Why I Teach

The feeling is mutual

We need more dedicated teachers like you.

We could have more. It's not, contrary to popular belief, about the money. It's about the frustration of being expected to fix everything with so little to work with and so little authority.

The system, for sure, is broken.

This is a vocation, really - not just a career. Otherwise, I'd have been gone long ago, to do something less frustrating.

As a died-in-the-wool Libertarian, I often have to remind myself to put my money where my mouth is. Another post to follow on this apparent paradox.

Give it a try. Students need a variety of teachers from a variety of backgrounds - but especially in the sciences. Your experience and passion for your work could light the spark for others to pursue something that they might not even have considered.

Had Patricia Cornwall and Nakimura and Reich been writing while I was in high school - had CSI and the like been on the air, I would have become a forensic scientist.

See future posts for information about mentoring. This is a way you can do both - research AND working with our young people. Mentoring is a simple, inexpensive and powerful way to change the lives of children and therefore the future. As an example, one of the local parks is having a solar car contest.

I have been considering it. Next time it comes up (I may have another job crisis within the next year if my boss has to move), I may be more willing to switch. Last time I felt I was being pressured into it by circumstances despite being in a prime lab doing great work. I resented my situation, so switching was far less palatable. Now I have continued in research and still find switching to be an option I am considering, but not just because I am being pressured.

I love research. I got into it because I want to know everything and at some point no one knows the answer...so I got myself a job where I can look for the answers. By now, with a family and kids and political involvement, I don't really want my own lab. I spent too much time exploring post-doc positions (including one in Kyoto, Japan) before I started cranking out good papers (my best paper since then has been cited more than 100 times!), so I wound up behind in the race to get one's own lab. But I think that was partly intentional because I like the research, not the grant-writing and politics that a PI has to spend 90% of their time doing. So I have always liked being the person who was senior in the lab and knew how to do things and the PI could rely on to review papers, write papers and guide research but without having to deal with the BS. My last job really was perfect for me, until NIH budget cuts hit.

I am reluctant to lose that sense that I am at the cutting edge in a very real way. But...I also like teaching.

One time when I was a TA for a grad student macromolecular structure class, I went through a topic for students that I felt the teacher had made needlessly complicated. It was a topic that was easy to me but the students were having a hard time of it. So I took them through it in a way that seemed clear to me. At the end their faces still looked a bit uncertain, so I asked, "Is that clear?" All nodded but one student said loudly, "Well, NOW it is!" That made me feel great. That isn't the first or last time I was able to clearly explain something to someone who had trouble with it before, but it was the time when the student most clearly said that I had untangled it for him.

So...I am considering it.

And by the way, welcome to Culture Kitchen. Even if you ARE a libertarian : -) This diary really is kick ass, as Liza observes.

Eldest just turned six on Christmas, and is in the first grade at a private school. He has an IEP - tentative diagnosis of Nonverbal Learning Disorder (which is, ironically, about being VERY verbal, literal, and poorly coordinated - his IQ is fine, it's the social/emotional stuff that's a little weak).

I am currently debating putting him into public school, as his private school seems to be unwilling to modify ANYTHING for him.

I won't homeschool because it would be horrible for all of us. As I post more and you learn more about me and my family, you will understand why. I have read one or two of Liza's posts already, and agree with her.

The public school system in this country is broken, for sure. NCLB is having the opposite effect of its intentions. I believe in accountability. I don't believe in tenure for teachers. I believe that all children should receive an education, but that not all children should be educated the same way for the same ends.

Parenting is a large part of it. Schools don't help that either, though. In general, we meet with parents and present ourselves as "the experts." I know that I am dreading my appointment with my son's principal on Friday - and I walk in well educated and prepared.

The real point, I suppose, is that we have a single model to serve all children. The children I currently work with were so dysfunctional within that model that they were sent to our alternative program. They are dysfunctional for myriad reasons, but none of them was being well served in a traditional school. At conservative estimates, 20% of students aren't - and that includes the 10% at the top as well as the 10% at the bottom.

I will repost a couple of my other pieces on my experience as an educator AND as a parent.

Familiar with the concept of "Situational Leadership" where the premise is all people and circumstances and the interaction that go with them require a certain amount of flexibility and event driven approach for a mutually beneficial outcome?

It seems to me to be in-step or harmonious with the natural order of things and also the opposite of the imaginary (delusional) cookie cutter / one mold fits all approach?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Situational_leadership_theory

The problem I see with schooling, especially as it has been WRITTEN IN LAW here in New York state, is that they treat kids as broken or in need of fixing and parents as a clueless at best yet, at worse, as potential abusers.

I mean, c'mon, there is actually a legal statute in New York state called "educational neglect" which is considered a form of child abuse. Of course, educational neglect is anything not following the conventions of schooling as defined by the board of education.

The issue I have as a former teacher is that many of my former colleagues think they know better than the parents or even the kids themselves. They don't. We don't. A good teacher listens and observes in order to direct a kid down the path of fulfillment of their abilities. Teachers should never, EVER, be in the business of trying to parent their students because, in all honesty, they can't.

Now, even with kids with special needs, whether cognitive or emotional, after all these years of homeschooling, I'd still debate whether schools are the answer. Why? Because compulsory full-time attendance coupled with compulsory academic education SUCKS.

Not everybody is meant to be an academic. Not because they are deficient but because academic work is not supposed to be creative in the first place. You can be in trade school, studying air conditioning systems repair and learn more about science, technology, math, history and social sciences than following the god awful track of bullshit that is supposed to get you to college.

There's different ways of learning. Academics are not the only right way to do it. In truth, it's the worst way because it doesn't teach you how to do anything.

I am glad you're here because I really want the blog to focus this year more on education policy. Now that I am in the system as well, I have A LOT to say about what I've experienced so far and my frustrations with not homeschooling but the lack of social infrastructure that would make things easier for people like me (and maybe you as well), to raise independent learners.

I hate homeschooling because schooling is in the word. But even unschooling bothers me because, schools --or in my preference, open learning centers-- do serve a purpose.

If I could pick and choose how a school could serve my kids --whether full time or part time-- I wouldn't have a problem with schools.

I cannot parent them (much to the chagrin of the one who lived with me for a while, and spent a great deal of time criticizing how I was parenting my little guys). I can mentor. I can listen. I can locate services that will help them and/or their families. I can treat the parents as the experts on THEIR kids, and I can do so respectfully. Most importantly, I can be aware of cultural differences that cause communications to break down.

I am not teaching this year, as I've been "promoted" to a quasi-administrative counseling position. I spend a great deal of time meeting with parents and students, and discussing life planning.

I am working with the local community college to pre-enroll students in certificate programs so that they will already be started prior to graduation. I am working with local trade unions to introduce some of my interested students to apprenticeship programs that are paid positions (earn while you learn and reach journeyman status).

We DESPERATELY need skilled labor in this country, and most people are too afraid of seeming politically incorrect to discuss vocational education.

I guess all manual labor jobs will require MBA's in this utopia.

Liza writes:

"If I could pick and choose how a school could serve my kids --whether full time or part time-- I wouldn't have a problem with schools."

The turbulent transition to that better place is far along imo. I like to think that, painful as it is getting there, it's where "School" as public institution will have to settle sooner or later if it's to survive at all. The new normal for public education needs to be a cross something like community college food court meets hooked-up public library, bursting with service-oriented talent in imaginative "theme parks of learning" where everybody in every family wants to be and plans-dreams to stay, virtual and real spaces where they can enjoy themselves differently together, without constantly competing and comparing, universally accessible yet discreetly catering to every possible need at any time (e.g. diaper changing assistance for young AND old!)

Oh, there she goes again . . .

I think you too would balance each other nicely and create some interesting conversations.

Nance could chime in ... and I would loooove for Paul Danaher to take a peek once in a while.

Who else?

Something I've been itching to get rolling!
Paul D. for sure if he has time . . .and personal bloggers already registered here (I think) might include Valerie Moon? Daryl Cobranchi of HE&OS? Lawyer Scott Somerville, who is no longer with HSLDA but out on his own workshopping ways to help dads with their own families' learning?

And maybe TeaTude will take take a look at this essay, as handy shorthand (well, not so short!) for views I bring to this forum?

. . .School is about defining clear answers that everyone accepts to pass. Education is about distinguishing one's self rather than being a credit to one's label, wanting to define one's own thoughts, feelings and questions to pursue, rather than being taught defined, clear, factoid answers written into curriculum, testing and the law.

Home education thus would be different than homeschooling, though we don't use the terms distinctively among ourselves or in law (that's another tired old battle.)

I've learned to contemplate and comprehend ambiguous reality through or around imperfect labels . . .in the end it's the human understanding itself, not the words used to dispute or articulate it, upon which real education is focused.

And society-wide disdain for (and the resulting dearth of) real education hurts not just kids who are directly denied it, but all of us, because we're interdependent -- culturally, politically, economically, scientifically, in our private relationships and ability for self-care, in our global ability to adapt and progress . . . whether we "know" or understand this as truth, or not.

MSM newspapers notoriously misreport and miseditorialize "public education" imo, so we may need to educate their practitioners first if we ever hope to educate politicians and the public about it.

". . . Isn't it ironic that journalism as a profession clutches so
tightly its right to remain totally free from all public standards? They have always successfully claimed this complete independence as essential to the quality and vibrancy of their work, and that it serves America much better than some governmentally imposed system of public accountability and standards for their preparation and performance.

So, while I think many lawmakers are a lost cause on this issue, at least for now, I believe there is a compelling argument to be made to the traditionally left-leaning world of journalism that we haven't begun to make. I'd like to begin demanding that they defend our innocent children's first amendment freedoms with the same zeal they apply to
their own, or else stand before the public eye hoist on their own conflict-of-interest petard.

I get the gist of what you are saying in pointing out the difference between schooling and education.

Defined in those terms, I agree that most EDUCATION takes place outside of an officially sponsored school building. I know that my children learn as much with us as they do in daycare/school. I would choose a different word for schooling, though. I would use the word INSTRUCTION.

I have no beef with individuals choosing to educate their children outside of the public or private school systems, especially with all of the problems associated with one or both. At the moment, it wouldn't work for us (and with an English/social science mom and a math/science geekdad, we'd be able to handle content just fine), primarily because neither one of us could handle being home full time with the kids

I would argue, though, that schooling is an important thing to the vast majority of children whose parents are unwilling or unable to provide INSTRUCTION at home. It doesn't take 13 years to provide the instruction required to begin educating, though.

Instruction covers the basics - the three r's if you will. It also includes an exposure to some body of information that is required to learn the vocabulary necessary to pursue an education (geometry, science, etc). Schools can and should be doing a much better job of providing kids with the SKILLS they need to continue their EDUCATION.

Why is it that a public school education that stopped at 8th grade was sufficient (and in many ways superior to what we offer now with the addition of 4 more years) prior to WWII?

Why is it that schools have become so incredibly bureaucratic that they are still operated in order to produce individuals ready to work in an economy that no longer exists?

I teach because it is what I love to do. I would hope that my methods educate as well as instruct. I hope that I inspire my students to figure out what they want to do and be and help them find ways to attain that.

As long as their are parents unwilling or unable to educate their own children, schools are a necessary thing. I just wish that there were more options regarding what a school should look like.

I hope this is coherent. I process information in a spiral rather than linear manner, and need to percolate this a bit more.

You did say percolate?

Some good thoughts to do that with, thanks. And please don't confuse my comments with criticism of anyone-- especially present company!--who does send kids to any sort of school including traditional public brick-and-mortars. Most people still do and maybe most always will, that's fine with me, and I agree public education is the highest form of public service.

I do think all the teaching and instruction is what's getting in its way. Set free the mentors!

And here's a splash of provocative cream for our next cuppa -- when it comes to undesirable parenting, if "School" were the solution for saving kids from it, then how to explain that school-taught kids don't grow up to be the intrinsically motivated, school-responsive and school-supportive Thinking Parents that School supposedly LIKES and is satisfied with, as a job well done??

Much less grow into parents who might, with little muss or fuss, be inclined and [gasp!] capable of teaching their own kids to read, write and cipher in preparation for living and perpetuating the Cultural Life of the Mind?
If School were so necessary and successful, wouldn't that be the one thing you'd expect it to have focused on and succeeded at by now, instructing kids for productive parenthood and citizenship?

With all its funding and authority and expertise and social moralizing and compulsion and regulation, and its huge hordes of government employees, if it FAILS to do that in generation after generation and still has not succeeded and shows no signs of getting better at it instead of worse, then what is the point really?

If School ever DID once succeed at solving the problem of poor parenting, by creating a parent generation that prized all kinds of learning and civic engagement, then why would we need the vast edu-industrial complex after that? Couldn't we then make school an attractive resource center rather than dreary compulsion, both instruct and educate through empowered, motivated families with access to the Internet and public libraries and museums and fun little boutique programs and theme park-style education, after that?

Something else from my Kitchen collection that I think reflects back on the one-kid-at-a-time mentoring of TeaTude's original post:

As our new century's political storms rage on and the light is dying, we can rage, rage back against it, and against each other. We certainly have the right to live our mutual lives as satire in the streets.

But if this reviewer was right, Tolstoy offers us the more enlightened lesson of problem-solving in a storm - we might lay freely and joyfully upon each other as individuals, without regard for class or [SCHOOL!] colors, as the storm rages on without . . .