Episode 7. Big Textbook Exposed: An Interview with Two Confidential Teacher Informants

In this episode of the K 12 Confidential podcast, veteran teachers discuss the detrimental impact of canned curriculum in public schools. With an emphasis on the marginalization of English Language Development (ELD) teachers and students, the episode explores how lack of teacher autonomy and corporate-driven education solutions are harming the education system. Two ESL teachers share their struggles and experiences, revealing the inefficiencies and inequities caused by standardized, rigid curriculums. The discussion covers key concepts such as ELPAC, EL, ELD, and CLAD, while showcasing the complex challenges faced by immigrant students. Listeners are urged to understand the broader implications of these harmful practices and the necessity for teacher-driven, adaptable teaching methods.

00:00 Introduction to the K-12 Confidential Podcast

00:20 Overview of Today's Episode

00:53 Key Terms and Concepts

01:02 The Marginalization of Veteran ESL Teachers

01:21 Corporate Greed and canned curriculum

01:43 Introduction to the Interview

07:50 The Story of Teacher A

23:18 The Story of Teacher B

27:18 The Impact of canned Curriculum on Teachers and Students

39:20 Final Thoughts and Call to Action

We need more teacher voices to this this justice! Visit us at k-12confidential.com to request to speak on the podcast.

Sign the petition to join the movement to save K-12 Education!

Transcript

 Welcome back to the K 12 Confidential podcast, the podcast of current veteran teachers blowing the whistle on the messes inside of our world as our final best effort to draw attention to what is going on because we see that it is eroding our very ability to effectively self govern. Today's episode is another installment on the CAN Curriculum Mess episodes, and was recorded honestly a couple years ago now.

This is an interview with two different teachers who have a very powerful story to share with America, which highlights the dangers of CAN curriculum, a lack of teacher autonomy, the marginalization of immigrant students, and the lack of real experts leading our profession. It highlights. Corporate greed, waste, and inefficiency in K 12 when no experts are consulted in big decisions being made.

First, you're gonna hear me provide an introduction to some key terms which come up in this episode. This episode is specifically discussing. The marginalization of veteran English language teachers. These are ESL teachers, teachers who have specialized in teaching English as a second language. They are highly veteran and they have very highly specialized education experiences which qualify them to be the experts in the room.

This is one ridiculous, foolish district's. Attempt, successful attempt to silence their experts and pay for a dense scripted can curriculum to replace them. It is tragic and highlights exactly what is wrong with big textbook, but it also required that we conceal their identities. So you're gonna hear robotic sounding voices that sound kind of deep.

They were very specific in what they were saying, and they needed to be protected. It's dense. Stick with it. It's so important. We love you America. 

K 12 Education is a mess. Us literacy rankings are in the bottom half of the world and are a hidden cause of the erosion of our variability to effectively self govern.

How did we get here? America's teachers can tell you and the answers will shock you. This is K 12 confidential.

This is another episode about the oppressive nature of CAN curriculums. You should listen to the introductory episode of CAN Curriculum to understand this conversation a little bit more. However, you know, I've became aware of this scenario. A California public school through a large network of people that I communicate with.

So their story came to me and I found out about it and asked them to come on, and they were very gracious to do so. But the story is really about how. One teacher stood up against the oppressive nature of CAN curriculum and the intersection of how historically marginalized identities are oppressed further by CAN curriculum.

And when he refused to continue to teach it, it was given to a brand new teacher without tenure and he was forced to do it and had no idea what he was getting involved with, and he wound up leaving the profession over it. So you wanted evidence and proof that can curriculum is oppressing teachers and exacerbating the shortage crisis.

There you go. But these terms that Amanda mentioned, some of them are really specific to California, but they are very specific to teaching and I just wanna make sure that we unpack them right away so that you don't feel lost. This is probably one of the most technical conversations you're going to hear.

Please stay with it. Because what is shared is from these two gentlemen's hearts. And just if you get stuck with the jargon, just stick with it, please. But I will say teacher A, who's the veteran teacher who teaches, who goes F, refers to the lpac. This is the E-L-P-A-C. This is the English Language Proficiency Assessment for California.

We started using this a number of years ago. It replaced an old test. It assesses language acquisition levels for English language learners. We refer to these students in two ways, either EL or ELD, and we kind of conflate the terms, but EL just stands for English language or sometimes you'll hear ELL, English Language Learner.

ELD is sometimes the class that is taught English Lang English Language Development, which is specifically for English language learners. So you'll hear all these terms thrown around. You have something similar, if not identical in another state. I'm sure if you're teachers. Now when you administer the elpac, the English Language Proficiency assessment, it gives, it places students in a number of four different levels based on their reading, writing, listening, and speaking abilities.

Those four domains. Levels one and two are considered barely emerging skills, and levels three and four are higher, and four is where you're almost ready to be what's called reclassified. So you're gonna hear this terminology too. As teachers, we know this, we see reclassified on a roster. We know it means at one time they were an ELL, right?

They were still learning English language. So what another thing you're going to hear too is the complicated dynamic of teaching kids who have higher levels in something like reading and writing, and then lower levels and speaking and listening, and how complicated that dynamic is. So you're gonna hear that explained too.

And then we also mentioned the clad in here, both teacher A and teacher B discuss it. The CLAD is the cross-cultural Language and Academic Development certification, and if you got your teaching credential anywhere within the last 15 years, this came with your teaching credential and they mentioned CLAD and a, I barely remember what the heck that was in my credential.

It was like a, it was like a tiny. Blip on the radar, and then they say to you at some point years on the line, oh, you have clad. You can teach English language learners as if we all don't also realize that we don't. None of us remember what this was. Oh, one last thing. The die strategies that's mentioned, this is specially designed academic instruction in English S-D-A-I-E.

This is not a CAN curriculum. This is actually a very enlightened framework. Which gives us tips and guidance and ideas around how to make content more comprehensible for students who are learning English. This is instead of giving them a dumb down curriculum, which they're not need something of a lower level, they just need.

Different and better access to get into the content. So you will hear teacher A, refer to these SAI strategies. And then teacher B is the younger teacher who was given this not knowing what the heck it was. And these are both males. Their voices are disguised. They sound super deep. 

Hi, I'm glad to be here.

So my teacher journey began in 2001 into three different sites throughout my career, and my current one is the one that I've been at for the longest. I've. Taught language arts for my entire career with a focus on teaching English as a second language, ELD, English Language Development. And so for about 20 years I always had some EL classes peppered in with other literature classes, writing, et cetera.

So I've run the gamut. I've taught everything from grades nine through 12. To adults in night school, continuation school. I, I'm a Swiss Army knife of a teacher. I have, I have done it all and I've seen a lot over the past couple decades in education and, you know, like I said, I, I taught ELD for 20 years of my career.

Which might lead you to ask, well, well, what about the past two years? The beginning of the end, for of my time as a teacher of English language learners started with the adoption of a can curriculum in my district, which, you know, I I, for a number of reasons that we'll get into probably with this episode and through that criticism and through my advocacy of, of our very vulnerable el populace rather than.

Listen and work with me and, and try to come up with a solution that fits everyone's needs. They phased me and one of my other colleagues out of teaching these classes and tapped one of our other gut and another teacher to, to teach these classes. So I don't have any English learners anymore other than the ones that are into our regular classes because that, that's one of the most significant changes at our site is we went from, uh, a sheltered model.

D pullout model to a full mainstream integration model with. A support class based on a CAN curriculum. So that in a nutshell is, is me and I look forward to digging in. 

I invited both to be a part of this episode because they both experienced opposite ends of situation involving can content and before they talk 'cause they're gonna share their experiences.

I just wanna say that like K through eight uses more canned content. And that really gets back to structural sexism because there's a lot more females in K through eight and no one's like deliberately thinking, oh, women can't think so let's give them canned content. No, it's deeply ingrained and structural that K through eight teachers are given more canned content, but in ninth through 12 marginalized populations of students in order to like come up with fast, quick, you know, cures for their ills.

These teachers who are sort of governing and holding the spaces around largely marginalized identities are being given this canned content too. And the story you're about to hear starts with a, a space beginning with this idea of teacher professionalism, teacher knowledge, veteran teachers who we're gonna train, train, train for years are gonna help us create something that can really help our marginalized students who are learning English.

Learn best, and then they decide to pull it out of their hands and turn it into canned content. And so I'm, I just wanna let first. And let him start talking about how that all began in his district and to really frame the EL students from a lens of a marginalized group of students, and then experience the other end.

Well, like I said, I've been in education for over two decades and. The way that can curriculum has traditionally been presented to us is every few years, you know, the standards may change, the standards may be altered, the standards may grow, and there was always somebody coming along with a, a. Solution.

Right? We have the standard space curriculum. The standard space textbook, and, and it, you know, it almost feels like that episode of The Simpsons, Marge versus the Mono, the classic episode where, you know, some huckster comes from out town and he comes in and he's like, you know, there's nothing on earth like a bonafide electrified six mono, and Mar is like the.

We should think about this first, but of course, you know, sorry, Marge, the mob has spoken. It often feels like that sometimes in education when we're presented with these snake oils, we're presented with these, these cure alls that really do nothing other than give district leadership an opportunity to point and check a box when they're asked about how they're servicing their kids, and so often these.

These plans, these curriculum are cowed in the name of, you know, equity and servicing our kids. And it all sounds very nice and, and, and very neat because that's what you know, district leadership is looking for neat, clear and easy signpost for them to point at when the state comes in and says, Hey, what are you doing to service this populace English learners in our case?

So. As is the case with these, these curriculum, when they're presented to us, it's almost like they're giving us a tool chest, right? It's always been treated like that. Like here is this, this textbook for American literature with all of these, these different resources more than anyone could use in, in a single year.

And it's just boxes and handouts and now it's all, you know, technology is involved in all of it, but it's always. There's always been a matter of choice, right? We've been presented with this curriculum by our department head or by, you know, school leadership, and we're said, use this. It'll help. And we're kind of like, you know, Rumpelstiltskin, right?

Spinning that straw into gold. That's how I've always looked at it. But now these days, rather than saying, here's this curriculum, spin this straw into gold, make something out of it. You know, our kids, you know our populace, you form the relationship. So use these tools to help enhance what you're already doing in your classroom.

But now we're being given a pile of straw and said, here, no, we don't need gold. Just here's this straw. Right? And so what? What's become, you know, what was once a choice has now become this oppressive system where if you do our. You'll use this curriculum with full fidelity, whatever that means. And if you don't, then they will retaliate in my case and, and take those classes away.

And you know, I've kind of been in mourning the past couple years because some of my happiest memories my entire career have been with English learners. The relationships that we formed, the stories that I've helped them tell, and now I don't get that. The way that I used to, because those kids are still in our classes.

We still service them. But now, um, they're in with everybody else and their voices often get drowned out as they do. So in the case of, of our district, the change that occurred, 'cause usually these curriculum. Curriculums are reactionary. You'll notice the cycle often begins and ends with new standards, right?

So when I started teaching in 2001, it was the California State Standards, and those had existed for decades and, and there was a little bit of movement here and there in flux, but they were really outdated and the common core. Came along a few years into my career and they started talking about this Common Core.

And as soon as those conversations started, the textbook companies who sold us all that curriculum based on the, uh, California state standards, now we're selling us on Common Core. And again, that huckster came out and he's, he's talking about how this is gonna fix everything and it's gonna fix your kids.

And the the, the difference now is they don't trust teachers who are the experts in the room to work with this curriculum or to e or even better come up with our own. There was a time in the past 10 years, you know, when I started at my school 10 years ago, we had rigorous curriculum design teams. We had dedicated time during meetings, we had dedicated time.

During all staff meetings, we had pullout days with subs, you know, that were pulled for entire teams where we would sit all day long and talk about curriculum, what worked, what didn't work. I mean, we did what teachers are supposed to be doing. Right. Um, now. Are different. We can't, we, we went from, you know, five years ago having one rigorous curriculum design day.

They called 'em RCD, day per quarter to one, a semester to last year. I don't really remember any. There's no money for it. We're being told there's no subs for it. There's sub shortages. So our opportunities to actually collaborate with each other. Are are far and few between? Well, traditionally in my career, EL is one of, has been kind of, ELD has been one of those specialized fields where every place I've worked, it's almost like we've been a department within a department.

Right? So my current department there are 25 language arts instructors, and traditionally there's been three of us who, whose focus was on the classes. So we, when I was hired there was hired. Specifically who specialize in teaching English learner learners? So when I, when I came aboard my current site, there was a team of two seasoned veterans who had been teachers of English learners all over the world, and more recently at my current site.

So there were a lot of experts, I mean us three combined have over 75 years worth of experience under our belt. And site leadership. And district leadership always trusted us to develop these classes to come up with a research-based tiered approach to language acquisition. And that's how it was for, for five golden years of my career.

Then around, uh, or my time at, at my current site. And then around 2016, the new Common Core English Language Development standards were published, and it was like red alert. State and.

Things like it's inequitable to have sheltered classes. That sheltered classes equal pullout and that is inequitable. So we can't have sheltered classes anymore. Um, we'll continue to offer support classes, which traditionally have been designed by us. So we taught, let's say, an EL sophomore level course, which was the same curriculum, the same standards, the same skills, the same novel, same everything, same essays, just modified using SAI techniques again.

Using the experts in the room. So when these new standards were rolled out and we were told that the, the school was fine and the district was fine, their solution was to vet a number of different curriculum that they had been, that they had seen somewhere. They probably got a sales pitch at some, some conference somewhere and brought that back.

And so we had a few different options presented to us. We pilot a few of them and despite our. We kind of had a sense from the beginning that this is just a formality that we're gonna adopt this curriculum. It's, you know, they're saying it's scientifically based. The person who created it is considered it one of the experts in the field.

So it all looks really good on paper until you actually. I have to use it with students. They paid big money for me and three of my colleagues to get trained. A six day training throughout the course of a summer and a year to learn how to use this new curriculum. And we were being told that this is the only thing.

I, this is the only thing this class will be based on because before it was a support class that we looked at as study skills, help in other classes, academic language, all of the other things that benefit English learners besides the the core content. And we were allowed to create that and try new things.

Now, they wanted this class to focus solely on this curriculum that they could point to when the state auditors come and say, this is what we are doing. Here's the state standards that are tied. You can open a binder and see you day by day, point by point, minute by minute, second by second, what you should be doing in the class.

And we're being told, if you do this, it's going to improve the situation for our English learners who are, oh yeah, by the way, they're not gonna get a separate sheltered class anymore. They're gonna be thrown into a mainstream class, some of which have 40 or more students in them. Imagine you're a kid, even a, a skilled kid, a level three and four who you know, can read, can write, but that speaking and listening is always the piece.

And you throw 'em into a class with 35 kids, 40 kids, what's gonna happen to those kids, right? You can probably make some pretty bold guesses. So when I push back. On this curriculum, and I, you know, I wasn't defiant. I wasn't, you know, I'm not using it. I refuse to use this, which I could have done. I'm tenured, I could say I'm not doing it.

But when I suggested that maybe we need to differentiate a little bit, that one size does not fit all in this case, and this. Alone is not enough for a class. This is an elective class that these kids have to take based on this, this can curriculum that is so tight and rigid that there's no room for creativity, no room for innovation, no room for anything other than you sit.

Let's open the binder. 1.1. Alright, let's go. And so when I push back. Being, being asked to teach these classes because again, I was a teacher of English learners, it made sense that I would be teaching that class, um, after a couple years of pushback. And again, I never said, I'm not gonna do it. I never said I refuse.

And I did use it in tandem with some of the other stuff that I knew would, would engage kids and make them make their time in my class at least a little less abysmal. It was just using that can curriculum every day. And when I pushed back, I was a little saddened and surprised when I got my schedule last year.

That didn't include any of those EL classes anymore. No word. No. I'm sorry. No conversation. Just it's not on your schedule anymore. And I asked my other colleague who also pushed back, it's not on her schedule anymore either. So we were retaliated against for standing up for these kids, for knowing what we know is right.

And, and, um, and so no good deed goes unpunished is how, how I see it. And so the next thing I knew they were tapping other people, including our friend here. And I'm gonna be quiet now because I really interested to hear what has to say about 

Yeah, I think it's really funny that you found yourself surprised by your ELD class being removed from reschedule, because I remember being extremely surprised was added to my schedule because.

I still to this day feel totally unqualified. I have no idea how to teach like ELD students. We, we took like one very short course in our credentialing program that I really don't think much about how to teach. I do wanna break down kind of like from beginning to end what this process looked like for me to, you know, kind of have this ELD class pass on to me.

So I remember before the semester started last year, I was put into a, you know, quote training really was a zoom, like two to three hours. I was presented a slideshow. I watched two videos about how the class would go, and then I was asked to read, you know, this giant textbook. The one gave me, you know, a lesson plan for every single day, the beginning of class, the end of class.

Say, reading it, I was a little, I was a little lost and I was a little skeptical. I was like, you know what? Okay, lemme just give the benefit of the doubt. I'll try it out. The class didn't go very well. A lot of the can curriculum was, you know, fill in the blank. Here's the of fill in the blank. Let's come up with example sentences for each word.

Okay. Fill in the blank. Let's summarize this short text that we're gonna read together. Fill in the blank. It was just extremely repetitive. It did not feel like it was designed for students. It was designed for, I don't know, like robots that would be obedient to you or every single word. We all know that that's not how kids are.

We all know that's not how human beings are. And throughout this, uh, entire time, you know, I really had no idea how to give them what they needed, especially because of how disorganized, I think our ELD program kind of became. I had students that had taken this class before, had done the exact same workbook before.

I had students that were extremely fluent in English. I had students that were fluent in maybe the, you know, reading and writing, but not, not so much in speaking and listening. What I mean to say is many, many different needs. That I had no idea how to meet. You know, there were a couple times where I observed another teacher, I really want to learn how to be more effective, and this teacher they, you know, taught this workbook to a TI remember perhaps much striking impression was the entire back row is kind of on their phone or they're whispering to each other and it's like, wow.

It's like really clear that I think this classroom is just playing along because they just know they have to do this medial task of filling in the blanks in the workload. I remember thinking like, wow, this doesn't seem effective. It doesn't seem like these students are gonna pick up a lot of English.

Maybe a couple vocab words here and there, but I just, I remember feeling incredibly drained after this class. Pretty much like every single day after the first like one or two months. I remember feeling like, wow, I really don't wanna be here. I really wanna change things. We had maybe one meeting over the entire year, you know, asking how things are going.

It wasn't even how things are going. It was just asked for feedback. They were just, you know, hey, like. Are you guys teaching this thing? Cool. That's great. Uh, what can we do next year? Okay, let's, let's make sure that we have a couple more differentiated levels. So there aren't so many students that are stuck in the same class, but it's still like, that's not a solution.

The, the whole issue is like, we are teaching out of this workbook, this planned curriculum, and it was just so clearly not created with, um.

Like the, the natural variance that occurs in each classroom community. It was not created with that in mind. Um, it was created for the ideal student, whatever that ideal student is, and that ideal student does not exist. Um, I have no idea what the politics were in going to the creation of our, uh, ELD program.

I just remember, uh, feeling, you know, this program wasn't created for them. It was created to check the box. 

And do you, do you see the connection of. Them taking this away from self-possessed veteran teachers and giving it to someone who's not tenured, because that feels very oppressive and intentional.

What do you think when I say that? Do you feel like, my gosh, they took advantage of me and my situa? I don't know. I'm gonna let you respond to that comment. 

No, for sure. I, I think maybe like halfway to the year I was like, huh, you know, I think I was thrown through the dogs. Like there's some political battle going on that.

I was not a part of. I'm just like pawn in this weird game that asked to be a part of. But you asked professional, I don't wanna you make things for these kids. Yeah, I definitely get the sense that I was being used in some way and also being kept in the dark. 

And that's the thing is, you know, we're in the dark about a lot of things.

They wanna check in with you halfway through the year here using this curriculum. But when we start to ask questions based on that, right? Hey, yeah, I'm using this curriculum, can I see some evidence that this has made a mark? I wanna know what your end game is. You wanna raise ELPAC scores. You wanna raise SPAC scores?

If that's the case, can you prove that this curriculum will help facilitate that? Because as is tradition with learning as we always teach our kids. Learning is messy. Learning is about making mistakes and throughout my entire career, teaching is also about learning and we make mistakes and we try new things and we've always been given that freedom to try new things and to throw 'em out if they don't work.

Unless, as is the case with this curriculum, the district spent a giant wa of dough on it and there's no turning back from money because let's be honest, they money on it. Hey, does it work? But if we don't use it, then, then they, their money is, is being wasted. What they really should be looking at is, okay, we've been using this curriculum for three or four years now.

That should be enough of time to realize whether or not. We should continue betting on this horse because if we don't really see the growth, if we don't see kids mainstreaming, if we don't see those LPAC scores being raised, promises that this textbook company made to us aren't being upheld, and as a consumer shouldn't we look at that and say, we are not getting what we are paid for.

We need to try something else. But again, it's, it's the cycle of we have money to spend, we're spending it, we've spent it, now we have to use it. And in, in the case of this, if you don't use it, we're gonna find somebody else to do it. And it was dirty what they did to you and to our students as well because they act like the people who, who were trained.

Because, unlike you, who got a few classes in your credential program teaching English learners, that was my dual manager. I have a degree specifically that says I'm an expert on second language acquisition, as are the other two colleagues of mine. We are the experts in the room and to not listen to us and battle against us and act like we are not in it for the kids, because that's honestly who I'm in it for at all times.

Me would be able to teach that class and see the effects on these kids with a good conscience and, and, and let it slide. And I couldn't let it slide. And I didn't, and I spoke up. And now here we're, 

and, and most teachers are not like, they're not gonna be like, I see this for what it is. I'm out. He's rare.

Like that's why it's so incredibly important that we have his voice in here right now because we are so overwhelmed with everything else. We're, we're given something and we're given this idea that this curriculum is gonna fix everything. And when it doesn't work, we don't, it doesn't occur to us like, this isn't working.

Who do I talk to? Like it's that kind of self possession that has, is rare. Like it's, it's extremely rare. But I also wanna like caution against. How we refer to kids, especially EL kids, as long-term learners, like this movement of like recoding it because it white washes things, it can whitewash things.

There are a lot of reasons why an English learner is a, a long-term, what we call an education is a long-term el, meaning they've been at a very low level of language acquisition according to lpac. The tests that we administer now. For a number of years, and for whatever reason, they're not progressing.

The reason why they're not progressing is not the teacher pedagogy. There's a number of other factors that are going on in that include wraparound services that a child needs that are keeping them from progressing that are expensive, but we wanna believe it's all the teacher's fault and we need to buy a can curriculum to move them along.

And we also hide behind terms like equality and inclusion. To justify not giving them the individualized education that they once had. This happens in sped, we're gonna talk about this in the equity episode and it definitely happens in el, but there's already these textbook companies making K eight curriculum, so they're all too happy to make something for ninth through 12.

You know, 

I wanna push back a little bit on the.

Long English language learner. So instead calling them English language learners or whatever, schools, instead call them

multilingual because demeaning 

play around with labels like we call kids who are functionally illiterate, struggling readers. We are just hiding our own inadequacy. It's the educational system, the system, not us is the teacher's, the system, because a long-term, Yale is a kid who's for whatever reason, not progressing past a certain stage.

And if we dress that up and play that down and whitewash that, we absolve ourselves from any responsibility. So you can call them experienced, but what's really happening is for some important reason, these kids are not learning English. And I think that term experienced. Maybe makes us feel better, but it doesn't change the, the problem, 

a lot of the languages is wrapped up in, in, you know, the old standards, the, the, the legalese that's spoken by the state and the federal government.

They're the ones that use these terms like L one. L two. I mean, my, my graduate level clad classes and, and language acquisition classes were full of acronyms and long-term English learners is just, it's everywhere. It's, it's in all the standards. It would be hard to, to sweep that away and, and start fresh, although I do.

Like more positive Connoting words. I, I do think that, I agree with Trina that it's important to be honest about what these kids are because there is some shame in that. Not just not for the kids. For them, they feel it because when they're labeled as a long-term el, there is a deficiency label there, right?

Like, oh man, I'm never gonna learn English. When the reality, most of the kids who are labeled as long-term English learners are perfectly fluent. Read and write and speak and communicate. They struggle in other areas that are indicative of the long term English learner label. Things that might occur even down the road, like the amount of long term ELs that go to college versus mainstream kids who do like, so I, I agree with you.

It's important to, to change the language as we change the culture. But um, long is the one that they use and that's one that. Most people are talking about these days. I'm not sure structurally what your new school is, is what it looks like, but our school was restructured to look like this. We had newcomer English that students would be in for a year.

Then they had English 1, 2, 3, and four based on grade level. That's what it was for years. Now, all the grade level EL classes have been swept away. Those kids have been mainstreamed into other classes if they're a level three or four based on their ELPAC scores. And, and it just, it leads to this cycle of, you know, kids getting stuck.

Kids. That's what a lot of long, long-term ELs are labeled as being sort of stuck, stuck academically. Stuck in place. They're not progressing. Their scores are kind of have plateaued. They're not improving and they're not given as many opportunities. They, they don't have as many opportunities when they, they leave our, our schools.

So we're trying to fix that. And the way that, that we're trying that is by one tightening up the state standards, which are fine. You know, I look at the new EL Common Core standards and there's nothing new in there. There's nothing archaic or strange or that doesn't make sense. This, they're actually probably a little tighter than they used to be.

They're a little more intensive, I think, especially at the higher levels, but they're doable. But to, to say that that. We can fix this longstanding problem of long-term English learners. Being stuck in place with a color by numbers can curriculum, um, is erroneous at best and oppressive and dangerous at worst.

I just have a quick question and, uh, how much were people kind of coming into your room making sure that you were teaching this can curriculum to Fidelity? Like how much pressure did you feel. Teach this curriculum because I feel

comes. So like, what was the follow up? Because I know she said there wasn't really much follow up, but she was outspoken and like being, you know, authentic and vulnerable and like speaking up for the kids, which, yes, the kids come first, but yeah, like can you tell us a little bit about like maybe the follow up that you had with your administration or anyone else?

Yeah, sure. I remember four people. I come in at, they came in once this entire year. Four people. They observed me, they hold me ahead of time. I'm gonna be completely honest. I put on the works for them. I did exactly what was in the book. I like split the tables and did all this stuff that I don't normally do because I felt the pressure of, oh, I need to do it right.

The second semester basically did away with that curriculum. I stopped using that workbook. I taught it for maybe like 15 minutes, the beginning of each class, and then afterwards, it was just work time. I told them time to work on stuff. I'm gonna come around, I'm gonna be checking that you're working. If you need any help on anything, especially you know, English or history, I'm happy to help you out.

Just come up to me, I'll stop whatever I'm doing. I just, I couldn't. Put my kids and myself through an entire day of this canned curriculum. So, sorry, to go back to your original question, they came in once. I didn't really know who some of these people were, but they just watched me. I put on the works, tried to like show that I was doing it, and then I just did my own thing afterwards.

I am, I'm cracking up because I've been in that situation where I've been in a low socioeconomic school and people come in to check on you and in their mind. Dave, check that box. You're good. 

The last thing I wanna say is that, you know, these kids need our help. They're one of our most vulnerable populations, English learners, and for all kids.

There's no magic bullet. You know, there's been companies since I've been in education in decades before trying to get their hands into the cookie jar of education, be it through technology or textbooks or curriculum. There is no magic bullet. Different. The real work in our classrooms is the relationships that we form with those kids and our ability to.

Because we're the experts in the room. We know what we're doing. And when district leadership starts trusting us a little bit more, um, we can get back to doing the real work and stop coloring by numbers. Because until we do that, we're just gonna be standing in place. We're not gonna see growth. We're not gonna see happy kids, healthy kids, and.

Engaged and can curriculum is moving in the opposite direction of that. 

Do you have final words? 

Yeah, I think I want to add one last thing. I feel like the practice of throwing new teachers into the pits with these poorly planned and grade classes is definitely contributing to the decline of new teachers.

I just don't think new teachers are going to put up with this knowing that they can get a higher paying job. Requires less work elsewhere. It's, yeah, it's not, it doesn't look great. It doesn't look great. 

I am, you should not be giving the hardest stuff than the new staff that we're still trying out to new teachers.

I mean, they did that on purpose because he is not tenured and he didn't have the self possession yet to stand up to them and. That is so oppressive to the kids and to us, and it did such a disservice to this amazing group of people that have a rare and precious knowledge within education. Like the kind of knowledge they have to support ELD students is rare and they've completely sidestepped it 'cause they didn't like the complications of what they were saying and they just wanted to like.

Quickly move it along and let's be very, very, very clear. They're gonna call it equality so that they're getting the same education as non EL learners. It's just what's cheaper because EL kids were getting a, a much lower student to teacher ratio in their rooms and they'll say it's anything else to save face, but it's all about dollars and cents.

And those textbook companies say, Hey, you don't like paying for these small classes. Here's a curriculum. 

Thank you for listening. You can help this vitally important movement by signing our petition found@k12confidential.com. Liking and subscribing to our YouTube channel, following us on Instagram.