One of my favorite teaching moments happened early during my second year.  I caught a child using a racial slur in an argument with another child.  Obviously upset, but recognizing that this nine-year old didn't understand the consequences of his words, I punished him by taking recess away for a week----a huge deal to an athletic third grader. 

Before the end of the day was out, I received an angry phone call from his father.  "What in the world are you doing?!"  he shouted, "You can't punish my child so severely for something so small.  Are you out of your mind---or do you just hate my son?"

Nothing seemed to help him understand that throwing racial slurs around was simply unacceptable.  He was convinced that I'd misunderstood the situation and administered a consequence that was too severe.  "Mr. Ahmad," I explained, "I'm a teacher...I know children..."

Before I could finish, he roared the ridiculous:  "Well, I'm a heart surgeon and I know children better!"

This was my first experience with what Dan Lortie calls "the transparency of teaching."  Because nearly everyone has spent the better part of 15 years sitting in classrooms---and because many have worked with children beyond the schoolhouse door---most people believe that they know exactly what teachers do each day.  That false awareness causes painful assumptions that teachers wrestle with from the beginning of their careers until the end.

False transparency has been nothing short of miserable for me.  You see, I'm a  guy that has been motivated by elevating his voice into powerful conversations for almost a decade.  I'm a deep thinker who wants to help translate what I know about the classroom into the decisions that guide the direction of education. 

The greatest challenge, however, has been elbowing my way into those same conversations!

Early on, I did a lot of talking, but no one seemed particularly interested in listening  Several educational leaders saw me as nothing more than a nuisance.  While they appreciated what I was doing with students, they weren't interested in anything that I had to add to conversations beyond my classroom.  Their typical response to one of my suggestions went something like this:

"That's nice, Bill, but it will never work.  You see, you just don't understand the bigger picture."

I couldn't have been more discouraged---and I thought about leaving teaching time and again. 

Then along came the internet!

Seems like a simple change, right?  After all, what exactly could the internet do to elevate the voice of a frustrated young educator looking for the opportunity to be heard?

The answer:  Almost everything. 

First, I stumbled across my digital friends here at the Teacher Leaders Network.  A pretty impressive group of provocative thinkers, TLN started as nothing more than an ongoing email conversation between teachers focused on what mattered in education.

The difference was that John Norton---TLN's formal moderator and digital community pioneer---was taking elements of our conversations and summarizing them to provide content for the Teacher Leaders Network website.  Understanding that the key to any website is a never-ending stream of new material, John began to beg members to write diary entries or book reviews that he could use on our growing site. 

And I jumped in feet first!

In the span of two years, I'd written almost 40 book reviews and 15 diary entries for TLN.  Writing became a passion.  It gave me the opportunity to have an audience for the first time.  I was crafting a place for myself at the digital table without an invitation.

That's the beauty of what Clay Shirky--in his new book Here Comes Everybody---describes as the "Publish, then Filter" world that we live in today.  No longer does anyone have to be tapped by a formal publisher---powerful because they own a printing press and have extensive connections with a broader audience and distribution network---to have ideas recognized.

Instead, everyone can publish using free digital tools.  Everyone can build an audience and have a voice, whether they're writing about rugrats, racing or religion.  Like no time in history, publishing is universal----and for me, that changed everything. 

Almost immediately, my writing was linked in other locations.  Authors were citing me in research reports.  eBlast newsletters from major organizations were referencing my columns.  Eventually, editors from formal publications started to find me.  They recognized that my writing had resonance and wanted to add teacher voice to their magazines. 

Five years later, that snowball continues to build. 

I've had ideas published by Threshold magazine, the National Staff Development Council, Education Leadership and Edutopia.  I've been contacted by the National Middle School Association, Solution Tree, Corwin Press and Teacher's College Press about potential book projects.  Other education blogs, including Teacher Magazine, Horn Book and the Learning First Alliance have offered me opportunities to write.

In just under two years, I've gone from a guy struggling to have any audience at all to a guy who is humbled every day by the fact that people read my work---regardless of forum or format---regularly.

How's that for influence? 

I've finally earned the credibility that I couldn't seem to find early in my career---and it had nothing to do with me.  I'm the same guy today as I was 10 years ago.  The only thing that's changed is that digital tools now allow me to be a publisher.

They can do the same thing for you!  All you need is a willingness to write and a sense for the kinds of tools that make this work easy.  Here's what I'd recommend:

For Advanced Writers:

If you're already confident in your ability as a writer, consider starting your own blog.  I know, I know--it sounds intimidating, doesn't it?  How can you possibly figure out how to post information on the internet?  You're not one of those die-hard techie-types that eats and breathes HTML, XML or HTTPs. 

The good news is that you don't have to be!  Most blog services are ridiculously easy to use.  After you create an account, you'll be working in windows that look like any word processing application that you've ever explored.  You'll see comfortable toolbars that allow you to change your fonts, add links, and center your content.  When you're done writing, click on a "publish" button and your work is automatically posted to the web.

How's that for easy?

Choosing a blog service is mainly about personal tastes.  I'm a Typepad user, even though it means I have to pay an annual fee.  I chose Typepad a long time ago---before most blog services were free---and I'm comfortable with it.  It's easy to use and offers tons of tech support if I need it.

Many of my peers have jumped on the Blogger train.  Blogger is a Google product, so it's not going away anytime soon.  Better yet, you can access Blogger blogs with the same username and password that you use for any Google service---so if you have a Gmail or Google Docs account, Blogger may be a logical choice for you.   

And I'd be remiss if I didn't remind you about Edublogs.  Edublogs is the premier blogging service for educators.  The advantage of creating your own digital home with Edublogs is that you'll be instantly connected to a community of like-minded writers who you might just be able to convert into readers!

For Intermediate Writers:

If you're just beginning to dip your toes into the digital waters, consider working with peers on a collaborative writing wiki.  Wikis are editable websites, and like blogs, they require very little technical skill to master.  Wiki toolbars also look just like common word processing programs---and when you're finished saving a contribution to a wiki page, your work is posted online automatically.

The difference between a wiki and a blog is that wikis are designed for collaboration between a group of users.  The content on a wiki can be edited at any time by anyone with the shared wiki password.  Wikis also provide discussion boards for every page, allowing users to engage in ongoing conversations with one another about the quality of their developing project.

For novice writers, these features can be invaluable.  Consider finding a few peers and writing bits about teaching and learning together.  Divide selections into sections and have each member of your collaborative writing group take responsibility for small contributions.  Allow users fluent with language to polish your final text.  Find members that are sticklers for spelling and grammar and turn them loose!

By doing so, the writing process becomes far less intimidating because you're not responsible for an entire selection all by yourself.  Instead, you'll be reflecting together---which in and of itself is a powerful form of professional growth. 

Almost every wiki service provides the same tools and features, so you'll just have to find a service that you feel good about.  I'm a fan of PB Wiki because I've been using it forever.  What I like the best about PB Wiki is that it allows users to create a "My PBWiki" account that provides immediate access to any wiki a user has created from one login screen. 

For a guy like me who is currently using 9 different wikis for work with teachers and students, this is a pretty important feature!

Wikispaces is another popular wiki service.  It was one of the first wiki services to be embraced by educators, so there are thousands of Wikispaces that you can check out as samples.  Wikispaces also has some unique features that will resonate with teachers who want to use wikis with their students---including automatic account creation for students without email addresses.

The service I'm most intrigued by right now would have to be Wet Paint.  Wet Paint is a slick little wiki service that caught my eye because its templates (the frame that goes around one's content) are super professional looking.  Wet Paint also puts more emphasis on facilitating and promoting the collaborative elements of wikis than any of the other services combined.  What really has me hooked, though, is that Jeff Utecht---and educational technology writer who I've followed for years---has started working with Wet Paint.

With his help, Wet Paint is bound to be the wiki service of choice before long!

Does any of this make sense to you?  Essentially, I've grown convinced that teachers---like anyone living in the 21st Century---can take advantage of free tools for content creation and collaboration to elevate their voice.  No longer do we have to sit unsatisfied, wishing that we had more of an influence over our profession. 

Instead, we can write about what we know.  We can help others to see exactly what it is that makes our work so challenging.  We can offer advice and guidance to one another.  We can speak the truth about testing, look for support with classroom management, make suggestions about educational policy, comment on trends that we see in our communities and testify on behalf of our students.

And most importantly, we don't have to wait to be asked what we think!

(Image credit:  Elbow by L. Marie, licensed Creative Commons:  Attribution)

One of my favorite conservative bloggers is Matt Johnston, who writes over at Going to the Mat.  Matt tracked down my recent post on the impact that testing has had on teaching and learning in my classroom and asked the following question in the comment section:

Bill, I think your rant (well grounded as it is) raises a couple of very difficult questions. I will have to assume that all teachers of subjects on standardized tests have experienced the same frustration as you. That leads to the question, should teachers who teach in subjects tested on standardized tests (i.e. math, science, English, etc) be evaluated in terms of professional development and annual reviews differently than those who teach non-standadized tested subjects, art, music, social studies, etc. If so, how would that be done so that it is equitable? Could tested subject teachers be rewarded more for success? Should they be disadvantaged for lack of success (as defined by your students' peformance)? What impacts would you see for the recruitment/retention of teachers in both tracks?

Interesting questions, Matt---especially because they operate from the basic assumption that we've made the right decision by using standardized tests as an effective indicator of "success" and "failure" in schools.  While I think that you're right to assume that standardized tests are the "indicator du jour" for the forseeable future, I'm personally holding out hope that we'll become more sophisticated in our assessments of children in the upcoming decade. 

That being said, I think that teacher evaluation is completely ineffective as it currently exists for all teachers!  Administrators---who are often completely overworked and under prepared---are asked to provide "instructional leadership" to teachers who span incredibly diverse curricula and ability levels.  It's an impossible task, to say the least. 

The results:  No one is evaluated particularly well.

And that's actually quite shocking to me as an "insider."  Let me give you an example:  I'm a pretty reflective guy who has a solid understanding of what I do well and where I struggle.  My personal weakness as a classroom teacher is providing differentiation for students of different ability levels.  Considering how academically diverse our classrooms are becoming, that's a HUGE weakness.

But I'm not sure that any of my principals or supervisors have ever noticed that weakness.  Why?  Because they simply can't effectively judge my entire skill set in the two 20-minute observations that they do "on me" each year.  Instead, they typically come in my room, look to see if objectives are posted on the board, decide whether my instructional plans are appropriate for the grade level I'm teaching and then move on to another room. 

It has always been a surface-level evaluation of my performance at best---and in 15 years, no one has ever mentioned the lack of differentiation in my room.

Now, when it comes to evaluating tested v. untested teachers equitably, I'd argue that it'll never happen.  Tested teachers have numbers attached to their names---and right or wrong, we seem to put a lot of weight in those numbers.  In fact, I'd argue that most administrators tend to trust those numbers more than their own observations when determining who is an "effective teacher" and who is an "ineffective teacher." 

The numbers just seem so darn reliable, don't they?  After all, we live in a "data-driven world." 

But non-tested subjects will never have numbers attached to them.  Instead, their performance is always going to be judged by performances---How does the teacher look in action?  How do the students perform in the upcoming band concert?  How does the artwork look in the hallway?  How does the dance performance go off?

Don't get me wrong:  I truly believe that those kinds of assessments are more reliable---and more reflective of effective assessment.  When you can actually see a child applying skills from the standard course of study in performance based situations, you can truly begin to understand what they're capable of.  It's a more sophisticated measure of ability, don't you think? 

But those kinds of performance measures are never extended to teachers of tested subjects.  No one comes in my room and watches my students interact in meaningful conversations with one another.  No one ever sits down and challenges their thinking about a particular novel or piece of text to see if they can analyze an author's purpose or notice elements of bias. 

Instead, they count on the test to do those things---which I'd argue is simplistic at best. 

In many ways, this dichotomy between the ways we're willing to evaluate teachers of tested and untested subjects is almost ridiculous!  If a test is an effective method for judging English and math teachers, why haven't we developed standardized tests for dance and drama teachers too?  Why don't we have tests for the band teacher or the media specialist? 

And if we're willing to admit that testing in those areas is ineffective practice, then why aren't we willing to embrace the idea that testing in ALL areas is ineffective? 

As far as compensation goes, I am a firm believer that it is time for us to begin to reward teachers differently based on "performance."  Honestly, as a young-ish teacher who works 90 hours a week, I'm completely burned by the fact that I get paid based on years of experience only.  To know that there are teachers sprinting to the parking lot at 3:30 every day while I'll be plugging away until 7:30 or 8:30 is probably the biggest "hurt" there is in teaching. 

This recurrent pain is easily one of the biggest barriers to teacher recruitment and retention.  Do you have any idea how hard it is to encourage young teachers to stay in the classroom when they are making barely $30,000 a year---and when they know they'll get a 2% raise every year until they die regardless of how hard they work?  Worse yet, imgaine trying to stay positive when you know there are people in your building making twice as much as you are even though they make no meaningful contributions to teaching and learning.      

Where's the motivation to improve?!

Somewhere I read a statistic that the average young adult today will have held 13 jobs by the time they are 32.  That willingness to move flexibly between positions is a part of the professional fabric of today's worker---and it means that teaching has to change dramatically in order to compete for the best employees. 

New teachers aren't going to be as satisified with the "perks" that earlier generations embraced.  Tenure and job security mean nothing to today's employee.  Guaranteed raises over time and a "retirement" account don't either. 

What new teachers want is the chance to be rewarded for accomplished practice in the same ways that their peers will be rewarded in other professions.  The vision of the altruistic teacher who embraces the "I don't do it for the money" mantra is a thing of the past.  Today's teacher loves kids as much as their predecessor----but they expect to be paid for performance as well.

The never-ending barrier to this entire conversation, however, is that we have yet to effectively define what "accomplished performance" means.  Complicating matters is the fact that our nation is constantly changing the outcomes that they expect schools to produce.  Some people want higher test scores.  Others want improved graduation rates.  Still others want "kids of character" or "twenty-first century learners." 

Perhaps the first step in any attempt to establish alternative compensation packages for teachers should be a focused conversation about what exactly we want schools to produce.  Once we've got that vision established, we can start to "measure" the contributions of educational professionals and reward them appropriately.

My thinking in this post feels incomplete---but I'm due at the gym in 10 minutes for a workout.  I suppose I'll continue to polish this thinking in upcoming entries, but I'd be interested in hearing feedback from readers. 

Does anything I've written here make sense to anyone besides me!