Education's greatest adversary is Poverty

2008 was a life-changing year for me. My husband’s mom passed away from terminal cancer, I started with Teach for America, and I became a teacher. Of those three things, becoming a teacher was the most life-altering experience – I would never be the same person again. Melodramatic, I know. While I sound like a sappy introduction to a personal teaching memoir, it’s the truth. My entire core transformed when I stepped into that fourth grade class for the first time. Up to that point I was oblivious.

I grew up in the middle-class. I attended good public schools. I had three meals a day, sometimes more. I had parents who helped me with my homework and guided me through the formative years of my development. When I was sick, I went to the doctor. When I was hungry, I ate. The realities of my students in 2008 were nonexistent to me, they were a nightmare I only saw in movies or read in books. The only glimpse I ever had of this foreign poverty concept was my friend’s experience. She quickly became a permanent member of our family. I recall my parents paying (out of pocket) for her health care needs when that luxury wasn’t available to her. I remember my mom buying groceries so they could have food for the week. As a young girl, this was the closest I came to seeing the affects of poverty. Again, still a distant reality; one I did not quite grasp until recently.

Poverty is real... Currently, there are 16.4 million children living in poverty. More disappointing is that children under the age of five are the poorest age group in America. While Republicans and Democrats argue about accountability, our policies are only affecting the most vulnerable population in our country, children. Unquestionably, many hardworking Americans are troubled by the corruption within the welfare system. Our political arguments are in response to adult error yet the children are the ones who suffer. As I walked into that fourth grade room and saw 26 sets of eyes starring back at me and I knew that their struggles had nothing to do with the poor choices they made. 

I want to thank my parents. When they observed poverty first-hand, in my friend’s situation, blame wasn’t placed. My parents realized the best way to change my friend’s circumstances was to do something about it. Casting blame on incapable parents will not eliminate poverty, doing something about it will. My friend is graduating from college, is in a healthy relationship and on her way to a life that breaks the cycle she was born into. My parents are my heroes. They remind me everyday that there is no such thing as “us” and “them," just a community...just "us."

In my first year of teaching I learned a very valuable lesson, that poverty affects learning. America ranks 17^th in reading scores, 23^rd in science and 31^st in math. Additionally, we rank the worst in relative child poverty. A child’s socio-economic status irrefutably affects their academic success. The current education debate is teacher responsibility of student gains and the level of accountability that is necessary. Somehow, policymakers have come to believe that external factors are less significant than the caliber of teacher standing at the front of the classroom. If a student does not meet standardized test goals it is the teacher’s ineffectiveness and lack of skill that made it so.

In my first year of teaching, my students met those standardized test goals. What did I do to ensure student success? I fed my students, gave them necessary hygiene products, took them to get proper healthcare, clothed them, handed out Christmas gifts and filled their poorly stocked home libraries with books. I filled in all the external gaps.

As an effect, after two years I was burnt out and emotionally depleted. Every year I would adopt 26 new students, which I fought tooth-and-nail for, to give them an environment that defied the true impact of their poverty. I realized that what I did as one educator, in my class, was not sustainable. After they left my walls and moved onto another year, another teacher (with different strategies) those gains might dissipate as poverty again took hold. Poverty eventually won out. I was a good teacher and I worked relentlessly everyday to defy the gravity of their socio-economic status. Was it my lack of pedagogical knowledge and skill that caused my student’s to fail, no. It was the lack of a stable home that kept them from doing their homework. It was the inability to attain healthy food and proper healthcare that kept them from attending school regularly. This was the hardest lesson to learn as a new teacher in an urban school, I wasn’t strong enough to conquer this reality in my student’s lives. I alone was not going to be the cure for my kid’s poverty. Even more troubling was the reality that no matter how hard my students tried to overcome the circumstances they were born into; the odds weren’t in their favor.

Poverty wasn’t used as an excuse in my classroom. However, in order to accomplish this I had to adopt the same philosophy my parents did – fill the gaps. I had to shoulder their problems and struggles, extinguish them, and only then could I begin the teaching process. Only then was my classroom free from the chains of poverty. I was exhausted, emotionally volatile…a hot mess. Ending poverty in my classroom was no easy fete; it was impossible for one person to do alone.  

My concern with our current policy agenda in education is that the wrong issues are being fixated on. While the Department of Education and State Education Agencies are focusing on teacher factors in student success, research shows that this is only a small fraction of the equation. Linda Darling-Hammond wrote, “Research reveals that gains in student achievement are influenced by much more than any individual teacher.” I propose spending the millions of dollars that will be allocated to the Common Core be spent instead on teacher preparation programs. I believe that providing additional funds that will go directly to students can make a larger impact than the present-day focus of checks and balances on teachers.

If studies have found that poverty and child development are directly related, than resources need to be invested in early education programs, healthy food initiatives and placing the most qualified educators in urban classrooms. It’s money well spent and will begin to change the face of student success in the classroom. I also recommend that the state education agencies need to encourage additional school partnerships with community programs and businesses. If communities are not investing in their children’s future, change will not happen.

Federal programs are also a crucial component in alleviating child poverty in America. Providing food, healthcare, necessary mental health treatment and quality schools with well-trained teachers, are essential in moving towards greater academic successes. To believe that all education issues will be solved with the creation of a new national curriculum and the punishment of teachers for low-test scores is futile. Education will not improve until the problem of child poverty is addressed. Change will not ensue until society recognizes the need and has the desire to make meaningful reforms that transcend the “us” and “them” accountability measures.

**If you would like to read more about child poverty and education, as well as the facts I shared in this post, please check out the Children’s Defense Fund’s 2012 That State of America’s Children Handbook. Additionally, read Linda Darling-Hammond’s article from Education Week titled, “Evaluating Teacher Evaluation.”

Test Scores got Nothing on You

The first cardinal rule of teaching is to encourage and inspire.  Kids need to KNOW that they are worth something, capable of anything. When I think about the role my past teachers played in my life, I realize the greatest impact was their confidence in me. From that I learned to have confidence in my abilities too. This past summer I spent it in Washington D.C. working alongside a man I now fondly consider my “adopted uncle.” While D.C. is a big and scary world full of people trying to prove themselves, Mr. F continued to speak encouragement into my heart. When I handed in a written brief and was terrified that it would not be good enough, Mr. F beamed with confidence in my abilities and intelligence. That, for me, is a true educator. It’s not about number facts or reading levels, it’s about reminding the children how amazing they are and encouraging them to find that truth within themselves. From his encouragement and assurance, I too began to feel confident in my abilities to be a policymaker and a force to be reckoned with. This great educator made a tremendous impact in the way I viewed my place in this world.

I scored a 1,000 on my SATs and not much better on my ACTs. I was rejected from Cornell and Georgetown. I graduated from American with a 3.17 GPA and nothing more to show for my time there. Before now, I felt insignificant in the world. I thought what I had to offer was nothing spectacular. This lack of effort reflected the inability to see my special and unique place in this world.  It wasn’t until someone I respected and admired encouraged me to see the special qualities I embodied, that I began to see my future differently. I wonder, do my students admire and respect me? When I share my confidence and encourage them, does it plant a seed too?

One of my favorite quotes is from Henry Brooks Adams when he said, “A teacher affects eternity; he can never tell where his influence stops.” Mr. F changed the fabric of my eternity. His encouragement inspired me to reach higher, dream bigger and never stop being extraordinary. His immense knowledge made me a more refined educator and policymaker.

I want to be a teacher like him. I want to change my students’ eternities.

As I begin the application process to Harvard and Columbia, and as those thoughts of not being important or special enough creep up on me, I am reminded of the confidence that my dear friend Mr. F has in my passion for education and my abilities. If he believes in me, than I believe in me.  Every student should have a teacher who believes that they are capable of amazing things. Every child was built with extraordinary qualities, and I will spend the rest of my education career reminding them of that everyday. William Arthur Ward once wrote, “the mediocre teacher tells. The good teacher explains. The superior teacher demonstrates. The great teacher inspires.” Mr. F you are definitely a great one!

**Mr. Duncan, test scores don’t define a teacher. If you want a true evaluation contact ALL the students they have ever taught and hear the amazing testimonies. This will definitely shed light on whether a teacher has made a life-altering impact. Thank you Mr. Kolodinski, Mr. Reck, Mr. Dover and so many other teachers who inspired me to go to college, become a teacher, and strive for excellence.  It wasn’t the tests scores that made you one of the greats; it was your encouragement and ability to inspire my heart. 

Growth isn't always a Number

One important thing I learned during my time on Capitol Hill is that whatever policymakers are fighting for at the federal level is not what teachers are trying to change in their local schools. While I attended meetings about Highly Qualified, Charter Schools and Parent Trigger Laws, my fellow colleagues were  advocating for adequate planning time, fair evaluation procedures and critical resources. I've learned that the trickling down of policy is a slow process when you're talking about the two extremes (local vs. federal) and when policies finally do make it down to "our" level, they lack relevancy and real-world practice. 

One topic of popularity at all levels of education is accountability. We are talking about it at the federal level AND in the local classrooms. The conversation is pretty similar in terminology and belief. Teachers must be held accountable for student achievement. Arne Duncan (the Secretary of Education for President Obama) has made this plight for accountability all the more attainable through the state waivers. He has given states the opportunity to break free from the No Child Left Behind evaluation standards for educators. However, because accountability is such a staple for American Education, states must determine other ways in which to evaluate (rate) teachers. Most waivers stipulate that teacher evaluations will be based upon traditional methods (observations, work portfolios, etc.) AND student "growth." Most states have even attached a percentage of how much weight each will have in determining the teacher's overall percentage. In Maryland, educator's evaluation will be determined by 50% of student "growth." 

What does this all mean? Absolutely nothing. Teachers are the first to understand the emptiness that comes with using loaded words. Growth is a term we use in education to describe a student's progress towards development. Growth can be seen in a student's academic abilities, behavior, social skills - you name it, growth can occur. However, with a society so obsessed with numerical data growth becomes a daunting accountability measure. No longer is it a word to define development, but now it's a term used to decide if a teacher is "highly effective," "effective," or "ineffective." 

The reason I bring all this up (this all interrelates - I promise) is because I have seen growth in my students. In the five years I have been teaching I have seen small growth and substantial growth. A percentage can't be attached to it, a letter grade can't be derived from the artifacts. These growths are organic, and they are not meant to be translated into statistical measurements. 

At the end of my second year, after the students were taught about writing persuasive essays and social citizenship, my students had to write an "I Have a Dream Speech." The idea was that students would understand the purpose of MLK's speech and replicate it for their generation. This meant that they had to understand the bigger issues in their communities, the ones holding them back from success and achievement. Just like MLK, their speech had to be compelling and convey a message - their message. For a fourth grader, conveying a message, much less coming up with one, is tough. It requires a year of learning, practicing and GROWING. This was their culminating activity to show the growth of their writing skills and their understanding of the world around them. I graded these assignments for content, grammar and mechanics - like any teacher would. But the growth present in my student's skill was not easily graded. My principal had no rubric for this type of growth, it was just obvious - it was just there. 

As a nation, we spend so much time trying to hold teachers "accountable." We take that concept to a new extreme by translating a very abstract process, growth, into numbers and percentages. I firmly believe that good teachers are obvious. In the way they interact with their students, their planning and implementation and the enrichment that emulates from their class at the end of the year. No evaluation will ever capture that adequately. Just as this real-world application showed immense growth in my students better than a standardized test could. 

So, my suggestion for our federal policymakers, start going to your local schools (not the private or charter ones) and see, with your own eyes, what teaching is really all about. Take notes, and begin to realize what we educators already know - teaching is not cut-and-dry. It is not always easily measured through numbers and statistics. 

I leave you with one of those essays written by a student of mine. Do you think she grew in her fourth grade year? Did you need a percentage to tell you that? 

** Extremes are easy to believe in when addressing the topic of accountability and data. It is easy to completely live by it or reject it all together. Percentages and Numbers in education are necessary, it has a place in the education sphere. What concerns me is that so many teachers have examples of how their students have grown that can't be translated into a percentage. A friend shared a story with me about one of her students. She worked with him throughout his six years in elementary school (K-5). When she first met him he refused to speak, but slowly throughout the years he grew. By the time he graduated from fifth grade he was confidently giving a speech to his fellow classmates on stage. That is growth, something that can't be measured in one year, or even through a percentage rate. My friend is an amazing teacher who helped that child grow in such a substantial way. I just want to encourage you to think more globally when it comes to evaluations in our practice. Growth can be a very concrete thing and it can be a very abstract concept. We nee to appreciate the it cannot always fit into a standardized box. Isn't that why Duncan gave the option of Waivers to begin with? 

Charter Schools, My concern with David Osborne's Recent Report

I attended a meeting on Charter Schools in late June. David Osborne was the main presenter. Osborne is a pioneer of charter schools in America and has done extensive writing and research on the topic. He currently is a Senior Fellow at the Progressive Policy Institute in Washington D.C. and a Senior Partner at The Public Strategies Group. David Osborne expressed the importance and necessity of charters in American communities. He believes that charters are the enablers of innovation and allows for more experimentation, which is crucial to a quality education system. Charters are becoming more popular because there has been a massive withdrawal of public trust in the education system (statistics show that public trust in the 70s averaged 59%, while currently it has dropped to slightly above 20%).

The original goal of charters was to provide schools with more autonomy in exchange for more accountability. The charter concept allowed for exemption from some state laws that public schools had to abide by (such as teacher required work hours). In exchange for this, charters agreed to more academic accountability, meaning closure if students were underperforming.

David asserts that public schools are only effective for half the students it serves and are built on the assumption that all who attends are inherently motivated. From David’s perspective, charter schools solve these challenges faced by public schools, and provide a learning environment that can change and accommodate the entire student population. Charter schools provide a hefty incentive for teacher success, “if kids don’t learn I will lose my job.” This, according to David, is a benefit of charters that produces consequences for ineffective teachers and ultimately drives staff to embrace fundamental changes.

David’s perspective on charters raises four concerns for me. First, the idea that fear is a better mechanism for success than passion in the teaching profession. David explained how charters have an accountability system that requires teachers to produce student achievement or their jobs can be terminated. For him, this fear is a powerful tool that gives teachers additional motivation not matched by anything else. For David, fear is the difference between heroic educators and mediocre ones. As an experienced educator who has worked both in urban and suburban settings I completely disagree with this assertion. A study by the National Institute of Education at Nanyang Technological University in Singapore cited “intrinsic factors must be present for maximum motivation to occur” (Tin, Hean & Leng, 1996, p.7). It seems more plausible that a teacher would be motivated, initially, because of an intrinsic passion for the profession, not a fear of losing their job if student performance goals are not achieved. The same study concluded that teacher motivation is most influenced by the job itself – teaching (Tin, Hean & Leng, 1996). What does this mean? Teachers are entering the profession because they have passion; fear is a merely a tactic used as a means to immediate significant gains. In fact, teachers are heroic because of the passion they bring with them to the classroom, and fear is not the factor in teacher heroicness, it’s the innate desire to serve children in the learning process.

Second, I would argue that charters face the same issues as public schools.  In his most recent article, Improving Charter School Accountability: The Challenge of Closing Failing Schools, David stated

“ But any rules that apply to all charters must be made with extreme care, to avoid closing effective schools that have low test scores because they educate high percentage of students with learning disabilities, or former dropouts or some other “alternative” population” (Osborne, 2012, p. 4).”

 This is the same obstacle most public schools face, trying to diversify standardized expectations. As charters increase in number the same “traditional” issues will arise. Naturally, charter and public schools are dealing with the same concerns, but Osborne is certain that charters are the “silver bullet” solution. Synthesizing his research, I conclude that in a couple years time, he too will come to realize the same realities the rest of us “traditionalists” already know about education and the absence of any quick fix or easy answer. Currently, David creates a massive chasm between public and charter schools, but I struggle to find any great differences between the two.  

I am concerned that David and his research reinforce the segregation that is all too familiar in our school system. Valerie Strauss wrote about this in her blog when she shared that of the 40,000 homeless school-aged children in New York City public schools, only 100 are enrolled in charter schools (2010). David frequently restated how charter schools are better than public schools, but never mentioned this reality. The truth, as Valerie said, charters cannot be compared to public schools when the distribution of special needs and at-risk students is unequal. It’s the responsibility of charters to take on the same level of burden public schools endure with the needy population. Otherwise, it’s as if to compare apples to oranges or Sidwell Friends to Locke High School. Charters are preserving segregation in schools; New York is a great example of this.

Finally, what concerns me most is the inadequate research that is being used by Osborne and other charter school supporters to make high-stake decisions in education. David refuted CREDOs findings, published in 2009, on charter schools, which said that successes of charters was not significant compared to public schools. David discredits this study with an argument of rhetoric he found on page 32 where it states that the majority of the data was derived from students’ first year in charters. He argues that charters need a couple of years to show their significant successes. My concern is that David will reject any research that does not produce the desired outcomes and thus decisions will be skewed and flawed empirically.

In conclusion, while David provides a strong argument for charters, I disagree. I believe that charters have the potential to be successful, but it is not the silver bullet David proclaims them to be. In fact, it is a matter of time before he realizes why public schools struggle with student achievement. Not because teachers are unmotivated, but because of external influences that teachers and school communities cannot control. Factors that charters work really hard to avoid and isolate in public schools. I applaud his attempt to find a salvation model for education reform in America, unfortunately charters will experience the same fate public schools have endured for the past few decades, and I am curious what his reasoning will be then.

** Let me make it clear, Charter Schools are not bad. In fact, there are some pretty amazing ones. One of my old colleagues teaches at a charter school that focuses on environmental education for elementary students. I like the fact that these schools can create a more innovative curriculum and step-outside the box public education is so strictly confined too. However, like anything else in education, I am not a supporter of this "us vs. them" mentality. Charters are not the golden ticket of school reform and just like public schools, they face the same challenges and failures. David Osborne believes, as he expressed repeatedly, that a public school teacher is less effective simply because they aren't charter school teachers. Additionally, he shared his belief that charter schools are the ONLY way to student achievement. I think many teachers can agree that these assertions are far-reaching and unrealistic. 

Works Cited

Tin, Low Guat, Lim Lee Hean, and Yeap Lay Leng. "What Motivates Teachers?" New Horizons in Education 37 (2006): 1-9. Print.

Strauss, Valerie. "Charters vs. Public Schools: Behind the Numbers." Web log post. The Answer Sheet. The Washington Post, 23 May 2010. Web. 26 June 2012. <http://voices.washingtonpost.com/answer-sheet/charter-schools/about-the-brill-story-on-chart.html>.

Osborne, David. Improving Charter School Accountability: The Challenge of Closing Failing Schools. Rep. Washington D.C.: Progressive Policy Institute, 2012. Print.

Parent Trust in Teachers

When a doctor tells me I have an illness, I believe them. All it takes is a five-minute analysis, using a stethoscope, a weird-looking ear-examination thingy, and asking me to breathe in-and-out. After that, when they say, “you have Bronchitis, take this,” I do. When a lawyer tells me that I need to file this particular paperwork and go to court over that, I believe them. I trust the experience and expertise of a doctor, lawyer, electrician, and air-conditioning repairman. Their advice, remedy, cure is something I don’t question (very often), because I trust their ability to diagnose and have my best interests at heart.

As an educator I have seen the complete opposite from parents. I have worked in both an urban and suburban educational landscape and there are not many differences when it comes to this experience. For some reason, I can’t explain, parents believe they know best when it comes to educating their child. While I don’t disagree with this on some levels, I do challenge the blanket statement as a whole. Parents are right; they know their children better than I do. They spend more time and energy investing in their child’s development on a regular basis. I don’t challenge the parent’s expertise on their children. However, what society seems to forget about education is that, just like medicine and law, it is a science. A child’s developmental capacity is a science. Understanding the “how” and “why” is a science. I may not spend as much time with the child, but as an educational scientist and child development expert, I can understand how they are learning and why they are learning in that way.

There is a growing societal norm that parents should be in control of their child’s education. I completely agree…to a degree. A parent should be actively involved in their child’s education journey. They should have the power to make decisions on whether their child receives special assistance, extra support, and what direction they want their children to go in. I agree that parents have the final say, but they shouldn’t be given the authority to determine whether teachers are effective, whether a school is closed and if teachers lose their jobs. Parent trigger laws are not beneficial to the climate of education. It would be similar to giving me, a patient, the ability to fire a doctor or close their practice because they misdiagnosed my cold symptoms. The intricacy of a school is much greater than test scores. A teacher’s effectiveness is more than student test outcomes. Giving parents such a paramount right with little knowledge on the science of teaching and education is counterproductive.

As an educator, one of the most disheartening things I experience is when parents question my advice. For me, I step foot into a classroom because I love the children I am working with. I have spent countless hours and money on degrees and certifications to learn the science of teaching and child development. I consult with other experts before coming to a conclusion. I continue to develop my science, so I can be a better practitioner. When I advise a parent, I take into consideration every facet of their child’s wellbeing and future. My advice is not a random shot in the dark.

A parent once asked me, “Why is my child not reading as fast as the other kids?” She seemed frustrated that my teaching wasn’t “effective” enough to help her child be the fastest or best reader in class. Contrary to test scores and standardization, not all kids will grow at the same rate. Every child is different. I can employ the same teaching methods for every child and they all will receive varying levels of success. Just the same, every child learns to talk and walk at different paces, none less smart or successful.

My advice to parents, the best way to help your child get the best education possible is rally for your teacher. Trust their desire to give your child the best education possible and do whatever it takes to make them successful. Also, throw out the notion that standardized tests have any merit. I firmly believe that they test a child’s ability to take tests, not what they know and how educated they are. Educators, like myself, enter the profession to serve our children and their families. With that motive our ultimate goal is to grow the child developmentally, academically and socially as much as we can. Just like your doctors, trust that we are competent and are making decisions informed by academic insight and professional experience.

**Parent trigger laws are becoming more popular around the nation. They allow parents to sign a petition to close their community public school and open a charter school in its place. The teachers are fired from their positions, the school is labeled “failing” and parents, within a short time, can “turnaround” their child’s school. Instead of creating a divide between parents and teachers, we should be creating laws that strengthen partnerships and promote school success. How many times will parents “turnaround” a school before addressing the global issues that plague their communities? Firing some teachers and getting a new school name doesn’t solve education inequity. 

Competition Stifles a Remarkable Student

My greatest regret is that I didn’t try hard enough in school. I always found a way to “get by” and do the bare minimum. This had a lot to do (as I look back) with the fact that I didn’t believe I could do anything extraordinary. I was average and didn’t have anything unique to offer. Where does this mentality come from? Definitely not from my parents, who always encouraged me to be an astronaut or the President. As I spend my summer days on Capitol Hill, observing the policy process, I continue to hear one word echo in education discussions – competition. This word is the anthem of my high school and college career. My entire existence has been rated on arbitrary standards. How well can I score on tests? Am I the best writer, do I have superb study skills? How do I compare to my peers? Who is the best? Of course I didn’t believe in myself, because I bought into this rating system that always reminded me I wasn’t good enough – the truth, there will always be someone better than me. I never realized how detrimental competition was in education until I began to reflect on this personal reality.

So, how has competition affected my life? Well…I didn’t try in fear of being out-done. I am not a competitor, I begged my swim coach to keep me on the J.V. team so I could avoid tough competition. I simply don’t like the feeling of being a loser, especially when I worked hard for my accomplishments. I subjected myself to mediocrity so I didn’t have to be told I wasn’t as good or not good enough. Competition promotes a hierarchy that separates the elite from the rejects. As an 18-year-old I had a fundamental problem with this culture, one plagued with the inability to see each individual’s uniqueness in the name of SAT, GPA and IQ.

As an educator I have learned a beautiful reality – children are unique. This is key to understanding why competition doesn’t work in education. Competition stifles uniqueness; it requires children to conform in order to be measured on a scale that determines opportunity and accomplishment. The truth however, education and competition can’t be interchangeable. Finnish children are not compared to their peers and standardized tests are not the determent of success. Students are praised for their unique qualities. The lie my competitive education instilled in me, despite my parent’s attempts, was that my unique qualities did not make me extraordinary, instead my test scores and the amount of A.P. scores determined my academic worth. Thank you competition for making me “average” when I was anything but. Thank you for constantly reminding me that I wasn’t “good enough” in comparison to my peers, who had higher test scores.

As I prepare to apply to universities like Columbia, Harvard and Stanford, these feelings of inadequacy flood too the surface. I begin to question whether I will have what it takes to compete against the candidates who are far more qualified and superior then me. I begin to doubt my chances even before I have tried, all in the name of competition. But, I have to remind myself (constantly) that my unique qualities and life experiences mean more than a test score (I hope) and my passion for education will shine through. Any program would be lucky to have my expertise and drive.

Look around you, everything is consumed by competition and determining the “best” from the not. Education is NOT a well-oiled business, simply because it is not a business. I think there is a place for competition, in the swimming pool, on the field in the business sector – not in education. Think about this for a minute…that achievement gap we work so hard to close may perhaps be a great example of the detrimental nature of competition in the classroom. If it weren’t for my loving parents who believe in my extraordinary qualities, that make me unique, I would have given up entirely. Not every child has that support system, and many get lost in the competitive fight for elite spots in education. Eventually they become another “average” faceless student who stops trying before they even start because they are unwilling or unable to play the standardization game.

Every child I teach reminds me of how beautiful the journey (not production) of education is. They remind me why each child should be cultivated into a unique individual with their own qualities to contribute. With that attitude every child has the opportunity to do extraordinary things in the world and excel in their own way.

**Disclaimer, I didn’t get into my preferred college because of my lack of effort. I blame no one for this outcome, but me. However, if we are telling children, at a young age, that their worth stems from a test score or extracurricular activities we are losing the point of education entirely. We are setting students up for a lack of interest in education. Here’s a thought, instead of ranking our students and creating an elite few, let’s work with every student to make them extraordinary in their passions and future goals. Isn’t that what the process of education and knowledge is all about?

Call me an idealist, but I refuse to believe that God made any child anything less than special and remarkable, and with effort and the desire to succeed every one of my students can accomplish great things! 

My Heroes - Special Educators

To the unsung heroes of teaching, special educators. Without you, us general education teachers would be lost, uninvested and disconnected from our school's most precious and needy students. Without your passion and drive our public schools would be incapable of differentiation and individualized instruction. I thank you from the bottom of my heart and admire your desire to serve our most needy students. 

Rhetorical Warfare

Last week I posed the question, “What makes a teacher highly qualified?” The answer seems simple enough...someone with the proper background education and certifications, who continues their growth and enrichment of the profession. For teachers the answer is simple, highly qualified is reserved for professionals who have mastered their art. Like any career profession someone who is highly qualified in his/her craft have been 1) doing it for a long time and 2) built an expansive resume of certifications, credentials experience and knowledge.

Simple enough, right? Not so for our policy counterparts in Rayburn and Dirksen. Capitol Hill is struggling to understand and define these two simple words, “Highly Qualified.”

A little history…

When No Child Left Behind became effective in January 2002 it required all American public school classrooms to have a teacher who is “highly qualified.” This requirement was to be fully executed by the end of the 2005-06 school year. Seems easy, right? It makes sense, to have all students proficient in reading and math they must benefit from highly trained and qualified educators. Minor problem…how do we (NCLB drafters) define those two words? What do we focus on? The number of years in school, like medical residencies? Or rather, the program a person graduates from and their GPA, like law school? Does a teacher automatically gain the title upon the completion of a certain amount of years in teaching? Is it a certain number of proficient teacher evaluations?

I did some rummaging through the handy-dandy World Wide Web and came across the Secretary of Education, Rod Paige’s 2002 Annual Report, focusing on Highly Qualified Teachers. Paige explained highly qualified teachers as:

“As part of the new law, Congress defines highly qualified teachers as those who not only possess full state certification but also have solid content knowledge of the subjects they teach. For example, beginning Fall 2002, all new elementary school teachers will have to pass tests in subject knowledge and teaching skills in math, reading and writing, while new middle and high school teachers must pass rigorous subject-matter tests or have the equivalent of an undergraduate major, graduate degree or advanced certification in their respective fields. As this report details, research suggests teachers with strong academic backgrounds in their subjects are more likely to boost student performance.”

That makes sense, so what’s the big deal on the Hill? Why are we even having this discussion? It is safe to say that all teachers would agree with this requirement. It helps to set rigorous standards to weed out the weak or those not truly invested. 

A little more history…

One of the biggest questions raised from the definition of “highly qualified” was whether an alternative certification program meets the standard. The Bush administration essentially said yes and issued a regulation making it so. Thus, Congress approved language in a spending bill that would ultimately allow teachers in alternative certification programs to count as “highly qualified” as long as they were working toward certification and part of a recognized program (such as TFA). This provision was set to expire at the end of the 2012-13 school year. The big issue for many education groups is the extension of this clause, which organizations, such as TFA, want to lengthen (the House of Representatives did, extending it for 2 more years).

I was a Teach For America Corps Member. I am forever grateful that this program offered me a way to teach in an urban classroom and obtain a cost-effective credential at a prestigious school. I was attracted to its ability to make the teaching profession rigorous and selective. I liked the idea of being one of the “chosen few” that had the “privilege” and opportunity to make a social impact in my local community. In my school there were far too many vacancies and not enough “highly qualified” teachers. In fact, we had a sizable portion of staff that were long-term subs or in alternative certification programs too. Teach for America cultivated my resilience and perseverance. It gave me front-line experience that not many teachers, even traditionally educated, can obtain. I believe in the mission of TFA and its desire to positively improve the public education infrastructure.

However, to say I was a “highly qualified” teacher in my first (or even second) year of teaching is ridiculous. I, the corps member, will openly admit that my first year class of kids did not benefit from my teaching abilities. They benefited from my ability to build relationships and work relentlessly to produce success on some level. They benefited from a teacher who was committed for an entire year and who was working towards a credential. None of these things however, truly capture the science of teaching. I had no idea how to approach special education. I was not equipped for behavior management or reading recovery. I was inept on so many levels and refuse to take the title of “highly qualified.” I was about as qualified for teaching as I was for heart surgery. The hands-on experience and real-life practice has made me a better practitioner in teaching. Even now, 5 years deep, I still question if I am “highly qualified.”

Do I think alternative certification teachers should be labeled as highly qualified? No. Do I think that should keep them from teaching in a high needs area if the only other option is a substitute? No again. My belief is this, if I was the only good and stable option for my kids, then great! I am the most qualified for that situation. I am not a competitor of a traditionally trained educator I am a supplement when there is only lesser options. There is a difference between a doctor and a resident. The titles represent level of training. It is impractical and detrimental to compare the two as though they are on the same level professionally.

This is where I disagree with TFA and many other organizations and policymakers. In an action alert this was stated:

“The most rigorous independent studies have demonstrated that Teach For America corps members outperform non- Teach For America teachers (including veteran teachers) in multiple subjects and grade levels.”

Correction, if it weren’t for those “non” TFA teachers I wouldn’t be a successful educator today. My ability to impact change and achieve significant gains came from the community of educators around me who were more experienced and effective, sharing their resources. I have a fundamental problem with this fight and you should too. This is not about providing children with the best teacher, it’s about rhetoric, and in the end it becomes an “us” against “them” battle. For me, those are fighting words. A highly qualified teacher is one who has spent years perfecting their craft and working personally and professionally to reflect and improve. Unfortunately an alternatively certified teacher does not have those qualities and expertise, and I refuse to group myself with that level of experience and commitment. TFA and organizations alike shouldn’t be competing they should be supplementing and supporting.

I know it’s easy for me to say now that I’ve done TFA and never faced that adversity, but entrusting me with a classroom after 5 weeks of training not only did a disservice to me as an educator but to the community I was serving too. If it weren’t for my highly qualified counterparts I wouldn’t have learned the way of the land and developed the expertise I now have.

I would implore you to take a stand in this. I know everyone won’t agree with my view and I am okay with that. It’s imperative that you figure out what the facts are and decide what you believe in, because this is will impact the nature of education in the future to come. At the end of the day I am a Finnish-at-heart. Instead of looking to competition as the catalyst for change, we need to adopt a philosophy of collaboration and abandon this “highly qualified” nonsense. Then, we would actually be focusing on creating an army of career professionals who only gain a title of “highly qualified” when they’ve mastered their craft. I encourage your opinions and perspectives.