The Factory Model: The Conservative Metaphor Misses the Mark

It’s interesting to see how the factory metaphor of schooling has been adopted in conservative circles. Unfortunately many of these folks have misapplied the factory comparison.  Contrary to their talking point, schools are/were not designed to churn out line workers. Industrial Age factories manufactured products not people.

Progressive educators have used their interpretation of this metaphor for most of the last century to fend off various trends in education (e.g. Behaviorism or high stakes testing). Perhaps the progressive version of the metaphor misses the mark some, but it holds water better than the new conservative metaphor (which isn’t actually new). Conservatives stopped fighting against this metaphor (first in the 1980s and more recently circa 2015) and adopted their own version of the factory metaphor.  This adaptation, however inaccurate, fits well with their effort to dismantle public schools in favor of private entitlement programs.

Oddly enough, if we peel back the politics, both sides seem to agree that the public education system needs a revamping to be more responsive and less top heavy. Unfortunately bipartisan collaboration is a thing of the past.

Let’s take a moment to compare both versions of the factory model of schooling metaphor. In the original (progressive) metaphor the student was the raw material to be added to as they moved down the line. Think of a car being put together piece by piece. In this metaphor of school as an assembly line, the teachers build the student as they move down the line grade by grade. 

The conservative interpretation states that schools were designed to create factory workers.  This does not hold water (see A Wolf At The Schoolhouse Door, Schneider & Berkshire, 2023). In fact this version of the metaphor obfuscates early 20th century conservative efforts to indoctrinate recent immigrants to the United States.

Early 20th century schools - those public schools that emerged as the 2nd Industrial Revolution coincided with waves of  immigration from Southern and Eastern Europe - were used to Americanize immigrants. Conservatives in that time used schools to mold immigrant youth into good Americans. A secondary purpose of these schools  (and one still used in schools today) was to filter out less successful students.  

Like the auto chassis some students move down the line while others are moved off the line. Those that succeeded in school had access to better jobs than those who did not do well in school. In many ways this system of filtering students into specific tracks of possible socioeconomic futures is not so different from the filtering that results from high stakes testing (hey there No Child Left Behind).

While education does lag behind in their preparation of students, to say schools only want to create line workers is not accurate.  Many schools do prepare students for outdated jobs.  However this lag has been part of school for some time and perhaps exacerbated during the 1980s (when this conservative factory misrepresentation first emerged).

Reshape the education system. Don’t destroy it. Yes some conservatives will warn that I have progressive education beliefs. Yes I do. I also criticize the education system for its bloated inability to adapt meaningful change; overemphasis on middling administrations who can’t find their way out of a box; and the lack of respect for teachers (pay them). Education in the US must evolve and transform to better meet the needs of students. Many of us across numerous perspectives can agree on that.

Don’t fall for disingenuous plays by ultra right wing conservatives.  Their methods are sophisticated and well funded, but their goal is clear. They have no interest in saving public education.



Differentiate DEI Work

In recent weeks I’ve caught more than a few mentions of diversity fatigue and rumblings about “just checking boxes” for diversity training. Numerous forces, both real and imagined, threaten Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) work in the US. For a moment let’s leave political misinformation and manufactured outrage aside for a moment.  These issues lead to crucial ideas being  sidelined or ridiculed. As a teacher, when a lesson doesn’t go well and students don’t ‘get it,’ you don’t blame the lesson and you don’t blame the students. When things go sideways in class you stop and look for a better way to deliver the material.

If we really want to transform individuals and communities we have to ask, are there more effective ways to facilitate DEI education for adults and students out there? 

In the wake of the murders of Breonna Taylor, Ahmaud Arbery, and George Floyd (and myriad others), Summer 2020 saw a spike in attention and awareness concerning equity, justice, and the layers of racism intertwined in America. Beyond the mass protests, numerous institutions began speaking up about and focusing on DEI in their organizations. And while their web sites and social media gave evidence to these practices, in too many cases, little structural change occurred. The dynamics of power remained largely intact. 

DEI training was not new in 2020. However, it gained more attention as more and more businesses or schools began requiring this training.  These trainings may or may not have had the intended impact within various institutions and organizations. Instead of transformative workshops and training, most organizations provided performative experiences that succeeded in only checking off some boxes and pissing people off.

After listening to a few different people discuss their recent DEI training experience, I spent some time reflecting on these practices from the perspective of both a facilitator and as a teacher.

Many of us have sat in the meeting. As people take their seats various thoughts and emotions swirl around the room. Eventually a supervisor introduces the trainer who proceeds to stand in front and speak to the group.

Having stood in front of the audience and in the audience for DEI training I can say that some sessions go better than others. A quick Google search gives us a window into the numerous perspectives regarding the effectiveness of DEI training.  Once again we have to reflect on and examine how we impart transformative information on race, gender, sexuality, class, and power to a wide range of audiences.

In general, the practice for trainings such as this follows a Group Facilitation Model.  A facilitator or co-facilitators leads a larger group of participants through an exploration of a specific topic or area of concern.  This is not unlike how many classrooms work in school. Teachers often stand in front of class dispensing information, answering questions, and leading students from point A to point B in a given amount of time.

One of the most difficult aspects of group facilitation is finding the sweet spot for each group - finding activities and materials  that work for all the different participants. Some call it the Goldilocks Approach. It’s usually a place of moderation - just far enough outside most people’s comfort zone but not so far out to squelch participation. The problem with this approach is that you’re usually teaching to the middle. While the heart of your standard distribution is addressed, both ends of the spectrum are left out. Some facilitators will teach to the tails of the distribution, but when this happens the majority of the group tends to have some big feelings about being left out. Oftentimes, no matter what you do,  problems emerge.

In a classroom or group training session there are generally four basic groups of students/participants that you need to plan for and whose needs you will need to address throughout the session. 

Four Types of Participants:

  • The Reluctant: Those who are not ready. For a variety of reasons they just are not ‘there’ yet.  It is from this group that most of the push back and defensive  behavior comes.  Some have decided before walking in that they will not find value in the material or that they intend  to disrupt and prove the trainer wrong.

  • The Ready Not Able:  The participants in the group are psyched and engaged. However, their readiness is not a good match for the level of challenge the material provides.  The ‘eager to learn’ individuals from this group sometimes reflect the adage of “ a little knowledge is dangerous.”  Armed with powerful tools they don’t quite understand or have the strength to yield, they facilitate over their heads with a variety of repercussions.

  • The Ready Willing Able: The sweet spot of participants whose readiness matches the level of challenge. From within this congruence of challenge /skill readiness many positives emerge.  This group listens, wants to learn, and become nascent practitioners of the material.

  • The Choir:  This group represents the ‘Been There, Done That’ segment of your group.  Academically these would be the students who understand the assignment, finish the assignment, and need more challenging assignments or they will get bored (and potentially disruptive). This group can be as difficult as the Reluctants.  You have folks who have done some work but their participation can go a few ways.  Some may go full know it all on you. This is the ‘ yep you’re preaching to the choir’ people.  They’re comfortable in their advanced proficiency level but confuse that with mastery. They may present as an ally, but that kindred spirit has limitations. Oftentimes they prefer to not risk their proficiency and are reluctant to take on new layers of complexity and challenge. There’s also usually some “ the choir can always sing better’ individuals in the group. These folks have done some work and want to learn more. They are ready for more complexity and next level material.

The challenge for any teacher or facilitator becomes how to connect with and meet members of each of these groups in class or training where they are. 

However, the Group Facilitation Model does not work that way.  Think about how many classrooms work. The teacher leads and students follow. The teacher dispenses information and the class has to access and process the material. Start a task on Monday, get quizzed on it a few days later.  Students ask questions and practice.  If they ‘don’t get it’  they can ask questions. If they still don’t get it, they might be assigned some extra practice. If they still don’t get it, they do poorly on the assessment. I’m willing to bet you’ve been in a DEI training like this. At least as adults there aren’t too many quizzes at the end of trainings.

Fortunately this teaching strategy has begun to fade into antiquity. More recently teachers have begun to differentiate lessons to better meet the needs of students. 

What if DEI training followed this approach? If more DEI training followed this approach and differentiated the material; perhaps these trainings would have a more profound impact on groups and institutions. Now maybe the top 5-10% of DEI facilitators do this already, but most sessions use the Group Facilitation Model. Companies do this in order to get everything done at one time. It's easier and more cost effective.  However easy isn’t usually effective.

DIfferentiation works well in the classroom. It could, after solving some initial logistic questions, work equally well for DEI training in the workplace.

I have for some time differentiated DEI work in my classroom. This means assessing the readiness and willingness of the students as individuals and as a whole group to move into transformative education. Some groups and some individuals are more ready than others and some  groups require baby steps.  In order to differentiate academic or DEI topics requires knowing your audience. It means getting in the mix to talk with each individual and finding ways to explain difficult topics several different ways. Differentiated DEI is easier said than done, but worth the mess and struggle if it means getting each person down the road  a bit further. 

Instead of continuing with performative DEI work (which often exacerbates problems), schools and businesses can provide transformative experiences. 

We don’t all learn academic skills the same way or at the same pace - why should learning DEI skills be any different. Differentiate DEI to improve learning outcomes. Meet people where they are, not where you think they should be. Our future may depend on it.

Founder's Response: We Do Not Stay Down

The world can really kick your ass. I only have a VAGUE recollection of when it wasn’t kickin’ mine.”

Roy Munson, Kingpin

Sometimes as a small business owner (and a school at that) I feel like a punching bag for the universe - one of those blow up punching bags  that have a clown on them and a weighted bottom. When you punch it and it falls over but pops right back up so you can punch it again.  Some days  I’d like to let the sand out so I could  stay down, but I can't.  The whole getting back up thing has always been a big deal in my family.

And yet, some days the ground is so very comfortable. It would be so nice just to lay here. Getting back up seems really complicated. And if I’m just going to get knocked down, wouldn't it just be easier to stay down and save some energy?

All good points, the ground feels mighty nice…

While both sets of grandmothers talked about the importance of getting back when you get knocked down, my paternal grandmother (MaMa) drove the point home for me rather unexpectedly.one afternoon.

My high school lacrosse team had the NJ semifinals game in Montclair one afternoon. Their stadium was closed so we played in a park. The field was sort of roped off but it didn’t do much. The crowd was seven or eight deep of some fired up people - very few of whom seemed to be rooting for us.  It felt like we were playing inside a mosh pit - a pit that bordered on out of control at that. 

At some point in the second half I got lit up and went over the rope and into the crowd. I heard voices, felt spit, and knew my jaw was out of whack. My vision was a tad blurry as I opened my eyes  but I could make out  a knot of angry dudes taunting me. However, as my eyes focused there I saw my grandfather (BaBa) had carved out space (he was the wrong one to fuck with so a space opened quickly).  In the haze between concussed and sunset I found MaMa kneeling down giving me a bemused smile.  

MaMa was not one to mess with or annoy. Also she didn’t come to many games so it was a big deal when she was there. I was confused as to why MaMa was suddenly kneeling next to me.  Before I could ask, she reached under my helmet and in one gentle snap, reset my jaw. With her hands still gently holding my jaw, MaMa came closer to my helmet, looked me in the eyes. Her smile took on more seriousness.  With gentle seriousness she reminded me, “We. Do not. Stay down.” And you do not argue with MaMa. I nodded and returned her smile.  BaBa hoisted me up and dropped me over the rope and back on the field. 

We never again spoke of that moment, but I hear words whenever things goes really sideways.  Suffice to say I hear MaMa’s words in my head on a pretty frequent basis.  In graduate school when I found myself tangled in a forest of weeds… “We. Do not. Stay down.” And now as I try to keep school going, the shadows that fill my lack of sleep echo … “We. Do not. Stay down.”

 Maybe I'm too stupid to stay down.  After a brief wallow in my misery, the voice returns and muscle memory takes over. Somehow I get my legs under me and stand up once again. So almost 40 years after her reminder and even though she’s been gone for some time, I still heed MaMa’s words. After all, it’s still a good idea not to get on her bad side. “We. Do not. Stay down.”



Founder's Dilemma: Smells Like Burning

Oh the bridges I have burned… That’s the book Dr. Seuss wanted to write.

I don’t really like to burn bridges and certainly don’t burn things down like I want. Although I still dream of some good ol’ scorched earth antics,  I’m more likely to set myself on fire instead of any bridge. I should really be more careful with matches.. 

In the last few months self immolation has come up in a few different articles I’ve read. Setting yourself on fire is quite a way to go and quite the statement of protest.

Not long ago I may have committed professional self immolation.  I lost three potential students for Do.Think.Learn (DTL). This doesn’t sound like much but with only one confirmed student for next year and my messaging not resonating, I need to make some decisions about the future.  

Anyway, two families contacted me about enrolling three students at DTL. A former colleague warned me that these moms were “high maintenance;” but they seemed like cool people.  Demanding parents are not automatically a red flag for me so I agreed to meet with them to hash out details. Besides, three potential students represented a path forward for DTL and a temporary reprieve from debt and self-doubt

As such, I spent months building a bridge to these potential students and their families. 

One thing I do well is to lay out explicit and clear expectations about what this school does and does not do. If it works for your family - awesome. If it does not, no worries - we’re good. It’s all about fit. Clear and consistent boundaries work for everyone. Except when they don’t.

Every few weeks the moms would ask to meet. At each meeting they would present a new set of concerns or a new list of asks.  I would listen and consider how this would impact the other students and my program. We would discuss and again I would what DTL could do and how we could make adjustments.  Certainly we could make this happen. With time we seemed in agreement and my optimism grew.

However hope seemed to blind me to the fact that with each meeting the bridge got longer instead of stronger. Instead of walking away I put up lanterns so we can find our way to meet in the middle.

The moms scheduled a new meeting and I’m led to believe that I will leave this meeting with deposit checks in my hand. 

Except instead of checks they greeted me with a new set of ‘wants.’ 

We had now crossed into ’a bridge too far’ territory.  The various wants would fundamentally alter DTL, and more importantly, would have a negative impact on my returning student.  The list included several demands that would require me to fundamentally alter my entire program. I was not able or willing to do that for them.  I explained my concerns to the moms. 

On the bridge I lit more lanterns to shine more light on what DTL is and how we do things.  When in doubt more fire is usually the solution.  Perhaps with more light they will see how they have strayed from their original path. Nope. More fuel, the fires grow. Still no. Standing on the bridge flames spill from the lanterns The railings on the bridge start to burn. 

It becomes clear that what they want and what I do will never be congruent. We agree this just isn’t going to work out.  I thank them for their time and we part amicably.  

I watched them walk safely back to their side of the bridge. After they go,  I stand stunned and empty handed in the middle of a bridge that has now caught fire.  As the flames wrap themselves along the railings of this bridge I wonder - What just happened? What did I do?  Should I have given in to their demands? What kind of fool walks away from the money to save his business?

Looking around at the flames feeding on the wood and oxygen, I don't know if I can make it back to my side of the bridge before fire engulfs the entire structure.  Maybe I’ll sit here and watch it burn.

This brings me to a Founder’s Dilemma.  Do you cave and do whatever for clients even if it dismantles what you built to stay afloat.  Or, how do you balance your organizational identity with financial survival?

Who knows what the future holds, but the fire is nice. Guess I’ll go for a walk and see what happens.

RE-Learn - Regenerative Education at Do.Think.Learn

I constantly reflect on how I describe Do.Think.Learn to prospective parents and the public. Educational trends and ideas constantly bombard parents. It’s hard to keep up sometimes.

In education beyond public, independent, and charter schools parents can unschool, re-school, homeschool, and microschool their child Do.Think.Learn sits in the middle of the rather messy Venn Diagram of all these ideas. Perhaps this is why folks struggle to picture what it is we do at Do.Think.Learn. So let’s change that.

In a recent moment of questionable thinking, I considered referring to our microschool as “artisanal education” with “handcrafted learning.” This, however, seemed disingenuous. Thus, I stopped looking and that’s when I stumbled on a new idea. Sometimes reading articles outside of education sparks ideas about teaching and learning (thank you Patagonia).

Let’s talk about regenerative education. We already have regenerative technologies, agriculture, and medicine, so why not regenerative education?   Regenerative education  (ReEd) is not something I came up with - turns out other people have had similar thoughts. How people think about and operationalize regenerative education differs slightly, and Do.Think.Learn follows many of these ideas, but with our new school meets old school interpretation of ReEd.

ReEd at Do.Think.Learn means a school that restores, rebuilds, reignites, and reinvigorates learning and school for students.  

We call our version of regenerative education - RE-Learn.  We share many of the concepts as other regenerative schools. RE-Learning at DTL involves finding what works for each student. This means dismantling the negative experiences students have had at other schools; undoing how they have been trained to do school; and creating a path to success for each student.

Relearning definitely triggers some folks. Many of us have a visceral response when we hear relearn.  For some this means the drill and kill monotony of worksheets or endless toil doing something over and over in school. For me, I flashback to a variety of math tests with bad grades in red across the top or my honors English teacher asking me in class if I was stupid. In many schools when they ask students to relearn something, it means that student has a problem.  But maybe it’s the school that has the problem.

RE-Learning  at Do.Think.Learn reimagines how school works. Many students struggle in school. That struggle takes many forms. Some schools dismantle a student’s confidence or sense of purpose.  Of course nontraditional learners struggle in rigid systems and other students get bored waiting for work to challenge them. Some students just need a more flexible and meaningful school experience. We take the time to establish who that student is and what they need in order to succeed in school and beyond. It means removing the meaningless toil and rebuilding each student’s experiences in school.

Please Stop #2: Joyful Learning

I took your joy. I’ll give it back. Swear. 

Please stop telling students that learning should be joyful.  I know this makes me sound curmudgeonly, but hear me out before you dismiss my point.

When people say ‘learning should be joyful’ they are often referring to learning in school. Well school brings only a select few students joy. And, let’s not confuse school and learning. They are not synonymous.  Learning can be joyful but learning in school rarely is. Students usually just try to get through the school day. Students should want to go to school. Ideally school could serve up some fun throughout the day.  Similarly, learning can and should be fun. Learning in school could be fun but it would be even better if it was meaningful. In fact, school usually sucks for most students. That’s the bigger issue. Instead of telling students that learning should be joyful, let's make schools a place of meaning and belonging for students.  If each student feels that they belong and school has a purpose - then you have a foundation for joy. 

Emphasizing joyful learning can also set youth up for disappointment and stymie their potential.  Learning can bring joy, but often that joy comes as a result of successfully overcoming a challenge or even a frustrating process. In schools that tell students that learning is joyful I salute any student who refuses an assignment they do not find joyful.  Focusing student attention on joy gives them permission to only focus on those activities that they enjoy or gives them pleasure. 

This idea of joy in learning has been in the mix for a while now. I read the seminal articles in graduate school. Some independent schools picked up on the idea a few years later. Some changed their mission statements, marketing materials, and their professional mantras.  Joyful learning makes for some great marketing material - the warm fuzzies attract a lot of parents. In reality, however, those same fuzzies can keep individuals in their comfort zone -safe from risk or failure. 

Joyful learning tends to emphasize comfortable and easy tasks. However, easy learning isn’t usually effective learning. And while many schools emphasize easy and meaningless learning  - that is perhaps part of this country’s educational shortcomings. 

Supporters of joyful learning may be complicit in setting up youth to fail. Learning sucks sometimes. Developing a new skill does not always go well. When a student operates at the edge of their ability they will stumble occasionally. The process can get clunky and messy from time to time. Moments of frustration litter the road to understanding. Overcoming challenges and demonstrating persistence- that makes for some joyful moments. 

Teachers help students reflect on their process and support their efforts to explore and expand their repertoire of skills and understanding beyond their comfort zone. When students overcome obstacles to enter the next level of knowing, not only do they find joy but the teacher relishes their accomplishment as well.  Twice the joy at half the price equals a solid ROI.

As mentioned, sometimes learning sucks. And sometimes we need to embrace that suck.  But, a good teacher can disguise the suck or make it bearable. What sucks is two fold. First, not “getting it” blows. No matter the reason when we push and pull on the pieces and they still don’t come together…. UUUU GGGGHHHH. The second part of sucky happens when students feel alone or trapped in the suck. A great teacher dives into the suck with their students. They provide support and encourage students to keep at it and to find a way that works for each student to come out the other side.  A great teacher acts like a personal floatation device for students swimming on the Sea of Suck. Pretty soon that student stands on the opposite shore triumphant. This builds resilience and grit. It also enhances their sense of self. The sweet success after a difficult process inspires students and fires them up for what comes next.

If students only do what they’re good at; what they like;  or what brings them joy (or what they’re passionate about) they limit themselves and evolve into educational dilettantes. Instead of pushing joy on students, educators would better serve their students by making the process fun and meaningful while providing high levels of support throughout the learning process. 

Teachers need to help students enhance their learning practice. Each student has a practice - the process by which they build skill and knowledge. Educators can focus more on helping students understand how they learn and how to make that process more effective and efficient.  In doing this, we empower students and build their confidence.  These things transcend school. And the by-product of this enhanced, more effective practice - joyful learning.

Please Stop #1: Woke/Anti-Woke

To Whom It May Concern,

Please stop using terms such as ‘woke’ and ‘anti-woke.’  It makes you sound desperate and not nearly as cool as you think it does.  In fact in most cases it makes you sound stupid. In other cases you’re just pretending not to be racist. Fools and extremists exist on both sides of the cultural, social, and political spectrums.  I get it. You need some lowest common denominator type phrase to make your fear based marketing campaign work. But beyond sounding dumb, these political catchphrases don’t help solve real problems.

Some White folks co-opted outdated terminology from the African American community a few years back. And while initially a group of self righteous progressives referred to themselves as ‘woke,’ these days it’s the ‘anti-woke’ folks hollering the loudest. This tantruming was both predictable and a derivative of decades of behavior in certain communities. Regardless of who uses these terms they sound like out of touch parents trying to sound hip and cool by using adolescent vocabulary.  Either way neither group is fire nor lit. 

Conservatives have begun using ‘anti-woke’ as a catchphrase for all their anti-anti racist messaging and as a safety blanket to coddle themselves against a changing world they can't handle. Now whole states refer to themselves as sanctuaries for the ‘anti-woke.’  I guess this is better than all of their anti-CRT blathering. At least with ‘anti-woke’ they can almost define and explain what they’re talking about.  No one could actually define and pinpoint what Critical Race Theory is and how it was being used in schools.  As a student pointed out not long ago - if you’re anti-anti racism, isn’t that just being racist.

One aspect of the anti–woke culture war focuses on stoking fear around DEI issues and curriculum in schools taking away from “real” learning. This is bullshit for two reasons.  First, it assumes that real learning actually takes place in school. The formal curriculum of school pales in comparison to what students take away from the layers of informal curriculum in their school experience.  For the sake of the drill and kill fans, let’s say that schools provide meaningful learning experiences.  This brings us to my second reason this conservative rally cry is crap.  Students outside the myths of history and narrow confines of power and privilege - those conservatives work so hard to strip of representation and push to disenfranchise - struggle in schools that ignore who they are and in which they don’t feel safe.  Students of Color, Queer/Questioning/Trans students do better academically in schools that support their identity and safety. And to make matters worse for conservative extremists, mainstream students do better academically in those same schools.  Embracing differences and pushing for equity does run counter to high quality academics. DEI/JEDI work and academics are not mutually exclusive.

Now on the other hand, there is a segment of liberals who are just as misguided and ineffective. This group gets ‘triggered’ by everything. This group actually uses the term ‘triggered.’ They go from zero to pissed off in no time. They default to aggro and  get into people’s faces quickly. Let me say a few things here. First, there are a lot of things for members of various communities (BIPOC, LBGTQ+,  women across the board, etc.) to be pissed off and rage against. Second, I am a man of privilege and recognize there is a lot I don't know and need to learn. I also recognize that bell hooks (1996) made some strong points in support of Black Rage and that there is a time and place to burn the house down.  However, if we want students to learn more deeply and support the transformation of our communities into equitable and just places for all - zero to aggro may not be the most successful way to go right from the start.  

Learning requires opportunities to fail. If we react to someone’s mistake too forcefully or aggressively we rob them of a chance to learn. Perhaps they then walk on the proverbial eggshells - afraid to say or do anything that may get them yelled at. Worse, if we react too strongly we back them into a corner from which they will refuse to learn from that moment onward. None of this helps transform the dynamics of equity and power.

White and older folks are not the quickest on the uptake. There’s a lot of things changing fast and it really is hard to keep up. As a result we sometimes have to go slower with them.  If we go too fast or too loud, they retreat into their shell and either hide or get super defensive.  People with power and privilege, on the other hand,  rarely give up their position willingly. So if you’ve given someone a chance to come correct and they still aren’t getting it - well, then it’s time to rip the bandaid off.

Let’s just be clear - ‘anti-woke’ is coded language for intolerance and an excuse for mobs of people to destroy the lives of others. Supporters of the Anti-Woke movement just can’t handle things. They fear change. They fear those they don’t understand. As a result, they cling to outdated ideas and myths of history while worshiping false idols that support religious intolerance.  The anti-woke mob has more in common with the Taliban than they do with American democracy.

We can and should have conversations. There are no shortages of conversations to be had -  about the most effective ways to discuss racism in schools, gender and sexuality, etc. These discussions can be difficult, but they can also be supportive and respectful. Hiding your head in the sand is not an effective solution. So while Florida evolves into a delusional dystopian state under the pretense of freedom and other states call their morality police on those they don’t understand, perhaps the rest of us could have a respectful conversation.

REACH vs IMAGINATION

Back in the day I worked in a climbing gym. One evening as KJ and I set beginner and youth routes for the next day’s sport climbing comp I had the opportunity to set next to former world champion and all around badass climber Katie Brown.  She was then a ‘retired’ climber and full time college student helping to set the expert level routes for the gym.

For those of you outside the climbing community, in the 90s Katie Brown set the climbing world on fire. This quiet young woman took on the male dominated climbing world of the day. As a teenager she set new standards and dealt with a lot of blow back from the wounded egos of men around the country and world.  If she could climb it (at five feet tall) a climb’s grade was often reevaluated. If Katie did it, the dudes reasoned it couldn’t be as hard as they thought. Afterall the dominant ideology in climbing of those days was that you had to have a long reach and overwhelming power to be an elite climber. And yet, Katie Brown went about her work, climbing most of the hardest routes of the day.

Of course the young men in our gym also setting expert routes needed to assuage their ego by challenging her to climb their masterpieces. Graciously accepting the challenge with a knowing eye roll of ‘hear we go again’ she put on her shoes, chalked up, and tied in. With a quick look at the route in front of her, Katie Brown flowed up the wall stringing together moves no one considered and using the holds in ways nobody thought possible. Back on the ground, she smiled and said thank you to a dumbfounded dude who could only mumble, “How… You… What the…” etc.  Katie Brown’s genius response has stayed with me for decades…

“It’s not a question of reach. It’s a question of imagination.”

This simple yet elegant statement set my brain into a tizzy. Sure she was talking about using foot holds for handholds and bolt holes for footholds, but reach versus imagination applies to SO much outside of school.

Outside of climbing reach involves using your advantages to skip steps on the most obvious path forward. It means doing what you’re told and following the well worn road laid out for you.  Imagination involves deconstructing the prescribed path and reconfiguring the pieces into a different path. Essentially using what’s in front of you in new ways. The public applauds what they see as ‘natural’ ability but scrutinizes innovation. 

In climbing, people consider a long reach advantageous since you can often skip  more compact moves. Those same people often frown upon imagination since the imaginative climber usually rearrange or avoid the dictated sequence of moves. The community rewards reach and ridicules magination. Schools do the same.

Imagination > Reach is a spin off of  ‘by any means necessary.’ For many students traditional learning seems like a ‘what’s next’ competition.  Schools love such students. Yet other students ask questions and can’t help but look around before  asking, “what if I…”  Schools frown on these students. Standardized assessments definitely do not reward creativity and imagination. Perhaps we, as educators, need to support  the development of imaginative learning for our students. Part of teaching means helping students see what is possible and what they are capable of as students and people. We help students look at things from new perspectives and support skill development so they see new pathways forward. 

Normally in these articles this is where I try to drop in something smart sounding or a shameless plug for Do.Think.Learn. Today however I wonder what would happen if I replaced ‘reach’ with words like ‘smart ‘ or ‘strong.’ Maybe imagination can circumvent preconceived limitations. So all I can manage right now is to suggest you go out and get creative in reaching new heights. Try to see new lines in your world or connect the dots in new ways and see what happens.

NOTE: In recent years Katie Brown has told more of her story outside of climbing in interviews and most recently in her memoir - Unraveled: A Climber’s Journey Through Darkness and Back.

DTL: Two Student Perspectives

At DTL I’m able to work at my own pace. After working at my own pace we have discussions which help me extend my understanding of what I’m learning and keeps me engaged. If I were given a bunch of assignments for a test at the end of every week. I would barely be able to stay engaged at all and I wouldn’t improve. DTL allows me to focus and do well in school. Flexibility, another quality of DTL, that works well with me. While I’m traveling or out playing music the amount of work is adjusted to my schedule. This allows me to balance my school work with my music schedule when I need to. If you have trouble staying engaged in your school and want flexibility in your learning environment DTL is the right school for you. 

_____________________________________________________________________________________________
Do.Think.Learn’s flexibility and constructive approach to learning works best for me. I appreciate the school’s emphasis on identifying the significance of certain topics learned, which serves as a great way to make students feel like what they’re learning truly serves a purpose. The school’s acknowledgement that acquiring basic ideas of complex topics can go a long way (for example, physics) helps me to better balance out my work. Researching complex topics can sometimes lead to spending way too much time on a single subject. By attaining just a basic understanding of complex topics at first, I can spend more time on other assignments in a school day. In addition, I like that the school tests student knowledge through presentations at the end of each term. Presentations push students to think about what aspects of their given topics are necessary to discuss, as well as what aspects can be discarded. Through presentations, I feel like I’ve grown in my ability to explain the things I learned in a clear manner. In many ways, Do.Think.Learn kills two birds with one stone. Do.Think.Learn has greatly fulfilled my learning needs.


Can Openers & School Choice

At a previous job, besides teaching my middle school students all day everyday, I ran the school’s outdoor program. This gig had some bright spots; had some less bright spots; and provided some truly remarkable moments. At one point I contemplated wearing a GoPro the entire time on each trip  just to capture some of the more unbelievable moments.  

Near the top of my list of unbelievable moments would be the high schooler who struggled with his breakfast. For 10 minutes I watched him go between confusion and anger when he couldn’t figure out how to get cereal from the box into his bowl.  At long last he asked a peer for suggestions and they showed him how to open the box and liner. He was truly mystified and intrigued by all of this and his newfound cereal pouring skills. Evidently teachable moments exist all around us.

Usually the teachable moments happened in more mundane scenarios.  One that popped up a few times each semester centered on using can openers.

Can openers provide some interesting teachable moments. How an individual responds when they struggle to operate said technology is most telling. Usually someone in the kitchen crew would say something along the lines of, “The can opener is broken.” “These cans won’t open.” “Let’s have something else for dinner.”  Soon students would gather around to assess the problem. What followed would resemble  ‘how many middle schoolers does it take to open a can of beans?’  On a few occasions an argument would break out over the proper use of can openers. Some groups would alter the menu to avoid opening cans. Others would ask for the opener on my multitool. Yet every once in a while someone would flip the can over to help the can opener  find purchase and release the contents held within.

This morning I struggled to open a can of refried beans. After a week of school choice articles and avoiding conversations on the topic, fiddling with the can opener reminded me of the ‘debate’ around school choice. 

I use quotes around debate to signify that using the term debate in this case is much like when my parents would say they want to ‘discuss’ something when it really meant they would do some loud talking and I would sit there. School choice discussions tend to devolve quickly into political mudslinging before venturing into some shade of crazy. 

Generally I stay out of the fracas. Yet since I run a microschool people tend to ask my opinion on the issue. So here it is - the current ‘debate’ is ridiculous. While conservatives blame liberals and Democrats shade Republicans, the needs of students quickly get lost in the mudslinging and tantruming.

Everyone is to blame for the state of education in this country. The political agendas of various constituents undermine all hope of moving forward in a reasonable and effective manner. Some conservatives only want choices they approve of and really would like to see the American public education system dismantled. Some liberals have afforded the teacher unions way too much power over the last few decades and now it is these same unions who block effective reforms and innovation.

I do not shy away from my critiques of the state of schooling in the US. The system, in many places, is bloated and ineffective. Something has to change. But even in my younger days when I advocated for burning the system to the ground, I have always believed in the power of public schools. Education enables students to change their worlds. 

However, the current ‘debate’ is really about power and money. Some adults want to control the various narratives; while others want access to the financial resources  deep within the administrative coffers of different states and philanthropic organizations.  At some point reasonable people with different perspectives need to sit down to craft solutions that put the needs of all students ahead of the needs of the so-called adults in the room.

Unfortunately the school choice ‘discussion’ looks a lot like my former students who couldn’t figure out how to open a can.   Someone has to be brave enough to flip the can over and try a new approach.

PS.  In an effort to keep this missive brief, I chose not to get into deep detail around school choice. Down the road I’m happy to discuss using economic forces to reshape institutions or the power of innovation to encourage reform.  The truth is, I’m in the process of rethinking and untangling this mess.  But really, right now, I really just want to teach, learn, and make Do.Think.Learn the best school possible.

Sound

The influence of sound

An invisible force of prominence

Vision need not exist

Sound can come in a wisp

A thump

A thud

Fierce enough to induce action

Trembling the roots

Of a well maintained tree

Whose arms grip with passion

Quivering the chins

Of the betrayed

A force like wind

Goosebumps form from the arctic air

Moisture protrudes like a trickling waterfall

Under the influence of shining beams

Even in arrangement of song

Whose rhythms discuss beauty and love

Volume brings malicious outcomes

Shattering precious tea sets

Creating flaws within neat lines

Produced by ink

Lullah

Wingnuts, Zealots, and Hippies

The struggle feels more real today. Most weeks I struggle to choose which struggle to focus on. For today let me focus on dispelling a common misconception about microschools - that only political wingnuts, religious zealots, and hippies send their kids to microschools.

Unpacking this misconception helps address other parental misconceptions and anxieties around microschooling. The first fits under the framework that I call ‘The Stanford Fear.’ Really you could insert what college into the name, but usually this gets verbalized as,  ‘how will my child get into Stanford’ (if they go outside the traditional avenues of schooling)? The second centers on calling microschools alternative schools.  To be clear, not every student needs to go to college let alone Stanford and calling microschools alternative schools damages the possibility of many parents sending their child to a microschool.

A multitude of microschools exist around the country. So yes some do have or were formed as a result of some deep rooted political or religious ideology. And yes, other schools have some crunchy notions of peace, love, and let my kid do whatever they want philosophy. In reality, microschooling reflects the multitude of students in our communities and exists to provide avenues to educational success for those students outside the traditional school options. However,  that doesn’t mean we should refer to microschools as alternative schools.

The phrase “alternative school” comes with considerable baggage for many parents. That baggage is rarely positive. A good number of adults hear “alternative school” and think “school for fuck ups.” Others hear the term and picture barefoot students finger painting in geometry class or expressing themselves in a decidedly nonacademic manner. Yes, adults with that parental baggage should talk it over with their therapist. Yet, with those ideas weighing on their thinking, parents will usually opt to keep their student in an educational factory that isn’t working for that student or that family. They do this out of the most basic parental anxieties - how will my child ever be successful and get into a good college if they go to an “alternative school?” 

Until recently I lumped these fears  under a ‘they’ problem - something to be aware of, but not something to concern myself with. Now, this is most definitely a ‘me’ problem. As I work to grow Do.Think.Learn and increase enrollment I constantly run face first into the wall created by the “alternative school” label and the parental concerns over their child’s future.. 

If we rephrase how we describe microschools, we can alleviate some of these parental fears and increase the likelihood that more parents will choose microschooling over traditional institutions of learning. Change the language. Change the message. Change what people hear.

Ok let’s review. Yes, microschools do provide learning environments that represent alternatives to the usual suspects of school options. However, instead of calling them alternative schools, how about we refer to them as alternatives to traditional schools? Hmmm, we may need a descriptor that differentiates microschools more.  We could tell people that microschools reflect innovations in education? Using phrases like “innovation” seem promising.  People like hearing about innovation and it doesn’t trigger nearly as much parental anxiety.

I have never adopted any technology early. In the late 70s I even told my cousin Aaron that nobody would ever want a computer in their home. In the 90s told me to get on board with email or I’d be lost in the technological boonies of the future. Yet, I tell people all the time that traditional school environments reflect outdated technologies such as dial up wifi and landline phones. They understand and get comfortable with this analogy reasonably quickly which extends their willingness to hear more about microschools. As parental anxieties diminish and the conversation continues, I explain how microschools can provide a blend of old school and new school education practices designed to support their child’s success and better meet their needs in school and beyond.  And that, I believe, sits at the core of most parental fears and anxieties.

Words matter. Understanding what parents want and what they worry about also matters. Choose how you describe microschools carefully in order to dismantle that struggle bit by bit.

Thinking that microschools exist only for wingnuts, zealots, and hippies is a tad outdated (although those schools are out there). More recently, microschools have emerged to better meet the needs of neurodiverse students (although I fear neurodiverse will become  a marketing catchall in the near future).  Microschools such as Do.Think.Learn also exist. These schools mix academics and a less traditional

approach for small groups of students so those young adults can rediscover their confidence, build their skills, and realize that they too can succeed in school.

The Illusion of Instructional Time

I recently read a few articles that explored the pros and cons of the four day school week. The articles mentioned districts (primarily back east) that planned to move to a four day week in order to save on expenses and to address dwindling enrollment.  However, these articles focused considerable space on the backlash against this move. The usual adult focused arguments were made - parental work schedules, etc. However, one article actually focused on how this move could impact students (students are rarely mentioned in educational reform hullabaloos). 

This predictable critique against the four day week suggested that in this new configuration students would suffer due to a decrease in instructional time. This criticism has a few flaws. Most notably, it assumes all instructional time has value.  At least this criticism focuses on the needs of students. These worn out critiques anchor education to the past and impede innovative practices from taking root in schooling.

The illusion of instructional time reflects outdated notions of learning in school. For those outside of education, instructional time represents the amount of time a student receives instruction (in person or virtually). In theory, instructional time is constructive. Ideally it builds students' understanding of various topics and their practice of discrete skills within subjects. Unfortunately instructional time and seat time have merged and become conflated. Seat time represents the amount of time an individual student is present at school (this is one way schools make money). In too many schools, instructional time has little meaning for learners and does little to shape an individual construction of knowledge and skills.

We all want to believe that instructional time has meaning and value. However, education has to move beyond its outdated definitions and generalized ideas towards  practices that better meet the needs of students.  One thing the pandemic laid bare is that school has little meaning for many students. For some students, school is nothing more than seat time. Other students have grown frustrated with the lack of actual teaching in their class. They go from outdated textbooks to worksheets to fill out to YouTube videos their teacher assigned. These students crave knowledge but the education factory does not provide what they need. If we change how we view and define ‘instructional time’ we can start to bring meaning back into our classrooms and schools.

One way to think about instructional time is to equate it with nutrition (apologies to any nutritionists for this overly simplified discussion). Instructional time is like carbohydrates and fats in our diet. Some carbs and some fats are better for us than others. Roasted fingerling potatoes have a different impact nutritionally than a bag of potato chips. The fat from an avocado differs from the fat in lard.  Saying all instruction time is good for you is just like telling someone that all carbs are good for you. Our nutrition benefits when we take a more nuanced look at ingredients and nutrients. Education isn’t that different.

We can improve learning if we take a more nuanced approach to skill development and the delivery of  information for students. People who reject educational alternatives and innovation based on generalized and often outdated ideas are no different than someone who pushes nutritional practices based on the food pyramid from 1950.

Hats off to the superintendent in one of those articles who stated his district would implement the four day week (because they had to financially) and adapt or adjust their practice as necessary to support student learning. And that if they noticed a negative impact on the students after a specific window of time they would scrap the idea.

Now Do.Think.Learn has operated under a four day school almost since its inception. We feel that by distilling our class time down to the essentials and removing the BS from our day, we get plenty done each day. Over the last few years we have adjusted our school hours but the four day school week remains. We firmly believe that less is more, but nuance and flexibility also help.



Real Teachers & Real Schools

Do.Think.Learn (DTL) has three big obstacles to overcome. First, getting the word out in the community about who we are and all that we do. Second, is convincing folks that while we don’t offer the social resources larger schools do, what we offer in terms of building confidence and skills outweighs not hanging out with your friends for a few hours each day. Third, people have a hard time believing we are a real school or that I’m a real teacher. I have devoted a bit of time to the first two issues, but recently the needle on the turntable of my life is stuck on that third issue.

A potential student stopped me during a recent admission interview to ask me if I was really a teacher. When I started telling him about our school day and projects, he interrupted again and asked  if Do.Think.Learn was an actual  school. A few days later I ran into some former colleagues at Trader Joe’s. When I told them about the work I do with Do.Think.Learn they paused and politely said, “ that’s nice.”  They did well not to roll their eyes in front of me.  Whatever, even some of my friends look at Do.Think. Learn as some curious oddity than a real school. I get those questions quite a bit. 

These somewhat innocuous questions and responses ooze deeper issues. When a student asks these questions, it usually indicates  curiosity and astonishment. When a grown up asks such things it usually means that they have been zombified by the Business as Usual Model of education. While the real teacher query has a ‘don’t judge a book by its cover’ layer. If we push a bit further, we arrive at people’s preconceived ideas of what it means to be a teacher and what the profession of teaching involves. 

The real school query cuts straight into the public’s notion of what schooling and education involves. In several of the schools I have worked in, parents have said they enrolled their students because they “wanted something different.”  However, when we provided “something different” those parents freaked out. That hits at the crux of why transforming school tends to bog down. 

Schooling remains  one of the few businesses that still holds tight to the problematic mantra “that’s  how we’ve always done it.” So when new models for schooling emerge, many parents remain reluctant to try them despite ample evidence that traditional school models continue to fail their students.

Real Teacher?

I’ve gotten the “real teacher” question far longer than the “real school” question. Both queries continue to make me pause and reexamine my public persona and professional choices. Aside from occasionally changing the decor or upgrading my wardrobe at school, not a whole lot has changed for me. 

Back in the day one of my students told me she appreciated that I “keep it real.” I like that. Plus, adolescents are a weird moving work in progress so being a little quirkier than they are, provides connection in most situations. Students tend to appreciate an honest, straightforward approach. They’re so used to adults blowing smoke up their @$$ or talking down to them that they find honesty refreshing and accessible.  They also don’t do boring. If you make work fun, and play serious business - that transforms the school day in a variety of ways. Maybe I do have to “look the part” more, but why?

Students and parents often have ingrained ideas about teachers - what we look like… how we dress… how we talk and act in class. The education system in many places still clings to the traditional model of teacher appearance and behavior. While appearance and behavior have nothing to do with a teacher’s professionalism or ability to teach, we live in a world in which a large majority of books are purchased or read based on their covers. If I wear a tie, does that make me a better teacher? If my shirt is untucked, am I therefore a worse teacher?  Such constraints only reinforce many traditional notions of professionalism. I suspect that these traditions also remain in place as a nod towards ideas of respect. But, will my students really respect me more if I’m wearing a tie? Sure some may show some cursory respect, but real respect is earned. Cursory respect is really just sucking up. Some schools (mostly independent and charters) have begun to reshape these ideas - allowing more casual attire or allowing students to call teachers by their first name. 

Sometimes the teacher who really looks the part is just a poseur. Real teaching  means building trust; supporting students’ well being; as well as, examining deconstructing ideas or data. An actual teacher guides a student across the bridge from not knowing to knowing. That knowledge includes who they are; who they want to be, how they work; as well as how to discuss, question, and present a variety of ideas or issues. 

Now maybe I’m a poser in many areas of my life, but as a teacher I work hard to speak my truth and encourage each student to speak their truth. I tell it like it is. Sometimes I wear shorts to school. Some of the stories I tell push the limits of appropriateness.  On a few occasions…wait, let’s leave it there. All of that aside, I do what it takes to support and guide my students beyond what they think is possible. I don’t blow smoke up their ass (wait do real teachers say ass?). When they fall down I help them back up, dust them off, and get them going again. I help them figure out how their wings work so they can fly wherever they want to go. So feel free to look down your nose at me and my teaching style - but yeah, I’m a real teacher.

Real School?

Most people have an image in their mind about what a school looks like and how learning happens in a school. Usually they picture a brick and mortar structure that resembles a combination of a prison and outdoor mall. Perhaps they envisioon a low slung building that stretches from K to whatever; or maybe an imposing edifice that oozes tradition and rigor. All of these images are accurate, but schools exist in other ways and in other types of places.

Not many people flinch when you tell them that the people who designed schools also designed prisons.  Let that sink in.  What does that say about school and learning? One of the issues facing education in America is that too many people think that for real learning to occur it has to happen in a building that screams school. In order for education to regain meaning we have to consider that real learning and real teaching can happen in a multitude of  places and structures (some schools don’t even have buildings). School is where learning happens. Unfortunately too often when I tell people about DTL, they smile politely and say “Wow, that’s exciting” before walking away, scoffing, and dismissing my school.

In the five years DTL has existed we began in a garage before moving into a shared work space office (during the pandemic school moved into a backyard). When we moved into the office, students didn’t flinch. Some parents question the set up, but students dig it.  Even the student who’s yard we’d been using was psyched to move into the new office. Our office neighbors run start ups, investment groups, and do some lawyering. The engineers engineer. While others create and edit various media (primarily podcasts and films). Everyday students see people working and experience a professional workplace. In this environment, school becomes a professional endeavor not something you endure until adulthood.


DTL take their school responsibilities seriously, but still have a good time. Students actually want to come to school. They get a set of keys and those who drive get a parking spot. In this setting, school takes on a level of professionalism that elevates learning and school. And while many people disparage teenagers, our neighbors treat DTL students, if not like equals, like professional colleagues. This has a huge influence on how students think about school. Feel free to shake your head at our location, but this setup is pro and our students respond accordingly. 

I built that road and walked every mile
Teachers teach in school but school does not alway happen in large educational holding pens.  If we expand where and how learning happens educators can better meet the needs of all students. By diversifying what and where school happens we will have schools that work for all families and youth. 

Not long ago, I lost a potential student when his former school said the DTL was not a real school (not accredited). Now accreditation is tricky business for microschools. The ‘rules’ prove  difficult for many microschools that don’t meet the criteria for number of staff or enrollment. Bureaucracy is necessary but often suffocates creativity and innovation. So despite the fact that DTL would better meet this student’s academic and mental health needs, which would enable them to hopefully re-enroll in his previous school rather quickly, that esteemed institution instead preferred that he sign up for an internet school that provided instruction solely via you tube videos and online worksheets. That ‘real’ school ended up doing more harm than good.

Microschools and microschooling continue to emerge and evolve as a viable alternative to traditional schooling. As a (micro) school Do.Think.Learn has come a long way and continues to evolve. The students and I do the work everyday. I know their work is comparable and more meaningful than much of the work being done in other schools around the country. Professor Geneva Gay used to tell us that want to change the staus quo “you make the road by walking it.” Well, as a teacher, I walk the road everyday. My students and I do the work and walk their road each and everyday. Every step shapes their school experience and DTL’s identity. 

Let’s go back to answer the original questions… School at DTL looks a bit different than most schools but we walk the road and keep it real. We strip away the fat to make learning meaningful, flexible, and personal.  We build students up and respect who they are and who they want to be. Still some will say we’re not a real school. To those folks, come on by - I can show the registration paperwork from the state that says DTL is a real school, but I’d rather you just check out our students and their work. This real school focuses more on student success rather than the usual BS of schooling.

Rethinking Thanksgiving

While most people celebrate Thanksgiving, many Native Americans pause for a National Day of Mourning. Their National Day of Mourning represents the truth of Thanksgiving. Most people in the U.S were taught that Thanksgiving is when “the Pilgrims and Indians celebrated” which isn’t true at all.  Yet the myth of the first Thanksgiving is still taught in schools and passed on in homes.  The American myth of thanksgiving represents ignorance and lack of acknowledgement to the Native American people. Many students throughout generations were taught the myth of Thanksgiving.  NativeHope.org stated that,  “many teachers focus on this happy story, helping students make American Indian headdresses out of construction paper and holding Thanksgiving reenactments in their classrooms. These school activities also encourage young students to think it is okay to wear culture as a costume”.  The truth about thanksgiving needs to be known, understood, and taught so we can acknowledge the people who came before us. 

In 1621, the Plymouth Colony wouldn’t have survived if it wasn’t for the Wampanoag tribe. The Pilgrims were totally clueless about the resources available around them until the tribe showed them how to gather, hunt, and fish the area. The truth shows that no meals were eaten together in 1621. The colonists of Massachusetts Colony  thanked the local Pequots by killing them off. According to Tommy Orange in There There, Thanksgiving comes to mean a time for Europeans to celebrate killing indigenious people.  He tells us that, “In 1637, anywhere from four to seven hundred Pequot gathered for their annual Green Corn Dance, colonists surrounded their village, set it on fire, and shot any Pequot who tried to escape” (p. 5). Thanksgiving didn’t become a holiday in the US until Lincoln made it one in the middle of the 19th century. In colonial America “Thanksgiving” often involved violence against your local indigenous tribe. “Thanksgivings like these happened everywhere, whenever there were what we have to call successful massacres. At one such celebration in Manhattan, people were said to have celebrated by kicking the heads of Pequot people through the streets like soccer balls” (There, There, p. 5).  Due to this Native Americans use  Thanksgiving as a day to remember, honor their ancestors, continue to protest against racism and oppression against indigenious people. 

Giving thanks was already a way of life for Native Americans. Sean Sherman founder and CEO of the Sioux chef’s Indigenious Kitchen stated that,  “Many of my indigenous brothers and sisters refuse to celebrate Thanksgiving, protesting the whitewashing of the horrors our ancestors went through, and I don’t blame them. But I have not abandoned the holiday. I have just changed how I practice it.” (Time).   Even though Thanksgiving isn’t what most people think it is, for many indigenous people Thanksgiving can still be a time for gratitude and acknowledging a more honest version of history. Sherman continues, “the idea of giving thanks is central to Native heritage and culture, and in this way, Thanksgiving is simply a chance to appreciate the good things of life like family, community, and the riches of the land. Long before settlers arrived, Native tribes were celebrating the autumn harvest and the gift of Mother Earth’s abundance.”  As we move into Thanksgiving holiday week, take time to rethink your understanding of the holiday. Move beyond the myth and take a moment to recognize a more honest history. Giving thanks on Thanksgiving is still ok, although like Chef Sherman said, we would all benefit from changing how

(and what) we celebrate. So this Thanksgiving, take a moment to recognize the real past and give thanks to those who came before us..







A Helpless, Motionless Rock

I am a rock on the ground

So much space exists around me

Endless lands of endless variety

My freedom has no bounds

I am free to do as I please

Think

Feel

Express

My highly desirable life sparks undesirable feelings

Jealousy

Envy

Sadness

However, I’m too distracted to care

Distracted by my liberty

Distracted by my abilities

to do things all on my own

I’ve lived a long time now

I can feed myself

With no reliance on anything else

The gentle wind pushes me

Wherever I wish to go

If I hit something along the way

Oh, well

I can overcome it

I’m a strong individual

When I arrive at my destination

“How beautiful.”

The wind gives me a hard push

Interrupting my appreciation

“Can’t I have a moment to myself after traveling several miles?”

The wind pushes again

“Leave me alone. You only bring me problems.”

The wind continues

Its force progresses

Into an unforgiving jab

“Fine, I just needed some time.”

I allow a mass of myself to part ways with me

I give the wind some of my value

“Bye now.”

The wind leaves but I know its still there

I just suppress its everlasting existence

Deep down inside

I know I can't live comfortably without the wind

But I also can’t live comfortably with the wind

Without the wind, all I’d be is what I am

A helpless, motionless rock


Reframing The Narrative: Oppression versus Privilege?

My friend Wedge has a theory. He believes that undoing racism and the stranglehold mythology has on American history or society comes down to reframing the talking points away from White Privilege and emphasizing oppression in the past, present, and future experiences of People of Color (he’s not ready for BIPOC).

I have to point out that Wedge has enjoyed instigating and provoking people with his views for some time (trolling since the early days of dial up?). We used to get into it on a regular basis. Sometimes our ideas overlapped but more often our conversations digressed and one of us would walk away. More recently when we do have a chance to hang out, we have more civil and productive conversations around his backyard fire pit.  One night around the fire he dropped his notion of oppression versus privilege theory on me.  A year or so  later I keep thinking about it. As I begin my 12th grade history seminar (the History of the Other in America) I find myself dwelling on his talking points for changing how this country engages in some difficult conversations.

This year for our inaugural senior history seminar, we will examine a variety of questions or issues across racial and cultural groups as a means to reframe the narrative of America. The goal as we explore these questions or issues is twofold. First to create a more honest interpretation of US History we want to deconstruct the dominant historical narratives so that new, more accurate narratives can take their place. Second, we wish to rethink what we know about American history by exploring new topics and reexamine specific issues in greater depth. Thus far in our introductory discussions we have focused on the role of sovereignty, power, and control shape or have shaped these issues.  As I prepare for each week I keep hearing Wedge’s voice telling me to focus on oppression not privilege.

In the Wedge Theory, activists and educators will not make much headway in undoing the sins of history unless they change how more of White America thinks about race. To do that,  we need more people on the side of honest history and fewer people digging their heels in with defensive reactions. He pointed out that using terms such as privilege seems to alienate working and middle class White communities. His reasoning centered on how many people down the socioeconomic food chain struggle to comprehend that they have any privileges around race when they’ve struggled and continue to struggle to get by economically.. He suggested that  focusing on oppression initially instead of privilege would pull more people into the conversation and  create some cohesion that could then be used to dismantle the animosity between different racial and economic groups. While not a complete theory (and not without some blindspots) I found his ideas to be eye opening and intriguing. 

Of course, two old White guys sitting around a fire discussing privilege oozes privilege. We own that and recognize that we have blind spots in our understanding on numerous levels. That said, we are insiders on the outside with ideas for infiltrating the system. So, as Wedge pointed out, we need more ways to build alliances, crank up the volume on multiple narratives, and engage in supportive conversations. This doesn’t mean we avoid dismantling White privilege, it just means that perhaps we lead with another topic to get the discussion going and build relationships instead triggering a defensive reaction right from the get go.. 

So as I built curriculum for this year,  I kept his idea front and center and tried to merge it with something we talked about last year in school - that members of different communities aren’t victims of history but survivors of America’s history. That racial or ethnic groups have resisted and succeeded in spite of myriad efforts by those in power to break and bury them in the shadows of history. Regardless of where the seminar takes us, so far oppression has proven more accessible for my class than other approaches and access provides a good place to begin

When You're On The Wheel...

“When you’re on the wheel, you’ve got to deal” (Geneva, NY;, circa 1987)

I don’t remember when or who first told me I had to deal on the wheel - maybe EK but it might have been Meags or Roberti.  The phrase originated with a guy who had a Keyser Soze-like reputation in town. When we met he had an air of normalcy about him, but even if you had heard the rumors, you said nothing. His status lurked in the shadows, but when you told someone, “when you’re on the wheel”  you spoke as someone who knew the secret handshake.

It stayed with me. These days the phrase holds less intrigue and encourages folks to ‘deal’ otherwise they’ll be the person who gets thrown off the treadmill.

I use it in school all the time. It sounds way more caring and supportive than telling someone to “get over it.” The phrase can apply to a wide variety  of situations. To me it conveys a “Yes it does suck” with “what are you going to do about it” message. When I say it to a student I want them to acknowledge the problem and create a plan to overcome the issue. Resilience doesn’t come naturally to many students so like other skills, school needs to help students develop their response to obstacles and problems

For instance a few years back I had a student who did next to nothing for his culmination project on the atlatl. Two hours before his presentation when he had to hand in the various written components of the project, he mentioned that he did not do any of the work. He then asked me if he could go home. After telling him that he still had to present,  I dropped “When you’re on the wheel, you’ve got to deal” on him. Inspired, this student walked around campus and picked up a bunch of sticks and rocks. He then spent the evening trying to convince those who came to his table talks that they were in fact ancient atlatls and that cavemen rode around on dinosaurs using atlatls to hunt. Maybe that’s not the most inspiring response….

“When you’re on the wheel” also has a second level of meaning that reminds me to keep one foot in the world of how things are and the other in a world of how things could be. 

A recent conversation around high stakes testing reminded me of The Wheel. I had a brief discussion with someone who may not have appreciated my comment to an article about low test scores in America. Testing, in my professional opinion, has little educational value. Like many things in education, testing works for the adults but doesn’t really help students.  The other gentleman and I had similar frustrations with testing and the business of schooling but he came at the issue from the perspective of a parent with two students dealing with the outcomes of tests. I don’t know if he enjoyed the convo as much as I did, but it provided a good reminder that sometimes you have to deal with the ‘what is’ and not so much with ‘how things should be.’ Even though Do.Think.Learn doesn’t do standardized tests and right now my students won’t be going to colleges that require SATs, etc. I do a fair amount of test prep with my tutoring clients. Despite research that suggests that your written DMV test is a more accurate predictor of undergraduate success than the SAT/ACT. Some students still need to play that game. Just because I think testing is a scam, if my students want that, my professional obligation is to get them ready for those tests. When you’re on the wheel…

Teachers and students find themselves on the wheel everyday. As much as we may dislike some things we can’t just choose not to do  them. That doesn’t serve anyone well. 

As I closed out of that conversation, I had a flashback to the Q & A at my first conference presentation. At that conference I presented on the intersection of students’ perception of risks and moral and ethical issues in school.  Somehow the first question I got went something like, ”What are your recommendations for transforming the education system.” My response - “burn it to the ground and start over.” Once the gasps and eye rolling ended the rather patient principal who asked the question followed up with, “Sure we’d love to but for those who have to do our best with students on Monday, how can we better move the system forward?” I really appreciated how they followed up and we ended up having a great discussion that produced some solid ideas. I needed to take into consideration that as a school leader that educator might want to “burn it down” but doing so wouldn’t benefit her students or teachers. That principal had  to deal with the practical issues of the right now and work to transform a system that may not welcome change. I tell prospective families that Do.Think.Learn changes education one student at a time. This tagline reflects both the reality of the education system and the idea that to create change you have to start with the world right in front of you. 

“When you’re on the wheel, you’ve got to deal.”

The education system often presents teaching and learning as a narrow set of wheels that students have to deal with to “succeed” (testing for example). In reality school represents more than one wheel; more than a single measure of success; and more than one successful way to deal. More frequently, schools present students with wheels of all shapes and sizes as well as the occasional interconnected set of wheels. Fortunately more and more multiple paths forward have emerged for students not only to deal with school but to successfully demonstrate a wider range and greater depth of skills.

Do.Think.Learn emerged as a way to do school differently. We didn’t burn the system down, but created a space for more students to succeed in school. We support students who need a different way to learn or those whose talents go unnoticed in more traditional learning communities. In many ways we follow in the words of Husker Du frontman Bob Mould - I didn't smash the system as much as create something new.  That said, as much as I want to burn it all down, I stay tethered to the institution of education in this state and this country. We do things differently - emphasize skills not subjects, personalize the curriculum, and follow a less is more ethos. Yet we still follow the A-G reqs for high school and national subject standards. This modern one room schoolhouse sets out to show you can have a nontraditional environment and still provide high quality learning.  Rigor isn’t a bad word, DTL just redefined what rigor looks like in school. This school doesn’t test but every day is a test.  We do this so students can deal with whatever they come across; wherever they go; and whatever they do. So when they find themself on the wheel, they know how to deal.


Why I Teach

From a young age  I knew I should teach. Yet I fought it. Then I fought it some more.  I spent my youth “volunteering” in my Mom’s classroom. Our basement at home had a small classroom set up in the corner.  I saw firsthand what it took and tried to avoid the calling. Eventually I gave in. Although how I teach evolves and changes, why I teach has remained the same.

I teach to empower. Learning - real learning - empowers individuals. Supporting their development of various skills builds confidence. Encouraging students to deconstruct an idea and rebuild it - to think critically or from multiple perspectives , and to develop their own answers - helps each individual discover how much they are capable of in school and out. My job isn’t to teach students what to think. My job is to teach students ways to think and effective ways to express themselves. Learning lights a spark. That spark powers change and empowers the future.

I teach to break down walls. In school and life students confront myriad walls. Some walls exist between students and teachers. Other times walls separate students and subject matter or skill development. Numerous walls intersect in classrooms and hallways between students or groups of students. Students construct walls to protect themselves from a variety of academic and social intrusions. These walls limit or prevent individuals from accessing their full potential, diverse resources, and an array of opportunities. Part of teaching means breaking down these barriers and providing guidance for students so they can address such barriers in the future on their own. Too often students bash themselves against the wall to no avail. However, every wall has a weakness and knocking it down is not the only path forward.  I teach so that  individuals can access the knowledge, skills, and community resources around them. A teacher also provides students with the guidance to confront, navigate, and overcome the walls or gatekeepers obstructing their success in the future.

I teach to build bridges. Whether we want to admit it or not, teaching and learning doesn’t happen without an interconnected network of relationships.  First, the teacher/student relations establishes the foundation of learning. To learn means  crossing a gap between old and new knowledge, the past and future, or the known and the unknown. Trust, safety, and support allow a student to step out to cross that gap. The teacher builds bridges that each student feels safe walking across those gaps. Students also need a bridge to cross over the schisms of social risks and peer pressures that interfere with their academic and mental health. Bridges between individuals and groups build community and support students as they negotiate around the array of pressures in school. Students also need to bridge their life in school and their life outside of school as well as who they are now and who they want to be in the future.  Building a network of bridges between their various worlds students know they have a way forward that remains connected to their identity and their history. As a teacher I build bridges and watch as they cross into the future.

That’s why I teach.

Comfort Kills

As in skateboarding, it’s the concrete, the scrapes, and hitting your shin on metal that leads to improvement - getting better and keeping you sharp.” (Van Doren, 2021, Authentic, p.200)

____________________________________________________________________________

My Mom taught me a lot of things about teaching. She often said that a teacher should comfort the afflicted and afflict the comfortable. Mary Jo also told me that as a teacher I should get comfortable with being uncomfortable.  Since my Mom was the greatest teacher I know, I actually listened.  So before we afflict the comfortable, let’s explore why comfort limits what we know and makes us more susceptible to problems in a rapidly changing future.

My students told me that saying, “comfort kills” or “afflict the comfortable” might be considered clickbait, but that they seemed like solid policies. Millions of students do not have access to comfort. These students are too busy negotiating fight or flight situations. For these students, schools should actively find ways to provide comfort so those students can learn. However, lately the comfort/discomfort conversation has not centered around students on the margins or borderlands  of school communities. The politics of schooling has flipped the script in some parts of the country as a reactionary response to the perceived victimization of those who fear diversification of the social, economic, and political landscape.

People do strange things and fight hard to remain in their comfort zones. Parents do even stranger things to ensure that their students remain comfortable. Many popular parenting styles (helicopter, drone strike, snowplow) all strive to maintain comfort. Too often these days comfort has become the end all be all of life in school and out of schools. In some parts of the country, causing someone intellectual or cognitive discomfort lands you in jail. Politicians and parents in various communities have worked quite hard to ensure that their children retain exclusive rights to the privilege of comfort. Archconservatives in Florida, Texas, and other states designed, misappropriated. and promoted outdated orthodoxy in order to keep the comfortable comfortable. One could easily argue that the efforts by Christian conservatives and White Nationalists in (primarily) southern state governments have far reaching and immensely harmful effects on the members of the BIPOC and LGBTQ+ communities. However, one could also argue that these efforts also damage the very youth that these politicians and mobs of parents claim they want to protect. Disenfranchised or marginalized students - those outside the mainstream or dominant narrative - have had to get used to these exclusionary and prejudiced practices. Unfortunately they have experience in dealing with and negotiating racism, homophobia, and anti-trans rhetoric. The students within the mainstream usually have no clue. They have become so used to the comforts such social and political protections provide that they struggle constantly when mommy, daddy, or Uncle Ron can’t help them and life forces them out of their comfort zones. Those students need help. Yes way too much attention and too many resources go to the comfortable, but let’s take a moment to dismantle this idea of comfort. 

All students can benefit from exploring and expanding the edges of their comfort zone. Students, parents, and teachers have all become reluctant to embrace discomfort. Many of us have all become too used to our comfort zones. We have grown lazy from not venturing out or only speaking with those we agree with on issues. Teachers, students, parents, and politicians are all guilty of this failure to act. Accommodating parenting or teaching styles and efforts to preserve, protect and provide a better childhood for the well off has actually backfired.

If comfort kills, then discomfort saves. Discomfort does not mean pain, suffering or even pressure to perform.  All learning involves causing some level of discomfort, so buckle up. Discomfort is a good thing.

Comfort gives both privilege and problems. Physical, social, emotional, and cognitive comfort represents moments in which a person does not have to worry. To be comfortable is to exist above or free of worry.  Linger too long, not doing anything and getting going again feels impossible. The double edge sword of comfort provides rest and recovery, but also stagnation and a loss of physical or intellectual dexterity. Coaches and meatheads used to say, “No pain, no gain.” Frighteningly, they had it mostly right. To get in better physical shape you need to sweat and you’ll be sore afterwards. However, there’s a big difference between pain and discomfort. If you don’t ever sweat in the gym, you won’t ever make much progress. If you limit learning to only rainbows and sparkles, happy happy, joy joy activities, students won’t learn much.

When people say that learning should be happy and joyous - I usually throw up in my mouth.  After I choke down my initial reaction, I ask some clarifying questions. Don’t get me wrong, I dig it when someone feels giddy or triumphant at the outcome of an activity or learning experience. But the process of learning may not go smoothly or may present significant challenges. In order to learn, you must embrace some discomfort.

Learning requires us to move outside our known world and process new information. This requires some time outside one’s comfort zone, which is not alway happy or joyous.  We don’t always know what to do with or how we feel about new information. Academic or intellectual comfort is the antithesis of learning.

Comfort sits at the center of the American Dream. Even as that dream fades into mythology, comfort remains the goal for many Americans. Social comfort… economic comfort… emotional comfort… intellectual comfort - if you subscribe to Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs this makes total sense. However, if we never get off the proverbial couch our curiosity stagnates and we become reluctant to explore new ideas or challenge ourselves.

Classrooms can do more to help students explore the boundaries of their comfort zones, to learn, and to realize their full potential. When individuals explore the boundaries of their comfort zone, their behavior resembles how people behave when they decide to swim in the ocean. You’ve got those that get their feet wet and then spend time splashing bits of water on themselves before moving a bit further out so their ankles get wet. Others go and stand knee deep and contemplate the water. With these first two groups, they may go in further but often return to the safety of their chair or towel. Still others walk slowly into the surf taking everything in, hopping over breakers for a bit before sinking under a wave. Finally you have the few folks who sprint out into the surf and dive under the biggest wave they can find. If you asked a classroom teacher they could probably group their students by similar classroom behavior.

Discomfort and comfort are necessary components of growth. I love sitting doing nothing every once in a while. I can’t stay like that since things always have to get done. You don’t get stronger when you exercise. The gains come after you workout and let your body rest. Exercise pushes your muscles, etc. but rest allows your body to incorporate that work as growth and create a new normal. In order for your body to learn how to be more capable, you have to balance discomfort and comfort, effort and recovery.

Different sciences tell us that systemic learning requires balance. Homeostasis or equilibrium represent bodies or ecosystems in balance. When something new comes and disrupts a food web, it pushes things out of whack. This disequilibrium causes some panic in the  system but adjustments happen and equilibrium returns. However, if a system gets pushed too far from it comfort zone, it struggles to recover. If a system never experiences change, it struggles when it eventually does confront problematic incursions.

Balance is the key to managing discomfort. If you push too hard exercising bad things happen - pulled muscles, back goes out, etc. Injuries represent your body’s reminder that you pushed too hard and went too far out of balance. In response your body will need time to recover, find ways to heal or grow while it slowly returns to its preferred state of homeostasis.  The brain works in similar ways. For our purposes, comfort represents a state of cognitive and emotional balance. New or different information comes in that stretches or pushes our system out of balance.  We make sense of that information as we sit with for a period of time in which we construct knowledge and expand what we know.

Balance allows us to keep one foot in our comfort zone while we edge out into unchartered territory or wrestle with new ideas. In a previous lifetime I studied the impact of various types of risks on learning and students’ behavior. To help students negotiate risk (another key component of learning) adults needed to provide moderate risks.  This Goldilocks sweet spot provided not much risk; not too little; but just the right amount of risk so that students could extend their comfort zones and achieve more. Discomfort in moderation within a supportive environment helps us all grow, learn or understand more, and live a more enriching life.

We have to remember that our students, your children, almost all youth can handle WAY more than we think they can and can demonstrate resilience beyond what we imagine. Usually, and I think it is the case in this situation, the adults are the problem. If students don’t learn to negotiate discomfort they will struggle with the increasing complexity of life as they get older. Realistically however, school years have already become more difficult for youth than they were back in the day.  Instead of supporting their students, parents and teachers more often than not help youth avoid uncomfortable topics or issues.  Given the tools to succeed, students can do amazing things and handle whatever comes their way in this ever changing world..

I learned not to argue with Mary Jo. In order to learn and grow we all have to get comfortable with being uncomfortable. Teachers do, from time to time,  need to upend the couch on those who are hogging it in order to let others rest. Challenge yourself to embrace discomfort in different ways each day. As for the states of Magastan that have banned uncomfortable conversations,  I can only wonder why these conversations frighten them so much.