Cell phones

As summer begins to wind down, most high school seniors will turn their thoughts to a new year filled with Friday night football games, college applications, and for some, driving to school instead of taking the bus. They will begin to feel like real adults, making decisions that will have a profound effect on their futures.

As a veteran teacher, I hope to help them with an increasingly more difficult problem: how they manage their cell phones.

This year I will start by telling them about Robbinsville School Superintendent Steven Mayer. He was killed while jogging in April, allegedly by a high school senior. The driver, now 18, has been charged with death by auto and leaving the scene of a fatal motor-vehicle accident. According to authorities, the woman was on her phone at the time of the accident.Mayer was 52 years old, a man with a wife and three sons. I cannot imagine the pain and grief his family has been going through - all because a high school senior was allegedly on her cell phone while driving.

As many of my former students can attest, I have been sounding the alarm in my classroom regarding cell phone use for a very long time. While most students will at least try to hide that they are sending a message or checking the latest tweet, it's still terribly disruptive.

I have appealed to their moral conscience: "Checking a cell phone signals that you don't value the teacher or the learning environment."

I have appealed to their intellect: "Being on your phone means you might miss something important in the lesson."

I have shared articles that detail how cell phones have become enormous distractions in daily life, and that it requires discipline to manage their use.

I've even shown them Youtube videos of Adele and Beyonce excoriating their fans for videotaping songs instead of being in the moment and enjoying the music.

With Mayer's death, I will appeal to my students' emotions. I hope they will see themselves in that teen driver. I want them to make a direct connection between what happened on that April morning and what so many of them do every day - get behind the wheel of a car. This won't be easy - after all, they are biologically programmed to believe they are invincible, that something like this couldn't happen to them.

When cell phones became a regular presence in schools, many of us were concerned with cheating - students taking a picture of a test or writing topic and then sharing it with friends. As social platforms have proliferated, however, it has become clear that there are few times in a typical day when teenagers aren't engaged with their phones. With almost half of all U.S. teenagers reporting that they are addicted to their phones, it's time to have a national conversation about their proper use.

Recently, the National Council on Highway Safety began airing public service ads that focus on the dangers of texting and driving. The tag line - stoptextsstopwrecks - should serve as a reminder to all drivers, rookie and veteran, that we have a personal responsibility to do the right thing.

One way is to use the many apps now available, such as AT&T's DriveMode and Verizon's Safely Go, which prevent phone and text messages from coming in or going out while the car is moving. Another suggestion is to place the phone out of reach, in the trunk of the car or a locked glove compartment. One of the most effective methods is parents and other adults modeling good cell phone behavior. Once it becomes a national priority, much like the campaign against drinking and driving, cell phone behaviors will improve dramatically.

When school starts in September, I'll explain my cell phone policy to a new group of seniors. I'll remind them of the school guidelines and the procedure for violations, and I'll repeat my mantra that cell phone discipline in the classroom will transfer to cell phone discipline in the car. I will also show them a picture of Steven Mayer, and share the very tragic way in which he died.

PARCC and Common Core

Now that the Partnership for Assessment of Readiness for College and Careers (PARCC) tests are over,  it's a good time to have a serious discussion about the usefulness of standardized testing. When the National Governors Association first began talking seriously about a national test, few could have envisioned what we have today--a very contentious environment pitting educators and parents against officials and leaders on the state and federal levels. This spring's opt-out movement, and the decision by many states to delay implementing the tests, clearly demonstrates that much work lies ahead for those who have invested a great deal of time and money in the Common Core State Standards (CCSS).

When many states adopted the CCSS, which is a set of skills, not a curriculum, and then the PARCC, which is the test that measures those skills, educators across the country were thrilled to see a genuine, bipartisan effort to raise the educational bar. States are free to set any curriculum they wish, using any materials at their disposal. It would allow for academic comparisons not just within states, but between states, so a parent in Nebraska who would traditionally get feedback on how her child compares to other fifth grade Nebraskans, could now compare her child's achievement with other fifth graders throughout the country.  This would solve an ongoing problem in education: states having their own tests to determine academic achievement, with wildly different results.  Florida, for example, could no longer pretend that a majority of their 5th graders were proficient in reading and math when using their own tests, but far fewer when using a national test.

Another problem that the CCSS solved was getting students college and career ready.  With almost 40% of college freshmen needing remediation in math, reading and writing, it's reasonable to ask why such a large number of students are unprepared for college level work.  The PARCC tests, especially at the high school level, could give a very clear indication of how ready a student is.  Students can then either rethink their decision to go on to higher education, or spend more time and effort in improving their skills to meet the minimum standards. For decades high SAT or ACT scores were the holy grail when it came to college readiness; for the SATs, a minimum 1550 is the college and career readiness benchmark score, according to the College Board, which administers the SAT.  Note the phrase "college and career readiness"--the College Board has been in the standards game for a very long time, and while there are numerous challenges one can make about the SAT, one thing is very clear: they are the best at developing standardized tests. In a few years, the PARCC may give college admissions committees one more standardized, national test score to evaluate students, but only after years of collecting data.

Of course, it was inevitable that the CCSS and PARCC would become a political issue.  The fear of federal overreach in education has always been a concern among states.  Governor Christie, a long-time supporter of the CCSS, just recently stated his intention to replace it with a new set of standards developed by parents and educators in New Jersey, rather than " developed by people near the Potomac." The bottom line is that the stated goals of the tests, as well as what they can measure in student learning, is very valuable, but the tests aren't ready yet for prime time.

So what should be done?

First, the tests themselves should be reevaluated and revised.  Tests must show validity and reliability, and one way to check for both is to administer the tests and examine the results over a reasonable period of time. David Coleman, the president of the College Board, was a main architect of the Common Core State Standards, so his expertise is unquestionable. The professionals who are in charge of making up the tests, which always include educators (but should not include parents or politicians), are in the best position to determine what changes need to be made.  Once proficiency scores are established, educators, students, and parents will understand the work that needs to be done.

Second, no PARCC test scores should determine whether or not a student advances to the next grade level.  There is not a single professional study that suggests there are any benefits in retaining students, so threatening students with being left back is simply a non-starter. This would also put the brakes on the opt-out movement that has gained tremendous momentum.

Third, the PARCC tests were never intended to measure teacher effectiveness. Again, as the political motivations of various elected officials became evident, the opportunity to link test results with teacher performance was too good to pass up. The CCSS and the PARCC were designed to bring rigor and uniformity to the classroom, not evaluate how well a teacher teaches. Witness the strange alliance between teachers unions and Republican governors as proof of just how contentious this point is.

Lastly, let us treat the tests for what they are: another data point for students, parents, teachers, administrators, and college officials. For years elementary school students have taken the California Achievement Test (CAT), and high school students have taken the SAT and ACT; the PARCC can simply add information to a student's academic profile. Rather than eliminating them before they have a chance to demonstrate what they can offer, let's see what the data shows this school year, and wait for the publishers of the tests to tell us what they have learned from their first year.

In 2010, 45 states adopted the Common Core, a remarkable achievement by the National Governors Association. By 2015, only 10 states have implemented either PARCC or Smarter Balanced, another test aligned with the Common Core. The bottom line? Let's keep the standards; they are rigorous and superior to most existing state standards. But let's take some time and do what's right for anyone who has a stake in student achievement, which includes every single one of us.

New Jersey's Broken System (2014)

The more things change, the more they stay the same.  A glancing look at New Jersey's budget woes, and Governor Chris Christie's solution to the problem, remind me that after all these years, the same rhetoric is used with the same, tired excuses.  Yes, there is a very serious budget problem, and yes, health and pension benefits for state employees have a lot to do with it.  But the real work is in crafting a long-term solution, and this involves not just the governor, but the two legislative bodies, the Senate and Assembly, that have been controlled by the Democrats for more than three decades. To blame the current Republican governor is to ignore the realities of the past, as well as to exonerate the elected officials in the New Jersey Legislature of their responsibilities to the citizens of New Jersey.

          When former Governor Christine Todd Whitman took pension money to balance the budget in 1995, there was an understandable outcry, but since her tenure, there have been a series of Democratic governors and legislators who did virtually nothing to ensure that the pension system remained healthy.  Even then, there were warnings; former New Jersey Treasurer Richard C. Leone said at the time, "There is no question that this is creating future debt."

          Fast forward to 2011, and Governor Christie, along with a very compliant Democratic State Senate President Stephen Sweeney, negotiates legislation that claims true reform, but in actuality it isn't.  Christie knew that the revenue estimates were too high, thereby rendering his budget projections useless.

          The cynic in me says Christie knew that he would not be making the pension payment all along.  After all, this is a person who has said things on the record, and has then gone back on his word. He also knew he could depend on the negative public sentiment regarding public workers in general, and unions in particular, a new reality that is not abating anytime soon. Christie banked on the idea that he could balance his budget by simply not making the pension payment.

          But none of this really matters, because this is an issue of values.  The Governor can claim that there are no other solutions to balancing the budget save for not making the pension payments, and asking public employees to contribute more to their benefits; the Democrats can claim that increasing the gas tax, giving corporate tax breaks and increasing taxes on the wealthiest residents are very viable solutions to the problem.

          Both political parties will take jabs at one another, but no one will do the hard work--vote on legislation that restores sanity to the budget process, and to the health benefits and pension systems.

          What must happen is voters--both state employees and New Jersey citizens--must insist that their elected representatives pass legislation that does two things: make it impossible for governors to take pension fund money and move it onto the state budget, and require that full pension payments be made yearly.

          Christie, like any good Republican, believes in corporate tax breaks as a means to grow jobs, and not raising the gas tax or imposing a millionaires' tax for fear of driving away businesses.  Proposing these solutions is absurd because they run counter to his political and economic philosophies.

          But if the Legislature does its job, then they need not visit this issue with acute regularity every spring. They must take on the responsibility of reforming the whole system, because there will be an end game, and New Jersey taxpayers will feel it.  But by then, it will be too late to do anything about it.

          It's all a matter of values, and those in power--both Democrats and Republicans--get to exercise their values. Democrats had numerous opportunities to fix the system when there was a Democrat in the Governor's office, and they chose not to. Now that there's a Republican, and for at least three more years, their work is far more complicated.  Hopefully they will find the political will to do what is right.

Superstorm Sandy (2013)

When Superstorm Sandy hit last October, I could not begin to imagine
what summer 2013 at the Jersey Shore would look like. News footage of
the flooding, wind damage, and storm surge guaranteed at least a
challenging season for some businesses and homeowners. The good news is
the cleanup has been remarkable; the not-so-good news is it will take
years before everything is back to normal.

Last November, when my husband and I were allowed back into our home in
Beach Haven West after the storm, we were met with absolute devastation.
We passed boats off their lifts, and saw random wave runners and jet
skis strewn in people's front and side yards. Dried seagrass was trapped
almost four feet high in chain link fences, and a thin layer of mud
covered rock lawns, decks, and, for those of us with homes on a cement
slab, the first floor.

But those are distant memories. Since summer unofficially began on
Memorial Day, I've been peering into empty homes, eviscerated of their
contents. Some look as though they were last entered just before the
storm, with furniture settled wherever the water level receded. Others
are stripped down to studs, standing naked clear through the windows.
"For Sale" signs are everywhere, as are demolition and house-raising
advertisements. Although there is very little debris in the streets and
driveways, some properties clearly have been abandoned, such as the one
with a boat, its windshield missing, crashing through garage doors.

However, one thing that has not changed is the incredible support and
generosity of friends and neighbors. Although some families just needed
to hose out their garages just after Sandy, others lost everything. It
has been extraordinary to see people open their homes to residents who
have suffered the most, especially those still dealing with the stress
of insurance companies and new local zoning laws.

Except for an occasional sighting of a Real Housewife of New Jersey, it
turned out to be a quiet summer. Some new construction took place, but
most homeowners were remodeling. Traffic was way down, and hard-to-get
reservations weren't so hard to get. Our little bungalow didn't have any
drywall (love that '70s-style paneling), so after tossing all the
furniture and hosing it out, everything dried. Is there mold? We don't
know, but we're staying.

Considering what things looked like 10 months ago, it was a good summer.
As for summer 2014? It can only get better.

An Open Letter to Governor Christie

Dear Governor Chris Christie:
So I hear you may have some job openings in your administration, what with most (if not all) of your inner circle not telling you about the George Washington Bridge problems, and having to deal with those pesky subpoenas for the next few months.  Although it looks bad for you right now, I might be able to help you out.  I'm proposing that you hire me, a middle-age, future pension-collecting, card-carrying New Jersey Education Association member who is also a registered Democrat who voted for Barbara Buono.  Before you call me an idiot and say I'm stupid, hear me out.

First, you've been accused of not being told anything about what happened by your closest confidantes, and said that you were humiliated and embarrassed.  I can guarantee you that any information you should know about, I will tell you. Our state doesn't just produce tough-talking Jersey guys--it produces tough-talking Jersey girls, too. So I'll have no problem whatsoever telling you exactly what you need to hear. And I won't allow you to intentionally be unaware of things so that you can then hide behind the nod-and-wink of "I didn't know about that."

Second, since I have no political connections whatsoever, I'm incorruptible. Think about that--no one can buy me; therefore, I'll never be caught doing anything illegal, such as ordering the closure of a few bridge lanes to depress the value of some $1 billion undeveloped property or withhold federal funds to send a political message to a rival. No one can ever come to me and say, "Hey, you do this for me, I'll do this for you." You know how that can come back and bite you.

Finally, as a public school teacher, think how impressed voters will be after the way you villified us. Think of the headline: "Christie hires educator as chief of staff" We could do some in-school assemblies where you pretend to bully me and I pretend to be deeply insulted. If you're worried about my lack of credentials, don't.  The former director of interstate capital projects, David Wildstein, was a political blogger until you became governor, so really, what's the difference?

That's my pitch.  Think about it, and call me, maybe.   My first task will be to get you booked on Jon Stewart's and Stephen Colbert's shows. Hey, it's a start, and let's face it, you've lost the Boss, so it's all downhill from here.

Sincerely,
Olga Polites

Neshaminy High School

     The dispute at Neshaminy High School regarding the school newspaper brings up a number of interesting questions.  First and foremost, should public schools be at the forefront of doing what is right when it comes to issues such as race, gender, sexual identity, or religion?  If yes, then how should schools go about balancing the needs of students with those of the public at large? Also, if public schools' primary objective is to develop engaged, well-informed citizens, then how does a high school ensure that students feel secure and confident in expressing their views without punitive action being taken against them?

     Clearly, the principal of Neshaminy and the students of the school newspaper have some challenges ahead.  The law appears to be unequivocally in the students' favor.  In addition, the decision by Slate, Mother Jones and the Philadelphia Daily News to adopt a similar position lends credibility to the students' decision.  On the other hand, the Washington Redskins owner, Dan Snyder, has a very clear position. According to USA Today, he stated: "We'll never change the name. It's that simple. NEVER-- You can use caps."

     I have been teaching at a school district with four high schools, and three of them have had Native American mascots going back to the 1950s. When a new high school was built a dozen years ago, it was an opportunity to show students and community members that the school board is sensitive to the use of Native American symbols.  Although we have the Indians, the Renegades, and the Chiefs, our newest high school is known as the Golden Eagles, a clear departure.  Yes, similar discussions regarding the use of these symbols have taken place over the years, but the difference is that the administration has never tried to silence students.  Rather, they looked at it as a teachable moment, an opportunity to show students and citizens that meaningful dialogue is the best way to understand complex  issues.

     I commend the students of The Playwickian for taking a stand against the use of the word.  It shows tremendous confidence on their part considering the power structure of schools, and it shows incredible moral courage, something so rarely seen today by not just students, but many adults as well.  No doubt the issue will resolve itself, and in time it will disappear from the front page, and another issue will take its place.  To give you an idea how things have changed, I remember a time when any discussion of gay rights in a school newspaper provoked similar angst. This past spring, when NBA player Jason Collins came out, my students asked, somewhat incredulously, "What's the big deal? So what if he's gay?" Perhaps the same will happen with Native American mascots, once the adults realize--yes, I'm talking to you Daniel Snyder--that defending an offensive name is unconscionable.  It doesn't matter if the name was originally intended as a symbol for courage and bravery; things change, and it's the responsibility of reasonable-thinking adults to do the right thing.

An Open Letter to Wayne LaPierre:

I do not want a gun. My fellow teachers do not want guns. My students do not want me to carry a gun, nor do they ever want me to be in a position to have to use a gun. I do not want any free training in how to use a gun, as some teachers in Utah had this week. I also do not want your guns because I do not want to infringe on your Second Amendment rights. What I do want, desperately and fervently, is a measured, reasonable solution to the problem of military-style assault weapons and magazines. I know that your proposal hits a cord among those who want to keep children safe, but I see it as a ploy to get even more guns into people's hands while ignoring the complexities of this dilemma.


The fact of the matter is that we cannot address all of the mental health issues plaguing our youth and young adults, but we can address, easily and cheaply, the very real intersection of guns and mental illness. The one common denominator among all of the mass shootings since Columbine is that the shooters had easy access to assault weapons. This is where the conversation needs to start. So keep your guns. Just don't try to put one in my hand.

Sincerely,

Olga Polites

http://www.philly.com/philly/opinion/inquirer/20130103_Letters_to_the_Editor.html

What is College Prep?

Recently the Lenape Regional High School District changed the level designations for courses: Level 1 is Honors, Level 2 is Accelerated, Level 3 is College Prep, and Level 4 is Modified. This has provoked a great deal of discussion among students and parents, particularly the new college prep designation.  For many years Level 3 has been the place for students to be exposed to college prep work (i.e. reading novels and plays, writing essays, etc.) but moving at a slower pace to accomodate the academic needs of students who might have deficits, and would therefore not be ideal candidates for Level 2.

The overwhelming majority of Level 3 students do in fact go to college, so changing the designation to College prep is not only appropriate, but necessary. We will now be in line with most high schools across the state in how academic levels are identified. 

Some argue that colleges will be confused by the new designations, and admit students who are not truly college prep.  This is unfounded because all student applications include a school profile that specifically outlines course selections and their degree of difficulty.  In addition, weighted class rank reflects how rigorous a student's schedule is, and therefore gives colleges a fairly accurate picture of their academic ability. 

In college, students must be appropriately placed in English and Math classes.  Some colleges place students according to their SAT scores, while others ask students to take a placement test.  Since this infrastructure is already in place, we as high school teachers need not fret over level guide designations.  In addition, many classes that are designated Level 3 include Art, Music, and Computer Applications, and those teachers hold students to a college prep level. We have a responsibility as educators to provide students with a pathway to higher education, not an obstacle to that goal.

R.A. Dickey

R.A. Dickey's memoir is extraordinary.  Here is a guy who was sexually abused by his babysitter when he was 8 years old, then by a random predator, and he grows up to become a major league baseball player.  What I love about his story is that he also studied literature--there are references to writers such as Hemingway and Faulkner--so he brings a literary flavor to his memoir. Dickey talked about having to write the book, not so much choosing to write it--just like Faulkner said about his stories.  Writers are compelled to get the stories out of them, as though it is an exercise in therapy.  How many times have we heard people say writing is cheaper than therapy?

Whenever we talk about why we study literature, R.A.'s story fits in nicely.  We study literature to understand ourselves, others, and the world we live in.  R.A.'s innocence was taken from him;  he spent most of his life burying what happened, never dealing with the trauma.  This manifested in his relationships with others, and more importantly, it affected how he saw himself.  We read stories to help us understand how people cope, but with the advantage of distance.  For people like R.A., they don't have that advantage--they suffer just like the characters do, only worse because it is real. 

I finished the memoir the day after Dickey clinched his 19th win of the season.  Even if he doesn't get a 20th win, even if he doesn't win a Cy Young award, he's already won.  Overcoming the trauma of his past and sharing his story through this memoir trumps any award--although I'll be rooting for him to win. It's all in the pursuit, not the goal....

I Have a Tablet!

As someone who has resisted every single technological invention brought to market, I cannot contain my excitement about owning an Arnova tablet. Over the summer I heard rumors that the publishers of The Philadelphia Inquirer and Daily News were going to release a tablet with their content loaded, and I thought maybe my self-imposed banishment of techie products might end. And it did.

The day after I read about it in my paper-version human-delivered copy, I ordered the tablet online, and counted down the days until it arrived. I was amazed that I could so easily load the information required, and start reading the Inquirer that day. Aside from basic computer skills, I don't have much experience with products that require advanced technical abilities. I have never owned an iPod or a Kindle, although I have purchased them as gifts, I still own a dumb phone, and I don't have a laptop. I'm not one of the 800,000,000 people who have a Facebook page, and I don't have a Twitter account. But then something happened last year that got my attention: the iPad.

When the late Steve Jobs presented it a year and a half ago, I went positively gaga over it. I visited the local Apple store, and played with it until closing. Although my husband has used an iPhone for the last couple of years, not once have I ever borrowed it to check my email or browse the Internet. The screen is too small for my middle-aged eyes, and my fingers are too fat for the keyboard.

But the iPad and other tablets that are now available solved both of these problems. They are aesthetically beautiful, with sleek casings and glass screens, and most important, they are big. When I'm reading, I want the letters to be large enough so that I can read with speed, and this is the tablet's greatest achievement.

For Philadelphia Media Network, offering the papers with the tablet allows people like me--the tech-averse--to invest a small amount of money to try something new. I was not ready to invest upwards of $700 for a tablet, but I absolutely jumped at the opportunity to buy one for $100. I have been an Inquirer subscriber for over two decades. I'm old enough to remember the Bulletin, and I want to live in a community with a vibrant newspaper presence. When there is little oversight of community and government agencies, corruption flourishes. While technological advances have presented enormous challenges for media companies in recent years, we need to ensure that content is paid for, not simply rerouted to other websites. Otherwise, what will there be to aggregate if no one is paying reporters and editors?

Perhaps the tablet initiative will be the wave of the future. For the last few weeks I've been learning how to use all of the features available on the Arnova, and I may even try and download a free book from the app store. Every so often I see someone with an iPad, and while I await patiently for the market price to come down, I'm quite satisfied with what I've got.