Student Insight

I need to write about something that is NOT the Coronavirus.  Take a breather, and let me tell you a story about my physics students.

In my honors physics class, we read the book The Pleasure of Finding Things Out, a collection of speeches and essays by renowned physicist (and somewhat cult-figure) Richard Feynman.  When we started doing this, I decided on two things.

1. I didn't want to ask them factual questions about the book.  Rather, I wanted them to reflect on how some of the book's themes play out in the 21st century. 
2. I wanted these conversations to be public, so we use Twitter chats to hold our discussions.  With Feynman being such a well-known figure, I hoped that people would stumble upon the discussion and join in.  That's only happened once so far.  Because the questions aren't just about science, some of my colleagues have joined in, responding sporadically to insights about ethics or learning.

Some of the discoveries I have made as a result of doing this were planned.  Others were accidental.  I knew that if I asked the right questions, I could get deep reflection and insight from my juniors and seniors.  Some examples

• I gave them the Oppenheimer quote ""I am become death, the destroyer of worlds." Then, I asked, "Do you think he was overly dramatic, or was this the correct response?" There were some who interpreted it from a very 2020 perspective, feeling like he was fishing for people to tell him he was wrong. Others said they would have felt the same way, knowing they had invented something so destructive. Others pointed out that Feynman and many of his colleagues entered deep depression after the bomb was used.
• There is a story in the book where Richard Feynman is sent to Chicago to gather information but is not allowed to talk about his Top Secret work and was instructed to lie. I asked, "When he was sent to Chicago, he was instructed to lie in order to get information from people. This atheist said his conscience bothered him. What do you think of that?" While I expected their answers to discuss the ethics of lying and whether it is every okay. (Rahab lied to protect the spies and is praised in Scripture.  Christians lied to Nazis about the Jews they were hiding in their basements.)  I didn't expect an answer that led to the philosophical question of whether we, as humans, have a universal sense of right and wrong.
• Our discussion on the pros and cons of nanotechnology is too long to write about here, but it was quite interesting.
• Last week, I asked "Feynman says, “The imagination of nature is far, far greater than the imagination of man.” He gives a gravity example. What is something in nature that you find astounding because you could not have imagined it?"  I got answers ranging from Yosemite's cliffs to Auroras to snow hanging from tree branches to sunrises. One said that he couldn't wrap his mind around the massive nature of outer space.  One student even said golf courses and clarified that while they were man-made, they "derive their richness from what is already there on the land."
• I also posted, "Feynman observes that a roaring ocean is made of tiny particles all following patterns. How has God made it so that individuals (whether atoms or people) cause a massive outcome no one of them could on their own?"  Answers ranged from blood cells to armies to the wind.  

I didn't expect these exact answers, but I did expect that, if I posed the right questions, I could get deep thought.  What I stumbled upon was that it is a way to make connections on a non-academic level.

• The boy who provided the answer about Yosemite talks about Yosemite a lot.  He's a rock climber, and once he visited Yosemite, it became his dream to climb El Capitan.  I've learned a lot about climbing from him, and, while I'll never climb a rock, I love national parks so we have a basis to share.
• In the first chat we have, I post, "When Feynman describes how molecules make a catastrophe called fire, he is so joyful. Is there any learning that makes you feel joyful like that?"  My intent was that they connect the rest of what Feynman has to say to something they like (because, let's face it, they don't all have a consuming passion for physics).  What I realized the first year while grading these was that I now had a list of my students' passions.  Since physics relates to absolutely everything, I make a list and try to connect practice problems or concept illustrations to the things they love.  This is, of course, easier if they are passionate about cars, golf, or exotic animals than it is if they are interested in politics or economics.

In the past few years, I have found much joy in asking my students open-ended questions, in which the point is less about getting a "right" answer than an interesting train of thought.  What I most love asking is "What's your favorite . . .?  Explain why."  It could be about their favorite thing they have learned in this chapter or what they think is the most interesting thing about the human ear or who their favorite scientist is.  The answers they give to those questions are longer, more interesting, more amusing, and filled with far more information than the answers they give to the standard "explain how this works" questions (I do still ask those when needed because it doesn't make sense to ask them what their favorite thing is about how boats float or what's the most important part of the breathing process).  I find it even more valuable to do this with middle school students because it stretches them past memorizing in a way that doesn't seem scary.  (What 8th grader doesn't want to talk about their favorite things?)

Teachers, I know it can't be every question on every assignment, but try to find ways to allow your students to show their insight, not just their learning.  Even if it is only one question per chapter test, you will find great joy in grading them. 

(And, if I can make just one Coronavirus reference, during these next few weeks when we are all teaching online, these are ways to assess learning at a distance in a way that isn't possible to cheat.)

Teachers Cheating - We Have a Problem

I've been casually following the Georgia teachers cheating scandal the past few days.  A year ago, I think there was a similar story out of South Carolina; so if I get the details mixed up, please forgive me.  As what the industry calls a "veteran teacher," I am horrified by just about every part of these stories.  I almost can't organize my thoughts because I have so many.  This blog is really serving more to help me sort out my own thoughts than to enlighten anyone.  Join in my thoughts at your own risk.

First thought - every study in the known universe says that standardized tests do not show student learning in any kind of meaningful way.  Whether it be Stanford Achievement Tests, State End of Course Tests, or some kind of Common Core / No Child Left Behind federal nonsense, all of these tests can only test the lowest possible levels on Bloom's taxonomy - Remembering.  They do not test a student's ability to apply, analyze, synthesize, evaluate, create, collaborate, or innovate - you know the important stuff we really want them to learn.  They test their ability to remember factual information.  If your child's teacher cares about education, they are teaching them on much higher levels than these tests can possibly evaluate.  Remembering is important, but it hardly seems like what a student should be evaluated on, much less their teacher or their school.

That brings me to my second thought.  I'm in favor of evaluating teachers on their merit, but the scores on a standardized test that only evaluate a students lowest level thinking skills is not the way to determine the merit of a teacher.  Government schools are using this method because it is the easiest method, not the best.  To connect the salary of a teacher to these scores alone is insane.  Here are some examples of why.
1.  When I taught in public school, I taught courses called "basic skills" courses.  That meant about 30% of my students had special needs and were on IEP's.  The teacher next door to me taught honors courses, so about 3% of her students were on IEP's, and a few of those were for high IQ programs.  Our students were given the exact same End of Course test.  Was it really expected that my students would achieve the same scores?  Some of her kids could have made the 99th percentile without having taken the class.
2. There are students who care so little about these tests that they fill in C for every question and then take a nap; that cannot possibly be how you want to evaluate whether that teacher deserves a raise. 
3.  When I taught in public school, I had students who spent the weekend in jail right before taking these tests.  Can we expect a teacher, no matter how great he or she is, to affect the outcome of that student's score?
4.  The same tests is given to students who speak almost no English and native speakers.  Do we penalize the teacher whose students have a hard time understanding the question?  Should she have also taught them to comprehend written English while she was teaching them biology?

The stakes are getting even higher (which is the only explanation I have for administrators getting in on the cheating).  Now, the existence of an entire school might be entirely dependent on how students score on these tests.  The school in a district with a lot of kids at risk for hunger might not be able to exist because its students were to hungry to focus on test questions.  The school in a high crime area might be shut down because students don't care enough about the test to answer the questions with anything more than random letters (or spell out curse words in the bubbles).  These are the areas where the schools are most needed.  Clearly, there is a problem with using the "easy method" of evaluating the people who choose to teach in these most difficult of circumstances.

All of this said, I do not give these teachers any kind of pass for the horrible example they have set for their students.  There is NO EXCUSE for any teacher ever cheating.  We are here to teach them far more than what is on these tests.  We are here to model ethics, responsibility, and citizenship.  We are here to teach them that no matter what the pressures, honesty is non-negotiable.  We teach 24/7/365, and they are ALWAYS watching.  Everything we do teaches them something, and these teachers have taught that a lack of integrity is okay as long as you feel pressured.  What does integrity mean when you aren't under pressure?  If you can't keep your integrity under pressure, please don't choose education as a career. 

In last year's story out of South Carolina, teachers were gathering together in the teacher's lounge with erasers and pencils.  They were holding "erasing parties!"  This. Is. Horrifying.  I can almost see how one teacher, alone in their classroom, could talk themselves into crossing this line, thinking no one would know.  I can almost see a teacher trying to help a kid out while they are taking the test with a hint in the direction of the correct answer.  It's still wrong, but I can see how it could happen.  I cannot fathom what makes a group of educators (including their boss, who should be an additional model of ethics) collectively check their morality at the door.  Was there no one feeling uncomfortable?  Was there no one who said, "Guys, I don't think this is okay"?  For everyone to do this, there had to be some kind of communication.  Was there an e-mail or an announcement, telling teachers to bring their erasers to a meeting?  How can a group of people decide to do this?

We clearly have a problem.  What do we do to solve this problem?  I'm not sure.  I do know that merit needs to be tied to something besides test scores.  I do know that kids need to be taking fewer standardized tests, so there can be time for the more important things.  I do know that teachers who cheat should never be back in the classroom.  I do not know how to make those things happen.