The Power of Dreams in Education

Why aren't US students going into careers in science, engineering, and math?  That is a question we've been asking as a society ever since I was working professionally in Washington DC in education policy in the 1980s.  There have been many proposed answers to that question, but mostly the blame as been laid on our education system.  Our science and math education isn't rigorous enough, or it isn't concrete enough, or it isn't relevent enough, or it isn't hands-on enough, etc. etc. etc.  So our latest response has been lots of government and private programs to improve education in what is now called STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics).

While I know science and math are tough disciplines--tough to learn and tough to teach (she says, having just completed teaching a hands-on physics class on light and optics that required lugging multiple sets of things for hands-on experiments to an outside classroom for five weeks)--and that we could definitely improve our science and math education, to my mind, that isn't the biggest problem with our current "brain drain" in STEM careers.  The data I read indicates that most of "the best and the brightest"are choosing to go into fields other than math and science.  That is to say, even if we could wave our magic wands and make our STEM education programs perfect, that isn't going to change the situation if students refuse to go into those programs in the first place.

There are many aspects to why American students aren't studying STEM.  But one of the big ones, according to astrophysicist and science writer/media specialist Neil deGrasse Tyson, is that we, as a nation, have stopped dreaming about a better future and the important role science, math, and engineering have in getting us there.

I could say more, but Tyson himself says it so much better in the short video below, entitled "Why We Stopped Dreaming:"



There is no way I can improve on that.   Except that I would say that it is not just limited to STEM.  I grew up in the Washington DC area, where almost everyone there was employed in what we used to consider "public service."  When I was growing up, working in Congress or the White House, the multiple court systems, the many federal agencies, the military complex built around the Pentagon, the related research institutes, the multiple non-profit public interest groups on all sorts of issues--all of those were honorable professions, and even though people found it a financial sacrifice, in terms of making a lower income than they might have had in private industry, it was worth it because they believed they were making a difference or playing a role in making the world safer, smarter, healthier, and better.

Now, after decades of people bashing "the government," our best and brightest don't want to work there either.  Looking at the nastiness and frustration among our top politicians--the US Congress and White House--it is no wonder that our students don't want a career in politics.  Education is another field where most of the public policy discussion is very negative, constantly highlighting all the perceived failures and rarely lauding the good work done day after day by millions of teachers across our country.

So what is left?  Becoming an athlete, rock or rap star, an actor/actress or, even better/easier, becoming a celebrity through so-called "reality" TV?

This is a tough, tough problem, and I don't know how we are going to solve it as a society.  But I know one thing.  As teachers and as parents, we need to support our students in dreaming again.  And I think it is particularly important in this middle school age--when they are old enough to understand and deal with some of the real substantive problems of our culture, but haven't yet experience so much frustration and inability to make a difference that they become cynical and indifferent.  In our case, it is why we are so heavily invested in a effort called Healing Oceans Together, where the students wrote the following mission statement for their group:

Healing Oceans Together (H2O) is a non-profit organization dedicated to preservation of the seas, raising public awareness about the oceans, and supporting the community through environmental education. Our organization is largely student-driven and is exceedingly resourceful. We are homeschoolers saving the world one step at a time, because we believe that everybody, working together, can make a difference.

I have to end with quoting (yet AGAIN, for those who know me) from one of my favorite books of 2011, Okay For Now by Gary Schmidt.   In this passage from the book, which is set in the 1960s, the junior high science teacher, Mr. Ferris, is talking to a group of incoming students.

 "Within a year, possibly by next fall," he was saying, "something that has never before been done, will be done. NASA will be sending men to the moon. Think of that. Men who were once in classrooms like this one will leave their footprints on the lunar surface." He paused. I leaned in close against the wall so I could hear him. "That is why you are sitting here tonight, and why you will be coming here in the months ahead. You come to dream dream. You come to build fantastic castles into the air. And you come to learn how to build the foundations that make those castles real. When the men who will command that mission were boys your age, no one knew that they would walk on another world someday. No one knew. But in a few months, that's what will happen. So, twenty years from now, what will people say of you? 'No one knew then that this kid from Washington Irving Junior High School would grow up to do".....what? What castle will you build?"

With all our focus in education on test scores and STEM initiatives and funding priorities, we are forgetting to encourage our students to dream big dreams.  And what kind of a life are preparing them for without dreams?  As Langston Hughes said in his poem, Dreams:

Hold fast to dreams
For if dreams die
Life is a broken-winged bird
That cannot fly.  

Hold fast to dreams
For when dreams go
Life is a barren field
Frozen with snow.

Should We Be Supporting Virtual Schools?

There was an excellent story in the Washington Post this weekend on the pros and cons of virtual schools.  Virtual schools are sort of a hybrid between public charter schools, online learning such as Khan Academy,  and homeschooling.  Virtual schools are K-12 educational systems run by public schools to teach children their entire education at home using technology.  These are generally treated as charter schools (and thus exempt from many school regulations), but are paid for and treated as part of the public school system, usually with significant learner support expected by the at-home learning coach (e.g., parent or other similar substitute).

It is quite an extensive article, so I recommend that you read it in full here.  But here are a few of the items that stood out for me:

Some Pros:

• Virtual schools provide a different educational choice for students who can't go to school or who have been failing in traditional school.
• For parents, virtual schools are similar to homeschooling, but without the responsibility or expense of obtaining high-quality curriculum yourself.
• Technology allows students to study at their own pace and schedule, to review what they don't understand as often as necessary and to skip through the things that they do, to use multi-media rich learning materials, and, to some extent, to adjust learning to their own learning style.
• Companies are investing lots of money into curriculum development, which presumably should translate into high-quality learning tools.

Some Cons:

• Virtual schools have a pretty terrible achievement record, both in terms of test scores and in completion/graduation rates.  One study showed that only one third of the schools managed by the largest player in the business, K12 Inc, met the federal NCLB standards last year.  And the article had an example of the Colorado Virtual Academy, also managed by K12, which has achieved only a 12% on-time graduation rate, compared to 72% of other schools statewide.
• In at least some states, the Virtual schools are "locating" in the poorest, most rural counties that received the highest levels of funding support from the state, but are enrolling students from throughout the state and counting them as students in that poor county.  So, for example, the Virginia Virtual Academy counts all its students as being from its home base in Carroll County, which the state reimburses $5,421 per student.  Therefore, the 66 students enrolled who actually live in Fairfax County, which would only receive $2,716 per student if they attended their local schools, are costing the state twice as much by being counted as Carroll County students.
• Socialization can be a big issue with these students, because unlike local homeschool organizations, which foster a variety of group social and academic experiences, virtual school students receive all of their education in their own home, even starting as early as kindergarten.  Virtual schools are trying to address that issue and find more opportunities for their students to interact with their peers.
• While these companies are paying 35% less for their teachers than traditional schools, they are putting lots of money into lobbying politicians.   According to the Post, in the past six years, K12 has contributed half a million dollars to US politicians, 3/4th of which went to Republicans (who are typically stronger supporters of the school choice movement).

This is actually a subject I know a good bit about in general, because not only do I homeschool, but I used to work in the distance education field before that.  The pros and cons above (at least the ones that don't have to do with funding and lobbying) are things that we have long known about the potential and the problems with distance education.

Education via technology is sometimes the only solution for some students, such as those that are geographically remote or isolated (students in Alaska, rural Maine, or the mountains of West Virginia, for example) or who have health problems, physical disabilities, or other issues that prohibit them from attending traditional schools.  Beyond that, distance education can be a fantastic option for disciplined, self-motivated learners.

However, while that designation applies to some percentage of students who fail in traditional schools, that description does not apply to the vast majority of struggling learners.  Particularly students in poor communities have little or no home support for their learning, since they are often in full-time employed single parent or dual working parent homes, many of who are illiterate and/or do not speak English.   They do not have access to the type of "learning coaches" that is critical for making this kind of education work, particularly for elementary-aged students.  So while it sounds good to say these programs give choice to failing learners, the reality is that having these types of students trying to learn through technology at home without any support is likely to make their educational performance be even worse, not better.  

As a homeschool mom, I can attest to the fact that showing a child the best-producing, most enthralling computer-based instruction featuring the most brilliant people on the planet does not ensure that he or she will learn anything from it.  As I have stated in an earlier post, education is so much more than just giving a child wonderful instructional content.

So while I'm not saying I don't think they have potential and shouldn't play a role in the panoply of educational options we are fortunate enough to have in our country, I, personally, am suspicious about how much at least some of the schools are really dedicated to solving our educational problems, and how much they are about making their owners a substantial profit.

But take my word for it.  Read the Post article, check into the situation in your state, and if you have any opinions, pro or con, feel free to add them below.

PS--Thanks to my father, who lives in DC, for pointing out this article for me.  Also, just to be clear, I am extremely supportive of distance education options for taking some classes, particularly among older students.  But the virtual school, which supplies the entire educational curriculum at home from literally grades K-12, is an entirely different matter.

Majority of Texas Middle and High School Students Suspended At Least Once

In the debate this week, it appears the single major word that Texas Governor Rick Perry used most often was "border."  Many uses of that term came as he talked about how dangerous things are along the Texas-Mexico border.

However, it appears that the border line isn't the only dangerous place in Texas.  A six-year study of one million students in Texas--all the 7th grade public school students in Texas in 2000, 2001, and 2002--discovered that between 7th-12th grade, nearly 60% were expelled or suspended from school at least once.  Because only a small fraction of these cases (3%) were legislatively-mandated (violations such as illegal drugs or bringing a weapon to school), it indicates that the vast majority of these suspensions or expulsions were done at the discretion of the school.

The study, which was conducted by the Council of State Governments (CSG) Justice Center in partnership with the Public Policy Research Institute at Texas A&M University,  considered many variables, including age and income level, but found that only two sub-populations in the student body had higher-than-average suspension/expulsion rates:  African Americans and student with certain learning disabilities.  The data reported that 75% of African American had some form of discipline, compared to 65% of Hispanics and 47% of white students.  For students with educational disabilities, 75% of all disabled students, and 90% of students with an emotional disability, were expelled or suspended at least once, compared to 55% of students without any recorded disability.

The report also addresses the consequences that being suspended or expelled has on student success.  Of the 60% of students who had been so disciplined, 31% were held back for at least one year (which many previous studies link to poor academic achievement and higher drop out rates) and 10% officially dropped out (the study also notes that the system underreports how many students have actually dropped out but haven't completed the official paperwork confirming that decision).  Among the 40% who made it through school without suspensions or expulsions, 5% repeated at least one grade and 2% officially dropped out before graduation.  Even worse was the correlation between suspensions and expulsions to being involved in actual crimes; of those who had been so disciplined, almost a quarter eventually became involved in the juvenile justice system, compared to only 2% among the non-disciplined population.

The problem with reports like this is that they are only dealing with numerical correlations, not cause and effect.  So how people interpret the results probably depends on whether your world view is more Hobbesian (who described the life of man as "solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short”) or Rousseau-ian (who argued that poor human institutions warp people's natural tendencies towards both self-sufficiency and compassion).  That is, some people think that the high number of drop-outs and juvenile offenders among those who have been disciplined is just common sense; their innate bad behavior and/or anti-social principles showed up in school, and was properly disciplined, before they engaged in actual crimes or stopped bothering with school.   Thus, the students' bad character was the cause of both the suspension/expulsion and the dropping out/juvenile crime.  Others, however, wonder to what extent such harsh discipline actually caused the high drop out and juvenile justice figures.  This side would argue that when struggling students are banned from school (for a short term or permanently), that encourages them to spend their time with "bad influences" and/or have more time and opportunity to get into trouble.  In addition, students who have been suspended or expelled probably have more negative feelings about school--either around their ability to succeed there, or whether it is a hostile and unfair, rather than a nurturing and encouraging, place to be, which effects their decisions about whether or not to continue their education and to pursue fields outside the illegal alternative available to them.  The study, however, does not contain the kind of information that helps to support or refute either interpretation.

And I don't know about you, but my immediate reaction to these findings were "They suspend or expel 60%?  Surely they can't have THAT many "bad" students in Texas!  If so, the Wild, Wild West ethos must still rule in the Lone Star state."   But am I just uninformed?  How far from the "norm" is a 60% suspension/expulsion rate?  It turns out that is a hard question to answer, because the study had a more comprehensive database and addressed the question in a way that hadn't been done before.  So I was never able to find a national average for suspensions and expulsions (although, I will  admit, this was not an exhaustive effort....given that this blog is done with the time and money I have to spare after everything else I do).  But I did find at least some information in my home state of North Carolina.

While North Carolina generally collects suspension and expulsion data in a different way--it is much more focused on the number of missed days, rather than the percentage of students--I did find one report from the state Department of Education that stated that in 2006, approximately 10% of North Carolina students had short-term suspensions.  That statistic was for the entire school system, but let's just assume that percentage applies to middle and high schoolers, since that is what the Texas study covered.  But that is just short term discipline, and doesn't include long-term suspensions or expulsions.  I believe the Texas study said that 70% of its disciplinary actions were short-term, so if we apply the same statistics to North Carolina and round out the numbers (generously), then that would mean that about 15% of North Carolina students had been suspended or expelled in 2006.

If that figure was accurate, then that would indicate that about four times the number of secondary students in Texas had been suspended or expelled, compared to those in North Carolina (in terms of percentages, not in actual numbers, since Texas is a much larger state).  Is Texas so wild that four times as many student misbehave?  Or is something else going on?

There was one other interesting data analysis that was included in the report.  The researchers actually divided the schools into three different categories, based on such demographics as family income level, percentage of immigrants or migrants, size of school, etc., and predicted whether disciplinary actions would be at a low, average, or high level.  But when they looked at the three categories, they found that about half reported the "expected" number, but a little less than a quarter had higher than expected percentages, while a bit more than a quarter had lower than expected numbers of disciplinary actions.  This was true regardless of expected level of school, size of school, type of school, or year of analysis.  And the good news was that those that had fewer percentages of students suspended or expelled certainly did no worse than those with average or even high numbers of disciplined students.

So the bottom line is, looking at the entire Texas secondary school system, is that suspending or expelling students is associated with dropping out or getting involved with the juvenile justice system.  But individual schools have a lot of discretion about whether or not they suspend or expel students.  Those who have a more lenient disciplinary system don't do any worse than the schools with higher percentages of disciplined students.  But there is obviously a lot of leeway between schools about who--and how many--are being suspended or expelled.

And either Texas is a LOT tougher on students than North Carolina, or they have a LOT more bad seeds--like four times as many.   Whether you think that is good or bad...well, like I said in paragraph 5 above, that probably depends more on your underlying assumptions about people than any statistics I can report.

Traditional Schools in LA's Lowest-Performing Areas Raised Scores More Than Charters, so Wal-Mart Gives $15 Million...for More Charters

More bad news for the charter movement came out of LA this month--well, bad news in terms of actual student outcomes.  But that didn't keep the founders of Wal-Mart from donating $15 million to add 20,000 more charter students in LA and 100,000 more throughout California.

A study this month by the Los Angeles Times compared test scores among K-12 students in the city's lowest-performing areas, and found that the traditional public schools had done a better job overall at raising student performance than had the comparable charter schools, even without additional resources that had been given to the charters.  In the most dramatic case, the increase among high school students who were performing at "proficient" levels was almost double that of the high schools run by other organizations.

As in the other study I discussed lately, which showed that LA charter schools had dramatically higher teacher turnover rates, it is hard to draw conclusions from a single study about such a complicated topic as educational performance.  Also, Los Angels obviously has some conditions that make it different from much of the rest of the country, although it gets a lot of focus when it comes to charter schools because it is the school district with the largest number of charters, both in terms of number of schools and number of students.

However, these and some other research certainly suggest that charters are not clearly outperforming the traditional educational systems they seek to replace.  But that does not seem to dissuade the well-funded proponents of the charter movement from continuing to pour more money into these experimental systems. Hence, the $15 million gift from the Walton Family Foundation to the California Charter School Association, only weeks after these studies announcing negative trends in charter school performance.

Charter schools are experiments, and it is the nature of experiments that some, many, and even most are going to fail.  But it is important for parents, beguiled by the hype of media like the tear-jerking "Waiting for Superman," to remember that these charter schools ARE experiments, and there is no guarantee what will happen if their child happens to get in.  Charters may end up being like the fantastical Willy Wonka story:  You may feel like the luckiest child in the world if you get one of the golden tickets, and at least some will succeed tremendously, but once you are in the chocolate factory, how many will end up turned into blueberries, shrunken, or fallen down a garbage chute?

Matt Damon's Pep Talk for Teachers (and Parents)

Everyone may have already seen Matt Damon's keynote speech at this weekend's Save Our Schools rally.  If you haven't heard about Save Our Schools, it was a rally held last weekend in Washington DC to show support for public schools and to protest the extensive use of high-stakes standardized testing to evaluate both students and teacher on its performance.  Although it drew some of the biggest names in the alternative education reform camp (that is, the Diane Ravitches and Alfie Kohns, not the Bill Gates and Michelle Rhees), unfortunately, it tended to be overshadowed by all the drama on Capitol Hill about the debt ceiling increase.

Matt Damon flew overnight from Vancouver, where he is filming his latest movie (hence the bald head) to give his support to the cause and to speak out against the overuse of standardized testing.  But even more, he spoke of his appreciation for teachers, and let them know how grateful people are for the tough but invaluable work they do.  He was introduced by his mother, who was, and maybe still is, a school teacher.  And he did was is really the ultimate reward that those of us who teach, or those of us who parent, fantasize about.  He acknowledged that an important part of who he has become and the success that he has achieved has come from the support and education he received from his teachers and his parenting (he does mention the last one specifically as well).  He said he knew it wasn't always easy, and he was thankful.

So I think this is a great video to have on hand for those days when teaching, or being a mom or dad, just seems really frustrating and thankless work.  Our students or children may not be able to communicate this feeling, but I'm sure they would if they could.  And it also reminds us that maybe we ought to take time to thank our own parents and teachers for the difference they have made in our lives.

You can watch Matt's mother's introduction, and then Matt's talk here:

Arguments Against the Case for Standardized Testing in Education

Is the use of standardized tests improving education in America?  That is the latest question posed by ProCon.org, a website that takes controversial issues, lists claims and studies by proponents on each side, and describes the background and development of the topic in order to promote critical thinking and a more informed public on major social issues.

So on the standardized testing page of ProCon, they list 22 arguments in favor of testing, and 23 arguments against.  Of course, in the nature of most educational issues, that means that there are a lot of cases of "this study demonstrates X, this study demonstrates the opposite."  It brings to mind Andrew Lang's quip about using "...statistics as a drunken man uses lamp-posts - for support rather than for illumination."

And I know I'm biased, because I am a strong opponent of the current trend in education towards high-stakes testing in education (as regular readers to this blog already know).  But a lot of arguments on the PRO side of the standardized testing debate just make me crazy.

A prime example is the first sentence in the first pro-testing claim:

1. 93% of studies have found student testing, including the use of large-scale, standardized tests, to have a "positive effect" on student achievement.

What is left unsaid at the end of that sentence is "...student achievement, as measured by standardized tests." So, basically, it is telling us that using a lot of standardized tests improves students ability to do standardized tests.  As the young people today would say, DUH!  Similarly, a large-scale, standardized student basket-weaving test would result in greater student achievement in basket weaving.  That statement alone says nothing about the quality or value of students doing better on tests; it merely says that as students are forced to take more tests, they get better at taking tests.  That is also the gist of pro arguments #3, 5, 7, 15, 19, and 20.

Then there is another whole clump of arguments based on statistics that show that people support testing.  Thus, pro arguments #9, 10, 11, 12, 14, and 16 cite studies that show parents, teachers, college professors, and (here is my favorite) students support testing.  Students?  Really?  I've known a lot of preschoolers getting ready for kindergarten, and I've known them to be excited about the big yellow school bus, about having a lunchbox and a pencil case, about making new friends, about having a wonderful teacher, even about the things they will get to learn, like learning to read and write and add numbers and such.  But I've never known one who was looking forward to getting tested in school.

This supposed support by students is the best demonstration of what I think is the real reason behind all this alleged support, which in many cases is cognitive dissonance.  Cognitive dissonance is the internal discomfort we feel when we are faced with two conflicting beliefs or experiences.  Psychological theory says that when we encounter cognitive dissonance, that either we change our actions, behaviors, or beliefs to eliminate the conflict, or find some way to rationalize it or explain it away.  A classic example is the Aesop Fable about the fox who, unable to reach some delicious-looking grapes hanging from a high tree branch, decides that they must be sour, so he doesn't really want them anyway.

In this case, particularly with students, I think it operates the opposite way.  For the most part, children don't get to choose whether or not they come to school and get tested.  They may not like it, but they trust us and believe we are doing what is in their best interest.  So they might say they support testing, because they are forced to do it anyway, and they want to believe it is for a good purpose.  And the ones that really can't deal with testing are gone; either, if they are lucky, they are being homeschooled or are in some other kind of alternative educational setting, or if they aren't, they have dropped out or flunked out.

The same thing is true of parents; since their children are forced to take the tests, parents want to believe it is for a good purpose.  And I think cognitive dissonance may be worst for the teachers, many of whom feel deeply from their professional training and experience that such high-stakes testing is not the best educational approach for their students.  It think it is a major contributor to the high levels of teacher stress and burnout that we are seeing today (although I don't have any statistics to back me up...but I do get that feedback from a lot of my friends who are teaching in the public schools).

Then there are a bunch of random pro arguments that just make me grind my teeth, like everyone's favorite "educational reformer," Michelle Rhee, who says it would impinge on the "civil rights" of  non-English speaking students to allow them to take tests in their native language, or the one that says we give doctors and airline pilots high-stake tests before allowing them to operate or fly a plane, so it must be OK to do that to (in the case of North Carolina) third graders.  Yeah, right....

But here is my BIGGEST issue with all the high-stake testing advocates.  Our differences are summed up in their pro argument #17:

Teacher-graded assessments are inadequate alternatives to standardized tests because they are subjectively scored and unreliable. Most teachers are not trained in testing and measurement, and research has shown many teachers "consider noncognitive outcomes, including student class participation, perceived effort, progress over the period of the course, and comportment," which are irrelevant to subject-matter mastery.

Since when did we reduce our children's education to nothing but subject-matter mastery?  That was not the goal of school in "the olden days," when all these reformers claim that education did such a better job.  During the great growth years of 1850-1950, the primary purpose of the schools was to teach children, many of whom were immigrants from all over the world, what it was to be a good American.   That meant teaching them reading and writing and math, of course, but it also meant teaching them the skills required to get a job and the skills required to participate in the American system.  That meant teaching them skills like responsibility and cooperation and tolerance and sometimes sacrifice.   It encouraged students to learn to work hard and to play fair, to appreciate what American democracy had to offer and to do their part to keep the American system strong.

Now, to a large extent, I think American school still teach these things.  But statements like the one above proclaim that active participation, hard work, demonstrated educational progress, and good behavior are "irrelevant."  And that makes me REALLY crazy.

What Education is Supposed to Be About

It's getting to be that time of year when, whether you are student or teacher, homeschool or institutionalized school, we're all just ready for school to be over. ( Of course, most homeschoolers I know continue to homeschool over the summer as well, but usually in a more laid-back way, especially since most of the group classes, coops, and projects are suspended during the traditional school "summer vacation" period.)  It is not a season when most of us wax eloquently about the wonders of schools, especially these days when the end-of-the-year focus is so fixed on standardized tests and numerical quantifications of our students' performance.

So it was such a treat last night when, as I was reading Gary D. Schmidt's latest wonderful book, Okay For Now, when I came upon a beautiful passage that reminded me what education is really supposed to be about.

In this book, set in 1968, 8th grader Doug Swieteck (who also appeared in Schmidt's Newbery Honor award-winning book, The Wednesday Wars) is the sole transplant to a new junior high in a new town who is attending a pre-school orientation for new students.  Divided alphabetically, Swieteck is assigned to the principal's section, where he has to listen to rule after rule after rule of school regulations--being on time, boys keeping their hair short (1968, remember), girls keeping their skirts long, etc.  He acts up a bit and is excused to go to the bathroom.

On the way there, he overhears what the science teacher, Mr. Ferris, is tell the other group of incoming students.  Here is what Mr. Ferris tells them:

"Within a year, possibly by next fall," he was saying, "something that has never before been done, will be done.  NASA will be sending men to the moon.  Think of that.  Men who were once in classrooms like this one will leave their footprints on the lunar surface."  He paused.  I leaned in close against the wall so I could hear him.  "That is why you are sitting here tonight, and why you will be coming here in the months ahead.  You come to dream dream.  You come to build fantastic castles into the air.  And you come to learn how to build the foundations that make those castles real.  When the men who will command that mission were boys your age, no one knew that they would walk on another world someday.  No one knew.  But in a few months, that's what will happen.  So, twenty years from now, what will people say of you?  'No one knew then that this kid from Washington Irving Junior High School would grow up to do".....what?  What castle will you build?"

Thank you, Mr. Ferris, and thank you, Gary Schmidt, for reminding us all what it is that we teachers and students get to do together.

How Do You Know When You Are Done?

Even though we homeschool, we are in our final push towards the end of "school."  Now, most of the homeschoolers I know consider that they homeschool year round.  However, at least in our community, most of the organized classes and coops and sports and such are organized around the traditional school calendar of August/September through April/May/June.  To some extent, that is just a practical economic decision--lots of facilities that host homeschoolers during the day when most students are in school can make a lot more money over the summer by running camps.  But I think most of us enjoy the break from the scheduled events and having to prepare classes and events for multiple students beyond our own, and use the summer to just homeschool on our own and to do the typical summer things with vacations and swimming and the like.  At least for us, summer is a good time to catch up on some of those things that we don't tend to do in groups--things like grammar and spelling and such.

But how do you know when you are done?  When you are homeschooling, which means you basically have the same teacher in the same "school" for as many years as you homeschool?

In our case, our local homeschool group holds an annual student showcase on the first Saturday in June each year.  Participating families get a table on which to display whatever they want to share about what they have been doing for the past 12 months.  We invite family members, friends, neighbors, and the general public to come, which helps the community better understand all the things that homeschoolers do. In addition, our children get to hear from someone besides US about the quality and interesting nature of the work they have been doing for the past year.  It is also an opportunity for the parents to assess all the things we have accomplished over the year (given that, overachievers that we tend to be, we tend to focus on all the things we HAVEN'T gotten around to doing), and that is a really good feeling.

Everyone does their showcase exhibits differently, but for the past several years, our family's focus has been on creating an electronic portfolio.  We create a DVD of me interviewing my son about what he thinks are the highlights from the past year in the different disciplines---language arts, history, science, math, art, etc.  The visuals behind his discussion of favorite or most valuable aspects of the past year's learning are photos or videos that relate to the project he is describing.  For us, that is the best way to remember, re-evaluate, and record all the many things we've done over a year of homeschooling.

However, since he is now in middle school (hence the name of this blog, right?),  I'm also starting to think about how to know when we are DONE done--as in, done with homeschooling and ready to move on to college or employment (or some combination of the two).    There was a great article in the Washington Post about that yesterday in their education section.  Entitled "How high school should really end," it describes one high school's graduation requirements beyond the typical standardized test.  Seniors at this school must develop a portfolio that demonstrates (1) their plans for the coming year; (2) proof of their competency in the major subject areas; and (3) the positive impact they have had on the world.  They must also present the results of a senior year project in which they show major learning through a significant project in the topic of their choosing.

I love this kind of thing as an end to our pre-collegiate education, and plan to do something like this when my son gets to an appropriate age and level.  I think that any student who can pull off the above will be ready to take on the world, whether it is through college, work, travel, volunteerism, or the other paths that young adults follow.

The iY Generation

I have just stumbled onto a new book about our current middle schoolers, high schoolers, and college students, which is called Generation iY:  Our Last Chance to Save Their Future by Tim Elmore.  I haven't read the book, so I can't speak directly to its value; however, the reviews of the book do raise some issues that I have been discussing recently with my fellow parents of tweens/teens.

Elmore argues that the students born after 1990--which is basically our "traditional" college, high school, and middle school population--differ significantly from the young people who have been labeled the Millennials, or Generation Y, because they have grown up in the era of I--Internet, iPods, iPhones, and iTunes.  This, claims Elmore, has led this population to focus on "I" (in a narcissistic way), and to be extremely advanced in dealing with technology, online social networks, and technology-mediated relationships, while not being very good in dealing with actual people or real life situation.

According to Elmore, who claims to have communicated with 50,000 students and educational staff and parents per year in writing the book, leads to young people who are:

• Overwhelmed--So much is going on in their lives that 94% of colleges students agree with that description of themselves, with 44% saying they are so overwhelmed that they can barely function;
• Over--connected--So attached to their cell phones and computers that they are connected full time, and almost consider these devices as "appendages" to their bodies;
• Over-protected--Parents have tried so hard to meet their children's needs that it is a rude awakening when they enter a world that largely doesn't care what they think, need, or want;
• Overserved--Longitudinal studies say this is the most self-obsessed generation in modern history.

On the other hand, the technological connection and media savvy of this group of people can make them much more socially aware and active than previous generations.  And so Elmore dubs them a "Generation of Paradox":  social, yet isolated; sheltered, yet pressured; self-absorbed, yet generous.

Elmore contends that the solution is for adults to assist with the human abilities that this technology focus has atrophied, particularly in regards to the spiritual, emotional, and relationship arenas.  He also states that adults who teach such students need to incorporate four qualities in their educational activities (qualities that I think are pretty much lacking in public education):

• Experiential education
• Participatory education
• Image-rich education
• Connected education

He also believes that today's students are increasingly right-brained, while traditional education continues to teach in a left-brained dominant way.

As I said, I haven't read the book, so all of the above is basically hearsay.  And I think it actually applies more to college student than to middle schoolers.  Nonetheless, I think it raises interesting questions about the impact that growing up in such a technologically-connected world does to our children's experience and expectations, especially in regards to education.  I think it is a discussion that is worth us having--with our children's teachers, our fellow parents, our children, and ourselves.

How NOT to Respond to Reports Critical of Wake County School Board

In case you missed the latest in the agony and the ecstasy that is the Wake County Public School System (WCPSS), here are this week's headlines for the leading educational stories in the local paper, the News and Observer:
3/12/11  (School Board Member) Goldman's child sent to out-of-zone school, soon followed by
3/15/11 (WCPSS Superintendent) Tata to look into transfer
(Short version:  Board Member Goldman's middle school daughter was one of only 15 students out of the 140,000+ students in the system to receive a little-used administrative procedure to transfer out of her usual school choices that requires merely an oral request, rather than the more extensive paperwork necessary for traditional transfer requests.)

3/15/11 Play nice, audit tells board
(Short version:  An outside audit conducted by Superintendent Tata's educational training organization concluded that the WCPSS school board's public fighting, disrespect for fellow board members, and even name calling was damaging the school system's image with the public and overshadowing all the good work the schools were doing.  You can read the entire 52 page audit on the WPCSS website using this link.)

The biggie, however, was this one:
3/17/11  Schools lost Wake's trust, report says
(Short version:  The WCPSS accrediting agency, AdvancED, is giving the school board one year to clean up its act or risk the system losing accreditation.  AdvancED accused the Republican majority of alienating much of its constituency by giving inadequate notice of major action and ignoring data when making major policy decisions.  Because the system's governance had created "a climate of uncertainty, suspicion, and mistrust throughout the community," AdvancED gave WCPSS its second toughest rating, Accreditation Warning," which means that it is a serious problem that must be addressed within a year in order to remain accredited.  You can read the entire 15 page report on the WCPSS website using this link.)

That story broke, by the way, two days after Superintendent Tata presented his budget cuts for the 2011-2012 school year, and on the same day as Tata was meeting with officials of the U.S. Department of Education's Office for Civil Rights, which is investigating WCPSS' elimination of its diversity policy.

My two-bit response to all this good news is:

YA THINK?
After a year in which school board meetings have become a zoo, with many citizens regularly protesting and even getting arrested, while the board members insult each other in front of the public, AND the NAACP is bringing lawsuits and administrative actions against the system, AND our school system has been publicly criticized from such national figures as the Secretary of Education Arne Duncan, former president Bill Clinton, and even Steven Colbert, AND just plain old residents such as myself are writing blog posts like Wake School Board Majority Should Be Ashamed....yes, I think it is reasonable to say that there are some serious governance issues here.

However, how are the Republicans responding to these critiques?  Well, good old Apex Representative and NC House Majority Leader Paul Stam (sponsor of the bill to give tax credits to families who pull their children out of school in order to send them to private school or homeschools, which I wrote about in this blog post) is one of several Republicans who have introduced a bill to effectively bypass the well-established tradition among ALL of American education of outside accreditation, and instead create a state-run accrediting agency.  The bill would also PROHIBIT any North Carolina higher education institutions (colleges, universities, or community colleges) from considering whether or not a candidate's high school is accredited when making admission, scholarship, or loan decisions.  (You can read the full text of the bill, HR 342:  High School Accreditation, through this link.)

I'm sorry, but I think this is the same "heads in the sand" thinking that I criticized the WCPSS board in my post Why Wake County Board Should Continue Accreditation with AdvancED.  I know it sounds naive to say this, but if there is anything that should be above politics, it should be our children's future.  A community will come to pieces if it can't trust the people responsible for their children's education.  That is the point of OUTSIDE, NON-POLITICAL, UNBIASED accreditation agencies like AdvancED.  They aren't Republicans, pushing more charter schools and lower budgets, etc., and they aren't Democrats, pushing more early intervention and social programs for disadvantage populations, etc.   They come in without an agenda, and say, Are the policies fair?  Are children being treated equally?  Are people--teachers, administrators, support staff, and even BOARD MEMBERS--do their jobs right at the level of quality that the public deserves to expect?  They also have a regional and national perspective, and can comment on how a system is doing vis-a-vis their peers in the state, area, and country.

A state agency will be immediately suspect of bias.  Even if it can avoid a partisan bias, which seems difficult, given the increasing involvement of the NC legislature in educational issues, it will certainly seem to have a bias to continue accreditation of NC schools to maintain the state's reputation.  I mean, isn't that why it is being created?  What purpose would it serve but to provide NC schools with some alternative accreditation if AdvancED pulls their, as they are threatening to do in Wake and Burke county (coincidentally enough, most, if not all, of the co-sponsors of the bill come from those two counties).

Also, this view point is very provincial.    Outside this state, college specify requirements of accreditation from regional accrediting organizations, so it would not help with the thousands of NC graduates who want to attend higher ed institutions outside of North Carolina.  However, it would probably diminish the national reputation of North Carolina colleges and universities, not to mention setting a bad precedent of the legislature messing around in the UNC admissions policies.  ( And I thought the Republicans were supposed to be the party of less government interference....)

Wake County can not continue to ignore the big rifts in our community over school issues.  But things seem to be getting better since Superintendent Tata came on board.  The Board has been acting more professionally.  They actually managed to go on a weekend retreat and come back with something constructive.  The WCPSS has been open about these critical reports and have posted them on their websites.  I think the general mood is hopeful that some healing and compromises can take place.  However, that is only possible if people feel that they have been listened to and respected, even if there are disagreements and ultimately their positions don't win.  And it only works if people feel like they can trust their school system.

In my opinion, HR 342 would only make things worse, not better.

In Which I Prove that the Current Focus on Testing Is INSANE

People in my educational circles generally know that I have a Masters in Education, but most of them don’t know that as an undergraduate, I was a Philosophy major--a Phi Beta Kappa Philosophy major, actually, from the Alpha chapter of Phi Beta Kappa, since Thomas Jefferson and some other 18th Century alumni founded PBK at my alma mater, the College of William and Mary. (I don’t mean to brag here; I’m just trying to establish a modicum of evidence that I might know what I’m talking about.)

Anyway, with all the discussion back and forth about standardized testing and data-driven schools and performance-based teacher evaluation and salary systems, etc., I thought perhaps I should go back to my philosophical roots and use some old-fashioned philosophical proofs to bring clarity to the debate.

I’m a little rusty, but I could probably write this all up in formal philosophical logic symbols, but to make it more reader-friendly, I’m just going to use the English language.

Argument #1
High standardized test scores are necessary because they prove the effectiveness of school education.
High standardized testing scores require all students to give the same correct answers to the questions.
For all students to give the same correct answers to the questions, all students must learn the same things in their educational classes.
All students learning the same thing in their education means that school education is standardized.
Therefore, to have high standardized testing score, education must be standardized.

Argument #2
Human brains do not operate the same way; indeed, science is proving all the ways that individual human brains, or at least groups of them, think differently from other groups and/or individuals.
Humans do not have the same personalities, body types, learning styles, or energy levels.
Humans do not have the same body of experiences, histories, or family situations.
Therefore, humans are highly differentiated.

Argument #3
School education is the education of humans.
Humans are highly differentiated.
Therefore, to serve humans, education must be highly differentiated.

But wait! We’ve now proved that education must be standardized AND education must be highly differentiated! Obviously, both can not be true. So which argument is wrong? The one that is based on what science and our own common experience both tell us--that humans are a set of very different creatures? Or the one that is based on a premise that was invented by a subset of humans who decided that high standardized test scores are the best way to evaluate education?

If you are having trouble, let me give you a hint. Arguments 2 and 3 are based on what we philosophers like to call “Facts.” Argument 1 is based on what we call a “Supposition.” Which one do you think triumphs in a logical argument?

Or if philosophy isn’t your thing, try approaching this from a scientific perspective. As I wrote in Monday’s blog post, we just had a class on biodiversity. Nature supports differentiation, not a reduction in complexity or variety. When humans have interferred with biodiversity by reducing the number of animal or plant or sometimes insect species living in an area, it has generally led to ecological, environmental, or health problems, and often even disasters. Life itself is supported by diversity, not standardization. So why would we be developing an educational system that runs counter to this basic precept of living?

Thus, the problem with all this focus on testing is not just that it doesn’t work, or wastes resources that would be better spent on other things, or that it is unproven. The problem with such an insistence on standardized testing, and therefore standardized education, is that it runs counter to the fundamental reality of life, which is diversity. And what do we call people who insist on things that are counter to reality? (Let’s skip the obvious topical joke here, folks--this is serious business.) We call them INSANE.

So there you have it. A singular focus on standardized test scores is insanity. I only wish that more educational policy makers would get their heads out of their data and wake up and smell the coffee---coffee that originated, of course, in the rainforest...the most biodiverse ecosystem on this planet.

Education Week on Jon Stewart's Daily Show

Since I presented Steven Colbert's coverage of the Wake County School system in a blog post in January, I feel it is only fair that I also mention the recent education coverage by Jon Stewart (who, by the way, is a fellow William and Mary alumnus).  Although Stewart has been surprising silent about all the educational issues facing the country in the past several years, this week he has featured a series of bits on the subject.

First, on Monday, February 28, he castigated teachers for their greed and for "destroying America:"

The Daily Show
Tags: Daily Show Full Episodes,Political Humor & Satire Blog,The Daily Show on Facebook

He followed this up on Thursday, March 3, with three discussions about education. Stewart opened the show with some video from Wisconsin and Governor Walker's attempts to get concessions from the state's educators:

The Daily Show
Tags: Daily Show Full Episodes,Political Humor & Satire Blog,The Daily Show on Facebook

 Stewart later talked about the notion of sacrifice, but then captured certain commenters who demanded pay cuts and union concessions from teachers while defending six figure salaries and additional bonuses for CEOs who led financial institutions into such dire conditions that they required public bail-out money:

The Daily Show
Tags: Daily Show Full Episodes,Political Humor & Satire Blog,The Daily Show on Facebook

Finally, Stewart then interviewed NYU professor Diane Ravitch, probably the most renowned critic of the current school reform movement and author of the best-selling educational policy book of the year, The Death and Life of the Great American School System:  How Testing and Choice Are Undermining Education:

The Daily Show
Tags: Daily Show Full Episodes,Political Humor & Satire Blog,The Daily Show on Facebook

Whether you agree with Stewart's perspective or not, at least someone beside Wake County is getting some attention for a while.

Should We Expand the Charter School Program in Wake County?

This week the NC Senate passed a bill to remove the cap on charter schools in North Carolina, which had previously been limited to 100 statewide.  The following are some of the arguments for and against expanding the charter school program, based on statistics for Wake County students:

PROS

Charter Schools Are Popular

Although Wake County already has the largest number of charter schools than any other county in North Carolina, those 13 charters can not come close to meeting the demand.  For example, Raleigh Carter High School advises new students they have about a 13% chance of getting into the 535-member school.    Applicants faced even worse odds attempting to enter Franklin Academy in Wake Forest.   In 2009, 1,842 students competed for 123 open spots, which represents only a 7% acceptance rate.  Even though the school expanded in 2010 to provide more openings, Franklin Academy reports that there are still about 2,000 students on its waiting list.

The existing charter schools only enroll a total of about 6,000 students.  However, the high application rate indicates that many more families would choose a charter school for their children if there were additional space available.

Charter Schools Are Innovative

Freed from some of the regulatory restrictions of traditional public schools, charter schools can experiment with new approaches and curricula, although they must still conform to the NC Standard Course of Study and participate in End of Grade (EOG) Testing.

Charter Schools Outperform Traditional Schools

While national studies have not shown a clear academic advantage in comparing average charter school student performance to their peers in schools, charter schools in Wake County do seem to have better average test scores.  According to the Wake Education Partnership, in 2007-08, 74% of students in Wake charters were performing at grade level, compared to 70% of general Wake County Public School System (WCPSS) students and 65% of students in public magnet programs.  Similar results were reported in 2008-09, when 81% of Wake County charter students were at grade level, compared to 76% of WCPSS students and 65% of magnet students.

CONS

Charters Reduce Diversity

Charter schools are much more racially unbalanced than traditional Wake County schools.  The Wake County Public School System reports that in 2010-11, approximately 50% of WCPSS students are White, 25% are Black, 15% are Hispanic, 6% were Asian, and 4% are mixed or other.  

However, the North Carolina Department of Public Instruction states that among the 13 charter schools in Wake County, seven have enrollments that are 75% or higher White students, while three others have enrollments that are 75% or higher Black students.  Only three charter schools--Casa Esperanza, Southern Wake Academy, and Sterling Montessori--have a more racially mixed student population, although even those schools have a disproportionately high number of White students. 

Charters Do Not Serve Low-Income or Special Needs Students

Charter schools receive a per-student payment for educational expenses, but not for building and facilities expenses.  Therefore, they are not required to have cafeterias, nor must they participate in the free or reduced lunch programs designed to support low-income students.  

Charters do not have to provide transportation for students, which can effectively eliminate students from families who do not live nearby and who not own a car or other means to get their children to school.  Finally, charters do not have to offer services to students with special needs, such as learning disabilities or autism.

Charters Will Drain the Public Schools of Resource if Expanded Dramatically

Currently, Wake County charter schools only enroll about 6,000 students, compared to the 140,000+ students in the WCPSS.  Thus, the issues of racial imbalances in charter school or the relatively small numbers of low-income or special needs students in charters don’t have a large impact on the entire school system.  However, critics warn that as the program grows, it could continue to drain off the most affluent and successful students, leaving the public school system to deal with larger percentages of more challenging student populations, such as the low-income, non-English-speaking, and learning disabled students.  

Stephen Colbert Coins New Word For Wake County School Battles

I used to think things couldn't get much worse for the national image of the Wake County School System than the very public rebuke of the U.S. Education Secretary.....but it turns out I was wrong.

Now Wake County has become the inspiration for Stephen Colbert's "Word of the Day" segment last night.  My text can't do it justice, so just watch the clip and make up your own mind about it:








http://www.colbertnation.com/the-colbert-report-videos/371414/january-18-2011/the-word---disintegration


Thanks so much to my good friend Bridget for bringing this to my attention!

Why Educate?

I was going to write something different today, but I was inspired by one of the comments from a previous post (see what power you have if you leave a comment?) to draw together some thoughts I've been pondering for a few weeks about what is the point of education.  That was not her question; her question, posted in response to my post about the latest battle over whether or not our local school system in Wake County, NC should drop its accreditation rather than to submit to the questions posed by the accrediting agency, is how people can continue to deal with the frustration of trying to resolve the numerous issues that are dividing our community about the fundamental principles of our educational system.

But I think those are both really the same question, or at least, the same set of questions.  Why does it matter?  Who cares about education?  What is it that education should be doing?  Why care?  Why educate?

So let me give you my perspective on this issue.  As I've said before, I'm from the DC area originally, and between growing up there and spending most of my professional life there, I've met lots of important and significant people in many different realms (not the least of which is my father, who held presidential appointment-level positions under six? eight? different US Presidents, along with teaching in two universities and serving as a top-level executive in the Federal Reserve Bank of New York).  But no matter how accomplished (or not), almost everyone I've talked to who has children tells me that their children are at least as important as, if not more significant than, whatever they have achieved in their professional lives.  I think for most people, if you ask them the most miraculous moments in their lives, the top ones include holding their child(ren) in their arms for the first time--whether the children were naturally born, adopted, born through a surrogate, or whatever.  For the vast majority of those of us blessed with children, other things fade in comparison with them.

Even those who haven't raised children themselves usually have a soft spot for children.  Some chose to forego them because they thought they couldn't be the kind of parent they wanted to be, given their professional or other life situations.  Others wanted to be, but things just didn't work out.  And some just never felt the call that parenthood was for them.  But that doesn't mean that such people don't care about and work towards the safety and well being of children.  Because, as the saying goes, it DOES take a village.

So at least in the US, once you've got the child's basic food, shelter, and physical safety needs met, the next need we deem most important as a society is the child's education (we could make a good case here for children's health care, but we'll leave that for another post).  But education is kind of a funny thing with us Americans.  With our rugged individualism mythological past, we tend to think it is up to the parents to take care of feeding, clothing, sheltering, and providing medical care to their own children.  But everybody wants to have some say in how the children are educated, since our historical analogy was education as a melting pot where all sorts of different cultures came in, blended together, and were poured out into multi-colored molds, producing components that fit together to build an ever bigger and better America.

So this is part one of the question--Why does it matter?  Why deal with the frustration?  Why bother?  We care and we fight and we bother and we persevere despite frustration because, really, what else can be more important?  Yes, we can do other things---we can acquire wealth, or fame, or accomplishment, or lose ourselves in hedonistic pleasures, or just surrender ourselves to staying in bed all day.  Does any of that matter all that much in the long run?  Most of us want to invest at least some of our energy in making sure that the next generation not only survives, but flourishes.  And for many of us, the education system is the most tangible way we can do that (beside supporting the raising of our own immediate families).

So people have a high level of investment in the fact that education matters, not just for their own family, but for society in general.  High enough that for many of us, at least, it is enough to forego the frustration and negative energy to continue to fight for what we believe.

This point of view assumes agreement about the importance of education and the future of "our" children.  So our real issues, then, are about what it is that education should be doing.

I can't be a good advocate for the point of view of the current majority of the Board of Education--who, it is important to remind ourselves, were elected by a majority of the voters in Wake County.  If there is every a reader from that side who would like to present that perspective, I would LOVE for you to send me a guest post, which I PROMISE to post (with full credit, of course).

Until that happens, though, I can only present my perspective and the things that inspire me.

As I've said before, we homeschool, and one of the reasons we do so is because I don't like the current commitment nationwide to evaluating education only by those things that can be rated by standardized tests.  We are just starting a study of Dickensonian English history and literature, so when thinking of the present approach to education, I can't help but recall the opening passage to Dicken's Hard Times (his novel that deals most specifically with education):

'NOW, what I want is, Facts. Teach these boys and girls nothing but Facts. Facts alone are wanted in life. Plant nothing else, and root out everything else. You can only form the minds of reasoning animals upon Facts: nothing else will ever be of any service to them. This is the principle on which I bring up my own children, and this is the principle on which I bring up these children. Stick to Facts, sir!'

Maybe it is my personality, maybe it is my education philosophy, or who knows...but I while I think facts are definitely important, there are other important things.  As Albert Einstein says, "Imagination is more important than knowledge.  For knowledge is limited to all we now know and understand, while imagination embraces the entire world, and all there ever will be to know and understand."  So facts teaches our children what we know from the past, but in the rapidly-changing world in which we live, preparing for an unknown future must be, I think, equally important.

(Note:  Of course, this is not one of the battles that are even being debated in the ongoingly-contentious Wake County School Board public meetings.  But perhaps we can get to it once we settle the issues about who should be going where and how we should distribute the resources and children of this county.)

Let me add a few links of other people who have asked this question about the ultimate role of education.

In honor of Martin Luther King's Day yesterday, here is a link to his article on this issue.  Dr. King makes the point that it is not enough for education to make our children smart; it must give them character as well.  He gives an example of a man who is an accomplished scholar within the realm of academia, but can still justify discrimination against people based purely on the color of their skin.

Then, in the Washington Post today, the president of Hampden-Sydney College in Virginia wrote a nice piece about the purpose of a liberal arts college education today.  According to Dr. Christopher Howard, the role of COLLEGE (let alone undergraduate education) is to help today's students make sense of their individual experience with the world, past, present, and future.  Dr. Howard calls for engagement, which he describes as purpose, passion, and calling, rather than providing them with specific skills, knowledge, or employment tracks.

One of the other blogs that I follow, a lovely site called Fairy Dust Teaching, kind of sparked my thinking along these lines with a post she had last month.  She is a Waldorf-trained Kindergarten teacher, so she is the other end of the spectrum.  But one of the thing she said in her post was:
I have a sticky note posted in the front of my lesson plan book that says, "A good education gives you goosebumps."  It reminds me to not forget to add a little wonder and curiosity in the plan.  


I love that reminder.  I may not always get there, but I think that is a great goal to aim for.  To read the rest of her inspirational notes, see her post on Why Educate?

I have one last reference to add.  I have been reading the magnificent book, My Reading Life by Pat Conroy, a writer that I have adored now for about 20 year now.  This book is like a Valentine's Box of Godiva Chocolates for literature, and each essay is like the richest literary truffle you could ever imagine.  But Conroy is only the latest to write about the impact that an individual teacher made on his life.  In his case, it was an English teacher whom Conroy describes as:
Gene Morris didn't just make his students love books; he made us love the entire world.  He was the essential man in the lives of a thousand boys and girls who dwelled in the shadow of his almost unnoticeable greatness.

Conroy had one other fantastic quote from that essay that I must add:
If there is more important work than teaching, I hope to learn about it before I die.

And that, I think, sums up why we continue, despite the frustration.