As I look back through the quarter, I’ve found that I’ve both reaffirmed some thoughts about teaching that I came into the class with and have had to reevaluate others. Probably one of the most important insights I gained was fully realizing something I’d only suspected: that, as I wrote earlier in my blog, “we cannot expect the answers to our questions about education to come to us as Platonic forms or Golden Rules that will magically transform education into an incorruptible ideal.” As I further stated: “Our answers will alternately be brilliant and bad - both messy and mutable.” I feel these to be two of the most valuable insights I received because these realizations, that none of our ideas, insights, or techniques will be the magic bullet that solves the problem of how best to teach forever, are, in my opinion, critical for teachers to come to.
This realization is both my hope and my fear. I say hope because it’s simply a wonderful thing to believe that the role of a teacher will never be perfected or statically defined, that there will always be change and growth and learning and new adventures on my journey as a teacher. I say fear because I now realize that the role of a teacher will never be perfected or perfectly defined, and that though I may crave direction, there is no best way or formula that will enable me to get it right every time. Such a formula simply cannot exist. A formulaic approach would only be possible if the classroom and its complement of students fit some scientifically controlled standard - but, thanks to Heraclitus, we all know that the only constant we can expect is change, that we can never step into the same river twice. All systems evolve, and teaching doesn’t occur in a vacuum. While this open ended question of how best to teach terrifies me - I often worry about how badly I can mess up, especially starting out - it’s also an exhilarating prospect. To me, it’s what going to keep teaching interesting.
Everything that I wrote after this initial realization reflects this idea. Most of the inspiring ideas I took from Ayers and other authors’ writings this term were all rough outlines, guidelines, suggestions, and queries - not prescriptions. The hard part is going to be how to know what something feels like without first being able to see it or touch it. Jane asked me several times in response to my earlier blog posts what certain things would look like, and that’s just a difficult question for me to answer, especially right now. My ignorance of how things will actually work feels a bit justified, however, as this term feels like the part of the certification program where I am permitted to theorize and conjecture to my heart’s content. The ability to feel ideas out and limn what certain things might look like in the classroom will come as we progress through the program, or at least I certainly hope it does!
Another conclusion I came to this semester is that I am a very “left” thinker regarding education. Although I still have proclivities that reflect more conservative thought - such as an affinity for concrete assessments and valuations of my work - for the most part I could sit down to dinner with folks like John Dewey, Neil Postman, William Ayers, Lisa Delpit, Vivian Paley, Maxine Green, Margret Buchman, et al. and just thrill to all the ideas and theories they could share with little disagreement. I can’t wait to try out ideas like Delpit’s and Greene’s that aim for understanding and appreciating difference, for using the arts and storytelling. I’m excited to investigate how best to create a caring classroom community and to practice “seeing” my students. I look forward to creating relevant curricula and developing authentic alternative assessments, and exploring project based, interdisciplinary, and experiential learning.
But is this going to happen? I’m beginning to have a few doubts. No Child Left Behind shackled schools to standardized testing and enslaved teachers to curricula which pursued one goal: higher test scores. Now Race to the Top (aka Dash for the Cash) seems to promise more of the same and new standards based accountability for teachers. Where is project-based learning going to fit into this? Where is a spirit of valuing strengths over identifying deficiencies going to find a foothold? I visited a potential main placement school with Jon Howeiler and several of my cohort members a couple of weeks ago. The principal mentioned the “Balanced Literacy” program nearly a half a dozen times in as many minutes. I’m certainly not against the aims of the “Balanced Literacy” program, but I do feel put off by the constraints such a rigid methodology puts on teachers, and I do not like the short shrift it gives to content. Is this really the only recourse for getting those coveted test scores? Is it really balanced literacy if the students can pass a standardized assessment but cannot intelligently evaluate a piece of writing? Further, can any other methodology find a place in a school with such a strong emphasis on the Balanced Literacy program and other scripted curricula? My initial excitement at visiting my potential main placement school turned to disappointment and disillusionment. Is it, perhaps, that all these great ideas are something we just talk about and analyze, not something we can actually do in our own classrooms?
I haven’t completely lost hope, however. I will probably be completing my dyad placement in a new themed K-8 school. This school has an environmental science focus and seems to embrace all the kinds of things embodied in the NOAA-BWET learning experience I shared on my blog. Their environmental mission statement stresses interrelated knowledge, an integrated curriculum, and hands-on learning - all the wondrous things we’ve heard Ayers and others talk about. I am, as you might imagine, thoroughly excited at the prospect of this placement. Also, I know that schools like Thornton Creek, with its Expeditionary Learning model, at least exist, even though our program isn’t currently placing students there. I believe in the possibility that more schools like this will appear as we become more disillusioned with programs like NCLB - since it’s now clear that 100% proficiency is not an attainable target - and Race to the Top. If I should land in a more conservative school, however, I certainly feel as though I have enough flexibility to succeed (so long as we’re not talking arch-conservatism). I’ve certainly gained some new perspectives on alternative viewpoints this term. Though I still may not agree with some of these more conservative views, I can appreciate where others are coming from.
So, if we do find a way to inject more of these holistic ideas that we’ve been reading about into our schools, a key question is the one Jane asked on my blog: “[H]ow do we *know* what students are learning as they do these things and how do we convey that to external audiences who do have a strong interest in what we are doing?” This is a difficult question for me to answer, but I believe alternative assessments such as those mentioned on my blog are sufficient replacements at the individual level. On a group-, class-, or school-wide level, however, it’s difficult to imagine a single test that could accurately measure the achievement level of all. Perhaps a better question is how to convince parents of this truth - that standardized test scores are misleading and plagued by inaccuracy - instead of devising new, ostensibly better, standardized assessments. If we could recognize the very important limitations of what standardized tests can tell us about student achievement, they can tell us a few (qualified) things. But we’ve made test scores the arbiter of too many decisions. I am still thinking about Jane’s question regarding alternatives, and will likely be thinking for a long time. If there was an easy answer, we’d have found it.
Reading Ayers and others with like ideas this term was probably the most enjoyable and affirming aspect of our class, but learning about the dominant model of today’s education - the business model of “free market” schooling - was probably the most eye opening. I did not enter the UW certification program with a full realization of exactly how many outside influences impact what happens in individual classrooms. School levies once seemed to me the ultimate decision regarding our schools, but now I realize that tremendously powerful influences - which operate largely beyond our individual control - control the direction of education. And what I see indeed scares me. As I mentioned in my blog, I believe these influences have created an education system with a “strong dichotomy between knowledge, which is treated as esoteric, and application, which is often seen as of secondary importance.” All these realities - positive and not-so-positive - in education today will affect me and my teaching, and I will need to stay apprised of how external forces continually reshape and reconfigure our educational system. As soon as is practicable in my teaching career, I plan to try and advance as many of the theories and techniques that we’ve studied as I can, because I believe them to be sound and beneficial ideas and ideals.
I know I have a long row to hoe. The first order of business is simply to become a competent (or at least halfway competent, I hope) teacher. I believe UW’s program will provide me with the necessary background material and knowledge I need to succeed (no brown-nosing intended). Actual teaching, however, is the only thing that’s going to give me the opportunity to become a competent teacher. I wish I had an apprenticeship period to look forward to, but barring that, I fervently hope to enter a strong professional community with a supportive environment. I appreciate the good start in evolving my own thinking about teaching that this class has given me.
