May 19, 2009

Another year comes to a close ...

The end of another school year is upon us, and me. It's number eighteen for me, meaning I'm a few years past the "halfway point" to retirement (that is, if I can actually afford to when the time comes). The bunch I had this year were the most ... "trying" I've had in the many years of teaching my current subject, perhaps the most trying. By that I mean academically and behaviorally. I don't think I've ever seen the degree of utter apathy among my students that I witnessed this year.

What got me really thinking about this was when I caught a short segment on CNN's "Lou Dobbs" show a couple weeks back. A few graphics showed the [growing] percentage of drop-outs across the country, with Dobbs then asking "Are we failing our children?" Then I thought of the numerous foreign students I've had over the years -- and some of the observations made by their parents. Why? Well, to show how spoiled we've all become in our country.

I still recall an Indian (from India, not Native American) family from my very first year in the classroom (1991). They were astonished at all the "stuff" American students had at their disposal in their classrooms, and school in general. Really. Astonished. Hell, my wife (from Costa Rica) was equally astonished the day she first set foot in my class. And again, this was 1991. Drastic improvements in schools and classes have taken place since.

So, if we have top-of-line schools and classrooms across this country (and face it -- even our poorest districts are [much] better off than schools in the 3rd World), why do our kids still drop out? Why could they care less about their performance in class? They have the best facilities, as a whole, anywhere on the globe.

In short, I think we've become a victim of our own affluence -- and of our "no (or "lack of") responsibility" mindset. After all, why study when you know you're going to be "promoted" anyhow? (This is called "social promotion" -- granted to those who do absolute sh** in the classroom and eventually get moved on to the next grade because, well, they're too old.) Why study when you know that X-Box will be there for you when you get home, along with your cell phone and laptop? Why study when it's mostly the teachers' responsibility to "make" you learn? Why study when the government will take care of you if you just wanna be a bum?

Why behave in class when no matter what you do, mommy and daddy will believe you and not the teacher? Why behave in class when even the most egregious behavior will garner a mere slap on the wrist? Why behave in class when disruptions that require the teacher to physically restrain a student frequently result in the teacher getting into trouble?

Yet, society demands more and more that the classroom teacher rectify these academic and social shortcomings.

Hey look, trust me -- I'll be the last person to place all the blame on society and parents for the travails in our schools today. Hell, a good/great teacher is vital today more than ever, especially in classes where there are numerous academic and behavioral issues. But as the degree of social strife increases year after year in our schools, logic dictates that not only will the effects of these great teachers be less, but more and more great teachers will be less willing to stay in the profession, let alone enter it at all.

Is it any wonder that the most successful schools are those with the lowest BS tolerance? Seriously. Take a look around. Schools with strong administrations -- administrators that are a constant presence in the hallways and classrooms, and tolerate NO behavioral nonsense -- are the ones that end up with safe, successful schools. Just consider the Rudy Giuliani approach to crime and safety during his tenure as New York mayor: Deal with the little things and the big things will follow (being dealt with, that is). Administrators (and teachers) who don't deal with the "small" things (like school/class latenesses, minor class disruptions like repeated talking, constant unpreparedness) are just inviting bigger hassles to appear -- and they will. Why? Because students recognize that they can get away with it. It sure ain't rocket science. And anyone recall the name Joe Clark? (I previously discussed Joe here.) Immortalized in the film "Stand By Me," Joe was hired to turn around a perpetually dysfunctional high school, and he did just that -- by putting up with absolutely no bullsh**. (Granted, some of the instances depicted in the film I doubt could actually occur in real life -- unfortunately -- like gathering the numerous repeat troublemakers on the auditorium stage and informing them that they are "expurgated;" basic state laws would forbid such a casual dismissal.) If more school administrators -- and their higher-up central office administrators -- were willing to go to the mat to get rid of the worst of the worst elements in a school, problems would decrease markedly. However, these folks fear the costs of lawsuits brought by the "parents" (and their ambulance-chasing lawyers) of such troublemakers and [especially] central office personnel end up making the most cost-effective decision: Cede to the "parent's" demands. And so the cycle continues ...

And what of stigma? The very definition doesn't exist anymore in schools. Back when I was in school, those known to use drugs (usually marijuana in those days) were known as "druggies" or "burn-outs." Socially they were shunned, and with good reason. The majority of students were well-behaved, and most were decent-to-good students or at least worked to be. Now, truly good students are a minority. "Tracking," or its slightly less un-PC relative "ability level placement" has become anathema because those who aren't as intellectually rigorous or hard-working might be "hurt" by their placement in a "lower level" class. So, in the meantime, the hard-working and bright students sit aside those who could care less, the behavior and attitude of the latter diminishing the class atmosphere as a whole. But hey, at least their self-esteem is intact! Isn't that more important than the achievement of the kids who really care about school? Right? Getting suspended from school used to be considered a really big deal. Now, it is almost a status symbol. Where it was once rarely invoked, suspension is done on a daily basis now.

Do I sound like an embittered educator ... a surly grizzled veteran who should vacate for someone new and fresh? After reading this post I can see how you might get that impression. However, I am really not at that point yet. Really. Teaching keeps me young (in mind and spirit) and the joy of seeing that "light bulb" go on in a young student's head is still a joy for me to behold. My students seem to think so too as they've yet again -- twelve years in a row now -- chosen me as the school's "Favorite Male Teacher."

Perhaps part of the problem related to my beefs is that I hold what are considered to be largely "traditional" views. And as such, these beliefs go up against "the system." Traditional belief holds that misbehavior should have consequences, especially severe and/or chronic misbehavior. Modern "educationist" belief holds that we have "to understand" the student, counsel him/her, and rely more on "positive reinforcement." (Granted, I am not against this out of hand; however, note that I previously said "severe and/or chronic" behavior. It gets beyond ridiculous when a kid who's constantly a disruption gets only a talking to ... about the "good" things he/she has done. Meanwhile, the kid is laughing his/her ass off inside planning what he/she can get away with next.) Traditional belief holds that students actually have to earn something. Educationist belief holds that "all students are special" regardless, thus ability grouping (discussed above) is scorned, competition is frowned upon, and awards celebrations have to include everybody. (I've made a decision not to attend any more "awards nights." They've become a satire of their former selves as kids are now getting "awards" for being an office aide or for mere participation in, say, an afternoon "chat" session -- right alongside those who earned a perfect 4.0 GPA and/or earned academic honors in a specific discipline. Sheesh.)

I suppose I'll end where I began. Later in June I'll be traveling back to Costa Rica to, in part, celebrate my daughter's "quinceañera." While there, I am always incredibly touched by the hundreds of "Ticos" (what Costa Ricans call themselves) all dressed in the standard school uniform, walking several miles, if need be, to what in many cases is something akin to a traditional, old-style one-room schoolhouse. Often with only a few pencils and a notebook. Costa Rica is, after all, the country that abolished its armed forces over a half century ago ... to pour those monies into education. It is one of Latin America's most prosperous countries.

Let's hope that it's growing prosperity and affluence doesn't alter its attitudes on education.

Check out a big part of the US's problem here -- my Watcher's Council non-member blog submission of the week.

Posted by Hube at May 19, 2009 04:12 PM | TrackBack

Comments

excellent post and agree 100%! But I would place most of the problems mentioned on parents( if you can even call them that!) Ability grouping would solve many of the above problems as well and have the effect of making sure the average kid can achieve as a result of being away from the influence of the ner do wells! I tell many students that once they hit high school, they will never see many of 'these miscreants' again other than in the hall ways and walking the streets as dropouts. Punishments for minor infractions no matter how loud 'parents' yell and the hell with self esteem!

Posted by: cardinals fan at May 19, 2009 05:31 PM

Yep. I'm with you.

Posted by: Bronwen at May 19, 2009 08:30 PM

Excellent post! I agree 100%. These are the very reasons that I pay a lot of money to send my son to a private school. They don't have to put up with the BS that the public schools do so they don't. Just this year a student whom my son had been going to school with since about 5th grade was expelled because he was found smoking pot on school property. One time and he was gone.

In the Christina school distrcit (when I attended in the eighties)there was an "alternative" school for the behavior problem kids. I think they did away with that though. The administrators need to have options for removing the problems from the classroom. I'm not sure what they are doing these days -- probably nothing -- but that is definitely part of (if not the biggest) problem.

Posted by: Nosy at May 20, 2009 08:19 AM

Nosy: I like public schools. After all, I wouldn't work there if I didn't. This post is "merely" observations of a veteran (can't believe I'm writing that -- I feel old!) offering suggestions to make them [much] better.

I believe the big four NCC districts have an alternative school; however, it serves all four districts and each district is "alloted" only so many spaces. So, despite the number of problem students a district may have, they can only send so many to this school. Only the very worst will get sent. This needs to change.

Regarding private schools, having been involved with them in the past, it's my understanding that they have their own sets of problems. Like, parents are paying a good chunk of change for the school, therefore they can use that as a "threat" against teachers/administration if they don't get their way.

Posted by: Hube at May 20, 2009 09:23 AM

I think you make a good point in the beginning of your article. We have continually heard from the schools that we need more - more technology, more access to diverse classes, more activities-clubs-extracurricular activities. When our system is looked at the from the outside ( i work with several pacific rim families) they are amazed at how much the focus is off school work and on activites outside the classroom.

Posted by: arthur at May 20, 2009 09:52 AM

I'm currently a teacher, and agree wtih much of what you say. However, I have an often unpopular view of the situation. I think part of the problem is due to "compuslory education" being considered a legal individual right.

In my opinion, education is a priviledge offered to citizens by the goverment, much like the ability to have a drivers license. If you repeatedly show that you cannot handle or are not interested in education, you should be removed from the system. Those families and individuals that do not value education can leave the system, allowing everyone else to enjoy its benefits. If they choose later to go back for an education, there are alternatives (GED, nightclasses, etc..). Expelling a student should be simple, and follow a clear procecure, much like the state revoking someone's driver's license. If the law viewed education as a priviledge instead of a right, many of the frivilous lawsuits and the culture of fear they have inspired would go away.

Posted by: PT at May 20, 2009 11:59 AM

There's a lot to be said for that, PT! Thanks for your thoughts!

Posted by: Hube at May 20, 2009 01:59 PM