How many of you who stop by here teach in private schools? It doesn’t seem as though there are many of us private school teachers out there in the blogosphere. I read Waterfall’s blog; she teaches at a Christian school in North Carolina. If you know of others, I would appreciate links. I feel like an island!

When issues like school vouchers come up, I admit that in my new position as a private, indeed a parochial school teacher, I feel as though I should feel torn. I don’t. I’m against them. Obviously, I have no problem with parents who choose to send their children to private schools and are willing to pay the tuition. I do have problems with parents expecting the taxpayers to send their children to private schools in the form of vouchers. I know of many students at my school that might not be there if not for scholarships, but those funds are freely donated for the purpose of giving students a Jewish education.

The New York Times reported Friday that Florida’s Supreme Court “struck down a voucher program … for students attending failing schools, saying the State Constitution bars Florida from using taxpayer money to finance a private alternative to the public system.” I would venture to guess that many other state constitutions have similar clauses. However, I was surprised to find that the U.S. Constitution did not:

The United States Supreme Court has ruled that the federal Constitution does not prohibit vouchers, but it also held last year that states were not obliged to finance religious education as well as secular education. Those actions left it to state courts to decide whether voucher programs were legal, and focused national attention on the battle over vouchers in Florida, which teachers’ unions first challenged in 1999.

Florida’s Consititution says, “Adequate provision shall be made by law for a uniform, efficient, safe, secure and high quality system of free public schools.” [Emphasis mine.] The court added, “This diversion not only reduces money available to the free schools, but also funds private schools that are not ‘uniform’ when compared with each other or the public system.”

And that’s the point, isn’t it? For instance, the curriuculm at my school requires Hebrew and courses in Tanakh (Bible) and Rabbinic Literature (as well as other Jewish studies), in addition to academic courses such as English, math, social studies, and science. I can think of no public schools that require Hebrew (or even offer it) or offer courses in Judaic studies. Our school is simply different from public schools, and students from public schools who enroll often find it is a bit of adjustment. We might not offer classes those students were taking in their public high school, such as French.

Governor Bush seems to be considering amending Florida’s Constitution. He referred to the ruling as “a blow to educational reform.” I just can’t agree with that assessment. It is clear to me that we need to do something to reform public education, but giving students money to go to private schools is not the answer.

Does your school use block scheduling? Some years back, and I’m sure someone who remembers the particulars can fill us in with a comment, lots of schools jumped on the block scheduling bandwagon. Block scheduling would allow students to take, in most cases, eight classes a year. This would accomplish several things — first, students would be able to work for longer stretches without interruptions, which would help them get more done; second, students who failed would have more wiggle room in their schedules to re-take classes; and finally, it would serve to make the day less hectic.

I currently teach a modified block schedule. Each of my classes meets for 45 minutes three days a week. One day a week, each class has a double-block of 90 minutes. There is also one day off for each class. It took me a while to learn my schedule; it’s a bit complicated. I’m used to it now, and I have figured out how to make it work, but I won’t pretend it wasn’t an adjustment. Students, on the other hand, take a total of eight classes (one of which is either Study Hall or Spanish) each year except senior year when their schedules are often very light. On any given day, they will attend six classes, two of which will be 90 minutes long.

My daughter goes to a school that runs on an A/B block. She has four classes each day, but they alternate. On A day, she takes Science, Orchestra, Social Studies, and a Focus class (organization, skills, minimester-type classes, such as Southern Music). On B day, she takes Math, Language Arts, Reading, and a Connections class that changes each nine weeks (this past nine weeks it was Spanish).

My first year teaching, I taught a 4X4 block schedule, which meant students took four classes each day, but each was 90 minutes long. Two semesters were covered in one semester. I didn’t find it worked that well with English, frankly, and in order to keep my disadvantaged, low-level, non-reading students interested in English for 90 minutes, I most often wound up teaching a lesson and giving them an assignment based on the lesson. They almost never had homework, and if they did, it wasn’t done.

It looks like some schools may be moving away from block schedules. The Washington Post reports that schools in Ann Arundel may drop an A/B block schedule due to teacher complaints of a heavy workload. Rather than teaching five classes and planning for one period, teachers were teaching six classes and planning for two periods over two days. The increased workload of one class did not outweigh the “extra” planning period, teachers found. The extra class typically expanded the average teacher’s number of students from 150 to 180.

When I taught a 4×4 block, I taught three classes and had a 90 minute planning period. I also had about 90-100 studens. This was really nice. But I can see how it would not work the same with an A/B schedule. At my current school, the normal workload for a teacher is five classes, and not six as in Ann Arundel schools. Because I am also the coordinator for a new track in the 10th grade, I actually teach four classes. We also sub for each other whenever one of us is out, so some of my blocks are designated sub periods. Some days of my week are very hard — Mondays, for example, I teach three single blocks and one double block; all four of my classes meet. On Tuesdays, my lightest day, I teach one single block and one double block. While I teach two doubles and a single on Wednesday, it doesn’t seem as hectic as Monday, because I don’t meet with all my students. Thursdays are heavy meeting days for me, aside from the three single blocks I teach. I teach all four classes in a single block on Fridays. I also have a small number of students. I currently teach about 65 students in four classes — my largest class has 20 students.

Class size and the number of blocks make a huge difference. I don’t know how I could do an adequate job teaching writing without enough time to grade all the student essays. As a matter of fact, I feel like it takes me forever to grade a set of essays as it is. I can’t imagine having to grade 180 essays each time. It makes my head spin.

Ann Arundel has a serious problem on its hands. The block schedule was cited as the number one reason for leaving on surveys taken by teachers leaving the system. To solve the problem, Ann Arundel is looking at the 4X4 block. I think they will find that while it will lighten the workload, the 4X4 schedule is not without problems. The article cites issues with AP and IB classes. I don’t know enough about IB to comment, but I know that AP tests typically take the school year for which to prepare. It is problematic to contain these classes in one semester — if students take them first semester, too much time elapses between the end of the semester and May, when the tests are taken. Electives, especially ongoing classes like Band, Chorus, and Orchestra, will find it difficult — students will have scheduling issues. We didn’t have that problem at the school where I taught 4X4 because we didn’t have those classes available to students. The schedule also allows for gaps in learning. A student can take Algebra I first semester of freshman year, for instance, and possibly not take math again until second semester sophomore year.

You can read some research in block scheduling from EducationNews.org.

The New York Times profiled a school for highly gifted students in Nevada today. According to the banner on their website, Davidson Academy serves “profoundly gifted” students. The only concern I have about pushing gifted children through school so that they graduate early is that it forces them to become little adults. While they may have a vast intellect, they do not have the social and emotional skill sets of adults. The movie Little Man Tate, directed by Jodie Foster, explored this issue. In my opinion, what we need to do is create good programs for gifted students that allow them to stay in the same grade level as their peers.

I am certified to teach gifted students. I was also considered gifted in school, though I was not profoundly gifted, and to be honest, my IQ puts me in the moderately gifted range. I was enrolled in gifted classes beginning in 5th grade. I opted out of gifted education in the 10th grade. My gifted education classes in the 1980’s were kind of joke. I went about once a week. I was pulled out of other regular instruction classes, which meant I missed instruction. I mostly did brain teasers and logic problems. While those were fun, I was never really sure what I was supposed to be getting out of the experience. I did one project in which I researched Susan B. Anthony and created a display box biography of her life. That was fun. Once I got to high school, my gifted instruction centered more around subject matter. I was in what they called Honors English, but that was my only gifted course. When I moved to California, my school records were apparently lost. My school in Anaheim wanted me to re-take the gifted test. I was scared to do so, because qualifying for gifted education in 5th grade was very different from 9th grade. My peers were really smart. I was afraid it was a mistake — the fact that I was in gifted education at all. I decided not to take the test, and I was required to drop into regular college prep classes. I regret that stupid mistake to this day — I should have taken that test, continued gifted education, and taken AP classes. Gifted education in high school, at least my experience with teaching it, is so different from elementary and middle school. I hope things have changed since my days as a student.

When I was taking my certification courses, I recall we had a discussion in class about a statement made by our textbook’s author that teachers of gifted students ought to be gifted themselves. I really don’t think that is out of line. Gifted students require some level of understanding, some level of thinking like them in order to challenge them. One teacher disagreed with that statement, and our “professor” agreed with her (he was actually a vice-superintendent of a local school system, so I’m not sure what his actual degree was). I didn’t say what I thought. I read the room and decided my opinion was unpopular.

The article mentions that “Susan Aspey, a spokeswoman for the Department of Education, said the ‘vast majority’ of federal spending for children in kindergarten through 12th grade was for the neediest children.” Our position in this society is that if you are gifted, you have everything you need, so we don’t need to devote resources to you. This is true emotionally and socially, too. We assume gifted students are OK because they are gifted. A study cited in the article notes we don’t spend enough money on gifted students:

Nancy Green, executive director of the National Association for Gifted Children, said that state and local efforts were admirable but that their inconsistency reflected lost opportunities. A new survey by her association found that among 39 states that responded, 24 spent as much as $10 million on programs for gifted children but 7 spent less than $1 million and 8 spent nothing.

Green continued: “For a nation, I’m not sure why we value equity over excellence. All kids are entitled to an appropriate education for their ability, not just those we’re teaching to a minimum standard.”

Have you by any chance read the short story “Harrison Bergeron” by Kurt Vonnegut? In a sense, what we are doing with gifted education is handicapping gifted students as much as the Handicapper General’s office handicapped any individuals who showed excellence in any area. At one time, gifted students were considered “exceptional children” in the same way as special education students were considered “exceptional” — meaning “different from the norm.” I’m sure someone can correct me if I’m wrong, but I learned in my Exceptional Children course in college (back in 1992 or 1993) that the conventional wisdom was to remove gifted students from underneath the umbrella of exceptional education, although I see the CEC still includes gifted education as part of its agenda. In some ways, this harmed gifted education, because dollars earmarked for exceptional students no longer went into gifted education.

Because our gifted kids are smart, we assume that they will be fine if we focus on students who are not gifted. We assume those other students need us more, while gifted students will get by on their own. All of our students need us.

Some gifted education resources:

• National Research Center on the Gifted and Talented
• Hoagies’ Gifted Education Page
• Neag Center for Gifted Education and Talent Development
• A Glossary of Gifted Education

Wait a second — according to the Seattle Times, Washington students were considered sophomores if they were in their second year of high school, even if they hadn’t earned enough credits to “pass” their freshman year?

Everyone says Georgia’s backwards, but goodness knows you have had to pass five out of six ninth grade classes to move up to tenth grade in Georgia for as long as I can remember. How is it that Washington just figured out this might be a good policy, and why did it take a concern over test scores to effect this change? No wonder “[s]ome still think if they complete four years and are taking senior classes with friends, they’re going to be able to walk at graduation, when that’s not true.”

Two hot stories in education news right now involve the ongoing debate over teaching intelligent design in the classroom and school prayer. I am passionate about the issue of separation of church and state with regard to public schools for several reasons. As a parent, I do not want schools indoctrinating my child with religious beliefs that run counter to what I, as her parent, want to teach her. In this country, I am free to practice religion (or not) as I choose, and every religion and various denomination under each religion represents very different ideas. Who gets to choose what is “right”? I am also a proponent of separation of church and state because I think it would be bad for churches. I believe this is what Jesus’ teaching means: “Render unto Caesar the things which are Caesar’s, and unto God the things that are God’s.” Finally, as a teacher, I would feel uncomfortable supporting religion in public schools, knowing full well that the wide array of religious beliefs of my students.

I currently teach at a private Jewish high school, and it does not bother me at all to support Judaism within the context of my job, because I think it is clearly understood that my students attend a religious institution — their education is not separate from their religion. They have told me some very interesting stories about public school teachers they have encountered. One student said that she had a teacher in the 5th grade who assigned her a seat near the teacher’s desk. Right in front of my student’s desk, on her own desk, the teacher placed a copy of the New Testament. She offered to loan it to the student at any time. She also offered to loan my student her copies of the Left Behind series of Christian fiction by Jerry Jenkins and Tim LaHaye. I find the behavior of this teacher reprehensible. Who is she to try to undermine the religious teachings in the home of my student? How might she feel if someone did something similar to her daughter — for example, tried to pass her a copy of the Qu’ran?

As a high school student in marching band, our band held hands and recited the Lord’s Prayer before football games. Our band director was not involved. He passively watched on as we did this. In fact, it was in this circle that I learned the Lord’s Prayer, as my family did not go to church. However, I will say I felt awkward and pressured in that situation. I felt uncomfortable. It seems, though, that my director was following the letter and spirit of the decision made in Engel v. Vitale.

I was actually confronted with a dilemma involving school prayer this week when my students watched The Crucible. At the end of Nicholas Hytner’s movie, John Proctor, Rebecca Nurse, and Martha Corey recite the Lord’s Prayer. In the discussion following the movie, my students, unfamiliar with the New Testament, asked what it was. I told them. One remarked that it sounded kind of like a Psalm. Then another asked me why they would recite it at that time. I explained that it was similar to the Jewish prayer known as the Shema (“Hear O Israel, the Lord our God, the Lord is One.”) In fact, I explained, I had read account of Holocaust victims reciting the Shema in much the same circumstances as the three accused witches recited the Lord’s Prayer. I indicated that the Lord’s Prayer had the same prominence for Christians as the Shema did for Jews. Then a student asked if I knew it. I replied that I did. She requested that I recite it. I thought for a second, decided that it would not constitute a violation of my principals, my school’s principles, or my students’ rights, because they were more or less asking not to be taught Christianity, but to hear the Prayer one more time for their own analysis of my claims that it was similar to the Shema, and I recited it. As an English teacher, I am often called upon to explain Biblical allusions to my students. I think it can be done in such a way as to prevent any discomfort or violation of my students’ rights.

There was a time in my life when I was very active in church. I listened to religious radio a great deal at that time. One of the pervasive fears of many of the hosts of the shows on that station was the spread of Secular Humanism. It was out of this fear that the Religious Right’s movement toward homeschooling began to pick up steam. The idea was that our schools were a bastion of Secular Humanism, and if one wanted to ensure their child was brought up with the proper beliefs and morals, it was incumbent upon the parent to shield their child(ren) from those influences, whether that took the form of homeschooling or private Christian schooling. In our country, parents are free to make this decision. I think it is important that parents have the freedom to choose how to educate their child in their religion (or lack thereof). There are countries where state religion and religious freedom exist in tandem. However, there are also countries with dogmatic state religions which actively encourage the obliteration of conflicting religious beliefs and harm those who have divergent religions.

I feel passionately that students should not have to be confronted with the pressure to pray in school or be taught intelligent design in public schools. Because I feel this way, many have asked me about my own religious beliefs. I actually do believe in intelligent design (or, to be more precise, theistic evolution), and I am a Christian who prays. However, I also believe firmly that these two values are religious values, and in choosing to pass these values on to my children, I would not wish her school to be involved.

I absolutely love Tolerance.org. I think it is wonderful that they supply teachers with materials for free — and good materials, too. If you haven’t checked them out, you should.

Because I’ve order materials in the past, I’ve been subscribed to their bi-annual magazine, Teaching Tolerance. I have found some good lesson plans in the past. The current issue had an interesting opinion piece entitled “Good Morning Boys and Girls” The subtitle? “Simple greetings can promote discrimination in young children.” I was intrigued so I read on.

The contention of author Rebecca S. Bigler is that we highlight differences between boys and girls more by using gender as a means of organiziation (alternate boy/girl seating) and in lessons (alternating boys and girls in turn-taking). She notes, for example, that we would never use race or ethnicity as a label in this way: “Good morning, whites and blacks,” or “Latinos, get your backpacks now.”

Does she have a point? Well, there are David and Goliath’s tee-shirts for girls. As a girl child, I probably would have considered them funny. As a mother of a son (as well as two daughters)… not so much.

While I think some of her arguments are valid, I wondered if this isn’t a mountain created from a molehill. I grew up in an era which was marked by less gender equality than my students seem to feel. I remember feeling pressured to pretend I wasn’t smart. That isn’t to say I succumbed to that pressure, but then, I was also considered a nerd, too. There were plenty of smart girls who played dumb. I also remember going through a period in elementary school during which boys were extremely yucky, and my peers and I spent plenty of time highlighting our differences. I grew out of it, and it seemed most of our peers did, too.

The more I think about it, however, the more unsure I feel. What exactly are we saying to children in our classrooms? What sorts of messages are they receiving? Does all this matter?

In the controversy over my school’s future building site and Fulton County Schools, the divide over public versus private schools was outlined starkly in the AJC’s reader blog over Weber’s brush with eminent domain. Very early on in the discussion, posters began to veer away from the topic at hand and debate very nastily over whether public schools or private schools are better and why. I think the blog is an interesting microscope of many issues we’ve all discussed in the education blogosphere.

I teach at a private school, but my background in education is mostly in the public schools — 6 years in total. For the last two, I’ve been teaching in a private school. I think private schools can be like any other schools — there are good ones and not so good ones. The school where I work happens to be a good one. At the same time, the public schools in my area have very good reputations.

However…

If I could afford to send my daughter to a private school like the one where I work, I probably would. I happen to make too much money for us to qualify for scholarships, but too little to afford private school tuition.

I have no broad condemnation of public schools. I can’t even bring myself to vote for Libertarian candidates because of the Libertarian platform on education.

So why do I feel this way?

I think that’s a question worth examining.

1. Smaller class sizes at my private school mean students receive more individual attention.
2. A marked difference in the number of discipline issues.
3. I can’t say if this is always true, but my experience so far has been that private school teachers are more satisfied with their work environments. Any teachers reading this blog probably realize morale is very important in making good schools.
4. Private schools are not inundated with testing. No CRCT. No ITBS. No state graduation tests. No “gateway” tests. With all that testing out, I’m able to have more hours in the classroom to really teach, and not to teach to some standardized test.

I would be remiss if I didn’t point out that private school teachers are less likely to be certified. In fact, some of my own colleagues are not. However, they are also brilliant, gifted teachers. While my salary is competitve, I have heard that some private school teachers do not earn the same as their peers in public schools.

With NCLB, school choice is once again a hot topic. Indeed, parents are allowed the option of transferring their children out of schools which fail to make AYP. I have to say that I am very conscious that I am delivering a product that parents pay a lot of money for. I think I was as good a teacher in public school (or tried to be — I didn’t always have the necessary support from parents or administration) as I am in private school. However, I am very conscious that parents do not have to send their child to my school. They have chosen to do so. I can’t say I feel more obligation necessarily so much as a different obligation. After having said that, maybe I do feel more obligation to my students and their parents, if I am to be completely honest with myself.

Do I believe in school vouchers? I just can’t go that far. I don’t think students are entitled to a private school education. And it isn’t just the wealthy upper class who send their children to private schools. Middle class families, poorer families send their children, too. I was surprised to discover how many private schools had financial assistance for families when I began researching possible schools for my daughter over the summer. I believe all Americans are entitled to a free, public education, and they receive that under our current education system. I am starting to wonder, however, what sort of changes will be wrought in public education if parents were allowed to send their children to the public school of their choice, and not just because the school failed to make AYP. What would our public schools look like? Where would the line between public and private be?

I have good news! According to Fox 5 News Atlanta, Fulton County Schools has decided not to exercise its right of eminent domain in order to seize the property purchased for our new school.

I will let you know if anything changes. I am upset that Fulton County’s new line is that they were under the impression we wanted to sell that land. If that is so, why threaten eminent domain? We never gave the impression to anyone that we wanted to sell the property, and I think it was a weak attempt by the school district to wipe the egg off their faces.

You can read the latest Atlanta Journal-Constitution story about the controversy.

Update: The AJC has a new article about this story, detailing Fulton County’s “withdrawn threat.” Fulton County maintains that they thought we were in negotiations with a willing seller. This is not true. No indication was ever given that we were looking to sell the land. I find it odd that Fulton threatened eminent domain if they felt so sure we were willing to part with the site.