By now we have held quite a slew of these little talks; forays into the turmoil that is the modern world of education. We’ve established a mutual trust and discussed enough important subjects, that I feel can share with you something personal about myself.

I suffer from a condition.

A few of you may have guessed already. Some of my close friends probably know, they can’t help but have noticed but in the name full disclosure I feel I should make a general statement to clear up once and for all any possible confusion.

I’m not looking for your pity when I tell you about this. Nor am I attempting to make myself a more attractive or sympathetic individual. I don’t want to influence your opinion about me in any way. I just want to come clean about this situation that has affected me virtually my entire life and will always be with me.

Even as I write (speak?) these words I can see the light of recognition dawning in your eyes so let me go ahead and say it.

Yes, it’s true, I’m a Cubs fan.

Please don’t pity me, don’t feel you must go out and organize an intervention or start a fund to help search for a cure — trust me — it is incurable.

There may be a few ways to begin understand a condition such as mine. For example when cable TV came to my neighborhood, I was among the first to call them and set up an appointment. When the representative came he was surprised to find that I cared nothing for the fact that they offered free HBO or Showtime, The Playboy Channel did not even elicit a glimmer in my eyes, all I cared about was “Do I get WGN, the Chicago Cubs channel?”

You may ask why someone seemingly so rational would choose to submit himself to the decades of punishment that Cub’s fans have endured. I can honestly say it is not by choice. My mother used to tell of how she would set me in my little “Johnnie Jump-up” right in front of the black and white Emerson TV with its 12inch screen, so she and I could watch the Cubs game while she did the ironing. By the time I was three I had a favorite player, Hank Sauer, number 9, which became the number I wore whenever I played any team game throughout my checkered athletic career.

There are rewards, such as they are, for being a Cub’s fan. You just have to dig a little deeper than most to find them and they are not as sweet as rewards generally are for others. One such trufflle came to me serendipitously last Friday when I got to see Kerry Wood, a personal favorite of many of us benighted folk, pitch what is ostensibly his last pitch as a Cub. Kerry was the original ‘phenom’, the ‘can’t miss’ prospect, an arm that with the help of a guy named Prior was going to finally bring the Cubs that much longed for World Series ring. Early in his career he had a game where he struck out 20 of the opponent’s batters. That’s twenty strikeouts in a total of 27 outs! I watched it and it was dominance on a scale unheard of.

But over the years, injuries forced Kerry to rehab or go under the knife for surgery and that ring never materialized. Yet, he kept coming back and enjoyed considerable success over and over again in a way that most of us can only aspire to achieve. On Friday, rumors were flying around the media that Kerry was “hanging it up”. Though he could still throw a baseball 95 miles an hour, he didn’t always know where it was going with the precision he expected. The word was, from those in the know, he wanted to pitch one last time and then he was done.

In the eighth inning he came into the game to face one batter. His last pitch was a nasty curve that had the batter swinging at nothing and in the dugout I’m sure someone called out “Thanks for the breeze!” in derision. Kerry walked off the field having struck out one more major league batter and as he approached the dugout, bathed in a tumultuous standing ovation, his son came running out and jumped into his arms. It was the stuff of hackneyed, cheap movie sentiment and I had tears rolling down my face.

There was a singer-songwriter named John Stewart. He died a few months back. Over his career he had one top hit, a song called “Gold”. For the entirety of his professional life, which spanned decades and included near the beginning, a stint as one of the Kingston Trio, he was much respected by others in the field of music. Many of his songs were recorded by other artists and he produced nearly a score of albums, copies of most of which, I can proudly say, I own. If you ever get a chance, type in the title, “Mother Country” by John Stewart and listen to that song. There is a line that goes “and he’s driving her ‘stone-blind’!” that never fails to elicit a well of emotion in me and that was what I felt on Friday; that same rush of bittersweet emotion that is drawn out of you despite all your efforts to the contrary.

Kerry Wood has retired. He can still throw a ball and throw it better than most but over the years the effort becomes harder and he has to work more diligently to get the same results. When he gets up in the morning there are numerous aches and pains to contend with and besides, young arms are out there waiting for their chance to show what they can do. The game has not passed him by but it is time to move on, he can leave knowing he has had many successes, more than failures and he did so at a level that many others could not achieve in his chosen profession. He is satisfied, I think with what he has accomplished. Was it what he expected, or was expected of him? No, of course not, but still there is the recognition that he did well, especially given the various situations thrown at him over the years. No one but he really knows the total effort he put in. The pain and the frustration are his to remember alone. But as recompense for those dark memories there is the sweet sound of that ovation in his ears and more than that, that magnificent curve ball, spinning forever, just out of reach, right where he wanted it to go.

And in my own way I know just how he feels . . .

In a guest blog for EdWeek he points out the all too obvious flaw in my argument about national standards as presented by the Common Core: even more testing!

Yes, I am guilty, I have just endorsed additional testing for children. Santa Claus wears a fake beard, he gives out toys to naughty children and the Tooth Fairy doesn’t build a castle, she throws those teeth away!

No, they don’t. I do believe in Santa Claus but I know that even his gifts often come with bills attached. Still, to anyone who has read all of my previous 50+ posts, first, let me say “Thank you!”; second, let me say “Get a life!”, and finally I will add that you must know from completing that daunting task that I am not in favor of any testing other than the maintenance of checklists to record developmental markers accomplished. I would have gleefully taught these last thirty years without ever giving one single high stakes test had I been allowed to do so!

But Dr. Krashen is correct when he says:

The US Department of Education is developing a massive new testing program, with far more testing than ever before, and they have made no secret about it. (1)

I did not sign on for this. Eat Cuban food? Sure. Invade Cuba? No! In endorsing national objectives that can be employed effectively by educators I am in no way encouraging the subsequent adoption of increased testing, in point of fact in my post I clearly stated:

First and foremost, ESEA must go away. There is no place for the schizophrenic personality disorder that would result from teaching both to the curriculum and the test. (2)

I apologize for being unclear or less than transparent. Rather than increasing testing, I am calling for it to go away in favor of empowering teachers to do what they do best: teach. Co-terminus with adopting national standards for each grade we must also return to the belief that teachers are the experts. They must be allowed to deliver the curriculum and assess as they need to for their records or as they deem appropriate but no one should be telling them how and when to do so.

The greatest argument against high stakes testing is that it puts too much pressure upon our most fragile resource: our children. Yet my own reason for being against the tests is much more selfish — I don’t want to gather data for someone else that does not benefit my own work. When I give a test in April, the results of which will not be released until August when that actual class is three months absent never to return, those results tell me nothing. It’s just someone else’s data.

So, no tests? From my perch in Tucson, I can see the next argument as it approaches now like a massive dark cloud on the southwestern horizon above the Whetstone mountains. “How will we know if we are getting our money’s worth?” “Where is the accountability?” “What about ‘educational rigor’, how is it demonstrated?”

Personally I don’t care, I know how hard my colleagues work, but I understand the problem. How will I offer a compromise? Compromise is important, it is a viable tool, currently out of fashion in our political arena. Ok, you can have your tests, every three grades, but here is my sweet and sour offering: we also must stop social promotion. We have to stop sending children on to the next grade simply because they had a birthday.

What I propose is that children move when they are ready and they are ready when their teachers agree that they are ready. It brings new meaning to the oft maligned term, AYP. Along with establishing core standards to be completed at each level we must recognize that not all children mature at the same rate. Public education needs to change, I agree with this statement but educators should work to change it, not politicians; let them work on how to return to a reasonable dialogue in their workplace — they can fix their own house and let us take care of ours.

Thank you Dr. Krashen, for reading my words and for pointing out the facile nature of my argument. I do apologize but I have to admit I am making this up as a I go along. My articles are not products, they are syntheses and observations; not tenets but more the stuff of wishes, or prayers if you will, for the survival of public education.

1) http://blogs.edweek.org/teachers/living-in-dialogue/2012/04/stephen_krashen_testing_and_te.html

2) http://tucsoncitizen.com/tired-tucson-teacher/2012/05/18/the-common-core-standards-and-unfunded-mandates/

As the year winds down many teachers try to tie up the loose ends. Last week we were having an awards assembly to recognize good students, improved students, good sports and children who had demonstrated kindness to others. As I discussed names with my aide we reviewed who had previously been honored and who might deserve recognition.

I had one award left that I had not yet allotted, it was for children who had demonstrated kindness to others. After pondering the group for a while I mentioned a student that we had not previously considered. All year she had been a struggling student and we had expended enormous time and energy on her to try and bring her skills up to grade level. All our efforts had failed and in fact she had lost ground over the last quarter when the work became significantly harder. I had finally decided that we weren’t going to be able to remediate her in a normal setting and had put her in for testing to assess possible placement in special education.

As can be expected she had not contributed much to the classroom discussions or been seen as an asset in cooperative education activities with her classmates. She was quiet and unassuming like so many needy students who simply fade into the background.

Why single her out for an award then? There were several people in class who had made various overtures of kindness to others. Yet, as I recalled the year, I remembered that whenever we had a new student she was often one of the first to greet them. And when those new students had questions about rules or procedures; where to put finished work; where to find pencils; this child made it a point to respond to their questions. She was kind of the class ‘mom’. She did it almost offhandedly, without fuss, in a matter of fact manner. It wasn’t a big thing but it had helped several people solve simple problems so I decided to have her recognized for simply making herself available to others all year.

This was the day of the assembly, I quickly filled in my last certificate and sent it down to the master of ceremonies. A few minutes later we lined up and went to the cafeteria to witness the proceedings.

My class sat near the back, their legs folded, “criss-cross, applesauce” as good second graders should. Meanwhile a young man of more hats than Bartholomew Cubbins (that should send some to Googling) who came to our school this last year and has been the driving force behind the awards ceremonies, stood on the stage and read the names, shook their hands and passed the certificates out to the winners.

Eventually I heard the first of my student’s names called out but I knew that the kindness awards would be saved for last. My aide nudged me and nodded toward the girl that I had added as an after-thought to my list. Our little classroom mother sat stock still, her eyes glued to the announcer, her hands held out before her, both with fingers crossed.

“She’s sat that way the whole time,” my aide whispered. Of course hers was the last named called, like some TV suspense program, and the effect was electric at least, to me. She exploded up like a shot and took the certificate in her hands as if it was fringed in 24 carat gold. She stood in front of the group, her smile stretched from ear to ear, proudly displaying the award for all to admire. Later she ran back to show to me the paper I had just filled out a mere hour ago as if I had never seen it before and then she displayed it to anyone near her  to prove it was truly hers. Back in the room she carefully put it in her backpack to make sure it would make it home so she could show her family. I was more than surprised, I was astonished at the effect this scrap of paper had created in her.

It leaves me wondering what other gifts have been given out over the last three decades that I know nothing about and probably never will.

As a teacher, sometimes you just never know, and that’s a big part of the magic.

For those of you not currently virally endemic to the education profession, the concept of ‘unfunded mandates’ in a nutshell (which might be a good place to put them) are things that teachers are told to do that are not supported by supplemental materials or additional funding, thereby forcing the schools to find their own way to implement the objectives. This is, of course, on top of whatever else they are already doing and paying for.

Needless to reiterate, nonetheless I will, unfunded mandates have further exacerbated the problems of public education. Having watched NCLB and later ESEA become the bane of educators everywhere, how am I now to feel about the Common Core Standards? As simply as possible I have to say, “It’s about time!”

You heard me correctly. I believe nationally established educational standards are not only welcome but possibly the only way to save this foundering ship that is public education.

Currently a child that goes from one state to another, hopefully accompanied by their parents, faces the daunting task of being placed into the new system in operation where they have arrived. There is no guarantee that any of the skills that they have already mastered are still viable exigencies where they are, nor is there any reasonable way to predict what will be expected of them in their new environment; quite simply, curriculum is set, state by state.

With nationally established standards a good portion of the disconnect will be expunged from the process. Clear objectives, sequentially ordered and evaluated will be predetermined by the established nationwide curriculum.

But, you know there is always a ‘but’, this apparent Shangri-La is not without caveat. If educators are going to be held accountable for a nationally established curriculum some things must change. First and foremost, ESEA must go away. There is no place for the schizophrenic personality disorder that would result from teaching both to the curriculum and the test.

Teachers already know this; they have struggled with it for years. It is one of the reasons I like this time of year so much. I no longer have my concentration divided into two brutally warring camps. The test is over now. Unfettered, I can teach to the previously uncovered objectives and highlight those that I know my students will need next year without concern as to how many test questions actually focus on that skill.

A high stakes test does not think; it does not evaluate students on a daily basis; it does not even give teachers data that can be used for the current class of children. For me these tests are useless. A national curriculum however, that is pure gold.

When I left the profession of archaeology, my experience in early childhood education and some classes helped me get a job working with 0-5 year olds in preschool mainstreaming programs and as a home-bound child developmental specialist. I wrote IEPs, worked with identified children in preschools and made home visits to assist parents with developmentally delayed or disabled children. It was a complex and tiring job that demanded I learn a great deal of information and skills very quickly.

After seven years as a case manager and resource teacher I could see that I was rapidly approaching burn-out and so I left to go work in the public school sector in a regular classroom. Even then I stayed in my comfort area and focused primarily on kindergarten. Between my on-the-job-training, a strong early childhood principal and my wife’s masters in early childhood I was able to quickly assimilate what it takes to become a reasonably solid early childhood specialist. As I complete my 26th year in public education I can look back on eleven years as a kinder teacher, eight as a second grade teacher, as well as several summer school stints in first, second and third grades. More than two thirds of my public school career has been as a primary level elementary teacher.

I have taken the time to describe my background so that you will know that when I speak about men in education, I know what I am talking about. Sarah Sparks, writing in EdWeek says that despite a downturn in the economy, the number of male teachers is actually declining.1) There is especially a need for minority male teachers and yet the numbers continue to drop. She cites programs that are making a significant effort to recruit men into education and yet see little progress.

Chanté Chambers, the managing director of recruitment at historically black colleges and universities at the New York City-based Teach For America, sees the same trend playing out in her organization’s efforts to recruit teachers among high-achieving college students. She said education’s perceived low status is “definitely a major barrier” to bringing more men, and particularly black men, into the teaching field.

In my own school we are fortunate to have four male teachers, two in primary and two in intermediate levels. But I am also aware of many elementary schools where the only males in the school are not present in the classrooms, they may be custodians or social workers but their effect as a model for young children is minimal. What’s more, many male teachers in middle school and high school are leaving the field of education to work at other professions. My own belief is that we need many more men to choose education as a field and yet we are doing little to encourage them. In an article by Michelle Galley less than 5% of child care workers across the nation are male. 2) While I do not expect men to dominate the field I still feel that it is a tragedy that there is not more of a male presence in the lives of children in educational environments. So many families are fractured these days and many children are being raised solely by female parents with no significant male behavior role model.

1) http://www.edweek.org/ew/articles/2012/05/09/30maleteacher_ep.h31.html?qs=Male+teachers
2) http://www.edweek.org/ew/articles/2000/01/26/20men.h19.html

I’ve heard it before. Some years ago I stood out on the school playground during my charges’ 15 minutes of totally unsupervised PE and took a call from my daughter in Florida. “Dad,” she began, haltingly, “would you be mad at me if I switched my major from education to nursing?”

Colleagues say that children, hundreds of yards from where I was standing, jumped, startled, at my scream of unmitigated joy.

And yet I was also disappointed. Not in my daughter — she had made the right choice. I was disappointed that after so many years, my chosen field was so obviously unattractive to young college students.

There are not many new teachers out there. I hope my colleagues will forgive me an obvious observation but we are old. So many teachers are preparing not for another school year but to retire, after decades in the educational trenches, I worry; where will the next generation of dedicated instructors come from?

The 28th annual MetLife Teacher Job Survey, released in March found that teacher job satisfaction was at an all-time low:

Teacher job satisfaction has fallen by 15 percentage points since 2009, the last time the MetLife survey queried teachers on this topic, from 59 percent to 44 percent responding they are very satisfied. This rapid decline in job satisfaction is coupled with a large increase in the number of teachers reporting that they are likely to leave teaching for another occupation (17 percent in 2009 vs. 29 percent today). Teachers are also more than four times as likely now than they were five years ago to say that they do not feel their job is secure (34 percent today vs. 8 percent in 2006, the last time this question was asked). In addition, 53 percent of parents and 65 percent of teachers today say that teachers’ salaries are not fair for the work they do. (1)

It is not all dire and dreary, there is some good news in the survey. Teachers report that they feel more supported by their communities than they have in the past; a phenomenon I discussed in an earlier post when I pointed out that most parents thought their school was a good one — it was other schools that needed shoring up (http://tucsoncitizen.com/tired-tucson-teacher/2011/10/21/on-equity-and-assessment-in-education/).

What’s more, the MetLife survey reports that parent involvement is up. This is big! If there has been one complaint that I have heard voiced over and over by teachers it is that they just don’t get enough involvement from parents.

Teachers have not given up but they are still under fire, hopelessly underfunded and definitely under-appreciated. The newest “Teacher of the Year”, Rebecca Mieliwocki, says she wants to help “restore dignity to the teaching profession.”(2)

It will take more than that. In addition to restoring dignity we must restore funding and begin listening to teachers and other educators who are the ones struggling to keep American public education alive.  And that includes listening to the many educators who have signed on to end this morbid fascination with high stakes testing. A national resolution has been started (3) that seeks to find more equitable and less harmful measures of student achievement.

One area that shows much promise and is getting a lot of attention from educational professionals is the concept of project based learning. In Tucson we have seen the success of such programs as the JTED program which as well as being aligned with school objectives, concurrently focuses students attention on practical craft and employment opportunities so that they emerge from high school ready to begin to contribute to the economy and society.

A program in Oregon has also shown considerable success in the project based model while operating as an alternative high school. (4) A similar model would be easy to implement in public schools given our new found fascination with the Internet and social media. Used properly, doors can quickly be opened encouraging students imagination and natural desire to learn. The key is tailoring the curriculum to each student by assisting them in pursuing all the necessary disciplines of math, science, social studies, the arts and language arts needed to express the findings of their chosen project. Implementation of such radical learning styles could suddenly make students engaged and interested instead of sullen and angry. And concomitantly a similar result might be seen in our current instructors tired eyes and more importantly our profession could begin to increase its attractiveness to the young college students, who while certainly concerned with maximizing their earning power also would want to be able to report job satisfaction as strong in their chosen career.

(1) http://www.metlife.com/assets/cao/contributions/foundation/american-teacher/2011-Teacher-Survey-Findings.pdf

(2) http://www.edweek.org/tm/articles/2012/04/24/ntoy_2012.html?tkn=YVRFQGZ2NSoBe7P%2Fy7gGEs46%2FodFoFeiEX0X&cmp=ENL-EU-NEWS2

(3) http://timeoutfromtesting.org/nationalresolution/

(4) http://www.edweek.org/tm/articles/2012/04/18/projbased_or.html?cmp=ENL-CM-NEWS2

The foundation of the curriculum is in the areas of phonics, phonemic awareness, vocabulary, comprehension, and fluency. While I hold that these are all important to the process I feel that something is missing here. Unfortunately many research professionals are ignoring an obvious dichotomy that I see existing within the list. Phonics and phonemic awareness and separately vocabulary do not equate with comprehension and fluency.

To be an effective reader, a student must not simply identify the words by sound but by meaning and then string those words together with others to arrive at understanding. Reading means understanding what is read, the implications and the expected intuitions. When evaluating students as to their reading ability the only true measurement should be whether they understand what they have read. It doesn’t matter how fast, or slow, or how fluent or if they recognize the words and what they mean. If the reader cannot put it all together to understand what the writer is saying it means next to nothing.

Sawchuk states that the basis of the reading instruction support for teachers can be found in a study from Wisconsin. (2) The first stated goal is that “comprehension is the ultimate goal” and in that I agree. But pursuant to the premise is the understanding that without comprehension there is no reading. Personally I love Pavarotti’s various renditions of “Nessun Dorma“. As a bathroom baritone I may be able to teach myself how to pronounce all the words in Italian without understanding what a single one of them means; doing simple mimicry, without comprehension. Pavarotti can convey the passion of the moment with his voice but I have no understanding of the reasons for his transcendent emotions if I have not read a translation or learned how to actually read in Italian.

A study by Betty Hart and Tood Risley, from 1995 states that children living in poverty have as much as a “3 MILLION words heard” deficit by the age three. That means that they have heard 3 million fewer words than their peers in more affluent families. Yesterday, I was holding my 8 month old granddaughter, Annabelle, when she began the mewling that precedes her crying for something. My wife sitting across the room asked if she needed more of her bottle. Annabelle, sitting looking to my right at my wife instantly swiveled her head to look at the bottle sitting to my left. I borrowed a line from Jurassic Park, and said, “Clever girl!” A few seconds later I repeated the experiment with the same result.

My point is that, as in architecture where form follows function, in reading, phonics follow understanding. It comes down to the basic question of whether I would rather have a child able to figure out words by understanding content or discern content by knowing words? Both are important to the emerging learner but in the final analysis the former must supersede the latter because without meaning there is no communication and the purpose of reading is to communicate, just as I hope I am doing with you right now.

Which means what? It dictates that our focus should be on developmental education, rich in content and meaning for all children. If we want our children to be fluent readers, we must speak fluently to them, often and with a richness that makes them participants in language. We should be investing in appropriate early education, for all children, not drills and tricks but true language-rich environments that seduce the young child into learning language just as television, computers and hand-held game devices have seduced so many into the non-interactive world.

(1) http://www.edweek.org/ew/articles/2012/04/18/28teachertest_ep.h31.html

(2) http://165.189.60.210/Documents/Read.pdf

(3) Hart, Betty and Todd Risley, “The Early Catastrophe: The 30 Million Word Gap by Age 3!”. Meaningful Differences in the Everyday Experiences of Young American Children, 1995.

Sunday I attended Pima College’s production of “Inherit the Wind”, a play which was based upon a famous trial that occurred back in the twenties but featuring an argument that is as current today as it was then; the scientific concept of evolution. Recently Tennessee enacted a new bill that opens the door for the teaching of creationism in schools. The governor, despite the fact that he had initially said he would sign it, allowed it to become a law without his signature. Governor Bill Haslam said that he did not feel that the law “accomplished anything that wasn’t already allowed in Tennessee schools.” (1)

Our forefathers, though finite in their wisdom, were very specific about this issue: the age-old argument of separation of church and state. And it is an issue that could have severe repercussions for education and our country.

It is the difference between belief and knowledge. In school teachers teach what we have learned about the world; in science and social studies, language arts and math, but we do not teach people what to think about that knowledge. This is the crux of the argument in the play; people have the ability to think for themselves and they should do so from an informed position. But when it comes to people’s religion, that is personal and should remain so. Religion is something people believe and take on faith. That too, is their right

While I am happy to have someone teach me what they know, I do not want someone to teach me what I believe. We are a nation of many beliefs. When we discuss extending those issues of faith into the education arena, the danger lies in the decision about what is to be taught. Creationists say that their story should be taught equally with the concept of evolution, but which Creationist story? Judeo-Christian religion cannot even agree upon the truth of the existence of Christ. We have a Mormon running for President, if elected will Mormonism become part of the national educational discussion?

There are some areas of life that government should not stray into. Under our Constitution we are guaranteed freedom of religion but we are not given the right of imposing our religious beliefs on others and I want it to stay that way.

1 http://www.edweek.org/ew/articles/2012/04/10/514580ustennesseeevolution_ap.html?r=1697929713

That having been said, I am angry. There are things you just don’t do to people you work with and hope to continue working with. One thing you do not do is put them in a position to compromise them as a professional. At least you don’t do that if you value them as a professional. If you don’t care about them one way or the other, I suppose some people might dismiss their core principles as being unimportant, though I would hope that in my career I have never been guilty of having done that to a colleague.

Since I have been in TUSD I have focused much of my energies on what I see as our worst problem: lack of communication. I get in trouble all the time for sending emails that go out like the blast of a shotgun — everyone I think should be hit with the email gets a copy. I try to make sure that I have left no one out of the loop. I apologize if I bother people but I am adamant that communication within TUSD must improve.

One form of communication endemic to all teachers is the infamous lesson plan. Now I will readily attest that what I write as a lesson plan does not resemble the pages long product that I used to turn out in my younger days. But I try to write on a need-to-know basis and I would no more send a substitute into my class without a lesson plan than I would go outdoors without pants and believe me when I say, I never go outdoors without pants!

If my lesson plans are Spartan in their occurrence my wife’s are the polar opposite. Over the years she has felt compelled to reproduce all of her vast knowledge about children and ther educational development into voluminous lesson plans that outline not only the what, but the why and wherefore of each individual lesson. I can only watch in wonder as she fashions exhaustive daily guidelines that leave little or nothing to chance.

With a teacher like that there is one cardinal principle you do not ignore: Never leave them without enough time to prepare. The other less well known but nearly as equally to be avoided principle is don’t call a teacher on the day before they return to work from a much deserved break and tell them that they won’t be in class for the next week.

My wife was on the verge of tears this morning at the news that she needed to prepare for a sub tomorrow. I said to her, “Honey, you left plans. “I know I did,” she responded, “But I wasn’t planning on having a substitute.” Besides which, she continued, much of the work she was planning for her kids to do was here at home, she had, of course, been working on getting it to get it ready over the break (what else do teachers do when faced with free time?). Should she take it to school? Should she rewrite her plans (not a simple task) to make them more substitute friendly? Who was her sub? When my wife knows she is to be absent she usually tries to get someone she knows who understands how she works.

I could only watch in mute frustration as she agonized over these decisions knowing there was little or nothing I could do to alleviate her anxiety. Meanwhile I have to spend my last day of break in frustration over yet one more example of the total ineptitude of the people in my district when it comes to communicating effectively with each other.

The intent of most of the legislation is to put in place a “third grade limit” to social promotion. You can be promoted in kindergarten, and in first grade and in second grade even if your reading scores are not up to par but when you hit third grade your free ride is over — time to grow up and read.

This suggest a dangerous precedent to educators: a wall in third grade that will lead to clogging of classes at that grade and less success instead of more.

Educators know that all children do not read at the same age. They will tell you some who come into kindergarten have deciphered the great mystery and are already reading. My first daughter was one of those (2 ). Others don’t get it until first grade is well into the year, like my second daughter. Then there are those that are not ‘in the know’ until much later — like me.

What is important about this is that the person who best knows when that child will read is their teacher. They are the one working with that child on a daily basis, the ones seeing what progress is made, however incremental. Legislators are right to be concerned about the issue of children being able to read by a certain point in their school careers but they also have to be willing to work with the experts in the field to equitably do away with social promotion.

As a teacher I have retained children in grade. I have to admit that I am not a real strong proponent of how it should be employed. I tend to err on the side of time and encouragement. But I can look back on those children that I have retained in grade and say that I am two for three. Two out of every three that I retained were successful the next year. As a former baseball player I think that’s a pretty good batting average.

If I may be so bold as to tell legislators what I think their legislation in re education and retention in grade should look like, I would propose this: empower teachers by removing age as a criteria for placement and promotion.

Rather than setting a grade level as being the ‘end’ so to speak, I would facilitate the end to social promotion by taking away the expectation.

We are currently in the process of establishing nationwide standards for each grade level. This is long overdue. A child in second grade in Mississippi should be learning the same basic skills as a second grader in Arizona so that if one moves from one state to the other, the transition is less troublesome.

By removing age as a criteria, a child would move from grade to grade by completing the standards for that grade, not by having a birthday. The teacher would have to focus on teaching children on an individual basis more by maintaining portfolios. Testing would be reduced to progress monitoring on an individual basis, not stigmatizing whole classes. That would mean that states would have to fund education so that teachers had a reasonable number of children to work with to allow for the increased follow-along. Support would also have to be offered to assist those struggling by offering them tutoring and small group instruction. I would also look at the way classes are established more closely and encourage multi-grade class designations. Classes like Primary K-1 or Intermediate 4-5 might make more sense. This would also call for smaller class sizes to be enacted.

Certain caveats would need to exist. As a developmental educator I would retain the idea of being five years old as a minimum for entry though I would allow testing of four-and-a-half year olds. I would mandate preschool on at least a part-time basis and by this I do not mean, mini-academies, I refer to PRE-schools that focus on large motor development and socialization through play. These are areas that all primary educators recognize are sadly lacking in many of our current students.

I would also continue the long-standing practice of no double retention in schools. That is to say I would not want to see a thirteen year old in fifth grade. If a child has been retained in one grade in elementary school, they should not be retained again in that school. Inability to complete grade level objectives more than one year in six would suggest that educators and support professionals need to offer more specialized assistance to a student, not simply make them do it over again. Finally, I would ask that parents and legislators realize this is not about failure — it is about success. Our goal should not be to punish the student for struggling to learn but to celebrate their progress toward learning more. This can only be accomplished through adequate funding and a renewed dedication to the idea that educational professionals not only understand what they are doing but are the best ones to frame how they do it.

(1) http://www.edweek.org/ew/articles/2012/03/28/26retention_ep.h31.html

(2) http://tucsoncitizen.com/tired-tucson-teacher/2011/10/09/i-dont-teach-reading/