Entry #30 - April 19, 1999


"I asked my students the question which had been bothering me, 'If you're working so hard and I'm using all these cool teaching tools, why aren't you all getting A's?' At first they just looked at me, but then they began to talk."


When I returned to school after attending the Annenberg Colloquium, I thought I should share some of my experiences with my students. In particular, I was anxious to talk with the class whose work had been discussed on Saturday.

I described to the kids how folks from all over the country had watched the videotape of their lesson. I shared all of the wonderful feedback I'd heard about their positive cooperation and engagement in the lesson. I also told them about my nagging doubts throughout the process.

I asked my students the question which had been bothering me, "If you're working so hard and I'm using all these cool teaching tools, why aren't you all getting A's?". At first they just looked at me, but then they began to talk.

They talked about basic things like their comfort level in my stuffy, crowded room (the windows are sealed). They complained that they have too many different projects going on in separate subjects to focus on them all. They asked for review sessions or practice tests before assessments.

A boy questioned my practice of calling on boys and girls equally, when girls don't want to answer. He said he knew I was trying to be fair, but said he gets tired of waiting. A girl responded that she often answers correctly in her head, but is afraid of making mistakes and being embarrassed.

Another girl said that she often didn't understand what I was talking about, but was embarrassed to ask. And finally, students complained that after a 100 minutes of language arts, they needed a break of sorts before moving right into another 100-minute block like science lab.

My students' feedback was very provocative. I spoke informally to my vice-principal about the need for a testing and assignment schedule so kids don't feel so backed up and overwhelmed. We also talked briefly about rostering options to address the students' feeling about longer blocks.

I raised the idea of thematic teaching with my students, so their/our work is not so fragmented, but this needs more discussion. The bell rang and only two kids had had a chance to respond. (Unfortunately, we gave our standardized tests this week so we haven't returned to the topic yet.)

I need more information about my students' desire for added explanation of my directions and lessons. I'm not sure if Jennifer meant that I need to break up my instructions and direct lessons into smaller chunks or if she meant my language wasn't accessible.

I'll need help with this from my kids and a peer coach. From my perspective I don't think I give a lot of direct instruction, but I'm not sure if the students see it that way. A peer mentor could actually observe and record the number and length of times I speak.

I do know that when I observed the video of my teaching, I felt I talked more often than I thought I did. Some of the talking is repeating students' questions for the whole group and lots of it is questions, but it still adds up to a great deal of teacher talk vs. student voice. . . .

In fact, during last Saturday's "tuning" of my work, my focusing question was: "Are students truly constructing meaning when all conversation is channeled through the teacher?"

During my tuning session, most teachers were very comfortable with my talking a lot on the tape. One person said I needed to talk because I was giving new information, but another said that teachers are always giving new information and asked how that related to student inquiry and constructivist learning.

When I responded, I thanked folks for all of their feedback, but admitted that I felt a much-needed push by the colleague who posed the teacher talk vs. student inquiry and constructivism question.

This dilemma leads me back to the need to achieve the optimum balance between a student-centered vs. teacher-directed classroom and curriculum. Now, I'm really on a roll. In fact, my thoughts are racing and I can't settle on one question before 10 more pop up! Questions like, "How can you establish a balanced, student centered classroom when your District is calling for standards-based lessons that follow a standardized curricular framework?" or "Should student curiosity be the driving force of our classrooms?" or "Can we expect students to become lifelong, independent learners if we constantly dictate their educational experience?" and on and on.

In an effort to escape from all my questions, I turned on my email and what did I see? A message on the coaches listserv from Susan Gold, a CFG coach in San Francisco, listing still more questions about student voice and democracy! It seems a group of teachers were discussing this at the Colloquium during the breaks.

Someone responded to Susan with a suggestion that anyone interested in student voice should check out the Sudbury Valley schools on the web. I followed this piece of advice and spent this morning reading about the schools in Framingham, MA.

As I began reading, I was reminded of my attraction to the Montessori Method and its reliance on teacher as coach, student as worker, but Sudbury goes a great deal further. It represents a totally student directed model, with classes organized solely on the basis of student demand.

The most informative piece I found about Sudbury was a January '94 article by David Ruenzel, "Classless Society," in Teacher Magazine. The article has pushed my thinking about my own views of teaching and learning. Do I agree with Montessori that children are naturally curious or do I agree with Aristotle and countless others that these kids today are lazy and incorrigible?

I agree with the first characterization, almost all of the time, and so I need to rethink my classroom approach and ask a CFG colleague to come in and observe. I've also written my principal to ask if I can organize my classroom next year on the basis of monthly skills' profiles which students will then adapt for their own purposes and projects.

I'm comfortable, or at least I think I am, with Montessori. I'm not so sure about Sudbury and the views of its chief spokesperson, Daniel Greenberg. I think there's something valuable to be found the space between a totally student directed model and a "rigid, prison-like" teacher directed one.

I think I'll just continue to plug away, trying to find the balance between exposure, direction and joint participation on this journey of teaching and learning. I'm glad I'm travelling with my kids and my CFG colleagues. I'd really get lost and overwhelmed without them.


Read next week's entry >>>

<<< Read last week's entry

READ FEEDBACK about this diary entry


Post a comment about this week's diary entry

Find out more about Deborah

Back to Middle School Diaries index


A teacher writes:

I appreciated reading your thoughts and feelings. As a teacher I know most of us have been there at one point or another -- some on a daily basis.

I like the student inquiry method, but I also strongly believe that it needs to be instructor driven. The standards address the skills our students should know, I can't complain with these, or my state's goals. Our students need more than just exposure to what they are interested in or initially drawn to. Once exposed to other areas, it opens doors; it also opens eyes!

I spent my summer writing curriculum for my science classes, because I felt what the district had to offer was outdated and did not prepare my students for high school classes (let's not even mention higher learning!). I feel confident that the lessons planned for my students not only allow individual exploration but also a concrete base.

In any subject, students always learn what interests them most. But that does not mean and should not mean that we don't or ignore teaching them other things. In doing so we decrease their knowledge base. A classroom is driven by the teacher ...with objectives and insight into student learning. We are there as faciliators, but we can't simply say that just because students don't care to learn this, that it's no longer important or worthwhile.

Students don't drive the curriculum. We must remember that we are a knowledge base -- what they learn now from us is what they will build upon in the future. It helps them decide (or decides for them) what additional course work they may be able to pursue.

I love inquiry based learning -- I think it is fundamental. But my daughter is entering the 2nd grade. I will have a fit if she is not taught proper science this year. The national standards set a great goalline. Our students must learn a love of knowledge, and later as they mature, they should refine that love; but without a base they are just floating.

Education is not in the job of pleasing .... it is in educating, and that does not always mean teaching or learning that which we love. Education is well balanced -- at least fine education is -- and as a
parent, teacher, PTA member, and community person I will not allow our schools to let student interest direct curriculum.

Fine point: that in which we are interested in we learn -- no matter what! Our reluctance in certain
areas brings major "ahh hah's" later in life.

Maintining student interest and motivation is a key point, but not to the point of melted curriculum. The good, knowledgeable teacher will find a way to involve her studnets. As for the rest, who ever said teaching was for everyone? Those who can do ... teach! Those who can't find a less deserving
profession (with greater pay, benefits, bathroom breaks ... yeah, yeah, yeah, but do they get to go home with a bag full of papers to evaluate ... huh, I think not!!)

Our job is tough. In more ways than just curriculum. We are dedicated professionals (without the benefits given to a profession) and perhaps it is time to stop being so modest ... it hasn't gained much, except fads in education. (Pure inquiry based learning is one of them). We, as professionals, know what our children need. Perhaps one day soon we will act like the profession we claim to be, and stop letting the "others" dictate what is learned/not learned at our schools.