Alternative Education

A few weeks ago a teacher came to me and told me that a student with whom I had developed a good relationship with was struggling. In fact the chances of them graduating was slim at that point and it frustrated me so much because this was not the first student who needed a second chance at learning. Over the last few years I have become the teacher you go to when it seems that you have hit a dead end because regardless of what you have done or where you are at I won't give up on any student. So in looking for solutions for these students I began to look at alternatives in education and learning environments.

I call them learning environments because they are not traditional settings. These "classrooms" can be anything and they seek to find a way for students and teachers to develop a much more personal relationship. These new environments focus on the relationships and building trust with the student so that the appreciate learning again. The fact that students are able to see that they are trusted, respected, and surrounded by people who care about their success goes a long way in the students believing in themselves and their success.

To track or not...

For many years there has been a heated debate over whether or not to track students. After reading several articles I have come to the following conclusions:

1. Tracking is beneficial to higher level students when they have a strong peer group to build relationships with through out their schooling.

2. Tracking has only negative affects if students are ability grouped and those ability groups cause students to be shuffled to low income and low achieving schools.

What I found interesting is that the trends are moving towards allowing high achieving students to be accelerated into high levels thus reducing the need for grouping. If students are allowed to accelerate into higher grade levels slowly by taking a few college classes at the high school level, a few high school classes at the middle school level, and then preschool before moving them up to kindergarten early there is greater success.

The biggest issue is making sure that students are moved as a peer group so that they can have a support group to work with until they become comfortable in their surroundings. This also cuts down on their undervaluing of their own self-worth.

For students of low-income and ability the issue is the fact that they are shuttled into schools and classes that receive less aid therefore they do not get the best materials or teaching. That is not to say that all low-income students are underachieving but it is harder to be recognized because there is a great number of students at this income level thus less time is spent testing or analyzing these scores. It has been shown however that lower ability tracked classrooms who have dedicated teachers can achieve high test scores if their teacher develops the curriculum for the class. Teachers that adjust the curriculum individually for lower ability students tend to show the most progress with those students.

I still agree with the concept of tracking and I know that I am in a minority these days but I feel that students who are given a chance to excel in homogeneous grouping will allow for better teaching and learning opportunities.

Battling Technology...

As a self proclaimed techno junkie I am the first to jump onto anything new I can bring into the classroom to engage the students in new ways. The biggest challenge is for me to bring other staff members into the techno world. Some of my fellow staff members are so set in their ways that they don't even want to hear about the new technology out there that might really engage their students. As technology and our students grow in technology we are becoming more stewards to the world for our students. We need for teachers to also let students run with the technology and help others to learn it in the classroom. Students can be our greatest assets in integrating our classrooms and finding new ways to learn with technology. I ask teachers on a daily basis what are you doing or have you used this new software? I go out and find new things for people to try in order to engage them more but even that is too much technology for them. Teachers are going to have to begin embrace technology or begin to fall behind.

Why is curriculum planning so hard

After my first semi-failed attempt at curriculum mapping I have realized why it is so hard to get teachers to talk about their curriculum, they are scared. I think it all boils down to nobody wants to take a hard look at their personal curriculum because it means opening themselves up for critique. I tried to get my department members to simply looked at what they teach each year so that we could re-align our curriculum to make sure that we are all teaching the same things at the same time but instead I got excuses. The most common reasoning is that we don't have set curriculum that has been handed down so left to our own devices we could not possibly set a curriculum tight enough to all follow it together. I think this is just another excuse and that if we were to work together as a team we could set up an amazing curriculum because I know I work with talented teachers who are brilliant. Maybe it is the extra work or the fact that we have written and rewritten curriculum year after year to meet the newest trend but for once I feel that this writing of the curriculum is the right thing to do. I am going to try to sit down again this time one on one to assess were we are so that we can really do the students the justice they deserve.

expecting more then the basics

There are some days when my students surprise me in a way that make me want to run out and tell everyone how amazing they are and how much they are learning. Of course there are other days when I want to bang my head against a wall because I can't seem to get them beyond the basics of the lesson. I have so many students who are willing to just get by with their learning and it is so frustrating to me to constantly watch bright kids settle for so little.

It was after a particularly hard day of teaching or more like preaching about a concept in chemistry that I decided to stop in the middle of one class and ask them why they did care to reach beyond the basics. The response I got was one of those surprising moments, "because nobody cares if we do." Which I immediately knew was false and so I asked why my students felt that way and that answers was just as surprising,"because teachers move on to get through the material no matter what." I never really thought about it that way before, it was never because I did not care if the student undstood it is was more about my thinking they did not care so they blew me off.

While reading this book and that conversation I decided to take a new approach...talking more with my students than to my students. I do not accept the blank stares or the shrugs, I ask them to teach me the concepts and to try new projects that the students decide. I am more class led than teacher driven. Who knows if this will work but I figure it is better to try everything rather than to constantly fail and complain about students lack of learning.

The science curriculum flow

So somewhere along the way it was decided that students should take earth/physical science, biology, chemistry, and physics in that order for all college bound students. While many schools only require 2 or 3 science credits to graduate they still stick to this dogmatic approach to earning the credits. I don't believe that we are truly helping students making them take certain courses in a prescribed order.

My suggestion is to give students more of a choice in their selections. I think earth and physical science are a logical place to begin but maybe let them try physics as a sophomore. Many of the concepts while based in math are not so difficult that students could not understand them with an algebra basis. One of the complaints I get year after year is that they don't get enough say in their classes and if they got to make more decisions they would get more out of the process.

Another thought is to have students take integrated classes for earth science and physics and then their sophomore year have them take chemistry and biology integrated. This allows students to specialize their Junior and Senior years. Students become more invested in their education and thus gain more from the experience. I think that the most important piece of all of this conjecture is that we need to explore the best options for students to gain the best experience of science education.

How do you determine what students should take...

I was tasked last staff meeting to determine what classes my students should take next year and I am a little nervous at the prospect. I know I am fully versed on their capabilities and their motivations but I still hate to give limits to students. Then come the phone calls about the fact that it is not their student but instead your teaching or your subject area. Do you know how many parents tell me that chemistry just does not interest their student so they do not try their hardest.

What does this have to do with curriculum well everything. When we set up the science department program of studies we do so with the student's progress in mind. We try to determine what the most logical sequence of classes and levels of class we will need. It is like planning a road map for students to take and with all good maps there are areas for u-turns and alternative routes which what is exciting for students. I want students to explore our electives and challenge themselves with harder classes.

My final thought is why do we encourage students to reach for the stars if we are going to put Plexiglas ceilings in?