Should Teachers Profit From Their Lessons?

I just read a New York Times article - Selling Lessons Online Raises Cash and Questions.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/15/education/15plans.html?_r=2&hp

Three thoughts immediately came to my mind:

1. We live in the United States - it is a capitalist country, where the marketplace decides if a product is worth the exchange of currency.
2. Teachers spend too much time and money on canned teaching strategies that worked in one setting, but likely won't in all settings (including the setting of the purchasing teacher).
3. Why would school districts / Boards of Education be worried about teachers selling their own ideas?

Let me pontificate on each as quickly as possible - just to raise questions and discussion.

Item #1-Capitalism

Teachers could be the most creative people on the planet if allowed to be so.  In the era of standards, and data-driven-decision-making any creativity they have is being effectively squelched.  "Stop that independent thinking!" says the DOE. "By golly, we'll tell you what is worth knowing for your students; because you really have no idea on your own.  Additionally, we'll judge your effectiveness as a teacher based not on what you do, but on what your students do with the material we say is important for them on a single day of the year.  Teacher, you are our middle-man of indoctrination."

Oops. Sorry. Didn't mean to get so blunt.

Just because a public school teacher works for the government does not mean they shouldn't be allowed to participate in the economic system of the nation.  Teachers work at department stores, restaurants, paint houses, and do yard work to make ends meet.  But if it is true that one learns more by teaching, then wouldn't it make sense that trying to teach other teachers would make one an even better teacher?

Oooo.  Philosophy.

Item #2-Canned Curriculum

Can lightening strike twice? Could what Erin Gruwell (Freedom Writers) be reproduced?  Perhaps, but it probably worked for Ms. Gruwell because the timing and setting was just right for her and the students she had.  Can I learn something from what she did? Absolutely.  But could I do what she did? Not me.  Her gifts and talents are different than mine.  Could she do what I do? Maybe, but I doubt it.

In the above paragraph you can replace Erin Gruwell with Mr. Holland, Rafe Esquith, Ron Clark, Louanne Johnson, or even John Keating (Dead Poets Society), or any of the thousands of other miracle workers in our profession.

Canned curriculum, whether from a big-time publishing house or an individually great teacher, is still canned.  It will not work for you the way it worked for them.  Don't expect the same results.  Teaching is still more about personality, interaction, and human connection than about content, methods, and standards.  That does not mean the later is not important, but without the former, the later doesn't really matter much to students.

Item #3-The Reason for Worry

Do BOEs and School Districts oppose the idea of teachers selling their material because they think they "own" what is delivered in a classroom setting?  If so, that reaks of indoctrination as the goal of education.  So that can't be the reason.

Do BOEs and School Districts oppose the idea of teachers selling their material because they think the teacher is slacking on the district's dollar?  Teachers don't have the time while in the school to write anything worth selling.  They likely do this at home, while on break, and during the summer.  Again, this practice would likely make the teacher a better teacher for the district that may be seeking to ban the activity of personal profit.  So it seems to me that the district would encourage such behavior, unless of course it would reflect poorly on the district is the material was made public and people could really see what was going on in their classrooms, or if it revealed that the teachers required extra compensation (due to furloughs and budget cuts) to make ends meet.  This could be the reason, but probably not.

Do BOES and School Districts oppose the idea of teachers selling their material because they think some publishing company might sue them for copyright violations? Now we might be getting somewhere.  When money becomes an issue, the districts and boards perk up. So there is a possible/probable reason for concern.

Perhaps someone in district administration wants to use the ideas of the teachers for their own advantage.  When they retire (in their early-to-mid 50s) with a resume including district administration positions, it becomes easier for them to become a consultant. Or perhaps the district seeks to be a "pilot program" school and can get "compensated" for helping a college/professor/publisher become rich. No potential conflict of interest there, huh? Not that any of us have seen this happen, but it could; so that might be a reason.

All the above ideas are so 20th century.  In the 21st century, if I were one to oppose teachers selling their lesson plans and ideas, my concern would be competition.  Public schools have battled and belittled homeschooling, religious schools, private schools, and anything else that would create competition and comparison.  In the 21st century, I can envision great teachers creating their own global classrooms.  An organization that would market itself to parents around the world, charge a tuition, and then provide parents with a list of specially qualified instructors (from across the world) to choose from to teach their child. Talk about a true International Baccalaureate diploma.  The Course Management Software is already available, the teachers already exist, the marketplace is developing. I could even see Bill Gates, Warren Buffett and others providing scholarships for families unable to pay the tuition. This competition for the minds of students will become increasingly prolific in the 21st century.  We have made the statement to cause this to happen - "We are educating students for a future we do not see."

Posted via email from Murry's World

On Becoming a Good Teacher

Perhaps I should use the term "lecturer," but that is not a highly accepted practice in the 21st century.

Many of you know, my son is entering his final year of teacher prep.  He's a good, quality young man (who will be getting married in June 2009).  He will become a good teacher I think, mainly because he has the personality, and the ability to teach math in ways that even I understand some of it.

Anyway, I have been cleaning out my home office to take things back to school (I head back to the classroom next year!).  In the process, I have come across some old notes and books.  So I am creating a list of things that are a part of what I believe make for a good teacher (lecturer in the days these books/notes were new).

• HAVE SOMETHING TO SAY
• If you want to teach, you better be a great learner.  Learn your subject.  Fall in love with the content.  As an old homiletics professor once told us, "Preach from the overflow."  As the leader (in the pulpit or classroom) you should know more than you are able to teach.  Will you know everything?  No.  But you should know your content well enough to be prepared to speak intelligently about it.  This way you are seldom caught off guard.
• KNOW HOW TO SAY IT...WHO'S YOUR AUDIENCE?
• Teaching civil rights to a 2nd grader will be different than teaching it to an 11th grader...or it should be.  In this era of "differentiated instruction" it behoves the teacher to have several ways to present the same content.  If you know your content, but can't deliver it on the level of the learner, then it doesn't matter that you know the content.  It is about the story, and the way you tell it.
• EARN THE RIGHT TO BE HEARD BY YOUR AUDIENCE
• Clche, yes.  True, yes.  Your audience doesn't care how much you know until they know how much you care.  If you have a class of 25 students, you will have to care about them first.  They must know, and to a deeper level believe that you care for their well-being.  When they know that you care, they will trust you.  Then they will be more willing to "hear" your message, not just listen to it.  Remember the Jimmy Hendrix dialog in White Men Can't Jump?  Can white people really "hear" Jimmy? [This movie was as much about race relations as it was basketball.  Great Social Studies movie. Language prevents it from being shown in classrooms though.]
• SAY IT WITH PASSION
• I recently read a quote in one of my quotation feeds that went something like this - "Passion is a mixture of frustration and a healthy dose of anger."  Think of the issues about which you are passionate.  Is there frustration that more people don't share your views?  Is there a little anger about the state of affairs surrounding the issue?  If you are passionate about the education of young people, you probably feel a little frustrated with the current state of policy, and you are a little angry that things don't change as quickly as you would like.  The bloggers I read tend to be this way.  They are passionate, which is why I choose to follow them.
• EVALUATE THE RESULTS
• All good teachers evaluate their day.  I try to do it on the drive home.  What worked?  Did I see the light bulb go on above my students' heads?  If not, what do I need to change?  Do I change my knowledge of the issue?  Do I change how to communicate it to my students?  Did I earn the right to communicate with the students the things discussed?  Did I really care, or was i just going through the motions?
• CHANGE ONLY WHAT NEEDS CHANGING
• Too many teachers I have known (and C.O. personnel with whom I have worked and outlasted) believe that if something didn't work, everything must be changed.  I disagree.  Could it be as simple as changing one thing in the scope of the many things it takes to communicate to a 21st century student?  Things that might need to be changed include: a) The teacher's knowledge of the subject, b) The teacher's understanding of the audience's needs, c) The teacher's relationship with the audience, and/or d) The teacher's presentation of the material.  See my evaluation questions above.  If all I need to change is my knowledge of the subject, issue, standard, etc., it would be a shame to scrap the whole thing. 
  

What led me to this post was finding Robert Mager's Preparing Instructional Objectives (1962, 1975 - and updated in 1997) and comparing it with Wiggins & McTighe's Understanding By Design (1998, 2005).  Teaching strategies really haven't changed much.  It appears that Wiggins & McTighe simply waited long enough for educators to forget about Mager (and others).  In other words, Wiggins & McTighe had something to say, they knew their audience's needs, and the said it with passion.  Good for them!  In doing so, educators around the world have relearned how to write lesson plans that make sense.  But UbD is nothing new.  As a matter of fact, it's already 10 years olds itself.  Who will be next to demonstrate how to construct a lesson plan?

Image: http://flickr.com/photos/foundphotoslj/466713478/in/set-72157594578266103

Blogged with the Flock Browser