Hello everyone,
I thought it would be interesting for you to see a discussion on a management problem in group work. A teacher wrote a general email (posted below), and two friends from around California posted their responses (below that).
To: Combe, Jeffery
Subject: STUDENTS EJECTING OTHER STUDENTS FROM WORK GROUPS
Dear Dr. Combe:
My ... class is examining Federalism. The students are separated into six different groups of their own choosing to reenact several different landmark cases having to do with Federalism... McCullah v. Maryland...etc. Each student is assigned a role that is relevant to his case. However, after two days of researching the various articles and amendments of the U.S. Constitution as well as other relevant concepts and vocabulary terms that pertain to these cases, several students from one group complained that they were doing all the work while others were doing nothing. They are being graded individually; however, some students must rely on others to carry out their own roles; some of the roles are [inter]-dependent.
If the students whom they must rely on do not carry their weight... it may have an impact on both students' grades, not just the student who is not doing the work. Therefore, the majority of (hard-working) students in one group asked me to eject a couple of students from their group for not researching the case. What is the secondary lesson that I should teach here? That
sometimes we have to pick up the slack of others who are too lazy to carry their own weight-- helping them as best as possible in the process--or [that we should] eject the slackers who do not contribute to the overall productivity of the group? The students want to eject the slackers. Should I let this happen?
* On a personal note, I want to give the hard workers what they are asking for... booting the slackers out of the group and into their own group or by giving them an option to do a smaller project on their own. However, I do not want to psychologically harm a child by ejecting him (publicly) from a group... especially if that student needs extra help. Pushing these students
away... isolating them... may be detrimental to their psychological health and non-conducive
to learning. However, leaving them in the group will slow down the learning process for the entire class.
Response #1
MERCY TO THE SLACKERS
NO! They picked the groups, you didn't. Life is about picking up after slackers. You can grade in such a way that the slackers suffer in many ways, including via their grade on the project. If the slackers don't kick in, they get a zero, while the others get credit for "covering" and picking up the extra load. A good lesson to the slackers and a good lesson about life to the
others . . . there will always be those who don't carry their own weight. Always. On the next project, put all the slackers in one group to work together. What a life lesson for them! You'll see if they learned anything from the process.
Funny you should have this problem. I was just discussing this very thing
earlier this week with a co-worker. . . same issues. She didn't eject the
slackers, either, for the same reason I told you. It's a valuable life lesson.
Response #2
"JUSTICE" FOR THE HARD WORKERS
My vote is... let them eject the slackers! In the real world if you do a crappy job you get fired; in school if you do a crappy job, some more motivated kid does the work for you lest their own grade is affected.
I've been dealing with this for decades! Some teachers give 2 grades, one for individual effort and performance and one for the group. At least this acknowledges each individual student's efforts.
I always hated group work because I always did the work. My kids had the same experiences. Yes, it does teach some to help others; [my daughter] helped a lot of kids that weren't even in her classes! However, it also creates disharmony between students. Next time, maybe you should have the students draw up and sign group contracts. Any who break the contract get poor grades.
"Forewarned is forearmed!"
COMBE'S FINAL REPLY:
BOTH ANSWERS ARE VALID, ALONG WITH IMPLIED AND STATED VARIATIONS OF EACH ANSWER. DECIDE WHAT YOU WANT TO HAVE REINFORCED (FOR EXAMPLE, PICK UP THE SLACK VS. FULL ACCOUNTABILITY), THEN PROCEED. PROCEED FROM A PLAN, NOT FROM FEAR.
AS IT IS WITH MANY THINGS IN EDUCATION, THINKING THROUGH THE POSSIBLE RAMIFICATIONS HELPS TO MITIGATE POSSIBLE NEGATIVE ASPECTS, BUT THERE ARE ALWAYS CONSEQUENCES BOTH NEGATIVE AND POSITIVE OF ALMOST EVERYTHING WE DO. HUMANS ARE TOO COMPLEX TO HAVE A ONE-SIZE-FITS-ALL APPROACH TO THEIR EDUCATION.
AS TO THE QUESTION OF PSYCHOLOGICAL DAMAGE: I'VE NEVER KNOWN ANYONE TO BE PERMANENTLY DAMAGED BY ONE CLASSROOM EXPERIENCE (ASSUMING THAT THE EXPERIENCE WASN'T ILLEGAL). I HAVE, HOWEVER, KNOWN SOME VERY FRAGILE STUDENTS THAT NEEDED INTENSE GUIDANCE THROUGH DIFFICULT EXPERIENCES. IF YOUR STUDENTS NEED GUIDANCE, GIVE IT, BUT DON'T BE AFRAID TO HAVE A PLAN WITH CONSEQUENCES.
JEFF COMBE
Friday, September 28, 2007
Wednesday, September 26, 2007
Groups
Hello everyone,
There are a variety of ways of having students work together. They may work in pairs (assigned or ad hoc); they may be in small groups (reciprocal learning groups or cooperative learning, both assigned and ad hoc); they may work on projects as groups of varying sizes (assigned or ad hoc); they may meet as study groups outside class (also assigned or ad hoc).
There are also a variety of reasons for having students work in groups. Current thinking is that, since they want to socialize anyway, we ought to make their socialization work for their education. Sometimes they are doing things in class that require them to work in groups (experiments, some performances, editing groups, sports).
You may have more than one way of assigning whom they work with and how they work. They may partner up according to the seating chart; you might assign them according to ability (matching high with low, for example); they may choose to work with their friends; you may assign them completely at random; they may choose numbers and you match them according to number.
You have a wide variety of choices to make on how large to make the groups. Everything from two to half the class can work.
Having the students work in a group is a useful tool, but you have to know how to use it to have it be most effective. Even so, don't be afraid to experiment.
The larger the group, the more necessary it becomes to appoint a leader of the group. Give the leader extra credit (if necessary) for the extra work required; always do your work through the leader or the leader's appointed representative. (This strengthens the leader and gives you relief from many administrative headaches.) Your leaders can gather supplies, suggest individual grades in the group, delegate assignments, control behavior, and explain content--or delegate any of those things to someone else. Leaders may be chosen by the group, by the teacher, or by random. Have an alternate for days when the leader is absent.
Decide if everyone in the group gets an individual grade or a group grade, then decide how to keep everyone accountable for the grades.
You may use fixed groups--unchanging for the entire year--, or you may use a variety of different groups over the course of the year.
Tomorrow, we'll treat some special problems in group work.
Jeff Combe
There are a variety of ways of having students work together. They may work in pairs (assigned or ad hoc); they may be in small groups (reciprocal learning groups or cooperative learning, both assigned and ad hoc); they may work on projects as groups of varying sizes (assigned or ad hoc); they may meet as study groups outside class (also assigned or ad hoc).
There are also a variety of reasons for having students work in groups. Current thinking is that, since they want to socialize anyway, we ought to make their socialization work for their education. Sometimes they are doing things in class that require them to work in groups (experiments, some performances, editing groups, sports).
You may have more than one way of assigning whom they work with and how they work. They may partner up according to the seating chart; you might assign them according to ability (matching high with low, for example); they may choose to work with their friends; you may assign them completely at random; they may choose numbers and you match them according to number.
You have a wide variety of choices to make on how large to make the groups. Everything from two to half the class can work.
Having the students work in a group is a useful tool, but you have to know how to use it to have it be most effective. Even so, don't be afraid to experiment.
The larger the group, the more necessary it becomes to appoint a leader of the group. Give the leader extra credit (if necessary) for the extra work required; always do your work through the leader or the leader's appointed representative. (This strengthens the leader and gives you relief from many administrative headaches.) Your leaders can gather supplies, suggest individual grades in the group, delegate assignments, control behavior, and explain content--or delegate any of those things to someone else. Leaders may be chosen by the group, by the teacher, or by random. Have an alternate for days when the leader is absent.
Decide if everyone in the group gets an individual grade or a group grade, then decide how to keep everyone accountable for the grades.
You may use fixed groups--unchanging for the entire year--, or you may use a variety of different groups over the course of the year.
Tomorrow, we'll treat some special problems in group work.
Jeff Combe
Tuesday, September 25, 2007
Learn the names
Hello everyone,
For those of you starting A-track or traditional calendar, there are a couple of things I would like to say.
First, I cannot overemphasize the importance of memorizing all of your students' names. This is usually easier if your students have been sitting in a consistent location every day, but it's possible (if you're really good) with the kids moving around. (If you aren't following my tone here, you won't see that I admit that it's possible, but I don't advise it. I recommend a permanent seating chart.)
I found that I could memorize all of the names of all my students within three weeks, and within six weeks, I could recognize most of my students outside class and call most of them by name. I sometimes struggled at the first back to school night, but if I could get a handle on where someone sat, I could usually remember a lot about the student.
The second thing I want to say is related to the first.
You will find that the names of your most (shall we say) flamboyant students are the easiest to remember, especially at first. Those students who misbehave the most--especially when the misbehavior is particularly outrageous--are the ones whose names you will call on most frequently, and that repetition will help you to remember them.
Likewise those outstanding students who enthusiastically jump into your subject and want to know the answers to everything you teach: you will learn their names quickly.
The secret is to know ALL your students, including the quiet, average kids who don't distinguish themselves in any way. Know them. Don't let them slip through the cracks.
Also, watch out for those quiet students who are covering up for gross deficiencies in their education. These are the ones who would never misbehave, and would likely never volunteer, and maybe have no clue whatsoever about what you're teaching. Don't overlook them. If there is an RSP teacher in your room, send the RSP teacher to help these students; they are prime candidates for quiet, individual help and attention.
Research shows what we have known all along in our souls: the best teaching occurs in an environment of nurturing and mutual trust, and that begins by knowing the name.
For those of you starting A-track or traditional calendar, there are a couple of things I would like to say.
First, I cannot overemphasize the importance of memorizing all of your students' names. This is usually easier if your students have been sitting in a consistent location every day, but it's possible (if you're really good) with the kids moving around. (If you aren't following my tone here, you won't see that I admit that it's possible, but I don't advise it. I recommend a permanent seating chart.)
I found that I could memorize all of the names of all my students within three weeks, and within six weeks, I could recognize most of my students outside class and call most of them by name. I sometimes struggled at the first back to school night, but if I could get a handle on where someone sat, I could usually remember a lot about the student.
The second thing I want to say is related to the first.
You will find that the names of your most (shall we say) flamboyant students are the easiest to remember, especially at first. Those students who misbehave the most--especially when the misbehavior is particularly outrageous--are the ones whose names you will call on most frequently, and that repetition will help you to remember them.
Likewise those outstanding students who enthusiastically jump into your subject and want to know the answers to everything you teach: you will learn their names quickly.
The secret is to know ALL your students, including the quiet, average kids who don't distinguish themselves in any way. Know them. Don't let them slip through the cracks.
Also, watch out for those quiet students who are covering up for gross deficiencies in their education. These are the ones who would never misbehave, and would likely never volunteer, and maybe have no clue whatsoever about what you're teaching. Don't overlook them. If there is an RSP teacher in your room, send the RSP teacher to help these students; they are prime candidates for quiet, individual help and attention.
Research shows what we have known all along in our souls: the best teaching occurs in an environment of nurturing and mutual trust, and that begins by knowing the name.
Thursday, September 20, 2007
An exhange about some problem students
I received an email from a middle school teacher. I present our exchange below with the teacher's permission:
Don't worry. We all go through this--especially with middle schoolers. (Right this minute, I'm typing this as a former middle school student of mine, now a substitute teacher, is sitting in front of me. This, too, shall pass.)
I have some suggestions in CAPS below, but I want to give some general philosophical ideas first: 1. Never do more than is necessary to get them to behave.
2. Let them hate you if they want, but make them behave while they do it. (Actually, they'll probably come around before the end of the year unless they have some extremely serious problems.)
3. Make the consequence (educators hate the word "punishment," but we can understand it if we want; I like the word "consequence," but I am willing to acquiesce to the idea that occasionally consequences may be close to punishment; I prefer that consequences be related to the action, and that's what distinguishes them from punishment for me) that they receive for their misbehavior be generally harder on them than it is on you.
4. Avoid showing your feelings. THIS IS VERY IMPORTANT. Be cold if you need to be, but don't show your feelings to the misbehavers.
5. Generally avoid making specific threats. Non-specific threats are better. ("What will you do about it?" or "What will happen to us?" they may ask. "Whatever gets you to stop," you reply. "If what I do doesn't work, I'll do something slightly harder until I find what works for you." Or, you say, simply, "I'll decide later.") If you are too specific, they weigh cost/benefits, and you usually lose. Their imagination is worse than anything you can do, anyway.
The rest is below
-----Original Message-----
To: Combe, Jeffery
Subject: some problem students
I am having some problems in particular with several girls in my [last] class. Do you have any suggestions?
[THE LAST] PERIOD SHOULD BE EASY TO KEEP AFTER SCHOOL. GENERALLY, YOU MAY RETAIN STUDENTS FOR UP TO 15 MINUTES WITHOUT PARENT APPROVAL. FIVE MINUTES IS USUALLY ENOUGH FOR 7TH GRADERS. (THEY'LL ARGUE WITH YOU ABOUT IT, BUT WHEN YOU POINT OUT TO THEM THAT YOU CAN KEEP THEM FOR 15 MINUTES WITHOUT APPROVAL, THEY GIVE UP. WITH APPROVAL, YOU MAY KEEP THEM AS LONG AS THE PARENTS ALLOW, THOUGH ONE HOUR IS STANDARD.) I RECOMMEND MAKING THEM SIT SILENTLY AND POLITELY; DON'T TIME THEM UNTIL THEY ARE SILENT AND POLITE. IF THEY BREAK IT BEFORE THE TIME IS UP, START OVER. (I USED THAT TECHNIQUE WITH MIDDLE SCHOOLERS.)
BE READY TO KEEP THEM EVERY DAY UNTIL THE BEHAVIOR STOPS. IT MAY TAKE A WEEK OR MORE.
ADD MINUTES FOR FURTHER MISBEHAVIOR. DON'T PROMISE TO TAKE MINUTES AWAY, THOUGH YOU MAY DO IT. DON'T SAY WHY, IF YOU DO; JUST LET THEM GO WHEN YOU'RE SATISFIED.
I have documented everything, and today was the last straw on misbehavior. I am calling home to 2 parents, but the third does not speak English.
CALLING THE PARENTS SHOULD BE AN EARLY INTERVENTION--ONE OF THE FIRST THINGS YOU DO. USE IT TO GET PERMISSION TO KEEP THEM FOR LONGER PERIODS, IF NECESSARY. SOME MIDDLE SCHOOL TEACHERS ASK THE PARENTS TO COME AND SIT IN CLASS WITH THEIR CHILDREN. IT'S A VERY EFFECTIVE TECHNIQUE AND NEVER HAS TO BE DONE MORE THAN TWICE--RARELY MORE THAN ONCE A YEAR.
THERE IS NO REQUIREMENT TO TELL THE STUDENTS THAT YOU ARE CALLING THEIR PARENTS, BUT IF YOU TELL THEM, YOU MUST MAKE THE CALL. NEVER SAY YOU'LL DO IT WITHOUT DOING IT.
THE SCHOOL HAS BILINGUAL AIDS THAT WILL MAKE THE CALL FOR YOU IF YOU WANT. ASK THE MAIN OFFICE. IF YOU HAVE ANY TROUBLE, OR IF YOU DON'T WANT TO WAIT, CALL ME AT 213-200-9192, AND I'LL MAKE THE CALL (I'M FLUENT IN SPANISH).
I have even moved them, and they call me names (such as crazy) or use foul language when I ask them to do something (such as GOD DAMMIT WHY?). I know we are hinted not to send them out of the room, but it is as if I am clamping down they just get worse.
STATE LAW PROVIDES FOR A CLASSROOM SUSPENSION. YOU MAY HAVE A CHILD REMOVED FROM YOUR CLASSROOM FOR THE REMAINDER OF THE DAY AND ALL THE FOLLOWING DAY. YOU ARE REQUIRED TO CONTACT THE PARENTS AND HAVE A CONFERENCE WITH THEM (OVER THE PHONE IS USUALLY ACCEPTABLE, BUT IN PERSON IS BETTER). WHEN STUDENTS CALL YOU NAMES OR REPEATEDLY USE FOUL LANGUAGE OR ARE "WILLFULLY DEFIANT OF VALID AUTHORITY," YOU MAY SUSPEND THEM. BE CAREFUL TO WORD YOUR REFERRALS WELL. DON'T GIVE TOO MUCH INFORMATION--JUST GIVE ENOUGH. IF "REPEATEDLY" DESCRIBES THE BEHAVIOR, THEN YOUR REFERRAL IS SELDOM QUESTIONED. "OPENLY DEFIANT" ALSO.
IT IS TRUE, HOWEVER, THAT IT IS BEST NOT TO SEND THEM OUT--NOT BECAUSE OF ADMINISTRATIVE DISAPPROVAL, BUT BECAUSE THE STUDENTS FREQUENTLY CONSIDER IT A MATTER OF HONOR TO BE KICKED OUT. THEY BELIEVE THEY HAVE BEATEN YOU WHEN YOU KICK THEM OUT, AND IT'S OFTEN A MIXED BLESSING AT BEST.
However, I am afraid they are going to run me over if I let this continue.
YOU'RE CORRECT. AS BAD AS IT IS NOW, IT WILL BE MUCH WORSE LATER, AND THEY WILL RECRUIT OTHERS TO JOIN THEM. YOU OWE IT TO THE GOOD STUDENTS TO CONTROL THESE GIRLS.
I am in tears after I type this, and I haven't been this way for 5 years.
BELIEVE ME, I KNOW HOW YOU FEEL, EVEN THOUGH I'M A GUY.
They also lied ... and said i was a liar...etc.
IT'S A COMMON TECHNIQUE OF THE STUDENTS. OFFENSE IS THE BEST DEFENSE. TELL THEM YOU WILL DISCUSS IT AFTER SCHOOL, THEN (AFTER SCHOOL), TELL THEM YOU WILL DISCUSS IT IF THEY WANT TO STAY AFTER THEIR PRESCRIBED TIME OF DETENTION.
OR TELL THEM TO HAVE THEIR PARENTS CALL YOU, AND YOU WOULD BE PLEASED TO DISCUSS IT.
DON'T LET IT BOTHER YOU THAT THEY CALLED YOU A LIAR, BUT DON'T LET IT GO WITHOUT A CONSEQUENCE ("WE'LL DISCUSS IT AFTER SCHOOL" IS USUALLY SUFFICIENT). YOU MIGHT REQUIRE THEM TO WRITE A NARRATIVE ESSAY ABOUT WHAT HAPPENED, TO BE INCLUDED IN THEIR GRADE.
They make gestures behind my back and refuse to work.
WE MAY DISCUSS YOUR POSITION IN THE CLASSROOM TO PREVENT THEIR BEING "BEHIND YOUR BACK." DO THEY SIT IN THE VERY FRONT? THAT WAY, YOU CAN BE BEHIND THEIR BACKS, AND IT'S INCONVENIENT FOR THEM TO MISBEHAVE WITHOUT CONSTANTLY LOOKING AROUND TO SEE WHERE YOU ARE.
YOU CAN'T FORCE STUDENTS TO WORK. YOU CAN MAKE IT UNCOMFORTABLE FOR THEM NOT TO WORK. WHEN MY STUDENTS REFUSED TO WORK, I WOULD NOT ALLOW THEM TO DO ANYTHING ELSE AT ALL. (THEY CLEARED THEIR DESKS COMPLETELY AND WERE NOT ALLOWED TO EVEN JOIN THE DISCUSSIONS FOR AT LEAST A DAY. IT WAS SO BORING, THEY USUALLY GAVE UP AND JOINED US THE NEXT DAY.) YOU MAY REQUIRE THEM TO HAVE THEIR WORK DONE CORRECTLY BEFORE THEY CAN BE EXCUSED. YOU MAY REQUIRE THEM TO STAY AFTER AND MAKE UP FOR THE TIME THEY WASTED IN CLASS.
I sent one girl next door because I just had to get them completely away from each other and out of the same room.
IF YOUR NEIGHBOR AGREES, THIS IS A USEFUL TECHNIQUE TO USE OCCASIONALLY.
Please send any suggestions you have.
Thank you!
I HOPE THE FEW SUGGESTIONS I GAVE ARE USEFUL. IF NOT, THERE ARE MORE. YOU MIGHT CONSIDER THE FRED JONES WEBSITE (ON CLASSROOM DISCIPLINE). (JUST GOOGLE "FRED JONES.")
JEFF COMBE
Don't worry. We all go through this--especially with middle schoolers. (Right this minute, I'm typing this as a former middle school student of mine, now a substitute teacher, is sitting in front of me. This, too, shall pass.)
I have some suggestions in CAPS below, but I want to give some general philosophical ideas first: 1. Never do more than is necessary to get them to behave.
2. Let them hate you if they want, but make them behave while they do it. (Actually, they'll probably come around before the end of the year unless they have some extremely serious problems.)
3. Make the consequence (educators hate the word "punishment," but we can understand it if we want; I like the word "consequence," but I am willing to acquiesce to the idea that occasionally consequences may be close to punishment; I prefer that consequences be related to the action, and that's what distinguishes them from punishment for me) that they receive for their misbehavior be generally harder on them than it is on you.
4. Avoid showing your feelings. THIS IS VERY IMPORTANT. Be cold if you need to be, but don't show your feelings to the misbehavers.
5. Generally avoid making specific threats. Non-specific threats are better. ("What will you do about it?" or "What will happen to us?" they may ask. "Whatever gets you to stop," you reply. "If what I do doesn't work, I'll do something slightly harder until I find what works for you." Or, you say, simply, "I'll decide later.") If you are too specific, they weigh cost/benefits, and you usually lose. Their imagination is worse than anything you can do, anyway.
The rest is below
-----Original Message-----
To: Combe, Jeffery
Subject: some problem students
I am having some problems in particular with several girls in my [last] class. Do you have any suggestions?
[THE LAST] PERIOD SHOULD BE EASY TO KEEP AFTER SCHOOL. GENERALLY, YOU MAY RETAIN STUDENTS FOR UP TO 15 MINUTES WITHOUT PARENT APPROVAL. FIVE MINUTES IS USUALLY ENOUGH FOR 7TH GRADERS. (THEY'LL ARGUE WITH YOU ABOUT IT, BUT WHEN YOU POINT OUT TO THEM THAT YOU CAN KEEP THEM FOR 15 MINUTES WITHOUT APPROVAL, THEY GIVE UP. WITH APPROVAL, YOU MAY KEEP THEM AS LONG AS THE PARENTS ALLOW, THOUGH ONE HOUR IS STANDARD.) I RECOMMEND MAKING THEM SIT SILENTLY AND POLITELY; DON'T TIME THEM UNTIL THEY ARE SILENT AND POLITE. IF THEY BREAK IT BEFORE THE TIME IS UP, START OVER. (I USED THAT TECHNIQUE WITH MIDDLE SCHOOLERS.)
BE READY TO KEEP THEM EVERY DAY UNTIL THE BEHAVIOR STOPS. IT MAY TAKE A WEEK OR MORE.
ADD MINUTES FOR FURTHER MISBEHAVIOR. DON'T PROMISE TO TAKE MINUTES AWAY, THOUGH YOU MAY DO IT. DON'T SAY WHY, IF YOU DO; JUST LET THEM GO WHEN YOU'RE SATISFIED.
I have documented everything, and today was the last straw on misbehavior. I am calling home to 2 parents, but the third does not speak English.
CALLING THE PARENTS SHOULD BE AN EARLY INTERVENTION--ONE OF THE FIRST THINGS YOU DO. USE IT TO GET PERMISSION TO KEEP THEM FOR LONGER PERIODS, IF NECESSARY. SOME MIDDLE SCHOOL TEACHERS ASK THE PARENTS TO COME AND SIT IN CLASS WITH THEIR CHILDREN. IT'S A VERY EFFECTIVE TECHNIQUE AND NEVER HAS TO BE DONE MORE THAN TWICE--RARELY MORE THAN ONCE A YEAR.
THERE IS NO REQUIREMENT TO TELL THE STUDENTS THAT YOU ARE CALLING THEIR PARENTS, BUT IF YOU TELL THEM, YOU MUST MAKE THE CALL. NEVER SAY YOU'LL DO IT WITHOUT DOING IT.
THE SCHOOL HAS BILINGUAL AIDS THAT WILL MAKE THE CALL FOR YOU IF YOU WANT. ASK THE MAIN OFFICE. IF YOU HAVE ANY TROUBLE, OR IF YOU DON'T WANT TO WAIT, CALL ME AT 213-200-9192, AND I'LL MAKE THE CALL (I'M FLUENT IN SPANISH).
I have even moved them, and they call me names (such as crazy) or use foul language when I ask them to do something (such as GOD DAMMIT WHY?). I know we are hinted not to send them out of the room, but it is as if I am clamping down they just get worse.
STATE LAW PROVIDES FOR A CLASSROOM SUSPENSION. YOU MAY HAVE A CHILD REMOVED FROM YOUR CLASSROOM FOR THE REMAINDER OF THE DAY AND ALL THE FOLLOWING DAY. YOU ARE REQUIRED TO CONTACT THE PARENTS AND HAVE A CONFERENCE WITH THEM (OVER THE PHONE IS USUALLY ACCEPTABLE, BUT IN PERSON IS BETTER). WHEN STUDENTS CALL YOU NAMES OR REPEATEDLY USE FOUL LANGUAGE OR ARE "WILLFULLY DEFIANT OF VALID AUTHORITY," YOU MAY SUSPEND THEM. BE CAREFUL TO WORD YOUR REFERRALS WELL. DON'T GIVE TOO MUCH INFORMATION--JUST GIVE ENOUGH. IF "REPEATEDLY" DESCRIBES THE BEHAVIOR, THEN YOUR REFERRAL IS SELDOM QUESTIONED. "OPENLY DEFIANT" ALSO.
IT IS TRUE, HOWEVER, THAT IT IS BEST NOT TO SEND THEM OUT--NOT BECAUSE OF ADMINISTRATIVE DISAPPROVAL, BUT BECAUSE THE STUDENTS FREQUENTLY CONSIDER IT A MATTER OF HONOR TO BE KICKED OUT. THEY BELIEVE THEY HAVE BEATEN YOU WHEN YOU KICK THEM OUT, AND IT'S OFTEN A MIXED BLESSING AT BEST.
However, I am afraid they are going to run me over if I let this continue.
YOU'RE CORRECT. AS BAD AS IT IS NOW, IT WILL BE MUCH WORSE LATER, AND THEY WILL RECRUIT OTHERS TO JOIN THEM. YOU OWE IT TO THE GOOD STUDENTS TO CONTROL THESE GIRLS.
I am in tears after I type this, and I haven't been this way for 5 years.
BELIEVE ME, I KNOW HOW YOU FEEL, EVEN THOUGH I'M A GUY.
They also lied ... and said i was a liar...etc.
IT'S A COMMON TECHNIQUE OF THE STUDENTS. OFFENSE IS THE BEST DEFENSE. TELL THEM YOU WILL DISCUSS IT AFTER SCHOOL, THEN (AFTER SCHOOL), TELL THEM YOU WILL DISCUSS IT IF THEY WANT TO STAY AFTER THEIR PRESCRIBED TIME OF DETENTION.
OR TELL THEM TO HAVE THEIR PARENTS CALL YOU, AND YOU WOULD BE PLEASED TO DISCUSS IT.
DON'T LET IT BOTHER YOU THAT THEY CALLED YOU A LIAR, BUT DON'T LET IT GO WITHOUT A CONSEQUENCE ("WE'LL DISCUSS IT AFTER SCHOOL" IS USUALLY SUFFICIENT). YOU MIGHT REQUIRE THEM TO WRITE A NARRATIVE ESSAY ABOUT WHAT HAPPENED, TO BE INCLUDED IN THEIR GRADE.
They make gestures behind my back and refuse to work.
WE MAY DISCUSS YOUR POSITION IN THE CLASSROOM TO PREVENT THEIR BEING "BEHIND YOUR BACK." DO THEY SIT IN THE VERY FRONT? THAT WAY, YOU CAN BE BEHIND THEIR BACKS, AND IT'S INCONVENIENT FOR THEM TO MISBEHAVE WITHOUT CONSTANTLY LOOKING AROUND TO SEE WHERE YOU ARE.
YOU CAN'T FORCE STUDENTS TO WORK. YOU CAN MAKE IT UNCOMFORTABLE FOR THEM NOT TO WORK. WHEN MY STUDENTS REFUSED TO WORK, I WOULD NOT ALLOW THEM TO DO ANYTHING ELSE AT ALL. (THEY CLEARED THEIR DESKS COMPLETELY AND WERE NOT ALLOWED TO EVEN JOIN THE DISCUSSIONS FOR AT LEAST A DAY. IT WAS SO BORING, THEY USUALLY GAVE UP AND JOINED US THE NEXT DAY.) YOU MAY REQUIRE THEM TO HAVE THEIR WORK DONE CORRECTLY BEFORE THEY CAN BE EXCUSED. YOU MAY REQUIRE THEM TO STAY AFTER AND MAKE UP FOR THE TIME THEY WASTED IN CLASS.
I sent one girl next door because I just had to get them completely away from each other and out of the same room.
IF YOUR NEIGHBOR AGREES, THIS IS A USEFUL TECHNIQUE TO USE OCCASIONALLY.
Please send any suggestions you have.
Thank you!
I HOPE THE FEW SUGGESTIONS I GAVE ARE USEFUL. IF NOT, THERE ARE MORE. YOU MIGHT CONSIDER THE FRED JONES WEBSITE (ON CLASSROOM DISCIPLINE). (JUST GOOGLE "FRED JONES.")
JEFF COMBE
Wednesday, September 19, 2007
Justice vs. Mercy, part 2 (Balance)
Hello everyone,
Yesterday I wrote about justice vs. mercy and how teachers must balance the two. Today I just want to make a couple of practical suggestions on how to do it.
I have recommended in other places that, especially at first, you refrain from showing emotion. This is an important way to be fair as well as to prevent throwing fuel on the fires of misbehavior. Be above the fray. Don't get angry or irritated; neither be excessively happy or effusive. (At least not until the class is thoroughly under control--often after the third month; hence the dictum, "Never smile before Christmas.")
Equally important--and somewhat related--is to treat all students the same. You will have favorites; you will also have those that irritate you more than others. Treat them both exactly the same. Never give special privileges to those you like; never give special punishments to those you can't stand. (Ironically, over time, your friendship is likely to deepen with both, and many students that are your implacable enemies now will return to bless you for treating them equitably.)
Another related matter: reward the work, not the student; punish the misbehavior, not the student. If you catch your favorite student cheating, you should behave exactly the same way that you would if you caught any other student cheating; you should punish the cheating, fail the assignments, and recognize that cheating is not always personal. If the most annoying student in your class gives A-level work, you should NEVER NEVER find ways to give that student a lower grade to punish them. (Give two U's if necessary, but nothing less than the grade earned.) Further, NEVER NEVER give A's for good behavior unless the work justifies it.
Sometimes, you will make a declaration in your class that, "If anyone else says a word, I will [fill in the punishment]." Then, one of the good students will talk. This is a moment of truth for you. If you let it slide, you are unjust, and the students will rightly disrespect you. You must carry out your threat and give punishment even to the good student. (It's better to have never made such a threat, but having made it, you must enforce it evenly.)
I think that one time is sufficient to tell students to obey a rule. Assuming that you were clear in what you said, that you gave ample opportunity for clarification if necessary, and that no disability has inhibited the students' understanding, you should not have to constantly repeat yourself about behavior. I am shocked when I see teachers repeatedly tell students to do something or to stop doing something. One time is enough; after that, there should be a consequence.
It is generally a bad idea to give in to students' begging to be given "one more chance." It is always a bad idea to give in to it if you have already given one more chance.
NEVER favor flirts. Treat attractive children or children with charming personalities exactly the same way you treat ugly children or misanthropes.
Of course, life isn't fair, and your classroom can't be--and indeed shouldn't be--perfectly fair. But the sense of justice must prevail, and it will make the mercy more appreciated.
Jeff Combe
Yesterday I wrote about justice vs. mercy and how teachers must balance the two. Today I just want to make a couple of practical suggestions on how to do it.
I have recommended in other places that, especially at first, you refrain from showing emotion. This is an important way to be fair as well as to prevent throwing fuel on the fires of misbehavior. Be above the fray. Don't get angry or irritated; neither be excessively happy or effusive. (At least not until the class is thoroughly under control--often after the third month; hence the dictum, "Never smile before Christmas.")
Equally important--and somewhat related--is to treat all students the same. You will have favorites; you will also have those that irritate you more than others. Treat them both exactly the same. Never give special privileges to those you like; never give special punishments to those you can't stand. (Ironically, over time, your friendship is likely to deepen with both, and many students that are your implacable enemies now will return to bless you for treating them equitably.)
Another related matter: reward the work, not the student; punish the misbehavior, not the student. If you catch your favorite student cheating, you should behave exactly the same way that you would if you caught any other student cheating; you should punish the cheating, fail the assignments, and recognize that cheating is not always personal. If the most annoying student in your class gives A-level work, you should NEVER NEVER find ways to give that student a lower grade to punish them. (Give two U's if necessary, but nothing less than the grade earned.) Further, NEVER NEVER give A's for good behavior unless the work justifies it.
Sometimes, you will make a declaration in your class that, "If anyone else says a word, I will [fill in the punishment]." Then, one of the good students will talk. This is a moment of truth for you. If you let it slide, you are unjust, and the students will rightly disrespect you. You must carry out your threat and give punishment even to the good student. (It's better to have never made such a threat, but having made it, you must enforce it evenly.)
I think that one time is sufficient to tell students to obey a rule. Assuming that you were clear in what you said, that you gave ample opportunity for clarification if necessary, and that no disability has inhibited the students' understanding, you should not have to constantly repeat yourself about behavior. I am shocked when I see teachers repeatedly tell students to do something or to stop doing something. One time is enough; after that, there should be a consequence.
It is generally a bad idea to give in to students' begging to be given "one more chance." It is always a bad idea to give in to it if you have already given one more chance.
NEVER favor flirts. Treat attractive children or children with charming personalities exactly the same way you treat ugly children or misanthropes.
Of course, life isn't fair, and your classroom can't be--and indeed shouldn't be--perfectly fair. But the sense of justice must prevail, and it will make the mercy more appreciated.
Jeff Combe
Tuesday, September 18, 2007
Justice vs. Mercy
Hello everyone,
As long as I'm getting esoteric, I might as well talk about justice and mercy.
The umbrella culture we live in, I think, has a fixation on justice. The culture cries for the punishment of everyone who isn't us, and it wants the punishment to be as severe as possible. The culture doesn't want to consider mitigating circumstances; innocence before proof of guilt is decried; the prison and crime enforcement industries are among the most powerful lobbies in the state.
The educational establishment has a fixation on mercy. We are taught to understand the problems our students face and grant them mercy because of those problems. We are asked to pass them whether they deserve it or not (beware of a high failure rate!); we are not allowed to suspend them without many interventions first; we are asked to take high responsibility for our students' failures. We are rarely allowed to hold students truly responsible for their decisions.
The ideal lies somewhere in the middle. In fact, if the previous two paragraphs caused a pendulum swing of emotions in you, you can see graphically the problems that arise when justice and mercy get out of balance.
There must be justice. There must be consequences for things. We should try to make our classes as fair as we are able ("fair" is almost a synonym of "just"). Students must be held accountable for their choices. The rights of the vast majority of our students who want to learn must be protected from the small minority who want to disrupt learning.
On the other hand, we must create an environment in which students feel comfortable attempting new things, even if they fail in the attempt. We must not encourage despair; there must be hope as much as possible. If we give the natural consequence for every single mistake, no one would ever have a chance of passing; indeed, few would learn anything except how much to hate school.
It takes time to establish the balance between justice and mercy, but the balance must be established, and we should always be careful of the times we fall out of it.
Jeff Combe
As long as I'm getting esoteric, I might as well talk about justice and mercy.
The umbrella culture we live in, I think, has a fixation on justice. The culture cries for the punishment of everyone who isn't us, and it wants the punishment to be as severe as possible. The culture doesn't want to consider mitigating circumstances; innocence before proof of guilt is decried; the prison and crime enforcement industries are among the most powerful lobbies in the state.
The educational establishment has a fixation on mercy. We are taught to understand the problems our students face and grant them mercy because of those problems. We are asked to pass them whether they deserve it or not (beware of a high failure rate!); we are not allowed to suspend them without many interventions first; we are asked to take high responsibility for our students' failures. We are rarely allowed to hold students truly responsible for their decisions.
The ideal lies somewhere in the middle. In fact, if the previous two paragraphs caused a pendulum swing of emotions in you, you can see graphically the problems that arise when justice and mercy get out of balance.
There must be justice. There must be consequences for things. We should try to make our classes as fair as we are able ("fair" is almost a synonym of "just"). Students must be held accountable for their choices. The rights of the vast majority of our students who want to learn must be protected from the small minority who want to disrupt learning.
On the other hand, we must create an environment in which students feel comfortable attempting new things, even if they fail in the attempt. We must not encourage despair; there must be hope as much as possible. If we give the natural consequence for every single mistake, no one would ever have a chance of passing; indeed, few would learn anything except how much to hate school.
It takes time to establish the balance between justice and mercy, but the balance must be established, and we should always be careful of the times we fall out of it.
Jeff Combe
Monday, September 17, 2007
Let Assessment Guide your Teaching
Hello everyone,
There is a cycle that must be constant in teaching. It has a variety of names, depending on which educational program you trained under, but the idea is that you plan, you teach, you assess, then you review what happened. Then you repeat.
The assessment part of this is very important. It tells you what you do next, and you need to be willing to adapt your plans to accommodate what the assessment has revealed about your students and your lesson.
Occasionally, I talk with teachers that are frustrated when they give a test, and they find that the students have done poorly. "I don't know why they did so badly with this," the teacher may say. "I told them all of this!"
A few problems are revealed in the teacher's lament. First, the teacher is taking the students' failure personally. It's not personal. It simply means that the students didn't learn the material in the way the teacher hoped. I suppose in a sense, it means that the lesson failed, and the teacher may have been deeply invested in the lesson. Still, that investment cannot cloud the issue; the students didn't learn what the teacher wanted the students to learn, so another approach needs to be taken. If we are honest with ourselves, we know that WE have never learned something on the first telling, even if that telling was superbly done; we should not despair when THEY don't do it.
In some subjects, skills are closely connected to content. If students fail an assessment, we must know if the failure was a failure to correctly apply skills, or correctly learn content. When we remediate afterward, we ought to remediate appropriately. (Don't reteach content when the failure was a failure of skills; you will only frustrate everyone, including yourself.)
A student's failure in an assessment should not be a stick to beat ourselves with--or to beat the students with either. (I grant that it may be a stick to nudge us to greater achievements; I just object to the beatings. If a shepherd uses his staff to beat the flock, he will eventually lose the flock. If he uses the staff to guide the flock, he keeps them together.)
Sometimes a student will sit quietly, take notes, and seem to listen, then announce at the end, "I don't get it." Sometimes the student will get fidgety, be distracted, and look for entertainment elsewhere, then announce the same thing. We tend to love the first and hate the second, but they are two responses to the same problem: the student didn't "get it."
Sometimes we ask, "What didn't you get?" and the student will reply, "Nothing" (or "everything" if their grammar is better). You may assume that the student's self-assessment is inaccurate, but you are left to find out where you lost each other. It is possible, even likely, that most of the class is having the same problem. Working with the one, in this case, may often be working with the many; feel free to take the time to re-assess the lesson in smaller chunks until you know which chunk was wrong, then reteach that portion. Don't reteach until your assessment tells you where the problem lies, or you will frustrate yourself and your students. (You wouldn't rewire your whole house because a light bulb went out in the bathroom, would you? Not without assessing the problem and doing the easiest fix first, then reassessing afterward.)
Let your assessments guide your teaching. If your students fail the assessment, reteach and reassess until you're all satisfied that they have what you wanted them to have when you first set your objectives.
Jeff Combe
There is a cycle that must be constant in teaching. It has a variety of names, depending on which educational program you trained under, but the idea is that you plan, you teach, you assess, then you review what happened. Then you repeat.
The assessment part of this is very important. It tells you what you do next, and you need to be willing to adapt your plans to accommodate what the assessment has revealed about your students and your lesson.
Occasionally, I talk with teachers that are frustrated when they give a test, and they find that the students have done poorly. "I don't know why they did so badly with this," the teacher may say. "I told them all of this!"
A few problems are revealed in the teacher's lament. First, the teacher is taking the students' failure personally. It's not personal. It simply means that the students didn't learn the material in the way the teacher hoped. I suppose in a sense, it means that the lesson failed, and the teacher may have been deeply invested in the lesson. Still, that investment cannot cloud the issue; the students didn't learn what the teacher wanted the students to learn, so another approach needs to be taken. If we are honest with ourselves, we know that WE have never learned something on the first telling, even if that telling was superbly done; we should not despair when THEY don't do it.
In some subjects, skills are closely connected to content. If students fail an assessment, we must know if the failure was a failure to correctly apply skills, or correctly learn content. When we remediate afterward, we ought to remediate appropriately. (Don't reteach content when the failure was a failure of skills; you will only frustrate everyone, including yourself.)
A student's failure in an assessment should not be a stick to beat ourselves with--or to beat the students with either. (I grant that it may be a stick to nudge us to greater achievements; I just object to the beatings. If a shepherd uses his staff to beat the flock, he will eventually lose the flock. If he uses the staff to guide the flock, he keeps them together.)
Sometimes a student will sit quietly, take notes, and seem to listen, then announce at the end, "I don't get it." Sometimes the student will get fidgety, be distracted, and look for entertainment elsewhere, then announce the same thing. We tend to love the first and hate the second, but they are two responses to the same problem: the student didn't "get it."
Sometimes we ask, "What didn't you get?" and the student will reply, "Nothing" (or "everything" if their grammar is better). You may assume that the student's self-assessment is inaccurate, but you are left to find out where you lost each other. It is possible, even likely, that most of the class is having the same problem. Working with the one, in this case, may often be working with the many; feel free to take the time to re-assess the lesson in smaller chunks until you know which chunk was wrong, then reteach that portion. Don't reteach until your assessment tells you where the problem lies, or you will frustrate yourself and your students. (You wouldn't rewire your whole house because a light bulb went out in the bathroom, would you? Not without assessing the problem and doing the easiest fix first, then reassessing afterward.)
Let your assessments guide your teaching. If your students fail the assessment, reteach and reassess until you're all satisfied that they have what you wanted them to have when you first set your objectives.
Jeff Combe
Friday, September 14, 2007
Ya Gotta Love 'Em
Hello everyone,
Ya gotta love 'em.
Actually, I really mean that.
But if I'm going to talk about loving students, I realize that I need to make all sorts of qualifying explanations, and I ought to tell you why I'm bringing it up in the first place.
I realize that, when I tell new teachers that they need to be firm, that they need to "clamp down," that they must be teachers not friends, that they must not show their emotions in many situations, and that they must not be afraid to be perceived as being mean--when I tell new teachers all these things, they sometimes think that they ought to be cruel or unfeeling.
I don't mean that at all. In fact, I think that teachers must come to love their students--even the really rotten ones.
In order to do that, they must understand what I mean and don't mean by "love."
First, love is never sexual in this context, and it must avoid even the very appearance of sexuality; hence, teachers must carefully guard displays of their love. It's best to be generally evenly emotioned with everyone.
Love does not give in to every whim of the loved one. I used to teach the girls in my class that if their boyfriend tells them, "If you love me you will . . . [fill in the blanks]," then it is a sure sign their boyfriend doesn't love them--he is only using them. (The boys hated me for revealing this secret male strategy, but they can't deny it. And they know how I know it, so there's no point arguing about it.)
Truthfully, if you love someone, you want what's best for them, not what's worst.
Sometimes what's best for them is to suffer consequences for their actions. This may seem paradoxical, but let me illustrate with a few questions: Is it better for your student to get in trouble for being late to your class, or lose a job for being late? Is it better to fail a class in high school or college? Is it better to get medium grades in a good high school, or excellent grades in a bad high school? If you have your own children, and if you love them, what sort of education do you want for them? Is it better for a student to get caught using drugs by someone who loves the student, or by someone who doesn't care?
I mean to say that sometimes, if you love someone, you make them responsible for their actions so that the consequence--though severe--is never excessive or destructive.
Sometimes your love for the many over-rides your love of the one. In a classroom that may mean that you may have to remove someone from the classroom, thereby hurting the education of that one, so that others may learn. (Here are other love questions: Is it better to be suspended from school, or have the parents informed of misbehavior? Is it better to be shamed by having mother sit in the classroom, or to be completely removed from the classroom?) Better yet, you may be harder on one student so that that student will behave and be able to remain with the others, rather than go easy on the student until the student drives you into hatred.
There is a saying that is sometimes bandied around in religious circles, that we should "hate the sin but love the sinner." It works in classroom discipline as well. Love your students, but don't endorse their misbehavior. Another saying, this time from educational circles, is also valid: "Correct the action, not the child."
Finally, love is forgiving, but not always trusting. A student that I trusted and was close to once stole from me and some other students of mine. The student was caught, disciplined, and forgiven for the theft after appropriate restitution. I was upfront with the student about how that student would not likely be able to be trusted for many years, but we are still good friends, and there has never been any doubt about my affection for the student.
Ya gotta love 'em. It sure beats the alternative.
Jeff Combe
Ya gotta love 'em.
Actually, I really mean that.
But if I'm going to talk about loving students, I realize that I need to make all sorts of qualifying explanations, and I ought to tell you why I'm bringing it up in the first place.
I realize that, when I tell new teachers that they need to be firm, that they need to "clamp down," that they must be teachers not friends, that they must not show their emotions in many situations, and that they must not be afraid to be perceived as being mean--when I tell new teachers all these things, they sometimes think that they ought to be cruel or unfeeling.
I don't mean that at all. In fact, I think that teachers must come to love their students--even the really rotten ones.
In order to do that, they must understand what I mean and don't mean by "love."
First, love is never sexual in this context, and it must avoid even the very appearance of sexuality; hence, teachers must carefully guard displays of their love. It's best to be generally evenly emotioned with everyone.
Love does not give in to every whim of the loved one. I used to teach the girls in my class that if their boyfriend tells them, "If you love me you will . . . [fill in the blanks]," then it is a sure sign their boyfriend doesn't love them--he is only using them. (The boys hated me for revealing this secret male strategy, but they can't deny it. And they know how I know it, so there's no point arguing about it.)
Truthfully, if you love someone, you want what's best for them, not what's worst.
Sometimes what's best for them is to suffer consequences for their actions. This may seem paradoxical, but let me illustrate with a few questions: Is it better for your student to get in trouble for being late to your class, or lose a job for being late? Is it better to fail a class in high school or college? Is it better to get medium grades in a good high school, or excellent grades in a bad high school? If you have your own children, and if you love them, what sort of education do you want for them? Is it better for a student to get caught using drugs by someone who loves the student, or by someone who doesn't care?
I mean to say that sometimes, if you love someone, you make them responsible for their actions so that the consequence--though severe--is never excessive or destructive.
Sometimes your love for the many over-rides your love of the one. In a classroom that may mean that you may have to remove someone from the classroom, thereby hurting the education of that one, so that others may learn. (Here are other love questions: Is it better to be suspended from school, or have the parents informed of misbehavior? Is it better to be shamed by having mother sit in the classroom, or to be completely removed from the classroom?) Better yet, you may be harder on one student so that that student will behave and be able to remain with the others, rather than go easy on the student until the student drives you into hatred.
There is a saying that is sometimes bandied around in religious circles, that we should "hate the sin but love the sinner." It works in classroom discipline as well. Love your students, but don't endorse their misbehavior. Another saying, this time from educational circles, is also valid: "Correct the action, not the child."
Finally, love is forgiving, but not always trusting. A student that I trusted and was close to once stole from me and some other students of mine. The student was caught, disciplined, and forgiven for the theft after appropriate restitution. I was upfront with the student about how that student would not likely be able to be trusted for many years, but we are still good friends, and there has never been any doubt about my affection for the student.
Ya gotta love 'em. It sure beats the alternative.
Jeff Combe
Thursday, September 13, 2007
When to "Clamp Down"
Hello everyone,
Occasionally I team teach with new teachers, and I often help with classroom management. We play a sort of "good cop/bad cop" team; I'm the "bad cop." I take this role to let the new teacher be the friendly one, and to save our having to send students to the deans.
I find that there are times that it is necessary to be very strict, even though I really don't enjoy doing it. If a class is especially immature; if the class has a low, cumulative reading or math score; if the class has had a long period of loose or undisciplined behavior; then it is usually necessary to clamp down pretty hard for an extended period.
It inevitably makes me feel bad, but I've had so many terrible experiences where I've been abused by the sorts of classes I just described, that I've learned to steamroll rather than be steamrolled.
I try to make the strict persona that I play remain distant and emotionless, not angry or vindictive. (I want discipline, not war.) If students misbehave, and I am team teaching, I take them into the hall and call their parents right in front of them. When I send them back into the class, I give them specific instructions on how they should behave. If they don't follow my instructions, I take them out into the hall and call their parents again. If I am in charge of the class all by myself, I sometimes have to impose class-wide consequences, even when I know there are only a few clowns acting out and not getting caught.
As I write this, I have several memories of times in which my Super Disciplinarian alter-ego has caused me problems. I blush to remember some times it backfired. If I'm smart, even when I'm strict, I will listen to students; I will assess the depth of their problems; I will have a depth of sensitivity beneath the facade of Unfeeling Discipline Machine. Of course, I'm not always smart. I'd rather not go into details of the times I've had to clean up the messes I made by being a steamroller when it would have been better to have been a feather duster.
Still, there were times when it was necessary to just clamp down.
I almost always had to be pretty strict with my 8th grade remedial reading classes. I have had to be strict with large English classes with large numbers of Limited English Proficient students. Classes that I have taken over from other teachers are very difficult to manage, and some of those students are still not reconciled to me after many years. (Frankly, I've come to believe that it might be better to simply compromise my standards for the rest of one semester, then come back stronger the next semester.)
"Clamping down" rarely involves the deans or the counselors. In fact, when you turn things over to them, it's usually a signal to the students that you've lost control completely, and then it's a real holiday for them. "Clamping down" usually means making a lot of phone calls home. Not just Teleparent, but personal phone calls. It means immediate follow up with consequences. It may mean actually taking ipods and cell phones away, though students try to talk you out of it. It may mean refusing passes for anything but the most extreme emergencies. It does not mean dumbing down your curriculum, but it may mean using more SDAIE techniques or adapting your presentation, or giving up the really cool discussion or film you had planned.
The truth is, if you don't clamp down on difficult classes, you will completely lose control of them within a very short time. (It takes a little longer for high school students to go berserk than middle school students, but they will be just as bad when you lose them.)
I sometimes resented the way my students forced me into being the disciplinarian I didn't want to be, but I never resented them as much for making me a disciplinarian as I resented them for taking complete control of my class and making my life miserable.
Don't clamp down unless you have to; but when you have to, don't be afraid to.
Jeff Combe
Occasionally I team teach with new teachers, and I often help with classroom management. We play a sort of "good cop/bad cop" team; I'm the "bad cop." I take this role to let the new teacher be the friendly one, and to save our having to send students to the deans.
I find that there are times that it is necessary to be very strict, even though I really don't enjoy doing it. If a class is especially immature; if the class has a low, cumulative reading or math score; if the class has had a long period of loose or undisciplined behavior; then it is usually necessary to clamp down pretty hard for an extended period.
It inevitably makes me feel bad, but I've had so many terrible experiences where I've been abused by the sorts of classes I just described, that I've learned to steamroll rather than be steamrolled.
I try to make the strict persona that I play remain distant and emotionless, not angry or vindictive. (I want discipline, not war.) If students misbehave, and I am team teaching, I take them into the hall and call their parents right in front of them. When I send them back into the class, I give them specific instructions on how they should behave. If they don't follow my instructions, I take them out into the hall and call their parents again. If I am in charge of the class all by myself, I sometimes have to impose class-wide consequences, even when I know there are only a few clowns acting out and not getting caught.
As I write this, I have several memories of times in which my Super Disciplinarian alter-ego has caused me problems. I blush to remember some times it backfired. If I'm smart, even when I'm strict, I will listen to students; I will assess the depth of their problems; I will have a depth of sensitivity beneath the facade of Unfeeling Discipline Machine. Of course, I'm not always smart. I'd rather not go into details of the times I've had to clean up the messes I made by being a steamroller when it would have been better to have been a feather duster.
Still, there were times when it was necessary to just clamp down.
I almost always had to be pretty strict with my 8th grade remedial reading classes. I have had to be strict with large English classes with large numbers of Limited English Proficient students. Classes that I have taken over from other teachers are very difficult to manage, and some of those students are still not reconciled to me after many years. (Frankly, I've come to believe that it might be better to simply compromise my standards for the rest of one semester, then come back stronger the next semester.)
"Clamping down" rarely involves the deans or the counselors. In fact, when you turn things over to them, it's usually a signal to the students that you've lost control completely, and then it's a real holiday for them. "Clamping down" usually means making a lot of phone calls home. Not just Teleparent, but personal phone calls. It means immediate follow up with consequences. It may mean actually taking ipods and cell phones away, though students try to talk you out of it. It may mean refusing passes for anything but the most extreme emergencies. It does not mean dumbing down your curriculum, but it may mean using more SDAIE techniques or adapting your presentation, or giving up the really cool discussion or film you had planned.
The truth is, if you don't clamp down on difficult classes, you will completely lose control of them within a very short time. (It takes a little longer for high school students to go berserk than middle school students, but they will be just as bad when you lose them.)
I sometimes resented the way my students forced me into being the disciplinarian I didn't want to be, but I never resented them as much for making me a disciplinarian as I resented them for taking complete control of my class and making my life miserable.
Don't clamp down unless you have to; but when you have to, don't be afraid to.
Jeff Combe
Wednesday, September 12, 2007
The Difference Between D and Fail
Hello everyone,
I was talking to a couple of Garfield administrators today about some of our earlier discussions on grades. We were talking about some of the finer points of when students deserve Fails, or when they should be given a "courtesy D."
On the outset, I must say that I'm opposed to "courtesy D's," but I must also confess that I'm as willing as the next guy to give someone a D instead of a Fail if there's any possibility that I can do it with a clear conscience.
So the question continues.
This is how it was proposed today: "Suppose you have a student who comes every day, does all the work, fails all the tests, and fails the class. Suppose you have another student who ditches all the time, does none of the work, fails all the tests, and fails the class. Should those students be classified equally?"
Before you answer the question in your head, consider what subject you teach, what the standards in that subject represent, what sorts of adaptations you will make for students with IEPs or who are ELL, and what you consider to be an appropriate assessment.
Some subjects are content oriented. I mean that someone may only be considered to have passed the subject when they have learned a certain percentage (usually 60%) of the material and have demonstrated that knowledge in some sort of assessment. Some subjects are skill oriented, and those who pass must demonstrate a minimum level of skill (harder to evaluate objectively). Some subjects combine content with skill acquisition.
Whether or not students know content is fairly easy to assess. Sometimes, however, teachers use an assessment that may require unrelated skills in place of content. Asking Steven Hawking to hand write the answers to a test may make him look like an idiot; a verbal assessment shows him to be a genius. If content is important to the assessment, allow for adaptations.
If skills are important, a single assessment is usually inadequate. If I am measuring a student's writing skills, I may use multiple essays (edited essays, rough drafts, research papers, essay tests), multiple modalities (fiction, non-fiction, poetry, variant narrators), and multiple media (illustrated, typed, handwritten, performed, spoken) to assess. I may also judge the process of writing. (The same idea applies in PE, I think; translate the skills and assessments for subject.) If, skills are important, give many opportunities for improvement in skills. Grade on skill practice as well as skill acquisition.
I used to promise my students that, if they completed all the work and came every day on time, I would guarantee that I would give them a passing grade. (Of course, students who do all those things rarely fail.) No student ever failed my class without failing first to participate and work. If students do everything, but the test scores cause them to fail, I might evaluate the percentage of my grade that is reliant on test scores. (I taught classes that measured both skills and content, so I could adjust to favor effort in skill practice.)
I would also consider giving an annotated grade. The student may receive a C in my class with the annotation that the grade reflects requirements of the student's IEP. That would ease my conscience about adaptations that could be perceived as unfair.
Still, when it finally comes down to it, if a student was 1% away from a D, I would allow error in favor of the D rather than a Fail. We're not talking about an A here, or admission to Harvard or a UC. We're also not talking about someone who is significantly far away from passing or who failed at every facet, including effort. We're especially not talking about the nice student who politely does nothing. We're talking about someone who tried, partially failed, and made honorable attempts.
Let the RSP student have alternative assessment; let the hard worker get a bonus for doing everything; let the honest student have credit for taking the real score and not cheating. The difference between a D and a Fail in this case is reasonably ruled by your good judgment.
Jeff Combe
I was talking to a couple of Garfield administrators today about some of our earlier discussions on grades. We were talking about some of the finer points of when students deserve Fails, or when they should be given a "courtesy D."
On the outset, I must say that I'm opposed to "courtesy D's," but I must also confess that I'm as willing as the next guy to give someone a D instead of a Fail if there's any possibility that I can do it with a clear conscience.
So the question continues.
This is how it was proposed today: "Suppose you have a student who comes every day, does all the work, fails all the tests, and fails the class. Suppose you have another student who ditches all the time, does none of the work, fails all the tests, and fails the class. Should those students be classified equally?"
Before you answer the question in your head, consider what subject you teach, what the standards in that subject represent, what sorts of adaptations you will make for students with IEPs or who are ELL, and what you consider to be an appropriate assessment.
Some subjects are content oriented. I mean that someone may only be considered to have passed the subject when they have learned a certain percentage (usually 60%) of the material and have demonstrated that knowledge in some sort of assessment. Some subjects are skill oriented, and those who pass must demonstrate a minimum level of skill (harder to evaluate objectively). Some subjects combine content with skill acquisition.
Whether or not students know content is fairly easy to assess. Sometimes, however, teachers use an assessment that may require unrelated skills in place of content. Asking Steven Hawking to hand write the answers to a test may make him look like an idiot; a verbal assessment shows him to be a genius. If content is important to the assessment, allow for adaptations.
If skills are important, a single assessment is usually inadequate. If I am measuring a student's writing skills, I may use multiple essays (edited essays, rough drafts, research papers, essay tests), multiple modalities (fiction, non-fiction, poetry, variant narrators), and multiple media (illustrated, typed, handwritten, performed, spoken) to assess. I may also judge the process of writing. (The same idea applies in PE, I think; translate the skills and assessments for subject.) If, skills are important, give many opportunities for improvement in skills. Grade on skill practice as well as skill acquisition.
I used to promise my students that, if they completed all the work and came every day on time, I would guarantee that I would give them a passing grade. (Of course, students who do all those things rarely fail.) No student ever failed my class without failing first to participate and work. If students do everything, but the test scores cause them to fail, I might evaluate the percentage of my grade that is reliant on test scores. (I taught classes that measured both skills and content, so I could adjust to favor effort in skill practice.)
I would also consider giving an annotated grade. The student may receive a C in my class with the annotation that the grade reflects requirements of the student's IEP. That would ease my conscience about adaptations that could be perceived as unfair.
Still, when it finally comes down to it, if a student was 1% away from a D, I would allow error in favor of the D rather than a Fail. We're not talking about an A here, or admission to Harvard or a UC. We're also not talking about someone who is significantly far away from passing or who failed at every facet, including effort. We're especially not talking about the nice student who politely does nothing. We're talking about someone who tried, partially failed, and made honorable attempts.
Let the RSP student have alternative assessment; let the hard worker get a bonus for doing everything; let the honest student have credit for taking the real score and not cheating. The difference between a D and a Fail in this case is reasonably ruled by your good judgment.
Jeff Combe
Friday, September 7, 2007
Grades part 1 (What's Your Failure Rate?)
What's your failure rate?
This is a question calculated to strike fear in the heart of every teacher. Well, not always fear--sometimes it strikes anger, sometimes despair, sometimes embarrassment.
The question has reference to the percentage of students in your classes that are getting fails. Presumably, if you have a lot of students failing, there is something wrong with you, so you feel fear or some other strong emotion if someone questions your rate.
Conventional wisdom suggests that, in a normal class, students will naturally fall into a curve, with the majority receiving C's. Suppose you have a class of 40. Conventional wisdom would suggest that you would normally have 4 A's, 8 B's, 16 C's, 8 D's, and 4 Fails. Sometimes called a "bell curve" because the statistics are thick in the middle and taper toward the ends, this piece of convention seems logical on its face, but is fraught with contradiction and controversy. Like most "norms," it rarely happens in a microcosm like a class, though it may reflect wide trends, and it has recently been used for racial profiling.
Even so, if your grades are heavy on the top or the bottom, you ought to examine yourself, and the need to examine your classroom can be painful.
My standard for grades has evolved over my career. Most recently, my standards were the hardest they had ever been, but I was most confident in the grades I gave. I never gave a final grade until I had had multiple communications with the student about the grade and I had made it very clear (in public) what that student needed to pass the class. I looked carefully at all my subjective scores (like essay grades), and I was willing to adjust them upward if necessary. I carefully checked students that were borderline, and called them in individually to tell them what their grades were, and what they would be without the required work.
I absolutely refused to adjust the grades in my class to accommodate any sort of artificial grading norm like a bell curve or the prevalent fear that the administration would punish me for giving too many fails (they never did). It's true that, when the time came for final grades, I would often agonize over them; and it's true that, if I made an error, I tried to make it be an error in the student's favor; but it's also true that my standards were high, and I wasn't afraid to give a fail when a student earned it.
Jeff Combe
Grades part 2 (The Meaning of "A")
Hello everyone,
If you are new to the daily emails, and if they interest you, I will be putting them all on a blog within a week or two, and you'll be able to access past ones. For some of you brand new to the profession, I might recommend some previous email that I've written so I can save myself the trouble of doing one again. Just thought I'd give you all heads up on that.
My last email was on failure rates. I'd like to address the opposite.
I have long had a problem with what constitutes an A. Normally, computer programs licensed by the District fix an A at 90% or more of graded assignments. The standards for an A make it clear that an A is an outstanding mark; it should tell the student that both the quality and the output of the student's work are extraordinary--far above average.
A's were important to me as a student, but I did not respect teachers who gave easy A's.
I still don't.
I think that an A should not be an easy grade. I certainly don't think that students who fail to achieve the standards--unless they show outstanding effort in improving themselves--should receive A's, even if they do all the work.
I don't mean to imply that an A should not be possible for anyone, nor do I mean to suggest that some elective classes may simply be easier in their grading standards. I just think that an A should really be outstanding.
I further think that an A in
There is something shameful to me when a student progresses to advanced grades or college, and the student has received an A, and the student doesn't possess basic skills. Sometimes, of course, students with poor skills will work very hard, do extra work, progress beyond normal expectations, and earn an A against my better judgment. I certainly don't believe in altering my grade standards in mid-stream to prevent an otherwise poorly skilled student with great work habits from earning an A. I just think that an A should represent a student's commitment to rigor and excellence, even when I acknowledge that some students may get A's by exceptional hard work, and others may get A's with exceptional talent (and much less work).
I keep a few things in mind:
A student who receives an A in my class should be proud of it. The student may even feel the need to explain the significance of an A in Combe's class and the standard of excellence that it represents.
A student who receives an A in my class should never fail out of college.
Students should not expect A's as a given.
A student with an A should be competent at least.
Students should not get A's if they fail all their tests.
A B is also a good grade. A C is an average grade. A D is passing.
But an A--an A is superior. Good, average, or passing is not the same as superior.
Jeff Combe
Grades, part 3 (More discussion)
Hello everyone,
I'm not advocating eliminating either adult schools or continuation schools; they both perform important functions. However, I have heard from many students that they felt no motivation to work in regular classes because they knew that they could finish their requirements in adult school and have it be much easier. Students who go to continuation school usually have severe issues that they're dealing with, and continuation is a place for them to work out their academic problems while simultaneously working out or surviving their other severe problems. They don't often choose to go to continuation school, and the question of the ease of the grading policies is usually more a pleasant discovery than a trend fueled by anecdotal stories of grade inflation. Still, the perception that continuation school is easier than regular school is so widespread that it hurts the effectiveness of a continuation school diploma.
On the other hand, if grades come with a specific label it can clarify the validity of the grade. An A in an MR, honors, or AP class is not the same as an A in a regular class, and that is widely understood outside the school. By the same token, colleges understand that an A from continuation or adult school is not the same as an A from regular school. If the students could be made to understand the weight of that stigma, they might be less inclined to go to adult or continuation school for the easier grades.
"Another issue that bothers me ... at the opposite end are the distributions of F's. How do you justify rigorous teaching if the majority of a teacher's grades are F's, and that same teacher continues to proclaim, 'Teachers are not doing their job in the middle school and our 9th graders don't know basic [content] when they come to us'? "
There are two issues here: one is the issue of distribution of F's, and the other is the prevalent custom of blaming our problems on the teachers that came before us (who blamed their problems on the teachers before them, all the way back to the teachers who blamed their problems on the parents). I'll address distribution later; I want to address blaming first.
I ought to point out--just to give perspective--that the colleges blame students' lack of preparation on high school teachers.
I also ought to point out that we are all correct. There are problems with the educational system, with the American family, and indeed with American culture that make our profession very difficult. There is more than enough blame to spread around.
At the high school level, we have the power to hold students back with our grades, and that power must be exercised with discretion, but it must be exercised nevertheless. At the same time, blaming failure on others doesn't accomplish anything except protect us from accountability.
"Can you address my problem in particular: too many fails? I'm failing easily 45% of my kids because they don't do their work."
This is very common among first semester ninth graders and second semester seniors, and it may be common among the entire gamut of our population. (I commonly had as many as 90% failing my AP classes before they all got their acts together, got over their senioritis, realized that they wouldn't go to UCLA or Yale unless they had a high enough grade, and handed in their make-up work late in the semester.)
About three weeks before the end of the semester, if you start pointing out to them on an individual basis what they need to do to pass, many of them will likely come around. There is a danger that they will scramble to do meaningless extra credit (i.e., clean the classroom instead of write an essay--completely meaningless) or plagiarize work and hope that the weight of last minute makeup will cover the plagiarism. If they do those things, and fail to do the others, you can fail them in good conscience.
We are commonly taught as teachers that when our students fail, it means that we have failed our students. I do not believe that I am individually responsible for every student's failure, though I know deep in my heart that I am sometimes responsible for some students' failures. I personally believe that students must be given the right to choose to fail, but I have a responsibility to make failure as (may I use the word "painful" without sounding corporal?) painful as possible.
I confess that this is a very difficult balancing act. I must provide my students with the possiblity to pass my class, regardless of their current abilities or the past failures of the system; but I must also hold out failure as a real consequence for their failure to do reasonable assignments or make reasonable progress.
A good way to judge whether or not you're accomplishing the proper balance is to ask the students themselves. If a student who fails is able to say honestly, "I was just too lazy to pass your class" (not, "I never understood," or "I don't know what you're talking about"), then you might be on track, regardless of the percentage. If 45% fail, and all of that 45% understand that the failure was theirs and not yours, and they all understand what they should have done but didn't do to pass, then you're probably OK.
You'll still agonize about it, but that's because you're a real teacher.
Jeff Combe
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)