Teacher Pay and Master's Degrees

A column in the Huffington Post notes several shots taken at "teacher pay," notably criticism from Bill Gates that the linkage of teacher pay to graduate degrees is a waste of time and money, as tests have disproved any link between a Master's degree and better performance. While I agree with much of that sentiment, Gates does have a tendency to miss the mark through over-generalization when it comes to education. To be a truly accurate criticism, there should be criticism between the type of degree.

Master's degrees in content areas - English Language and Literature, Biology, American, European, & World History, Mathematics - are certainly going to inform teachers in a much more meaningful way than one in Education or Administration or IT, or any of a number of other nonsense degrees. The College of Education on most university campuses are mostly to blame - that and teaching associations - and don't even get me started on the University of Phoenix. For years, I have been annoyed and dismayed by colleagues who got the Master's in Education "just for the pay raise," and they are the worst in complaining about what a waste of time and money it was.

Scholarship is what truly guides a growth in education, and a program that lacks one is destined to be mediocre. To start with, the lack of a Master's Thesis, or the substitution of a "shorter" assignment of "three long papers" or a few "projects" is anathema to intellectual growth. If states want to clean up the system - and their payrolls - they ought to start with the Master's in Education.

Candy in the Classroom

When I first started teaching in the classroom, I used to have what I called "Tootsie Pop" Answers". Each year I would buy a big container of Tootsie Pops, and when a student offered particularly insightful comments in class, I might toss out a sucker to the astute scholar. In reality, I gave out no more than a couple a week. However, after a while I realized - after watching the kids come back from the cafeteria with copious amounts of candy and snacks - that the treat system really wasn't necessary. In the past ten or twelve years, I have provided no treats in my classroom, and it in no way decreased participation or effort or changed the demeanor of my class.

However, at the same time I have been shocked by the amount of candy and junk that is consumed by students in school on a daily basis. This revelation has been accented for me by also having two kids in elementary school now. My conclusion: there is too much of an emphasis on candy and treats in school. In addition to the candy handed out in classes for nearly every activity, students bring treats for their birthdays, and some classes even schedule "Cookie Fridays." Every fundraiser seems to offer a donut party for the winning class. There is near constant consumption of sugary snacks - and that can't be good.

Many people argue that this is "simply part of childhood." They believe candy is an integral part of being a kid. That's ridiculous, especially when considering the "ridiculous" amounts of candy and cupcakes that are being consumed in schools - from kindergarten to senior year - everyday. There is simply no reason for candy to given to kids for good behavior, and the constant parties and treats emphasize the wrong idea. Celebrating a birthday or a good grade or a school function shouldn't have to be about sugar.

Teacher Training

Most teachers I know don't have many favorable comments about education classes. They may have had a class or two they enjoyed in college, such as Educational Psychology. But the vast majority argue that teachers learn to teach by teaching - and that doesn't mean student teaching/practicum. It seems most learned to teach in their first 2-3 years, and that probably explains why half of all teachers leave the profession after about three years. Thus, the question is how to "train" effective teachers - if that is even possible.

Colorado is joining a group of eight other states that are seeking to change the way colleges and universities train teachers, as they seek a way to produce an effective educator for every classroom. The focus is, of course, on the practice of teaching - notably expanding the in-classroom experience. The idea of teacher education as an "internship" seems to be relevant in this case. The plan reminds of a book I read a decade ago called The Conspiracy of Ignorance. The author called for the elimination of bachelor degrees in teaching and instead envisioned a Master's degree program for teachers who have completed a bachelor's degree in content. He also argued for higher academic standards for teachers, requiring that teaching candidates only come from the top third of their class.

While there are reasons to criticize this idea, it is more in line with teacher education practices around the world. I've argued before that there are only so many "Superman" teachers, and I really think an effective teacher is much more a natural characteristic than a taught skill. But that's not an absolute position. It will be interesting to see where this goes.

The Wrong Approach to E.Coli

As the battle continues to improve food safety and decrease the number of food borne illnesses, it appears corporate America is going the more complicated route once again, as it only seeks the bottom line. According to this story, the Cargill Corporation is having some success with a vaccine against E. Coli for the cattle in its herds. After testing 85,000 cattle, researchers report the cattle have not reacted negatively to the vaccine. However, this could simply create more problems.

It's always been my understanding the E.Coli - the dangerous strand of of 0151 - is non-existent in grass-fed cattle. Thus, if cows graze and eat only that which comes naturally to them, they never fall victim to E. Coli and don't pass it on to consumers. It seems, in some ways, as if companies like Cargill, who raise cows unnaturally on massive feedlots, are actually responsible for causing the illness they are now trying to develop a vaccine against. Yet, if they simply changed their business model, they wouldn't need this vaccine in the first place.

Not dealing with geniuses here - just unthinking profit seekers.

Stranger Than Fiction - Reach Out

It's a Friday, and I'm feeling like I need an interesting pop culture moment. So, here is a fascinating mix of movie clips from Will Ferrell's movie Stranger Than Fiction mixed with the song Reach Out. If you haven't seen the movie, you are really missing out. This will give you a great taste of what is truly a pop culture, existential masterpiece in modern film. If you have seen the movie, you surely loved it, and this clip will make you want to watch it again. Enjoy.





I wish I were that effective at mixing music and film. Have a great Friday.

Movies in the Classroom

Each time I'm teaching a new novel with a group of students, the question will inevitably come - "Are we going to watch the movie?" It is generally in the early part of the year, for as the year goes on the students don't even bother to ask. Are we going to watch the movie? In Class? After we already finished the book? The answer: Of course not. We're at school. It's not the weekend. It's not free time. It's not an hour to just kick back and veg out in front of the TV. It's school.

Occasionally, students will not ask, but "recommend" - "We should watch the movie. I've heard it's really good." In the case of a book/movie like To Kill a Mockingbird, I completely agree. I even tell them You're right. You should watch the movie. Why don't all of you get together at [Amy's] house this weekend and watch the movie. [Joe] can bring the popcorn. That's a great idea. They sneer as they smile back at me, not appreciating my smug recommendation. I sneer as I smile back, believing there is absolutely no reason to just "watch a movie" at school. It's not our job, it's not our purpose, and it is, in my opinion, a colossal waste of time and the taxpayer's money.

This is not to say, I'm opposed to using clips of movies to accent a discussion, or even using a film as a unit unto itself. I actually use a four-minute clip of The Jungle Book while teaching Lord of the Flies, and I have developed an entire unit on documentary film using Supersize Me. We watch the film, deconstruct the argumentative strategies, analyze it as commentary, take an objective test on the strategies and content, write an argumentative deconstruction of it, and develop our own piece of commentary about a social issue. That is a reasonable use of film in the classroom. Watching the movie for three days for fun after finishing the book is not.

Teacher Contract Work Time

The issue of "work time" has reared its head in Aurora Public Schools after the school district voted to ignore a ruling from a non-binding arbitrator that the district violated its contract for requiring that teachers accept an additional period of classroom instruction. Clearly, the scores in the district indicate the students need more instruction - or to put it realistically more effective instruction. At the same time, the district can in no way afford to pay teachers for additional time. And, of course, some always argue that if the teachers really cared about the students and student achievement, they would accept the task.

That's a tough one. And teachers have argued that taking away a planning period when they could tutor and counsel individual students will be even more detrimental to students. I certainly agree with that point, as I teach five classes in an eight period day with one period for lunch and two for planning and conferencing. Even then, it's tough to get everything done, and I put in at least two hours after contract time every day. And that is for the kids. And that's at a high performing school.

No way the teachers can look good in complaining about this. And I have to disagree with the extreme behavior some took in response. No easy answer and an unfortunate conflict.

Teachers as Performers

My students often refuse to believe me when I describe myself as shy and rather introverted. Obviously, the classroom persona seems to defy any possibility of reserve or anxiety - in the classroom, I am extremely enthusiastic and energetic and, yes, very loud and outgoing. However, I explain, that persona is, in many ways, a show. It's a performance. It's the Mazenko Show - and it's on five shows a day, five days a week for ten months of the year. That's excluding test days - though even the handing out of the test has some entertainment value.

Interestingly, this is something people in "the real world" will never truly understand. Often, friends and acquaintances will talk about a "big presentation" they have coming up at work. And, I think, "so do I. All day. Everyday." To be on stage as much as teachers are, we really have to be performers. Yet, it's never a problem for effective teachers because they, in the words of Bob Dylan "know your song well before you start singing." Outside of the classroom is something altogether different. Outgoing teachers are often rather reserved in public and at social functions. They often get nervous giving presentations to their colleagues. They are often quiet when away from the classroom.

Marlo Thomas, who is doing interviews for her new book, recently spoke of a similar situation for entertainers. Comedians, for example, are often troubled by the expectation that they be funny all the time. And they're not. The show takes a lot of work, and it's not always so easy. In fact, in most interviews with comedians, they will reveal that they were not the class clowns or the life of the party. They were, instead, the observers. They watched very carefully what was happening, and that understanding of humanity is what drives their art.

This issue tends to come up regularly as I talk to student about the task of figuring out who they are. As teachers, these kinds of conversations are important to have. Even as we project confidence and knowledge in the classroom, we are still human, and it takes a lot of effort to put on the show each day.

The Cost of College

The College Board reports that the net price of college with tuition and fees is actually lower in 2010 than it was five years ago. The predominant causes of this drop are increased financial aid and lower inflation. In fact, the average price for a state school, including room and board, is about $10,000 per year. The average for private colleges is about $20,000. That is certainly reassuring.

Of course, the criticism I hear from my students is "OK, but what about the costs for a good school." Obviously, the prejudice against state schools will always be there, though many studies argue that the elite college prices are not always worth the excessive price tag. That has to be decided on an individual basis. The reality is higher education needs to be more affordable, and consumers need to be more practical about where they are choosing to invest their education dollars.

The Magic of Taylor Swift

Taylor Swift rocks. That girl can flat out sing, and she's one of the few pop stars I don't mind my five-year-old singing along to. With the release of her new album the magic is back, and her new single "Mine" reveals the secret to her success. Like all great country singers, Taylor is a great "storyteller." It's the narrative component of Taylor that, as an English teacher, I can really appreciate.

However, as an English teacher, I do have a few criticisms. In the song "Fifteen," does she really have to sing "say hi to your friends you ain't seen in a while." Really? Try singing the song with the phrase you haven't - it doesn't mess with the cadence at all .... and it's grammatically correct. Is the use of the word "ain't" so important for realism? At my school it isn't. And of course, in the same song she sings "If someone tells you they love you, you're gonna believe them." It should be "he loves you ... believe him." And the idea of making the song appeal to both genders isn't relevant.

Regardless of these weak points, though, Taylor still rocks. Here's the latest:

Enjoy a great story - a love story.

Voucher Debate in Colorado

After the movie Waiting for Superman premiered, I expected the "voucher debate" to resurface across the country. Obviously, the target for voucher programs has always been the schools and communities featured in Superman - poor and low performing areas. Strangely, in Colorado, the voucher program has reared its controversial head in the most unlikely of places - suburban Douglas county, one of the highest performing districts in the state and the sixth wealthiest county in the United States.

The push for "vouchers" in Douglas county is an extension of the issue of school choice that has been so prominent in Colorado. With open enrollment and an extensive charter school movement, Colorado has been a leader in school choice. In Douglas county, however, there is a small movement of reformers who are promoting reforms that will extend choice beyond the current status. The goal of this plan is to extend the "choice" to private, and predominantly religious - specifically Catholic in DC - schools.

Though a similar plan was shot down as unconstitutional in 2002 in Colorado because it violated local control, proponents of this new plan argue it will respect local control while still extending choice. It should be a fascinating debate - as the issue of "low performing schools" is not the issue. They literally want students and families to be able to spend their education dollars anywhere they want. The Denver Post has weighed in on its editorial pages, and columnist Vincent Carroll has commented as well, both arguing that it is at least worth the debate.

I've always felt that "whatever works" is the answer for any school reform. The issue is whether Douglas county seeks "reform" or just more freedom. And is that a problem?

Balzac in the Heartland

As always, I love the way David Brooks of the New York Times looks at the world.

In today's column, he addresses the problems for the United States in the lack of ideas for how to put blue collar, working class Americans back to work in "the Heartland." The reality is that since America lost its manufacturing base, this segment of the population has been losing ground. For that reason they voted in droves to oust the GOP in 2006 and 2008. However, since that time, they feel like they have seen no benefit - other than unemployment benefits - from the Democrats and the attempts to "stimulate the economy." Thus, they sent the Democrats home.

The reality is that we need skilled labor, and we need jobs for the laborers. The jobs need to provide a living wage for working class people, so they can buy houses and send their kids to college. Brooks addresses some of the irony of this demographic that struggles to pay the bills on $40,000 a year, yet seems to have an Xbox and a smartphone and cable. Of course, those items cost a couple hundred dollars, but health care is $12,000 a year, and college educations run into the tens of thousands.

Something needs to be done, and my feeling is that it will take a complex blend of taxpayer backed infrastructure and higher education spending, along with a tax code that frees up money for small business investment and the entrepreneurial spirit and innovation that has always driven American society.

Here's hoping.