Testy

In the eight years that I haven't been in the classroom, I've watched and listened to all the dialogue about the encroachment of standardized testing.  In particular is something called the "Smarter Balanced" assessment tests that are being given in my community.  While the newspaper editorialists and many local politicos tout them as necessary and a significant, valid measure of what our students can and cannot do, those in the classroom are either silent and compliant, or condoning the virtues of non-compliance with these high stakes tests.  In fact, the head of the Portland Assn. of Teachers recently said: Abuse,  can be "the result of cruel and unconscionable acts that impair a child's psychological, cognitive, emotional and or social well-being" such as from "habitual ridicule" or "scapegoating." She questioned whether low-income or non-English-speaking students would be subjected to harassment if their school fares poorly in test results.

I've even heard some teachers calling themselves "conscientious objectors" when it comes to participating in the administration of these tests.  I see that parallel because, as an educator, everything that these challenging tests purport to be about is antithetical to what I believe and know to be excellent teaching.  Start with the 70% failure rate being predicted.  That tickles the "if it's harder, it must be better" fancy of those who claim to be experts on this issue.  Notice that they aren't in the classroom.  They have , or at least seem to have, no rigorous curriculum in use with which to compare their ideas of what is challenging and most important.  The are in love, in my view, with the idea of collecting data that shows schools are failing.  They are not, I assure you.  How do I know this?  I know this because every year students that leave our institutions of public instruction are doing well in college or their chosen professions.  I know this because I have the luxury of remaining in contact with hundreds, perhaps thousands, of former students, and I can see how they are doing.  But that was then, you might ask.  True, it's different now, it's always different a decade or so later.  With the disparity in wealth that is the new reality we face, there is no longer the certainty that a good education will be rewarded with a job or career that's equally as satisfying.  Maybe those test makers and corporations so giddy over the elevated place they have come to occupy in the school calendar know this.  Maybe, aside from tapping into that billion dollar industry, they are already beginning the training for the only jobs that will be available to most of those kids taking their tests.
That's all conjecture, I know.  But what is not is the fact that rigor and rigormortis aren't all that far apart.  As many students would say, "you're killin' me."

Picture This

I read with interest this week of Starbuck's corporate attempt to initiate much needed conversations about race by having some of it's baristas write "Race Together" on cups of coffee sold.  While I applaud the intent of the idea, there is so much that is off base about this idea that it's hard to know just where to begin.  let me try by saying that these discussions must be lead and facilitated carefully because while well intended, they can easily do more harm than good.  I realize there are many baristas out there with advanced degrees, is the coffee line the best place to have these conversations?  Are most people "on the run" and ready to begin their day?  Would another time and place be better?  I'm still wondering because at least the intention to have a dialogue is there.  Is there also another intention?  Given the corporate attack on public education these days, I'm a bit skeptical of the motivation...with good reason.  Is the conversation that's needed really about race, or is it about much more?  Race, as a scientific concept is soo last century; actually it's soo 19th century, isn't it?
Even though the concept of race is a bogus idea, a social construct, it continues to inform and impact how we think and what we do.
Some of my friends took me to task a bit because, as employees of large corporations, they can easily point to how those institutions have educated people.  But to have a life changing dialogues about race and ethnicity, it takes knowledge of historical perspective as well as the biology.  Many teachers today are fighting to reinstitute the historical perspective part.  One of the casualties of the current obsession with standardized tests is that the time and resources needed to teach the deep history required gets pushed aside.
In a similar vein, I recently read a piece where a cartoonist was asked to lighten the skin of some of her characters in a soon to be published graphic novel.  Is this racist, she asked?  Maybe the intention is to make the character bi-racial?  Maybe not.  It reminded me of the evolution of an old comic book character called Chop-Chop.  While collecting media images for a teaching unit on racial images and attitudes, I did some research on this character from the Military themed comic series Blackhawk.  Chop-Chop started out as the quintessential stereotype of a "Chinaman." From the huge buck teeth to the long braid to the exaggerated ears, he was a buffoon type sidekick of the first order.  Over time, the series acquired a new publisher and his image changed dramatically.  Note the picture here:

This is what I mean by historical perspective.  The racism in our culture, like every other one, is ingrained in so many ways, it would be crucial to have well-informed people lead discussions.  I guess the alternative is not having any conversation at all.  A real conundrum.

The Lark Descending

There is a standard of most classical music stations called "The Lark Ascending."  If you don't immediately recognize the title, you no doubt will recognize the melody.  It's a lovely piece with rising crescendos and falling denouements.
The piece reminds me of a beautiful Irish woman I met many years ago who gave me a tape of her favorite music.  Remember when we all gave people a tape of "our" music?  Over the years I played the tape until the technology I currently access made that difficult and a few moves along the way allowed that tape to disappear by accident or design.

Until recently, I'd hear "The Lark Ascending" either on the radio or while out and about because it is a stand-by of music stations.  It always brought a slight smile to my face remembering Molly and the music that defined her life.  Until recently.  The corporate powers that latched on to Peet's Coffee in my local shop have managed to conspire to play that piece on a more than regular basis.  I her their canned music every day and sometimes twice.  The appeal diminishes daily.
Somewhere in this diatribe is a metaphor.  Because some corporate wonk, who decides what music will be played (and re-played as nauseum)  the entire appeal of an environment changes drastically.  Now I know this is no big deal.  But it is symptomatic of what seems to be going on in this culture more often and with greater consequences.  The corporatizing of our environment, our schools, our food, and now, in some small way, the music we listen to.
Question: Why does a commercial establishment have to re-play the same soundtrack?  What would happen if the workers or the public had a say in the selection?
Oh I know all about the psychology of music when it comes to impacting the consumer.  Some person somewhere must have a logical explanation why I have to hear "The Lark Ascending" so often.  I'd love to hear it.  And if no such explanation exists, then stop it.  Stop it right now because the lark is descending.

Showing Up

This morning a hidden camera tape surfaced of a fraternity on the University of Oklahoma campus singing a blatantly racist song.  The verse included a reference to the N word and how their membership would never include the same.
How sad that this comes on the 5th anniversary of the Cvil Rights march for voting rights in Selma.  It comes juxtaposed in the news with another young African-American man being shot to death by police.
As saddening as this is, what seems even more troubling is that no major Republican figure went to Selma to represent the U.S. Congress at that major Civil Rights venue in this country's past.  Are we that alienated?  Apparently.  What is equally sad is that those frat boys and most of those politicos will never experience the power and empowerment that comes from taking your beliefs to the street.  The willingness to become visible and take a stand for what you know to be morally right is both a privilege and, I submit, an important experience for all.  What must it be like to have no sense of that?  Is that why people unthinkingly sing racist songs or do not think they need to attend milestone events that are crucial to the government they represent?

Though the media is rife with fear about International terrorism, we do well to consider that the inability of this country to deal with race is really the issue that is most threatening.  When I see school systems trying to literally control the narrative in their text books and intimidating young teachers with assessment data that is virtually meaningless, I experience fear.  Maybe the hidden camera can help with this current dilemma.  Evidence, on video, of the complexity of educating a human being just might be the way to go.  That and teachers uniting, despite the continued attempts to alienate and intimidate them.  What's at stake here is sending a generation to college that will sing a different kind of song.