying more than a few minutes beyond my scheduled shift when I worked at Dunkin' Donuts, Shop-Rite, and Roy Rogers in high school. I knew I would only be paid for the actual time I worked per 1/4 hour, so there was little incentive to work longer. But now as a teacher, I work until the work is done. I'm surprised and disappointed when I hear of people who aren't team players. Anyway, it would also be nice if administrators supported teacher-leader groups and arranged schedules so that this could be a possibility during the school day to accomodate those who won't work any time after school.

The Change Process

Fullan's chapter 4 discusses the three phases of the change process: 1) initiation, 2) implementation, and 3) continuation or innovation (systemic change). Many new-fangled ideas seem to make it to Phase I via a top-down approach and then fizzle out when it comes to practicing the change. Clearly one person having a "great idea" isn't enough; it takes a large number of people to collaborate and work on seeing change proceed.

Fullan mentions the importance of a lead administrator, such as the superintendent. The superintendnet in my district is excellent at making things happen if he supports them. He's also worked in the district for about 25 years, not the 3 years that Professor Domine told us was the norm. In my brief experience I've noticed the union as being the least supportive of initiatives. The idea of the union as protector is wonderful, but sometimes I see it as blocking development because it might mean what it perceives as more work for teachers.

Ultimately, a big part of change comes down to Fullan's identification of culture, or re-culturing. If it isn't driven from the administration, then the only way I see it happening is via professional learning groups - groups of teachers who spread the gospel and demonstrate change's effectiveness. I also agree with Fullan that sometimes the change will evolve through the course of effort. Maybe the original idea won't be the final outcome - sometimes ideas evolve. If the individuals don't feel "ownership," then change is going to be either unlikely or very painful.

The Home and Public Schooling Question

Before reading Romanowski's article, I had never given home schooling much thought. My stereotype of home schoolers was that they were white religious zealots living somewhere in the mountains far away from society; however, clearly this is not the case. NPR even recently had a blurb a week ago about an African American family choosing to home school their children because they were not satisfied with the education they were getting in the local public school.

This week's articles made me think more about the purpose of schooling. What is the aim of education? If it is to help make well-rounded individuals reach their full potential and be able to participate constructively in a democratic society, then there really is no one magical program to meet the needs of every individual child.

The Romanowski article mentioned some reasons for making the choice to home school: arguments about content; improved family relationships; religious/moral/ethic/value training,;and individualized, flexible pedagogy, and improved self-worth/concept - all good arguments. Questionable points that need to be addressed include whether home schooled children are exposed to enough diversity, whether they are being taught by someone qualified, and whether they have access to important resources and enrichment opportunities. This article also raises concerns about the parental stakeholder spoke on the wheel - what are a parent's rights?

The case study about Jane discussed the purpose of grading. Does grading encourage students to learn for the purpose of gaining knowledge? What exactly are we sayig by assigning grades to student work? Do grades motivate students to try to do better? What message are schools sending when they grade students? Are grades really constructive? I'm not sure. If I think of my own experience as a student, I want feedback that lets me know whether I am "getting" something or not. I want to know if I have understood something adequately and correctly. I much prefer dialogue (written comments or suggestion or questions) feedback on my work. I want to know what I can do to improve. I genuinely enjoy learning for learning's sake. The end-in-mind is never numeric.

It does take more time to provide this depth of constructive information to each student. Teachers are already burdened with administrative minutia; how could they take on more work in the current system? Herein lies one problem with education as an institution - it serves the masses, not the individual.

Jones piggy-backs on this issue by discussing how schools serve to prepare students for tests and conformity. I like the way he made an analogy to the movie "Pleasantville's" boring black and white world. Teaching to the test really does lack color and creativity and individuality. Public schools provide a cookie-cutter, one-size-fits-all structure determined by state policy not teachers, parents, or students. There's really little student or teacher ownership, or what Keefe and Jenkins call a "culture of collegiality" in education and learning.

Keefe and Jenkins also identify the importance of learners growing in knowledge and self-awareness which later "leads to wisdom, personal happiness, and collective responsibility." Their idea of "personalized instruction" is similar to some of the home schooling arguments; however, in order to implement such a strategy, class sizes would have to be dramatically decreased and the coordination or organization (small cooperative learning groups) would need some definition as to goals, strategies, and scope.

Education needs to be child-centered, meaningful, and flexible. Why does something that sounds so easy end of being so difficult? I think this leads us back to Fullan's points about culture. In that case, is home schooling just about taking control of one's own learning culture?

More on Change and Culture

Poor Kate. She's got alot on her plate right now. After reading the case study I felt like Kate, overswhelmed and unfocused. An important idea that came up in class was that in situations like these, the first task is to focus and prioritize. Problems can't be solved unless they are first acknowledged and categorized. Once we identify the problems and put them in order of importance, then the work of figuring out a plan of action can be started. Hopefully as a principal she would be able to identify and prioritize independently. Next she needs to be a leader in the sense that she shares the idea/solution-generating with some of her colleagues and teachers. Delegating responsibility would not only help her with time management, it would also empower and educate other teachers.

Professor Domine called this "renewal." We shouldn't feel that we must individually solve each school problem. I think this idea of getting "fresh incite" is essential for all of us. I can think of several examples of teachers who could really use some renewal in their teaching. Continuous learning and sharing ideas stimulates growth and improvement, but what about the teachers who don't think they (or the school) need to change or improve? This is where things get tricky.

Barth's article suggests we first become aware of the culture around us and then discuss the "non-discussables." I agree with Professor Domine's idea of needing excellent interpersonal skills. Life is about people skills. If you can't make friends in the sandbox, you're never going to realize your big sand-castle plans. I would also add that in a democratic setting, we must be prepared for the possibility of being over-ruled. Our approach to change needs to be team-driven.