A teacher recently said to me, "The boys in my classroom just don’t like to read."  This is a complaint that I’ve heard from many teachers, especially in the upper elementary grades.  But it’s not just boys who are more and more interested in other activities, leaving reading behind.  With so many other activities engaging our children, can we as educators and parents make reading something all kids can enjoy?

Recently, the Library of Congress announced the first National Ambassador for Young People’s Literature.  Jon Scieszka, author of The Stinky Cheese Man, is excited about his responsibility to "get kids jazzed about reading."  His goal is to reach the reluctant readers and offer suggestions to get those kids engaged in reading.

Among his suggestions, Scieszka advises allowing students to pick their own materials and not strictly limiting those materials to fiction.  This suggestion is one that I have often found to be a door opener for reluctant readers.  In my own middle-school reading classroom, I allowed students to read a wide variety of materials, including magazines.  Magazines tended to be a great equalizer in the world of reading classrooms.  Even the most reluctant reader could find a topic to interest him.  My hard core skateboarders, my athletes, even my computer nerds could find a topic to read about. 

Another reason I allowed reading magazines was that magazines offered support to my reluctant readers that novels didn’t.  Once kids start reading chapter books, visual cues disappear.  Pictures aren’t available to assist struggling readers.  In magazines, however, there are plenty of visual cues to help a struggling reader.

Another frustration I found with my middle schoolers was the constant need to compare the number of pages they could read in a sitting.  Struggling readers who were working on a novel could easily see how quickly they were falling behind, which often led them to give up more easily.  With magazines, students stopped comparing their reading speed.

When it comes down to it, whether our kids are reading "the classics" or Sports Illustrated for Kids shouldn’t be our greatest concern.  Really, the question is whether they are reading at all.  And if we can find materials to engage them, they will!

Educators and school board members alike are speaking out against the proposed graduation exam requirements in Pennsylvania.  With the number of benchmark assessments on the rise across the country, there are many who feel that assessments are the only way to hold both teachers and students accountable for their learning.  But in Pennsylvania, they disagree.

Citing a number of arguments ranging from financial strain on the districts to the inability of some assessments to gauge what students really have learned, teachers are speaking out!  They argue that between end-of-course exams and the state-mandated PSSA exams, there is already too much time spent on assessments that are simply geared towards accountability.

"Right now teachers are being driven by the tests, and most tests don’t tend to encourage creativity and problem-solving," Ellwood City Area School District Superintendent Frank Aloi said. "It’s mostly rote learning."

With teachers speaking up now against additional assessment measures, perhaps it’s time to consider what is truly being gained from assessments.  Are the assessments themselves diagnostic in nature or simply another data point in the world of accountability? 

And what is the point of the assessment?  Is it to benefit the students by assisting their learning?  Or is it simply a tool to document the competency of the teachers and the ability of the student?

And how are we using those data points?  Are we using the assessments’ results to measure students’ strengths and weaknesses?  Are we using assessment data to drive instruction?  Or are we simply using the assessments to measure a pass/fail rate that is then put aside until the next assessment comes along?

Perhaps when these questions are answered about each assessment we ask students to take, educators will be able to distinguish between assessments that are a useful and integral part of student learning and those that are a waste of teaching resources, student time, and taxpayers’ money.

For some reason, this past holiday season was filled with more dinner parties and holiday activities than I can remember.  It was great.  A casino-style party which benefited a local homeless charity; an ice-skating event supporting the George Mark House, a home for children with terminal illnesses; and traditional neighborhood parties with way too many mini-quiches, spanakopitas,  sugar cookies, and egg nog (not that it really matters, since I am told that everything is zero points, zero calories over the holidays).  My friends, the Fisher-Paulsons, throw a "Misfit Ornament" party every year, too.  At this party they have a tree set out on their front porch where guests deposit the ugliest ornament they have and in exchange take another ornament they might find attractive.  You give your bad ornament; you take another’s trashy one.  That’s how it goes.  However, every year a few guests misread the invitation, or sample a little too much of the mulled wine, and find themselves leaving their misfit ornaments on one of the two showcase Christmas trees inside the house as they walk off with a glamorous Waterford crystal snowflake or a collectible limited-edition, Marvel Comic Christmas gem.  That’s right:  my friends have one lacey Christmas tree covered with snowflakes and unicorns and another tree with blue lights and superheroes. 

            I’m not too sure about the origins of Brian’s unicorn tree, but Kevin Fisher-Paulson has been reading comic books all his life and has amassed thousands of comic books over the years in addition to hundreds of collectible comic book art objects, figurines, ornaments, and outfits for himself, his partner, and their two boys.  Kevin not only reads comic books and collects comic book items; he’s also a lieutenant at a local maximum security facility, holds an M.B.A., is a published author, and has appeared in PBS documentaries and produced radio commentaries for National Public Radio (NPR).  Why are his credentials significant?  Well, because as educators we often brush off children’s interests in non-traditional texts like rap songs, magazines, and comic books as "non-educational" or in some cases even "detrimental" to their personal and academic success.  So, we judge others’ intellectual worth by the books they read and expect that only children who read "enriching" novels and other forms of literature on personally approved lists will be whole and experience successful lives.  NCLB only exacerbates this way of thinking - in which children’s individual differences and ways of learning are overshadowed by a strong drive to create citizens who look and sound the same way and value the same things.  

            Granted, most kinds of text genres contain a handful of pieces that are over-saturated with gratuitous violence or have thin story lines.  But there are also some that are generally of worth.  My friend Kevin acknowledges that some comic books sell gratuitous violence but claims that other comic books have real-life themes worth exploring in a safe, accessible, and digestible format.  Batman’s human fight against evil, he argues, is not unlike what he himself does for a living as a lieutenant in the sheriff’s department.  He says that he even learned to read with comic books.  According to a New York Times article, "Superman Finds New Fans Among Reading Instructors," the Maryland State Department of Education is planning on expanding a literacy program which employs comic books as part of its curriculum after seeing positive results in a pilot program.  Also, educators from Columbia University plan on opening a high school with comic books at the heart of its curriculum and even naming the school after the creators of Superman.  Some skeptics are worried that a curriculum centered around comic books would water down already over-simplified lessons.  However, some proponents argue that the Comic Book Project could really engage students in learning important concepts, especially reading and writing.  I don’t know how I feel about a school centered around comic books and named after the creators of Superman, but I can appreciate a curriculum that honors the things that really engage children in authentic learning, be it Shakespeare or Marvel Comics.  And if comic books can teach kids reading, writing, science, math, and history and help produce successful, thoughtful individuals like my friend Lt. Fisher-Paulson, then more power to them!

A few weeks ago, my nephew was moping around the house, depressed that he wasn’t in the Gifted and Talented Education (GATE) program at his school like his friend Evan.  While my nephew takes "regular" education classes with some honors subjects in middle school, his peers take "accelerated" courses in GATE.  So, he asked me, "Uncle, should I be in GATE to get a good job when I grow up?"  His parents have asked me, "What do you think of these schools/programs for the gifted?"  For me, these are tough and often loaded questions that I’m inclined to avoid like the plague, along with "What religion are you?" and "Do I look fat in this?"

            Questions about "gifted" programs and "tracking" are difficult for me to answer because while I was one of those "minority" kids living in the lower-middle-class socio-economic strata, I also benefited from "tracking" and "gifted" programs.  Tracking is a system of placing students into different class assignments within a school, often according to academic ability.  The idea is that a more homogenous classroom benefits from instruction tailored to the abilities of that particular group of students.  However, researchers have argued that tracking is detrimental to kids in the lower track.  First, lower-track classes tend to be disproportionately composed of low-income minority students while the upper-track classes tend to be populated with higher-income White students.  As such, the differences in racial and socio-economic make-up do not adequately represent the abilities of the students and may create or heighten racial/class tensions within a school.  Furthermore, lower-track classes tend to be taught by less experienced teachers compared with higher-track classes which are taught by a higher caliber of teachers.  Some research has also indicated that those teachers in the lower tracks expected little from their students and rarely employed assignments which required critical thinking skills, while teachers from the upper tracks were enthusiastic about their teaching, expected much from their students, and often assigned challenging work. 

            As a person who benefited from a tracked system of education, it’s hard for me to say that the system didn’t work because it worked fine for me.  I don’t know nor do I want to guess how my educational experience would have looked had I not been in a tracked, "gifted and talented," college prep program.  But then, as an educator who has worked with inner-city schools and children who have had a history of poverty, violence, and racism/classism, it’s hard to endorse tracking when it appears that tracking doesn’t really help learners from these demographics.  My dream is to see kids of different backgrounds and academic abilities co-existing in a classroom in which they all get some sort of individualized support.  And researchers argue that that’s possible!

            If so, according to an article in the Washington Post entitled "‘No Child’ Law May Slight the Gifted, Experts Say," the No Child Left Behind Act, with its widespread focus on increasing test scores and getting all kids to "grade level," leaves behind gifted kids who effectively operate above standard, grade-level expectations.  Because NCLB is centered on helping kids meet minimum standards, some say that the high-ability kids are left behind and aren’t challenged to meet their full learning potential.  In an ideal heterogeneous classroom, instruction would be individualized and differentiated in a way that met the diversity of abilities - to keep all students at their maximum "zone of proximal development."  The problem, according to some education researchers, is that teachers aren’t really differentiating their classroom instruction.  Instead, they are compelled, often by local government mandates, to teach a one-size-fits-all curriculum.  The way I see it, when there isn’t an attempt to explore and capitalize on what makes children unique, "gifted" or otherwise, all children are left behind. 

The caveat, of course, is ensuring that your students are comfortable manipulating numbers before they begin using the calculators.  Once students are comfortable with numeric operations, the calculators can allow them to focus their time and energy on more complex tasks like problem solving.

In a recent article celebrating the birthday of the calculator, Bethlehem (NJ) Area School District Supervisor of Mathematics Julie Victory says, "Calculators actually empower a student.  It allows us to ask a whole different set of questions. Rather than spending hours manipulating numbers at a high school level, we can actually look at things like functions."

The role of the calculator as a tool, and not as a crutch, is a strategic one.  Like any other classroom tool, the calculator has its benefits, but it can be misused as well.  Teachers must know the abilities of their students and choose carefully when to introduce the calculator in classroom instruction.  Further, as calculators become more complex, teachers must know the capabilities of the tool as well.  And as with any tool, previewing is crucial.

Most of us can probably name at least one influential teacher or person who’s acted as an influential teacher to us.  Take a few seconds to think about this....O.K.  Now that you have a name or a face, think of one or two of the attributes that made this person such a positively influential teacher.  Do those attributes sound like these?:  "Passionate about the subject."  "Cared a lot about students."  "Believed in our ability to learn."  "Made learning come to life."  "Helped me find something useful in what I was learning."  "Taught in a way that made learning fun."  "Helped me realize my own potential."   If so, you’re not unlike other children who have encountered a quality teacher like Bonnie Freeman, my fifth grade teacher.  Ms. Freeman really cared about our class.   She talked to us about difficult topics like divorce and death.  She gently told me I could do more when I wasn’t trying my best.  She helped us explore what we were learning in a way that was meaningful to us.  In her hugs, I think she also saw the beautiful individuals we were as kids.  However, she left halfway through our school year.  Rumor had it that she was "encouraged" to resign because she wasn’t exactly following the curriculum that the school demanded she implement.  That was almost twenty-five years ago.  But it doesn’t seem like much has changed.  I know of teacher friends who have chosen to retire or switch careers because they felt like their ability to teach effectively was compromised by government mandates and political pressures which trickled down to the classroom. 

            According to figures released by the United Federation of Teachers in New York City, teacher resignations have increased steadily since 2001.  Not including retirees or teachers with certification problems, in New York City alone, 4,606 certified teachers resigned in 2006 - up from 2,544 in the year 2001.  Furthermore, according to another New York Times article, districts have had to take new legal efforts to remove "...ineffective tenured teachers who, in spite of receiving the time and support sufficient to allow them to substantially improve, won’t or can’t do it."  That’s quite a pinch - ineffective teachers staying, good ones resigning.  Something certainly has to change in the teaching profession and in educational policy.  Otherwise, our children will miss out in the classroom and we’ll hear fewer and fewer stories of those influential teachers who leave a lasting imprint on our children’s lives.