A Belated Valentine for Teachers

In 40 years of reporting about education for PBS and NPR, I figure that I have watched somewhere between 5,000 and 10,000 teachers at work. I have seen{{1}} an awful lot of really good teaching.

Every once in a while someone asks me, “Who’s the very best teacher you’ve ever met?”  In fact, a retired AT&T executive-turned-teacher asked me that just a few nights ago over dinner, which prompts this Valentine to great teachers everywhere.

I shouldn’t even try to create a list because I know I will leave out dozens {{2}}.  But, throwing caution to the winds, here goes.  On my list, and in no particular order are:

The late Ted Sizer. He taught adults and children, and his influence is still being felt  and ;

Two wonderful teachers, Nancy Welsh and Gary Wieland, at a Department of Defense elementary school on Fort Bragg, North Carolina;

Janis Huira, a teacher in Los Angeles who created SOS, “Society of Students”;

Doug Wood, an inspiring teacher in South Carolina who was light years ahead of everyone when it came to embracing technology; alas, he is no longer in the classroom;

Maria Eby, a first grade teacher in Raleigh, NC. You can watch her at work;

A good friend from graduate school, Larry Aaronson, who devoted his life to teaching young people, most of them working class, how to survive and excel, at a public alternative school in Cambridge.  Among his students were Matt Damon and Ben Affleck;

Kady Amundson, a Teach for America corps member from New Orleans now in her fifth year on the job. You can watch her at work in “Rebirth,” on Netflix;

Bob Gibson, a teacher at Community College of Denver;

John Holt, the writer and teacher (and rebel);

Esther Wojcicki, a high school journalism teacher in Palo Alto whose students work their tails off for her because she trusts them to aspire to the highest standards of journalism; {{3}}

Anthony Cody, a teacher in Oakland who now works with classroom teachers and blogs frequently about the excesses of the ‘Education Deform’ movement.

Johnny Brinson, a veteran teacher in Washington, DC.  All first graders learned to read with comprehension;

The fiery Diana Porter of Woodward High School in Cincinnati;

Fred D’Ignazio, who spent years teaching teachers who were afraid of technology how to embrace it (and to let go of their need to control everything);

A wonderful preschool teacher in France, a long drink of water who brought learning to life for the 3- and 4-year-olds in his program in a poor section of Paris;  and;

A teacher and a librarian in South Orange, NJ, whose names I am withholding because you will meet them on our air in the near future.

I could go on.

Oddly enough, however, my all-time favorite teacher is a man whose surname I no longer know, and whose school location I am not even sure of. In my view, George embodies the best in the business, not necessarily because of how he taught, but more because of what he stood for and how he stood his ground when the going got tough.  Here’s the story, as I remember it.

I met George at a public high school in Maine or New Hampshire in the late 70’s, when I was still at NPR. At the principal’s recommendation, I sat in on George’s ethics class, which I remember being lively and interesting.  Afterwards we had a cup of coffee at my request, because I wanted to hear his story. The Ethics class, he told me, was an elective, one of a bunch of courses that seniors could choose from for their final semester of high school. He had taught it for the first time one year ago.

George did not know that the principal had already told me the basics of the story. So I just said to George, ‘Tell me about the class.’   I set the bar high because it’s an ethics class, he said. I tell the students that I accept only A or B work. Anything else, they get a grade of ‘Incomplete.’  I make it crystal clear to them that they cannot flunk the class– or even pass with a D or a C.

He told me that he did this because he wanted them to approach their lives and careers that way.

How do the kids react, I asked?  They blow it off, of course, he told me, but I make them sign a letter of agreement up front. If they won’t sign, they can’t take the course.  And, he added, he cleared this approach with the principal, who agreed to support him.

Midway through the semester not even half of the kids were doing A or B work, and so he reminded them of the contract they’d signed.  He told me he could see their eyes roll.

And with a few weeks left, many were still well under the A/B bar.  And that’s when it got really interesting, he said. The guidance counselor spotted all those ‘Incomplete’ grades on the interim reports and called those students to his office. He told them their diplomas were in jeopardy because no one with an Incomplete on his/her report card was allowed to graduate.

Panic ensued, he told me.  The students came clamoring to his classroom. “Please just flunk me,” some kids begged.  They told him that they had enough credits to graduate, so an F wouldn’t hurt.  Remember the contract, he responded.  No grade of F, D or C allowed.  Go back and do the work, he advised.

Now, remember that George had obtained the principal’s approval in advance, probably because he anticipated some problems.  But he couldn’t have imagined what happened next. One student with an Incomplete went home and complained to his father, who just happened to be the Chair of the School Board. That gentleman made an appointment to see George.

He came in, George recalled, a mix of bluster and unctuousness.  I’m so proud of my son, George remembers him saying. My boy has been accepted at Colgate, he was voted “Most Likely to Succeed,” he’s interning this summer at the local bank, and he’s spending all his time working on his speech for graduation–he was chosen to be Class Speaker. He’s on track to graduate, so why don’t you just give him a D?  Or even an F, if that would make you feel better.

This is an ethics class, George says he told the father.  And are you certain that’s the ethical lesson you want me to teach your son: that contracts don’t matter, that his word doesn’t matter, and that all that really matters is ‘who you know’?

Chastened, the father went home.  The son did the work.

And, for me, George and his principal became models for the profession.  High standards and expectations; clear rules; choices for students; academic performance as the constant with time the variable; intellectual courage and foresight on George’s part; and solid leadership from the principal.  What’s not to admire?

If any of this this triggers memories of your favorite teachers, please consider honoring them by sharing your stories.    Thanks.

—-
[[1]]1. I have also been the beneficiary of great teaching, notably my high school English teachers, William Sullivan and Rowland MacKinley, at the Taft School in Watertown, Connecticut, Donald Gray at Indiana University, and David K. Cohen at the Harvard Graduate School of Education.[[1]]

[[2]]2. Ever since I began this list, I have been waking up in the middle of the night with new names to add to my list. I am publishing this now so I can get a good night’s sleep![[2]]

[[3]]3. Full Disclosure: Esther is now the Board Chair of Learning Matters, but she was on my list of ‘The Best’ long before we asked her to serve.[[3]]

Justice Denied…

*

Well, old man, I will tell you news of
your son: give me your blessing: truth will come
to light
; murder cannot be hid long; a man’s son
may, but at the length truth will out.
(Shakespeare, The Merchant of Venice)

Does the truth come to light eventually?  Are perpetrators eventually exposed and punished, or at least publicly humiliated?  When the alleged offenses involve government agencies and officials, the law is on the American people’s side.  The federal Freedom of Information Acts of 1966 and 1967 (and subsequent legislation in 1974) make most federal government documents a matter of public record, with exceptions for material that is national-security related, personal, private or ‘deliberative.’ All 50 states and the District of Columbia also have public records laws or their own version of FOIA which allow members of the public, including reporters, to obtain documents and other public records from state and local government bodies.

The District of Columbia’s Freedom of Information Act specifically allows agencies and departments to police themselves.  So, for example, reporters who want to examine documents involving the District of Columbia Public Schools must ask DCPS, which then decides whether or how to honor the request.

The expression “Fox guarding the chickens” may pop into your mind at this point, but my experience with DCPS for nearly two years involves some combination of incompetence, foot-dragging and duplicity. More about that in a minute.

The truth about school cheating is emerging in other cities, including Atlanta, Philadelphia and Columbus, Ohio.

Even in Washington, DC, which remains the epicenter of official denial, we know for certain that, despite her denials, Schools Chancellor Kaya Henderson was fully aware of the cheating allegations. For this revelation, we must thank Jack Gillum{{1}} and Ben Nuckols of the Associated Press.

Here’s a link to the emails (.pdf).

What’s particularly revealing is the spin suggested by the PR department.  Tell everyone that the dramatic test score increases are the result of hard work, experience, and great ‘structures’ and ‘implementation,’ the PR lady advises Henderson.

Please explain by saying the new principal has empowered the leadership team, including the SAM coach, to be data driven and instruction focused.  The coach has a stronger role this year than she has had during the past two years. She knows the model well and has been able to move fidelity much quicker this year.
About Noyes – even though there is a new principal and coach, the staff has had two years under Wayne (Ryan) and a strong SAM coach so they continued the implementation with support from the Program Coordinator.
About Simon – as the SAM coach said, “I finally get it.  We have worked for two years to put structures and procedures in place so  now we can see the results and focus more on instruction.

But the AP’s success notwithstanding, the District of Columbia continues to play fast and loose with the truth and the law, when it comes to releasing public documents having to do with the widespread ‘wrong to right’ erasures on DC’s standardized tests that occurred during Michelle Rhee’s tenure, 2007-2010.

Perhaps Shakespeare is right and ‘truth will come to light’ eventually, but it isn’t easy for it to emerge when one party, in this case the Democrats, control all the levers of power. And it’s even more difficult when the Mayor, the City Council, the current Schools Chancellor and the city’s leading newspaper do not have any real interest in knowing whether principals and teachers received hundreds of thousands of dollars in undeserved bonuses, or whether hundreds of children were inappropriately promoted or denied remedial attention, or whether their school system’s dramatic improvement was a hoax and a lie.

We began seeking the facts two years ago. That’s when Producer Mike Joseloff and I filed our first Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request with the District of Columbia Public Schools. We were–and are–seeking correspondence between Rhee’s chief data person and the outside expert she hired to review test data showing widespread erasures on the District’s standardized test during Rhee’s first year on the job.

Between that March 2012 letter and today, we have filed several dozen requests, which were denied or dismissed, and subsequent appeals.

How seriously did DCPS consider our request for email between Rhee’s data person and Fay “Sandy” Sanford, the outside consultant hired to review erasure information between October 1, 2008 and March 1, 2009?  Did DCPS follow the letter and spirit of the law?

Here are five examples. You decide.

1.  In November 2012 it informed us that no communication could be found. On appeal, however, we learned that DCPS searched only in 2008.  The Mayor’s General Counsel directed DCPS to search again.

2. Which it did, again turning up nothing.  This time, however, it searched for the words “Sandy AND Sanford” and “Fay AND Sanford,” but not his email address. Did the searchers expect those words to appear in an email address, or were they designing the search so it would prove inconclusive?   On appeal, the Mayor’s General Counsel ordered DCPS to search again.

3. In May 2013 DCPS misspelled the email address it was supposed to be searching for.

4. The law requires DCPS to act expeditiously, but on one occasion DCPS allowed six months to elapse between our request and its response, even though the Mayor’s Deputy General Counsel had ordered DCPS to resume its search.

5. On July 5, 2013, DCPS reported that it could not find any electronic communication between McGoldrick and Sanford.  Why?  Because, believe it or not, DCPS reported that it had searched “within the subject line,” not the address or CC lines!

Again we appealed, and in August the Mayor’s Office told DCPS to take another look, this time in the right place.  Lo and behold, this time DCPS found more than 400 emails.

Is this a track record of incompetence, foot-dragging or duplicity?  Should the people in charge be held accountable for breaking the law or fired for incompetence?  Neither has happened apparently, because I am still communicating with the same people today that I began writing to two years ago.

Only once in nearly two years has the District released the requested material in a timely fashion, Sanford’s invoices for about $200,000 in consulting work.

When DCPS informed us in December that it had ‘found’ 430 emails from the period we requested, it released only 276.  About 99% of those it released are group emails, where either DC’s data person or the outside expert were among the recipients. Most are trivial, such as this note from the business manager.

Subject: Great News
Sandy,
Today, I spoke with our accounting department and they explained to me that your check will be issued and mailed to you on March 9, 2010. If you have any additional concerns, please contact me.
Thanks,
BWP

And DCPS sent us a few like this:

What the public is entitled to read are the other 154 emails, correspondence which we believe include communications between DCPS’s Erin McGoldrick and Dr. Sandy Sanford regarding his review of the erasure data.  We believe these may shed more light on just how much Chancellor Rhee knew of the strong likelihood that some of her principals were responsible for the erasures, including men and women she had just given bonus checks totaling hundreds of thousands of dollars.

However, DCPS seems to have redacted every piece of one-to-one email correspondence between Ms. McGoldrick and Dr. Sanford that occurred between August 2008, when State Superintendent Deborah Gist first informed Chancellor Rhee of the suspicious erasures, and January 30, 2009, the date of Sanford’s confidential memo warning DCPS that the evidence pointed to widespread erasures by school principals.

The DCPS FOIA statute allows material that is personal or ‘deliberative’ to be withheld, but are we supposed to believe that all the email between the two during that time was either ‘deliberative’ or ‘personal’ in nature?

It is simply not credible to assert that the two did not correspond, because we know that Sanford routinely sent McGoldrick his invoices, which we have acquired through FOIA.

1. Sanford billed McGoldrick for $13,387.50 for work done between August 21 and September 7, 2008.
2. Sanford billed DCPS for an additional $5,397.50 for work done between September 21 and October 20, 2008.
3.  He billed DCPS for $5,737.50.50 for work done between October 8 and December 31, 2008.
4. In November 2008, Sanford traveled to DC for 5 days of work at DCPS, for which he was paid $6,000.
5. McGoldrick brought Sanford to DC  on January 26th, 2009, for 5 days, work which culminated in the confidential memo.

It is noteworthy that none of these invoices specify the nature of the work. That is a striking contrast to Sanford’s later invoices that describe in detail the ‘professional development,’ ‘new teacher orientation,’ or ‘principal training’ Sanford provided.  It seems reasonable to suspect that their emails would have touched upon the analysis he was doing.

We know that McGoldrick relied heavily on Sanford and would have turned to him for guidance on the erasures.  In his 4-page confidential memo he addresses several aspects of the problem, including its substance, the implications of the public becoming aware of the problem, the possible legal challenges if DCPS attempts to ‘claw back’ bonuses awarded to principals and teachers, and strategies for delaying OSSE.  Did McGoldrick delineate those tasks?  What did she say when she informed him of the problem in the first place, or when she sent him the data files? Such emails would not be ‘deliberative’ in nature, nor would they qualify as ‘personal.’

DCPS’ initial response to OSSE’s memo about the erasures was to ask for a second analysis by a second organization.  Did this suggestion come from Sanford in an email to McGoldrick?  That would not be ‘deliberative’ or ‘personal’ either.

On January 7, 2009, McGoldrick asked OSSE for an extension before reporting its findings regarding the erasures.  Did Sanford suggest that in an email?  McGoldrick’s long report to OSSE at the end of the extension, dated February 28, 2009, adopts the suggestions made by Sanford in a confidential memo of January 30, 2009 (in which he offers to help with the response). Are we to believe that the two did not exchange any emails about this delaying action?  No congratulatory emails when the probe was shelved?

Frankly, DCPS’ response to our efforts to bring the correspondence to light, which began more than 18 months ago, seem to us to be part of a continuing effort to cover up embarrassing and inappropriate behavior.  This pattern of behavior violates the spirit and the letter of FOIA and is a fundamental violation of democratic principles.  Sunshine is essential to democracy, but DCPS seems determined to keep the behavior of a key employee hidden away in the dark, an action which keeps the public from knowing the truth.

Why this matters: We know from Sanford’s memo that Rhee knew how serious the erasure situation was. We suspect that the coverup and non-investigations were carefully orchestrated as Sanford suggested, but certainly not by McGoldrick or Sanford.

Will the truth emerge eventually?  In the District of Columbia, a 1-party system makes it easy for those in power to keep the lid on, and that’s what’s happening.  By way of context, consider the benefits of a system where political power is contested, as in New Jersey:

We know a lot about the politically-motivated closing of access lanes to the George Washington Bridge.  Abuses of power are harder to hide when there’s a 2-party system, because 1-party rule invites abuses of power.  The New Jersey case also proves that a single subpoena is more effective than hundreds of FOIA requests.

On January 15, 2014, I filed another FOIA, this one an appeal with the Mayor’s Office. To date, the Mayor’s Office has not responded.

—-

[[1]]1. Jack was one of three USA Today reporters who first exposed the widespread erasures that occurred when Rhee was Chancellor.[[1]]

Teaching With Heart

I had planned to write about my 19-month (and counting) struggle to pry loose documents from Washington, DC, and the coverup of the cheating that went on there.

But then I began reading the galleys of Teaching with Heart.  It’s a collection of poems that inspire, motivate (or shore up) teachers as they go about their work.  Accompanying each poem is a paragraph or two by the teacher who submitted it.

I had agreed to write a blurb for the book but put off the reading until the last moment.  Up against the deadline, I began reading early this morning.  Hours–and a few tears–later, I emerged, feeling stronger personally–and more optimistic about education’s future.

Dozens of poems spoke to me, but none so much as “Purple,” by Alexis Rotella.

Purple

In first grade Mrs. Lohr
said my purple teepee
wasn’t realistic enough,
that purple was no color
for a tent,
that purple was a color
for people who died,
that my drawing wasn’t
good enough
to hang with the others.
I walked back to my seat
counting the swish swish swishes
of my baggy corduroy trousers.
With a black crayon
nightfall came
to my purple tent
in the middle
of an afternoon.

In second grade Mr. Barta
said draw anything;
he didn’t care what.
I left my paper blank
and when he came around
to my desk
my heart beat like a tom tom.
He touched my head
with his big hand
and in a soft voice said
the snowfall
how clean
and white
and beautiful.

—Alexis Rotella

“Purple” was suggested to the editors by Leatha Fields-Carey, a high school English teacher in Smithfield, North Carolina (a state that is going out of its way to be unkind to its public school teachers).

Here’s what Ms. Fields-Carey wrote about the poem: “I first ran across this poem when my enthusiasm for teaching was waning. The passion and excitement that I had initially felt for teaching and reaching individual students was melting away, being replaced by the sensation that daily I was facing a formless, nameless mass of humanity.
Teachers have incredible power to hurt and to heal. But often we get overwhelmed by the monotony of the day-to-day life of the teacher—the paperwork, the grading, the endless forms to fill, the reports to file, the lunchroom duties, the bus duties, the report cards to send home.  We forget that the most important part of what we do is building and healing human beings, one at a time.
When I read this poem, I cried. It brought back into sharp relief what I had been forgetting: that teaching is an expression of love. Period.
So many times students come to us wounded—by parents, by former teachers, by peers, by the system, by life. Some wounds are visible and some are not, but all of them could use a tender touch of understanding and compassion.
Much as Michelangelo saw the angel in the marble and carved until he set it free, Mr. Barta discerned the snowfall hidden in the paper left blank in an expression of resentment and frustration. I have a sign on my desk that reads ‘See the snowfall.’ It serves as a reminder of my most important job as a teacher—and as a human being.


Teaching with Heart
won’t be available (from Jossey-Bass) until mid-May, but you might want to reach out to your local bookstore now to make sure it puts aside a copy for you.

Refereeing a Rigged Fight

When I read “A Battle over School Reform: Michelle Rhee versus Diane Ravitch” two weeks ago, I felt as if I had entered a time warp.  This article couldn’t be new, I remember thinking that it must have been written a few years ago.  But no, it is dated January 2014, suggesting to me that the author, John Buntin, relied on old news, inaccurate data and a stack of clichés.  “Rhee vs. Ravitch” is his hook. Indeed, he writes:  “Reading Rhee (sic) and Ravitch’s books together is like watching two accomplished pugilists fight a 15-round bout…. Think of this as an attempt to score the fight.” In one corner, Buntin has Rhee representing ‘education reform.’ And in the other corner, Ravitch represents those who oppose reform–a semantic choice by the author that seems meaningful.  He ignores Washington’s erasure scandal that calls into question Rhee’s claims of academic success, and he fails to mention the current conditions of public schools in Washington, two points that readers have a right to know about.

Buntin hardly seems like an impartial fight judge. He writes of Rhee’s ‘most impressive accomplishments’ while she was in Washington; however, his tone when discussing Ravitch is markedly different.  She writes ‘with grim determination’ and ‘like General Sherman marching to the sea,’ he notes.

His real goal, we discover at the end of the piece, is not to referee a Rhee-Ravitch bout but to find a new heavyweight champ.  And so he urges us “….to step back from Rhee and Ravitch’s specific disagreements and consider the ingredients of educational excellence from a different perspective. That is precisely the strategy pursued by journalist Amanda Ripley in her new book, The Smartest Kids in the World (And How They Got That Way).

Rhee and Ravitch are both wrong, he says, although–because Rhee believes that teacher quality matters (and Ravitch doesn’t?)–Rhee is apparently less wrong than Ravitch: “In the world described by Ripley, Ravitch’s complacency is misguided. But so is the reformers’ narrow focus on standardized testing. The best way forward is likely more nuanced, and more complicated. {{1}}

Upset by his factual errors and the central argument of the essay, I wrote Mr. Buntin, as follows:

Dear Mr. Buntin,

I have a couple of observations about your Rhee/Ravitch piece that I hope you don’t mind my sharing. The first is a minor quibble about the firing scene. We filmed that as part of my NewsHour coverage–we followed the young Chancellor for her entire three years in DC (12 NewsHour reports).  Only later did we include it in our film for Frontline.  I allowed Oprah to use the footage, and Davis Guggenheim appropriated it without our permission for “Waiting for ‘Superman,'” although he did eventually pay us for using it.
My second objection is substantial and has to do with Rhee’s record as Chancellor. Not long after she departed, USA Today broke the story of widespread erasures on the DC-CAS, the city’s standardized test, during Rhee’s first and second years.  We covered that in our Frontline film. However, AFTER the film I obtained a copy of a confidential memo that made it clear just how much she knew of the erasures and how she failed to act.  That is summarized here:  http://takingnote.learningmatters.tv/?p=6232
While “Rhee vs. Ravitch” is a compelling headline and a sexy feature, it’s a roadblock to understanding American education.  Ravitch is a passionate advocate who argues from facts.  In contrast, Rhee’s policies were tried, and they failed. By almost every conceivable measure, the DC schools are no better than before her tenure. In key areas of student attendance, graduation rates, and principal and teacher turnover, they are worse.  Central offices in abutting districts have shrunk, but DCPS’ has grown considerably. Even DC’s most recent gains on NAEP, which began 12-15 years BEFORE Rhee’s tenure, seem to have been fueled by an influx of better-educated families (gentrification) and quality pre-school. Here’s a summary: http://takingnote.learningmatters.tv/?p=6490
I urge you to revisit this story.  There is a titanic struggle going on in public education, one that is complex and deserving of coverage.  Using Michelle Rhee as symbolic of ‘one side’ is misleading, unfortunately.  Wendy Kopp and Teach for America might better represent one side and Ravitch another, although the issue has more than two sides.

Thanks for reading this,
John

He has not replied.

The magazine that published Mr. Burton’s article, GOVERNING {{2}}, describes itself as “the nation’s leading media platform covering politics, policy and management for state and local government leaders. Recognized as the most credible and authoritative voice in its field, GOVERNING provides nonpartisan news, insight and analysis on such issues as public finance, transportation, economic development, health, energy, the environment and technology.”

The magazine, which first appeared in 1987, says its core readers are “elected, appointed and career officials in state and local government, including governors, mayors, county executives, city and county council members, state legislators, executives of state and local agencies, and those holding professional government positions…”

Those men and women ought to have accurate information. Perhaps they get it when the magazine reports on transportation, public finance, energy and other key issues, but GOVERNING let its readers down when it published Buntin’s superficial piece about public education.

GOVERNING claims to have 85,000 readers. This blog does not always reach that many readers every week, so I hope you will share this post.

Superficial opining like Mr. Burton’s muddies the waters, not a good thing at a time when clarity is needed.

—-
[[1]]1. Here’s the link, if you’d like to check it out for yourself:
http://www.governing.com/topics/education/gov-michelle-rhee-versus-diane-ravitch.html [[1]]

[[2]]2. For more about the magazine and its publisher, the Governing Institute, go here: http://www.governing.com/about [[2]]

Take This Test (Please)

These five test questions may explain why American students score lower than their counterparts in most other advanced nations.  The first is a sample problem offered by the University of Wisconsin/Oshkosh {{1}} to high school math teachers. It was designed with the stated goal of ‘Closing the Math Achievement Gap’:

Jack shot a deer that weighted (sic) 321 pounds. Tom shot a deer that weighed 289 pounds.   How much more did Jack’s deer weigh then (sic) Tom’s deer?

Basic subtraction in high school?  The second comes from TeacherVision, part of Pearson, the giant testing company {{2}} :

Linda is paddling upstream in a canoe. She can travel 2 miles upstream in 45 minutes. After this strenuous exercise she must rest for 15 minutes. While she is resting, the canoe floats downstream ½ mile. How long will it take Linda to travel 8 miles upstream in this manner?

While the second problem does not contain language errors, its premise is questionable.  Will some students be distracted by Linda’s cluelessness?  Won’t they ask themselves how long it will take her to figure out that she should grab hold of a branch while she’s resting in order to keep from floating back down the river?  What’s the not-so-subtle subtext? That girls don’t belong in canoes?  That girls are dumb?

And I found this on a high school math test in Oregon:

There are 6 snakes in a certain valley.  The population doubles every year. In how many years will there be 96 snakes?
a. 2
b. 3
c. 4
d. 8

Remember that these are math problems for high school students!  They require simple numeracy at most, and “Snakes” can be solved by counting on one’s fingers.

Next is an example of what lies ahead for 8th graders–not high school students–under the new Common Core National Standards, which are supposed to introduce much needed ‘rigor’ to the curriculum.  This question (without illustrations!) is from New York State’s sample tests.

Triangle ABC was rotated 90° clockwise. Then it underwent a dilation centered at the origin with a scale factor of 4. Triangle A’B’C’ is the resulting image.  What parts of A’B’C’ are congruent to the corresponding parts of the original triangle?  Explain your reasoning.

Did you go ‘Huh?’ I did.

The fifth and final question was given recently to 15-year-olds around the world on a test known as PISA (for Programme in International Student Assessment):

Mount Fuji is a famous dormant volcano in Japan.  The Gotemba walking trail up Mount Fuji is about 9 kilometres (km) long. Walkers need to return from the 18 km walk by 8 pm.
Toshi estimates that he can walk up the mountain at 1.5 kilometres per hour on average, and down at twice that speed. These speeds take into account meal breaks and rest times.
Using Toshi’s estimated speeds, what is the latest time he can begin his walk so that he can return by 8 pm?

For simplicity, let’s call these problems ‘Deer/Canoe/Snakes,’ ‘Triangles’ and ‘Fuji.’  Those high school problems are far too easy.  With enough practice, just about anyone can solve undemanding problems like that and, consequently, feel confident of their ability.

Note that ‘Fuji’ is not a multiple-choice question.  To get the correct answer to this engaging question, students had to perform a number of calculations.  The correct answer (11 AM) was provided by 55% of the Shanghai 15-year-olds but just 9% of the US students.

Speaking of confidence, the PISA results reveal that American kids score highest in ‘confidence in mathematical ability’ despite underperforming their peers in most other countries.  Is their misplaced confidence the result of problems like ‘Snakes’ and others of that ilk?

School is supposed to be preparation for life, but spending time on problems like ‘Deer/Canoe/Snakes’ is like trying to become an excellent basketball player by shooting free throws all day long.  To be good at basketball, players must work on all aspects of the game: jump shots, dribbling, throwing chest and bounce passes, positioning for rebounds, running the pick-and-roll and—occasionally–practicing free throws.

Come to think of it, basketball and life are similar. Both are about rhythm and motion, teamwork and individual play, offense and defense.  Like life, it can slow down or become frenetic. Basketball requires thinking fast, shifting roles and having your teammates’ backs.  Successful players know when to shoot and when to pass. As in life, failure is part of the game.  Even the greatest players miss over half of their shots, and some (Michael Jordan!) are cut from their high school teams.  And life doesn’t give us many free throw opportunities.

But if school is supposed to be preparation for life, why are American high school students being asked to count on their fingers?  That mind-numbing and trivial work is the educational equivalent of shooting free throws.

Now to ‘Triangles,’ which represents education’s brave new world of the Common Core, adopted by 45 states and the District of Columbia. In this new approach, students will be exposed to higher and more ‘rigorous’ standards. The hope is that the curriculum, locally developed to reflect the standards, will challenge and engage students.  I suggest you read ‘Triangles’ aloud.

Triangle ABC was rotated 90° clockwise. Then it underwent a dilation centered at the origin with a scale factor of 4. Triangle A’B’C’ is the resulting image. What parts of A’B’C’ are congruent to the corresponding parts of the original triangle?

Are you feeling ‘engaged’?  Imagine how 8th graders might feel. If ‘Deer/Canoe/Snakes’ are the educational equivalent of practicing free throws, then solving problems like ‘Triangles’ is akin to spending basketball practice taking trick shots like hook shots from midcourt—another way not to become good at the sport.  I worry that questions like ‘Triangles’ will impede the understanding and appreciation of math for the 99% who are not destined to become mathematicians.

If our schools persist with boring, undemanding curricula, our kids will be stuck at the free throw line, practicing something they will rarely be called upon to do in real life.  If, however, in the name of the Common Core’s ‘rigor’ we give our kids lifeless questions like ‘Triangles,’ schools may end up turning off the very kids they are trying to reach.

—-

[[1]]1. Wisconsin source: http://www.uwosh.edu/coehs/cmagproject/many_word/documents/1_Dear_Hunting_Problems.pdf The web page notes that ‘slightly more difficult problems are coded with a shamrock/diamond.’  Here’s one of those: “In the first half of a recent game, the Packers scored 14 points on touchdowns and 9 points on field goals. In the second half, they continued scoring, and they ended the game with 43 points. How many points did they score in the second half?”  [[1]]

[[2]]Pearson source: https://www.teachervision.com/tv/printables/botr/botr_140_3-3.pdf [[2]]

It’s Greek to Me

According to the Journal of American Medicine in 2000, somewhere between 44,000 and 98,000 people die every year because of problems they developed while under a doctor’s care.  The Greek term for ‘doctor-caused’ problems is Iatrogenesis.  (By the way, Wikipedia ups the ante, asserting that 225,000 deaths every year have iatrogenic causes, but it includes pharmacists, psychiatrists, psychologists and therapists among the killers.)

I raise this point because it seems to me that the widespread cheating in American schools is the result of the educational equivalent of iatrogenesis.  It is educator-caused, the result of threats and intense pressure to raise scores on standardized tests.  Take your pick of cities where some principals and teachers have cheated to raise student scores, and I think you will find that the ‘doctor’ at the top put intense pressure on his or her minions to “perform or else.”

The ongoing trial in Atlanta is the poster child, of course.

If Washington, DC, had courageous political leadership and a strong newspaper like the Atlanta Journal-Constitution, I have no doubt that the DC students whose scores were falsely inflated would be getting an apology and perhaps some remedial compensation, as the Atlanta students will soon receive. My colleagues at Learning Matters and I have carefully documented what I called “Michelle Rhee’s Reign of Error” there.  In other cities (Columbus, OhioBaltimore; El Paso, Texas, et cetera), adults have been caught breaking the rules.

(Many others have resisted the pressures and temptations to cheat, and their honesty should be acknowledged. I am personally grateful to the few who have blown the whistle.)

Because, like Mr. Shakespeare, I have “small Latin and less Greek,” someone else will have to construct a word to mean ‘arising from an educator’ to describe what has been happening in our schools.  “Edugenesis,” perhaps?

Unlike Iatrogenesis, “Edugenesis” doesn’t literally kill people.  However, it has ruined careers and blighted lives.

On a positive note, I sense the tide is turning, and so perhaps a new coinage is no longer necessary.  The backlash against excessive testing seems stronger than ever, and many knowledgeable people are recognizing that our system uses standardized tests to evaluate teachers, while other countries use them to assess students (which is what they are designed to do).  The AFT’s Randi Weingarten has just turned her back on using VAM (value-added measurement) to assess teachers.  Respected superintendents like Josh Starr of Montgomery County, Maryland, have called for a moratorium on high-stakes testing during the transition to the Common Core.  The tireless Diane Ravitch, once a lone voice crying in the wilderness about the tyranny of machine-scored testing and the war on teachers, now has 70,000 Twitter followers and countless readers of her blog.

Will the backlash against excessive testing bring down with it the national effort to raise academic standards, collateral damage as it were?  These are interesting times, to be sure.  And hopeful too……