If this were chess, Dan the recent “concern” titles would be a decent play. Distraction, but a decent play. Ignore the advice and concern. Hammer on. Otherwise, you might find yourself distracted.

BTW, all of us were offering a very similar rationale for our excessive and unapologetic hours back in our own first few years of teaching. We may not have been blogging with sophistication about planning and presentation becoming invisible at the same rate of speed that we in fact worried about presentation and planning, but it’s intriguing how familiar your argument feels. I can’t recall “ego” being my defense, either…and I suspect that the other voices offering some perspective from a few more years down the pike weren’t on an “ego” parade line either. The irony, however, is that “ego” drives much early on when you’re making it up as you go. Saving the planet is a better bumper sticker, however. Not wanting to become “one of those teachers” is almost as good.

I do wonder — forgive me for this because I’m probably way off here — how “ego” doesn’t in fact drive the following statement of yours here: “..odds are good some of my new- and preservice teacher readership shares their misunderstanding of exactly what I’m endorsing here”.

Does all of this come down to making sure that your “new- and preservice teacher readership” is somehow kept illuminated, that they can track your endorsements, that their next few years hinge on getting your argument figured out? Is that really why you offered your response? Really? As an ex-English teacher, the line above was your thesis. Everything hinges on it. The rest was the defense, particulars — but still the defense. Hopefully the your “new- and preservice teacher readership” will keep their rudder in the water knowing you’re worried about their potential “misunderstanding”. And the old guys who have unintentionally shifted the focus from your lesson plans and the kids themselves will be equally at peace.

Still not sure if will matter much in a few years when you look back on your development as a professional.

If at the end of the day the ultimate take-away for you is to simply overlook the respect each of us has for your teaching instincts and intentions and raw potential in the field (that will undoubtedly offer you a ‘master’ teacher path one day) simply to slice-n-dice the issue of “fear” and “ego” so as to draw attention away from the simple fact that many of us were right where you are now — slinging the hours, building lesson plans at hyper-speed, and throwing our hearts/bodies on the tracks for our kids, all the while not wanting to become like those “other teachers” the kids “vilified” — then you’d be better served to ignore the comments and posts written by others. Not sure what you’re defending, Dan. The instinct to defend is pretty human. But at a certain point, you still have the blessing of some time to reflect back on it. While it may be noble to worry about your “new- and preservice teacher readership”, and tempting to defend every observation that seems to strike home or even to misread your endorsements, perhaps it takes you a bit off-course to pursue each side of the fulcrum with such fever.

Either way, you’ve “put up some huge numbers” in season three. Probably OK to let the defensive posture down. Your “readership” has already come to respect you. Just because they don’t all glow at every grammatical turn, doesn’t mean that you’re not being well received. Even in spite of statements like this: “If I ever determined somewhere down the line that I wasted so many hours this year on lame instruction and self-serving practice, it’d kill me. Ego fell out of the equation somewhere after the second 60-hour week.” that appear to defend well at first glance. All of us who have made them in the past as young teachers didn’t make it very far before we had to smile at the irony of our own words. Amazing how much deeper and richer the teaching experience — and relationship with both colleagues and students alike — became once we let go of that early posture.

But again, it is probably just “concern” — and well worth ignoring. Certain that there are better future blog post titles waiting for you out there, as well.

Cheers,
Christian

Wow! I am fascinated by this discussion. Is the concern that Dan is going to burn out? Because it seems to me that his point in developing his lessons this way is that, yes, it’s a huge investment in year 1, but after that the focus is on tweaking the saved lessons to get the best results for the students. I have been teaching for 20 years, and I have found that every minute I spend thinking through how I present the information really affects how well the students can understand and then use it to make stuff themselves.

I am a big believer in constructivism, but I have seen a collosal amount of learning time wasted by not scaffolding the activities clearly up front. That is a teacher’s job. It’s true that “the person working in the classroom is learning,” and I assume that the students are the ones working in the classroom in response to the lessons Dan has structured. My students *work* in my lab, and sometimes it’s just a continuation of a project and I do no lesson at all, just moving around and conferring and helping. But when that happens, it is precisely because I have planned and scaffolded an activity that hits them right where they hit “flow,” challenging enough to engage but not so challenging that they shut down with anxiety. It’s the teacher’s job to communicate what they need to know and set up the parameters of the project so that they are working in their zone. To get to that place, I have presented carefully scripted lessons before they do the work. I have tried less structured lessons, and I find the investment of my time in what I am going to demonstrate in what particular order, and where I pause, etc, makes an enormous difference in student learning. And that is what it’s about, isn’t it? (I could go on and on about different outcomes based on student socioeconomic levels, but that’s for another day.)

You’re a good man, Dan; and a hell of a teacher (3rd year or ‘master’ matters little at this point; the talent/instinct is obvious there). Period.

The conversation and profession is well served by your passion, your work ethic, and your willingness to be transparent in your strategies/goals along the way. All of us are learning much by virtue of your leadership and vision, your confident answers and your questions alike, and the opportunity to interact.

On a professional/personal level, you certainly do not need to weather condesending comments or attacks on your character/intentions in the process of exploring ideas. You’re putting too much out there for the right reasons to be way-laid by such comments. I also hope that you’re in a position to see the other side of the comment mirror when visiting blogging colleagues/antagonists alike in the future. I’m certain that 99.9% of their posts are not fueled by ego or offered simply to be sliced word-for-word. Sometimes they are simply exploring ideas out-loud, looking for colleagues to help them grow in the process. Sometimes they’re not really trying to win the argument. Truly.

On my own personal level, I accept your well-selected challenge back at me (“flirted frequently with condescension”) as part of my own learning process. And offer appreciation for the challenge as well. Much thanks. Truly.

Cheers, Christian

More like too lazy or too tired. I am in the phase of career involving 2 kids, mortgage, husband, feeble attempts at maintaining physical and mental health, also at my school long enough as a teacher and parent to be too involved with every possible committee.

I am amazed by the people who are doing so much more than me — like running schools — and still blog. But I know that for some the chance to reflect and connect is energizing, rather than just one more task.