Final thoughts ... for now

There are many divisions on teaching ethics and character in school. Many struggle to define what it means to teach ethics and character, how it should be done, if it should be done and whose standard to use.

Linus Wright, in his 13^th and final point of “Restructuring Public Education for the 21^st Century,” calls for character education.

Intentionally teach core values of respect, responsibility, honesty, self-discipline and citizenship.  

I don’t intend, in this blog post, to get into the definition of teaching ethics and character. What I will say is this. It’s essential for a classroom to function for children to learn respect (in dealing with teachers, peers, administrators), responsibility (homework, belongings, grades, learning), honesty (no, the dog didn’t really eat my homework) and self-discipline (my parents weren’t home last night to make me do my homework). How could a classroom function without these qualities? Citizenship is an excellent practice (even if it evokes thoughts of the 1950s) because it teaches students to look beyond themselves to something bigger – a sense of unity and commitment to each other, to other community members, to the nation and world as a whole (and plays in well with all of the aforementioned character traits).

On this level, I don’t disagree with, and even applaud, character education. What I will say next, I haven’t always agreed with. But recently, I’ve changed my mind. Anything beyond this basic ethics education might be too far. Teachers are to teach students about academics. If a teacher takes the role of ethical trainer, he or she is removing that role from the home, teaching state-approved ethics material (which should raise red flags) and, possibly, influencing students to think more like him and her, as far as ethics go. And while a teacher might see this as a good thing (who doesn’t want others to think like they do), parents certainly won’t agree with this, unless the teacher happens to have the same values and ideals. It’s not the teacher’s job. As mentioned, teachers are to teach academics, and only as much ethics as is necessary to successfully run a classroom.

            Speaking of running a classroom (and moving on to a different subject), Wright’s 12^th point (and the last one I’ve yet to cover of those that I chose to) states this: 

12. Require each school district to undergo an external evaluation every five years to determine effectiveness of operation. Criteria for the evaluation and the personnel conducting such an exercise would be approved by the Texas Education Agency.

As far as Linus Wright’s 12^th point goes, there isn’t much use looking at its many aspects because the crux of it is flawed. Until you change the Texas Education Agency, any external evaluation, every five years or every year, is going to be based on high-stakes standardized testing. That’s how the TEA handles its schools, deciding which ones should be closed and which ones should deserve more funding. As long as the TEA continues to run schools like a business that bases its decisions on flawed results, what will this five-year evaluation accomplish? Administrators and teachers will continue to stress over test results they can’t entirely control and that don’t reflect true learning or how well a teacher teaches. Student achievement and learning will continue to decline as drop out rates continue to rise. Wright suggests some good points, but until some of those things (and some other things) are corrected, this evaluation is, essentially, a moot point. What will it take for his idea to be a valid point?

Thanks for sticking with me over the summer as I’ve looked at Wright’s plan. Now that the fall is sneaking up on us, I’ll be looking at a variety of subjects, including ethics teaching, in a less structured way. Hope to hear from you. 

Are extracurriculars extra important?

I have to open this post by admitting that my favorite aspects of high school were the extracurricular activities. As a student, I loved competing in several UIL events, other academic events and tennis. I enjoyed helping to produce the yearbook, volunteering with the honors group and running track and cross country to stay in shape. I loved working hard on a project and the anxiety of not knowing who won. I especially loved how often all of these activities gave me an excuse to miss class.

Going to a small school meant that our district allowed us a lot of wiggle room if we were involved in a lot of activities. Teachers were made to accommodate students missing class sometimes two or three times a week. Some students’ grades did fall because they were stretched too thin and couldn’t handle the distraction.

Linus Wright challenges this notion in “Restructuring Public Education for 21^st Century” in his seventh points:

7. Explore the amount of time, effort and expense of extracurricular activities in middle and high school relative to value produced and received.

           

I certainly agree with the idea that if something isn’t beneficial, it should be done away with. I’m curious to know how Wright would determine the value produced and received. Many studies suggest extracurricular activity tends to increase student achievement (as far as grades and graduation rates are concerned), but by how much, why or which ones is widely disputed. One study in particular believes that academic and athletic activities and watching TV can improve grades, but that activities that center around music decrease grades. You can see how this could be easily questioned.

            As far as benefits go, extracurricular activities encourage students to show up. It’s true that they miss some school for the particular activity, but they typically attend for the remainder of the time     to know what’s going on with their activity, socialize with other participants and keep their grades up so they can continue to participate (In the same vein, students who show up are more likely to stick it out and graduate). The loss of participation due to low grades can be a valuable lesson for a student that they have to work hard in order to do what they want. This, of course, isn’t helped by those who give grades so stars can participate (ex: coaches who pass star athletes or administrators who forgive athletes of poor grades). This preference of extracurricular activities is more detrimental – student’s academic achievement and honesty should always come first.

Extracurricular activities also teach students traits and skills they might not get in class – team work, perseverance, hard work and socialization, to name a few. They are allowed to try new things, stick them out, and then choose not to continue them the next season if they decide it’s not for them. Often students find passion through competitions and community service. They learn skills, such as hand-eye coordination in sports, that benefit them in the classroom and in life. As far as athletics are concerned, some studies show that students (and adults, for that matter) who work out once or twice a week have increased brain performance and find it easier to pay attention, keep up and engage themselves in the classroom.

            Of course, as with anything, moderation is the key. Perhaps missing class two to three times a week for a month or more at time is too much. When extracurricular activities begin to negate what the teacher does in the classroom, lower a student’s grade or take an undue amount of time from family life, a thin but important line has been crossed. Schools must build safeties into their system to ensure students get the most from extracurricular activities without crossing into negative aspects – this includes safeties that keep coaches, teachers or administrators from abusing power in favor of star performers, as mentioned above. This power is also best left with each individual district, and not to the Texas Education Agency.

Families are encouraged to build safeties themselves with their children.

            If this balance can be struck, I believe most studies and opinions agree extracurricular activities are an excellent way to engage, excite and teach students, as well as boost academic performance and graduation rates. I only hope we use this tool wisely.     

I also want to mention that I have chosen not to explore his eighth and ninth points on auxiliary staff and school facilities simply because I don’t have much to say on the subjects. Perhaps I will explore them in depth in the future, especially if interest is expressed.

Next week I will discuss Wright’s idea for five year external evaluations by the TEA. Hope to hear from you.