A Leader

Here is a poem written this weekend by my 16 year old son concerning the road to becoming a leader:

A Leader

There are life lessons
that you really need.
Things you must know
in order to lead.

Learn to listen
so that others will listen to you.

Learn to speak
so that others might speak to you.

Learn to love
so that someone might love you.

Learn to die
so others will die along side you.

Learn to forgive
so others will forgive you.

Learn to please
so others will try to please you.

Learn to follow
so boys will follow you.

Learn to be teachable
so you will be able to teach.

Learn to laugh
so people will laugh with you.

Learn to work
so they will work for you.

Learn to live
so people can live with you.

You can't show what you can't do.
You can't teach what you don't know.
So learn to learn
so these men can learn from you.

- Zac Wiemers, Junior, age 16

Mr. Wiemers
http://mrwiemersshop.com

"Education Week"

Occasionally I will read something in "Education Week" that strikes a harmonic cord with me philosophically. This week (August 26, 2009) Daniel Wolff made some comments and included some quotes that quickened the spirit of education for me in his article "The President's Laugh Line." While addressing the Hispanic Chamber of Commerce the President suggested that we "rethink the school day to incorporate more time." Wolff goes on to quote or summarize comments by Franklin, Lincoln, Ford, and Kennedy to redirect the conversation from "longer school days" to "better use of schools." Wolff writes:

Ben Franklin, writing as Poor Richard, declared: 'A learned blockhead is a greater blockhead than an ignorant one.' His Autobiography basically argued that he had become a great American, scientist, and political thinker by spending less time in school, not more.

Abraham Lincoln read Franklin, and when he ran for office made sure to portray himself as a largely uneducated backwoodsman. Henry Ford believed too much schooling could ruin a mind. And John F. Kennedy, for all his presidential rhetoric about the importance of education, thought his time in prep schools and then Harvard mostly silly: The socializing was fun, the learning of little to no consequence."

Wolff then comments what would be lost if our students were forced to spend longer days in school: time with parents working two jobs, responsibility and money from after school jobs, time spent supervising siblings, relaxation, time to do homework. I could add many things more that would be lost with a longer school day. I would suggest reducing the things we try to cram into a school day before we make the school day longer. But, that was not the point of this article.

Wolff ends with suggesting a more flexible, alternative solution. A school building, he says, is a major community resource with computers, cafeterias, libraries and sport facilities. "Why not institute a program that transforms our public schools into community centers?" They could be a place for students to do their evening research and homework. I would ask, why are school libraries and school computer labs shut down after school? Why aren't night classes added to assist students who need more help. I say we should reduce the socialistic load placed on schools during the day, restore the vision of education and, instead of lengthening the school day, simply extend the hours the school is opened and equip with man power to teach and assist in the learning process. Men like Franklin, Ford, Lincoln and Kennedy realized that school does not have a monopoly on education. If schools continue to think they have a monopoly on education and that they control the educational process they will continue to deteriorate as an educational institution.

Mr. Wiemers
http://mrwiemersshop.com

Education and Process

Education is in the process. Process is the goal. Process, when repeated often enough, leads to understanding, insight and mastery. Process is not artificial.

Mr. Wiemers
http://mrwiemersshop.com

The Convenience of Confusion

(The following is an excerpt from "Hope for America's Last Generation" written by Galyn Wiemers in 2007)
I AM A teacher, and I coach the boys’ track team at our school. Track practice takes place every weekday after school throughout the season. It’s always been that way, and probably always will be. One week I learned that a school dance was scheduled for Friday afternoon right after class ended. Because the dance was going to go well into the night, I told the boys we’d have track practice after school like usual, and they could head over to the dance when they were finished. I told them I was well aware of the dance, but practice was still on. I thought I’d made everything clear as the boys headed to their locker room after Thursday’s track practice.

On Friday, about five minutes before the last bell rang, I noticed a DJ setting up his sound equipment for the dance in the school gym. Since our track team practices right outside the gym, I knew the boys were going to be frustrated when they heard the music and saw fellow classmates dancing. I wondered if some boys might still be tempted to skip practice, so, for good measure, I decided to make one final announcement over the intercom as a reminder. The announcement was, “There will be track practice as usual immediately after school today for the entire boys track team.”

Right as the announcement ended, eight boys from the track team walked into my classroom dizzy with confusion. One boy conjured up his best look of bewilderment and asked, “Coach, do we have practice tonight? We were wondering because nobody really knows.” When I again confirmed that we did, another boy quickly asked, “What happens if we don’t come?” My reply was simple: “You’ll be punished.”

Confusion was not limited to this group of boys. Many members of the track team lingered in the hallway debating about whether or not there was track practice. One boy approached a team manager to inquire about it. The manager supposedly told him, “I think there’s practice…but it might be optional.” That was all that the boy needed. Now armed with words straight from the mouth of the team manager, he could claim ignorance to later justify the reason he followed his desires and went to the dance. As I left my classroom to head to the track, another boy stopped me to ask about practice. I looked right at him and said, “Yes, we have practice.” He went to the dance. The track boys who chose to go to the dance could actually see their teammates running warm up laps on the track outside as they walked into the gym. Yet these boys remained “confused” as to whether or not there was track practice.

When all seventy track boys showed up on Monday, I asked why twelve of them had missed Friday’s practice. The excuses varied but all came back to the same claim: they were in a state of ignorance due to so much confusion. Some insisted that I hadn’t made it clear. One blamed the manager for saying practice was optional. Others swore they forgot. And all the boys who went to the dance confirmed each other’s confusion by contending that there was just no way of knowing whether or not we had practice. Their strategy involved insisting on confusion. They figured if enough people said they were confused, I would have to accept it as a legitimate excuse. But I didn’t. The confused boys lost the privilege of
running in our first track meet.

As I stood there on Monday surrounded by the track team it became clear to me that, in life, people choose to be confused. I couldn’t have done anything more to get them to track practice short of picking them up and carrying them from the school to the track. (Even then some of the boys probably would have slipped away to the dance while I wasn’t looking.) After all my effort to communicate obvious truth, still almost 20% of the boys I spoke with chose to remain confused.

Today the people of the United States of America have become just like those junior high boys. It’s a growing cultural pandemic to be confused about what’s right, true, and moral. It’s hip to claim ignorance and say, “I don’t think we can ever really know for sure about things we can’t see.” In fact, claiming ignorance is the quickest way to avoid any kind of personal responsibility to know and understand the certain areas of life. But just because there so are many conflicting beliefs in this world doesn’t mean we can claim to be “confused” about what’s right without facing serious consequences. And just because certain areas of thought may baffle us doesn’t give us a free pass to skip over them. Just because some issues are hotly debated doesn’t mean we aren’t accountable for examining the evidence ourselves. We can’t hide behind our claims of confusion any longer. We must stop making excuses and admit that things can be known for certain. It’s time for us to quit being lazy and get busy gaining the understanding we lack. Like the track boys, the excuse of, “I just wasn’t sure which way was right,” is not going to cut it in the end.

Mr. Wiemers
http://mrwiemersshop.com/

Program for International Student Assessment (PISA) "Called Inappropriate"

The March 4, 2009 Education Week has an article entitled PISA Called Inappropriate for U.S. Benchmarking. PISA (Program for International Student Assessment) is described as "flawed" and may not be "appropriate for judging American schools."

The website for Program for Internation Students Assessment provides the following overview of what PISA actually is:

The Program for International Student Assessment (PISA) is a system of international assessments that focus on 15-year-olds' capabilities in reading literacy, mathematics literacy, and science literacy. PISA also includes measures of general or cross-curricular competencies such as learning strategies. PISA emphasizes functional skills that students have acquired as they near the end of mandatory schooling. PISA is organized by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), an intergovernmental organization of industrialized countries. Begun in 2000, PISA is administered every 3 years. Each administration includes assessments of all three subjects, but assesses one of the subjects in depth. The most recent administration was in 2006 and focused on science literacy. Results are now available.

PISA 2009 data collection will take place from September to November 2009 and will focus on reading literacy. The PISA 2009 National Report will be released in December 2010. The national contractors for PISA 2009 are Windwalker Corporation, Westat Inc. and Pearson.

In the March 4, 2009 article in Education Week concern for PISA testing and evaluation ability are presented because "questions asked on the Program for International Student Assessment (PISA) surveys of students' beliefs and attitudes about science reflect an ideological bias, which undermines the test's credibility." I find this interesting that a education system that has repeated suppressed certain ideologies in the spirit of freedom while promoting other ideologies in the name of education is actually offended by the same thing when it is done on an international level. This article leads me to believe there may be a strand of integrity and a hope for an honest pursuit of fairness yet within our system.

One of the examples used in this article to prove PISA political or ideological slant is that the student survey portion of the test "asks test-takers if they agree with certain statements, such as 'having laws that protect the habitats of endangered species.' " This is not a test of knowledge but a test of the students ideological or political views. No facts or statistics are provided in the question. It is just a simple statement concerning the student's position on an issue. It may be appropriate on the government section of the test (which does not exist) but it is certainly NOT a science question.

Maybe America is getting a glimpse of the way other countries test their students and use the educational system to brainwash and control their citizens. Controlling a countries population through education is not a new thing, in fact, historically, whenever a government has engaged in educating their subjects there is a natural tendency to advance the government's agenda. Fortunately in America we have a two party system (with a third party always ready to emerge) to keep a checks-and-balance on the government's propaganda machine. At least Tom Loveless of the Brookings Institution in Washington and Sean Cavanagh of Education Week have took note of this trend in PISA.

Other issues mentioned in the article:

• "OECD takes policy positions that it should not be doing if it collects and interprets score data."
• PISA emphasizes student ability to apply knowledge outside of school but does not measure where students gained the knowledge which means it it difficult to evaluate schools with this information.
• "the questions are vague, making it difficult for the scientifically literate to know how to answer."
  

See the 2008 Brown Center Report on American Education concerning how well American students are learning.

Mr. Wiemers
http://mrwiemersshop.com

When Should We Stop?

More about the information on this site later:
http://www.jamievollmer.com/burden.html

Is this random? Is it caused by an underlying philosophy? Is it the result of some unidentified plan? Is it necessary? Is it a good thing?

Mr. Wiemers
http://mrwiemersshop.com

TAG

Yesterday in our teacher's meeting we talked about TAG (talented and gifted) funding.

• First, remember I am a shop teacher and only can process information at my ability level.
• Second, I know from logic and from past experience I am not always right, but I do believe what I say.
• Third, "controversy causes learning" which means debate helps us determine the best way. Fear mixed with collective thinking will suppress the potential of individuals and groups. Do not be afraid, especially concerning something you care about. Seriously, on the other hand, if you don't care, put up with anything because, in this case, "mediocrity is underrated" (This is one of my original quotes and a favorite around the supper table at home as I teach my boys how the world works and how to set priorities. As surely as you can excel in somethings, you must accept mediocrity in somethings.)

So, where am I heading? Below are two videos of two high school students from Valley High School in West Des Moines, Iowa. I am not comparing these two students but using them to prove a point. One student you should know. She is a national hero and a world wide celebrity who attends the same high school as my boys. In fact, one of my sons recently talked to her at a Valentine's dance a few weeks ago. The other video is of one of my high school sons performing today with his trumpet. He was featured in a song with his jazz band today and I put the video online. I am most certainly not comparing these two students. One is preparing to appear on the TV show "Dancing with the Stars". The other just left for work at the Italian restaurant (Bravo's) where he waits on tables. What I am going to talking about is the TAG program that neither of these people were involved in at their public schools to help them develop the areas of skill in these videos. They had good teachers, great teachers, but what they do in these videos comes from their own drive and their own parent's support, not from government funded TAG program. Remember what I said above. You have to set priorities. You can not individually, nor as an institution, be everything to everybody. Identify what you do and excel in it. My dad told me many years ago:

If you want to be a success, first, find out what you are good at and then do it all the time."

I think schools need to do this.

I am just a shop teacher with an idea that I want to present to help us find the best way. I have more to say concerning TAG including the concept that all kids are TAG, but many times schools can not identify the students area of strength because they do not teach to that area. Nor should they. Remember, focus on what your mission is and do not let someone else tell you what your mission is. Establish priorities and let the parents pick up in the areas we have chosen to accept mediocrity in. Here's the two videos of a junior and a senior at Valley High School in West Des Moines that are not in TAG.

Hawkeye, who plays the trumpet in the video above, fell in love with jazz music back when he was in the DCG middle school and took summer lessons from the legendary Mrs. Irwin. Valley High School has over 2,000 students. Hawkeye knew he wanted to be one of the best trumpet players there, so he sought out a private teacher on his own and then paid his own money to get private lessons from the trumpet professor at Drake University for the last couple of years. The public school provides a very, very good band program. I paid for the trumpet. The rest was up to Hawkeye. I do not think Hawkeye is TAG material in music, but I do know he is gifted at working hard and getting things done. My wife and I fall asleep (or, get awaken) most nights between 10:30 pm- 1:00 am to Hawkeye practicing his trumpet when he gets home from work which he goes to after track or cross country practice after school. If a kid is gifted (and, I think they all are) they should give something to society instead of demanding more from society.

As a shop teacher, I like this video of Shawn because there is a clip of her with safety glasses on at school:

Another Shawn Johnson video filmed at her home
Mr. Wiemers
http://mrwiemersshop.com

Computers vs. Shop/Technology vs. Industry

After teaching Industrial Arts for several years I began to be approached in the early 1990's with the "threat" that my shop program was no longer going to be relevant. Computers were changing everything. Salesman would stop by to talk to me about converting my "dirty shop" (meaning sawdust, grease, piles of supplies, etc.) to a "clean shop" (carpet, climate control, computers, roll around chairs, etc.) Computers were going to effect everything, I was told, including what we taught and the way we taught it in the shop.

My response was negative for two reasons. First, the obvious reason. I was negative towards the "clean shop" and the new computer lab concept because I did not know how to use a computer. I did not own a computer at home nor did I use a computer at school. At school I had a computer on my desk but I didn't know how to use it, maneuver the mouse or check email. There was no tech support, but if there was, I would have had to walk down to their office to get assistance turning my computer on. But, what would I do then? Walk back down to the tech office and ask where my email was? It was easier just to walk to the teacher work room and pick up the hard copy in my mail box.

This was during the transition period between paper copies and email copies. During this transition the school would put a hard copy in our teacher mail boxes, and also, send us a copy by email. Back in the old days every piece of information was copied on a piece of paper and put in our teacher's mail boxes. I occasionally got calls from the office to check my box because it was full and they had more very important stuff to put in my box. I usually checked my box on pay day, though. Today they say, "Didn't you read the email?" A few years ago when I was shutting down for the summer I noticed I had 800 unread emails. I had no idea what to do with them at that time. Another similarity between my paper mail box and my email box is they both have a "trash" can.

My second reason, and my only correct reason, for rejecting the salesmen's alarm cry of, "The computers are coming! The computers are coming!!" was very simple. Computers could not eliminate basic industrial needs. Computers could not creatively manipulate material because they are material themselves. Our society is based on industry, not on computers. Computers can assist industry, but computers can not replace industry. If we lose computers we will have to go back to paper copies, a slower process time, a slower life, etc. But, if we lose industry we will lose everything our society knows. Without industry we would come very close to becoming a third world country. Remember the United States became wealthy and powerful with industry long before industry produced the computer.

I made it clear in my response to salesmen, and the futuristic educators that soon followed, that industry and technology were not synonyms.

Nonetheless, they soon began to refer to my Industrial Arts class as "Technology Education" or, "Tech Ed". In response I began to call it "shop" to maintain a separate identity from computers and computer labs. When I refer to my class as "shop class" people want to correct me. They figure I missed the last school bus route to the future. They only correct me once, though, because I feel obligated to provide them with my insight that is based on these simple concepts:

1. Shop Vocabulary Lesson: Industry and Technology are not synonyms.
2. Shop Economics 101: Our economy and society are based on industry not computers.
3. Shop History Lesson: Industry produced the computer not vice verse.
   
4. Shop Educational Principle: Teaching someone to move a mouse on a computer is not the same thing as training an electrician, a carpenter, a brick mason, a stone mason, or someone who hangs sheetrock.
5. Shop Psychology Lesson: Educators are realizing the importance of hand on manipulation of material in the physical world. The visual observation of cyber space does not produce the same learning process.
   

So, today, in Mr. Wiemers' Shop we teach industrial skills, we manipulate material and we use technology and equipment which includes computers. But, we do not have a "clean shop". We do not have carpet. We do not confuse the "computer lab" with the "shop" or misuse the words "technology" and "industry."

Now, 20 years after the first warning that computers were going to change everything, we still live in houses, buy furniture, call the electrician or plumber, and build and sell many things including computers. One thing that has happened is the education systems has failed to avoid being sucked into the carpeted computer labs. Research is now sending us back into the traditional shop. We could have avoided this. We could have embraced technology with out flushing the shop program.

Today, I have embraced the computer at school and at home. We have computers running in this middle school shop (often covered in dust and grease!) for a mill, a lathe, podcasting, video production and CAD. We have plans to add a few more "industrial" related activities with computers next year. At home I have six computers running most of the time. Four are on my double desk in my office. Two of these are committed full time to running the two robotic CD burners/printers I use. Our house is wireless. When my boys come home with their laptops, and the girlfriends follow with their lap tops, we could easily have ten computers operating at a time. If someone can't get online with a computer we get out our ipod itouches.

But, if I need to remodel the house, build a piece of furniture, fix the toilet or wire some can lighting in the ceiling, I go into my garage which has been converted to a shop (with no computers!) and get the job done.

Read the latest research that supports this kind of thinking:
http://www.sreb.org/publications/2008/08V12_State_Leaders_Forum_Newsletter.pdf

Below is one of our high school shop projects from the 1990's. We used no computers but drank a lot of Mt. Dew.

Mr. Wiemers
http://mrwiemersshop.com

Students Recording Teachers

In response to a blog about a student recording a teacher's profanity laced classroom rant I posted a comment that is seen below. I obviously think a teacher can cross a line and even become dangerous with their words. I believe they should be held accountable. But, I also think this is a dangerous game I do not want to play. Here is the news paper article. Here is the blog. Here is the comment I posted:

If everything I said to students, or for that matter, everything I said in any setting where there were cell phones to record with, I would be in trouble with a lot of people including . . . well, pretty much everybody . . . but, I am probably unique. I am sure most everyone else would have no reason to be concerned.

Imagine if kids would record parents at home? or, if kids would record other kids at the lunch table or on the school bus and then turn that recording in for administrative justice? How about recording half time in the locker room? My favorite would be a recording of a conversation in the teacher's lounge played back at parent/teacher conferences. How about recording school board members as they talked after the Monday night board meeting? We could play that on the local talk radio station. We will all be jobless, friendless.

Question: If there is no teacher to hear the student cuss is it still considered profanity if captured on a cell phone?

Question: What would happen if I could hear everything you said to my own son? How about if I could hear everything you said about my son??

Question: How about if I record our next conversation?

Who wants to play this telephone game? Anyone? Anyone? Hello . . . aren't you going to say anything??

Mr. Wiemers
http://mrwiemersshop.com

"Education Week" Article

An article in the February 25, 2008 Education Week entitled Waiting for the Transformation makes a good comparison of two education systems. One system focuses on:

• time
• teaching
• formal classrooms

The second system focuses on:

• outcomes . . . instead of time spent in a class (45 min, 1 semester, etc.)
  
• learning . . . instead of teaching the material (finishing the book, covering the curriculum, etc.)
  
• education in and out of school . . . instead of turning education on and off and limiting teaching opportunities

The author Arthur E. Levine (photo to left) describes our typical education system in this article by saying:

It puts all students through a common process tied to the clock; children progress based upon the amount of time they spend being taught in a classroom, with all students required to master the same body of knowledge in the same period of time . . . We now know that all students learn at different rates; the same individual even learns different subjects at different rates. It would make more sense, therefore, to have an education system that focuses on what students learn, rather than what they are taught, and sets common standards for what they must learn, rather than common amounts of time for them to learn those things.

First, I think our school system at DCG is implementing this idea in many different classes and with a variety of strategies. I still think as a whole our entire society needs to renew their concept of the effective educational model and begin to think in terms of learning and not just teaching. To evaluate the process on outcomes achieved instead of time spent.

When I had a construction business both the customer and myself wanted the same thing. We wanted the project completed fast and done right. Neither of us just wanted me to spend time working. We wanted the project done. Time was the enemy. Speed and efficiency made me money and gave the customer their product. It is not about working longer, it is about getting the job done.

Part of the teaching experience is seeing students process information and perform tasks proficiently at different speeds. An example of me as a teacher resisting this tendency can be seen each year in the shop during our nine week woodworking class with the eighth graders. If the above information presented by Levine is true (and, I know it is) why do 100 students in seven different classes all end up on the same day ready to begin staining their oak end tables? The answer is not something I want to brag about. It happens because I manipulate (as in, I slow down) the learning process for the first seven weeks. I do this by:

1. limiting the amount of knowledge I present so that the faster students are continually hitting a wall (figuratively) and need to beg me to show them the next step.
2. creating different standards of excellence to be reached. For example, the faster more proficient student may be asked to expend more energy or accomplish a task with out the benefit of "hidden" techniques or tools.
3. having skilled students repeat a process they already understand by helping catch up another student.

Now, all of these techniques of manipulation have an education silver lining. Some student may produces a finer project, refine their skills, or develop leadership ability. My point is that the way the eighth grade class is set up I need to "manipulate" the learning process in order to manage the class. (Of course, a "better" teacher will suggest I create additional learning situations for the students, but, I would bet this teacher has not made one hundred oak end tables with one hundred thirteen year old kids! I don't want additional learning situations! I want order and efficiency.)

I assume many teachers feel the same way about progressing through the chapters of their curriculum. How can you have a few students in chapter 13 while others are still reviewing the material in chapter 8. In fact, if what Levine says is true then in a class of 25 students a teacher may have 25 different lesson plans.

And, this is exactly what I have set up in the seventh grade shop classes.

In the seventh grade classes I have a completely different instructional system organized. I literally have 18 different lesson plans all happening at the same time. The students work in partners, or alone, to acquire the knowledge and perform a task at a module in basically a three day period. Daily students move through these stations at different speeds depending on skill, previous learning, interest, motivation, and whatever else their personal repertoire of characteristics bring to class. We have modules that include construction, electrical wiring, computers, cnc lathes, assembly, etc. We add to them each year in the way of content, experience and instruction.

Some students successfully achieve in a class period what others struggle with for four days. Or, some students get interested in a station and hang around it for four days gaining additional knowledge and developing additional skills while others do the minimum work with the least amount of knowledge and move on to something they find more interesting. Concerning levels of interest in the variety of modules, the students have never agreed which one is the best module. What one student considers boring another student will consider their favorite.

In the seventh grade class we have the critical content and skill that is communicated to each student, but after that the sky is the limit. There can easily be additional modules added. The level of required skill and knowledge can be increased at the modules we do have. I have plans for three more modules for next year and students are consistently "experimenting" with the material and knowledge that is available. In fact, many of the students ideas have developed into the actual project that is now required at certain modules.

I am not going to change my nine week eighth grade woodworking class because it is what it is. Each eighth grader will build and finish an oak end table. I see students each year who could easily build the end table in 4-5 weeks, but if everyone is going to achieve at the level we want, some are going to have to engage in learning at a different level as we explained above.

But, I do wonder if our seventh grade classroom could contribute to what Levine calls a "revolutionary change" that "will necessitate an individualized, time-variable system of education." I like the idea. I have seen it work. I know Levine is heading the right direction and I know the answer is going to come in a classroom organized in an educational system that is understood by a society that sets priorities on learning and outcomes and not on the time spent teaching.

Could more classes be set up like our seventh grade modules? Would it be more effective? Would teachers enjoy the module set classroom? Do you wonder if China is doing this?

Mr. Wiemers
www.mrwiemersshop.com

Wall Street Journal Quote

On most Saturday mornings Toni fries eggs in bacon grease and I load the toast up with real butter until it soaks through the back side. We then sit at the oak kitchen table that I built in 1986 and read newspapers and magazines while we eat our fried eggs and drink cappuccinos. Today was different. Toni said she was hungry for oat meal and since I wasn't about to extend any extra energy I agreed.

I came across an article in my copy of The Wall Street Journal entitled "Oops! I'll Do It Again. And Again. And Again . . ." that reminded me of a teacher inservice I interrupted five years ago. The quote in the WSJ said:

Students have shown that, while American students perform poorly compared with many foreigners of the same age, they are top of the charts when it comes to how well they think they have performed.

The line "they think they have performed" is the part that sparked my memory. Five years ago at an inservice we had an guest presenter share with us the new middle school model. The presenter went on and on comparing this great new middle school model of the twenty-first century to the archaic, ineffective junior high model of the 1970's. The meeting drug on as the speaker humored us with ridiculous comparisons which painted the picture that we were all idiots back in the 1970's.

Realizing that the room was void of any critical thinking at that point, I raised my hand to purposely interrupt this onslaught of propaganda to ask for an explanation of one key element. I said:

It appears from multiple reports that the United States has fallen behind several nations in areas such as science and math. I believe we are in 10th place and 14th place world wide and sinking. Yet, back in the 1970's with this so called "junior high model" we were leading the world in all areas of education. Do you think it is wise to mock the schools in the past who were leading the world in education? Has any one asked what are they doing in Japan? In Korea? In Europe? As a basketball coach I scout and research the teams that are beating us. And, I don't make fun of my school's past championship teams. So, before we jump to this new middle school model I want to know first, what are the other countries doing. And, I don't want everyone in the room to say, "Well, they don't test the same way we do" or "They only educate the smart kids." Bottom line, they are kicking our butts and the best AEA can do is make fun of our schools from the 1970's when we were kicking butt. You present us with this new middle school model that includes no research concerning the 10-14 nations that are crushing us academically?

With that the inservice was pretty much derailed. The presenter never regained his footing. No one answered the question. No one could answer the question. We just took a break and ate some cookies. Today several of us teachers still laugh about it and respond to most every inservice subject by mumbling at our table the question: "Is China doing this?"

Click here to see the Des Moines Register's World Class Schools for Iowa page. Notice the rankings of the nations:

• In Science: the United States is now 29th
  
• In Math: the United States is now 35th
  
• In Reading: the United States score is not recordable due to a "clerical error"? What!?

Since the AEA could not anwer any questions five years ago, we were left with assumption, hear-say, opinions and "how we felt we were doing." The Des Moines Register now provides you with an online T/F quiz called Education: Truth or Myth. Take this quiz! See the world map with rankings. (Notice the three comments on this Des Moines Register page all deflect the results of these numbers as unreliable or insignificant. Well, as long as that is the way you "feel". Who needs truth and facts when we already feel so good.)

Mr. Wiemers
http://mrwiemersshop.com
PS - want more of the same? go here

Vocabulary Inservice

This week's best vocabulary laced sentence used in the shop was when I instructed the students, "Dispose of your saturated application material to avoid spontaneous combustion." They did not know what I said, but they showed a great desire to understand since combustion of one's saturated material does not sound like a condition where a full recovery was an option! So, I told them to make sure they threw the towels used to stain their tables in the trash outside so they did not start a fire. (I have a story concerning fire to blog later. I hope I do not forget.)

This week on Wednesday we had an 1:00 dismissal for the teachers to continue their research and development of vocabulary instruction that will be used through out the school environment. We reviewed and discussed our previous work concerning the theory of vocabulary, tier 1-3 words and strategies for vocabulary instruction. We entered the implementation phase that afternoon by reviewing lists of curriculum specific words. Some of the words where words the students would need to remember and use to achieve success in the next few years in high school or college. Others words were recognized as being necessary for the rest of the student's life.

We looked through huge collections of words that students should know. These soon began to look like labyrinths of lawless layers of letters, language and linguistic labels. This initial step of the implementation phase seems to be the most challenging. It has the potential of derailing the entire process in one of two ways. First, a disposition of discouragement could quickly settle in.

Second, teachers could disengage from the process, produce an artificial list, create a couple of activities and check "teach vocabulary" off their to do list with out ever having moved forward. (I've done that before. Often.) We are at a crucial point. Even the language used in the meeting to describe this implementation phase indicated an anticipation of this educational hazard when the following terminology was used describe it:

• Flexible - dictionary definition: "to be bent repeatedly, to be changed, able to be persuaded".
  
• Revisit - dictionary definition: "to reconsider something such as an issue of public policy or a course of action, especially when additional facts indicate that an earlier decision was inappropriate"
• Process - dictionary definition: "to be in a state of procession or of going; not the arriving to a destination or the completion of a trip."

We are at an important place in our vocabulary "discussion" that will determine if we end up creating education altering activities or not.

Mr. Wiemers
http://mrwiemersshop.com

Professional Development Day

One week ago the Dallas Center-Grimes staff spent a full day in professional development sessions. As we have come to expect the trendy buzz words were easy to reengage with since they were in the session titles, the handouts, the skits, the presenter's verbiage, and, if we were willing, we volleyed them back in our questions and our offerings of answers and insights. So, our sessions included:

• Iowa Core Curriculum
• Relationships focused on Positive Interaction
  
• Formative Assessment
• Rigor and Relevance Framework
• Understanding and Caring about the student
  

All in all it was a good day. The sessions included good presentations with a variety of ways to interact with the material and those around us. Like usual, I got out of it what I put into it. This is what I took with me:

1. Concerning the latest trends or buzz words: Once you peel off the buzz word label (formative assessment, rigor and relevance, etc.), if you have been in the classroom for more than 3 years, are still conscience of your surroundings and have lines of communication open with your student, then you are probably already doing these things, but you probably call it "common sense." What I do like is that during days of professional development like this I can spend time thinking about how I could do these things more efficiently, with greater frequency and with an identifiable goal and purpose. If I let it, the desire to teach and make a difference begins to surface. Because, honestly, even though it is common sense, sometime around February I am no longer conscience of my surroundings and I have lost interest in communicating with my students. Point: No matter if it is a trendy buzz word or common sense, sometimes I still have to be refreshed and reminded what my job is.
2. Iowa Core Curriculum: Because of our school districts desire to constantly be in pursuit of excellence and give attention to detail many of the things we have worked on in professional development over the past 7-8 years are dove-tailing together like a well built stairway that easily leads us into the ICC.
   
   • Iowa Core Curriculum Home
3. Career Trends: The internet is 5,000 days old! By 2010 there will be more jobs in Iowa than we have qualified workers to fill. Iowa Core Curriculum will focus on: Literacy, Math, Science, Social Studies and Career Skills. Career Skills will develop the students: employment opportunities, financial literacy and technological skills.
4. Relationships: Any relationship must have some level of mutual respect. This includes between teacher and student. Some see this as some kind of modern approach or cultural deterioration. These are factors affecting education today, but lets go back to common sense. I remember being asked almost twenty years ago why I interacted with students the way I did. Even back then my reply was, "I first have to have some kind of relationship with the kid before I can expect to have him listen to me because of who I am." Sure, you can go through your whole teaching career spouting, "Listen to me because I am the teacher. I am your superior. I have the social right to be respected." True. I teach my kids at home that very thing concerning teachers, police officers and, especially, their Dad! But, it sure is easier to teach and parent when the kid trusts you. Respect makes society function. Trust builds relationships. Obviously we prefer to have both. And, we can.
5. Formative Assessment: Well, someone figured out that testing and scoring at the end of a chapter does not increase learning. It merely records what learning did or did not happen. If this is "new" information then it appears that for years we have an entire education institution with no common sense. Are we here to grade students or teach students. I remember speaking to a crowd many years ago saying, "Just because you taught it doesn't mean they learned it." I realized I had hit a nerve when I saw every one's head drop and they began to write in their notes the concept that teaching and learning are not a cause and effect duo. In fact, many times in my shop the students are learning, but I am clearly not teaching. So, to many teachers it is a great disappointment to learn that the "teacher" is not a prerequisite for the "learner". But, for an "educator" this information provides a sense of freedom and relief. We set the goal, aim the student and facilitate the natural process of learning. When they reach the goal, we move on. Evaluation or assessment should be taking place along the way to help determine what the student needs to know before they reach the goal. Assessment is more for the teacher than for the student. OK, this can become very idealistic very quickly so I am going to move on.
6. Quadrants of Rigor and Relevance: This concept for me was academically challenging. It took me a while to even figure out what we were talking about. I still do not understand the vocabulary used to define the four quadrants of Rigor/Relevance. They are Acquisition, Application, Assimilation, Adaption. I really got set back when it was explained to me that my eighth grade end table project was relevant but not rigorous in its current curricular status. In order to make it rigorous the students would have to recognize a mistake, analyze it, correct it and then correctly evaluate it as a success. The actual terms and steps the students would need to undertake to achieve "rigorness" would be: Knowledge/Awareness, Comprehension, Application, Analysis, Synthesis and Evaluation. Point: I really do not understand this and I am probably going to need either more training or need to increase my spin in presenting the middle school curriculum as simply just a basic introductory class designed to prepare students for the "rigorisms and releviances" they will be exposed to in high school. Pass the buck and grab the bail out!
7. Understanding and Caring: The last session of the day drove home the painful point that we are not working on an assembly line but working with living, breathing, feeling souls of young people. We can never fully understand their situations, their fears, their abilities nor their potential. It was at this point I realize how unworthy I am to be called "teacher".
   

Mr. Wiemers
http://mrwiemersshop.com

Teacher Unions

I really do not know much about teacher unions. I really haven't been paying attention. But, my friend and fellow staff member Eric Voelker had an editorial published in the Des Moines Register today titled Unions Should Offer Levels of Membership. (The full text is below.)

My experience with the teacher's union began and ended my first year of teaching shop. Two representatives came down to my shop. It was strange to see these two teachers walk into the shop. They explained membership dues and benefits. As far as dues were concerned I was taking home $900 a month and any dues over $1 were too much. (Yes, my contract pay has gone up since that time and unions will take the credit. But, I also have a part time job or two.) The big benefit they would provide would be in the case where I was fired. The teachers union would be able to rally around me and fight for my job if the administration ever fired me. At that point, being an arrogant young teacher/coach (unlike today, now I am old), I laughed and said, "I do not understand why I would want to work for somebody who wanted to fire me? I figure I would quit before they had a chance to fire me." That ended that attempt to proselytize me and I really haven't been approached since.

On a more intelligent level here is what Eric Voelker wrote to the editor of the Des Moines Register concerning a movement for mandatory union membership in the state of Iowa:

The Iowa State Education Association is lobbying the Legislature to pass a fair-share law. If passed, this law would unfairly mandate employees to belong to a collective group in an effort to share the cost of collective bargaining/contract management.

Having been part of the Des Moines Professional Firefighters Association and the National Education Association/Iowa State Education Association, I can say that it was indeed an exercise of my American freedom to choose to belong to these groups. I belonged to the Des Moines Professional Firefighters Association the entire time I was employed.

However, as time progressed, I dropped my association with the NEA/ISEA. I always supported the local initiatives and contract negotiations the ISEA local provided. What grew to be a deal breaker was that a good deal of my dues went to support the NEA and its liberal political agenda. Before I dropped I inquired about alternative forms or levels of association. It offered no options. There was no choice.

Rather than lobby for a law that grows government's regulation of this issue, the ISEA should simply offer choices in levels of membership.

- Eric Voelker, Dallas Center

Mr. Wiemers
http://mrwiemersshop.com

Things Change

I was talking with my wife about things that have changed over the years. Often times a conversation like that focuses on the things that have changed for the worse. (I will spare you the examples.) In this conversation we focused on what now seem like ridiculous rules or standards that have been replaced with what now seem like obvious common sense practices and guidelines.

Forty years ago we remember playing on school playgrounds with metal monkey bars and falling into gravel if we slipped. Blue jeans with rivets on the pockets (basically, all jeans have rivets on the pockets) were not allowed in school because they scratched the chairs. Belts were required dress code or else you faced discipline. Whole milk was a standard option at lunch.

Toni and I also remember that women had to wear dresses unless the temperature fell below 15 degrees, then they could wear slacks. Even during my first years of teaching the head of the house (a man) would have a different contract and different pay than his wife (a woman). I remember athletes sitting on the bench because their hair was too long. I remember when skipping a water break during practice meant you were tough but lifting weights was bad because it would mess up your jump shot. So, because I wanted to be tough and have a good jump shot I didn't drink water or lift weights. Looking back I now realize I was weak and dehydrated.

In the next few years how will we view our current standards for the management of technology? Our next challenge is how do teachers of my generation teach technology to the students of this generation. I began teaching and coaching using carbon copies and a mimeograph machine. I remember the ease and amazement of using a Xerox copy machine for the first time and thinking of the incredible potential these machines had.

For sure, one class we will never need to teach students is "How to Send a Text Message with a Mobile Phone." In fact, it may not be a matter of teaching technology as much as it is helping make technology available.

My boys at home laugh at my inability to text. They talk about my early days of texting (a month ago) when I did not know how to use the space key and all my messages were some kind of encrypted code. My sons have the ability to text in class with one hand in their pocket while looking at the teacher. I know they do this because they will reply to my text messages any time of day. When will schools embrace cell phones? Should they? I do not know. I will never have to make that decision. But, I will say this: Wouldn't it be less disruptive to the class for the front office to text a student that they want to report to the office than to do an all-call over the intercom system? I don't know if that is a good idea, but I do know it was a good idea to remove the concrete and gravel from under the monkey bars.

Below is a photo of my six sons from five years ago. Today they are a Combat Correspondent in the United States Marines, a certified snow board coach in Colorado, training to be an engineer in the United States Air Force, a senior in high school heading into economics and jazz music, a sophomore in high school and a student in my middle school. The youngest one does not have a cell phone but he does have his own facebook and a large online fan following for movies he and his brother and some friends have made. I have not taught them anything about technology. They laugh at my lack of it and tell me constantly to get a facebook so people know I exist!

Mr. Wiemers
http://mrwiemersshop.com

Knowing vs. Understanding

(Below is an excerpt from Galyn Wiemers' book Hope for America's Last Generation. Some minor portions and some references have been changed to make it appropriate for a wider audience:)

A Multiplication Analogy
THERE’S A COP out many people take that bothers me. Whenever someone poses a question about some issue, many people become uncomfortable and are quick to give the “right” answer.” But the difference between knowing the right answer and understanding why that answer is right is huge.

The answers to math problems can be easily memorized (e.g. 7 x 7 = 49). In elementary school, my teacher told me to memorize my “times tables” so I could regurgitate the right answers on speed drills and math tests. However, if I had simply memorized the answers without truly understanding the concept of multiplication, I would have failed. Why? Because if I memorize 7 x 7 = 49 but the teacher asks me for the answer to 7 x 8, I won’t be able to figure it out. I haven’t really learned multiplication; I just know how to spit out a few right answers here and there. Only someone who understands how he got the answer to 7 x 7 will be able to figure out 7 x 8 on his own.

So it is with life. We should never simply accept an answer we’re given without fully understanding it. Living life this way is not a skill for the faint of heart. In fact, many people don’t think it’s necessary at all. They ask, “Why can’t you be satisfied with 7 x 7 = 49? Why do you question it? Why can’t you just believe it? Can’t you just accept it?” Yet we must continue to question because, even though we may already know the right answer, we will never have a deep understanding if we stop questioning.

People who seek deeper understanding are often labeled “difficult” or "rebellious" by those who love to spout the “right” answers. Yet doubters and skeptics are usually the only people who have a true desire to achieve something most people never achieve—a real understanding of what it’s all about. It takes time and discipline to go from a basic knowledge to a deep comprehension of it. Growing into understanding is a much longer, more difficult, and often very frustrating process for those who take this longer route. But, in the end, it’s the only route that leads to freedom.

Saying, “I don’t understand” even in the midst of people who are perfectly content to “know the right answer” can be scary. You have to stop worrying about what others think of you. You have to remember that seeking understanding with humility is the only way to honor the truth.

Mr. Wiemers
http://mrwiemersshop.com/

Vocabulary in the Shop

Since one of our building goals is focused on vocabulary we spent yesterday afternoon's staff inservice reviewing Marzano's six steps for effective teaching of vocabulary. They are:

• Provide description, explanation, example
• Ask students to restate in their own words
• Ask students to construct a picture, symbol or graphic
• Engage students in activities that help them add to their knowledge
• Ask students to discuss terms with one another
• Games that allow them to play with terms

What does this look like in the shop? Well, for example, the other day I was giving the eighth graders a demonstration on how to glue together boards to make their table tops. After I had squeezed the glue across the edge of the board I said to them, "redistribute the bead of adhesive equitably." As expected, a couple of students quickly replied, "What did you say." So I translated my words into middle school language, "smear the glue on the edge of the board so there are no dry spots left." Then we joked around with the original statement a couple of times and I explained the phrase "bead of glue" and "adhesive".

The other day I called the class over for a different demonstration and said, "What I am about to show you will be advantageous for you." Because of the teaching staff's focus on vocabulary this year the students are acutely aware, it seems, of words they do not use in their own daily vocabulary and they asked, "what is advantageous?" I gave them a quick multiple choice answer asking them to tell me which of my following statements correctly defined advantageous:

1. advantageous is a disease a person gets from watching too many Super Bowl commercials. This meaning can be recognized by the "ad-" which refers to advertisement and the "-ageous" which distinguishes it as a disease.
2. advantageous refers to something that is a benefit to you or brings you some advantage in some situation or process.
3. advantageous is a corruption of an old, archaic English word for bandage.

After a few moments of discussion they unified on choice 2 but thought choice 1 was funny and had to consider choice 3 because they really didn't understand what that one meant.

I agree with Marzano, of course, even though he was not presented as the god of vocab in yesterday's inservice but simply as a voice of one who has carefully researched and made some intelligent conclusions. (And, made a lot of money selling his book and doing seminars.) But, I would add my own un-researched and less-intelligent opinion concerning teaching vocabulary:

• Sometimes we created artificial learning situations expending 110% of our effort for about 5% results. I do not like artificial learning situations because we live in a real world and habitually ignore that it is constantly teaching us.
  
• Most (or, 95% - an undocumented number) of my personal learning of vocab seems to have come from hearing conversations, reading, or listening to other people talk. I heard or hear words and begin to use them.
• Concerning preparing students for standardized testing one of the greatest means of decoding a word is to understand etymology. To understand English a little bit of insight and experience with Latin and Greek provides a great basis for student empowerment in decoding words. Here 5% of knowledge is going to provide 100% improvement in vocab ability (again, these are undocumented, estimates from my own imagination, but the point is: a little knowledge of Greek and Latin will provide greater insight into vocab. This would be very beneficial on standardized testing.)
• When I go to the men's room in an Italian restaurant (Macaroni Grill, for example) they are not playing music but instead of reading from an Italian-English dictionary . . . should we be playing the vocabulary words anticipated on the standardized tests over the intercom and over the speakers on the school buses?

I will be addressing the above points in my new book "A Shop Teacher's Guide to Improving Vocab". The book will be just a little longer than this blog because it will include an index. Don't miss my coming seminars where you can buy a signed copy of this book!

Mr. Wiemers
http://mrwiemersshop.com