TE 818: Final Post

Esteemed Interim Superintendent:

            At our latest faculty meeting, it was brought to our attention that all district principals had the opportunity to meet you. Although several of your qualities and qualifications were discussed, three stood out as most relevant in terms of the impact that you could make in our school district.

            The first of the qualities, which stood out, is that you have an open-door policy, hence my audacity in addressing you with my concerns and input about the proceeding issue.

            Secondly, it has been touted that you are stronger than most superintendents in the area of curriculum and instruction and more specifically, you come with a very real working knowledge of our district’s core curriculum. I am partial to this document, because, although its contents have been tweaked and restructured, I worked for six months with our education service center and other teachers across the region to help develop the original second grade exemplar lessons that have now been eliminated due to state board of education politics. Teachers in our district are in an upheaval with this abrupt change. I have been told as much as it has been recently demonstrated, a school district must and can continue to function without a superintendent at the helm. Along those lines, it has also been stated that it is the day-to-day classroom instruction by excellent teachers that is at the heart of student learning. That may be true, but the majority of our teachers are greatly affected by recent changes and even more so by the appearance of no leadership and accountability. I am encouraged by said credentials in the area of curriculum and instruction and hope that you tackle the challenges that we face not only in academics, but also in student home, social, and economic environments. I believe the district is in desperate need of a self-worth curriculum to supplement the academic ones. Perhaps even one that could be interweaved into the existing curricula and that would also call for a more assertive parental involvement program. We cannot tackle the issues of low academic performance without the real buy-in from the home environment of education as a highly valuable commodity. I bring this forth, not to lay blame on parents, but to make them aware and teach them that their comments and attitudes about issues such as education, social status, language, and sexual orientation have more staying power with their children, our students, than what we teach at school eight hours a day for one hundred eighty-eight days a year.

            The third quality that was highly regarded our campus principal is that you are data driven. I take issue with this because I do not yet understand what data means to you. Are data numbers that lead to new directives about improving them, or are data sets of information that should lead to investigating their true causes and implementing honest and valuable changes? I do not dispute the notion of data. My concern is that we are not using the data to any real advantage nor as an instrument to implement real changes or improvements for our district, for our schools, and at the base of it all, those we service: our students. My experience with data, as part of the district’s Reading Task Force and having received two days worth of Kilgo training, is that we take these numbers, plug them in to some spread sheet, shake our heads at the unfavorable passing percentages, and then sit back and dole out demands for added rigor and changes to produce different results the next time around. But the data alone do not provide us with much information. I know that we live in a testing world where in the end it is only the numbers that matter (not the student as is so often said is the center of our business). However, there needs to be a movement to look beyond the data and instead focus on the content that produces the data. A spreadsheet will not tell us, particularly teachers, what led to results. Teachers need to be aware of how tested information is presented, how questions are asked, and even how answers are written. If we are to streamline our daily instruction to attain overall success on state testing, then we need to know what we’re facing. We need more than data.

            It is not my intention to solely present these concerns and walk away from the situation that they bring to the forefront. I hope that your strength in curriculum and instruction will allow for a strong correlation about how we desperately need one to improve the other. I welcome any opportunity to be an active participant in any concerted efforts to work toward a revamping of how data is used to drive how TEKS are addressed and taught based on what could actually be invaluable data.

TE 818: Synthesis: Theme 5: Standards, Measurement, and Testing

As I try to pull my thoughts together for this final synthesis, I find myself all over the place. There are so many points that I want to address in each of the three readings. The only thing that saves me is that I referred primarily to Sir Ken Robinson's TED Talk for my initial post.

Let's see if I can thread a final thought together here. This summer I was on Royal Baby Watch as many others. My son (gosh, he provides so much good material) was appalled at the spectacle of it all and said on more than one occasion, "You know, we fought a war so that we wouldn't have to care about what happens on the other side of the pond." This comes crashing back to me as I reread through the points made by Apple and Sleeter and Stillman, specifically the latter, in noting that curriculum in reading/language arts and history-social sciences "rests most comfortably on historically dominant groups' perspectives, language, and ways of seeing the world" (Sleeter and Stillman, p. 43). I believe it was in the readings of Theme 4 that there was reference to structuring curriculum way back to the belief of our Founding Fathers. Well, weren't the Founding Fathers fighting to have a country and/or society that was not tied to what was going on in England? We are being corralled to teach a common curriculum based on a specific group's ideals and/or political agendas. I believe these political parties are in a panic. They have taken note of DATA such as those presented in a Bloomberg.com article (link below) that minorities are the majority. The historically majority population wants to make sure to secure their place in history before someone edges them out as they have tried, and continue trying, to do to minorities. Isn't this what led to the American Revolution in the first place?

There is nothing wrong with a national curriculum. There is nothing wrong with a national test. The premise of a national curriculum and national test and the manner in which it is implemented and interpreted is key. Shouldn't education be the cure for politics rather than the platform for it? So I make a full circle to Sir Ken Robinson's statement that "We need a revolution!" (Robinson, TED Talk, 2013).

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-06-13/white-share-of-u-s-population-drops-to-historic-low.html

TE 818: Theme 5: Standards, Measurement, and Testing

I like the way Sir Ken Robinson talks about education and learning being “organic” (Robinson, TED Talk, 2013). I know that to some extent, all teachers in a grade level should strife to “be on the same page” so to speak while teaching throughout the school year. However, with diverse student population, there has to be some wiggle room for lagging behind or moving ahead a day or two compared to your team members. In an ELL classroom in particular, there are days when vocabulary in any of our 5 core subjects is more challenging than others. This idea of organic education is even more interesting when he discusses standardized testing. There is a place for standardized testing, Robinson (2013) says, but it shouldn’t dictate teaching. We recently benchmarked in our district. It is amazing how dependent some teachers are in the results returned via scanned answer documents, rather than reading through the test and hand grading so that they can have a better understanding of what students missed. Better still, begin to determine or try to understand why they chose a particular incorrect answer. I find the incorrect responses to provide more valuable information than the correct ones. We want to be data driven, and I see a place for it, but it is my belief that we can’t fix or improve the data outcome if we don’t know what to tackle. As Apple states, I am not "opposed in principle to the idea or activity of testing," (Apple, p.24). I am realistic in knowing that there will always be some kind of testing accountability. Why, I was a 10th grader in Brownsville, Texas (Hoff, 1999) once upon a time, way before TAAS. I found it interesting that both Hoff (1999) and Sleeter and Stillman (p.32) talked about alignment when it came to standardized testing and textbooks. "Alignment" is certainly a buzz word that I have heard more than once when it comes to textbook adoption and test prep material. I have talked before about being on district textbook adoption committees, and I am currently tagged for our Science textbook adoption (thank goodness because the textbook we have now has been around for over 12 years!). Each textbook company presents their aligned curriculum, but what I realized in the last go-round, and going back to Amanda's Theme 5 introduction post, is that Pearson is the publisher for them all. So. Why put a textbook committee through the process of choosing an aligned textbook if the money is going to the same place no matter which we choose? Hoff also states "that test writers need to do little more than revise off-the-shelf products to satisfy the needs of states" (1999). If the test writers are not completely rewriting their tests, I suppose textbook writers can follow suit. Although I will say, the last two Texas standardized test remakes have been drastically different from the one before.

I believe that a national curriculum and therefore testing could be appropriate in subject areas mathematics and science. Areas with concrete conclusions, although I’m certain some would argue that point about science. Social Studies could stand to be a national curriculum if it were presented fairly across the board, but there are too many variables including home state indoctrination. Does every state do this in the 4th and 7th grades, or is it just Texas? But I have to agree with Apple’s statement that while “…the proponents of a national curriculum may see it as a means to create social cohesion and…to improve our schools by measuring them against “objective” criteria, the effects will be the opposite” (Apple, p.32). I see this happening within our district where we surely have the same curriculum as the other11 elementary schools. Yet, with the socioeconomic differences within our city limits, test results, such as the benchmarking we did last week, come back presenting huge gaps in student achievement "...given existing differences in resources and in class..." (Apple, p.32) between schools. If we see it within a district, it must be amplified ten-fold across the country.

http://www.parentvoicesny.org/?page_id=19

http://thedailycougar.com/2013/10/14/texas-opts-adopting-californias-common-core/

TE 818: Synthesis: Theme 4: Curriculum Creation

I don't know what kind of curriculum I would create. I would hope that as a classroom teacher, I would stay true to KNOWLEDGE rather than to a personal agenda. In anticipation of such an endeavor, I have to admit that I am quite hard-headed and can see myself falling prey to certain behaviors that the state board of education (or certain individuals) exhibit. However, because I do not have strong religious beliefs nor ever vote a straight party ticket, I believe I would be more open-minded about not stream-lining curriculum to a rigid point of view.

But then I take Edward's comments to my original post into consideration. Would having a more open mind make it more difficult for teachers to teach every part of this kind of curriculum. As it is, we have to be creative on how we hit, referring strictly to Texas, the TEKS. Would creating a more "open-minded" curriculum pose still a greater problem for teachers in terms of meeting the required instructional elements?

Tyler discusses filling the gaps in student development (1949, p.8). What, then, do we do in communities where, due to low socioeconomic circumstances, the gap is greater than it would be elsewhere. Does the bigger gap lead to still more delays in meeting the requirements of any state's curriculum? In addition, if we wait for the studies which determine where the gaps are, are we not missing the mark with an entire group of students? By the time the necessary information gets into the hands of a classroom teacher, the students to whom studies may be directly related are gone.

I attended a conference about a month ago where one of the breakout sessions was "student research." My impression was that the results of some study were going to be presented. Instead, the teachers presenting focused on Tier II instruction and discussed how the classroom teacher should research activities and strategies to meet student needs once those needs were determined. It implied more work for a classroom teacher, but the idea was to act now rather than wait around to see what resources became available. "The importance of seeing the implications of the data in the light of acceptable norms cannot be overemphasized because the same items of data permit several possible interpretations (Tyler, 1949, p.14). Herein lies the trick. Where one teacher will put forth great effort in research and implementation another teacher may not even initiate research or not be willing to do the same. A teacher should take more control over the delivery of curriculum in a classroom. This is the person who knows what lies within the confines of their four walls. It seems to go somewhat against the "team work," "work smarter, not harder" mindset, true, but a general collaboration can still exist without glossing over certain skills and concepts because one teacher is trying to keep pace with all the others. Besides, the odds in pacing are bound to even out as "simple" skills and concepts come along which will not take as long to master as others.

I believe there should be more teachers on state curriculum development boards. I can see how this has its own set of problems as teachers are not available for extended periods of time until the summer months, but there really needs to be a strong representation of people who are "in the trenches," present, and accounted for when it comes to curriculum development.

TE 818: Theme 4: Curriculum Creation

I hope I wasn’t supposed to read these articles in sequence, because you know as soon as I saw “Texas,” I went straight to that article. "Can We Please Mess With Texas?" (Shorto, February 2010).

If I address the issue of text book adoption, I have to say it's all a money game. I was on the district text book adoption committee which adopted the most recent reading text book. This must have been in late 2009 and/or early 2010, by the time it was all said and done. All of the materials were TAKS formatted (our recently defunct state test), and 2 years later, after who knows how much money, we have a new test with basically renders the "extras," which are part of the original purchase, useless for those who live and breathe test-teaching. In addition, the state knew that there were new TEKS coming down the pike and a new assessment to boot. If there were so many requests of text book publishers to meet conservative standards, why not have them address the new TEKS as well. By the way, it’s pronounced “tex,” not “teaks.” The “teaks” pronunciation refers to an entirely different program and if you walk into the right conference room, you can get tangled up in a whole pronunciation conversation. 

Shorto cites Frances Fitzgerald and her 1979 book America Revised to say "if there is one thing to be said about American-history textbooks through the ages it is that the narrative of the past is consistently reshaped by present-day forces. America is no longer portrayed as one thing, one people, but rather a hodgepodge of issues and minorities, forces and struggles." It is amazing that there are so many people who want to live with a definition from hundreds of years ago. There have been too many advancements in the world to keep wanting to shove us back into that box.

Shorto also cites Kathy Miller as saying something that I was not perhaps fully aware of: the notion that there are people who are not educators, who do not spend day after day in classrooms, making decisions about curriculum. “It is the most crazy-making thing to sit there and watch a dentist and an insurance salesman rewrite curriculum standards in science and history."  You know, there were real classroom teachers involved in producing those CSCOPE lessons. They were based on the existing TEKS. I can tell you that where the TEKS were specific about what content had to be met, so were the lessons. And I know that I was not asked my religious nor political affiliation before starting work on the project. Were they perfect? No. But neither is any text book curriculum out there. I will say this, and it has been repeated to us on many occasions, the TEKS are the what we teach. How we teach them is an entirely different ball game. And so I pose the question: Why not impose HOTS (higher order thinking skills) questions to enhance the curriculum? After all, the entire purpose of our "new" TEKS, as I understand it, is to ensure college readiness. The direction in which students move is up to them. How does the Christianity-based language of the Constitution apply today? Wouldn’t it be great if students could stop and think about how to shape an entirely new nation? What would they, as founders, include in a declaration of independence or a constitution?

I will cite one more point in Shorto's article. He shares a discussion with Tom Barber about Prentice Hall publishers changing the language of Magruder's American Government to read "enduring Constitution" from "living Constitution." It seems quite interesting at this point that McLeroy is exercising more of a "living Constitution" approach than an "enduring Constitution" when it comes to curriculum.

Shorto's article was written in 2010. Since then, the man he ran against, Thomas Ratcliff, was elected to the State Board of Education. I realize I went off on a particular curriculum and not curriculum in general, and I may have ranted and babbled all at once. Our school district is very much affected by this whole battle, as I suppose most of the state of Texas is. However, I maintain that "up north" school districts have more resources in terms of exposure for their students and can to some extent "fill the gap" that close-mindedness creates. I worry about the development and preparedness of our students as contributing members of society if our schools are tied to certain one-sided ideals, morals, and beliefs. 

The following are new articles, recent articles, about this hot mess. 

I know that CSCOPE does not contain student information.

http://www.texasobserver.org/dan-patrick-thomas-ratliff-slug-cscope/

This talks to the point that educators are capable of making curriculum decisions in the classroom, which emphasizes the comment I made earlier about the TEKS being what we teach, but teachers can still determine how we teach them. 

http://tfninsider.org/2013/10/04/texas-ed-boards-cscope-review-could-lead-to-more-political-warfare-over-instructional-materials/

TE 818: Synthesis: Theme 3b: What Should Schools Teach? "Controversial" Curriculum

Even as a write this synthesis post, I feel that my blood is not boiling as it should be. I came across the following poem...

http://www.latinamericanstudies.org/latinos/joaquin.htm

...and I could appreciate the sentiments, but I do not feel the bitterness and/or injustice that this poem conveys.

As I continue to think on it, and even after just having submitted my "brief" on Theme 3b, I think it may be because I honestly believe that I am a successful person. I do not feel oppressed. I do not feel that legislation could keep me from learning what I want to know about my culture and heritage.

Should schools teach it? Certainly. Heck, I try to inspire my students by EMPHASIZING Hispanic contributions to Texas' independence. National Hispanic Heritage Month is a big deal in my classroom. At the public school level, I think we're more likely to fall victim to the loss of Hispanic studies, and yet, I don't think it will be "felt" so much because there's a real hit-and-miss in public education. Some students may love and learn it, others are just going to go through the motions as is the case with any other subject. The college/university level is where I believe the loss will be detrimental. At this point, we have students, professors, and/or researchers who have a real passion for promoting and keeping alive our culture's contributions to the state, country, and inevitably, the world.

The initial interest and pride in Hispanic culture and heritage really does need to come from home. It is up to parents to dig deep and make the connections for our children so that they SENSE the absence of acknowledgement and take initiative to ask for educational courses to validate their (our) presence in this society.

I will go a step further and say that it is also necessary that the education about our advancements and changes as a culture come from the home also. We need to grow and emphasize changes for the better. Although not necessarily about Hispanics, the following link talks to gender roles, which are very prevalent in the traditional Hispanic culture.

http://www.science.tamu.edu/articles/1130/?utm_source=tamutimes&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=2013-10-22

So perhaps the point-of-view, or the basis for continued Hispanic studies should focus on our strength. "Don't leave me out" is so needy. "Where would you and where WILL you be without me?" That sounds like a better approach.

TE 818: Theme 3b: What Should Schools Teach? "Controversial" Curriculum

I will begin with a parental view of not just these two issues, but all controversial issues in general. Recently my son relayed a story to me about something that had happened at school and in the middle of it all, he said, "gay," in a whisper as if he were afraid that someone would hear him. When he was done, I asked why he had done that and went on to explain that when we whisper words like gay, homosexual, illegal immigrant (because that's a word that gets whispered a lot in my neck of the woods), we perpetuate the stigmas, discrimination, and overall backward thinking that comes along with them. I can honestly say that although my husband and I have open conversations with our son, I am glad that the school takes the initiative to put "it" out there.

"Now we’re told we can talk about race, but it has to be through a multicultural perspective" (Siek, 2012). This, too, will come to an end. A state-wide curriculum in Texas was scrapped over the summer months because a parent got a hold of a high-school social studies lesson in which, in just so happened, the Muslim religion was being discussed as part of a "big picture" lesson. That's all it took for everyone to get riled up, and, as with so many other things, the politicians won. "Our students have already learned so much this year and this process is teaching them so much more. They are restless, ready to act and eager for their voices to be heard, and our community is equally supportive to their desires" (Acosta, 2012). It would be wonderful if the young students directly affected by this can in turn affect some real changes in how they are being edged out of the history of the state they live in. I wonder if being true to student-centered instruction, and allowing these students to "teach" themselves, or learn by way of self-directed investigation/discovery would also end up against the law. Will student research projects also be shut down to fulfill a political agenda?

In terms of curbing bullying all around, our school district has staff development and student presentations either through the counselor or outside agencies and by classroom teachers. Students and parents are asked to sign off on a parent/student responsibility and consequences contract no later than the 2nd week of school. It works for the most part along with reminders throughout the year. Education about tolerance for homosexuality has to begin at home though. I have had students come to school and refer to students that they don't like by calling them "gay" or (Spanish slang) "joto." Neither the speaker nor the target of the slurs are fully aware of what these words mean, but they interpret them to be "bad." As a classroom teacher, I know that I'm not teaching these words to my students, so they and their connotation must be coming from home...Education begins at home. (On a personal note, if parents whose children come to school ready to utter these words were as dedicated about helping with homework and showing up to parent/teacher conferences, we would all be much better off. Students. Teachers. Community.) When these words are spoken, we are somewhat forced to address the issue, and that puts us between a rock and a hard place because we do not have a curriculum for this. What do you say? What do you attempt to make the student understand?

“By the time kids get to high school, it’s too late," says Tess Dufrechou (Eckholm, 2010).

TE 818: Synthesis: Theme 3a: "Unconventional" Curriculum and Schooling

Can't we all just get along?

There has to be some kind of balance between an "unconventional" curriculum and meeting state-mandated testing requirements. Was state testing even an issue in the readings we had this week? If not, it'll come up, that's for certain.

I believe that one of the biggest problems is being able to tell the difference between curriculum and lesson delivery. Many of our teachers immediately associate resources with curriculum and teach according to what the resource provides to meet the curriculum. There is no consideration of the students' interest level or knowledge base. So when a student is not successful, the teacher panics and ironically, feeds the student more of the same of what they were unsuccessful with in the first place. I can see that, if we make lesson delivery something authentic and/or relevant to students, we can include the soft skills which would lead to more well-rounded individuals. When students see how Math, Science, Social Studies, Writing, and Reading skills apply to their every day lives, we can provide students with an answer to, "When will I ever use this in real life?" and then there will be some relevance to their time spent in a classroom. We are pressed for time as it is, and I am not suggesting that every lesson to turn into a drawn-out project, but there has to be some sense of discovery for our students. That "connect" will provide them a basis for practice outside of the classroom (grocery store, movie theater, gasoline station), without our guidance or insisting, and THAT will turn into consideration of outside factors. How neat would it be that our students "see" the use of the character traits that we are teaching them at school in action and how it affects them? This authentic learning will lend itself to application in other mediums, for example, state testing. See how that came full circle?

TE 818: Theme 3a: "Unconventional" Curriculum and Schooling

“We don't need the current schooling system” (Mitra; Build a School in the Cloud). I would like to say that this statement shocked me, but it really didn’t. In my mind it was not developed as far as only needing a grandma in the room, but the seed that a “teacher” should be more of a facilitator in the classroom was planted some time back. In general, I believe this is the way to go. Reflecting on Mugan’s A Short Introduction to the Studio School, there are many times when I just want to get in, I want you to tell me what I need to know, and I want to get out. However, there is no substitute for doing the work yourself, hands-on. As is the case with our students because so many of them lack the sit, listen, and learn skill.

I return to a thought that I expressed in Theme 2, "How is present day schooling going to prepare them for that world?" (Mitra). There is a gap between what is being taught and what will be necessary when students walk out our high school doors. And another thought occurs to me. One of our readings in Theme 2 talked about how there is so much available and accessible research out there about learning, curriculum and best practices. Now that I read and see and hear more of it, it truly does boggle the mind about how classroom teaching can boil down to so much testing. Mitra was able to collect data and show growth through unconventional teaching. Granted, there was testing involved (the 0-30% test), but the delivery was unconventional. I have tried several times to teach outside the box only to be corralled back in for testing. Could we not produce better-educated citizens through more student-directed learning? How long do we continue with the typical and rigid delivery of instruction that Nussbaum and Eisner say, and we know, goes on, and expect different results?

Eisner’s discussion of the Null Curriculum makes a lot of sense. We want to churn out better, less biased citizens with a varied repertoire of thought process, but THAT we’re not teaching them (98). I see that process learning does not develop these qualities in students beyond those who already have it as a natural ability.

I like what Mitra had to say about educational self organization, “it’s not about making learning happen, it’s about letting learning happen.” In fact, although not through the use of computers, I often answer my students’ questions with questions in an attempt to scaffold their discovery process. That scaffolding applied to the Null Curriculum could lead to those better-educated citizens we’ve been looking for.

TE 818: Synthesis: Theme 2: The History of Curriculum in the United States

I didn’t read the Dewey chapter for my initial post, so I referred to it for an additional perspective for my final post. Two things to say about The Child and the Curriculum. First is that just yesterday I was working with our education service center. The presenter talked about how this particular curriculum included the Performance Indicator (test of sorts) in each lesson so that teachers could keep “the end in mind” so that lesson delivery can build toward that end. And so it has been from the beginning of this curriculum endeavor. The Performance Indicators are always listed at the beginning of the instructional focus documents and the exemplar lesson. I’m going to have to ask one day if they are following Dewey’s model. The second is that I like how Dewey emphasizes that a child has an interest in what is being taught to him. “Appealing to the interest upon the present plane means excitation…” (p. 112). I have served as a new-teacher mentor several times, and one of the points I make to my new teachers is that student learning has to be meaningful in order for them to engage. This is not an original idea of mine. I heard it at one of a hundred professional development sessions, but it made so much sense to me that I pass it along every chance I have. “They must operate, and how they operate will depend almost entirely upon the stimuli which surround them…” (p.114). I do believe it is up to teachers to take the curriculum and find the stimuli that will both meet the curriculum requirements and hold real meaning for the student.

TE 818: Theme 2: The History of Curriculum in the United States

Reading through Schubert's perspectives on curriculum, I immediately identified with the Intellectual Traditionalist. For a moment I thought it was because it was the first one I read, and I linked it to the hypochondriac who believes his/her symptoms match every illness in the book. As I read through the others, I found, as Schubert said, that I was a "blend" of probably two other perspectives, but the main ingredient was that of the Intellectual Traditionalist. The place where I found I most related to the Intellectual Traditionalist was where the textbooks were concerned. I told myself that I didn't consider myself an elitist, unless you count where I try to stay away from textbooks as much as possible because I find them so limiting, particularly in Reading, and I won't even go into how embarrassingly outdated our Science textbooks are. I have been with my district for ten years, and they were already old when I got here. Reel it back in, Lupita. "Too many teachers do not know or appreciate the depth and breadth of their subject, so how can we expect them to inspire others to immerse themselves in it?" (Schubert, p.2). I know that because I am a good reader and writer, I put on a great show for my students when teaching these subjects. I had to develop a better understanding of Texas history and Science in order to put the same effort into those areas, and Math, well, let's say it's a work in progress, and I can tell the difference in my classroom. Where the Social Behaviorist was concerned, I clearly understood the point of hanging on to old courses and/or teachings..."Fish Grabbing with the Bare Hands and Saber-tooth Tiger Chasing with Fire." Times and needs change and we must change with them. Also from the Social Behaviorist's perspective, I related to the "what" and the "how" comments about curriculum as I have gone through a number of trainings where this was reiterated after our district adopted a new curriculum. What also struck me here was the discussion about a needs assessment. I'm assuming someone in Texas put one of these together to develop our TEKS. And they have obviously re-re-revisited that needs assessment many times as our TEKS are now "college readiness" based. I seemed to have a lot to say about the Social Behaviorist quoting Bobbit..I get it, except that by the time their assessment is over, the students who would have benefited most from the assessment are probably out of high school and on not-to-college, or are pursuing the jobs and/or degrees of the previous needs assessment. The students who will receive the instruction based on the new needs assessment will be yrs down the "ladder, " and by the time they reach the job/college world, the results of a new needs assessment will be on the horizon. In other words, there is a HUGE gap between needs assessments and implementing the results to those who would truly benefit from it. The last tidbit I will include about the Social Behaviorist, I'm beginning to think I might swing this way after all, is the discussion about "[T]he multitude of handbooks, encyclopedias, journal articles, synoptic texts, and research reports that exist make it inexcusable that research is not a stronger basis for curriculum development" (Schubert, p.5). I wonder if the idea of a tailor-made curriculum is too daunting for the policy makers. It's interesting that teachers end up tailoring the curriculum to meet the needs of our students on a daily basis. Schwab also makes mention of how educators are only brought into the picture for developing assessments and for evaluation (p.125). In reading the Critical Reconstructionist's reply to the Second Questioner, I began to wonder…would I be perpetuating educational injustices were I not seeking my master's degree? I mean, I would then only be exposed to whatever professional development came down the pike, and I would be responding to my social environment. I believe myself to be a rather intelligent person, and to some extent, I can see having run into some research on the whole thing, and I do see inequities in the system. Finding teaching materials in Spanish alone will suffice. But how time would be lost in the long run?

I have spent a lot of time on this, and I can obviously provide support for each of the perspectives. I will end my observation of Schubert's article by focusing on his reference to Dewey and not to become a "card-carrying" anything. I know it's not the same, or maybe it is, but this is what I think about when we attend a professional development session. There is an underlying pressure to implement every aspect of the training every day in every subject. This is entirely too overwhelming for any teacher. I say, take the best of each training and work with that. After all, if you pay close enough attention, they all tend to overlap one another. Also, do what works best in your classroom and for your students. That ALONE might require you to change your approach from year to year.

I saw in Popkewitz and Schwab's articles that Labaree's idea of education being a "public good" was present. Schwab says "...for societies do not exist only for their own sakes, but for the prosperity of their members as individuals as well" (p.28). So yes, we want students to be able to serve society, but Schwab also emphasized meeting the individual's needs so that they can help out with the public good. Popkewitz was a little more direct, I believe. "These technologies linked public objectives about good health and the moral order of the social body with individual personal health and well-being" (Popkewitz, p.185).

In general, I found Popkewitz's History of Curriculum a difficult read. I did relate to his citing Thorndike that the purpose of education "was to shape the mind and the spirit so the individual can be responsible for her or his progress and trustful of her or his future" (Popkewitz, p.183). I made an instant and personal connection to this. I do believe that we are all responsible for where we allow our education to lead us. I found the establishment of a curriculum in the United States interesting, and did I understand this correctly...the use of the word "all" doomed curriculum to inequities from the onset? And as a final chuckle, I can see Paul Rabinow's (which fittingly I read as "Rainbow" at first) and the whole "education is aesthetic." I have to think about how to make my lessons "look pretty" every day so that I can keep kiddos engaged and interested.

TE 818: Synthesis: Theme 1: Conflicting Notions of the Purposes of Schooling

After reading several TE 818 posts and responding to the required 2 and also reading through the responses on my own post for this theme, I realize that focusing on only one aspect of our readings left most of my thinking unsaid, even on the one point.

I will maintain that education is a commodity to me, in each of the perspectives from which I commented. I can see how it came across a little crass, and perhaps even very black and white. I do, in fact, have a very real love of and enthusiasm for learning which I connect very closely to a formal education. I say these last few words because we all know that not all learning comes within the confines of an academic institution.

I'll refer to my "teacher self" and say that I hope I convey this to my students on a daily basis. I want them to come to school wondering "what will I learn today?" and I want them to leave thinking "Wow! I can't wait to come back tomorrow." That's what I want for them. Do I tell them that they have a better shot in the world with an education? Sure. But I also tell them that if they don't actively participate in their learning, they'll never appreciate where it can take them. I don't think I've ever told them that they need to fill a specific niche in the real world, although the teaching of good character does lend itself to discussion about the kind of person they want to be outside of what occupation and/or career they will hold. And Jillian hit it on the nose in response to my post when she said we're not in teaching to get rich (or something very close to it). I really do work to provide quality learning for my ELLs, more than anything to build their confidence and self-worth. Public good? I will say this, though. I really do wish many more parents would see their child's education as a commodity even if only to light a fire under them to speak up for an equal education for their children, to get them involved and in the schools to see what's going on between teachers and students.

As my "parent self," I know that I have instilled a love of learning in my son. He's always gone off on his own either exploring, reading, or observing. Is that a "private good?" I am now trying to develop in him a sense of loyalty, if you will, or some connection with an institute of higher learning to get him a little more excited about college. He KNOWS he has to go to college, and I suppose that's the "commodity" point of view, but I want him to look forward to it as what may well turn out to be some of the greatest years of his life.

As a student, I will say again that I love learning. I remember when my relationship with my husband started getting serious. I sat him down and told him that my education was very important to me. I didn't know what I was going to be "when I grew up," but I had to complete my degree no matter how long it took. I told him in no uncertain terms that if he could not support that part of me, that it was a real, honest to goodness deal breaker. We could negotiate children, a home, and anything else, but there was no negotiating my education.  I needed that piece of paper. I had no idea where it would lead me, if anywhere at all, but I needed it. As I mentioned in my original post for the cycle, I know that a degree from MSU carries more weight than one from the local university (commodity), but this degree is really for private/personal reasons.

So much to say about this. I don't know if I packaged my thoughts any better than I did the first time in trying to provide the flip side of my original post. "Too many minds..." as one character says in The Last Samurai.

TE 818: Conflicting Notions of the Purposes of Schooling

I just spent the entire day writing a reading lesson plan for my grade-level for the upcoming week. It was late. It was due at the very latest this past Friday. One of the reasons that it took so long is that I was working to create a lesson which would engage students from the onset and prompt them, or lead them to that higher order thinking that the entire educational world speaks of. But how does that get accomplished in a one-hour block each day, in two languages, with accommodations for special education, GT, and RTI students, and pending benchmarks and three grades due for the grade book each week? Talk about losing sight of the purpose of schooling.

Labaree talks about social mobility in education, making education a commodity. At the elementary level, particularly in our bilingual classes, we don't see much of the parents who are fighting to make sure that their child/student is being distinguished in the classroom. We see them at award ceremonies at the end of the school year which indicates that they, too, see the value of academic success. However, the benefit to their children would be immensely multiplied were their interest year round.

As a parent, I see education as a commodity. I removed my son from the school district that I work in after his elementary years. As a district employee, I was privy to the state test academic outcomes of the middle schools available to my son. In addition, there were several instances in which the very teachers at the middle school level were not very flattering with their comments about their own schools. I also did not want my son to go to school to participate in a drill-and-kill academic environment. I placed him in a charter school, and so far, I am convinced it was the best decision we could have made for him. The school does resort to test-taking practice and/or strategy sessions as testing approaches, but for the most part, I see that a "real" education is being provided. I see that his school diploma and the college readiness that is highly and publicly emphasized will weigh more heavily than my school district's high school diploma when it comes time for college applications.

As a student I see that education is a commodity as well. Having received my bachelor's degree at the local university, I feel that it does not weigh as heavily as if I had received one from MSU or Texas A&M. In my decision to attend graduate school, I could have had that out of the way years ago if I would have simply enrolled in the local university's graduate program. I did not see how that would enhance my education. Some people see it as a chip on my shoulder, and perhaps it is, but I dare anyone to tell me that a master's in education from UT Brownsville weighs the same as a master's in education from MSU does. By the same token, I have a sister who does not have a college education, but who worked her way up through management levels of a retail chain which shall remain nameless, and now has a management position at a pharmacy chain which, too, shall remain nameless. She makes crazy amounts of money more than I do and never had a student loan to repay, much less a second one. Now let's compare the exchange value of her high school diploma and my pending graduate degree. She wins. In terms of salary, anyhow.

As a school teacher, I see education as a commodity, too. Its basic value and exchange value are different from those of my personal life. I want my bilingual students to be able to compete with all students at their grade level, in fourth grade as much as in subsequent years. Their ability to perform in English becomes an academic as well as a social issue for them. There is somewhat of a lingering stigma about the quality of a bilingual education in our school system. In my classroom, I work to provide an equal education for them, but I don't know what happened before me or what will come after. Another way that education becomes a commodity for me is that of accountability. The exchange value in this aspect is a high one in terms of job security. This is where the purpose of education becomes somewhat skewed. Was I hired and kept on to teach, to provide what I consider a "real" education to elementary school children, or was I hired to meet state-mandated testing requirements? I ask this question because before becoming a teacher, I worked at that local university from which I received my bachelor's degree. It was fed primarily from the local high schools which were achieving recognized and exemplary status for state test performance. Curiously, though, there were a large number of remedial courses having to be offered to these students. Now the question becomes, "What is the REAL exchange value of passing high school level state-mandated tests?" This does, in fact, place a huge strain on classroom instruction.

My goal for this year is to provide the best education for my students whether they choose an academic or vocational future.

TE 818: Introduction Post

Hello, All.

My name is Lupita Ochoa. On our course roster and on the book club list, you will see my name listed as Maria Guadalupe Ochoa. One-and-the-same, I promise. I tried for about an hour and a half to get a neat little video done to upload as an introduction, but finally gave up.

This is my second semester of the MATC program. I started my undergraduate studies at MSU (Go GREEN!) in 1990, but was unable to complete my bachelor's degree, so successful completion of the MATC program is hugely significant to me.

I am in my 11th year as an educator in south Texas, mostly as a 4th grade teacher. The past 3 years have been one heck of a roller coaster ride. It started off leaving my campus to move to a brand new campus. About 4 weeks later, I received a letter that I had been assigned to a Kindergarten classroom. Who does that to a 4th grade teacher? I thought the best thing to do was introduce myself to my new administrator and ask, beg if necessary, if the possibility of a grade change existed. Fortunately, it did. I started off the 2011-2012 school year as a 3rd grade teacher. Did that for 9 weeks before I was moved to a 4th grade classroom (ah, home again). Started the 2012-2013 school year as a 4th grade teacher. Did that for five (yes, five) days before I was promoted to an Instructional Specialist. Ended the school year thinking I'd be doing that for at least another 3 years. I was wrong. A board of trustees decision eliminated the position across the district, and so now I'm back in a 4th grade classroom (ah, home again). As an added bonus, our district is participating in a grant which, long story short, has me capped at 14 students, and only 13 of them showed up. How great is that!?!

I am an EC-4 Bilingual Generalist certified teacher, so I have worked with ELLs my entire career. Last semester I had to rely on memory to relate to course topics, so I am really looking forward to making direct and current connections to my studies in this semester. I have my note-taking notebook ready to go.

I currently don't have any spare time, but I'm going to work on it. I'd like to up my running abilities from zero to 5k by November 9th. The Color Run is in town and I've already paid my fee. I like to read. I keep saying I'd like to read a good mystery, but I haven't picked one up since grade school. Still can't get through Anna Karenina, but did finally read Pride and Prejudice. I like to plan our summer family vacations to places we've never been before. This summer we spent a few days in Colorado Springs, and next year we're looking at Dallas.

Looking forward to the course. I'll work on that video post, too.

Concluding Post (TE 823; Summer 2013)

Esteemed Assistant Superintendent for Curriculum and Instruction;

For the 2012-2013 academic school year you made an attempt to help our new school improve on the dismal state exam results of 2011-2012. Thank you for taking such a dedicated interest in our campus. Teachers were excited and welcomed any and all assistance. However, the approach was one that only addressed state testing. It did not address our students in the manner that is readily expressed to us at the beginning of the year convocation where we are urged to know our students so that we can address underlying problems in their education or help to motivate them to excel and succeed. It was not in a manner that challenged teachers by stating “if you continue to do things the way you always have, you will continue to get the same results.” Instead, a consultant with a product to sell was sent to our campus, and state-mandated testing end results were the highlight of our teaching. Although test preparation could have been incorporated into the delivery of instruction, it should not have been the dominating factor. I believe there was a grossly missed opportunity here.

Opening a new school presented the perfect opportunity to implement those changes that are so vocally called for at the beginning of every school year. We had the opportunity to know that “every grade has a face, has a name, has a story.” Our school could have been, and I believe still can be, the model for the use of Differentiated Instruction and Understanding by Design (Tomlinson and McTighe, 2006).

Differentiated instruction, through staff meetings and even professional development sessions offered by the district, is somewhat pigeon-holed to address struggling learners. We see differentiated instruction as something that applies only to students labeled in special education and/or students who require remediation. In short, we see it as the “prescription” for those students who are not passing a given subject matter or for those students who would not pass otherwise. It is watered down to mean modifications and accommodations. At this point, rather than to view differentiated instruction as a benefit to the student, it is viewed as extra work for the teacher.  However, if we were to view differentiated instruction as an entirely different way of teaching every student every day in every subject area, rather than strictly modifications and accommodations, we would have an entirely new ball game. If we were to look at differentiated instruction beginning at the teacher level, have the teacher understand that we are going to live up to those beginning of year statements and change the manner in which we deliver instruction so that it is meaningful to those grades with faces and names, then we have a new level of learner understanding to look forward to in the coming months and years.  If we differentiate delivery of instruction from the outset, we will not only challenge ourselves out of our comfort zone, but I truly believe that our students will rise to the occasion.

Where we define differentiated instruction as an addition to our already burgeoning workload, Tomlinson and McTighe state that they “have ample evidence that students whom we often think of as “low performing” fare better with rich, significant curriculum” (p.84). Additional research references indicate that low performers “increase their grasp of advanced skills at least as much as their high-achieving counterparts when both experience instruction aimed at meaning and understanding” (p.84, citing Knapp, Shields, & Turnbull, 1992, p.27). Clearly defined lesson expectations for all students and clearly defined outcomes with rubrics to indicate appropriate completion can be laid out for all students. Drill and kill is not the best learning approach for any student because it doesn’t have meaning. Is the memorizing of multiplication facts or significant dates in history important? Certainly, but if a student does not know how to apply those rote skills to real world situations, it will not mean anything to him and will be lost as quickly as they were gained. The student will also not have the ability to apply it to standardized testing questions, which quickly becomes our primary goal.

One potential toward Differentiated Instruction and Understanding by Design to consider is taking a step back from, and maybe even leaving behind, the teacher editions/manuals. A teacher edition/manual could very well be the downfall to differentiated instruction. My son had a teacher who refused to deviate from the reading teacher manual. I could tell the day of the week from the homework he had. We mustn’t fall prey to what the sales representative tells us about their product. “Although the…textbook can proclaim it, few students will comprehend its meaning without some active intellectual work, guided by the teacher (p.108). Teachers cannot chain themselves to the teacher manual. There is very little differentiated instruction offered, and that which is available is, again, addressed to the strugglers or the high achievers. There is no suggestion of different instruction.  In addition, many of the teacher manuals repeat the instructional routine every week with no variance to introduction of a concept or skill, delivery of instruction, or assessment. This can provide some semblance of classroom management, but wouldn’t it be just as easy to maintain respect within the classroom community through student engagement in authentic learning situations? “When a teacher comfortably and appropriately uses an array of instructional strategies, tasks become more engaging to learners” (p.52).  Through Differentiated Instruction and Understanding by Design (DI and UbD), teachers maintain an active role through presenting the content/concept of instruction and by providing needed and essential guidance. However, “[T]he UbD emphasis on “uncoverage” of meaning (vs. “coverage” of the content) arises from our awareness that understanding must be constructed by the individual” (p.85). On still another note, at a recent Education Service Center ELAR training, we were informed that no textbook adoption in the state of Texas includes (auto)biographies which are a state-tested genre. If we are sticking to the textbook and teacher editions for assurance in “coverage of the content,” then we have come across a potentially damaging gap. Further more, as teachers we should use the “knowing of our students” to guide our delivery of instruction alongside the ideas of DI and UbD to see past grabbing the typical copy of a Cesar Chavez biography and reach for about Selena Gomez, Sin Cara, Ellen Ochoa, and Hector Cantu and Carlos Castellanos instead because the “different individuals [in our classrooms] will construct meaning fro their different experiences, abilities, and interests…” (p.85). “We are [also] teachers of human beings” (p.39). Our human beings happen to be Hispanic, bi-lingual, and some even Spanish-speaking only. We should envelope them in the richness of their culture and surroundings so that they know that they are a living breathing part of their environment.

In making this change, we will not be back at square one, perhaps one foot in square one and one in square two, but not entirely at the beginning. We already have a strong foundation for the implementation of differentiated instruction through specific professional development sessions. Kilgo trainings and CSCOPE rollouts have talked to us about identifying verbs in our Texas Essential Knowledge and Skills (TEKS). CSCOPE already has Performance Indicators laid out for each unit where the targeted TEKS are addressed, and these Performance Indicators in many instances are project-based, feeding directly into DI and UbD. In addition, the sheltered instruction initiative that our campus embarked on last year addresses similar ideas to that of Figure 3.1: Planning Template (p.30), Figure 3.2: Planning Template with Design Questions (p.31), and Figure 6.1: Instructional Strategies That Support Various Teacher Roles (p.87). We have this knowledge to get off to a strong start, but “[R]esearch [also] suggests to us that few teachers in fact translate that ideal (attending to learner variance) into classroom practice” (p.39). At our campus, as part of being a Title I-funded school, we engaged in a book study of The Fundamental Five which speaks to transparency of the content of instruction and the expectation after all the learning has been done as do DI and UbD.

Implementing a new style of teaching brings to light many questions and anxiety. We must remember and be continuously reminded that we are not starting entirely from scratch. One proactive way to view the pending change is to note that if we prepare a lesson with differentiated instruction for all in mind, then we will not have the additional task of having to do so for only a handful of students. It will be built-in to the day’s routine. An added bonus is that we have a substantial amount of professional development based on research under our belts and still available to us and experienced educators available share their bag of tricks. And in terms of cost effectiveness, the experienced educators are in-house…free! In addition, there are surely at least a handful of teachers who already strive to teach in this “new” manner, they dimply do not recognize that it is, in fact, whole-class Differentiated Instruction.

There is still time.  We are on the threshold of a new school year and because we are a new campus, are not faced with the same state testing number issues with which other campuses in our district are. It should be a directive and actively monitored and feverously supported. There should be collaboration amongst our teachers and administrators. We can make this change for our school, for ourselves as teachers, and most importantly for our students.

Cycle Three: Schools as Embryonic Communities

I may have mentioned before that the school that I am assigned to is our district's first "green school." The first "oooo"s and "aaahhh"s come from the gadgets and/or characteristics that qualify our school as a "green school." I will attach a link in a response to this post about just that. But, now what? What are we going to do with this designation? The school district community was excited at the onset, but you can pretty much tell that interest has waned, even for the teachers who work there, and, since our students were never introduced to much more than the solar panels in the two creation stations we have, I don't think they really care either. Picture this: A student wearing a/our school shirt, stopped by a member of the community who asks the student to tell them a little something about what makes their school green and the school's characteristics relate to their learning, and the student can't answer. What a saddening thought. And still another, perhaps, perhaps not, unrelated thought: What a waste of money!

I will say that at the onset of the 2012-2013 school year, I had big plans about how to engage our students in their learning environment. My first thought was that we could set up a milk weed butterfly garden and eventually witness the monarch butterfly migration in our own back yard. When my position changed, I became occupied with other school matters. I will not dote on the lost, but rather focus on the fact that I recruited and totally snatched a science teacher from another school who spent a summer in Wisconsin working with a monarch butterfly program. I'm hoping she can bring my idea to fruition. I don't know if this idea fits the mold of the embryonic community, but I definitely see it as a step in the right direction. The idea is that students will be engaged in the planning, construction (to the extent that elementary students can be), and maintenance of the butterfly garden. When they take ownership of the project, when we saturate "him with the spirit of service, and providing him with the instruments of effective self-direction, we shall have the deepest and best guaranty of a larger society which is worthy, lovely, and harmonious" (Dewey, p.20). I would love it if the entire project was initiated with "activity on the part of the children preceded the giving of information on the part of the teacher, or where the children had some motive for demanding the information," (Dewey, p.23). INQUIRY! I can see the smoke emitting from many tiny heads now. We, meaning my school, have a genuine space and premise for learning. Wouldn't this talk directly to "[P]ersonalizing the school environment is a central goal of effort to transform America's schools" (Felner, Seitsinger, Brand, and Burns, and Bolton)? Our student population desperately needs a concrete connection to their education. I often tell my students that they have to take responsibility for their own learning, but that means nothing to them. The statements in "Creating Small Learning Communities...About "What Works" in Creating Productive, Developmentally Enhancing, Learning Contexts" about "...bringing the learner in as a full and respective participant..." and "...engaging the student more deeply through building on connections..." really seemed to address my idea about taking our green school to an actual academic level for our students rather than have it become stagnant as a green school in name only.

Shifting from the "embryonic communities" focus, the Lieberman and Miller chapters were highly engaging for me, particularly the information about the National Writing Project. Many-a-winter I have invested time and energy in researching New Jersey Writing Project dates in my area. I have not had the pleasure of attending due to planned family vacations or summer district professional development. This year I got a little closer. A long-time colleague and friend attended the The New Jersey Writing Project as a district (not my district) initiative and is sharing some valuable information and insight with me. One day.

And loosely tying into were the references to professional development and particularly teacher buy-in. The premise of a collegial culture where teachers "move beyond consensus...and they go deeper to uncover and analyze problems" (Lieberman, Miller p.19) is one that I have experienced, if only at an introductory level, with my aforementioned long-time colleague. We have been working together on a project with our education service center and have engaged in some in-depth conversation about students and instructional practices. What I notice is that we both have a genuine interest in what happens in the classroom and with our students. From personal experience at one or two campuses I have been at is that constructive criticism, no matter how constructive, is uncomfortable and quite frankly unwelcome. There was so much in the Lieberman, Miller Chapter 2 that I could relate to in terms of what does and doesn't happen with and among teachers in professional development and implementation.

In the 2013-2014 school year, I am headed back to the classroom as a result of school board action. I am excited. I hope to take much, if not most, of what I have read and learned to provide a quality education to the little "esquinkles" (term of endearment which may not be a real word even in Spanish) who walk through my door next month.

Cycle 2: Challenges and Opportunities in Building Classroom Communities

I just responded elsewhere about the "levels" of community that come to mind when I think about communities in the school setting. My points of reference are at the campus level and begin with the community which is established to include the administrators and faculty and staff. I have worked on a campus where the rift is a tangible one. My next thought is that of the teachers in a grade-level. At that one particular campus, the community, the bond that the four of us formed helped us to get through some rough years. As I think back, I remember official grade-level meetings because they were required, but I couldn't count the times that we sat in each others' classrooms just to give each other a pat on the back or to take a deep breath together. Moving along to the classroom community, yes, as Kyle noted in his introduction to this cycle, I did use it to further my own agenda. I used it as a student management tool when my students were in other parts of campus, for example the gym for P.E. or the cafeteria at lunch. I would emphasize to my students that their behavior reflected on me, and that I did not want to be embarrassed by any reports of less-than-appropriate behavior. I know that I have a clear sense of what a classroom community should consist of, but other than typical classroom job assignments, I don't think I did anything, specifically, to build a community among the students.

I do believe it is possible for a classroom community to exist. I have seen it, believe it or not, through student tracking. "Many schools claim that they do not track students..." (Oakes, 2005, p. 1). For us, it begins with the Home-Language Survey that parents/guardians complete when enrolling students in school for the first time. If there is any indication that Spanish is spoken at home, either by the child or by those around him/her, the student is automatically tested through IPT (the full name of the test eludes me at the moment). If a student, usually a Pre-K student mind you, scores deficient in English, they are placed in a Spanish instruction classroom. And so as the years go by, these students continue in Spanish-instruction classrooms with the same classmates they started with in Pre-K. By the time they reach the upper elementary grades, why, they have already established family bonds. They defend each other from students in the all-English instruction classes, and they console each other through their trials and tribulations. What I have noticed most about these communities that they have built is that just like family, they are so loud when they are together. I don't mention it to insult, but more to show the ease and familiarity that they exhibit amongst each other. On the down side of this tracking, as I am sure occurs in schools across the country, is that students do not have much opportunity to interact with students in the same grade level in other classes. Oakes' statement, (2005, p. 3) "...how it both causes and supports differences in the lives of secondary students" couldn't describe this any better with the exception that I am talking about elementary students. This is not to say that sorting students by their spoken language is not an obvious route to take, but the bi-lingual program has such a negative connotation attached to it that some parents are willing to sign Denial Forms to keep their children out of these classes because they are perceived as classes in which their children will not learn anything.

In support of building a classroom community, I found the Johnson and Johnson (1986) chapter an excellent starting point with its discussion of Base Groups. The idea of "long-term, heterogeneous cooperative learning groups with stable membership...and (b) hold each other accountable for striving to learn" (p. 175) to be something to build upon as the school year progresses. I also agreed with their idea of the Informal Cooperative Learning Groups (p.170). I found many of the strategies and the suggestion for moving from lecture to small group at 12-15 minute intervals very similar to a Sheltered Instruction Observation Protocol (SIOP) training that our faculty received throughout this past school year. It provided for us, much like Johnson and Johnson (1986) and the chapter by Parker (2003) did, different ways to pair off students so that they do not end up in a same-partner rut, and most importantly, a safe environment for our students to grow academically. As a result, I saw students throughout the elementary grades work within these strategies and share with their classmates. I loved the low-risk environment in which students were able to build some knowledge about whatever the topic was by working with their classmates. And of course, these small group assignments/activities could be in the form of writing something or illustrating their thoughts if they could not conjure the necessary written vocabulary. When a teacher walked around the room conducting informal assessments, she was also able to steer misguided students in the right direction without pointing out their mistakes in a threatening manner. In a second grade classroom, we had a non-responsive student. Her teacher noted that she was extremely shy and that we should move on to another student, but the trainer modeled an alternative. The trainer approached the student, turned her away from the class and asked her to whisper the answer to her. She then turned back to the class and said, "Myra just told me that...Is she correct, boys and girls?" The students were so excited that "Myra" had participated. It turns out that she never actually gave an answer, but that was the spring board for encouraging her to participate with her immediate group, her classroom community, for the remainder of that lesson. Much, if not most of the chapter, I could directly relate back to my experiences and observations this past school year.

In the Tomlinson and McTighe (2006) chapter, there is a section "Students need to know the learning goals of a unit or lesson and critera for successfully demonstrating proficiency with the goals," which again related to SIOP but also a book-study that our campus participated in The Fundamental Five (Cain and Laird, 2011). The Fundamental Five talked about providing a Lesson Objective and a Closing Task for every lesson, to "Frame the Lesson." This way, in much the same way that Tomlinson and McTighe stress, students are aware of what they are going to, or should, learn, and what they should be able to complete at the end of the lesson, whether it be a task, something spoken, or a product/project. Our SIOP training expressed the same concept through Content Objective and Linguistic Objective. The end product here, because SIOP more specifically addresses bi-lingual education, being something mostly spoken or written. Referring to The Fundamental Five, I experienced how communicating the objectives and outcomes to students gave them a reference point through-out the lesson. If they lost track of the objective, they could refer to its location on the white board. And of course, objectives and tasks were always written in student-friendly language..."I will...," or "We will..." Again, providing a connection for the student, sense of knowing that the writing on the wall was speaking directly to or about them. Also, the verbs listed in Figure 6.1 (Tomlinson and McTighe, 2006 p. 87) were a central part of both SIOP and The Fundamental Five. It turns out to be a great way to make students aware of they can be actively involved in their education for the day.

To end with a little humor, I loved the example (Johnson, Johnson 1986) of the teacher providing the explanation for a simplex algorithm. It reminded me of the movie The Mirror Has Two Faces (1996) when Rose tells Gregory that he's up there having a Math Party and didn't invite anyone else. We mustn't forget to invite the students!