Is this really what makes a good Teacher?

Mr. McGuire in the The Reading Workshop blog laid out these inspirations in a post titled "What makes a good teacher."

1. Interpersonal skills trump professional skills.
2. Give students a job and let them do it.
3. Be open and collaborative, but step in when needed.
4. Be visible.
5. Keep a sense of perspective.
6. Finally, be a decent human being.

I look at this list and can't find "teacher" nor can I find anything that accepts the idea that the adult in the room is supposed to be imparting anything to the teenagers in the room. Everything screams "I am insecure in my knowledge and I doubt that the students are looking to me for anything."

Implicit is the idea that students are the equals of teachers, that their opinions are based on the same amount of experience and understanding. "Give them a job and let them do it" implies the teacher is only a obstacle to student achievement.

I know that some will blast me for saying this, but tough. If the kids were truly the equal of the teacher, why bother with the teacher? Why spend so much time, effort and money getting teachers to write curricula, design assessments and lesson plans, take workshops on classroom management and all the million other things we do? Plop him in front of the technology he loves so much and keep your old-school ways out of his way - yeah, <sarcasm> that works real well. </sarcasm> Just look at how much they accomplished last summer.

Why is being decent, having perspective and being visible, open and collaborative considered the be-all and end-all of good teaching? I think it's because so many of us are lousy teachers who aren't properly prepared, so we focus on our smiles instead of our subject. Being decent and all is important but it is not what makes a "Good Teacher."

When did the adults abdicate their responsibilities to be the leaders, to be the teachers? Why does that old joke about "those who can" still hold so much traction? The answers to these questions are complementary.

But not very complimentary to the profession.

Being a Good Teacher

I ran across a list of 6 things that apparently "made a good teacher." I'll post it in another entry, but one part caught my eye. In it the writer shares his inspiration - that's right, inspiration. In education, you see, we don't learn from experience, we learn from inspiration. Additionally, we don't learn from education exemplars, we learn from business ones.

"Doug Johnson on the Blue Skunk Blog discussed what made a good boss. This list has been adapted from his comments about a great boss.

But Mr. McGuire, wait. A good boss is not a good teacher.

A boss pays you. From the start, you are expected to be capable of doing everything the job requires. Boss expects you to be knowledgeable, erudite, and capable of doing the job you were hired for ... whether that entails good people skills in a cooperative job environment (the whole 21st Century thing which isn't anything new) or a cubicle keep-to-yourself and get the work done kind of job with minimal contacts beyond the check-in and coffee urn. The boss does not expect to teach you. You improve yourself or not. You accomplish your job or not. You get fired or not. You finish for the day and you go home. If you enjoy the work, bully for you.

A teacher does not have the same expectations of his charges - they don't know things. They don't know math, they can't write well, they're ignorant of history ... that's why they are enrolled. A Teacher cannot approach his craft in the same way as a Boss.

Everything about dealing with students is based on the fact that this society doesn't believe they are capable of making appropriate decisions or fending for themselves; everything about dealing with employees is based on the fact that they are and they can. Tread carefully if you try to cross these lines for you risk looking foolish.

Students aren't deemed responsible enough to be allowed to do choose whether or not to do anything - don't blame me for it, it just is.

• choose to smoke (laws)
• choose to drink (laws)
• have sex, (age limits, etc.)
• show up, (truancy laws)
• take an aspirin, (all those restrictions)
• slack off, (we need to inspire them, make learning fun)
• bring a pencil, or materials, (I just give them one if it's the occasional forgetfulness, but I'm not happy when it's a habit. They still get one but I scowl.)
• leave the building, (it's a closed campus)
• go to the bathroom, (without a pass and in some places there's a quota, for chrissake.)
• drive a car (restrictions abound)

A girl CAN get an abortion without parental permission, but that's the exception that proves the rule.

This business model doesn't apply here, Sir, even if it does inspire you.

World Air Traffic

I just like watching it.

World Air Traffic Over 24 Hours - Watch more funny videos here

Carbon Offsets - Buy 'em now !

Without a Doubt, this is priceless. San Francisco Airport is setting up kiosks for travelers to buy carbon offsets. (link to Michelle Malkin's blog. She quotes an article at SFGate.com)

Here's the deal ...

one would "approach a kiosk resembling the self-service check-in stations used by airlines, then punch in his or her destination. The computer would calculate the carbon footprint and the cost of an investment to offset the damage. The traveler could then swipe a credit card to help save the planet. Travelers would receive a printed receipt listing the projects benefiting from their environmental largesse."

That's it. Here you are, two and a half hours early to make it through the security to board a flight, and you VOLUNTARILY walk up to a random machine in the concourse, tell it where you are going and let it run some random numbers. Presto, whizz, bang! Swipe a credit card and you're done.

You have just given money to a company for nothing. ZIP. You didn't even get porno at $5/minute. You get a receipt listing some "projects" that "benefited from your largesse." Riiiight.

I know, I know. You're "saving the planet." But, really? Are you really saving the planet?

Let's look. 3Degrees claims to be doing something good with the money but is really siphoning off some of your cash before sending it to some very large companies. Take a look at the graphic from their website:

How much of that is truly going to be going to "saving the Earth?" None, really.  It will all go into increasing the CEO's compensation. All of the gas capture projects benefit the companies - they burn it all as fuel, write it off their taxes, and have an ROI of 10 years or less. Then it's all gravy.

And let's be clear here about those agricultural projects. None of them is the organic farmer down the road. She's too small of an operation to have enough bull&*$% to capture methane. Far better for you to buy her produce at the Farmers' Market - be a Localvore and support the people you think you should be supporting. Buy their stuff - it's what they want - a market, not a donation. 3Degrees is only working with the super-farms who have thousands of acres, haven't been a "family farm" for decades, and are just looking for another subsidy to not-plant corn and not-produce dairy.

I should pay for "Sustainable Forestry?" Give me a break. The timber companies have been doing this for years - they own the land and their forests are going strong because they want to get another harvest (or ten) out of them. I have no intention of giving them money just for the hell of it. I will buy their paper and wood products since that's what money is for.

Here's the best part: The kiosks "will serve an educational function. It's something interesting to do while you're killing time at the airport."

I'll give you the education right here:
You got conned.

3Degrees is proposing that you give the money to them so they can send it to the various companies. What do you get for your taxable donation to 3Degrees? You get a receipt. Oh, did you miss that? It's not tax-deductible because 3Degrees and the companies they give the money to are NOT non-profit. You are supplying income, not donating to anything.

You'd be better off giving it directly to the Appalachian Mountain Club and saving the paper.

And thereby saving the planet more efficiently.

---

Here's the original SFGate article:

S.F. fliers may pay their way in carbon usage
Michael Cabanatuan, Chronicle Staff Writer
Wednesday, December 24, 2008

Environmentally conscious travelers flying out of San Francisco International Airport will soon be able to assuage their guilt and minimize the impact of their air travel by buying certified carbon offsets at airport kiosks.

The experimental program, scheduled to start this spring, would make SFO the first airport in the nation - possibly the world - to offer fliers the opportunity to purchase carbon offsets.

"We'd like people to stop and consider the impacts of flying," said Steve McDougal, executive vice president for 3Degrees, a San Francisco firm that sells renewable-energy and carbon-reduction investments and is teaming up with the airport and the city on the project. "Obviously, people need to fly sometimes. No one expects them to stop, but they should consider taking steps to reduce their impacts."

San Francisco's Airport Commission has authorized the program, which will involve a $163,000 investment from SFO, but is still working out the details with 3Degrees. Because of that, McDougal said, he can't yet discuss specifics, such as the cost to purchase carbon offsets and what programs would benefit from travelers' purchases.

But the general idea, officials said, is that a traveler would approach a kiosk resembling the self-service check-in stations used by airlines, then punch in his or her destination. The computer would calculate the carbon footprint and the cost of an investment to offset the damage. The traveler could then swipe a credit card to help save the planet. Travelers would receive a printed receipt listing the projects benefiting from their environmental largesse.

The carbon offsets are not tax deductible, said Krista Canellakis, a 3Degrees spokeswoman.

"While the carbon offsets purchased at kiosks can't be seen or touched, they are an actual product with a specific environmental claim whose ownership is transferred at the time of purchase," she said.

Mike McCarron, airport spokesman, said the projects offered will be chosen by the mayor's office, in conjunction with 3Degrees, from a list certified by the city's Environment Department. Airport Director John Martin told the commission that projects could include renewable energy ventures in developing countries, agriculture and organic waste capture, coal mine methane capture, and sustainable forestry.

Nathan Ballard, a spokesman for Mayor Gavin Newsom, said a portion of each offset purchase would go to the San Francisco Carbon Fund, which supports local projects such as energy-efficiency programs and solar panel installations for low-income housing, as well as efforts to convert waste oils into biodiesel fuels.

The cost of offsets for SFO travelers is still being negotiated, McDougal said, but figures on the company's Web-based "carbon calculator" suggest that a two-hour trip uses about 1,000 pounds of carbon dioxide per person, and the cost to offset that would be about $4. Offsetting a trip to Europe would cost $36.

"It's definitely not going to double your ticket or anything," he said. "It's going to end up being a small percentage of your total airfare."

Under the agreement, the airport will provide the kiosks and 3Degrees will supply the software and the certified carbon offsets being sold and will operate the program. Kiosks will be placed throughout the airport, with locations at the customer service desk in Terminal 3 and two wings of the International Terminal. 3Degrees will get 30 percent of each purchase, with the rest going to carbon-reduction projects. The agreement calls for a one-year program, with a possible extension.

"The carbon kiosks will not only reduce global warming," Ballard said, "they will serve an educational function. It's something interesting to do while you're killing time at the airport."

Given the innovative nature of the venture, airport officials said they don't expect 3Degrees will turn a profit - at least not at the outset. McDougal said it's impossible to predict how many passengers will want to make what is essentially a voluntary contribution to compensate for the impacts of their air travel. But he hopes the program takes off.

"Hopefully, it will be successful," he said. "But if we just have a lot of people stop and read the information and think about it, that's something we've accomplished."

Happy New Year

Boom, bang ... ooooh, aaaaah.

The clock puzzle Answer

The hands are directly opposed at 6:00 sharp.  They are opposed again a little after 7:05, a little after 8:10; 11 times in 12 hours.  Therefore, the time between each is 12/11 or 1 & 1/11 hours. This works out to 1 hr 5 min 27 & 3/11 seconds.
6:00
7:05:27 & 3/11
8:10:54 & 6/11
9:16:21 & 9/11
10:21:49 & 1/11
11:27:16 & 4/11
12:32:43 & 7/11
1:38:10 & 10/11
2:43:38 & 2/11
3:49:05 & 5/11
4:54:32 & 8/11
6:00:00

Looking at the second hand in the picture gives us the answer of 10:21:49 & 1/11

back to the original.

The Milkman's Puzzle - answer

I haven't really thought this out fully, so there may be a better answer (I might have done a logical circle) or one in fewer steps.

The assumption is that we will, every time, pour milk until the RECEIVING vessel is full or until the pouring vessel is empty. There are no half-pours or "holding the pitcher at an angle so as to get half a can." Label the containers 4, 5, A and B.

4 5   A  B 
A -> 4    4 0   6 10
4 -> 5    0 4   6 10
A -> 4    4 5   2  9
4 -> B    3 5   2 10

5 -> A    3 0   7 10
4 -> 5    0 3   7 10
B -> 4    4 3   7  6
4 -> 5    2 5   7  6 
5 -> A    2 2  10  6

Back to the puzzle.

Overlapping Squares Puzzle Answer

In the diagram, the 4 in. square overlaps the 3 in. square in such as way that the corner of the larger square is at the center of the smaller square. The 4 in. square has been rotated so that its side trisects the side of the 3 in. square. What is the area of the shaded portion?

Rotate the 4” square until the sides of the squares meet at a right angle (dashed square above). We create a shaded triangle and a white triangle.

The triangles are congruent (properties of squares, the angles are congruent and the heights are both 1.5 and the bases are 0.5)

Take that small shaded triangle and move it to cover the small white triangle.

The area of the shaded region is congruent to one-fourth of the 3”square.
Area = 2.25

Lake Puzzle Answer

I used Heron's Law the first time I solved this and a buncha triangles the second time I tried. I kept getting 11 acres but, as jd mentioned in the other comment, the elegant solution must be available but it escaped me every time I tried.

The puzzle solution relies on the recognition of three pythagorean triangles. (How one came to these combinations was never quite clear to me, but hey ...)

5-7-√74 triangle would have the same length side as a square of area 74 sq. units.
4-10-√116 would have the same length side as the square of area 116
9-17-√370 triangle would have the same side as a square of area 370

Lo and behold, these triangles could be rearranged as below.

The lake is therefore the difference in area of the big triangle (0.5*9*17 = 76.5) and the three smaller pieces (28 + 0.5*5*7 + 20 = 65.5) which is 11.

So there you have it. In my opinion, this proves that the solution works but gives no indication (to me at least) of how one might solve similar situations in the future and does not enlighten the puzzler to some heretofore unknown rule, theorem or hypothesis. Not a very satisfying solution for me.

return to the puzzle.

Cattle Puzzle answer

Farmer Jones paid $150 for one cow and $50 for the other. He sold them for $210, clearing 5 per cent.

This puzzle makes no pretense at context. It is not even pseudocontext, yet it is a excellent use for algebraic reasoning and guess and check, or systems of equations if you were so minded. It is interesting to me to think that Loyd's Puzzles (ca 1910) were published in the newspaper for the common man, for the farmer, for the factory worker, for the clerk, for the uneducated, for everyone - as challenges.

Math isn't fun. It's satisfying.

1.1x + .90y = 210
1.05( x + y) = 210 ==>> x + y = 200 ==>> x = 200 - y

1.1(200-y) + .9y = 210
220 - 1.1y + .9y = 210
-.2y = -10
y = 50
x = 150

return to the Cattle Puzzle.

Koi Pond Puzzle Answer

Start by assuming the area of the big square is 4 square units instead of acres – it will make the calculations easier. Therefore the sides are 2 units x 2 units.

With a rotation, you can see that the diagonal of the pond and the diameter of the circle are both 2 units.

By Pythagoras, this isosceles right triangle with hypotenuse = 2 has legs √2/2. Thus the area of the smaller square is √2/2 * √2/2 = 2 units² = 2 acres.

SO the pond is 2 acres, or 87120 ft².
(1 acre = 43560 ft²)

Volume = 87120 ft² * 3ft = 261360 ft³
* 7.48051948 gals/ft³ = 1,955,109 gallons

National Board Certified

Stories from School is effusive ...
Across the nation, "more than 9,600 teachers achieved National Board Certification--bringing the total number of the nation's top teachers to nearly 74,000." The impact of these teachers on the learning of their students is huge. A whole new world opens up for NBCTs. There is a sense of confidence, even validation for the strength that one possesses in the art and science of teaching.
I have two questions for NBCTs.
(1) How will National Board Certification affect your classroom/school/district/state?
(2) What is your next step now that you are certified (any leadership thoughts)?

I actually have some thoughts on those two questions. The fact that you asked (1) now is somewhat odd. They just got certification - they don't have any experience as a NBCT yet. Ask them after they've put some of that special, super-duper HNCBQT-type teacher stuff into action with real students.

That's my thought on #2 as well. Why aren't you becoming a teacher now that you're certified? What's with the "leadership thoughts?" Get some experience before you start lecturing everyone on all of that educational goodness.

The last thing we need is another idealistic "ROTC 2nd Lieutenant" teacher turned professional development coordinator or district curriculum coordinator.

Bless us with your teaching of students before your teaching of us, will ya?

Collaboration was the Answer all along.

A nationally Board Certified Teacher-type person is certified in 2002 but now "currently serves as a district professional development director." So, of course, he is an expert on improving schools.

And what is is expert advice that the rest of us have missed all these years? We never talked. We never collaborated. Never had and IEP meeting. EST meeting. Cross-curricular. No one ever suggested something. For each and every kid.

I'll let him speak.

There's no F in "Team"
by Stories from School's FIRST guest blogger: John

The nationally syndicated article by E. J. Dionne on education that appeared in this past Sunday’s Seattle Times is relevant to Tom’s last post on what new approach the Obama administration will take on education policy.

In addition to the policy statement Tom mentioned (EPI), Dionne also mentions a second policy onto which new Secretary of Education Arne Duncan has signed—the Education Equality Project. It’s Statement of Policies includes this: “The sad reality is that these systems are not broken. Rather, they are doing what we have designed them to do over time. The systems were not designed with the goal of student learning first and foremost, so they are ill-equipped to accomplish what is demanded of them today.”

Damn those schools we all attended. They weren't designed for learning.

Schools were not built to overcome achievement gaps—they were designed to manage and rank all kids and educate some kids. While this may seem depressing, I believe it offers some hope…

Oh good.

If we can change the way schools do business, we can begin closing the achievement gap without spending trillions to do it. The key is in Dionne’s article title and final line—collaboration.

To continue the car analogy, what if you took your car instead to a team of mechanics? Instead of one mechanic’s opinion that you need a part that will cost and arm and two legs, you get a second mechanic who pipes in that he knows a wholesaler who can get the part for half that price. And then a third mechanic says “I can do you one better—I know a guy who refurbishes those parts for a quarter of the price.”

Right. Johnny needs a new muffler from the Guy in the Narrow Alley Over There.

Once schools start building a culture of collaboration, of collective responsibility for all students, not just those assigned to them, unprecedented gains can be made. The National Staff Development Council (NSDC) notes that “organized learning groups (of teachers) provide the social interaction that often deepens learning and the interpersonal support and synergy necessary for creatively solving the complex problems of teaching and learning.” (2007)

Bzzz. Bzzzz. More buzzwords! (Ignore the grammer errors.)

A school is built with a system of interventions that takes collective responsibility for not allowing students to fail can begin to overcome the factors outside of the school setting that provide barriers to learning. We did exit interviews with high school students in my district and several mentioned the fact that knowing they would not be allowed to fail was one of their strongest motivating factors. Often there is nobody else in the student’s life that cares enough to provide those expectations.

In some ways this approach makes the job much more difficult—it requires almost an “IEP” approach to each student. On the other hand, working together is almost always easier than working in isolation. Take a look at Damen’s comment to Tom’s post. He says, “I should just guide them and let them excel on their own. Then there are those who will struggle to achieve no matter how many hours I put in lesson planning. To reach these students I need to teach there parents how to parent or take the kid to a museum myself.” Damen’s language indicates that he sees the challenge completely on his shoulders. When looking at the challenge of overcoming the outside factors that hinder learning, it is overwhelming to do it alone. With a team approach, there is hope.

Obama and Duncan have teamed up on the basketball court with much success. I hope they focus on what has been shown to work and fight for the resources needed to implement true teamwork in schools.

John certified as a National Board Certified Teacher in 2002 in the Early Adolescence English Language Arts certificate area. He currently serves as a district professional development director.

Well, thanks John.

To continue the car analogy even further, what if you took your car instead to a different team of mechanics for a second opinion? They could stand around and talk over coffee and the one who knew what he was talking about could be overruled by the other two who had more seniority. The IEP specialist and the Director of Special Ed could then quarrel about exactly what services the school can afford while the parent steams and demands more tests. Finally, the case manager opens her laptop with the IEP template and actually writes the plan.

You wind up paying twice your original estimate and fail to help the problem. In fact, you spend even more money attempting to diagnose the problem because the first set of WISC-R results and Woodcock-Johnsons didn't jibe with what the teachers were telling the EST team in the first four meetings. So, now the teacher needs to fill out the 120 true/ false/ maybe questions that ask about everything under the sun and really don't specify much of anything. "Student has been sexually abused at home. Y/N/M" -- as if the teacher knew but was holding that information until you gave him the green form to fill out. What's with those green forms anyway? "Due no later than tomorrow, please fill out the kids name and address and his grades in every class and answer these simple questions."

It would be lovely if these meetings were effective. It would be even better if effective meetings could lead to a solution, but they don't. In my experience, the final result of all those meetings and all of that paperwork and those consultancy fees is that the teachers are told to make some accommodations and changes that have already been in place since the third week of school.

More importantly, children are not cars. Their problems aren't solved by plugging in a new set of spark plugs and replacing the oil. Teachers don't bid their ideas to the team in some capitalistic fashion. Children do not fail in one part that can be replaced by a magical pseudo-competitive free market multi-teacher consortium that has the best interests of the system at heart.

Teachers, parents, staff, and the kid all have ulterior motives and none of these lives up to your fantasy of mechanic #3 underbidding at a quarter of the price.

Although, I must admit that I'd love to start a bidding war in one of those meetings just to liven it up some.

"I can give him extra time and I'll do 15 minutes a day after school."

"Well, I'll give him that and organize learning groups of teachers to provide the social interaction that deepens learning and the interpersonal support and synergy necessary for creatively solving the complex problems of teaching and learning."

"Damn. Outbid again."