"Teaching is from the heart!"

After seeing the title of this post, I would be curious of your immediate reaction....  You probably went one of two ways....  "That's right!" or "That's absurd!"

(I hope you make it to the end of this post.)
I heard this statement recently at a conference.  Not only was this statement one of the central tenants, and the implied driving force behind a person wanting to be a teacher and their ability to be effective, but also something I read recently that went to a great number of people, "Teaching is a work of heart."  Two times in one week I've been told that (to be a great teacher, reach children, change the world, etc.) you have to teach from the heart, have a heart of compassion, want to love the children, love them into learning.  Heart is the driving force, the ultimate determining factor of your reason to be in the profession, the guide for your qualifications.  (I would posit that is actually why I became a teacher.)

I would agree with a colleague that has stated, "You teach children, not a curriculum."  I would agree that your motivations for being a teacher might determine your effectiveness in helping your students learn the subject matter.  "If you don't love your subject matter, you're not going to make it as a teacher."  If you loved your curriculum but didn't like children, you're going to have a problem "teaching" because teaching involves a teacher and a student, not a teacher and a curriculum.  This could go on and on, but you get the idea.

What does this have to do with TKES (and the teaching Profession)?  To me, everything.  As you review the TKES evaluation process, the Evaluator's observations, your lesson plans, the 10 TAPS standards, the 72 TAPS elements--for some reason or another, the Government/Legislators did not include anything about our heart, our feelings, our motivations, our caring.  Nothing.  Never have, never will.  Teaching from the heart will not make you an effective teacher, and you could get obliterated by TKES.

It is irresponsible for conference speakers, leaders, and anyone who has a microphone in front of educators to have a throw back to the early 20th century and pull on the "heart strings" of the audience to imply that is what they need, and that is what will make them successful in teaching: just "care" enough.  Tell that to a first year teacher (I have been a mentor for years) and you will see them at the end of each day leaving the school in tears.  (Another reason 50% leave in <5 years.)  Heart has (almost) nothing to do with it!  You have to be prepared, equipped for all aspects of the classroom.

I have previously summed up what I have seen in teacher education over time (40 years) from ever changing Government expectations from highly motivated to highly certified to highly qualified to highly effective.  "Which do you want to be?"  I posed to my audience.

Don't get me wrong.  I believe you must love your subject matter to be an effective teacher.  I believe you must love working with students to guide them to greater learning.  I believe you must love this profession to stay in it, irrespective of the huge imperfections and shifting legislative landscape.  I believe you must have great empathy and concern for each child to reach them where they are so that you can help them meet their needs.  But, I also believe that you must have real tools at your disposal to use, frequently, to be flexible and facilitate the learning process so that your students can learn as much as they can, as quickly as they can, as permanently as they can.  I want my students to be propelled into the future.

Yes, have a huge heart; pray for discernment each day; teach from the innermost of your being with all of the energy and excitement you can muster; walk in to your classroom each day with enormous compassion; "reach for the stars," "dream big dreams."  But also search for and acquire as many of the time-tested, research-based tools that you can possibly get to help your students learn as much as they possibly can, as quickly as they can--you owe them that.  During research on my doctoral study, I was astonished (shocked, alarmed) to find there were so many research-based, effective teaching techniques that have been discovered--that I had not known about.  Why hadn't I been exposed to them?  We were still working (only) out of the "teach from the heart" mentality; TKES is not going to allow that.  To the goal of disseminating quality teaching ideas, I continue to post pamphlets, handbooks, and resources to help you out.  Review and use "75 Instructional Strategies" or "Learning is a process, not an event" or "The Perfect Lesson Plan" or "How to pass all 10 TAPS Standards in one lesson" or "Some ideas for new teachers" or "Instructional Strategies That Work" under "Handbooks and Other Resources" posted at the top of this blog.  Need more?  Review "Links for Teachers."

Respectfully,
Glenn

Student Surveys of Teacher Instructional Practices: absolutely laughable, if it weren't true

1. The use of student surveys (for middle school: 11-13 year olds) to impact teacher evaluation, TEM score, effectiveness, retention, and certificate, is absolutely laughable - if it weren't true.  Because it is true, it is horrifying and ridiculous.  Now teachers need to teach the students how to evaluate their teacher; here's what summary looks like, here's what differentiation looks like, here's what asking questions looks like, etc.  More later.
2. It seems reasonable that if a child - students - could take a survey that would impact a teachers' -professional educator's - job, why couldn't we create a survey of our students that could count toward their grade (i.e., a summative test grade).  More later.
3. A friend of mine, who has a birds eye view of many things, has the opinion that this entire TKES process was developed to create an evaluation system which has the ability to create a sense of outrage and distrust in the Georgia public education system so that public sentiment would move toward supporting Georgia's elected politician's push toward more charter schools (which was just voted on and approved), allowing for schools, teachers, and benefits to move out of the GA DOE funding into privatized companies allowing schools to function outside of the GA DOE which moved from the lack of governmental funding public schools years ago which, in its fullness, will create a disparity of high functioning charter schools and low functioning public schools creating a reinvented system of segregation--this time, between the haves and the have nots.  TKES isn't about providing an improved valid teacher evaluation, it's about creating political movement toward charter schools.  The opinion is hard to argue against; time will tell.
4. A teachers, as with all other evaluation systems, is in the hands of the interpreting evaluator.  A teacher with less than 5 years experience has seven IVs and three IIIs on his/her summative evaluation.  Another teacher with minimal experience has five IVs and five IIIs.  Another teacher with less than 5 years with experience who provides differentiated experiences for his/her students every day receives IIs.  One evaluator interprets by the letter of the rubric, another interprets: "if you could teach a class on this Standard, you should receive a IV."  ...completely different interpretations, different grades, and different summative outcomes for the teacher--connected to their certificate.  Word is that if you receive a II in any Standard, you may not be eligible for interview or hire in some counties.
5. The survey questions do not/can not apply to all subject matters; this creates validity/reliability problems (yet, we are going to evaluate and judge teachers anyway.  See #3.)

For example:  Survey Question #4: "My teacher takes time each day to summarize what we have learned."  My score: 1.95 (17% strongly agree, 37% agree, 29% disagree, 15% strongly disagree).  Clearly 12-year-old students are clueless (because they are only 12), I summarize more than one time per class period, and now it seems teachers need to teach students how to answer survey questions (in lieu of time spent on standards) to keep their jobs - or at least avoid uncomfortable summative TKES conferences regarding their student survey results.  I graduated with High Honors (high school), cum laude (college), 3.8 (masters), and a 4.0 (doctorate) in my degrees and apply what I know, and constantly use formative assessments during class so my students will learn efficiently, and now I have to figure out a way for 12 year old students to recognize and approve of my teaching strategies and methods to validate my abilities.  Something seems out of place here (see #3).

So, 44% of my students do not think I summarize the concept each day.  Hummmm.  Let's see.  Suppose I teach music.  I teach a new note, I give the location on the staff, I give the name, I give the fingering, I let the students see it and finger it, I give how to play it, I give how it is used, I show them why the note is the way it is, I have the students play the note, I double check (through formative assessments) that the students understand and can perform the note, I have them play the note, and then I have the students play the note in new music.  If that is not summarizing of the new note, I do not know what is, but 44% of my students do not think so.  The same would go for rhythms, dribble a basketball, sing pitch, sew a straight line, or draw a perspective.  In many performance-based classes (Connections classes in particular), concept is about 20% and performance/skill is 80%; therefore, playing/singing/drawing/performing the new concept is summarizing.  So, if teachers are going to improve their student survey averages and TEM score in the coming years, it appears we will need to find new ways of teaching the standards, documenting performance for evaluators, and teaching students how to answer the survey.