Today I walked into the classroom to find an unfamiliar face sitting at Ms. Moraes’ desk. The substitute teacher introduced herself to me as Dr. G_____ F_____, a Ph.D. graduate in Natural Resources who had just completed her degree in December. She was looking for an assistant professorship in the area, notably San Jose State, but in the meanwhile was substitute teaching to make money to pay back her student loans. She told me she had subbed in many areas, including Oakland (“I’d never go back there”), where she noticed the kids were policed in a much more strict manner, and responded to set hand signals and rigid classroom protocol. Right away I figured this sub had had a tough day, and was in for even tougher times. She described the morning session as “unruly” and “very out of control” and seemed to be more content to get through the day alive rather than teach the students anything. She said “You can leave,” but I stayed because this was actually an exciting opportunity to step in.
I helped line the students up like usual after P.E. (which they have on Friday afternoons) and Laura Soto mentioned to me that the teacher had dropped an F-bomb already this morning. Seems like I was right about the frustration. The student government ran their student store, selling Otter Pops to kids for the first 15 minutes of class, which went fairly smoothly. They had a tough time wrapping it up on time, which is where it became even more obvious this sub had no control.
We started the afternoon block with a science lesson on inheritance. Initially, Dr. Feldman held the class’ attention fairly well (considering the room was dimmed and she was stumbling through the lesson plan herself), but it was clear the kids were merely compliant and not engaged, like they usually are with Ms. Moraes. By the way she was teaching, I could tell that she had very low expectations of the students’ ability, which put me off a bit. She also seemed to have low expectations of her own ability to direct the class, which was also a concern.
I sat in the back of the class with Max V., like I usually do. Max is a Fijian student who sits in the back close to Ms. Moraes’ desk for personal attention. He is a good-natured, friendly kid but has trouble focusing in on lessons, and I feel he simply goes through the motions and doesn’t pick up much, even when Ms. Moraes is teaching. Today wasn’t an exception, but I noticed Max was really good at folding origami and paper airplanes (which I asked him to save for later, and he complied). I also read along with Max as the sub teacher explained the concept of gene inheritance, and encouraged him strongly to raise his hand to read aloud when students were taking turns reading the handout. He appeared shy and didn’t want to do it, but I can tell that he’s actually quite a decent reader. I believe Max might have internalized the idea that he is dumb and slow, and thus is shy to speak out. The way his classmates treat him adds to this, as many of the more serious students don’t want to sit next to him or work in groups with him because he has an ingrained reputation for messing around and distracting others.
Max’s name was also up on the board, along with some other familiar names of kids I knew to be regular jokesters. The sub’s system of punishment was literally laughed off by most of the kids (name on the board, and check marks for further infractions), and even her threats to take away from precious “free time minutes,” which she invoked much more often than Ms. Moraes does, were brushed off as bluffs. I thought it was a fairly poor system that clearly didn’t work at all.
I noticed that many students complained Ms. Moraes had already covered the material we were going over. Although many students could probably have used a review, I think it was in line with the sub’s low expectations for the class that she went along and pushed through the lesson anyway. She got terrible results: the kids who usually have a tough time paying attention predictably did not get much from the lesson, and the kids who are more serious students were bored to death.
We broke into group work on a lab involving gene inheritance. The lab was poorly explained, and poorly set up in general. It took me a good 10 minutes to understand the instructions, working with a small group. Unsurprisingly, the other student groups which were working alone quickly deteriorated and lost focus. The sub lost her nerve very quickly, and retreated behind the desk with her hands up in the air. This was really disappointing: it seemed as if she was ready to give up even if the students were trying hard. And there was at least an initial effort from most of the students, though most could not sustain it (the lab was really not that easy to do without guidance). I worked with Fatima, Laura S., and Kevin. Together we worked out the lab and I made sure to include everyone. As I have mentioned before, Laura is extremely bright and clearly a classroom leader. She helped me explain to Fatima and Kevin how the lab worked and what they were looking for. I was happy to leverage her knowledge and ability to help me teach.
After the science lab ended with poor results (only the group I worked with actually was able to turn in a completed answer sheet), the sub moved on to handing out language arts packets. The worksheet was incomplete and difficult to explain (using transitional words), and at this point it was very obvious the sub had totally given up. I told her the worksheet was not useful without its counterpart, and she simply threw her hands up and said she’d given up on the day completely. It was up to me to teach the class. Since the worksheet was fairly useless, I took it upon myself to create a “lesson” to teach this concept, on the fly. The classroom was very loud and rowdy, and I deduced with the 30 minutes of class time I had left, I’d end up spending about half of it just quieting the kids down and getting them back to their desks. I decided to focus on the kids who wanted to learn the material.
I started with Sam, Fatima, and Mayra. The students were engaged. I tapped into their ZPD by using examples from the day’s events to describe transitional words.
- We worked on science and English until 4. ______ we got to go home.
o Answer: Then, Next, Finally, etc.
- Mayra wore green yesterday. ______ she wears pink.
o Answer: Sometimes, On the other hand today, etc.
The kids really responded well to this interactive teaching. They clearly found pleasure in thinking about the “blank” word and understanding the concept. I related to them that school is more about understanding material rather than completing it mindlessly, and they all agreed enthusiastically. Fatima told me that’s her biggest problem: actually completing worksheets. She said she’d rather just understand the concepts, talk things out. A Socratic teaching style might really appeal to her, as it’s all about self-discovery and bouncing ideas off others. By the time my mini-lesson was picking up steam, I had gathered a larger crowd of students. Kevin and Laura came back to join the discussion, as did many others who were previously fooling around. This really got me thinking that many of the students just want to be engaged and taught things that they realize are salient to their everyday lives. By using examples straight from the day’s events, I think I helped them connect schoolwork with reality a bit more, something they intimated to me that they value.
I also had an interesting conversation with Mayra and Fatima about what I do. I related to them that I’m a political science student, and they began peppering me with questions about Barack Obama versus Hillary Clinton. They were really well versed on their stances, for 7th graders. Again, more evidence to me that the kids are really smart, but just need a connection between school and the real world. Almost universally, the kids I talk to are very serious about college and achievement.
Though our little group was working well, things really fell apart in the last 15 minutes. The sub teacher pulled me aside, said “I’m never subbing here again,” immediately left the classroom and quit on us. Unbelievable. Ms. Thomas, the vice principal I had met before (during the Valentine’s wear-red talk) came in to regulate the class, along with two other campus aides. She expressed serious disappointment with the class’ behavior and talked about their responsibility as the first graduating class from EPA Academy. It seems like the administrators, unlike the sub, have very high expectations for the students and they sense that as well. After a tough-love lecture lasting 15 minutes, Ms. Thomas had the students write a 1-page reflection on their behavior, and the students were excused for the day.
Yo. Thanks for posting that interesting story yunit, I enjoyed it as i did the other one. DANK. That sub loads me up though. I mean wtf, why is she trying to teach if she doesnt give a damn about actually teaching something to the students. Seems to me that she is doing more harm than good. In your journal she is just going through the motions of teaching much like the students do with some of their work, which is sends a message to the students that its ok to bs youre way through things. Which, ha, can be true sometimes i guess, but not so much when it comes to learning basic concepts.
I think its baller that you were able to step up and take at least some control of the class when the sub failed so miserably. Im sure that the students have more respect for you than the sub.
Although I'm sure that it did the students some good to write the required page on their behavior, I hope that they or you expressed your feelings about the sub to the faculty. It would be interesting to get your hands on some of those papers. I wouldnt be suprised if many of the students wrote about how lax the sub was rather than why they behaved the way they did.
Comical that a Ph.D. can lack the awareness of the importance of proper delivery of the very thing that brought them to where they are, a good education. Cheers to being one up on this one already.
2 comments:
Today I walked into the classroom to find an unfamiliar face sitting at Ms. Moraes’ desk. The substitute teacher introduced herself to me as Dr. G_____ F_____, a Ph.D. graduate in Natural Resources who had just completed her degree in December. She was looking for an assistant professorship in the area, notably San Jose State, but in the meanwhile was substitute teaching to make money to pay back her student loans. She told me she had subbed in many areas, including Oakland (“I’d never go back there”), where she noticed the kids were policed in a much more strict manner, and responded to set hand signals and rigid classroom protocol. Right away I figured this sub had had a tough day, and was in for even tougher times. She described the morning session as “unruly” and “very out of control” and seemed to be more content to get through the day alive rather than teach the students anything. She said “You can leave,” but I stayed because this was actually an exciting opportunity to step in.
I helped line the students up like usual after P.E. (which they have on Friday afternoons) and Laura Soto mentioned to me that the teacher had dropped an F-bomb already this morning. Seems like I was right about the frustration. The student government ran their student store, selling Otter Pops to kids for the first 15 minutes of class, which went fairly smoothly. They had a tough time wrapping it up on time, which is where it became even more obvious this sub had no control.
We started the afternoon block with a science lesson on inheritance. Initially, Dr. Feldman held the class’ attention fairly well (considering the room was dimmed and she was stumbling through the lesson plan herself), but it was clear the kids were merely compliant and not engaged, like they usually are with Ms. Moraes. By the way she was teaching, I could tell that she had very low expectations of the students’ ability, which put me off a bit. She also seemed to have low expectations of her own ability to direct the class, which was also a concern.
I sat in the back of the class with Max V., like I usually do. Max is a Fijian student who sits in the back close to Ms. Moraes’ desk for personal attention. He is a good-natured, friendly kid but has trouble focusing in on lessons, and I feel he simply goes through the motions and doesn’t pick up much, even when Ms. Moraes is teaching. Today wasn’t an exception, but I noticed Max was really good at folding origami and paper airplanes (which I asked him to save for later, and he complied). I also read along with Max as the sub teacher explained the concept of gene inheritance, and encouraged him strongly to raise his hand to read aloud when students were taking turns reading the handout. He appeared shy and didn’t want to do it, but I can tell that he’s actually quite a decent reader. I believe Max might have internalized the idea that he is dumb and slow, and thus is shy to speak out. The way his classmates treat him adds to this, as many of the more serious students don’t want to sit next to him or work in groups with him because he has an ingrained reputation for messing around and distracting others.
Max’s name was also up on the board, along with some other familiar names of kids I knew to be regular jokesters. The sub’s system of punishment was literally laughed off by most of the kids (name on the board, and check marks for further infractions), and even her threats to take away from precious “free time minutes,” which she invoked much more often than Ms. Moraes does, were brushed off as bluffs. I thought it was a fairly poor system that clearly didn’t work at all.
I noticed that many students complained Ms. Moraes had already covered the material we were going over. Although many students could probably have used a review, I think it was in line with the sub’s low expectations for the class that she went along and pushed through the lesson anyway. She got terrible results: the kids who usually have a tough time paying attention predictably did not get much from the lesson, and the kids who are more serious students were bored to death.
We broke into group work on a lab involving gene inheritance. The lab was poorly explained, and poorly set up in general. It took me a good 10 minutes to understand the instructions, working with a small group. Unsurprisingly, the other student groups which were working alone quickly deteriorated and lost focus. The sub lost her nerve very quickly, and retreated behind the desk with her hands up in the air. This was really disappointing: it seemed as if she was ready to give up even if the students were trying hard. And there was at least an initial effort from most of the students, though most could not sustain it (the lab was really not that easy to do without guidance). I worked with Fatima, Laura S., and Kevin. Together we worked out the lab and I made sure to include everyone. As I have mentioned before, Laura is extremely bright and clearly a classroom leader. She helped me explain to Fatima and Kevin how the lab worked and what they were looking for. I was happy to leverage her knowledge and ability to help me teach.
After the science lab ended with poor results (only the group I worked with actually was able to turn in a completed answer sheet), the sub moved on to handing out language arts packets. The worksheet was incomplete and difficult to explain (using transitional words), and at this point it was very obvious the sub had totally given up. I told her the worksheet was not useful without its counterpart, and she simply threw her hands up and said she’d given up on the day completely. It was up to me to teach the class. Since the worksheet was fairly useless, I took it upon myself to create a “lesson” to teach this concept, on the fly. The classroom was very loud and rowdy, and I deduced with the 30 minutes of class time I had left, I’d end up spending about half of it just quieting the kids down and getting them back to their desks. I decided to focus on the kids who wanted to learn the material.
I started with Sam, Fatima, and Mayra. The students were engaged. I tapped into their ZPD by using examples from the day’s events to describe transitional words.
- We worked on science and English until 4. ______ we got to go home.
o Answer: Then, Next, Finally, etc.
- Mayra wore green yesterday. ______ she wears pink.
o Answer: Sometimes, On the other hand today, etc.
The kids really responded well to this interactive teaching. They clearly found pleasure in thinking about the “blank” word and understanding the concept. I related to them that school is more about understanding material rather than completing it mindlessly, and they all agreed enthusiastically. Fatima told me that’s her biggest problem: actually completing worksheets. She said she’d rather just understand the concepts, talk things out. A Socratic teaching style might really appeal to her, as it’s all about self-discovery and bouncing ideas off others. By the time my mini-lesson was picking up steam, I had gathered a larger crowd of students. Kevin and Laura came back to join the discussion, as did many others who were previously fooling around. This really got me thinking that many of the students just want to be engaged and taught things that they realize are salient to their everyday lives. By using examples straight from the day’s events, I think I helped them connect schoolwork with reality a bit more, something they intimated to me that they value.
I also had an interesting conversation with Mayra and Fatima about what I do. I related to them that I’m a political science student, and they began peppering me with questions about Barack Obama versus Hillary Clinton. They were really well versed on their stances, for 7th graders. Again, more evidence to me that the kids are really smart, but just need a connection between school and the real world. Almost universally, the kids I talk to are very serious about college and achievement.
Though our little group was working well, things really fell apart in the last 15 minutes. The sub teacher pulled me aside, said “I’m never subbing here again,” immediately left the classroom and quit on us. Unbelievable. Ms. Thomas, the vice principal I had met before (during the Valentine’s wear-red talk) came in to regulate the class, along with two other campus aides. She expressed serious disappointment with the class’ behavior and talked about their responsibility as the first graduating class from EPA Academy. It seems like the administrators, unlike the sub, have very high expectations for the students and they sense that as well. After a tough-love lecture lasting 15 minutes, Ms. Thomas had the students write a 1-page reflection on their behavior, and the students were excused for the day.
Yo. Thanks for posting that interesting story yunit, I enjoyed it as i did the other one. DANK. That sub loads me up though. I mean wtf, why is she trying to teach if she doesnt give a damn about actually teaching something to the students. Seems to me that she is doing more harm than good. In your journal she is just going through the motions of teaching much like the students do with some of their work, which is sends a message to the students that its ok to bs youre way through things. Which, ha, can be true sometimes i guess, but not so much when it comes to learning basic concepts.
I think its baller that you were able to step up and take at least some control of the class when the sub failed so miserably. Im sure that the students have more respect for you than the sub.
Although I'm sure that it did the students some good to write the required page on their behavior, I hope that they or you expressed your feelings about the sub to the faculty. It would be interesting to get your hands on some of those papers. I wouldnt be suprised if many of the students wrote about how lax the sub was rather than why they behaved the way they did.
Comical that a Ph.D. can lack the awareness of the importance of proper delivery of the very thing that brought them to where they are, a good education. Cheers to being one up on this one already.
Post a Comment