All About Taking Risks

I love my job and I love my school.

Why?

I have a wonderful gift of freedom to allow my creative side shine. Yes, I have to adhere to a curriculum but I do not have to give the same exact assignment as my fellow teachers.

Does this mean that my students may not focus on the same thing as the other freshmen and sophomores in another teacher's English class?

Yes

Is that a bad thing?

No.

With literature, there is so much you can teach that you have to pick and choose the larger picture part which allows for each teacher to teach what they enjoy about the readings from the curriculum and teach it how they want to teach it.

This allows me to use techniques and tools that I believe will reach out to my kids.

In the past, I have used memes, Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, and Pintrest with various degrees of success depending upon the lesson I was trying to have the students learn. Some lessons bombed and didn't do what I thought they would. Others were better than I could ever imagine.

Most recently, I have started having my students blog. With my sophomores, I had them mimic the style of the poems we were reading in class and then, in another unit, write about and reflect upon a particular theme that appears in the novel.

The poems worked fairly well but my sophomores seem to struggle with the reflection aspect. I know they are reading because they have lively discussions in class. The problem seems to be that they are afraid of writing especially when I don't tell them exactly what I want them to write.

This is a constant struggle I have with my sophomores. They are so afraid of being "wrong" that they are afraid of trying. Currently, the use of the blogs is only achieving the goal I want with only a few students.

However, I have faith that if I force them to keep with it, they will finally start to open up and reflect upon everything.

I know this because of my freshmen.

My freshmen were told to reflect upon The Odyssey as we read it in class. They started off timid; not really sure what to write. As time went on, the blog posts got better. They began to rant about Odysseus and the gods. They would try to tackle what they should have done and the motivations behind the characters actions. They well exceeded the 300 word limit and they were wonderful to read. I was (and am) so proud of them. Now, as we read Oedipus, they are much more open about debating in class. The class discussions have gotten better all because they learned to express their feelings through a blog that is not only personal but feels safe since there is no one making faces at them or giggling when they voice their opinion. They gain the confidence they needed to be able to find the excitement in English.

I can never be that teacher that does the same thing over and over and over and over again. I want to be the teacher that takes risks and is constantly trying to find new ways to reach out to their students. Not only do I want to be that teacher that takes risks, but I want other teachers to do the same.

Why?

Because if we all take risks, we'll be more willing to work together and only together can we change the things that we need to change about education.

No Two Children Are the Same - Unless They Are in the Classroom.

I am currently chaperoning a field trip for Model U.N. Since the kids are in session about 90% of the day, I have taken the time to gradeish (def. - getting distracted by TV or the internet while papers are in front of you occasionally being marked).

Needless to say, I have watched A LOT of HGTV and Food Network.

One commercial keeps popping up for Sylvan Learning Center. No matter what kid they choose to use, the story is always the same: the kid is disinterested in school, he goes to Sylvan, and *bam* he becomes interested in school.

After hearing/seeing the commercial so many times, I decided to start actually listening to what they say. The tag line is "Learning should be personal."

They follow a four step program of "Assess - Plan - Teach - Apply" in order to make children actually excited about learning.

There is nothing wrong with this approach. Actually, I love this approach. Asses your student's needs, plan the a lesson best for them, teach the lesson, and then have them apply it so that they can prove they fully understand it. This model assumes no two students are the same which is great!

So why can't we apply it in schools?

Why do schools assume every child is the same? Why do they think that everyone can take the same exact test to prove they know this knowledge? Why must we assume that every child can prove they learned the information the best by taking a test? Why do we assume children all learn the same?

Just because it was the way you learned, doesn't mean it is the way your child learns. Maybe the fact that places like Sylvan exist is not a good thing but a bad thing. We see many disinterested children and automatically assume something is wrong with them since they don't seem to excel in the system that has been virtually unchanged in decades. What if the problem isn't the children but the system? What if the reason they are so disinterested is because the system is failing them?

Why is it, that my grandparents can tell me stories about high school, specifically how they were taught and asked to prove they know the information, and they sound like I could have told them about my high school days?

My generation is different from my grandparents. My students are slowly starting to become less like my generation and more like their own. So why does education assume that each of these generations, with completely different learning styles and lifestyles, can all learn the same way?

Shouldn't we actually take the message of Sylvan and apply it to how we actually teach children? Wouldn't that benefit them for the future and the progression of the world in general?


The answer is yes, we should be changing education and stop forgetting what we did in the past and focus upon what we are going to do in the future. In 100 years from now, hell, in 50 years from now, the world will be a completely different place yet, education will still pretend it is 1973.

Lessons from Feeny: Utilizing Technology

I am currently re-watching the entire Boy Meets World series (thanks to my wonderful boyfriend). If you never saw the show, it is a typical 90's sitcom but better. Yes, it is situation comedy at its best but it does more than that by making sure they tell the coming of age story of Corey and his friends as they go through high school and eventually college.

Somehow, Cory, his friends, and even Corey's older brother Eric, all have the same teacher each year. Mr. Feeny is his name and he is such a great teacher that I want to be him.

No really.

I want to be a Mr. Feeny type of teacher.

Okay, not in the sense of me having the same students year after year, but in his teaching style and what he teaches his students for life outside of the classroom.

I mean look at this awesome speech

(note: Corey, Shawn, and Topanga are on a quiz show that used to be very highly academic and now it is all based upon pop culture)

Later in the episode, the three realize that Feeny is right. That the "information" they are learning isn't very useful to them in the real world.


Now, we could get into a discussion about if students really need to learn about Gutenberg or not but Feeny does bring up an amazing point.

My students know how to use Twitter, SnapChat, Tumblr, and basically every other social network in existence with no problem at all. Yet, when I ask them to do research, they stare at me blankly. They don't know how to utilize the tool given to them in order to enrich themselves. They just know how to make sure their selfie is seen by hundreds of people.

Imagine if they harnessed that power and ability to learn more. Not just learn more about Gutenberg but maybe learn more about the things that interest them (beyond reality TV). I want my students to see their laptops as more than just game centers. I want them to see them as a gateway to learning. I want them to learn about things that will help them like creativity. I want them to imagine and design using the technology they know so well. I want them to better themselves not dumb themselves down.

I want to be like Feeny and teach my students this. I just need to figure out how.

Part 4 of 4: What Does the PISA Report Tell Us About U.S. Education?

Time to tackle the final myth that comes from the PISA

Myth #5: Teachers are overpaid for the amount work they do

First, look at the map and chart below. It is a breakdown of every state's average teacher salary.





As the second chart shows, an average can be totally skewed by a few numbers. 16 out of 51 (because of D.C) pay their teachers higher than the national average so therefore only 31% pay higher. How ridiculous is that?

For the sake of this argument, I'm going to only focus on Virginia since that is where I teach. Virginia has an average salary of $49,869. Let's round up and say that Virginia teachers make $50,000 a year. Now, that is the average salary of all teachers in the state; new, 5 years in, with doctorate, etc. This is not the average starting salary.

In comparison, the median income in VA is $63,636. Let's round that to $64,000. So on average, teachers make $14,000 less than the average Virginian.

"Wait!" people who don't understand how teaching works say. "Teachers only work from the end of August to the beginning of June! Plus they have all of those vacations in the middle! They deserve to make that much. Actually, they are most likely overpaid for the amount of work they do!"

And here is why that argument is crap.

Teachers go back a week before students, so they work 2 weeks in August. They stay roughly a week longer than students so they work 2 weeks into June. So teachers work 9 months of the year in total. We get about a week and half off in the winter and one week for spring break. So that means we work 8 and 1/2 months.

We do technically get off other days, like Memorial Day and Labor Day, but most work places get those days off so it isn't worth considering them in the grand scheme of things. And the days that students have off, the teachers are working so although we are not teaching we are still working. So again, we only get advantage of 2 extra weeks.

This comes up with 34 weeks that we are actually in the school building for 40 hours. That means we are in the building for 1360 hours. A person with a "normal" job (aka one that works 48 weeks), works 1920 hours.

Yes, from that standpoint, teachers are overpaid.

Before you start rejoicing that I just proved this myth to be true, you're forgetting all the extra work teachers do during a week.

I get to work an hour before my contract hours and I stay at least an hour later on a daily basis  including the weeks I don't actually teach (this is normal for teachers. Sometimes it is only after school or only before but we all stay extra time at school). That equals 10 extra hours a week. This brings my total hours to 1700 hours.

Then we have the work we have to do on our own time.

Grading

I grade on the weekends, during commutes, over vacations, while I'm watching sports games, even when I go out to eat. I basically grade whenever I have a spare moment.

Let's look at the amount of grading I did yesterday: I graded one class worth of projects which took me about 2 hours. This is faster than papers which take me about 3 hours per class. I have 6 classes so when I have to grade a paper, it takes me about 12 hours. This is fast because I'm "good" at it now.

I assign two major projects or papers a quarter so, considering some are projects, let's assume I add 20 hours of grading a quarter. There are 4 quarters which means that is an extra 80 hours of work which brings my total up to 1780 hours.

Of course, this is only projects and papers. I also have tests. I usually do some type of short answer on each to truly see if students understand the information. It takes me about an hour per class per test and I give about 3 tests per quarter. That's 18 hours per quarter which is 72 hours total. My total is now 1852.

I also have homework. The amount of hours I spend grading homework per week depends on if I assign reading questions or something more detailed like paragraphs. However, on average, I spend about 2 hours grading homework a week. Since I don't actually give homework 2 of those 34 weeks, I spend a total of 64 hours grading homework. My total is now 1916.

So I'm now short by 4 hours of the 48 week worker.

But I'm still not done.

I need to plan which I can't always complete in my planning period during the day because sometimes I have to meet with other teachers, make copies, or hunt down a student for one reason or another.

On average, I plan an hour a week outside of school. 34 hours, since I plan more during the week before school, added makes my total 1950.

I'm still not done.

I am required to attend parent-teacher conferences and back to school night. Conferences are 2 hours each time, which is 4 hours, and back to school night lasts about 3 hours. So an extra 7 hours. My total is now 1957.

Assuming I'm making $50,000, I am making about $25 per hour. In 34 weeks.

Those that work 48 weeks and make the average $64,000 make about $33 per hour.

I work more hours, for less money, in a shorter amount of time. Yes, I "work" less weeks but usually, teachers do some other type of work over the summer. Last summer I taught summer school and attended an AP certification class. Some teachers work summer camps. Others take classes.

Next time you try and say a teacher rarely works, trying to spend some quality time with them during those 34 weeks that we are "working." My boyfriend will tell you it sucks because I'm always working during that time.

I am sorely underpaid for the amount of work I do.

And now that I've made myself sad due to doing math, I need to get back to grading.

Part 3 of 4: What Does the PISA Report Tell Us About U.S. Education?

I have finally got caught up(ish) with the grading I neglected over break so I'm finally able to take some time to debunking another myth.

Myth #3: The US spends the most on education

The myth, as it reads now, is somewhat correct. We are not the top performer but we are near the top. However, and this is a BIG however, in that same article, it points out that we are the ONLY developed country, and only one of five countries, that have CUT education spending since 2008. The chart below breaks it down for you by state.

Found here

14 states upped their spending on education. Fourteen out of fifty. That is 28% of the states.

This cut in education is HUGE! We have stopped investing in our child's future to save some money. If you know your modern history, you know that 2008 is when the economy started to take a downturn. Our political leaders decided that cutting education funding, which is below 10% of the budget, was the best idea to save money. They are also the same ones that complain about how bad the education system.

Here, have a mirror so you can see part of the problem.

So are we spending more than most countries? Yes.

But, we are no longer finding it worth while to invest in our future. I honestly think this is what the politicians say to our school boards:

 "Make classes smaller, get better teachers, and provide more up to date resources for our students. That will cost $100k but I'll give you $50k. What? You can't get it done? You're horrible at what you do! We need to totally revamp education! You're the source of the problem!"

You want proof they do that? I have four words for you:

No Child Left Behind

The basic idea was that if you performed well you got money. If you didn't perform well, we'll take it away from you and shut it down. Anyone involved in education would tell you this doesn't work by sheer logic. The schools that under perform have a low income level. That means less local taxes are going into the school which means they need more help from the federal government. I know teachers at these schools who are put on a strict copy count due to budge tightening since they lost funding under NCLB.

Luckily, it was realized how dumb this program was so they offered "waivers" but the school of thought still exists. I'll give you four more words to show that:

Race to the Top

Granted, RTTT isn't as bad as NCLB. They don't take away money if you perform badly, they just won't give you extra money. The extra money is only reserved for those schools that increase their scores. If you're a struggling school, you have to increase your scores first and then you'll get the money.

I mean that makes total sense.

The point of this is to show you that I'm not making it up when I say that politicians want million dollar results but don't want to invest the million dollars needed to get those results. The article I linked above said it best:

"When people talk about other countries out-educating the United States, it needs to be remembered that those other nations are out-investing us in education as well," said Randi Weingarten, president of the American Federation of Teachers, a labor union.

So, does the US spend a lot of money on education? Yes

But does the US invest the money needed in education? No

And that is where the real tragedy is.

You can't be a super star at something if you don't put in the required skills needed. In this case, you can't have a top performing education program if you don't invest in it.


Myth #4: US student performance is dropping

This is a quick an easy one. I'm only going to use the PISA results since that is what causes people to complain about all of this.

Are we below the average? Yes

Have we improved since 2003? Yes

Found here

The United States falls in that top left whit area close to the center which means that since 2003, we are still below the average but we have improved.

The report that chart is linked to also shows that not only are we at the middle of the pack over all, we are at the middle of the pack in all economic groups. There has either been an improvement or a minimal change since 2003 in all socioeconomic levels.

Our students are not getting "dumber," our policy makers are. Every test proves that we are staying about the same or slightly improving. 

Can we improve more? Yes

But are we declining? No. Not at all.

Changing It Up

Welcome back from break!

Sorta.

I guess.

I know we could all use some extra sleep.

Still.

Regardless, it is time for me to start teaching again. With my freshmen and sophomores, I'm teaching material that I have taught for the past two years. I know the text like the back of my hand. I have lessons that I know are successful and assignments that I know ensure the students are reading. I should be all set to go.

So why did I decide to change part of one unit and completely redo another?

Because I'm crazy.

No really. Teaching the same thing the same way year after year causes me to get bored and go slightly crazy. I wouldn't be able to put up with that.

I not only do it for my sake but I also do it for my student's.

Teaching the same material year after year is okay. Teaching it the same way is not.

By teaching the same way you're assumimg that every year you'll have the same group of students who learn the same way. Any time spent in the classroom will tell you this isn't true. My first year, my freshmen were pretty good writers but struggled with analysis.  The next year they struggled with both. This caused me to have to change how I taught some things. I had to mold to them.

Yes, I do reuse some things if I can. It does save me time and energy. But, I can't expect to keep everything exactly the same each year. That assumes everyone is the same.

As the teacher, it is my job to mold to the students. Its not their job to mold to me.

Ps..... I'll have part 3 of 4 dealing with PISA will be done this week. Just have to get back into the swing of things.

Part 2 of 4: What Does the PISA Report Tell Us About U.S. Education?

So the other day I decided to tackle the myths that surround education after the results of the PISA came out. There were five major myths that come from this and I tackled one of them in the previous post. (You can read that post here).

Today I wanted to tackle a second myth. Sadly, I cannot do two because I do not have time to do two.

Myth #2: The US has bad teachers

I really hate it when people say this. Usually it is parents who think their child is a little angel and that it must be the teacher's fault that their child is not learning. (hint: Most of the time it is because the child is lazy and doesn't do what they are supposed to at home....so unless I'm following the child home there isn't much I can do about it).


Personal feelings aside, the whole "Fire Bad Teachers!!!!" rant only applies to a small percentage of teachers. However, this very powerful emotion makes many people assume that only 1% of teachers are good with the rest being horrible when in reality, you should flip those numbers.

Most of the time, people scream about this due to test scores; the student's test scores didn't improve or the class average was lower then last year.

The sheer stupidity of this amazes me. Let's take my three sophomore classes I have.

The class average of the most recent paper were:
73%
69%
81%

No, I did not teach the material any differently. It is the make up of students. If those were their standardized test scores, I would have been yelled at my second year and then praised this year. Chances are, the percentage would go down the following year and I would again get yelled at (or it could stay the same which shows I'm "not improving"). Either way it is dumb. My students change every single year. No one student is like the other. You can't expect the same test score from each student when you have other factors to consider (poverty rate, emotional status, hell, if they got enough sleep). There are so many variables that basing a teacher's "goodness" or "badness" off test scores is total crap.



The other reason that the myth is crap is because of this chart.

http://dpeaflcio.org/professionals/professionals-in-the-workplace/teachers-and-college-professors/

How can we constantly have "bad" teachers when ALL teachers need a degree of some sort? Especially when about 50% of those teaching school aged children (aka those not in preschool or kindergarten) have Master's degrees or higher?

Not only that, but it has been proven that students score better on tests when their teacher has a Master's degree Yes, I hate using standardized tests as an argument because, well I'm not fond of standardized tests, but I might as well since the opposing side only uses them as their argument. Might as well use their numbers against them.

http://nationsreportcard.gov/math_2011/

Not only are teacher's getting advanced degrees which help students, they are also required to go through teaching certification process. This usually means getting a degree (either undergrad or grad) in education from an accredited university and having student taught which means they have to successfully prove themselves as teachers before they can get their certification.

None of this is an easy. 

For example, PA has the following requirements in order to get a certification:

1. Hold a Bachelor's Degree: Baccalaureate degree awarded (either prior to admission to the program or as part of the program) or for vocational subject areas, two years of full-time wage earning experience in the area of the certificate requested.
   
2. Completion of an approved program of study leading to certification in the area of certificate requested:
   
• State-approved teacher education program completion, including a supervised student teaching experience, leading to a comparable certificate.
• Affirmation/recommendation of successful completion from the certification officer at the college/university/educational entity on an application form designated by the Bureau or through the Teacher Information Management System (TIMS) for provisioned users in TIMS.
• For active/valid out-of-state instructional certificate holders, with two (2) years of successful classroom experience, program verification will not be needed. A copy of your certificate and verification of the two years of experience will be required.
  
3. Hold a 3.0 Grade Point Average (GPA): A 3.0 overall cumulative GPA as noted on Bachelor's or Master's transcript is required for an initial certificate in Pennsylvania. Active/valid out-of-state instructional certificate holders, with two (2) years of successful classroom experience will not be evaluated for the 3.0 GPA requirement.
   
   The cumulative GPA must be indicated on the college transcript. If it is not indicated on the college transcript, the overall GPA may be supplied in a letter from the college or university for out-of-state applicants. For applicants completing their program through a Pennsylvania entity approved to offer the program, the affirmation/verification should be completed through TIMS.

NOTE: All references to a GPA are relative to a 4.0 scale. Applicants with credits on other scales must have the equivalent GPA.
Please refer to Certification Testing and Scores for further information on GPA.
A list of frequently asked questions regarding the GPA-Praxis testing requirements can be found under Commonly Asked Questions.

4. Successful completion of Pennsylvania required tests: All candidates for certification must meet the qualifying score for all applicable tests at the time their application for certification is received by the Bureau of School Leadership and Teacher Quality. The required tests and qualifying scores may change as tests are reviewed and updated. Additional information regarding test score validity may be found in CSPG 21 - Testing.

Identify the certificate type in which you are interested and then refer to the Testing Requirements by Certificate Type document to identify tests needed.
NOTE:  Active/valid out-of-state instructional certificate holders, with two (2) years of successful classroom experience do not need to take the pre-professional skills test (PAPA), but must complete the content area test for the certification area requested.
Test codes, vendors and cut scores required for certification can be found on theCertification Testing and Scores document.

5. Meet all Pennsylvania requirements related to citizenship, moral, ethical and physical/mental fitness.

You can find more information here (and yes I could talk about the 3.0 and grade inflation but then this post would be much longer than it already is)

Not only do you need this certification, you need this certification for any school you intend to teach in regardless of it is public or private. (if you want to see your state's requirements, click here)

Each state has requirements that are similar to this. These are not easy requirements to meet. Most of the time, they weed out the "bad" teachers especially the student teaching part. Do some bad teachers become teachers? Yes. But I bet you have encountered bad doctors that you think should be fired that haven't yet. 

It happens in every profession. You will never have 100% amazing teachers. However, that doesn't mean that if you encounter one teacher it means they are all bad.

Oh, and for the record, "tenure" isn't the devil here. It doesn't mean a teacher can't get fired. It just means that if they want to fire you, they actually have to have reasons and proof not just a bunch of parents and students complaining the teacher is horrible because the student earned a bad grade. If you think your child has a bad teacher, get proof and once you have proof something can actually be done about it.

Now sadly, I have procrastinated long enough in grading these freshmen exams. More to come in this series after I'm done with grades.

What Does the PISA Report Tell Us About U.S. Education? Part 1 of 4

With exams finishing up and break fast approaching, I finally have time to breathe for a moment and actually discuss the PISA results.

PISA stands for Programme for International Student Assessment (yes, the British version of the word "program") which tests 15 year-old students in reading, writing, and math every three years. The first test was given in 2000 and it scores and ranks roughly 30 countries in these categories. As you may guess, the USA has never been at the top nor have we been at the bottom. Our students score "average" and have been every year. We are at the bottom of the "developed" countries which doesn't make us look good at all.

Test like the PISA are used in the United States to cry out for action to change things by using the same methods we used last time because it has to work eventually!

I wish I was kidding.

This year, Arne Duncan, our Secretary of Education, decided to use these test scores as proof that we need the Common Core standards and evaluations. The evaluation side of this is eerie similar to the ones No Child Left Behind (NCLB) or Race to the Top (RT) implemented. Standardized tests run by publishing and testing companies that, unless you are white and middle to upper middle class, you will struggle with passing.

The PISA has also caused people who know nothing about teaching to come up with ideas that have been tired since 2000 and obviously haven't done jack since our scores have been roughly the same.

Instead of me breaking down the PISA into numbers and facts which, face it, will take the English teacher way too many hours to do, I have linked a video below put together by American Federation of Teachers (AFT). It is a great 5 minute video and not a waste of time if you actually care about education.





If you didn't actually watch the video because you are like my students and would hope I would summarize it for you, you are actually in luck. Below are the 5 things people claim after seeing this report.

1. US student performance is dropping
2. US spends the most on education
3. Teachers are overpaid for the amount of work they do
4. The US does not have good teachers
5. Teachers unions are evil

I actually want to dive deeper into some of these reasons beyond what the video provides which is why I'm splitting up my posts. Over the next week or two, I'll actually do some research on some of these things beyond what the video does and since some I'm a little more passionate about, I'm not doing the reasons in order. So below is the order I'll be handling it with the myths I find the most annoying for last.

1. Teacher unions are evil
2. The US does not have good teachers
3. US spends the most on education
4. US student performance is dropping
5. Teachers are overpaid for the amount of work they do

Myth #1: Teacher unions are evil

To be honest, I do not have much experience with teacher unions. I work in a private school that is in a right-to-work state so there isn't even a union at my school. However, we talked about teacher unions at length during my undergrad program and currently in my grad program (which is filled with teachers that are in unions). I frankly do not have time to do the research required to give you facts that come from other locations besides anti-union politicians and the actual unions themselves. So what I'll give you is my opinion.

Teacher unions are not "evil." The reason why they exist is because people who have zero experience with education think they can run education. Some of these people do so with the best intentions while others seem to just hate teachers (which to me says they had to have been a bad student who thought they were the best thing since sliced bread but in reality weren't but that's another story). If teachers unions weren't there fighting against the NCLB or RT evaluations, we would be even worse off then where we currently are. If you want to stop fighting teacher unions, give education back to the people who know what they are doing. 

"But it is my children so I should have a say!"

Yes, a say. You can voice your ideas and opinions. Teachers work better when parents do this and teachers are able to actually work with the parents. The problem comes in when the "say" becomes the "law." You don't know what you're doing when it comes to teaching. Maybe parenting, but not teaching. So yes, you can give your opinions but when teachers explain why something won't work or fight against the horrible idea, don't sit there and think the teacher is wrong. They have the degree. You don't. You can't always be right.

Teacher unions are only perceived to be "evil" because they have to fight for their rights. Stop treating teachers as sub par and maybe the "power" that teachers unions want/have won't be as high.

The Dangers of Grade Inflation: Not Everyone is Special

Courtesy of Washington Post: Know More

(note: this chart refers to colleges but I promise the same trend is happening in primary and secondary schooling)

According to my school this is what each letter grade stands for:
"A" = Excellent
"B" = Above Average
"C" = Average
"D" = Below Average
"F" = Failing

If "C" is average, shouldn't the majority of students be earning this grade?

The fact that 40% of college students earn "A's" or better worries me. Maybe our students are getting smarter. If they are, shouldn't our schools get more difficult? "A" stands for "excellent." If almost half of our students are "excellent" doesn't that make them almost "average"?

This is the problem with grade inflation. Schools want to claim that their average graduation rate is above a 3.0 so many programs make it so that if you don't get a "B" or better in the class, you can't "pass" the class (this was true of my program). That virtually makes my GPA useless. If you're going to do that, then why claim that a "C" is "average"? Not everyone can be special.

The mentality of "A's" and "B's" being the only acceptable grades is not unique to colleges. I have had students say to me "Man did I fail that test." The apparent "fail" was a grade within the 70's or 80's. I tell them "No, you didn't fail. You just didn't do as well as you wanted to. But you did not fail." Without fail, the response is "Yeah, but you try telling that to my parents."

Parents demand perfection. When their children earn less than an "A" they ask me "What can my child do to earn an 'A'?" I can't just come out and say to them "You're child isn't this amazing student when it comes to English. They are a good person but they aren't going to get an 'A' unless they cheat." It is the facts of life. Not everyone can get an "A" but every parent expects that.

This is attached to the mentality that you should get a trophy for participating because "everyone is a winner." Everyone is a winner, but not everyone is a winner at baseball. Everyone is gifted, but not everyone is gifted in English. We have to stop assuming every child can get an "A" in every single subject. We should start admiring their efforts they put into the grades they do receive and take pride in what they are gifted in. So what if your child can't get an "A" in English? If they worked their butt off and earned a "C" you, as a parent, should be proud. If they are amazing at skateboarding, you should be proud of them for that. If they are amazing at scrap-booking, be proud of them for that. Be proud of them for what they can do, not critical of what they can't.

To fix the obvious issue of grade inflation that the chart above shows, we need to fix our mentality about students. Not everyone is the same. Not everyone can achieve the same goals. We should be proud of our students for what they work hard for. This will take stress of students and allow the world to grow because they will be able to actually focus on what they can do not what they can't.

I Will Not "Get Used to It"

A year ago today 20 young children and six educators lost their lives in a random act of violence. Not only did Sandy Hook effect everyone glued to their TVs but it also impacted every single school in America.

My school decided to have lock down drills and we had meetings on what we as teachers should do if a gunman comes into the buliding.

I have said this 100 times before and I will say it 100 times again: something needs to change because "protector from gunman" should not be in my job description.

Don't get me wrong;  I like to think I would take a bullet for my kids (you never know until you're in the situation) but why do I have to prepare for that?

When I say this to people they respond with something along the lines of "Well that's the world we live in. You just have to get used to it."

You want me to get used to having to deal with random violence? You want my kids have to get used to that?

What type of monster are you?

Violence is something no person should ever have to "get used to." Schools are supposed to be safe. Not filled with lock down drills or armed guards on the property. I've just described a prison.

I don't have the answers or the solution to this problem. All I know is what is currently happening isn't working.  My kids shouldn't be afraid of being shot going to school. They shouldn't have to "get used to it" and I'm sure the teachers at Sandy Hook would agree with me.

Remember the 26 adults and children that lost their lives due to the mentality of "get used to it" and don't let people use that as an excuse for maintaining the status quo.