My Life Untranslated

The Secret Adventures of an ESL Teacher in NYC

Archive for the tag “schools”

Differentiation at ALL Levels

If you are starting your own mom and pop business, you can expect to wear many hats and have a variety of responsibilities that would otherwise be the domain of other people, if you were able to hire staff. This could be true even with serious financial backers worth millions.

But fast forward a few years and most likely, if you became successful, you would be in a position to farm out your different responsibilities and even develop departments such as marketing and billing. You would find yourself with more time to specialize in whatever got you started in the first place and perhaps initiate innovations you otherwise wouldn’t have time for. You’d be less pressed to do the myriad of tasks you used to need to do practically simultaneously so that you could take more time to step back, assess the company, and even transform it to meet new needs you are now in the unique position to see.

Not true for teachers in most schools, though I’m learning that there is a very wide spectrum. Each individual teacher is kept in the position of the new businessman. Enterprising, dedicated, passionate, and hardworking even to the point of working twice the hours you are actually paid for. Doing the job of multiple people: decorator, data analyst, data collector, teacher (lesson planning and instruction), parent (are they eating dinner at home? Sleeping enough? Do they own a winter coat?), etc

Many good teachers keep their mouths shut and their heads down, consistently taking on the new burdens As a result, most are not able to become excellent teachers because they have become a jack of all trades, at best. They think they are doing an excellent job when they manage to do everything, or when they have been able to improve in one area. But then the administration determines 3 new areas of focus to become proficient in.

Being a jack-of-all-trades is not the same as being a Renaissance man/woman. Some school leaders don’t realize this. So teachers end up where we are — doing the work of a small business as one person, trying to do everything and excelling at very little.

In my previous professions, there was a division of labor. When I worked for television, as well as for magazines, I wasn’t expected to be able to analyze the stock market; I was expected to know how to rely on the analysts so that I could interview intelligently and write coherent, factual pieces. I had people I could delegate to hunt down documents at the courthouse in Texas.

Companies who don’t know how to manage and divide up their labor force don’t succeed as well as those who can, in my opinion. And, in the eyes of many, schools are failing. We may have different criteria, but the conclusion is the same. Schools are not meeting the needs of the children. Nor are they meeting the professional needs of teachers to be able to rise up and succeed at the new demands in teaching.

Because don’t be mistaken — times have indeed changed. Schools do need to transform how and what we teach because of the changes in society, globalization, technology, you name it. Even the makeup of the student population itself has been transforming. But heaping more on an already over-burdened workforce is not the smartest solution. It’s simply the easiest. Yet another quick-fix that fixes nothing.

Why aren’t schools given money to do a different form of differentiation — hiring data analysts, or more teaching assistants? Having more team-teacher scenarios? Or allowing for even 30 minutes a day where kids are working truly independently so their teacher can reflect on the day or analyze her own data? Rather than expecting her to, once again, add to the list of hints being done at home or on her own time?

Someone recently said to me — it used to be that teachers were not allowed to get married, have children, or even drink alcohol, and the same ideology continues to run schools. Instead of a warped sense of morality dictating these restrictions, it’s the rising demands and underlying belief that the job comes first and all else must be sacrificed for it.

I didn’t get into teaching to be somebody’s indentured servant (even if indentured and tenured sound remarkably similar), or some mediocre,jack-of-all trades laborer who ends up watering down excellent teaching in the name of doing it all. Something has to give. Or I’m gone.

Today’s Education Reform Rant Brought to You by the Letter “C”

I was once sitting among some colleagues who were discussing the difficulties our ELL students have with spelling – like kids who write “whase” for “was”. Teaching spelling is even trickier when your population’s first language has different sounds, and different sounds represented by letters that differ from English (if they have any experience with letter alphabets or writing at all).

We use Words Their Way, which is essentially a phonics program that encourages deductive reasoning, and uses pictures or word cards, all of which have proven problematic for classes such as mine. Firstly because when doing sound sorts with word cards usually kids just look and see that “mat” looks like “sat” and not “set”, and group them by letters rather than sounds, which they’re supposed to be noticing. While this might be useful for students if you’re teaching them the letters in the English language, but the usefulness even then is limited. Secondly, the picture cards, where they match pictures by the sounds in the words they represent, require vocabulary knowledge! You have to know the picture you are looking at is of a “hen” to see how it fits with “pen”.

Add to this the fact that spelling is arbitrary. There is no inherent logic that the squiggle that looks like a “c” should make the /k/ sound rather than the letter “g”. I know kids don’t need to know that, but teachers and curriculum authors ought to! Besides, spelling in English is so irregular that teaching rules has never proven too helpful (in my experience) because there is also a “however…” tacked onto the end if it.

So, it really struck me as such a surprise when I overheard a fellow teacher say, “No matter how many times I remind them, they still spell ‘excited’ as ‘exited'”. I responded by saying, (in the positive scenario, assuming the kid doesn’t have other problems or difficulties), “There’s a similar word in Spanish but spelled “exitoso”, and maybe that’s why.” And this person paused and replied emphatically, “But you can hear the c,” and then pronounced the word slowly.

What made me really stop in this comment is that despite knowing that ‘c’ can make more than 1 sound, what she didn’t know was that letters don’t actually “make” sounds. They are just representations of sound, and often they represent very different ones (between and within languages), which can reinforce confusion by ELLs and likely not just ELLs.

For example, if I’m thinking of something to say in Spanish or Italian that has the letters “ch” in it, which is pronounced differently in the two languages, I first think to myself how “Che” is said in Spanish, and then I know which sound I need to make. The Italian pronunciation for “ch”, is represented in English by the letters k, c, and also ch (think character). And both Spanish and Italian have their trilled “r” sounds that most people think English doesn’t have. We have one of them. Just say the word ladder out loud and compare what your tongue does to either the Spanish pero, if you know it, to see the similarities, or to the English “made” to see how our “d” at the end of a word differs when “d” is in the middle. Now do you want to teach kids how to pronounce words in English, or how to spell that way? A little trickier, isn’t it, when you think of all the sounds we actually make.

But I digress.

This is NOT a dig at this person, or at teachers — because many of us have not had the experience of really learning a foreign language, or of taking a linguistics class that really invite us to rethink the written language differently from its sound system, or phonetics. And perhaps the way we teach spelling would be different if teachers were encouraged to reflect on their teaching and their particular population’s needs in deeper ways, instead of just being given a book they are required to use three times a week.

I’d like you to consider: this is someone who actually has years of experience with ELLs and still doesn’t understand some key aspects of their learning. So imagine the true value of someone with no experience with ELLs — and I don’t mean the teachers now, but the politicians and others who actually write policy and determine teacher training and curricula — imagine them having the impact they do on our education system.

And we’re just talking about spelling here.

If this question of English orthography and phonetics interests you, I suggest reading this.

Really, Every Day Math?!


Dear creators of Every Day Math,

You have clearly never taught ELLs, because you give the most useless suggestions EVER. How about not creating a curriculum that assumes all child the world over learn the same math the world over at the same time?

A Teacher of actual ELLs

New Teachers: Don’t Believe the Hype!

Right now in NYC, Mayor Bloomberg and others, as part of a nationwide movement to undermine teachers and transform public education into a cheaper-by-the-dozen private enterprise, are working to undo the tenure system. They say the system of “Last In First Out” a disservice to students and new teachers.

Newbie or tenured, teacher or not, you may agree with them. I personally go back and forth on the question. But one thing we must be sure of: these politicians’ and pundits’ motives have NOTHING to do with worry or concern for new teachers, nor is it based on any research that proves experienced teachers are systematically worse than new ones, nor do their motives even have anything to do with any understanding or concern for how or what students learn.

If they succeed in doing away with tenure, soon they will just be on to the next point of attack — like collective bargaining, pensions, reduced class-size, etc., that are at the core of unionized labor typical demands/expectations, and the rights of teachers and students. And we will see a return to teachers leaving after 3-5 years. (Which is why I am linking to this article. I agree with it to an extent, but I think it really misses the point. This battle is not about new vs. old, and if we continue to let Bloomberg et al., set that as the terms of debate, then we’ve already lost this battle. *That* is the urgent idea.)

I don’t want to be so crude as to reduce Bloomberg et al.’s motives to simply the $, ¬†though that is no doubt key, or even central. Instead, I argue that their stance is ideological at its heart, and up for debate is NOT just tenure but the whole approach our cities have toward education.

You can see this if you read between the lines in the recent piece by Bill Gates, which many of you have likely read already and I will rant about soon.

Posted on the run with WordPress for BlackBerry.

Protected: Reflecting and reconsidering

This content is password protected. To view it please enter your password below:

Post Navigation


Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 60 other followers