Just a note...

The fellows of the Northern Virginia Writing Project have begun their intensive work in the Summer Institute.  As a leader of the Shenandoah Valley Satellite site I am steeped in the work of practicing teachers.  It is intensive, rejuvenating, enlightening and exhausting work as we teach each other, share theory, and write for ourselves.
The four or five weeks spent by the teachers transforms their practice and stance in the classroom, not just for the following year but for much of their teaching career.  (98% of Teacher Consultants in the National Writing Project stay in the field of education their entire working lives.  That is an amazing statistic.)
Needless to say, this is consuming work and means.....fewer opportunities to blog.
:-)

Mourning in America

Tonight was Parent Conference night and my room was full.  My juniors and seniors lead their parent conferences, explaining goals, sharing work, describing their scores.  They introduced their parent to me, offered refreshments, and then lead them to a private corner where they could describe their work and their personal goals for the course.  The parents love the opportunity to hear about school from their child.  I love to hear them describe what they are learning.

I learned how to do this from a colleague in the National Writing Project.

Today, in two classes, we worked on good beginnings--how to get your reader interested enough in your writing to want to read on.  I modeled, they wrote, I wrote.

These three things I learned from colleagues in the National Writing Project.

Earlier in the day, while my students took their state tests, I wrote notes on their personal essays.  I use sticky notes and first respond to the strengths of the writing.  "I love your personal belief.  I agree that you need to set goals before you can achieve them."  "Thank your for sharing a powerful story about the losses in your life.  I'm so happy that you have taken away a positive lesson from these experiences."  And then I ask questions that, I hope, will make the students want to revisit the writing and make it even better.

I learned to encourage all of my students from colleagues in the National Writing Project.

In the twelfth grade classes we dove into poetry with a three-reading exercise.  The students read a poem three times.  After each reading they write a metacognitive passage and describe what they think, wonder, or notice after each reading.  Then they rate their understanding on a scale of 0-10.  Three readings.  Three writings.  Then they discuss the poem with their peers.  Then we all discuss the poem.  At the end of this process most students can articulate a clear understanding of what the poem says, means, and why it matters.  The students will practice this on their own tonight.

I learned this from a colleague in the National Writing Project.

In fact, I cannot think of a single move I make in the classroom that is not the end result of the close examination, sharing, and planning of the teaching consultants and fellows of the National Writing Project.

Here is a list, off the top of my head, of things I do that I learned from colleagues in the National Writing Project:
--Reflective writing
--The Daybook (a cornerstone of my teaching practice)
--Peer review groups (and how to manage them)
--Publishing student work
--Invention strategies (hundreds of them)
--Revision strategies (dozens)
--Multi-genre papers
--I-Search papers
--Building community and trust
--Portfolio assessment


I know there are even more techniques and strategies, all based on a philosophy fed and nurtured in the Writing Project.  
The success students realize are the direct result of work done through the National Writing Project. I am still in the classroom teaching because the National Writing Project has kept me learning and growing so that students can learn, improve, and describe their own growth.
On March 2, President Obama signed a bill to keep the government running until March 18. 
The bill cuts about $4 billion in spending from the FY 2011 budget, eliminating a number of education programs, including 
The National Writing Project.

This can not stand.

The Need for Retreat

The Annual meetings of the NCTE and NWP (National Council of Teachers of English and National Writing Project) were held last weekend at Disney World in Orlando.
Every year I wonder at the numbers who flock to these meetings and, as I pack my bags, why we must gather face to face in this age of web 2.0 forums and other platforms for connectivity.
And then I go and am reminded.
Like any profession, these meetings are important for the intense exchange of ideas and the re-cementing of personal relationships.  It is easy to forget that there are many like-minded people who remember what the work is and why it needs to be done when we a mired in the day-to-day of public schooling.
The digital world cannot adequately replace the energy of over a thousand people writing their thoughts in a ballroom of the Contemporary Resort, as we do annually at the general meeting of NWP. It's the same cognitive hum from the classroom, amplified.
No ning can replicate intensity of a discussion on microagression in perhaps the most culturally diverse room I've ever been in. We explored race in the classroom and the need to engage our students in a discussion of their experiences and how they shape their perceptions and sense of self.  It was an energizing and difficult discussion for the adults.
Donalyn Miller was the keynote speaker at NWP and the perfect spokesperson for a room of writing teachers.  A classroom teacher with a sucessful book, The Book Whisperer - one I've shared with many colleagues - she touched us all with her surprising confession of how much she "hates to write." She hit all the right notes for classroom teachers and, best of all, showed us the faces and personalities of the sixth graders she teaches.  She credits the NWP, which she only found in 2007, for making her into the writer/teacher she is today.
But more than the programs, the human connection proves to be the most valuable.  As the kids say, it's great to know that somebody "has your back" when it comes to explaining the importance of pedagogical decisions that are proven remedies to motivation, memory, and depth of understanding.  And the ones who make the trek, each represent at least another hundred who could not.
Though the meetings are often hard to get to (finding funding, sacrificing time away from students, family holidays looming) they are an important links in the growth of educators who are first and foremost in the learning profession.
I always feel like my brain has been put through a "re-boot."

Witness

This Wednesday I have the opportunity to testify before the House Subcommittee on Labor, Health, and Human Services, Education, and Related Agencies of the House Appropriations Committee. (How would you like having to write that every time you tell somebody where you work?)

My testimony will relate the impact of the National Writing Project on my work as a classroom teacher. Arne Duncan's Blueprint for Education Reform proposes to eliminate funding for this national network of teachers.

I have one minute.

One minute to describe how learning from other teachers has been the most powerful, transformative experience of my professional life.

One minute to defend a program that has built a network of professionals and kept 98% of them in education, working for children throughout their careers.

One minute to express how writing in a classroom can deepen and personalize learning for all students at all levels in all subject areas.

One minute to express how working with my colleagues has meant time well spent for the thousands of students who have benefitted from confident, well-informed teachers.

One minute.

What would you say about your own best professional experience if you only had one minute?

It was a very awkward evening...

Here's my view of an online discussion with the DOE about the Blueprint for reform. For other views by participants, scroll to the bottom.

When I was in high school I received an invitation to a party as an act of charity. The invitation was extended by the daughter of my father's new boss in our new small town. "Let's invite the new girl, even though she's not really a potential new friend, being from the wrong social class and all..." Though I had assumed that the invitation was sincere, it became clear that I was there to help my hostess fulfill her Christian duty. It was a very awkward evening.

And they were right.

We never socialized after that.

This April Fool's Day was "deja vu all over again."

National Board teachers were invited to a webinar with the federal Department of Education representatives. The invitation was advertised as a discussion:

National Board Certified Teachers are invited to participate in a discussion with U.S. education officials via a Webinar about the U.S. Department of Education’s “Blueprint for Reform,” the Obama Administration’s proposed framework for the reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (in its current form, known as “No Child Left Behind”).

Though only slated for an hour, the first 35 minutes were devoted to a powerpoint presentation by our guests, Judy Wurtzel and two National Board teachers who are currently working inside the Ed Department. Only twenty-five minutes were left for our questions.

That was frustrating.

With approximately 250 NBCT's online, most of whom we can assume had done their homework and already read the Blueprint that was then presented to us, there was no way our concerns could be adequately addressed. Instead, we were held hostage to our computers as we watched the presentation unfold and the time tick away.

And we have many concerns.

As the national whipping boys for any failed programs, we want our concerns addressed. Many of us have made it our business to know what is going on in the world of education policy and want a voice in changes to the ESEA legislation that has ruled our classrooms for the past eight years.

Sadly, I was left with the impression that our 'conversation' would be evidence of "input from board certified teachers" and was another check mark on a long list of charitable to do's. Having been the token teacher on other rubber-stamp committees, it was a familiar feeling.

It was clear that the blueprint is set, and we were there just to hear the plan.

If I were to give real input, I would have given the following:

• Thanks for removing some of the punitive measures of No Child Left Behind. Celebrating success works much better as a motivator in the classroom than punishment. It will help to motivate our teachers and building leaders, too.
• Thanks for at least including the wording of collaboration in your blueprint. After the presentation I still see no legislative heavy hand in seeing that it will become a fact of our working lives. I'm sorry the DOE won't weigh in on how an "effective" or "highly effective" teacher can be identified.
• My question was answered, but I did not like the answer. It appears that much of the DOE money can, and most likely will, be spent on necessary tools and personnel to establish and keep a flow of data on student outcomes (and teacher performance, I am assuming) flowing into the DOE. The changes at the classroom level may only be a trickle down after that behemoth is up and running. I smell more monies diverted to big testing companies. I'm reminded of the increased workload on teachers when IDEA was passed. No doubt the legislation was worthwhile, but it increased workloads and cost dollars in unexpected ways.
• One question brought chuckles from Ms. Wurtzel. Asked if NBCTs could be forced into low-performing schools because of the wording of the blueprint, Wurtzel claimed that to be in no way the intention of the law. Well, the reason committees meet is to explore the law of unintended consequences, and there were many under the ESEA law now up for reform. Who better to raise the concerns of unexpected outcomes than those who have seen how the current law played out in their school or district? This is the very reason teachers want to be in on the planning, especially those who have lived at the bottom of sweeping changes. We want to address the "what ifs" of any new legislation.
• I also wanted to understand how eliminating the National Writing Project and Reading is Fudamental plays into the plan. The NWP is highly researched professional development that results in well-documented effective teachers. RIF puts books in the hands of low-income children several times a year. I know. I've worked for both. By putting these two programs out for state-by-state bidding means dismantling two national networks and eliminating the Fed's endorsement of strong, effective literacy programs. The states will be easy prey to corporate driven literacy programs which means more dollars spent on less effective programs. (NWP is totally teacher driven, totally researched based. No one can squeeze more out of a dollar than a teacher. RIF runs on a network of volunteers.)
• Too many of the initiatives sound like a marriage to the interests of big business and a "free-market" system. (Like the Race to the Top contest declaring winners and losers.) It still appears that those with the biggest bank account get the largest voice.

Thanks for the invitation, but it felt like an afterthought.

Clearly, those who are above our station had already held the real party months before.

For more discussion go to:

David Cohen at InterAct

Renee Moore at TeachMoore

Nancy Flanagan at Teacher in a Strange Land