[NOTE: Deborah Bambino refers to a "tuning protocol" in this week's diary entry. To find out more about tuning protocols and other strategies to examine teacher and student work, see this important article in Horace, the newsletter of the Coalition of Essential Schools.]

Entry #23 - February 22, 1999


Listening to my peers as they raised questions about whether the students had written down their thoughts and discussed them in their groups -- before I hit them with my questions -- was a little unsettling. . .Even allowing for my nervousness about being filmed, it was clear that I'd goofed.

This week was rather unusual. It all started on Monday, when I won a trip to Washington, D.C. at a hockey game. I'm not the athletic type, but I was at the game with a lot of my students and I thought all the chaperones were going to compete in this contest. I was pretty surprised when I found myself, alone on the ice, under the spotlight in front of 12,000-plus spectators. It was pure beginner's luck when my first shot won the D.C. trip. My next shot missed the puck completely!

The kids were thrilled, I was amazed, and I wisely decided to end my hockey career as quickly as it had started.

On Tuesday, I was visited by a film crew from Annenberg, so I was back in the spotlight again. They taped me teaching a science lab and did an interview with me, and then they recorded my Critical Friends Group discussing my concerns about the shortcomings of the taped lesson.

At my CFG meeting we used the Tuning Protocol to peel away the layers of my lesson and the students' response to it. I was concerned that the kids were experiencing lots of hands-on, but not enough minds-on. I felt they were missing the connections to the imbedded concepts in the lab.

I wish I could say that my CFG unearthed some really mysterious obstacles in my classroom, but in fact it was pretty basic stuff. On the one hand, I was concerned about my students' lack of reflection, while on the other hand, I rushed them through the lab like a herd of cattle being driven to market.

Listening to my peers as they raised questions about whether the students had written down their thoughts and discussed them in their groups -- before I hit them with my questions -- was a little unsettling. It was clear to me that I had neglected to build in reflection time or any of the teaching devices which I know facilitate student thinking. Even allowing for my nervousness about being filmed, it was clear that I'd goofed.

When it came time for my response to their feedback, I expressed my intention to turn the lesson around the next day. I said I'd build the reflection in, when I taught my second class. I decided to do some prewriting as well as some more review of the previous lab before we started the next one.

It was an unusual opportunity to implement the feedback in midstream. In most instances, by the time you get the work tuned you've moved on and have to wait until the next year to teach a concept or lesson again.

The camera crew decided to film again the next day. They wanted to see what changes I would make and whether the students would respond differently.

I wasn't as nervous about the cameras on the second day, but it was the new focus on reflection that made the biggest difference. I slowed down, asked questions and waited for answers. If the answers didn't come, I rephrased or repeated the questions.

Even though the second taping was of my most difficult group of eighth graders, it was great! The kids were motivated (the cameras helped here). They made sketches, asked questions of their own, formulated hypotheses and even made reference to comments I had made five days earlier.

I'm not saying I'll never rush a lesson again, especially if the camera's running, but I sure did learn a big lesson about setting a reflective tone. I was saying all the right things, "talking the talk", but I sure wasn't "walking the walk"...ugh.

I'm struck again by how we often blame others -- generally the kids -- first, and only after serious reflection look at our role in the process of teaching and learning. Our assumption is that we covered the material and that they didn't get it for some reason like lack of motivation, inattentiveness etc. Is it just human nature to want to blame the other guy? Is it always easier for adults to blame kids?

As usual, going through a fine tuning of my work was both humbling and exhilirating. It reminded me of a metaphor that had been shared with me in a recent e-mail. The metaphor talked about professional development as if it were the process of polishing a stone. We all have our rough edges and too often we act like it's only the students who need the polishing....

I'm grateful that I have a context, a CFG, to help me smooth over my rough spots. I don't ever want to return to the isolation I felt during my first few years as a teacher in a self-contained classroom. I guess what I'm recognizing for the umpteenth time is that despite the best of intentions, you can't improve your work alone. You need those extra eyes to clearly see the stuff that's right there in front of you.

[Read a letter written by Deb and published in the Philadelphia Inquirer on this topic.]

Speaking of reflection, I wrote up some focus questions for my "Ask the Girls" group. I'm hoping they'll answer the questions in their journals, outside of our meeting time. I asked them things about why they liked building the cars so much and how they might respond to people who think tools and building are for "boys only." I'm anxious to see what they have to say, and after my recent CFG experience, I'm building in a way for them to exercise their voices.


Read next week's entry>>>

<<< Read last week's entry


Read a comment about this week's diary entry

Post a comment about this week's diary entry

Find out more about Deborah

Back to Middle School Diaries index



READER COMMENTS:

Dear Deborah,

I want to thank and commend you for composing your diaries. I have spent part of the weekend reading all of your entries and after a few frustrating weeks you have allowed me to somewhat regain the feeling of "yes I can make a difference" which I felt in teacher's college.

I am a first-year teacher teaching math and science to seventh graders in North Carolina. I have obviously experienced everything (and more) that you have been describing in your entries, the sub fiascoes, science fair, questions about teaching and learning and the frustrations of functioning in a "vacuum" in terms of support from my peers. It is good to know that I am not alone in my struggle with all of these issues.

I wonder if you could send me more information about your Ask the Girls program you run on Fridays. It sounds exactly like what some of my girls would be keen about and I would like to introduce that type of activity to our school next year.

Susan



DEB'S LETTER TO THE PHILADELPHIA INQUIRER:

Deborah Bambino wrote this letter to her daily newspaper in response to their editorial supporting more sustained teacher development:

To the Editor:

In Saturday's editorial, "Make the time..." you said, "Teacher development is too important to be left to scattershot programs." Teaching and learning are not static commodities that you master once and voila, you're an expert. As educators we are constantly trying to fine tune our lessons and our understanding of the needs of the students we greet each day.

Professional development must be ongoing and consistent to the point where it becomes reflexive. Basic questions about what, why and how we're teaching must be linked to questions of whether students are learning and using what they've learned.

In addition to the Johns Hopkins Model which you mentioned, Central East Middle and others in partnership with IBM, have also developed a pilot called the Continuous Practice Improvement Model(CPI). CPI allows teachers to visit other teachers' classrooms for a full three days to share lessons and methods and to explore the effective integration of technology into our basic instruction.

Finally, teachers at Central East are involved in Critical Friends Groups (CFG), as part of the Annenberg Institute's National School Reform Faculty, which meet monthly after school hours to collectively reflect on our practice in order to move student achievement forward. My CFG and CPI work have completely transformed my approach to my teaching.

I no longer feel as though I'm running from this workshop to that one in search of a new trick to motivate my students. Now I've opened up the learning process to peer discussion, student input and on a smaller scale with parents.

While time continues to be a problem, I feel our commitment to a broad, ongoing conversation among all those concerned with public education is the key to student success. Results won't be the reward for this or that cookie cutter model, but rather the net effect of an evolving design, custom-made for the unique mix of individuals we meet in any given school year.

Deborah Bambino
Science Leader
Central East Middle School
Philadelphia, PA 19120