Archive for the ‘Current Events’ Category

Back to Basics

Sunday, March 7th, 2010

Building a Better Teacher,” a very long and very useful article from the New York Times Magazine, boils down to two very basic principles:

1. Classroom Management. “Students can’t learn unless the teacher succeeds in capturing their attention and getting them to follow instructions,” says author Elizabeth Green, paraphrasing Doug Lemov, a charter-school principal and one of the main sources for the article. If only saying were doing!  All teachers wish their students would pay better attention.  The good students do; they’re interested in learning.  With the others, you have to convince them that it’s worth their time and effort to invest in what you have to say.

For this, I can recommend no better book than Fred Jones’ Tools for Teaching (as I have before.)  There are some very simple techniques in it, most of which require a teacher who is prepared, calm and focused.  The advice in the Times article is similar: for instance, it advocates giving directions only while standing still and looking at the student(s,) which implies that getting them to pay attention is your highest immediate priority.

2. Fixing Mistakes. “Teaching depends on what other people think, not what you think,” says Deborah Loewenberg Ball, one of the teaching specialists quoted in the article.  In my limited teaching experience, I have noticed that students don’t need any help learning; they do that on their own, inconsistently and inefficiently but in the only way they can.  Your job, as a teacher, is to show them where and how their thinking is flawed, so they can learn more quickly.

For me, this second piece of advice is much more difficult than the first — so much so that I often wonder why I am a teacher at all.  I learn very quickly and easily, and I know what helps me learn; I have to constantly fend off frustration with my students, who lack my natural ability and / or self-awareness.  Working one-on-one, I can be as patient as the day is long, but in a group, when I sense control of the class sliding away from me as one student continues to look lost, it’s tempting to think, “Why can’t you just GET it?!”

So, that’s it.  “Do this and you will be saved.”  The article also discusses methods for training teachers to do these things and retaining the ones who already do them, which is interesting if you’re interested in the politics of education (I am, but am also increasingly disillusioned by it.)  Still, I am sure I will get the book mentioned in the article when it comes out in April, written by Lemov and based on his findings from a five-year study dubbed “Lemov’s Taxonomy.”  I figure it can’t hurt.

Cooking = Salvation

Thursday, February 18th, 2010

This is the first week of Lent, so I’ve been at church by night and trying to catch up on school by day.  As food for thought, however, you might be interested in this post I wrote for my current grad course, Child & Adolescent Development, about the childhood obesity crisis:

I blame parents.

Easy to say for one who is not a parent!  But I have heard too many caregivers lament that their child “will only eat” macaroni and cheese or hot dogs.  As one of my classmates points out, when given the choice, any child (or human, if allowed to act on his basest impulses) will gravitate toward the sweeter, more calorie-dense food.  It’s our instinct, derived from the days when such foods were very hard to come by — restricted to finding a patch of berries or a hive of honey.  Today, as others have already stated, such foods are actually cheaper (with externalized costs, of course) than nutritious foods, and they are certainly easier to serve.  But since when do we allow a child’s preference to govern his rules for living?  We don’t let him choose whether or not to brush his teeth, go to school, or say his prayers.  Why would we let him choose what’s on the dinner menu, beyond such reasonable choices as “green beans or broccoli?”

Many of you have indicated causes of childhood obesity with which I can’t argue: working parents, busy schedules, child-centered advertising.  I think there is one more vastly important factor: the demise of home cooking.  Statistics show unilaterally that fewer and fewer people cook for themselves — even when “cooking” is widened to mean putting together a sandwich from purchased ingredients.  Children are not learning how to come home from school, cut up carrot sticks and peel an orange — and, at a later age, to saute onions and garlic for a sauce or set bread to rise in a warm place.  They certainly are not learning where the carrots and onions come from, when to plant them and how long to wait before pulling them up.  I was lucky enough to be raised by parents who did everything themselves, but I constantly meet people my age and older who say they can’t (or just don’t) cook, and that number seems to rise exponentially as age decreases.

At this point I’d like to surrender my point of view to two gentlemen who are far more convincing and knowledgeable than I.  One is Michael Pollan, who has already been referenced several times on this board.  Please do read all of his books; they are wonderful.  However, this article (it’s long, but worth it) from the New York Times Magazine last year reinforces my argument by illuminating one of the strangest dichotomies in modern times: the huge popularity of cooking shows on television and the dearth of skilled home cooks.  We spend untold amounts of time and money watching Martha Stewart, Rachael Ray and Emeril, but we are less and less likely to translate that enthusiasm into our own kitchens and dining rooms, mostly because we haven’t seen and modeled that behavior from a young age.

However, on that note, the second reference I want to make is to this excellent lecture (about 20 minutes) by Jamie Oliver.  Yes, Jamie Oliver, the English chef / television personality.  It turns out he’s also a compassionate, dedicated humanitarian who is shocked and pained by the current crisis in child obesity, and determined to do all he can to alleviate it.  For me, the most moving moment in the film is when he confronts an obese mother with a dining-room table covered with pizza, corn dogs and sodas — all the food she typically feeds her two (also obese) children in a week.  “You are killing your children,” Oliver says simply.  It cuts like a knife, but it’s absolutely true.  This mother, by failing to pass on the skill set she never learned herself — how to make nutritious, satisfying, diverse meals — is setting her children up for severe health problems and an early death.  Sobering, but verifiable fact.

But, as Oliver points out, this crisis is entirely preventable.  Children who couldn’t identify a beet or a tomato (watch the video, seriously) can be taught to.  Children who will only eat macaroni and cheese can be taught to love spinach (and not only, Mrs. Seinfeld, through trickery.)  They love to help in the garden or in the kitchen, and they are far more likely to try diverse foods (and thus to learn weight-management behavior) when they have participated in the entire process of harvesting and preparing food.  We can fix this, one household at a time.

We Are the Robots

Sunday, February 14th, 2010

That’s what they should have named this travesty of a cover (music begins about 1:05.)

Don’t feel bad if you can’t make it all the way to the end; I had to turn it off after the offensively didactic rap section (”someone to help you rebuild / after the rubble’s gone”.)

After you’re finished laughing, take a few minutes to watch the original, below:

We have American Idol to thank for this mess.  I’m proud to say I hardly recognized any of the faces in the new version, but I can name almost everyone in the original recording (here’s a cheat sheet,) which was made with about a hundred times more talent.

GRRRR!  Can we just pretend the remake never happened?!

Good News

Friday, February 12th, 2010

The Times reports that its revered list of most e-mailed articles is governed by one overarching variable.  Politics?  Sex?  Celebrity?  Nope.  Awe.

Building on prior research, the Penn researchers defined the quality as an “emotion of self-transcendence, a feeling of admiration and elevation in the face of something greater than the self.”

They used two criteria for an awe-inspiring story: Its scale is large, and it requires “mental accommodation” by forcing the reader to view the world in a different way.

. . .

But in general, people who share this kind of article seem to have loftier motives than trying to impress their friends. They’re seeking emotional communion, Dr. Berger said.

“Emotion in general leads to transmission, and awe is quite a strong emotion,” he said. “If I’ve just read this story that changes the way I understand the world and myself, I want to talk to others about what it means. I want to proselytize and share the feeling of awe. If you read the article and feel the same emotion, it will bring us closer together.”

On that note, here’s one of the most beautiful things to come out of the blizzard so far.  Be awed with me!

The Changing Face of College

Thursday, February 11th, 2010

Everyone seems to be talking about college all of a sudden — not just meThe Times reports a very interesting trend: early college programs, in which students take five years to earn both a high school diploma and a two-year college degree.  There have always been schools who will do this for high-achieving students, but now programs are targeting first-generation college attenders:

With a careful sequence of courses, including ninth-grade algebra, and attention to skills like note-taking, the early-college high schools accelerate students so that they arrive in college needing less of the remedial work that stalls so many low-income and first-generation students. “When we put kids on a college campus, we see them change totally, because they’re integrated with college students, and they don’t want to look immature,” said Michael Webb, associate vice president of Jobs for the Future.

The article considers it a given that the last year of high school is a waste — I guess because students have already made plans for college or a career or both, prime conditions for the ailment known as senioritis.  That was certainly not the case with me; I found my senior year very freeing.  I was finished with most of my course requirements, so I was able to choose courses I knew would bring success and enjoyment, like Yearbook and AP English.  I also experimented a bit, taking Anatomy and AP Civics, neither of which interested me beforehand, but both of which proved useful and fascinating studies.  And I finagled an independent study of classical piano, which basically meant I got to continue studying with my private teacher while practicing for a whole period on the school’s sadly neglected 9-foot concert grand.  Someday I’ll tell you all about that.  Besides, I got to play Liesl in The Sound of Music, I learned how to swing dance, and I had my first real boyfriend.

So I’m a big proponent of senior year productivity, however it can be achieved, and although I still object to the idea that college is for everyone, I can’t take issue with an idea that expects a great deal of students out of whom  no one has ever expected much of anything.  I’ve never seen a study that didn’t prove the link between expectations and achievement, and this is no exception: dropouts plummeted from the 38% state average to zero, and one college president said this performance, from a group of completely average kids, was the most exciting development he’s seen “in 27 years.”  The kids are pumped, too:

“I didn’t want to do it, because my middle school friends weren’t applying,” Ms. Holt said. “I cried, but my mother made me do it.

“The first year, I didn’t like it, because my friends at the regular high school were having pep rallies and actual fun, while I had all this homework. But when I look back at my middle school friends, I see how many of them got pregnant or do drugs or dropped out. And now I’m excited, because I’m a year ahead.”

Good for her.  Good for her mother.  Good for the school, for trying something different.