The Purpose of the American School System

I'm not and I am speaking of the purpose of education. Today, because of the political focus on education that has charged the American school system with negative energy bent on serving those seeking votes to secure their jobs, we are subjugated to talk of the purpose of the American school system apart from the purpose of education. When we talk of the purpose of the American school system, we are talking of our schools serving the corporate imperative, preparing students to be good citizens--which today varies according to which extreme you are enlisted to defend. When we talk of the purpose of education, we ignore the political structures and the corporate imperative, we ignore the economic status of the United States and the comparisons of state and national standardized, norm-referenced tests designed to classify every child based on a choice between A, B, C, or D. When we talk about the purpose of education, we have to talk about the human factor, the factor of one child, of one future with or without hope, for that is what education gives--HOPE!

Kids come into our schools with their minds bent and twisted by television and Facebook and video games and churches and politicians and moms and dads. I say bent and twisted as opposed to shaped because some of their minds have no discernible shape. Like a garden left unto itself, their minds have grown wild. Their minds have hundreds of bent and twisted branches all gnarled together--largely green, but with scars where one branch rubs against the other in the wind. Largely green, but faded underneath and showing signs of illness and weakness and decay. Suffering from the lack of care. Suffering from freedom that ignores responsibility. The kids come to our schools in this condition and our schools are charged by the corporate imperative to clean up those gardens, to make them all healthy and productive--to produce fruit from acidic soil and the undergrowth.

The best teachers know that they cannot serve the standardized tests. They cannot serve the corporate imperative. They serve their students. And they do this by caring first about the child. These teachers know that what they have to do is give this child the hope that he can grow straight and strong and be fruitful. People only learn when they have hope. I saw a poster that said something to the fact that wonder and awe were the foundation of learning. Yes, but hope is the foundation of wonder and awe. Without hope, one does not care to wonder and one cannot be in awe. To the hopeless, the awesome is one more reminder that he doesn't stand a chance.

The purpose of the American School System is to serve the corporate imperative. But the purpose of education is to give every child enduring hope. If a child has hope, then he will wonder and be in awe. A child with hope will have a reason to learn and want to learn. And we have never been able to stop a child from learning who wanted to learn. A child who wants to learn no longer needs his teacher, and that is the mark of a great teacher--When a child can learn without dependency on his teacher, the teacher has done his or her job well and deserves all the awards. If a child has a reason to learn, we don't have to worry about the corporate imperative, the corporate tests, measuring and comparing the status of the U.S. against any other country. When a child has a reason to learn, she will learn in spite of corporate America. She will learn in spite of No Child Left Behind. She will learn in spite of Democrats and Republicans and Tea Baggers.

Teachers have to give some attention to the expeditiously evil standardized, norm-referenced, corporate-sating tests. But I urge teachers to work first and foremost from the desire to give every child hope. Every child. Especially those who are most bent and twisted and have the least hope. Give every child hope.

Learning is an Act of Choice

Having my interest in the concept of the intentional non-learner renewed, I spent some time reviewing notes that I had taken from a presentation made by Larry Lazotte at the Model Schools Conference in June of 2006. In that presentation, he had stated that learning is an act of choice. I wish I knew more as to his thoughts about learning as an act of choice. Not having more on the topic, I decided to attempt some understanding.

Without a doubt, some of our students choose not to learn, or not to learn what it is that we want them to learn. This is to suggest that there are students who are at varying levels of compliance. Some will do whatever we ask of them and others won't. The question becomes, "why won't they do what we ask?" Why do students choose not to learn?

I think there are at least two answers to this question. First, the learning often involves effort and there are many of us--I am included--who would prefer to avoid effort, if possible. (I believe that I have resigned myself to the understanding that the harder I work, the better off my life is. Therefore, I do what I have to do.) So, the learning looks like work...some students decide they really would rather not do the work.

Other students have tried to do the work and failed. Failure is a hurtful thing. They eventually come to the conclusion that when they try, they fail. Therefore, if they do not try, they do not fail and they can feel better about themselves.

Yes, learning is an act of choice...but there must be more to this topic.

Intentional Non-Learners Revisited

It has been a long time since I revisited this topic and a long time since I have posted an entry on my blog. There is so much to do every day that I've taken to placing more value on my down time. Probably a bad habit that I'm forming.

Anyway, I was researching Intentional Non-Learners and it led me back to my own blog...an entry from February, 2009. There I found a comment from a parent. His son's principal had told him that his son was a non-learner. I'm sure this made the father angry, although his comment on my blog does not come across as anger but certainly frustration and perhaps misunderstanding.

Let's be direct. If the principal actually said that the son was a non-learner, then the principal does not understand learning. The father talks about how his son asks so many questions that Dad has to ask the son to be quiet. This is indicative of an enthusiastic curiosity, which is the motivation to learn. If a kid is asking questions, he's a learner. Curiously, our schools often work to stop kids from asking questions. We kill the natural curiosity that students have, then we bemoan the fact that they don't want to learn what we want them to learn. Why do we do this? Because letting kids ask questions and make discoveries is messy business and we like everything neat and pretty and quiet and orderly. We don't really like kids that much. We would prefer that they all act like adults.

I'd prefer if adults would act more like kids from time to time.

Anyway...the term "intentional non-learner" does not mean that kids cannot learn. It means that some students choose not to learn what we want them to learn. They have decided that the system does not meet their needs, that they cannot function successfully in the system, that we don't really care about them, and that trying results in failure; therefore, why try? This is not a condemnation of the students. This is a statement against teaching practices in our schools. We not only allow students to become intentional non-learners, but we create the intentional non-learners.

This is why reform is so very important, and it begins with believing that every child can learn. From there, we begin to identify the students who are reluctant learners. We talk to the guidance counselor. We talk to the parents. Most importantly, we talk to the child. And we try to find out why the kid has decided not to do the work. Then we modify our lessons and differentiate the instruction in an attempt to engage the learner.

The desire to learn is something that we all share as human beings. It is one of the universal characteristics of the human experience that transcends all barriers and makes us able to relate to each other, to love one another. It is the responsibility of the school to nurture each student's desire to learn, not to kill it.

The Intentional Non-Learner label is not intended to dismiss students. It is intended to raise the awareness of educators so that we might better meet the needs of our students.

Don't Take It Personal

When a parent meets with a teacher to discuss issues related to the student-teacher relationship and the performance of the student in the classroom, it is difficult for the teacher not to take the concern as a personal affront. However, the teacher--as the professional--must do exactly that: not take the concern as a personal affront.

Taking a concern as being personal translates in to personal criticism: there is something wrong with me. From that point on, the teacher is no longer hearing the concern or focused on the better interest of the student. From that point on, the teacher can only hear in his mind, "Why don't these people like me?" "I'm doing the best I can." "Am I the only one here who realizes that I have to deal with 150 kids who don't want to learn what I'm teaching?" In other words, the issue has become not only a personal affront, but also a personal defense. The teacher is now so completely self-absorbed that he cannot do what is expected of him, concentrate on the issue as it relates to the student and try to find a way to get the student to work to his potential.

At this point, I would like to suggest that having a student work to his potential is something different from having a student work to the teacher's expectations. This does not mean that the teacher's expectations are not important or should be ignored. High expectations are important to the success of all students. However, when those expectations take into consideration the student's potential, then it may be possible to really stretch the student and to have the student learn more. Expectations alone will not do the job.

Back to the making it personal...

Sitting in a conference between a teacher and a parent, the teacher stated, "You make me feel bad when..." I don't know that I have heard a statement of more personal self-absorption. The teacher could not hear the concern of the parent. The teacher was not interested in the needs of the student. The teacher felt that he was under attack and that those attacking him were wrong and needed to know that. In other words, the teacher was not being a professional in that moment.

It is important to know that parents have a privilege of being emotional. Teachers, as professionals, are not afforded the same privilege. Teachers are required to listen to a parent's concern and to respond to the concern, without making the issue personal. That will communicate to the parents that the teacher is a professional, that the teacher places the concern for a student's well being and achievement first, and that the student is in competent hands. And that is what is expected of us, as professionals.

Grading, Assessment, and Feedback

Grading is an issue. It really probably shouldn't be an issue, but it is. I think much of the issue hinges upon a complete unawareness of the purpose of grading.

When I think back about my personal realization of grades, I believe I became distinctly aware that it was a rating system, designed to determine who was smart and who was not, before I ever thought that grading expressed how well I might know or understand a concept.

In a very real sense, these are the dominant reasons for grades: sorting students in such a way that a grade A student is better than a grade B student, and using grades to determine whether a student has mastered or learned a concept.

Of the two, I much prefer the latter. People get sorted enough, often of their own doing, without needing grades to mark the differences. Honestly, as one student may need more time to complete a task that another can do faster, the reality is that both students can complete the task and therefore have somewhat equal reasoning skills. It is only that one is faster.

Okay, faster is better in some situations. But slow and steady is also good. Sometimes, it is better to take one's time. But I'm way off the topic.

The topic is still, "What is the purpose of grades?" I believe this is an important question that every faculty of every school has to answer and agree upon, for then every practice regarding grading will be founded upon this belief. And that will be a good thing.

Another Good Year Has Begun

I'm tired after the first day of a new school year, and I really don't have a lot to say. I must have walked around the building twenty times, stopping in to ask teachers if everything was going well, talking to students and helping them find their classes, and just taking it all in. As I talked with teachers, I tried to keep the conversation light. I tried to offer compliments when possible. I tried to build the teachers up, help them to believe that they were and are capable of doing incredible work. I think this stems from a belief that I hold about how to get the best work out of people: you have to help people to believe in themselves. When a person believes in himself, he is willing to take a risk. He is willing to put in the extra time. He is willing to hear a critical review. He is willing to become more. Perhaps it is because he trusts that he isn't going to be attacked. No one is going to yell at him. He is safe.

In public schools, we talk a lot about providing a safe environment, and we immediately think about Columbine and kids bringing weapons to school. We think about some guy gone crazy walking in and shooting up the place. Those are certainly threats that we have to take seriously, but I think there is something much more important regarding having a safe environment. Students and teachers and everyone in the school have to believe that it is okay to take risks, to take chances. It is okay to be wrong, as long as you're trying. It's not okay, certainly, to be wrong and remain wrong, but it is definitely okay to make a mistake. The problem is that most schools are places where people don't feel safe enough to risk being wrong. Certainly their peers will make fun of them, but that's because the teacher holds the mistake up to display it and to embarrass the student--I don't know why.

There are ways to look at student mistakes without causing embarrassment. I used to retype passages from student essays onto an overhead transparency so that I could talk about the mistakes without the student's name being on the paper. I also made sure that the student whose mistakes I was using was not in the class. Relevancy was not an issue. A good portion of the students in all of my classes were making the same mistakes. It was relevant.

The president of our school board spoke to the teachers and administrators and classified staff on the day before students arrived and said that we were engaged in profoundly important work. He was right. And because it is important work, everyone involved in the work needs to feel that they are in a place where it is safe to take a chance and to risk being wrong, hoping that they might just be right. And what they will learn is that learning is a journey of discovery that takes them to places they couldn't imagine.

Such rambling....

Awareness--Preparedness--Confidence

I've talked a lot about confidence. There is a balance between a lack of confidence and an abundance of confidence that is the point at which a person feels capable of handling a crisis, a conflict, or a situation. A lack of confidence undermines an individual's ability to address the crisis, conflict, or situation in a manner that will be beneficial or productive. Indeed, a lack of confidence almost ensures failure and reinforces the lack of confidence; you can bet the person isn't going to try that again soon. An abundance of confidence can be just as detrimental to successful resolution, for the person who has too much confidence will probably have already decided how the crisis is to be resolved, will dismiss the ideas and concerns of other people involved in the crisis because he already knows what needs to be done, and will expedite the resolution regardless.

A person has to have confidence that he can resolve the conflict, find a solution to the problem or crisis, while at the same time the person has to recognize and honor the concerns of other people involved in the conflict or crisis. Such confidence does not come naturally. Confidence has to be developed or nurtured. Through an understanding of the need to develop or nurture confidence, the individual understands that there is a process that moves him closer to true confidence. This process moves from awareness through preparedness to end in confidence.

Awareness is the key to all understanding. All learning, all understanding begins with awareness. We become aware that we are hungry, that we have a need to eat, and we move to satisfy that hunger. Consequently, the satisfying of the hunger preserves our being. When we become more aware of the relationship between satisfying our hunger and the preservation of our being, we realize that it is not simply eating that is important but what we eat. In other words, eating a large bag of chocolate covered peanuts and raisins may satisfy our hunger, but we would not be receiving the right nutrients for a healthy body; therefore, we may become overweight and lethargic. Our health might suffer in spite of our having plenty of food to eat. Becoming increasingly aware moves us to a better understanding of life, of our relationship with all that fills our world, and allows us to make better choices.

Once we have increased our awareness, we move to prepare ourselves better to meet the circumstances and situations of which we have become more aware. In the case of conflict and crisis, becoming more aware of the characteristics of conflict and crisis helps us to prepare to meet those qualities. For instance, when we understand that people become emotional when engaged in a crisis or conflict, we become aware that we need to allow people to express these emotions, we need to listen to what they are saying, and once we have identified their genuine concerns, we need to restate those concerns to them so that they will realize that we have heard their concerns and listened to them. This is a first step in conflict resolution and seems simple. However, if we are not aware that emotion is a natural part of conflict, then we may not take the time to allow people to express their emotion, we might not actually listen to them, and we tend to force our solution without taking into consideration the concerns of others. It all begins with awareness.

Once the individual has become more aware and moved to prepare himself to better meet the circumstances of the conflict or crisis, he becomes appropriately confident in his abilities. The confidence will not abandon him. He can face any conflict, no matter how angry another person might be, and rely on what he knows to move toward resolution.

It all begins with awareness that moves the individual to prepare, which gives rise to true confidence.