Cycle Two: What Should Schools Teach? How Should They Be Held Accountable?

            As I reflect on the issue, “What Should Schools Teach?” I think back to my own varied education and teaching. Although I began my formal education in Kindergarten I was being educated from the time I was born. I had an older brother and thus was introduced to what school was early on. When I began my pilgrimage into the realm of formal education I already surpassed my peers academically. I distinctly remember in the K-8 parochial school I attended that I could be absent from school and take a test the day I came back, acing that assessment because I already knew the material. This knowledge was typically given to me with the many books I absorbed or by learning from my older brother. I think about the K-8 education I had and wonder how I am able to survive in the world today. This school valued the traditionalist education. There was a lot of teacher led instruction, note taking, diagramming of sentences, formal algorithms taught during math which were practiced over and over again, and a lack of any group work or independent thinking in the classroom. There was no freedom of expression, thought, or the ability of trial and error; to apply my knowledge in real world experience to see if I failed or triumphed. Dewey would probably have had thoughts of burning the school down!  

            So, what saved me? I believe it was the extracurricular activities I was involved in during this time.  I went to Girl Scouts, dance classes, and baseball practice on a weekly base. It was here that I used my traditionalist education in a real world setting which is reinforced in this website for parents that advocates extracurriculars. I knew in dance that if the teacher said there were six more counts of eight before I was suppose to come back on stage I would be counting to forty-eight or counting to twenty-four, two times.  I knew if the dance teacher asked what would be an even way to divide the twenty-four students into rows that we could have three rows of eight or four rows of six. When I went to Girl Scouts I saw the animal footprints and ecosystems we talked about in science class. Even when I played baseball I thought in the back of my mind as I was running form base to base, “Must go straight must go straight, the quickest way from one point to another is a straight line!” A concept that was ingrained in my mind during geometry class. I am thankful that my extracurricular activities allowed me to validate what I was learning in school and aspire to learn more. I think my extracurriculars saved me and wonder if other participating classmates felt this why. Did I gain higher level thinking skills which allowed me to apply my school knowledge in a nontraditional setting? Are all students wired to think like this, to find the cross over from what they learn in school to home/life? Was I at an advantage from my peers whom did not participate in outside activities, being able to apply my knowledge in a real world setting where I could see the value in it?  

Now, when I transitioned into High School I was faced with an extremely intoxicating mixture of educational philosophy. It was as if a daring mixologist wanted to see what would happen if he/she took the Cardinal Principles and the Committee of Ten values and blended them homogenously together. It was my first week at this college preparatory, private high school when I realized I was in way over my head. You see,  this was a K-12 school where I was considered a new student. I found myself at a great disadvantage in my critical thinking skills and understanding of what I would consider “old school” traditionalist values but still extremely helpful to have. Every 6-8 grader that attended this school was required to take a foreign language, Latin. Now, Latin was considered a necessity to know for the Committee of Ten. The first month at this school I could see the value of knowing Latin. It didn’t matter if I was in Biology, Chemistry, or English class, every teacher would ask the class what a word was and a “Liggett Lifer” (that’s what we called the students that had been attending the school since Kindergarten” would answer, “I believe the word comes from the Latin word  _____ which means ______ therefore I can infer that this word means ______.”  (For more reasons why Latin might prove to be a valuable adversary to other foreign languages please read the artcle, Learning Latin by Cheryl Lowe.)These students had an education that was fit with the best of both words a traditionalist education paired with enough indirect instruction to have strong critical thinking and inductive reasoning skills. I loved my time in high school because of the freedom I felt I was able to take in my education. The teachers guided us in our own educational needs.

I was never told what to think but asked, “What do you think.” It is funny how powerful those words are! Those four words gives a student a sense of empowerment, knowing that a teacher cares, knowing that if you sink they will not let you drown in your educational goals. I believe my high school's curriculum and educational values got it right and would make Dewey proud. If we were learning about the judicial system we were holding court in the classroom. If we were learning about physics we were zooming a go-cart around the track. If we were learning about chemistry we were using chemicals or making peanut brittle on burners. English class was the love of my life. I was never once told what my teacher thought about a book. I had to find my own values and beliefs; something that I think is very instrumental for a student.  I suppose in a way this school had, “a curriculum that (was) traditional in content but diverse in its emphases” (Hirsch, 1988).

I think about where I am as an educator when answering the question, “What Should Schools Teach.” My wonderful high school experience tells me that schools should teach traditionalist methods paired with a deep immersion of content in hands on ways. I know that my students remember more when they are interested and engaged. For instance, the first day we talked about the Alamo my students’ eyes were in pain, even with an interactive power point. They could remember little to know facts the next day. However, when the class was broken up into Mexican fighters led by Santa Anna and Texans (with the help of Davy Crockett and my brother’s old coonskin hat) and a battle was reenacted, leaving only 7 Texans alive, the students were able to tell me a lot more.  

The school I am teaching at leaves me feeling pulled in many directions when I think about HOW I am teaching. I know that we need to cover certain content for each grade, that part is easy. The difficulty lies in the how. I remember almost falling off my chair during my first staff meeting four years ago when I was told that I need to “teach to the test!” something that was engrained in my brain never to do in my education classes. Let’s face it though, with the high stakes testing and our school becoming a focus school, we knew something needed to change.  Students are being tested in a multiple choice format but being taught using higher level Blooms. Something clearly isn’t correlating. Then I think, “If they can write a paragraph about the War of 1812, why can’t they answer multiple choice questions about it? “ Part of the issue I have with high stakes testing is realizing that I really do need to take time to teach my kids how to take a test. Isn’t that a skill in itself or should they already have the inductive reasoning from the higher level thinking we do on a day to day level?

The last issue I want to talk about is this idea of accountability. I don’t like using high stakes testing to hold teachers accountable but understand why it is being done. I also see the many issues that occur because of it. It was very refreshing to read the article, Outside The Core,  where the music teacher states that the music performances are a reflection on what his students learn and how well they were taught. In all honestly, isn’t this what is happening to teachers in my schools now? I know that I am being assessed by how well my students “perform” or grow on their MAP tests they take in the Fall, Winter, and Spring of each year. In fact, my pay and bonuses are determined by my students’ growth. This was an issue for a few years because teachers would “cheat” in a way, knowing that if students’ did not try as hard in the Fall they would look like they grew a lot more in the Spring. One new improvement that my charter school put in place two years ago which I know is a high interest topic for public schools is a teacher evaluation system. This system tracks a teacher on a point system weekly with classroom observations. Now, not only is student growth but also teacher performance factored into my end of the year evaluations. To me, it makes a lot more sense tracking a combination of teacher and student growth to reflect a teacher’s worth and salary than just test scores. It also is an observation which means that their is no standard between teachers because not everyone is being observed by the same person. This article is an interesting read about the new observation protocals teachers are being faced with.  I also know that all I really know is a charter school system and thus have not seen greener pastures. What are your thoughts on how teachers’ should be held accountable?