The First Week

In every teacher prep program or path I've ever heard about, there's talk about the first week of school. Whether your philosophy is "don't smile until December" or "don't look at the syllabus until week 2", there's no denying that you can use the first week of school to set the tone and expectations of your classroom. So when people ask me what I've been doing with my summer, my answer is "planning the first week of school".

After weeks of reading, reflection and discussion with some of my friends from grad school here's my plan for the first week:

Day 1: What's in a name?

Goal - Building community and learning more about each other as a class.

Activity - Brainstorm and free-write about our names; Share with a partner; Mrs. Beck shares with the class.

Homework - First assignment, due Friday: The History of Me

Other important notes for Day 1:

Students will learn class routines and structures, including self-regulated warm-up. Students will be expected to come into the room, pick up their materials and begin their warm up. Students will have the opportunity to start over and try again if they struggle with this structure.

Day 2: How do we learn about History?

Goal - Introduce students to the inquiry process.

Activity - How are classrooms today different from classrooms during Reconstruction? Modeling, Group Practice, Individual Practice.

Homework - History of Me

Other important notes for Day 2:

I've noticed in the past that students often struggle with inquiry, particularly if they are not used to it from prior classrooms. My style of teaching involves a lot of student-driven learning, where students need to interpret and infer information rather than copy or recreate it. I've found it is important to explicitly model the process of interpretation and inference for students, so they believe they can be successful at it. This is the goal for Day 2.

Day 3: What makes a good student, good teacher?

Goal - Engage students in a collaborative discussion of class expectations; continue to build community.

Activity - Brainstorm & partner work: What makes a good student? What makes a good teacher? Identify final class list of five qualities as an expectations contract.

Homework - History of Me

Day 4: Epic Road Trip

Goal - Learn the location & significance of the 50 states.

Activity - Groups design and present plan for Epic Summer Road Trip through the U.S.

Homework - 50 States Map

Things I'm still thinking about:

- Classroom Rules vs. Classroom Expectations: I view classroom rules as non-genotiable structures that paint a picture for students of what behavior is required in my classroom. I would have no more than 3, and they would be something like "You will not take away from learning opportunities in this classroom" and "You will treat yourself and others with respect in this classroom". How will I treat these differently than the expectations we come up with in our Day 3 discussion? When will I introduce them? How do I explain them?

- Order of Day 2 and Day 3 Lessons: Do I jump into inquiry first, or continue to focus on community building by having the expectations conversation?

- Best way to teach 50 states: This is something that students need to know. Do I emphasize memorization techniques or try to build associations and connections? Right now, I'm taking the associations approach by going the Epic Road Trip project route, but I'm not convinced that'll work the way I expect. For homework, they will need to make a flip chart to help them memorize. Maybe I can compromise by building in the memorization to a lesson the following week?

I'm not sure who is reading this blog, but anyone who has any ideas or suggestions for me in my first week - please! Pass it on! Whether you remember being 12 or are a teacher yourself, I welcome feedback.

Dear Apple

Dear Apple,

Anyone who knows me in real life knows I'm a huge fan of your brand. I have almost all of your products, from my desktop to my laptop to my smartphone . . . I'm a loyal customer. I discovered you as a primary student growing up in Palo Alto, California and took you with me to college in the same town. You stayed with me at home even when my work as a management consultant forced me to learn keyboard shortcuts on a Dell. When I headed back to grad school, I was accompanied by a brand-new Macbook and now, as I begin a new career as a classroom teacher, I couldn't wait to find ways to bring your products into the classroom with me.

As a student teaching intern, I would bring my Macbook into the classroom and was shocked by the attention my students paid to it. They wanted to play with it, stare at it, be the one to click next on the presentation. I knew I loved my Macbook - I did not realize the excitement it would bring out in my students. So when I got a full time job for the fall, I knew that the iPad would be a great way to bring engagement and excitement into the classroom. I wanted to find ways to teach with the iPad. My goal was to buy one with my own money, find ways to use it meaningfully in the classroom, and then apply for grants to cover a class set in future years. With this exciting vision, I headed to the Apple Store.

When I got the Apple Store, the first thing I noticed was a giant Teach For America display in the front window. "Donate your iPad and we will refurbish it for use in a high-needs classroom!" I got excited: I'm a classroom teacher in a high-needs classroom, and I just finished my Masters in Education - if Apple is willing to donate iPads to TFA teachers, surely they will have some sort of program for the rest of us. When I asked about the program, however, I was informed that not only was I not eligible for the refurb program, but I also was not eligible for any sort of discount on the iPad at all. Not as a grad student, not as a classroom teacher, not as a high-needs classroom teacher. Just if I had been TFA.

Apple, I'm angry. I appreciate your support of education and I think it is a wise branding move for you to encourage schools to use your products through philanthropy. But someone needs to explain to me: Why TFA? Why not high-needs classroom teachers, regardless of how they got there? Why not let us equally apply for and be eligible for refurbished iPads based on availability?

Do you doubt my credentials? I went to the same undergrad university as many TFA teachers. In fact, I have my masters too. Because I'm not TFA do you doubt my passion for my students? Or my integrity when I say I plan to use the iPad for the classroom? I will write you essays, I will take pictures and document my instruction. My rigorous graduate program required that of me as well.

Please don't misunderstand me. This is not about free stuff. I came to the store prepared to spend my own money on a classroom iPad. I know that I am not the only teacher willing to spend my own money on making my classroom better. This is about your running an philanthropic campaign that - like so many others- elevates a certain education agenda above others. Teach For America, whether you support it or not, is political. And choosing to limit your philanthropic support to TFA-er's instead of all high-needs teachers sends a message that TFA is more worthy or valuable than other routes to teaching.

Public school teachers need support. Not some of us. All of us. I realize that this was likely a philanthropic campaign born of relationships and TFA's excellent Public Relations department, not necessarily intended as an educational agenda. I also realize that maybe what I should do with my frustration is boycott your products. But that's not what I want. I want to use your amazing products in my home and in my classroom. All I ask is that you put the same thoughtful design into your philanthropic programs as you do your innovative products.

Sincerely,

Mrs. Beck

Review: Teach Like a Champion

This summer I've made myself a Summer Reading List. It's a mix of historical fiction that I may use in my classroom next year, historical non-fiction to develop my own content knowledge, and books on teaching pedagogy and philosophy. I'll be posting some reviews here, mainly as notes to myself, but also in the hopes it prompts conversation with other teachers.

First up, Doug Lemov's Teach Like A Champion. It seems like this book is everywhere lately, so I thought I'd see what all the fuss was about. In short, the book is a compilation of classroom management strategies Lemov observed in several of his most successful (defined by test scores) classrooms at Uncommon Schools.

The book had me asking some of the same questions I've been wrestling with through my teacher prep year:

- What does learning look like?

- How do we measure it?

- Does it look different for urban vs. suburban kids?

Regarding the last question: in the last year of my M.Ed. program, I've spent a lot of time in a variety of schools for observations and internships. It was interesting to note in which schools I saw these techniques being used - almost exclusively the urban schools. In the demo video that comes with TLAC, the students are almost all African American. While I don't know if they were from urban or suburban neighborhoods, the Uncommon Schools model generally seeks to serve urban youth.

My first reaction to TLAC was to note how teacher-centered the approaches are. In the introduction, Lemov criticizes student-centered approached that ineffectively or inefficiently achieve learning, suggesting inquiry and constructivist approaches are a fad that ignore the "shortest path" to learning. The techniques focus on how to grab and keep student focus on the teacher, and how the teacher can direct the lesson to ensure 100% correct answers and high standards for language and learning. The classrooms are very controlled, with heavy-handed direction from the teacher. Lemov argues that learning is impossible without focused time being devoted to it, and these controlling techniques make time and focus available for learning.

To be more candid, my second reaction was to how bored the students looked in the demo lessons. With a few notable exceptions (Ms. Austin!), I was even bored. One question I have for Lemov is - does it matter if students are bored? I'm genuinely not sure what he would say. Perhaps I am reading it wrong, but I would *not* want to be a student in 95% of the classrooms featured in the demo lesson.

What matters most - that students learn? Or that they are engaged? That they get the 100% right answer, or that they construct knowledge themselves in a way that teaches them how to learn?

Given these reactions, I wondered, is it a luxury to learn in a student-centered environment? Do "certain types" of students need to focus and get the Right Answer, while "other types" have the luxury of constructing knowledge and working through misconceptions? By types, of course, I mean urban/suburban, rich/poor, haves/have-nots - not that those dichotomies always parallel each other.

Next year, I'll be teaching at a high-needs suburban middle school with 60% students receiving free meals and 40% learning English as a second language. How will they best learn? How do they deserve to be taught? Is an active, engaged, messy, sometimes unclear or inefficient classroom a luxury they can't afford? A disservice to their needs? My gut tells me no, but I genuinely wrestle with these questions.

In the TLAC videos, I see little conversation, little genuine interaction with students. Does that happen outside of these videos? Does it have a place in this philosophy?

When I see the controlled classrooms of TLAC (10 seconds to pass in papers, pencils picked up and put down as the exact same moments), I think to myself, "This is not real life . . . or if it is, what kind of real-life are we preparing these students for? What type of job or role requires such disciplined automations?" And, in fact, students coming from controlled charter schools are struggling the in less-regimented college environment. It is the next challenge faced by schools who get their underserved students into college using such techniques . . . getting them through college.

I also thought it was interesting that most of the classrooms featured were early-education, ELA and math. There were very few social studies or science classrooms featured. I wonder if many of these teaching strategies are more effective with concrete tasks that require repetition (such as grammar, vocabulary, and formulas) than with less concrete skills or content such as what factors lead to the rise and fall of civilizations.

In summary: There's nothing wrong with the focused, teacher-centered methods emphasized in TLAC, but it makes me uncomfortable when it becomes the entirety of instruction. One of the most difficult skills of teaching that I want to develop in my classroom is the ability to shift in and out of teacher- and student-centered instructional approaches within a single period. It is challenging for both teachers and students to do this, but it more closely mirrors real life, where problems will not be easily practiced or repeated, and where social interactions will not be mechanized and rote. I hope that students in my class will know when it is time for them to drive their learning, and when it is time for me to direct it. I hope they will know what is expected of them in each case, without me having to snap my fingers or count down from 10 as a regular course of action. I know they will need signals, and I know they will need structure. but I also know they need to learn to self-regulate their learning and behavior amid the messiness of life and TLAC did not address that element of student development.