The 18th century poet and lyricist Robert Burns is known for the phrase: "The best laid plans of mice and men often go awry." The book Of Mice and Men credits its title to the poem. This book tells the story of two men who move from job to job, town to town, hoping to make it "big," only to find themselves often back where they started. 

In the national narrative of education reform it can be difficult to discern which of the plans promoted by politicians or researchers will be able to improve the future of the American education system and which will simply "go awry." Foundations and organizations are crafting policy statements and reports that advocate one position or another, often with dire implications students, teachers, parents, and community members. While education reformers may genuinely have good intentions for students and communities, this effort to make it "big" is destined to fail, while leaving students to pay the price.

Recently, the results of teacher evaluation systems in New York City and Los Angeles have caused a flurry of anxiety across the country. Teachers worry about their livelihood, parents are concerned about their children's future, and community members point fingers of blame at each side. The Strategic Data Project and other organizations provide reports using this data, often called Value-added modeling (VAM), in which teachers are compared with prior test scores in order to discover how much they, in particular, influence student achievement. Sometimes their skill and experience is even summarized in one number or grade. Advocates of VAM contend that it holds the key to determining which teachers should be retained and which let go, allowing better-qualified teachers to take their place. Organizations like The New Teacher Project create reports like the recent Irreplaceables, a piece emphasizing the need for more control over teacher hiring and firing in order to retain high-quality teachers, demonstrated by high VAM scores. Through reports like these, teachers are being unfairly compared using these metrics and demoralized in the process.

When analyzed on a deeper level studies show that Value-Added Modeling has many flaws, some acknowledged by its own users. They recognize the problem but emphasize the need for a metric to be used, regardless of how well it works. In fact, these flaws undermine the modeling system itself and prove it to be of little use when comparing specific teachers year after year. On his blog, "School Finance 101," Dr. Bruce Baker analyzes the VAM scores of New York City teachers over two years and demonstrates the minute correlation between teacher scores. Teachers who were once in the top 20% of their cohort (red points) are scattered across the spectrum the next year. 

A research briefing from September 2011 produced similar negative results in its analysis of teacher evaluation being used across the country. One study showed "a small minority (25%) [of teachers] stayed in the same rating band the following year while most scores moved to other parts of the distribution," meaning only one in four teachers had consistent scores from year to year. Another showed an "experienced English teacher in the study whose rating went from the very lowest category in one year to the very highest in the next year." This was due to a significant decrease in the number of English Language Learners in her class, making it significantly easier to communicate. In addition, since a "teacher who works in a well-resourced school with specialist supports may appear to be more effective than one whose students do not receive these supports," teachers in low-income schools across the country, much like Philadelphia, are less experienced with higher turnover, causing problems down the line. 

One of the more perplexing issues, however, is that VAM is being used to boil down the expertise of an educator to one number - a feat most would argue is impossible and de-professionalizes the career path that needs motivated individuals. Even if VAM were to show more promise in its purpose, the sharing of this data will inherently influence the outcome of its use. Instead of allowing for time to improve, parents and communities would pull their support for teachers who could potentially grow in skill if allowed the time. With thousands of teacher retiring and leaving the classroom each year, there is not much room for this to happen.

Value-Added Modeling is currently being misused as the "silver bullet" in education reform. Unfortunately, not only is there no one policy that can have the effect desired to change everything, but this one is also inaccurate and dangerous. Alternatives with more proven (but more expensive) results do exist. In Montgomery County, MD teachers are evaluated using the Peer Assistance and Review (PAR) Program, which fosters collegial and collaborative processes to improve performance of teachers or dismiss those who cannot improve. Teachers are referred by their principal and then evaluated by a team of trained educators (including other mentor teachers). Philadelphia is currently piloting a program like this in schools. 

Programs like PAR may be difficult to implement due to high costs in labor and demands on time. However, they are effective in creating a professional community that can thrive and sustain itself, warrants their use. In contrast, Value-Added Modeling is more often used punitively and neglects the need for high-quality teachers judged by a fair standard.

Metrics used today like VAM are touted as a way of quantifying the work that teachers do but, in the end, prove only to quantify what reformers think of teachers, while demoralizing them in the process. Instead of focusing on the negative and working against teachers, focus on the positive and work with them. Treat them not as cogs in a wheel but as partners on a journey.

The "Speak Out" question in the most recent issue of the American Teacher, a publication created by the American Federation of Teachers, focuses on start times for schools across the country; in particular, should they be pushed back to accommodate the different sleeping schedules of teenagers or should we maintain the status quo due to all the potential issues that might crop up with the shift?

These two sides have been butting heads for years now with research from people like the National Sleep Foundation on one side and the critics on the other pointing out the detrimental effects to non-school aged society. The usual complaints regarding this time change involve the following:

• Rush hour: there would be more traffic congestion as all students would be attempting to go to school at the same time people are going to work.
• Extracurricular activities: it would be difficult to run these programs as students who need to commute long distances would be going home when it was dark outside.

On the other side, there are scores of articles describing the potential benefits of later start times in schools. Minneapolis, Minnesota piloted this idea with two school districts and found improvement in many categories with regards to their student population. As a nation we should really think deeper on what we care about: the externalities to traffic congestion or the future of our students? I vote the latter.

For the second time of my career in the School District of Philadelphia I felt compelled to bring up an issue to the School Reform Commission (our body that overseas the District as well as various charter schools). I am very happy that the SRC allows public comment and encourage others to take part as well. If you curious to know their next meeting times you can click here; if you want to know the policy and procedure on registering for public comment, click here. Otherwise, you can read the text of my speech below.

I was happy to hear Mr. Dworetzky and Dr. Hite talk about the idea of teachers having a more direct voice in curriculum development and making sure we are not just teaching to the test.

--------

Good evening and thank you for allowing all of our voices be heard tonight. My name is Brian Cohen and I am a concerned high school math teacher at the Academy at Palumbo. I am now in my fourth year in the School District of Philadelphia and my concern grows every day for the sad statistics that I hear and how they might influence me and my students. According to the Richard Ingersoll’s studies, half of all teachers leave by their fifth year - which means people like me have only one year to go.

I have many concerns about how the District and schools are run: lacking in transparency, lacking in true community engagement, lacking in foresight, and more. But tonight I want to talk about one that might cause me to join the statistics I just mentioned: testing. More specifically, the movement across the region, state, and country for people like me to tailor my instruction to these assessments. In layman’s terms, I am being forced to teach to the test.

I thought a specific example from my content area would exemplify the problem. I am an Algebra teacher at my school and, as such, am responsible for laying the foundation for solid understanding of abstract representation of numbers. What I mean is, I need to train my students to use monomials, binomials, and polynomials. I need to inform them of their meaning, purpose, and interpretation so that they can build and manipulate for themselves.

For those who do not remember such technical terms - think back to Greek prefixes. Mono is one; bi is two; poly is many. It is my task to ensure students have a strong grasp of one before moving on to the next. If they don’t know what x means, they can’t understand y = mx + b let alone y = x^2 + 2x + 1.

With that in mind, during the first quarter of instruction I teach content related to variables, altering them through the order of operations, and building up to patterns and tables so that students can understand what a line is and how it works as y = mx + b. With this knowledge, students can predict the future of graphs in order to make an argument - something the Common Core standards demand.

Much to my chagrin, instead of providing time to study and analyze the monomial the current Planning and Scheduling Timeline has me at this moment jumping ahead to polynomials. The exact phrasing of the eligible content to be tested is “add, subtract, and/or multiply, polynomial expressions.” To any math teacher I have talked to this seems like a completely out-of-place demand, yet we are forced to follow it. Why? Because it might show up on the Benchmark test at the end of November.

My purpose in speaking today was not to teach a math lesson - although it seems like we could all use some more math in our lives. Instead, I want to inform you of what is happening on the ground in your schools so that you can make better decisions for the future of this city. Do you want students who know how to complete standardized tests at proficient levels or do you want students who know how to think and interpret? At this moment, it seems that we are getting more of the former.

If you want me and teachers like me to stay in this job long term - change something so that I feel my voice is heard and so that my students develop true understanding. Stop me from teaching to the test.

Thank you.

This past weekend I was invited to share the story of this blog and other initiatives I am involved in with people from the Teacher Action Group and the Philadelphia Writing Project - an offer I could not turn down. I participated in a one hour session focusing on how teachers share their thoughts with the world through social media, blogs, editorials, and in-person commentary at the School Reform Commission. It was great to hear so many committed teachers and be able to inspire them to take their visions and thoughts a step further.

During the workshop I thought a lot about how and why I started this blog almost two years ago. I remember I had tossed the idea around with some friends and even got a name suggested from my former math coach at West Philly HS. But I hadn't sat down to write anything until a snow day gave me the extra time I needed to get started. I didn't expect the blog to go very far - maybe to my immediate family, friends, and some colleagues at school. As it turns out, more people started reading it and some even commented.

My main purposes in communicating my thoughts were - and are - to educate and empower people surrounding issues in education today. I did not want this to become a place for complaints and venting. Instead, I have tried to provide alternatives or suggestions that might help alleviate some of the problems I see or hear about. If I am able to do that and empower others to do the same - great. If not - then I will only be taking up a tiny fraction of the Internet anyway and no one will notice. 

But, if I can help be a rallying cry to teachers everywhere to learn more about their profession and rise up when it is threatened from any side - then I have been a success. I got a bit emotional when the workshop ended and some participants said I had inspired them to talk at the School Reform Commission - that it is not that hard and you can have direct contact with the people in charge. If more people start speaking, then they will listen. Just don't give up.

Over the past few weeks I have spent a lot of time reading a great book about neuroscience as it relates to education and the work place: Brain Rules by John Medina. Medina has outlined 12 specific things that we should consider in how we function daily and how they relate to the development of our brains. Many of these so-called "rules" seem like common sense but he backs them up with research and understanding that emphasizes their importance.

For those blog post I am going to focus on one that is quite salient when it comes to how we educate our youth: exercise (or, in reality, the lack thereof in schools). When it comes to how our brains developed in prehistoric times, we were most definitely not as sedentary as we now are.

In fact, according to anthropologist Richard Wrangham, we were moving "about 10 to 20 kilometers a day for men and about half that for women." In order words, we were walking up to 12 miles each day when our brains were developing. The blood flow caused by exercise goes hand in hand with our increase cranial capacity.

This fact could (and should) have immense repercussions for how education is conducted in the world. Not only should we be emphasizing fitness at home, but we should ensure it takes place in a meaningful way during the school day, preferably at the beginning of it. If we can get kids moving around before they have to learn something, they will likely retain it longer and in deeper ways. 

The most recent lesson my student-teacher crafted is a great example of this: instead of teaching a concept in solving equations and giving a number of problems on it while seated, he brought the students to another room and had them follow questions to answers around an empty classroom. The students were constantly in motion, talking, solving, asking questions, etc. They were so engaged in their learning and moving around that I'm sure they will remember more of the concept on Monday than the way that I had taught it. So, like the good teacher I am endeavoring to be, I will likely use that lesson when we return from the weekend.

Imagine if schools began each day with some kind of exercise regimen - for staff and students alike. It could provide the energy boost we all need in the morning and help us retain more information. If only.

As I've improved my practice over the past four years I have come to seriously agree with the adage, "teachers are the best thieves." If we were not, all the knowledge and best methodology would be lost in decades past and our students would be the ones to struggle because of it.

Now let me unpack that statement a bit: I am obviously not saying teachers physically or literally take things from others without permission. What I mean is: if I see a great lesson in front of me, or I hear about a great method, or I read about a lesson plan that went well, I am probably going to use it in the future. In point of fact, some of my best lessons come out of reading the blog of Dan Meyer, a PhD student out in California who used to teach math and who wants to improve the profession for all. 

That being said, reading about lesson plans online or in books is only one way to gain this knowledge. One of the best things you can do is quite simple: watch someone else teach. It could be in your school building or elsewhere; in your subject area or not. But make sure you spend time doing so in order to see what other people are doing. 

For teachers within the School District of Philadelphia, there is actually a policy that was created in the 1970s to help encourage you to do visit other schools across the city (and country). If you look at Board Policy #308, section 2.8-2.10 you will see how we have been given permission to take two observation days a year to see what else is out there.

I highly encourage this practice. Two years ago I took a day to visit a colleague at Science Leadership Academy because we were both using a computer program to augment our math instruction and came back with great ideas to implement. It was wonderful and easy!

As a brief warning: this year the coding system for inputting absence days has changed and secretaries might not think you can take these days off with pay - that is false. The code for something called the TPERS is "17" and still exists. If you have any issues, please contact me or the group Teachers Lead Philly - they have intimate knowledge of this as well.

Over the past decade there have been massive changes in schools and districts across the country as they relate to technology use. Districts are using their websites to disseminate more information, teachers are engaging their students through multimedia resources on the Internet, and parents and students are able to get help from suggested resources online. At the same time, there are many policy makers who are scared about this substantial increase in speed and ease of access. To be sure, it is important to be conscious of what we do online and how we work with our communities, but to be blind to the fact that communities are demanding more online engagement is silly.

Enter: the antiquated interim report. Briefly defined, these reports are status updates sent to parents about their students. They can inform them of their current grades and any comments from the teacher. The official version from the School District of Philadelphia is located here (please note its revision date is back in 2000).

My gripe with the interim report is that its lack of importance (or, indeed, its lack of detail). Instead, I have an issue with the timing: these reports are generated mid-quarter and they take time to print out, organize, and distribute. During the 1-2 week period in which this takes place tests, quizzes, projects, and more are being demanded from the students and grades are fluctuating. Especially in my own classes where students can retake tests and quizzes as much as they want, these grades may change from a 50 to an 80 over the course of a week.

So why rely on an out-dated, slow system to update parents when we could instead be emphasizing connecting with them online? The School District of Philadelphia already has a system they implemented over the past two years to post assignments and grades online. This system, called Gradespeed, does work (with some flaws) but has the potential to allow parent and student access easily. Personally, I would advocate for another system called Schoology.com because it is more versatile, but the idea is the same: connect parents, students, and teachers so they can all hold the other accountable.

Interim reports take time - unnecessary time that could be spent lesson planning, tutoring, contacting parents, and more. Why not change the requirements to leave them in the era of their last revision - the last millenium.