When I Solved The Most Vexing Problem In Education or The Time I Was Almost Arrested At School

If you were to ask educators what some of the most frustrating, most infuriating, most maddening issues in education today were you would get an array of answers. Some of the responses would probably be topics such as the over-reliance on testing, administrators that are either incompetent or micro-mangers or both, the extraordinary amount of unnecessary meetings, or how education as a whole has commitment issues because what we teach and how it is taught never lasts long enough to see whether it works or not. But if you asked educators (particularly secondary educators) what was the Number One biggest problem in education the response would probably be overwhelmingly cell phones. 

Fighting cell phones has become not a daily fight, but a fight that educators wage constantly. Initially, when cell phones were first able to text as well as make calls, the problem was irksome but wasn't bad. It was essentially the same as writing notes in class just electronically. This was something education has had to deal with since the dawn of classrooms. However, the entire world changed around 2007 when the first smart phones hit the market, now it was possible to access the internet from your phone, on top of this new frontier social media was just getting started. At this point the dam broke and whole new version of student distraction came flooding into the classroom. Teachers were ill-equipped to deal with this and the education system as a whole was oblivious to the issue because this also happened to around the time that it was believed testing was the solution to our educational issues. Since you couldn't test on cell phone use, it was a problem that did not exist. Now be sure, teachers were pleading for some sort of guidance or policy around cell phone use but the response from the education lords was usually something like: "We don't have time for that, because CSAP/TCAP/Dibbles/BEAR/IOWA/SAT/PSAT/ACT/PACT (insert your own testing acronym in here) will be here in 6 months and we've got to be ready!" So teachers languished in their classrooms fighting to get students ready to take some silly test while students were far more interested in disappearing behind their screens to see how many "Likes" their recent post had received. For students it was far more important to them how many bars their phone had than how the Bill of Rights was important to their lives. And so teachers trudged on teaching their content while students had their hands below the desk and their eyes looking at their laps while thinking they were cleverly fooling their teachers into believing they did not have their phones out. It was exhausting and infuriating for educators. Then I decided if the educrats or other educational leaders weren't going to do something or recognize the problem, then I would. I figured out a way to solve the issue, and that almost got me arrested. Now that you know the problem, here's the story.

It was 2013 and cell phone use had only gotten worse. It wasn't an isolated case of one or two in class, it was an issue with 1/3, 2/3, 4/5's of the class. I had heard about these devices known as "cell phone blockers" and I immediately was intrigued. These devices emitted a signal that jammed cell reception meaning that the phone would not be able to make or receive calls, send or receive texts nor could it connect to the internet. This was an amazing invention! I looked on Amazon and VIOLA! You could buy them from Amazon! I chose one of the devices listed and excitedly read the description: It blocked all cell reception and data. Great! It was perfect for dinner time or bedtime in households with teenagers. It was great for schools and movie theatres. Perfect! I had to get one, this was the holy grail that I and virtually every other teacher had been looking for. I couldn't order it fast enough, after I had ordered it I got the disappointing news that it wouldn't arrive for six to eight weeks because it had to be shipped from China. Total bummer, but totally worth the wait. Visions of late 1990's and early 2000s classrooms danced in my head. Six to eight weeks couldn't go fast enough.

Finally the day arrived. My package had been delivered. It was a black square box, about two inches by two inches and maybe one inch in depth. It had two black antennas that screwed into the top of the box and were about an inch and a half tall. The box plugged into an outlet and there was a switch on the bottom of the box to turn the blocker on and off. The next morning when I got to school I moved a bookcase I  had over an outlet, plugged in my device and turned it on. Sure enough all of the bars on my phone disappeared, I couldn't make a call, send a text, and most importantly I could not access the internet. I moved my bookcase back in place and waited for school to begin. Shortly after first period began I noticed my students were perplexed, many of their brows were furrowed with frustration and angst as their phones could not connect to anything. Some of the more brazen students even raised their phones in the air and swung them wildly about trying desperately to get something, anything on their phones. Nothing worked. Alas, their only outlet was to learn about the New Deal. The first few days were baffling to the students, but soon they seemed to resign themselves that their phones just were not going to get reception and the phones all but disappeared. As the phones vanished the amount of work and effort increased. I soon found out that the device not only worked in my room, but apparently had also knocked out the entire third floor of the school. The third floor of the school now cell phone free. I let the other teachers on the floor into my secret and they were pleased. Education once again ruled supreme and liking posts had been laid low. It was glorious...for two weeks.

It was during lunch on a Friday, I distinctly remember it was a Friday during lunch. My social studies department members and I were gathered as usual in the social studies office eating lunch together. As was par for the course during our lunches we were discussing current events, laughing at events from the morning in our classes, and making jokes at each others expense. It was an otherwise unremarkable normal afternoon. Then came the announcement over the intercom. "Teachers, please check your emails immediately for an urgent message." We opened up the email on the computer in our office to find an email from our principal labeled in all capital letters URGENT! The email said that an there were a few satellite trucks in our parking lot from AT&T and they had found a cell phone blocker being used inside the school. They asked the principal to get it taken down within the next 30 minutes or they would would be able to pinpoint exactly where the blocker was and whoever was employing the blocker would be arrested for violating FAA laws because the blocker was denying access to data and satellite services that a customer had paid for. The email ended with the plead to do this or one of you will be taken out in handcuffs this afternoon. Well, that seemed overly dramatic and a bit heavy handed, but since it has always been a goal of mine to not go to jail, I really didn't want to find out if this were true or not so I went an unplugged the blocker. As lunch ended and the students filed into my classroom they were abuzz about the satellite trucks in our parking lot and the hubbub that surrounded them. They also quickly discovered that their phones had bars and they could access the internet and thing quickly returned to they way they had been...sadly.

The fallout was almost as comical as the story itself. I got called down to the principal's office that afternoon. This principal and I had an increasingly frosty relationship and this was just another layer. My principal told me that she knew it was my teaching neighbor- with whom she also had a very strained relationship with- that had the cell phone blocker. When I told her that I was the one with blocker, she assured me that she knew I was only covering up for my neighbor. When I insisted again that I had the blocker, my principal again did not believe me and told me to not take the fall for someone else. Then my administrator went on to tell me that AT&T had a search warrant to enter the school to find the blocker and they were ready to arrest and press charges against the culprit. However, my principal pleaded with them to allow her to try and get it taken down without incident because she didn't want to see my teaching neighbor or anyone else taken out in handcuffs. To this, I raised my eyebrows. I cannot imagine AT&T having a search warrant to find a blocker- that seems a bit ridiculous and I promise you, at this point in our relationship if either myself or my teaching neighbor were going to be possibly removed I cannot imagine our principal standing in the way of that. Furthermore, according to my principal, the blocker not only knocked out the entire third floor, it was much more serious that that. To hear the way our principal tell it, the blocker knocked out an entire area of the city! Cell phone reception was down for up to a mile away, the police radio in our school police officer's office was destroyed because it fried it's ability to get reception, it would not have surprised me if I had been told that the entire area had become a communications dead zone and planes were dropping out of the sky when they flew over. To hear my administrator tell it, this small $60 black box from China had caused a small Electromagnetic Pulse over a square mile of Arvada, Colorado. Who knew?

So, there is my story about how I, for a short time, solved one of the most frustrating problems in the classroom while at the same time apparently almost got sent to San Quentin in solitary lock-up for life. After that my teaching neighbor's and I relationship with our administrator went from being very strained to an all out war ending with myself and my teaching neighbor being moved out of our school and being placed in different schools with orders that we could never again be on the same staff- but that is a totally different story that maybe I'll tell someday because it too is a good story. Students went back to being on their phones and the problem has only exacerbated in the years since. The battle has gone from being irritating in 2013 to exhausting and disheartening in 2023. It's hard to compete with 45 second cat and dance videos or constant selfies with filters in order to get those desperately needed "Likes". Teaching now is not near as enjoyable as it once was, but I couldn't imagine anything doing anything else. And for a brief two week moment in 2013, the third floor of Arvada High School won the war.

Eternal Folly: The Absurd, Perpetual Treadmill To "Fix" Education

 

In 1983 the U.S. federal government issued a comprehensive report of the state of public education in the United States. A Nation At Risk: The Imperative for Education Reform presented the shocking results of the study conducted by the U.S. Department of Education. Among its findings was that there were an appalling number of functionally illiterate high school students, plummeting student performance when compared with students in other industrialized nations, and low standards at all levels of education. In short, the report concluded, "the educational foundations of our society are presently being eroded by a rising tide of mediocrity that threatens our very future as a Nation and a people". Since that jarring report American education has attempted time and again and again and again to reformat, restart, re-imagine, and reform American public education. In the 40 years since the publication of the findings education has scrambled looking for the antidote to remedy the seeming collapse of American education and in the mean time looking to respond to the critics of public education who often view it with great contempt. In short, over the past 40 years not much has changed; scores remain fairly constant where they were in 1983, reformers  and "education advocates" continue to look for the silver bullet, and critics remain convinced that public education in an enemy of American society. Now, exacerbating this situation, the Trump Administration is attempting to dismantle and eliminate the Department of Education. Because, somehow, getting rid of the agency specifically tasked with improving American education will somehow improve American education... absurdism abounds in Washington D.C.

However, I believe that American education is not as circumspect as many would have you believe and that the real problem is, at best, misplaced. The problem with American education is not who is in the school classrooms or the students themselves, the real issue with American education lays with those who proclaim the problems and then attempt to remedy them. To rephrase an old adage: Those who can teach, do. Those who cannot, reform. 

The Snake Oil That Is Testing

"Accountability" is a big buzz word in the education world (eduspeak is full of buzzwords). One of the ways devised to hold educators, students, and the education system as a whole accountable is through standardized testing. The idea being that all students will take the same test and then we can see where students have learning deficits, what schools are excelling and which are not, and, in many cases, see which teachers are skilled at their jobs as well as see which teachers are not as skilled. Noble idea to be sure, however, upon closer inspection the reality of this notion is far removed from its grand premise. The entire argument that standardized testing is a good or fair measurement of student progress and/or ability is truly one of the great fabrications of our time. To fully understand this, we only need to look at the purveyors of these tests. In the interests of simplicity we will focus on Pearson, which is the largest and most used educational testing company in the world, but there are a number of other educational testing companies out there whose methods and purpose are very similar. 

Pearson creates a number of educational tests for all levels of education and contents. The most used test is the PARCC test which is administered to a wide variety of grade levels throughout the United States. These tests are purported to measure mathematical skills, scientific understanding, critical thinking, analysis, as well as the comprehension of students. The claim is that these tests give districts, schools, parents, and teachers a clear indication of how our students measure up against other students around the state or nation as well as showing how many students are performing "at grade level". All of this is, in a word, hogwash. Supposedly this is determined by how many students score above the "cut score". The cut score is the minimum score a students needs to achieve in order to show proficiency. Guess who determines the cut scores? The same testing company that created the test. The test companies do claim that the cut scores are created by educators who employ complex mathematical algorithms to determine the cut scores. While it is true that educators are involved in this intricate process of determining "cut scores", it is ultimatly the testing company, or the state, or the individual school districts who determine this cut score. Moreover, these scores change every year and very often the formula used to determine these scores change as well. Why is this done? It's a pretty simple answer: Money. 

Testing companies receive millions of dollars from states and districts to create and provide these tests for their students. So, testing companies want a test that shows rigor and some degree of intellectual challenge, but at the same time have enough students pass the test that it seems to show that educational systems are not failing. If the cut scores are too low, then obviously the test does not have enough rigor (another favored eduspeak word) and the state or the district will look for another, more challenging test perhaps from another testing company. However, if the cut score is too high and not enough students perform well, then there will be a fear among states and districts of a political backlash because obviously our schools are not educating our students properly forcing the testing customers to find a new test, perhaps with a new testing vendor. Therefore, the cut score must find the perfect balance- enough students pass the test that it seems to be a fair test, but enough don't pass the test so that it seems to have rigor. To further complicate the process of cut scores, states or districts- depending on who is administering the test- can adjust the cut scores above or below the recommended cut scores so that the results meet their desired outcomes. For instance one study found that in 2010 nearly 50% of all 5-8 students in Kentucky passed the reading comprehension test, while only 30% of all 5-8 students in New York passed the exact same Pearson created reading comprehension test. Does this mean that the education in Kentucky is better than in New York? Or that students in New York are not as smart as students in Kentucky? Of course not. Kentucky lowered the cut scores to benefit them while New York increased the cut score for their own benefit. Scores are manipulated to reflect whatever outcome is necessary.

To say that standardized testing is far less about improving education and far more about money, here is an even more insidious example. Let's say that students are not performing as well on these tests as we would like. Too many are falling below the cut score- which we know to be arbitrary at best- or there is a large number who are "line dwellers", meaning the students are just above or just below the cut score. Is there anything we can do to help these students? You bet you sweet #2 pencil there is! There are a number of ready made interventions and curriculums to help these students...for a price of course.. And guess who makes these products? The exact same company that writes the test! This is a scam of monumental proportions. Pearson will enter into a contract for millions of dollars to create a test that they can guarantee a certain number of students will not pass and then create a curriculum that they can sell to states or districts to help students perform better on a test that, again, no matter how well students actually do, a certain number are guaranteed to fail. This isn't about improving education, it's only about using education to make money at the expense of education.

Side note on "data" (another favorite eduspeak word). Data can be useful and helpful, but in fields such as education, data can also be very inefficient. Data is cold, impersonal, rigid, and unfeeling. In short data lacks soul. And truly effective education relies on soul and warmth and compassion all of which data does not have. Test scores don't tell the story. Not the real story. The real story of teaching requires a soul, a heart, and compassion all of which test scores lack.

Reforming the Reforms

Education has a commitment problem. Anyone who has been in education for any length of time knows this to be true. If education were a man, it would be the type of man that women hate. He's really interested early on and enjoys your company, but never is willing to really commit to the relationship because of a belief that there will be something better and new to come along. And once something new and more interesting comes along, he moves on. This is the uncomfortable truth about education.

 Education is in constant search for that one elixir, that one silver bullet, that one reform, that one program, that one curriculum that will be the answer to fixing whatever is wrong with education. Every few years the school year will begin with the introduction to a new, shiny program replete with its own vocabulary and acronyms (eduspeak LOVES acronyms, the more the better) that promises to right all the wrongs, fix all the failings, and forever change the way we teach and students learn. Educators are promised this is a long-term commitment, that we are in this for the long haul. Then a few years later, perhaps less than a few years later, educators are confronted with a new, shiny program with its own acronyms and vocabulary that promises to be the new savior of education and, we are assured, this is here to stay...until it is inevitably not.

However, if you find a program that you really like, worry not because in a few years it will come around again just with a different name and new acronyms...because we all know different names and acronyms makes everything work better. This is why educators such as myself and others who have been in this profession for the long haul derisively roll our eyes and sigh a heavy sigh when the next program is introduced, we know its not for long and we've probably seen the exact same thing before. Cynicism in education is a learned response.

One of the key issues with educational reforms is that they are almost all created by people who have not been in the classroom for years- if ever. Their ideas usually sound good in theory, but as is often the case, theory fails when confronted with the realities of life, or in this case, the classroom. One only need to look no further than the current educational gods: Robert Marzano and John Hattie. In many educational administrative circles their reforms are religion and their studies are the Bible. It is very difficult to go to an educational conference or training without hearing, "As Marzano states...", "Hattie says...", "Marzano wrote..." or sometimes you are blessed with the educational holy binary "Marzano and Hattie agree..." Marzano and Hattie are no doubt brilliant people who have the time and financial backing to conduct lots of studies, however, do they have the classroom experience to give credibility to their findings? For me, the answer is, no. 

Robert Marzano claims to have taught English in "New York City schools" from 1967-1968, despite the fact that he graduated from college in 1968- not sure how that works. Then in 1969 he went to Seattle where for two years he was the English Department Chair at an elite private school. Hardly real classroom experience but for many administrators he only speaks the gospel. 

John Hattie, who holds an impressive number of degrees, has a very thin classroom resume as well. According to his own Curriculum Vitae, Hattie only spent a total of two years as a full time classroom teacher, once in 1972 and then again in 1974. The last time Hattie was in the classroom I was three years old. Ironically my age at that time would be one more year than his entire classroom teaching experience. And yet, Hattie is seated at the right hand of educational theology. 

It is a foundational belief of mine, that people who have been out of the classroom for more than 5 years should  not be making suggestions about how to improve education and teaching. If we want true, sustainable, and impactful changes to education it must come from those who are in classroom on a consistent basis, who know the realities of today's classrooms and its students. Ask those who are doing the work, how to improve the work.

It's Not As Bad As It Seems

We have heard it time and again: American students are lagging behind students around the globe. Or another very popular refrain: Students today just aren't as smart as when I was in school (or X number of years ago). Both are popular beliefs and both are inaccurate. 

The United States is the only industrialized country that tests ALL of its students. In many parts of the world students with learning disabilities or students learning the native language are not tested, in the United States for the most part, they are. In most industrialized nations only some of the students will go onto high school- or secondary school. In many industrialized nations secondary school is for those who can or want to go onto college, others go to schools that prep them for careers after school, sort of like a trade school. Therefore only those who are college bound are tested. In the U.S., all students- those going to college and those who are not- are tested. Knowing this, it only stands to reason that scores of American students would be lower than those of their global counterparts. 

As for the argument that students are not as smart or as high achieving as they were X number of years ago is also something of a fallacy. If we were to compare the textbooks and lessons for students 100 years ago, we would find that what students are learning today is far more complex and rigorous (there's that great eduspeak word again). Furthermore, it seems to be quite a generational phenomenon to view the younger generation as somehow intellectually inferior. We can look at articles from any time period of the past about the intellect of the young people of the day and most of them will call into question the intellectual abilities of the younger generation. Today is no different and make no mistake when our students today become the adults of tomorrow, they too will make the same accusations.

To be sure, education in the United States can be better, it can be improved, and we should work to do just that. However, we can't just rely on numbers and graphs to guide us. We can't continue to look for the answers from a vending machine of solutions wrapped in fancy names but regurgitating old solutions. Nor can we take as the gospel solutions from those who haven't been in charge of a classroom for years. Those who are in the game and play the game know the game better than anyone else and those are the ones who can make the game better. Those who are in classrooms know best how to improve education. If we truly want to improve education in this nation I propose a novel idea: Provide the materials to teachers, get out of the way and let teachers do what they went to college for, what they were hired to do, and why they have always done; TEACH!

DONE

Exhausted. Dead-tired. Drained. Enervated. Fatigued. Spent. Debilitated. 

There simply are not enough adjectives in the English language to describe how I feel at the end of this school year. I am in the midst of my 24th year of teaching and am exasperated from the past almost two years. This feeling of exhaustion certainly coincides with the pandemic, however, it is not because of the pandemic itself- which, to be sure, exacerbates the issue. These problems are scion's of the pandemic. The compounding of the issues has begun to wear on not only me but scores of other educators down to the point where we no longer view teaching as a calling but is now nothing short of a penance. As recently as a year ago I knew I would certainly teach beyond 30 years. I might do 35, 37, maybe 40 years. I loved teaching, I loved interacting with students, and the annoyances were tolerable so long as I was in the classroom. Now, however, I am at the point where I find myself saying 'Just six more years'. I know I am not alone. I know there are many in classrooms today saying to themselves 'Just six more months'. This malaise is palpable in schools across the nation. For me, this feeling is not all that prevalent when I walk into my classroom, shut the door and its just me and 25-30 teenagers learning American History. That, for the most part, is still enjoyable. I still love teaching. I still love interacting with students. I still love history. Inside my classroom when the door is shut it is still chillingly exciting and wonderful. It's when the door is open and I step outside of my classroom or the outside world creeps into my classroom that is so very wearing. 

Over the past year and a half teachers have gone from heralded heroes of American society to enemies of society in the eyes of many people. Around this time last year, because I am currently the Vice President of the local teachers union, I was contacted by several people in the community accusing me of being against students because the teachers union was advocating for mandatory masking in the schools as well as maintaining the schedule of only half of the students being in-person with the other half being remote. I answered every email I received, I even had a few meetings with some of these individuals. In every interaction I was always polite, professional, and never attempted to dodge their questions or accusations. I can honestly say some of these individuals did not reciprocate. Most were very nice and and respectful, but not all were. Some accused me of simply not caring about the well being of students. I completely understood the frustrations and angst about online learning. I hated teaching online, and I despised even more teaching in-person and online simultaneously. I wanted nothing more that all students to be back in the classroom everyday, but only when we were reasonably sure it was safe for all. I loathe wearing a mask. It is cumbersome, uncomfortable, hot, and makes it difficult to hear what is being said. I want nothing more than to pitch the mask, but not at the risk of making others mortally sick. However, many people firmly know they know things about what I and other educators believe and want without actually knowing anything about our intents or beliefs. Being attacked in such a grievous manner is certainly taxing mentally and emotionally. It is very wearing.

As students began to return to the classroom- wearing masks I might add- a new bogyman appeared on the horizon, becoming the siren-call for many and placed a new target on educators, particularly American History teachers. Critical Race Theory. Suddenly, many believed, CRT was being taught in elementary and secondary classrooms across the country brainwashing American students turning them into good little Bolsheviks. First, let me be clear that CRT is an academic theory to explain the unfortunate prevalence of and role that racism has played in shaping American society. The theory has been around for decades and is primarily taught in graduate level political science and law classes. It is not taught in public classrooms. Believe me if I had the ability to brainwash my students I would be teaching them to put away their phones and turn in their work, it would not be teaching them to be Anti-American Communists. I have been asked by parents as well as community members if I taught CRT. My response is always the same. I simply reply, "I do not teach CRT. I teach what happened. Some of American history is good and inspiring. Some of it is bad and some of American history is awful and shameful. But good citizens should know the good to use as a blueprint for the future and they should know the bad to know what to not repeat." Racism is a thing, and it has played a role in American society. Slavery existed, it was real. Segregation happened. All are indisputable. No one should ever be taught to be ashamed of the color of their skin or of their nationality, and that does not happen in the overwhelming number of classrooms in the United States and it certainly does not take place in my classroom. However, if teaching and learning about what actually happened in our history is offensive, then the problem is not with schools but rather with individual sensibility. But, because many people believe that schools are destroying the fabric of America, teachers- history teachers in particular- are being targeted and attacked on false charges. When all you want to do is teach, this is beyond demoralizing and dispiriting

Perhaps the last component in all of this are the students themselves. I read an article recently that described them as "feral". This is a very apt description. I still really enjoy them and have a good time with them, however, over the past 18 months they have forgotten how to, for lack of a better term, "student". Since they returned full time this past fall the work ethic, which had become very suspect during remote learning, did not return as hoped. Cell phones which have always been the bane of my teaching have become even more of an issue to the point where the students don't even try to hide the fact that they are on their phones during class. And new to this year, is a wonton disrespect for the school facilities. Bathrooms are being mindlessly destroyed. Fights have become more frequent and brutal. Worse still is the fact that in the past other students would come to get an adult when such boorish acts were being committed, now students response is to get out their cell phones to record these behaviors. These unconscionable actions only compound the other new issues that have sprouted in the last year and a half. Altogether, they become a dispiriting, disheartening, dismal and crushing weight.

Teaching has never been easy. It has always been hard. People know when they enter the teaching profession they won't be paid well, respect is tenuous at best, and everyone is an educational expert willing to give their advice because they were students once as well. None of that has changed, it is still true. What has changed are new pressures and demands being placed upon teachers. Worse still, is that many of these new issues are completely unfounded at best and unfortunately very often completely irrational. Teachers are trained to use logic and rationalism when dealing with problems, but when confronted with aberrant rants the weapons of teachers are of little use. If I could remain in my classroom, with my students and my corner of the educational world, I could happily teach another 10-15 years, it is when my classroom door opens and the world outside slinks in that six years seems so far away. My parting words for my educator friends is this: I know we are all very tired and exhausted. It is real and it is palatable. Winter Break is rapidly approaching. Take advantage of that time. Go home, reconnect with your loved ones and recharge. That's what breaks are for. You sacrifice enough of your time during the school year, don't do it during break. There will always be planning to do, there will always be meetings to attend, there will always be problems to address, but time with those who are most important is limited. Do nothing but enjoy the holidays, your loved ones, and your time off. 

The Suffering of Suffrage

Voting has long been held as a right of citizenship in the United States. However, how voting has been conducted has changed quite a bit over the course of our nation's history. The way we vote has changed several times and more importantly WHO gets to vote has evolved over the last 230 years. What is curious about these revisions is that very often they are created less out of standards of fairness and adherence to the lofty ideals of the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence but are more about political benefit to one group over the other. These Machiavellian suffrage maneuvers continue still today as some again begin to question who exactly can vote, when people can vote, and how citizens can cast their vote. 

Early in United States history voting was conducted in a few very different and inexact methods. One way was a method known as viva voce, which means voting by voice. Early on local officials would walk down roads past houses as eligible voters (white, land owning men) stood on top of their houses and shouted their vote as the local magistrate came by their house. This where the saying "shout it from the rooftops" comes from. In larger towns and cities, men would gather at the local courthouse or another central building in the area and would shout their preferences when they were asked how they would vote. Another way voting that was conducted early on would be for all of the men gather at the town square and were told to physically go to one side of the area or the other to show their voting preferences. Whichever side had the most men was the side that won. By the mid 1800s the United States began using paper ballots, however these paper ballots were very different from any paper ballot we would be familiar with now. Initially voters would simply write their choices on a paper and put them in the ballot box. However this was very limiting because knowing how to write was not a given at this time as well as corruptible because if you didn't know how to write you could have someone else write your choices for you and there was no guarantee that your surrogate elector would write out the choices you actually wanted. Eventually parties began to print their own pre-printed ballots with only their candidates names on the ballot. These ballots were then distributed to voters for them to cast. However, this was also corruptible because very often these ballots were distributed at the local saloons or party sponsored picnics which were nothing more than a bacchanalia of free alcohol. Which ever side provided the most free adult beverages would earn the support of the drunken voter. 

With the arrival of the Progressive Era in the late 1800s voting reform came in the way of the "Australian Ballot", a pre-printed ballot with all of the candidates names listed and this ballot was only distributed from the local government, not from political parties. With this reform elections became much more fair and counting far more accurate. As our methods for voting have evolved for the better, the question of  who could actually vote has always been a political football. Any notions of this question being one based upon the desire to fulfill the mandates of democracy, meeting the promises of the Constitution, or other equally noble aspirations is naïve at best. The question of who can vote and the ease of access has, and is still today, rooted in political gains for one side or, at the very least, politically damaging the opposition. 

The first major change in who was able to vote in the United States occurred during the 1820s and 1830s during the presidency of Andrew Jackson. Jackson narrowly lost the 1824 election to John Quincy Adams. Jackson and his supporters- many of whom were poor, uneducated white men- cried foul and accused Adams and Speaker of the House Henry Clay of fixing the election in favor of Adams, the so-called "Corrupt Bargain". Jackson spent the next four years expounding on the rule of the "elites" (educated, land owning men) at the expense of the the "common man". Realizing that by extending the vote would benefit Jackson because there were far more "common men" than elites, Jackson supporters began to get states to repeal the land owning requirement to vote. In 1828, Jackson ran for office again, and with the expansion of voting to almost all white men, not just land owning men, Jackson won the election handily.

Following the Civil War, the franchise was extended to all former adult male slaves in the South. In the 1868 presidential election Republican U.S. Grant won the election thanks in large part to the large black vote for him in the South. Recognizing an opportunity to expand their voting base and possibly begin to dominate American politics, Republicans passed the 15th Amendment in 1870 extending the right to vote to all black men in the United States. As a result, Republicans did begin to dominate American politics as African-American men at that time overwhelmingly voted Republican.

American women suffragettes, who for a long time were also ardent abolitionists, were shocked and repulsed when the 15th Amendment was passed. After all, they argued, white women had always been viewed as citizens whereas African-American men had only been recognized as citizens beginning in 1865 and yet former male slaves got the right to vote before them. Thus, the women's suffrage movement, more motivated than ever, continued their push for the right to vote. This cause was advanced in the early 1900s by the Republican Party, who were growing alarmed at the continuing rise of the Democratic Party on the national level. It was on the vote of the Republican congressional members that the 19th Amendment was passed in 1920. The Republican Party again benefitted from supporting the expansion of the franchise as women overwhelmingly voted Republican in 1920 beginning a decade of Republican domination of American politics.

The next major expansion of voting was again done with eyes on political gain, however, those hopes were not initially realized. In 1971 the 26th Amendment was passed lowering the voting age to 18 years old. The argument was that if young people were old enough to be drafted and sent to war (which they were) and were old enough to drink beer (at that time the drinking age was 18) then young people were old enough to vote. This argument was championed by liberals who were alarmed at the war in Vietnam and the rising popularity of Richard Nixon. Advocates looked at college campuses and the unrest there among young people. If these young people could vote, it was theorized, the war in Vietnam would come to an end and the likes of Richard Nixon would not be elected. However, the hopes were dashed after the passage of the 26th Amendment. Young people who could vote in 1972, did not in large numbers and Nixon was re-elected in one of the greatest margins of victory in American history. In fact, despite having the right to vote for the last 50 years, it was not until the 2020 election that large numbers of young voters actually cast a ballot.

This leads us to the movement taking place today. Unhappy with the election, many Republicans are advocating for laws to restrict access to the ballot claiming this is in the name of "election security". Despite the fact there has not been any evidence produced that shows widespread voting irregularities or fraud. In fact the Department of Homeland Security, whose officials were all Republican nominees, proclaimed the 2020 election the "most secure election ever in the history of the United States". But because the election was a record turn-out (indeed more people than ever before voted in the 2020 election) and Joe Biden won, there of course must have been fraud. Therefore steps must be taken to ensure that all future elections are "safe" and maintain the integrity of our democracy. The way to do this? Restrict access to the ballot box. This is a curious path being taken because, as we have seen, usually political parties have viewed increasing the franchise as the way to increase their political power. Aside from the Jim Crow laws passed in the South following Reconstruction which were aimed at taking away the right to vote from African Americans, political parties have usually wanted to expand not limit the ability to vote. And yet here we are, limiting the number of ballot boxes and voting precincts, not allowing food or water to be given to those waiting in line to vote, and severely limiting if not outright denying early voting. 

So, where do we go from here? I don't really know. I hope contraction is temporary. I hope that decisions are based on verifiable facts, not wild conspiracies. The right to vote is a basic American right. The right to vote shall not be abridged on account of race or sex.

Graduating From The Electoral College: A Primer For January 6th

In The Beginning...

In 1789 delegates from across the states convened in Philadelphia initially with the purpose of  fixing the numerous problems with the Articles of Confederation (our first form of government), soon it became all too apparent that the Articles were beyond worthy of redemption so their collective attentions turned to creating a new government. After a series of compromises and often grueling, bruising debates a new government emerged, a Constitutional Republic. A triumph of the Enlightenment Movement. One of the peculiar features of this new Constitution was the way the President would be chosen. Rather than by a direct vote of the people, the President would be chosen by the vote of electors who would be chosen by the vote of the people in their respective states. The reasons for such a...ahem..."unique" system are equally unique. In short, the Framers were fearful of a direct popular vote. They were worried that "uneducated" citizens (of which most at that time were), who did not understand the concepts or structures of the new Constitution could be swayed by a foreign (or domestic) entity convincing the people to choose a candidate who would be a threat to the interests of the nation, the government, and ultimately its citizens. So to safeguard such a happening, the Electoral College was born. The thought being that the electors would be "educated" citizens, who would recognize these cabals and refuse to allow such a threat to assume the presidency. This was the reason. The need for such an arrangement has been greatly debated and the chorus of debate has only grown louder within the last 20 years. Despite the merits of each sides argument, the Electoral College is still the method by which we chose our president today, and it will be on full display this Wednesday January 6, 2021 when the 117th Congress will officially meet for the first time and officially choose the next President of the United States. 

Here's What Will Happen January 6th

The process for January 6th is outlined and explained in Article II, Section 1. Both Houses of Congress will meet at midday with Vice President Mike Pence presiding. Vice President Pence will then open the certified electoral votes from each state in alphabetical order beginning with Alabama and ending with Wyoming. Once Vice President Pence has opened the certified vote for the state and inspects it for the proper signatures from the state officials of that respective state validating that states electoral votes, he will then hand the certificate to "tellers" (selected members from each house and from both parties), the tellers will then announce the totals to Congress. After the teller reads the certificate any member from either house can stand and object to that state's vote for any reason. Vice President Pence will then ask that member to present their objection in writing and the objection must be supported by a member of both the House and the Senate. If the objection is not in writing or is not signed by a member from both the Senate and the House, Vice President Pence will dismiss the objection and continue on opening and reading the states votes.

However, if an objection meets the above criteria, both houses will retreat to their respective chambers to debate the objection. The debate can take no  more than two hours and each member of the chamber will be allowed no more than five minutes to speak to the objection. At the end of the debate, each house will vote on the objection and a simple majority will carry the vote. At the end of the two hour time limit both house will come together again, for the objection to stand both the Senate and the House must have voted to support the objection. If both do not support the objection, the states electoral votes will stand and be counted. Vice President will then move to the next states certificate. During this process there are not any witness called, no testimony is taken, and any evidence to support the objection is not allowed. An objection is just that; an objection to the votes, nothing else.

Knowing that many Republicans plan to oppose a number of state's electoral votes and that there are a number of members of the House and the Senate to support those objections, what is normally a fairly perfunctory process may very well turn into a very long, drawn out process. So, the question begs: Will these objections be successful in overturning any of the electoral votes and/or overturning the 2020 Presidential Election? In short, the possibility of that happening is virtually non-existent. Remember, for any of these objections to stand and the electoral votes to not be counted, the majority of BOTH chambers must support the objection. That will not happen since the House is controlled by Democrats and in the Senate many Republican Senators have denounced such an effort and have stated they will not vote in favor of any objections. Making any objections to Joe Biden's electoral vote total an exercise in futility.

Has This Happened Before?

There are some instances in the past of electoral votes being questioned. The most notorious election was the election of 1876 when Democrat Samuel Tilden won the majority of votes and more electoral votes than Republican Rutherford B Hayes. However, Tilden did not have enough electoral votes to win the presidency, in dispute were 20 electoral votes from four states: Florida (it always seems to be Florida, doesn't it?), Louisiana, South Carolina, and Oregon. Both parties claimed victory although it seems highly unlikely in post Civil War America that any Republican would win any Southern state. The election was settled when a Republican controlled Congress decided to award the 20 electoral votes to Hayes and end Reconstruction in the South.

In 2001, George Bush narrowly defeated then Vice President Al Gore when he was awarded the electoral votes from Florida. There were several objections raised in Congress to the electoral votes of Florida. Vice President Gore had to rule several objections out of order and ultimately, with the bang of his gavel declared George W. Bush as the next President of the United States.

In 2016, with then Vice President Joe Biden presiding, there were numerous objections raised by Democrats to the election of Donald Trump. Vice President Biden ruled these objections out of order and without merit. Several times during this process, Biden angerly banged his gavel and admonished the Democrats reminding them the election was over.

A Death Knell: My Prediction

I have come to believe that midday on January 6th, 2021 will mark the time of death for the modern Republican Party. The aftermath of the 2020 election has been particularly stressful on the Republican Party. With each challenge, court loss, and controversy it has become increasingly clear; Republicans must decide between complete fealty to Donald Trump to retain his favor or seek to stake some independence from Trump and be labeled as a "RINO" (Republican In Name Only) at best or a traitor at worst. Indeed, Trump has already declared that he will make those Republicans whose loyalty was not complete pay for their infidelity.

The anticipated spectacle of January 6th will complete this split. Republicans will be forced to vote with Trump or the will of majority of American citizens. This will cause, I fear, an irreparable facture of the GOP. You will have the "Trumpers" faction and the "Traditional" Republican faction, which will lead to two distinctly different political parties and the end of the Republican Party. I say this with great sadness as I was a 30+ year proud member of the Republican Party. I truly believe my party will go the way of the Federalists, the Whigs and a host of other political parties whose infighting and questionable political stances doomed it to be remembered only to history.

In Conclusion...

Despite the chaos that it seems will be taking place outside of the Capitol and the histrionics that will be taking place inside the Capitol, Joe Biden will be formally elected as the 46th President of the United States on January 6th and will be inaugurated as such on January 20th.

I've Got The Rhythm, But I Still Hate The Song

 

So Much.

That's my response when people ask what it's like to teach right now. It is just so much. I honestly have not worked this hard, or this long, or done this much since I student taught 23 years ago. However, 23 years ago I had no idea what I was doing. It's 23 years later and I know very well what I'm doing but it is just harder now. A LOT harder. Who knew that teaching in a pandemic would be this hard? This was definitely not something that was covered in any of my teacher prep classes back in college and it has never been addressed in any staff meetings or professional developments I have ever attended. How has this been particularly difficult? Let me share the ways. However, before I do, let me first say that I am not complaining. I am not a really a complainer, and honestly complainers are probably my number one pet peeve. I hate hearing people complain. So this is not a complaining rant or a woe-is-me diatribe. It is simply the reality of teaching in October of 2020.

We are now almost two months into this school year and it still seems so surreal. Almost Kafkaesque. The school has been transformed into something almost unrecognizable. One way hallways, limited access to bathrooms, one way stairways, and classrooms with half the desks. At my school, Pomona, there is a large tile "P" on the floor in the main hallway. This was THE hangout spot for students. They would congregate there before school, during passing periods, at lunch, and after school. Students would regularly receive texts from friends during class to "meet me at the P". No longer. The P is now visible during passing periods as the students silently and solemnly move about the hallways from class. Absent from the hallways is the usual strident plagency of teenagers engaged in the usual jocularity and gossiping that are commonplace among adolescents. In its place is a placid, eeire quiet more like a seminary than a school. In person the students hardly speak, ever. They simply look at you with their lifeless eyes peering at you above their masks which are covering their expressionless faces. They don't respond to you, they don't laugh, they rarely even speak with one another. Teenage boys, who prior to COVID, found it impossible to keep their hands off of each other, now quietly get out of their desks and stand at the back of the room with their hands dangling lethargically at their sides, staring straight ahead while I spray their desks with a solution to kill any possible Corona virus particles before the next class arrives. When the bell sounds, the students silently file out into the dour hallways, as the next equally morose class enters into the room.

Teaching to the remote students is even my disheartening. You speak at a computer screen filled with black boxes because none of the students will turn on their camera. They are as silent as a grave. You can't help but wonder to yourself 'Are they listening? Are they even there?' Ask a question and it will be followed by a minute or two of deafening silence as you stare hopefully and defeatedly at a series of black boxes on your computer screen. Eventually a disembodied voice will answer from the void. It is never an expansive answer. It is simple, to the point, and absent of any wonderings or nuance. Just as quick as the ghostly voice answers, it is gone. Ask if there are any further questions or problems and the screen remains reticent. So the natural response is to tell them to work on their assignment and to remind them you are available if they have any questions or problems. At this point, one by one the black boxes disappear from the computer screen as they students retreat to their gloomy solitude. The question now is, "Did they understand the work, and more importantly, will they turn it in?' Sadly, for the most part, the answer is no.

I am now in my third decade of teaching and I have never had this many failing grades, ever. It's not from bad scores on assignments or poor test grades. The high number of F's is due solely to the fact that the students simply do not turn in their work. However, it is not all work that they are not turning in, it is overwhelmingly the work they need to do when they are remote that does not get submitted. For whatever reason, any work assigned when the students are remote simply does not get done. Further exacerbating the issue is the fact that I will only see each student in person once a week, the rest of the week they are remote for my class which means that most of the work needs to be done remotely. I use Google Classroom which allows me to look at the students assignments to see what they have done even if they haven't submitted the assignment yet. I've done this often during this school year and, for the most part, the students never even start their remote assignments. This is defeating for teachers as we are left to wonder what else and how else can we teach our content when we only have contact with them once a week. It is even more crushing for the students as they see their grade slowly sink while their work slowly rises. This whole year is a discomfiture for students and teachers and the other side of this is still somewhere around the corner.

I will say that as the school year has progressed I have gotten better in teaching and presenting information. I can confidently say I am a better teacher in this format now than I was in August and I am certainly better now than I was in April. When we began in August, I could not wrap my mind around hybrid teaching. I was going to see my students in person once a week, students would be remote twice a week and I would have each class for a total of three times a week. They were divided up into Group A and Group B by alphabet. Group A would come to school on Monday and Tuesday. On Monday Group A will go to period 1-4, on Tuesday Group A would go to periods 5-7. Each class period is 80 minutes. While Group A was in person, Group B was at home following the same schedule but remotely. On Wednesday and Thursday Group A and Group B switch with Group B being in person and Group A going remote and the same schedule of classes is followed. On Friday both Group A and B are all remote and they go to all their classes which are 50 minutes long. Doing this means I need to have a separate grade book for each class so now instead of having to maintain five gradebooks, I now have ten gradebooks to maintain. Instead of posting work for five classes on Google Classroom, I now need to post work for ten classes. Instead of needing to create two different lesson plans for the two different subjects I teach, I often times now need to create four to six different lesson plans for the two subjects I teach. All of this, of course means more grading (assuming the work will be turned in). At the beginning of the school year, I tried to teach both the remote and the in-person students at the same time. I quickly found this next to impossible as you had to ensure the remote students could not only see what you were doing but also hear what you are doing which is a challenge when you are wearing a mask and not close to the computer. I quickly ditched that idea, that was just too much and too difficult. So now I actively teach the students who happen to be in person that day and I post the work for the day in Google Classroom for the remote students. I usually make a video explaining the work for the day or giving the students content and contextual information they need. Making a video for everyday means I have to take the time to make the video, edit it, download it and then post it. I do this everyday and sometimes I need to make two or three for each day. On top of all this, each class usually has a few all remote learners sprinkled into the mix, so I have to keep them in mind when I'm doing check-ins and posting assignments. 

If this sounds like a lot, it is. If it sounds confusing, it is. When we began in August I was scrambling everyday to keep up and I was exhausted all the time. Having done this for several months now, I've got the rhythm down, I know what needs to be done, how it needs to be done, and when it needs to be done. Friday's, I have found, are a God-send for me. I don't regularly meet with my classes, I post the work for the day to Google Classroom for each class at 8:00 am and then I leave my Zoom link open all day if they need to jump on and ask a question or have a problem. Usually they don't but every once in a while a student does come on to ask a question or sometimes they come on just to talk about random stuff. For myself, I use this time to catch up on the week as well as to plan and prepare for the coming week. I have figured out how to make the work more mangealbe but it is still a lot. I am working more, harder and longer than at any point in my teaching career. Because I can no longer go into the school at 4:30 am like I used to, I am at the breakfast counter in the kitchen every morning by 4:30 doing school work. I am at the doors of the school by 5:45 when the custodians are opening the school for the day to get to my room and continue working. I usually stay at school until 4-4:30 in the afternoon working and when I come home, I usually have a few hours of work to finish before I can spend time with my family. I follow this routine everyday Monday-Friday. On weekends, I usually have a few hours of work that I need to do as well. I am putting in on average 70 hours of work a week. It is a lot and it is hard but I figured out the rhythm, I have got the beat to this requiem down, but I still hate the song.  

I do have to say, that while my schedule is overwhelming at times and very difficult, elementary school teachers have it much worse. Their students are there everyday Monday through Friday. They do not have the opportunity to use Friday's as a catch up/plan day. That should and must change if this model is to continue for sometime. 

COVID-19 has absolutely turned all of our lives completely upside down. Everyone's lives are harder, more difficult and more dangerous now than they were last February. My wife, who I adore and dearly love, works in healthcare and she has been going into people's homes and nursing homes to deliver treatment to patients since May. She does this five days a week. Her job is significantly more difficult and more dangerous than it was, but she keeps doing it. She doesn't like it any more than I like what I'm doing. This is the story for all of our society. Everything is different, everything is more arduous but we have all figured out how to make it work. None of us like the song, but at least now we can dance to the beat. My advice on this is simple; keep swimming we are bound to find solid ground at some point. We have to. Right? 

The Wild, Weird, Wacky World of Presidential Campaigns

For whatever reason President elections tend to bring out the worst in our leaders and in ourselves. Are you turned off by the nastiness and brutishness of today’s politics and elections? Just be glad that you live today and were not around during our nation’s past. Your friendly American History teacher here with a quick lesson on the nastiness, bizarreness, and flat-out meanness from past presidential elections.

The election of 1800 between Thomas Jefferson and John Adams  was remarkably sleazy and obnoxious with both sides hurling wild accusations against each other. Supporters of Jefferson charged that Adams was abusive and neglectful of his wife. That he worked against the U.S. on behalf of England. That he supplied several very young prostitutes to a visiting Russian dignitary. And most shocking of all, it was alleged that Adams was a hermaphrodite! Supporters of Adams alleged that Jefferson stole money from a widow and her children. That he was an agent of France. That he was a “slave lover” (this happened to be true, by the way). That he was an Atheist (although he probably was not, he was not really a Christian either). Adams supporters, relying on the fact that lies spread faster than truth especially in 1800, even said that Jefferson had died! Opponents of Jefferson even went so far as to warn that should Jefferson be elected president, his administration would actively teach and support “murder, robbery, and rape!” Of course, Jefferson won the election and none of these things were taught nor supported by Jefferson. 

Throughout our nation’s history there are several instances of similar crazy allegations made against presidential candidates by supporters of their opponents. In 1840, Whig supporters of William Henry Harrison, cast incumbent Martin Van Buren as a rather effeminate dandy who spent taxpayer money on fancy foreign made finger cups in which he would “wash his pretty, tapering, soft, white lily fingers”. Furthermore, Whigs alleged, Van Buren also spent taxpayer money on a closet full of fine silk, frilly clothing. Not one of those allegations were true, but Van Buren nonetheless lost the election. In 1876, Democrats charged that Republican candidate Rutherford B. Hayes shot his mother. He did not. In 1948 Harry S. Truman stated that a vote for his opponent, Thomas Dewey, was a vote for Fascism. In 1964 the Lyndon Johnson campaign ran a now infamous TV commercial that alluded should Republican Barry Goldwater be elected president, Goldwater would start a nuclear war that would kill your children. In 1988 Republican George H.W. Bush had a commercial that Democrat Michael Dukakis, while governor of Massachusetts, gave weekend furloughs to “268 first degree murders to kidnap, rape and murder some more”. A wildly inaccurate and misleading charge.  

Religion is also a favorite target for scurrilous lies to be spread about presidential candidates. Especially if they can connect them to the Catholic Church. 1856, the Democratic Party charged that the Republican candidate, John C. Fremont, was an alcoholic, a crook and worst of all a Catholic. While Fremont may not have been the most virtuous person, he definitely was not a Catholic. He was an Episcopalian. During the 1928 presidential campaign, many Republican Protestants argued that good Christians could not vote for Democrat Al Smith, who was a devout Catholic, because Catholicism was really a cloak for the forces of Hell. In 1960, it was widely and not so quietly whispered that Americans should not vote for John Kennedy as President because Kennedy would simply be a minion for the Pope. In recent times, religion has again often taken center stage for outrageous accusations against candidates. In 2008 and again in 2012, seizing on the Islamophobia that gripped the nation following the 9/11 terrorist attacks, many opponents of Barack Obama alleged that Obama was a Muslim who would institute Sharia Law. Obama was not, nor had ever been an Muslim and he obviously did not impose Sharia Law. During the 2020 election, there were again questions arising about the Democratic nominee Joe Biden, because he is a Catholic and concerns that if he were elected the nation would in essence be turned over to the Vatican. We know that did not happen. 

Recently in the Truly Weird and Bizarre Category there have been allegations- that have been supported by some- , that are so crazy it would seem more appropriate to have come from earlier, more informationally challenged times than now. In 2016 it was alleged that Bill and Hillary Clinton along with the rest of the Democratic Party were running a weird child-sex ring out of a pizzeria in Washington D.C. This was taken so seriously that shortly before the election a “good samaritan” charged into the alleged pizzeria armed with a high power rifle demanding that the surprised and confused pizzeria workers release the child sex slaves from the back room. Also, in 2016 opponents of Donald Trump stated that, while on a business trip to Russia, Trump had two Russian prostitutes urinate on each other while he watched. Eeeeeewwwww. Gross. While Trump did pay a porn star to have sex with him, there is not any evidence that Trump watched Russian call girls urinate on one another. In our current election, Trump seemingly accused Kamala Harris of not actually being black, but instead decided one day that she would say she was black. To be clear, Kamala Harris has always claimed to be partially black, because she is! Her mother was an Indian immigrant and her father is a immigrant from Jamacia. Finally, the election of 2020 provided American voters perhaps the most bizarre story of all. One so kooky and fantastic, not even the supporters of Adams or Jefferson in 1800 could have envisioned it. In our current 2020 election there is a story circulating that shadow forces are at work to ensure that Joe Biden is elected president so he can cover up and protect high ranking members of the American government and powerful figures in the entertainment industry who are Satan worshipping, cannibalistic, pedophiles....WOW! 

Presidential politics have always been fraught with mud-slinging, half-truths, and outright, outrageous lies. We hopefully can take heart that, until very recently, the lies, half-truths and distortions have become more tame over time.  Hopefully, brazen and scurrilous allegations of late are only an anomaly and will fade following the election of 2024. Luckily, no one has accused the other of being a hermaphrodite. Yet.