On Hosting President Xi at Lincoln High School

One of the things that I really enjoy about teaching is the relative anonymity of the profession. We are public servants, but not public figures. I couldn’t imagine working in sales, marketing or politics where I was constantly meeting new people or trying to sell myself (in fact, the idea of that just gave me a chill). As a teacher at Lincoln, I work with a relatively stable staff. I have been there for seven years and at least half of the faculty predates me. I meet a new crop of kids and parents every year, but once I meet them, they’re familiar, we develop routines, become family even. Last week, while students were reading a Ta-Nehisi Coates article, I stood in the back of third period and realized I had eleven siblings of past students and two children of my former HS classmates in the class. Abe Nation is familiar turf for me and I am familiar to them. When I am teaching I am selling ideas and content, not myself. I am not the focus, the mission is.

The last week has blown a hole in all of that.   

I found out about the possibility of President Xi’s visit a while back. As time passed it went from “there’s this crazy idea that might go down, but probably nah” to “Secret Service vans parked by the Abe statue and snipers in the clock tower.” 

As a government teacher, hosting a head of state in your classroom (or one you borrowed for the occasion) is like an classic R&B fan sitting at the mixing board in Quincy Jones’ studio or a soccer fan playing pick-up with Messi or Ronaldo (pick your poison). China is the most populated nation on Earth. Twenty percent of all the people alive right now are Chinese. They are the largest economy on the Earth. China is the most powerful nation in Asia. China is a nation that I was fascinated by as a student and have had the pleasure to visit twice as an adult. I could go on… Having President Xi walk the halls of my school, stand in our auditorium, joke around with the football players from my third period--watching it all was whatever comes after things become surreal.

My favorite part of the visit though was the kids. It’s early in the year, I have all their names down, but we’re definitely still the rapport building phase. I was nervous about how they would behave. Would they understand how big a deal this was? Would one of the boys in the room try to be funny and instead create an international scene or worse get beatdown by Chinese Secret Service (yes, these were actual fears I was having).

After being screened by the Secret Service, while we were being briefed by a Chinese Protocol Officer (there were several, both officers and briefings) a student asked if they’d be allowed to shake the President Xi’s hand. I and the Protocol Officer both (belly) laughed. Fast forward an hour, when President Xi, after his conversation with my students and before departing under a blitz of camera flashes, reached out to shake hands with the front row of the room, there was an audible (and hilarious) burst of co-ed squeals. That moment… that moment, they’ll never forget. The kids were amazing. They got it the importance of the moment.

President Xi concluded his visit by addressing a crowd of nearly 500 students and community members and offering one hundred students from my school the opportunity to travel to China; it brought on a thunderous applause. I ended my night posing for photos and doing interviews with a half dozen Chinese media outlets. Many of you know I recently wrote about my love of travel and particularly my experience teaching and living in China. Now many of my students will have this same opportunity, decades younger than I was when I caught the bug. I hope they grow to love travel as much as I do. I hope it changes their lives as much as it changed mine and I hope that this week is more calm than the last.

On the Great Charter Divide in Washington (and Shabby Adult Behavior)

Last Friday at 4:30 pm (Labor Day weekend) the Washington State Supreme Court threw a Molotov cocktail into the already volatile education policy debate here in Washington State. The court ruled 6-3, that because charter schools do not have elected school boards, they are not considered “common schools” and are therefore ineligible for the state funding they were expecting to receive. If you are reading this, you are probably familiar with the fallout.

The blame for this fiasco falls squarely at the feet of the Washington State Legislature. Because of the intransigent, donothing-ness of our our lawmakers, people and interest groups have increasingly turned to (our flawed) initiative process: reduction of class sizes (passed, but suspended by lawmakers), creation a state income tax (failed), background checks for firearms (passed), liquor privatization (passed), marijuana legalization [(for both medicinal and recreational purposes) pass and pass] and after numerous attempts to enact a charter law via the legislature, charter advocates turned to the initiative process in 2012, running Initiative 1240, which passed 50.69% to 49.31%. This fall seven charter schools began operating and one (in Seattle) was expected to continue its notably troubled operations. That was until last Friday.

Since last Friday we’ve witnessed a cavalcade of national media attention and some honestly gauche online behavior. Before I go further, I feel obligated to layout (for full disclosure) my stance on charters:

I am not an ideologue. I work in a public school in Tacoma, by choice; it is the highest poverty high school in our county. My views on charters are similar to my views on gay marriage: “I am pretty sure it’s not for me or my family, but I am often flummoxed as to why some people are so upset over the idea.”

I also believe that if the public K-12 system was serving the needs of the communities we are intended to serve, that there would not be a need/desire/appetite for charters. In many ways, the charter phenomenon is the natural consequence of communities--especially communities of color, in urban areas--dissatisfaction with the educational status quo.

Teachers United, an organization I am a founding member of, publicly supported I-1240, however I voted against that decision as a member of the board of directors.

I have met with the CEO of Green Dot Schools and was offered (and considered) roles within two of the charters that opened in Tacoma, but I declined them and remain (a) a charter agnostic and (b) a (mostly) happy employee of Tacoma Public Schools.

Long story short, I am very familiar with both camps and the contours of the charter argument.

There are no winners when adults behave poorly over issues that impact children: It is tough to watch people you respect and care about behave like children and I must say I was disappointed with the reactions I saw to the charter verdict. Celebrating the (potential) closing of a school is (never) a good look. Nevertheless, I saw substantial spiking of the football from “adults” whose social media bios proclaim them as “champions of education”. I found the celebrations and “we won” posts that erupted, to be very problematic. Closing schools, or throwing schools into uncertainty harms children. Period. I found it especially ironic that many of the same people who were “hashtagging it up” in support of schools in Chicago, late this summer, found cause for celebration in the possibility that charters would be shuttered here in Washington.

On the other hand, I found the response from many charter advocates to also be upsetting. The save our schools posts and demands for a special legislative session went out immediately. Many came from people who have been dead silent about the crippling underfunding of public schools here in Washington State [a situation that has contributed to the ongoing strike in Seattle and a contempt of court charge (and $100,000 daily fine) against the State Legislature].

During the budget crisis of in 2011, here in Tacoma, we closed Hunt MS, McKinley ES, and temporarily closed Wainwright ES. Earlier, but within recent memory, we also closed Rogers (now the site of Green Dot), Gault and Willard. Given that local history, I can’t help but ask: where were all these voices in 2011? Where were you when our school board voted to close three schools serving the Eastside (Tacoma’s most economically disadvantaged neighborhood)? Where were the calls for a special session? Statewide these eight charter schools serve a total of 1,200 students, fewer than four of the five comprehensive high schools in the City of Tacoma. Why are eight charters worthy of a national outpouring of support, but our “common schools” remain perpetually underfunded and allowed to be closed with nary a whimper?

Thinking about where this goes next and the political endgame: Since the decision, the charters have successfully raised enough money to maintain their operations for this year. So for 2015-16, Washington’s charters will actually be “donor/foundation funded, tuition free, private schools, targeting urban populations”. I am genuinely happy for the kids and relieved for the teachers (and families) of those schools, but the entire experience has left a nasty taste in my mouth and I find myself wondering about what lies ahead.

Republicans control the State Senate and I believe a “charter fix” would pass (with relative ease) in that chamber. Democrats hold a slim majority in the House, but there are enough pro-charter (or like myself, not anti-charter) Democrats that a “charter fix” will probably pass out of that body as well, however with greater difficulty. The charters have secured their funding for 2015-2016 (and I’m guessing could probably secure another year’s worth as this gets sorted out). A fix will certainly be a priority in the next legislative session. Therefore, the fate of the charters will reside with our Governor, Jay Insee (D). Insee is heavily supported by the Washington Education Association and signing the charter bill would anger membership and leave the union with a tough set of choices going into the 2016 gubernatorial election.

Conversely, vetoing the bill would greatly upset charter parents (many of whom are parents of color) and charter advocates--both powerful voices within the Democratic Party. Add to the volatility, that Inslee will probably face a strong challenge from a to be determined Republican challenger in 2016.

This fight is a long way from over. Sadly the only guarantees are more uncertainty and more kids used as pawns in the ongoing morality play.

Now, before you jump into the comments, please be aware, this is not a forum to debate the merits or faults of charter schools; that conversation is happening all over FB and in every newspaper comment section in the state. Nor are we going engage in ad hominems, namecalling or other petulant nonsense. I expect the same level of civility in the comments section that I demand in my classroom.

If you want to discuss the decision, share information, offer other perspectives, discuss the political implications or make predictions about what comes next, I’d love to hear from you in the comments.

The Enigma of Clock Hours for Teachers in Washington State

Update: NBCT facilitator extraordinaire and giant of the Washington State ed scene @maren_johnson weighed in with some detail and context in the comments. She touched on changes to the recert process and the importance of clock hours for NBCTs. She is always worth a read. 

Original Post: I am entering my tenth year of teaching and throughout (most) of my career I’ve dutifully filled out forms for, paid for and accumulated clock hours (mostly because the people at Evergreen told me that’s what I was supposed to do, back in the aughts).

I have to admit though, up until starting to write this, I didn't really understand how the clock hours system works. I’m not daft; I know that we’re accumulating training hours for our certs, but there’s a math that underlies it all that eludes me and many of my colleagues.

Let me start with the knowns of the system (and a few unknowns)

I know that our state salary schedule is complicated (and overdue for revision by the Legislature).

I know I graduated with an MA+45 (and will probably remain there until I die).

I know that I have to complete 150 clock hours every five years to keep my cert valid.

I know there is some magical formula whereby X number of clock hours (magically) become credits and Y number of credits moves one up the salary schedule [conversely, I have no idea of the values of X and Y (edit: just found the answer here)].

I know that despite dutifully (for the most part) turning in these clock hour forms for nine years, I remain in the same place on the salary schedule (although that doesn’t really matter to me, I just present it for context because I know my situation is not unique).

I know that if you complete you Pro-Teach Portfolio, which I did last year, you are automatically awarded 150 clock hours.

I know that… (no, I learned from Googling it five minutes ago that) people who complete their National Boards are exempted from the entire clock hours process (see image below). 

I promise you many NBCTs in Washington have no idea about this.  

If you’re paying attention you might notice an interesting connection between #3 and #6 that I didn't know about until this week:

• You have to complete 150 clock hours to keep your cert;

• The mandatory re-cert process grants you 150 clock hours.

So this leads me to my questions one systemic and one personal:

Systemic: Why do we continue to maintain the clock hour system and how does its continuation serve students? They're a hassle for practitioners. I don’t have to tell other Washington teachers about the rules: paying by check or exact change to have our training documented, hand carrying the forms to the district office, making their filing deadlines, lost/misplaced forms, being berated for late submission, being charged silly look-up fees for past trainings, etc.

Don’t get it twisted. I am not anti-PD. I am the opposite. I am a fierce advocate for high quality PD, but the clock hours system does very little (a bubble in evaluation sheet) to ensure the PD offered is of high caliber. More is not more. Who is this system actually holding accountable? A teacher would have to be in a coma to not accumulate 150 hours of PD over a five year period. Moreover, if the PD is lacking in quality (which much of it is) or the participant has no interest in improving their practice (which sadly is often the case) a teacher could accumulate 1500 clock hours with no impact on students.

Personal: Unless you’re doing it for the money, why should we bother with clock hours? Admittedly, I long ago forsook ambitions of the (alleged) raises at the end of the X & Y rainbow. Can't I just sidestep the entire system? In four years, to maintain my cert, I will face the choice of doing the NBCT process or going through the Pro-Teach Portfolio process (again). If I complete boards I am rescued, from on-high, from the clock hours system and if I (choose the other path and) do Pro-Teach I will be awarded all the hours I need regardless of how many forms I did or didn’t dutifully fill out, pay for for accumulate in the interim. What's the point?

I am bothered that it has taken nine years in the game to understand this math. I promise that few recent grads from ed programs entering schools this fall understand it at all. That's nuts...

 I need someone to talk me down on this... do you understand the system better than I do? Am I wrong? Did you actually get that magical X/Y pay bump? Is there a better way in other states? The questions posed aren't rhetorical… I’d love to hear your thoughts, questions, experiences, etc. in the comments.