Two toxic moments in staff meetings and what we can learn about being truly inclusive

This is a post that I want to write because these incidents happened.  There are a lot of other incidents that don't necessarily rise to the top in the pile of indignities, assumptions,  and examples of ignorance that are part of the life of being a bi-racial Latinx woman who is white passing and who is not afraid to speak up.  Name spelling and pronunciation, anyone?  (And yes, I acknowledge the great privilege I carry with my light colored skin and hair color.)

These things happen, and I think we can learn from them. So, stick with me.  This is not about comprehensible input.  It is about being better teachers.  And hopefully better humans.  

Anyway, let me give some background.

If you have read my blog for a while, you maybe know that one great passion of mine is inclusion, with the related passions of diversity, social justice, anti-bias, and dismantling the system of oppression and racism and bias that we live with every day.   

One key idea for me in being inclusive is that each member of my classroom (and hopefully community) feels safe and seen for who they are and what they need. They feel safe to say no if they are uncomfortable, or to ask a question if they don't get it.  They feel safe talking, or not talking.  

One of the greatest compliments that I have ever been given was in feedback about a presentation I did this summer.  I am putting it out here because it makes me feel great (because I read this blog too!) and because this idea of safety goes hand in hand with consent.  I am grateful that what I try to do was seen.  

[Elicia] was so open and engaging that she made each of us in the over-crowded room feel welcome. She modeled many important social-emotional practices: tiny physical "brain breaks" to reset our tired minds, differentiating by offering different options and encouraging us to make the activities we liked our own, responding to all suggestions and comments with "yes and", and above all, modeling asking consent for every little thing - "do you mind if I use your picture?" "may I use you as an example?" 

So this work is not just part of my teaching practice, it is who I am and what I bring to the classroom.  I believe in it and it's important to me.     

Fast forward to some incidents in staff meetings.  I want to be clear that I don't have issue with the activities I am describing.  I have concerns with the responses made by my peers, and I want to bring to light some of the embedded assumptions that are made when choosing these activities.   And I want to highlight what a good response to these kinds of incidents looks like. 

After these incidents, I sat down with my administrator and shared my concerns and we made a good plan to address them.  I am really thankful that I have a administrator who makes time and takes time to hear me, and takes these concerns very seriously.  

#1: In a getting-to-know you activity, there is a soccer ball being with questions written on it being tossed around. When you catch it, you answer the question that your right thumb lands on.  This game was being modeled as one that could be played in class or in our advisory groups, with kids.  Some questions were about favorite things, like breakfast cereals, and others were things like "what makes you sad?". 

Let's digest that for a minute.  First, what are the assumptions there?  

• Everyone in the community knows about breakfast cereals.  
• Everyone gets to eat breakfast.
• Everyone is feeling comfortable with getting a ball tossed at them.
• Everyone has the physical ability to catch the soccer ball. 
• Everyone feels comfortable talking about what makes them sad.  (Because you know what makes me sad?  Surviving this.  Is that really what people want to hear?  Trust me, the answer is usually no.) 

Being me, I asked the person running the game what happens if a student doesn't want to answer that question. (Because if I don't speak up, who will?)  Before an answer could be given, someone snickered and made a very belittling comment about what a stupid question that was, that they (the students) could answer the questions.  

Wait- WHAT?  Do we not want all students to feel safe?  Do we not acknowledge that students come from different backgrounds?  

The game leader (our very thoughtful admin) quickly responded "oh sure, great question- have them answer one near their thumb" and moved on.   

So, on one hand, I feel like the admin heard the question, acknowledged its value, and answered it.  I felt seen and heard.  But on the other hand, not only was my question belittled, there was no awareness from at least one colleague that it might be relevant. 

#2:  In a later activity, several pictures of a prominent sports figure were projected, displaying different emotions.  The activity was an emotional check-in.  The pictures were of this sports figure with different facial expressions, and we were supposed to put our initials next to the image that best expressed our emotional state.  

Again, let's dig in to some assumptions about the activity: 

• Everyone can read facial expressions and assign meaning to them.
• All participants know who the sports figure is.
• Everyone is comfortable sharing their emotional state.

I was not super happy for a number of reasons when this activity occurred.  But more frustrating to me was that I had no idea who the sports figure was and I didn't really know what the expressions were.  I asked who the person was (because asking about the expressions felt like it would open me up to ridicule, so I chose instead what I thought was a safer route).  The admin quickly responded, telling me the name and sport. No biggie.  

But my colleagues gaped.  "You don't know who X is?" "Do you know who Y is either?"  "How can you not know who X is?" "Are you serious?"  

I was shocked.  Like, really, really shocked.  Hurt, disappointed, sad, angry, and a dozen other negative emotions.

I want to reiterate what I said at the beginning of this post.  I did speak to my administrator. He heard me. We made a plan. I felt heard and seen and respected.  It's ok and I'm ok.  But it is a solid example of embedded assumptions and of not treating each other with respect and kindness.  And of side conversations getting out of control.   

Imagine if I was a kid in a class where that happened.  Maybe I'm 12 and growing in all kinds of new places.  Maybe I am new to the school.  Maybe my family doesn't allow screen use at all.  Maybe I just lost my parent. Maybe I ...there are a million maybes.  But I am sure that in that moment, I have completely lost the trust of that kid.  Note that the person running the activities, the "teacher" (admin, in this case), handled each moment with consideration and kindness.  It was the side talk, the outside conversations that were harmful.  

And please, I am not saying that every kid needs to be coddled and treated like a precious snowflake.  I believe deeply in the gift of failure, the power of hearing no, and the growth that those bring.   

But friends, they see a lot more of the real world than we think.  And they are still kids.  

I can not control what happens to them outside of my classroom.  I can commit to making my classroom as safe as possible.  Especially in 2019.  

What can I take away from these situations as a teacher? (Hopefully they will apply to you too.) 

For me,  it is to critically examine the actual things I do in the classroom and constantly ask myself what assumptions I am making.  Yes, it is exhausting.  I am going to do it anyway.

It is also to take a moment before reacting- to questions, to comments, to actions.  But especially to questions.  If I want to give an eye roll or a smirk, I need to check that right at the door. Because it is legitimate to someone.  

I need to keep focusing on creating a community where those kind of side comments can't happen (through procedures) and don't happen (through community building) and when (not if; I am only human) they do, I own it and address it.

I need to remember to take a cue from my administrator.  He never got defensive.  He owned what happened, apologized sincerely, and together we found a way to repair it.  

Most important, I need to keep asking questions and question other peoples' assumptions.   

I need to remember that it takes courage to ask questions and call attention to unpopular ideas and call people out on their assumptions.  And sometimes I am going to feel bad or unwelcome.  (These weren't even about race. Think about that.)   I need to remember that is who I am- courageous- and find ways to connect with communities that support me and that build me up and help me when I'm down.   

Targeted vs Non-Targeted input...the great debate

Targeted vs Non-Targeted Input: Our little slice of language teaching is finding itself divided over these terms.  There seems to be WAAAY more animosity and negativity around these than could possibly be justified.  At times, the discourse seems almost political (that is to say horrible, disrespectful, unnerving, unkind).

Ben Slavic demonstrating the power of pause and point in a
demonstration of Non-Targeted input

However, in my exploration of non-targeted input (NT) at the recent Comprehensible Cascadia conference, I learned that we all want the same thing and most of the core beliefs about how languages are learned are identical.


These observations are mine and mine alone.  They do not constitute a manual, plan, or merit much in the way of debate.  I am just thinking out loud and trying to process some of what I learned and match it to what I already know.  Many thanks to Ben Slavic, Tina Hargarden, and all the participants and workshop leaders at Comprehensible Cascadia for discussions and answering my questions.  

First, definitions.  Thanks to Bryce Hedstrom, Tina Hargarten, and the great community over at the CI liftoff Facebook page for creating this definition.

Non-Targeted Input:  The words needed (the input) emerge from the activity. The teacher uses skills to make the students comprehend the language. Acquisition is allowed to develop according to the natural order and the unconscious mind is able to process the linguistic data from understanding the messages. One technique that works well for Non-Targeted (NT) is One Word Images, pioneered by Tina Hargarten and Ben Slavic.

Targeted Input: The words (often called structures or target structures) are chosen from high frequency word lists; often they include the Super Seven (from Terry Waltz) and the Sweet Sixteen (Mike Peto).  Teachers create input around these words using techniques that include TPRS and other comprehensible input techniques. (This is my working definition)


Some similarities:

Non-targeted classroom, comprehensible input

• Languages can be taught most effectively through comprehensible (comprehended) input.
• The core skills- going slow, teaching to the eyes, sheltering vocabulary but not grammar (aka staying in-bounds), personalizing.
• The idea of teaching for mastery, not memorization.
• Creating a classroom community that is safe, welcoming, extremely positive and joyful, and equitable (reaching all kids, not just high achievers) is a huge priority.  In fact, it is necessary to do it in order to be successful. 
• Equity is a core theme: all kids can learn language.  
• Languages can be most effectively taught through comprehensible input.
• Teachers have a responsibility to hold ourselves to best practices and research-based instruction.
• Everyone who is doing it is extremely passionate about their work.  
• Teaching is a very difficult job and as such, teachers have a right to not be miserable in their professional life work-life balance.  As such, low to no prep lesson planning and a joyful classroom allow us to take care of ourselves so we can be the very best we can be when we are with the kids.  
• Much of the content comes directly from the kids- in NT it is One Word Images or Invisibles; in TPRS it comes from story-asking and student suggestions.  But both are student centered and highly personalized.  

Some differences:

• One of the key skills in TPRS is circling.  Often circling is used to get frequent repetitions of targeted words.  
• NT prefers to use light to no circling and does not focus on repetitions in the same way.

My takeaway: As I get more experienced, I focus less on circling anyway.  When I do it,  I *think* it is light circling.  Having Terry Waltz's circling cards is pretty great for this.  However, for less experienced teachers, circling is a basic skill that I think one needs to know how to do for either type of input.

• TPRS is one way to stay in the target language at the recommended (by ACTFL) 90%.  Practitioners (myself included) find it easier to maintain that much language in class. 
•  In a recent workshop with Ben Slavic, he dismissed the notion that staying in the target language for a certain number of minutes is an important goal.  While he didn't actually scoff at the ACTFL 90% recommendation, he pointed out that since a human brain needs 10,000 hours to learn a language and we have at best 120 hours a year, it's ridiculous to stress about it. We aren't going to get 10,000 hours, so why not focus on the important stuff: creating community, having fun in the language with the class.  From a private conversation:  "The stress that it (90%) puts on the teacher and the children doesn't make sense." "It is not practical in a school setting to go at 90%."  

 I think it is important to note that he is not saying we shouldn't teach in the target language. Of course we teach in the target language.  He is merely asking teachers to give ourselves permission to lighten up.
My takeaway: I don't need to stress so much about that 90%, or compare myself to others who do it better.  That is a huge gift!  Also, it reminds me of Karen Rowan's frequent admonition: "Comparison is the thief of joy." 

• Comprehension Checks- TPRS teachers use comprehension checks to, well, check comprehension.  Frequently.  Individually and chorally.  Sometimes cold calling students.  Often by simply saying "What did I just say?" and expecting an answer in the shared language (L1).  In fact, much of circling is comprehension checking, when you think about it.  
• Non Targeted (Non targeting?) CI teachers watch for understanding (look at them- do they understand?) and listen for the weakness of the response (to questions).  In a discussion about this, Ben said: "I am not doing any comprehension checks, I am just paying attention."  Tina mentioned that she no longer cold calls on kids at all and does not do comp checks that put kids on the spot, and reports that it seems to be positive for her classes.  

One path, lots of ways to get there!

My takeaway: There are many different ways to do comprehension checks.  But everyone using CI effectively is probably doing them in one way or another.  More experienced teachers with strong classroom community building skills (note- I did not say classroom management skills!) know how to pay attention to what they need to and do less intrusive checks, and less experienced ones will benefit from just asking what was understood.  My wondering: I wonder how to teach the skill of listening/paying attention for comprehension checks?  

In conclusion:
We all want the same thing.  We all choose the same path to travel.  We differ in the exact pattern of stepping stones that we jump to get there.

Helping learners learn how they learn...or how I am turning my classroom into a sensory OT experiment

Many elementary teachers know that some kids truly need supports to learn.  These supports are frequently written into IEPs and 504 plans.  Many parents and OTs are the ones who get these supports written in, and good teachers incorporate the fidgets, lap weights, earphones, etc. into their classroom without a blink.  Other teachers can't get over the idea that "fair is not equal."

I'm not here to judge.

I am here to say that in every english - speaking classroom that I have taught in, there has been a huge sign saying "Fair is not equal."  I taught a series of lessons around this idea: that if Johnny needs (glasses, crutches, a cast on his arm), than it would be silly if everyone in the class also needed that support for it to be fair.  Or...more to the point, if Jane is allergic to chocolate, than to keep things fair, no one should be allowed to eat chocolate.

That's usually the point where kids nod and agree with me: how ridiculous.  Fair is not the same as equal.  They get it pretty quickly, especially once it's normalized.

Now, I can't do everything for everyone but I can do my best.  I can do my best to differentiate, to personalize, to make learning relevant and interesting, and to help kids learn what they need in order to learn.

You see, secretly I have had a lot of experience and training with behavior plans,  observations and tracking of behavior, identifying and data-keeping for IEPs and 504s, and that sort of thing.  I have been incredibly fortunate to work with amazing school psychologists and occupational therapists who have supported, mentored, and guided me as I tried to make my classroom equitable as well as a place for learning.  Those skills are not ones I have had to draw on too much since I moved to my current school.  Truly, I get to focus more on teaching and building relationships with kids, and less on behavior and/or meeting kids' basic needs.

I currently teach in a middle/high income independent (private, not parochial) school.  We do not have IEPs or 504s.  Some students have as many learning needs as in any of my public school classrooms, but our school doesn't have a strong culture, especially in the middle school, of trying to help kids meet those needs with more unusual accommodations.  That's not a criticism.  It just is.  Independent schools work differently.  We work as a staff to meet individual needs in different ways and we do have a culture of making traditional accommodations and modifications.  Both approaches are valid.

http://www.codeshareonline.com/plan-b.html

  But this year, I have been confronted by groups of kids who really struggle with impulse control.  To the point that in one class, I have gone to Plan B a bunch of times.This form is one of my favorites for this kind of formalized data keeping.  I can not recommend it highly enough.) I realized that I needed to go back to some of the strategies that I have used before.  Because there is no reason not to try.
 Seriously frustrating and boring for all!   After watching the kids for the first few weeks of school and thinking deeply about what their behaviors are telling me,  (

I spent a few hours re-reading notes from other accommodations, plans, and searching the web for DIY OT sensory kits.  I realized that many of my most challenging students are sensory seeking (chewing, touching, bouncing, etc.).

As I told them when I started discussing this in class, all those behaviors (not Behaviors!) are well within "normal" human range.  In fact, I am sensory seeky myself: I asked them if they had ever counted how many times I put on chapstick or check my pocket to make sure that it's there.  (One observant student pointed out that those behaviors happen about every 5 minutes.  I think she was being generous!)

I made a plan, a budget (which got a little out of hand...that's what happens when a sensory seeker goes to put together a sensory toolkit!), and a shopping list. I was going to get fidgets, make some lap weights, and whatever else I could find to make my classroom a sensory seeker's favorite place.

I hit up the thrift store, dollar store, winco for bulk rice and beans, and a party supply store just because it was near the dollar store. I ended up with a huge variety of squishy, hard, textured, and soft items.

Best scores:
coiled keychains for chewies (party store) + ziplock bags to keep them personalized
beads, pipe cleaners, popsicle sticks  for small fidgets
a bin and vertical magazine storage thing to store it all in
a great Frozen fleece sweater that was repurposed into lap weights - both non gendered and fuzzy!
a huge variety of squishy balls and critters from the dollar store
a variety of pet toys (soft, soothing), duster mitts (textured), and massage tools (hard, pointy), also from the dollar store
lengths of rubber from Amazon for chair fidgets

Homemade weighted lap belts-very popular! 

Tool check out system- very high tech

I knew I wanted some sort of accountability for students to use these "tools" so I also bought some clothespins, and wrote numbers on them (each kid has a number in my class) as well as"Tool check out".  When they check out a tool, they simply move their numbered clip to the correct bin.

I am introducing the tools slowly- and with great success.  The lap weights are the biggest hit so far, followed by some of the squishies and the chair fidgets.  I will follow up this post later...once the magic has worn off.
My biggest take away after two days with them are:
1) Students lit up when I asked them to try something (like a chewy, or a lap weight).  They knew what they needed- they just needed to be told it was ok to need it.  Seriously, the love was overwhelming.
2) I said that I was going to try this so all students could have a chance to learn the best way possible- and maybe other teachers would come on the journey with me if it worked out.  One student told me "well, you are way ahead of the rest of them.  Thanks!"  I reminded her that we are all on a different journey- this is mine, and I don't mind a little contained chaos.

The evolution of an assessment

Last year, my school sent me to a 2 day workshop on differentiation. It was a great workshop and I came back all fired up with ideas to try to apply in my class. One big take-away for me was the idea that I don't have to have each unit differentiated perfectly right now. In fact, the trainer suggested picking one unit and focusing on one activity or assessment to re-create, and test drive it. This dovetails nicely with Angela Watson's suggestions for planning units (scroll to number 5) without losing your mind and spending too much time planning.

One idea that I really wanted to try with a unit was a RAFT, a type of writing prompt that lets students choose their perspective or topic, and directs them on what to write. So I wrote a RAFT for a unit that I felt that my students would enjoy. The idea was that they would pick the perspective of a parent of a participant, an item of clothing, or participant in one of the human tower building teams in Tarragon, Spain.  (This is the Castellers unit from Martina Bex. It's a great unit.)  I spent a lot of time on the assessment rubric, ran it by the trainer of the workshop for a second pair of eyes, and taught it.

Big flop.

The learning that was demonstrated was...well, it showed me that even if it was fun, it wasn't a very good activity in terms of comprehensible input. For example, it's an output activity. It isn't a novice activity either. I taught it 3 times, refining it, trying to make it work if only because I put SO much time into it. It didn't really work. The students did love it and did some creative things with it, but...it wasn't a good activity for the levels I teach.

It the whole process made me think about output, writing, and assessment in a whole different way. I got really exited about assessment and spent a lot of time thinking about what I was really trying to assess, and in that way, it was a great activity for me. I might even try to use it with my highest level group...at the end of the year.

So this time around, I decided to take the main idea- writing from different perspectives using target vocabulary, and change it up.

I printed and found pictures to represent the different perspectives, and wrote up prompts. I posted the prompts around the room and gave each kid 5 sticky notes. They had to write one or two sentences on that sticky note and stick it up, gallery walk style.

I then led a discussion, reading their answers out loud with extreme drama and student actors, reframing their language to be correct. (I want to point out here that a year ago I would have read the previous sentence and not been able to understand it nor actually do it. So I am making some of my own progress.)

Finally, they wrote their student numbers on each sticky so I had them collect their pile at the end. Bam- super easy formative assessment. It could have been a summative, but based on the language that I saw, they have not yet internalized the target structures, so now I can give them some feedback and use their errors to hopefully inform my teaching. Since I already had a rubric that was specific (from the abandoned RAFT) to the language, it is easy to adapt it to give them specific feedback.

So, for your enjoyment, here are the prompts and rubric.  For pictures, I just used creative commons images from Google Images.  (I used search terms such as "enxaneta, castellers, tourists, scarf, and parents")

Click for downloads.
Rubric
Writing prompts
Directions in English