Lowered Expectations: School Failure is the New Success

(Image by Tinou Bao)

In response to teacher concerns that school reform efforts were moving forward too quickly, without adequate discussion, analysis or teacher buy-in, an administrator suggested that it was okay to “fail forward.”

The most appalling implication of this statement is that failure is considered a reasonable goal. However, this statement is also a not so subtle way of saying “your concerns are not wanted, the decision has already been made. So live with it.” It also is also based on the disturbing premise that it is better to try something new, even if it is not likely to work, because any change is better than no change. After all, you can’t have progress without taking risks. And what the hell, if it turns out to be a mistake, you can always learn from it, fix it, and grow stronger as a result.

The problem is that you cannot fix all mistakes, especially in institutions like schools with deeply entrenched bureaucracies. In fact, administrators often deliberately push through policies quickly, precisely to avoid opposition, knowing that they will be difficult or impossible to reverse. Consider NCLB, which has been a total disaster, still going strong after nine years.  

Even ineffective site-based changes can become entrenched. However, when an administrator loses the trust and respect of his or her staff by ruling autocratically or ignoring their concerns and suggestions, it becomes much harder to implement any new reforms. When reforms are not supported by staff they are unlikely to result in improved learning outcomes because staff will not put much energy or passion into the changes and may even undermine them.

Lastly, though it should be obvious, this administrator needs reminding that change in of itself is not necessarily good. A cost-benefit analysis must always be done. If the costs are too high or the benefits too small the reform is a bad risk and not worth doing. Costs must necessarily include the labor and time to implement the change, while anticipated benefits should be based on accurately parsed data, not on hypotheses or assumptions. Just because a reform sounds like it should be good for students or seems to be a “no brainer,” doesn’t mean that it will actually improve learning outcomes or that the improvements will be significant enough to justify the investment and sacrifices.

Seasonal Affective Pedagogue Disorder

Depression Drags You Down, by Ianuiop

As winter break approaches, teachers across the land begin to fall into a seasonal funk that is unique to teaching and distinct from the more generalized depression afflicting the rest of the country that results from relentless familial obligations, winter colds and flu, financial woes, seasonal affective disorder and overdoes of Christmas commercialism.

This peculiar teacher malaise is caused by the weariness of toiling for months to keep kids engaged, stimulated and well-behaved, combined with ongoing harassment by parents, politicians and pundits, and the sad realization that, despite all the hard work, we still have large numbers of failing students. For those unfortunate enough to teach in districts where finals occur after winter break, there is the added bummer of knowing that some kids will fail because of family vacations that extend past the end of the semester.

By the end of spring we are exhausted, but at least we can look forward to the long summer vacation ahead. Additionally, by second semester, many of the students who failed first semester have figured out how to do their work, or dropped the class, so the total number of Fs is lower. Spring is also graduation time. Students are more excited and optimistic. I receive my most positive feedback in the spring, when students and parents thank me for sticking with them and ask me to sign their yearbooks. I’ll never forget my first year teaching, when one boy introduced me to his father on graduation day, explaining that he would be the first in his family to graduate from high school, and then attributed it all to my confidence in him. 

The Bowl Curve

I suspect that Seasonal Affective Pedagogue Syndrome is more common in low income and low-performing schools, which tend to have a disproportionate number of students who begin the year without many of the prerequisite skills necessary to succeed at their grade level (e.g., reading, math, organization). As a result, they often fail to complete assignments and do poorly on exams, thus bringing down class averages to depressing lows. I have so many of these students that my class statistics (both overall, and for any given exam) more closely resemble lopsided bowls than traditional bell curves, with more students earning Ds and Fs than As, Bs and Cs.

The really sad thing about the bowl curve phenomenon is not just that there are so many Ds and Fs in one class or school, which is depressing itself, but the deplorable social conditions that contribute to it. The majority of my students who fail are reading below grade level. Most of them are low income. Many of them haven’t the slightest idea how to behave academically, routinely showing up without pens, their binders chaotically stuffed with random papers. Some have GPAs of less than 1.0 by the time they are seniors. Many are homeless, or have one or both parents looking for work, or in the hospital, or in jail, or deported, or dead. I have Iraqi refugees and students who’ve lost parents in the war.

It’s really quite remarkable that some of these kids make it to school at all. For others, it’s the only sane and structured part of their day.

Student Malaise

It’s not just the teachers and disadvantaged youth who suffer this seasonal depression. Even privileged students are burned out from all the homework, projects and testing. Many have tuned out by December. Frustrated, I went to a colleague for support. “I’ve been reviewing for finals with my students, but no one seems to know the answer to anything anymore, not even topics we covered yesterday.”

My colleague told me not to take it personally, that it was just the time of the year, and that we’re all experiencing the same thing. She told me she got so frustrated that she told her class, “I’m not going to stand here and ruin my voice asking review questions if you won’t take the trouble to think or look up the answers.”

Nevertheless, the problem seems worse this year than in previous years. I suspect that the economy has something to do with it. We have far more unemployed parents than usual. The stresses of living in poverty or even in a struggling middle class family can have profound effects on children. Worried parents, arguments over finances, privation and sacrifices, all cause stress and can affect children’s sleeping and eating habits, cortisol levels, immunity, and ability to concentrate in class.

On A Bright Note

Attendance is up and tardies are down, so at least my kids are making it to class. Very few kids have been rude to me this semester and interactions with self-entitled parents have been minimal, which has kept my stress levels low. Best of all, I will soon have two weeks to eat, read, relax and pee when I want to, unencumbered by bells and regulations.

The Bowl Curve

Another disturbing trend I discovered during my first year of teaching was that most of my classes had more students earning Ds and Fs than As, Bs, or Cs. When graphed, my grade distributions looked almost like upside down bell curves. I dubbed this syndrome, The Bowl Curve.

The D and F students were often bright, but they did not do homework. They often came to class without books, binders, pens and pencils. Many were reading far below grade level and had trouble paying attention. Most had clearly experienced social promotion in the past.

I checked their school records out of concern that maybe I was grading to harshly. In most cases, these same students were failing 2, 3, even 4 other classes. Their other teachers and I had met on several occasions to discuss the matter. In general, they were not doing their assignments, or they were chronically absent or tardy, or they come to class unprepared.

I met with one parent who was upset about her daughter’s D in my honors biology class. Her daughter was a bright kid who had terrible test anxiety. I explained that her daughter had earned only 65 out of 270 on the midterm exam and had failed to turn several assignments. Furthermore, her lab reports were poorly written and incomplete. We discussed test-taking strategies and ways to combat the anxieties. By the end of the meeting, both mother and daughter appeared satisfied. The mother thanked me and said she would help her daughter try some of my suggestions.

The next day I was called into the principal’s office. “Mrs. Jones is really upset! She can’t understand your grading policy. She says her daughter has turned in all her work, yet she still earned only a D?!”

After repeating to him what I had discussed with Mrs. Jones, I asserted that the grade was more than fair. “I don’t agree,” he argued. “She worked really hard. She deserves more than a D. After all, 65 out of 270 is a pretty good score for biology.”

“65 out of 270,” I reminded him, “is only 24%. To earn a D- she would need 60%. Keep in mind, this is an honors biology course. Considering the missing assignments and weak lab reports, I consider a D to be very generous.”

“Generous?!!” he screamed. “You’re so old-fashioned, Mr. Dunn. No one uses that old percentage system! Get with the program! And it’s not just the Jones girl. You have too many Ds and Fs.”

He suggested that I make missing assignments worth 25% instead of 0%. “An F is an F, after all.” So I tried his Enron style of grading and found that in most cases it made no difference. These students were missing so many assignments and had such low test scores that they still had Fs overall.