DCPS "Whole Child" marketing campaign: A waste of money

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Everything in education, and particularly urban education, is cyclical. A heavy focus on attending to the needs of the whole child and social-emotional learning is not new. However, after 20+ years of high-stakes accountability and testing ad nauseam, the system is churning out grads who get to college or the workplace and are maladjusted/ therefore not performing optimally and/or quickly dropping out. Whole-child/SEL work is an evolution of government and philanthropic efforts centered on persistence-- not just getting kids to college but through. Those who complain about infusing this into a child's educational program likely have the resources and awareness to socialize this at home and/or within other engagements (sports, faith-based activities, etc.)

So the schools are supposed to raise these kids because their parents can't be bothered to? This is why people leave public schools. It's not fair to kids who are there to learn and whose instructional time is eaten away by whatever trendy useless nonsense ed schools and social justice activists want taught these days. I mean, math and reading scores in the city are abysmal:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/education/2022/09/02/dc-schools-parcc-test/

There is only so much time in a school day.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:BUT - what you are explaining is not "Whole Child" - it is expectations of being a teacher.

When I hire someone, I do not need a special marketing program to teach them how to respond to email.

This. I thought this was why hiring and salaries favor masters in education?

I'm a random businessperson and I know about the whole child concept for teaching. If people are getting hired with this as a mystery, then there's a problem in the pipeline.

It’s not a hiring problem it’s just a way to gaslight teachers. They put 30 kids in one class and expect teachers to control the room like Snow White and have a sweet and caring relationship with each kid. It’s impossible with the instructional demands and that many kids, but in a perfect world it would be possible so it’s the teachers fault when they aren’t able to achieve that.

Most teachers know all the best practices, they just don’t have the time to properly implement them because of class size.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:BUT - what you are explaining is not "Whole Child" - it is expectations of being a teacher.

When I hire someone, I do not need a special marketing program to teach them how to respond to email.

This. I thought this was why hiring and salaries favor masters in education?

I'm a random businessperson and I know about the whole child concept for teaching. If people are getting hired with this as a mystery, then there's a problem in the pipeline.

It’s not a hiring problem it’s just a way to gaslight teachers. They put 30 kids in one class and expect teachers to control the room like Snow White and have a sweet and caring relationship with each kid. It’s impossible with the instructional demands and that many kids, but in a perfect world it would be possible so it’s the teachers fault when they aren’t able to achieve that.

Most teachers know all the best practices, they just don’t have the time to properly implement them because of class size.

Point taken.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Teacher here - agree. We are being told that making eye contact and developing relationships with students & families is important. As if none of us already realized this.

So true. And as a teacher, when do I get to do this if I am stuck in PD and don't even have the time to call a parent about their child?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:BUT - what you are explaining is not "Whole Child" - it is expectations of being a teacher.

When I hire someone, I do not need a special marketing program to teach them how to respond to email.

This. I thought this was why hiring and salaries favor masters in education?

I'm a random businessperson and I know about the whole child concept for teaching. If people are getting hired with this as a mystery, then there's a problem in the pipeline.

It’s not a hiring problem it’s just a way to gaslight teachers. They put 30 kids in one class and expect teachers to control the room like Snow White and have a sweet and caring relationship with each kid. It’s impossible with the instructional demands and that many kids, but in a perfect world it would be possible so it’s the teachers fault when they aren’t able to achieve that.

Most teachers know all the best practices, they just don’t have the time to properly implement them because of class size.

+1

And add to the mix a few kids who have traumatic home situations that make building relationships with adults difficult.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Everything in education, and particularly urban education, is cyclical. A heavy focus on attending to the needs of the whole child and social-emotional learning is not new. However, after 20+ years of high-stakes accountability and testing ad nauseam, the system is churning out grads who get to college or the workplace and are maladjusted/ therefore not performing optimally and/or quickly dropping out. Whole-child/SEL work is an evolution of government and philanthropic efforts centered on persistence-- not just getting kids to college but through. Those who complain about infusing this into a child's educational program likely have the resources and awareness to socialize this at home and/or within other engagements (sports, faith-based activities, etc.)

So the schools are supposed to raise these kids because their parents can't be bothered to? This is why people leave public schools. It's not fair to kids who are there to learn and whose instructional time is eaten away by whatever trendy useless nonsense ed schools and social justice activists want taught these days. I mean, math and reading scores in the city are abysmal:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/education/2022/09/02/dc-schools-parcc-test/

There is only so much time in a school day.

Whole child teaching is a philosophy; it isn't a separate course taught during the day. It takes no time from PARCC prep so don't worry

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:BUT - what you are explaining is not "Whole Child" - it is expectations of being a teacher.

When I hire someone, I do not need a special marketing program to teach them how to respond to email.

This. I thought this was why hiring and salaries favor masters in education?

I'm a random businessperson and I know about the whole child concept for teaching. If people are getting hired with this as a mystery, then there's a problem in the pipeline.

It’s not a hiring problem it’s just a way to gaslight teachers. They put 30 kids in one class and expect teachers to control the room like Snow White and have a sweet and caring relationship with each kid. It’s impossible with the instructional demands and that many kids, but in a perfect world it would be possible so it’s the teachers fault when they aren’t able to achieve that.

Most teachers know all the best practices, they just don’t have the time to properly implement them because of class size.

+1

And add to the mix a few kids who have traumatic home situations that make building relationships with adults difficult.

Teachers, I get how frustrating this job is. I've been there and am still there. But these are excuses not to try. Nobody thinks this is a cure all for everything but I need to push back on these statements bc they sound like excuses for not trying something that will help a large majority of your classroom. There will always be kids who need support outside of the Tier 1 instruction and SEL support you can provide in the classroom, but that doesn't mean this isn't worth implementing

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:BUT - what you are explaining is not "Whole Child" - it is expectations of being a teacher.

When I hire someone, I do not need a special marketing program to teach them how to respond to email.

This. I thought this was why hiring and salaries favor masters in education?

I'm a random businessperson and I know about the whole child concept for teaching. If people are getting hired with this as a mystery, then there's a problem in the pipeline.

It’s not a hiring problem it’s just a way to gaslight teachers. They put 30 kids in one class and expect teachers to control the room like Snow White and have a sweet and caring relationship with each kid. It’s impossible with the instructional demands and that many kids, but in a perfect world it would be possible so it’s the teachers fault when they aren’t able to achieve that.

Most teachers know all the best practices, they just don’t have the time to properly implement them because of class size.

+1

And add to the mix a few kids who have traumatic home situations that make building relationships with adults difficult.

Teachers, I get how frustrating this job is. I've been there and am still there. But these are excuses not to try. Nobody thinks this is a cure all for everything but I need to push back on these statements bc they sound like excuses for not trying something that will help a large majority of your classroom. There will always be kids who need support outside of the Tier 1 instruction and SEL support you can provide in the classroom, but that doesn't mean this isn't worth implementing

Over the years I have had a very difficult students with several kids coming from traumatic experiences, chronic absence and low performance academically. Although they were not in my classroom at the same time they were all so far from being able to access the curriculum I felt like having them in the classroom was absurd. I worked really hard to establish relationships - ignored the attention seeking behavior, pushing my buttons to get a reaction, refusing to do work, etc. and focused on building the relationship. I was able to develop personal relationships with all of them and believe they knew when they were in our classroom it was always a safe and loving place. Despite all my efforts, I could never build the same relationships with the families because there wasn't mutual interest. Academically, most of them made little progress and it wasn't because they weren't capable. For each one, I felt like they lost another year of school. I still have a good relationship with all of them but I guess the impact of that won't be obvious until years in the future. In each case none of them were ready to move onto the next grade and I always worried about them as they get closer to middle/high school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:BUT - what you are explaining is not "Whole Child" - it is expectations of being a teacher.

When I hire someone, I do not need a special marketing program to teach them how to respond to email.

This. I thought this was why hiring and salaries favor masters in education?

I'm a random businessperson and I know about the whole child concept for teaching. If people are getting hired with this as a mystery, then there's a problem in the pipeline.

It’s not a hiring problem it’s just a way to gaslight teachers. They put 30 kids in one class and expect teachers to control the room like Snow White and have a sweet and caring relationship with each kid. It’s impossible with the instructional demands and that many kids, but in a perfect world it would be possible so it’s the teachers fault when they aren’t able to achieve that.

Most teachers know all the best practices, they just don’t have the time to properly implement them because of class size.

+1

And add to the mix a few kids who have traumatic home situations that make building relationships with adults difficult.

Teachers, I get how frustrating this job is. I've been there and am still there. But these are excuses not to try. Nobody thinks this is a cure all for everything but I need to push back on these statements bc they sound like excuses for not trying something that will help a large majority of your classroom. There will always be kids who need support outside of the Tier 1 instruction and SEL support you can provide in the classroom, but that doesn't mean this isn't worth implementing

Right. Because it's always morale-boosting to have your boss tell you to do more and while they simultaneously put you in a situation in which half that is possible. That's even worse when you already know and agree with what they've hamstrung you from doing. A good manager would set high but realistic goals and set-up the job to make it possible.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:BUT - what you are explaining is not "Whole Child" - it is expectations of being a teacher.

When I hire someone, I do not need a special marketing program to teach them how to respond to email.

This. I thought this was why hiring and salaries favor masters in education?

I'm a random businessperson and I know about the whole child concept for teaching. If people are getting hired with this as a mystery, then there's a problem in the pipeline.

It’s not a hiring problem it’s just a way to gaslight teachers. They put 30 kids in one class and expect teachers to control the room like Snow White and have a sweet and caring relationship with each kid. It’s impossible with the instructional demands and that many kids, but in a perfect world it would be possible so it’s the teachers fault when they aren’t able to achieve that.

Most teachers know all the best practices, they just don’t have the time to properly implement them because of class size.

+1

And add to the mix a few kids who have traumatic home situations that make building relationships with adults difficult.

Teachers, I get how frustrating this job is. I've been there and am still there. But these are excuses not to try. Nobody thinks this is a cure all for everything but I need to push back on these statements bc they sound like excuses for not trying something that will help a large majority of your classroom. There will always be kids who need support outside of the Tier 1 instruction and SEL support you can provide in the classroom, but that doesn't mean this isn't worth implementing

Over the years I have had a very difficult students with several kids coming from traumatic experiences, chronic absence and low performance academically. Although they were not in my classroom at the same time they were all so far from being able to access the curriculum I felt like having them in the classroom was absurd. I worked really hard to establish relationships - ignored the attention seeking behavior, pushing my buttons to get a reaction, refusing to do work, etc. and focused on building the relationship. I was able to develop personal relationships with all of them and believe they knew when they were in our classroom it was always a safe and loving place. Despite all my efforts, I could never build the same relationships with the families because there wasn't mutual interest. Academically, most of them made little progress and it wasn't because they weren't capable. For each one, I felt like they lost another year of school. I still have a good relationship with all of them but I guess the impact of that won't be obvious until years in the future. In each case none of them were ready to move onto the next grade and I always worried about them as they get closer to middle/high school.

From your perspective, what is the solution to this?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:BUT - what you are explaining is not "Whole Child" - it is expectations of being a teacher.

When I hire someone, I do not need a special marketing program to teach them how to respond to email.

This. I thought this was why hiring and salaries favor masters in education?

I'm a random businessperson and I know about the whole child concept for teaching. If people are getting hired with this as a mystery, then there's a problem in the pipeline.

It’s not a hiring problem it’s just a way to gaslight teachers. They put 30 kids in one class and expect teachers to control the room like Snow White and have a sweet and caring relationship with each kid. It’s impossible with the instructional demands and that many kids, but in a perfect world it would be possible so it’s the teachers fault when they aren’t able to achieve that.

Most teachers know all the best practices, they just don’t have the time to properly implement them because of class size.

+1

And add to the mix a few kids who have traumatic home situations that make building relationships with adults difficult.

Teachers, I get how frustrating this job is. I've been there and am still there. But these are excuses not to try. Nobody thinks this is a cure all for everything but I need to push back on these statements bc they sound like excuses for not trying something that will help a large majority of your classroom. There will always be kids who need support outside of the Tier 1 instruction and SEL support you can provide in the classroom, but that doesn't mean this isn't worth implementing

Right. Because it's always morale-boosting to have your boss tell you to do more and while they simultaneously put you in a situation in which half that is possible. That's even worse when you already know and agree with what they've hamstrung you from doing. A good manager would set high but realistic goals and set-up the job to make it possible.

Which part of whole child pedagogy do you feel is putting too much on your plate? Maybe I can support with suggestions on how to integrate it without making it too much of a lift.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:BUT - what you are explaining is not "Whole Child" - it is expectations of being a teacher.

When I hire someone, I do not need a special marketing program to teach them how to respond to email.

This. I thought this was why hiring and salaries favor masters in education?

I'm a random businessperson and I know about the whole child concept for teaching. If people are getting hired with this as a mystery, then there's a problem in the pipeline.

It’s not a hiring problem it’s just a way to gaslight teachers. They put 30 kids in one class and expect teachers to control the room like Snow White and have a sweet and caring relationship with each kid. It’s impossible with the instructional demands and that many kids, but in a perfect world it would be possible so it’s the teachers fault when they aren’t able to achieve that.

Most teachers know all the best practices, they just don’t have the time to properly implement them because of class size.

+1

And add to the mix a few kids who have traumatic home situations that make building relationships with adults difficult.

Teachers, I get how frustrating this job is. I've been there and am still there. But these are excuses not to try. Nobody thinks this is a cure all for everything but I need to push back on these statements bc they sound like excuses for not trying something that will help a large majority of your classroom. There will always be kids who need support outside of the Tier 1 instruction and SEL support you can provide in the classroom, but that doesn't mean this isn't worth implementing

Right. Because it's always morale-boosting to have your boss tell you to do more and while they simultaneously put you in a situation in which half that is possible. That's even worse when you already know and agree with what they've hamstrung you from doing. A good manager would set high but realistic goals and set-up the job to make it possible.

Which part of whole child pedagogy do you feel is putting too much on your plate? Maybe I can support with suggestions on how to integrate it without making it too much of a lift.

Not the pedagogy. The too full classrooms and too many extraneous demands. But thanks.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:BUT - what you are explaining is not "Whole Child" - it is expectations of being a teacher.

When I hire someone, I do not need a special marketing program to teach them how to respond to email.

This. I thought this was why hiring and salaries favor masters in education?

I'm a random businessperson and I know about the whole child concept for teaching. If people are getting hired with this as a mystery, then there's a problem in the pipeline.

It’s not a hiring problem it’s just a way to gaslight teachers. They put 30 kids in one class and expect teachers to control the room like Snow White and have a sweet and caring relationship with each kid. It’s impossible with the instructional demands and that many kids, but in a perfect world it would be possible so it’s the teachers fault when they aren’t able to achieve that.

Most teachers know all the best practices, they just don’t have the time to properly implement them because of class size.

+1

And add to the mix a few kids who have traumatic home situations that make building relationships with adults difficult.

Teachers, I get how frustrating this job is. I've been there and am still there. But these are excuses not to try. Nobody thinks this is a cure all for everything but I need to push back on these statements bc they sound like excuses for not trying something that will help a large majority of your classroom. There will always be kids who need support outside of the Tier 1 instruction and SEL support you can provide in the classroom, but that doesn't mean this isn't worth implementing

Right. Because it's always morale-boosting to have your boss tell you to do more and while they simultaneously put you in a situation in which half that is possible. That's even worse when you already know and agree with what they've hamstrung you from doing. A good manager would set high but realistic goals and set-up the job to make it possible.

Which part of whole child pedagogy do you feel is putting too much on your plate? Maybe I can support with suggestions on how to integrate it without making it too much of a lift.

Not the pedagogy. The too full classrooms and too many extraneous demands. But thanks.

What are the demands of whole child that you feel are extraneous? The too full classrooms is obviously outside our control but I'd be happy to help with the former.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:BUT - what you are explaining is not "Whole Child" - it is expectations of being a teacher.

When I hire someone, I do not need a special marketing program to teach them how to respond to email.

This. I thought this was why hiring and salaries favor masters in education?

I'm a random businessperson and I know about the whole child concept for teaching. If people are getting hired with this as a mystery, then there's a problem in the pipeline.

It’s not a hiring problem it’s just a way to gaslight teachers. They put 30 kids in one class and expect teachers to control the room like Snow White and have a sweet and caring relationship with each kid. It’s impossible with the instructional demands and that many kids, but in a perfect world it would be possible so it’s the teachers fault when they aren’t able to achieve that.

Most teachers know all the best practices, they just don’t have the time to properly implement them because of class size.

+1

And add to the mix a few kids who have traumatic home situations that make building relationships with adults difficult.

Teachers, I get how frustrating this job is. I've been there and am still there. But these are excuses not to try. Nobody thinks this is a cure all for everything but I need to push back on these statements bc they sound like excuses for not trying something that will help a large majority of your classroom. There will always be kids who need support outside of the Tier 1 instruction and SEL support you can provide in the classroom, but that doesn't mean this isn't worth implementing

Over the years I have had a very difficult students with several kids coming from traumatic experiences, chronic absence and low performance academically. Although they were not in my classroom at the same time they were all so far from being able to access the curriculum I felt like having them in the classroom was absurd. I worked really hard to establish relationships - ignored the attention seeking behavior, pushing my buttons to get a reaction, refusing to do work, etc. and focused on building the relationship. I was able to develop personal relationships with all of them and believe they knew when they were in our classroom it was always a safe and loving place. Despite all my efforts, I could never build the same relationships with the families because there wasn't mutual interest. Academically, most of them made little progress and it wasn't because they weren't capable. For each one, I felt like they lost another year of school. I still have a good relationship with all of them but I guess the impact of that won't be obvious until years in the future. In each case none of them were ready to move onto the next grade and I always worried about them as they get closer to middle/high school.

From your perspective, what is the solution to this?

I'm guess you mean the solution to kids coming to school traumatized, chronically absent and performing low academically. I don't know a solution but I would love one. This reminds me of when Michelle Ree came storming into town with her belief that one teacher can change a child's life or the well meaning TFA folks who didn't get that 85% of success in the classroom starts with classroom management; it's like a needle in a haystack scenario. I continue the same practices with my students and I have warm relationships with them after they leave but their academic needs weren't served, and I imagine when they get to middle school life gets even harder.

[Anonymous]

Teacher role breadth is ever-expanding. Districts don't take this into account when layering on initiatives like a whole-child approach. It results in an untenable workload, and teachers having to prioritize what's best for whom and when. Usually results in disparities/differing approaches: Mr. Jones doing SEL all day long and Ms. Watkins doing skill/drill. Central office should partner with principals and teachers to map this out to see what's feasible in a given day/week. Integrated approaches are great, but are usually more idealistic and not as practical.