A Depressing Reading

Not that long ago I got into a spat over Harry Potter books. The argument was over the axiom that "Harry Potter books are great because they got kids to read again." There are at least three things wrong with view:
1. It presumes that kids were not reading before.
2. It presumes that the kids have continued to read after they've finished Harry Potter series.
3. Therefore, the unspoken conclusion goes - thanks to Harry Potter children's literacy rates have gone up.
On the surface, the ever-expanding Kids/Teens/Young Adult sections of your local book store seem to support this conclusion. But from where I am sitting, even this YA boom is more of a desperate attempt to recapture the Harry Potter phenomenon, rather than an indication of a massive surge of reading among the young people. And then there is this NPR article titled "What Kids Are Reading, In School And Out." Please read it.

OK, done? Or did you just read the first paragraph? Did you just scroll to the end, hoping to find the talking points? If you read it through, then you are ahead of most young people I know. "But wait, the conclusion of the article directly contradicts you! The man said 'reading leads to reading' so reading Harry Potter must have led to more reading!" Not so fast, there is no guarantee that a young person will, upon finishing a beloved series, desperately seek out a new series. And even if s/he do, it will likely be on the same reading level, not a more complex one. Thus "Hunger Games", thus "Twilight", thus "I am Number Four", etc. etc. etc. The NPR article above seems to support the conclusion that American young people are reading below expected grade level when they bother to read at all.

Lest you say "Well, it's American public education system! Of course that's the case!", the situation in Canada isn't much better. Here's the conclusions of the International Adult Literacy Survey for Canada, conducted in 1994. This stands out: "[It] is particularly disturbing that a substantial number of Canadian adults scored in the bottom two levels on all three literacy scales. Although over 20% achieved Levels 4 and 5, over 40% were rated at the lower end of the scale at Levels 1 and 2, and of these, nearly 20% were at Level 1. These adults with low literacy skills are likely to see their future economic opportunities further eroded. Canada’s overall literacy ratings were comparable to the United States; however, a high
proportion of our population achieved the lowest level of literacy in all three domains." (by the way, Singapore, Sweden and Finland are consistently the most literate countries in the world) 1994 is three years before the first Harry Potter book hit the stores. Let's suppose that in 1997, the kid reading (or more likely being read to) Harry Potter is 6-10 years old. In 2007, s/he would be 16-20 and would therefore be a potential participant in the International Adult Literacy Survey (people 16 and up are eligible). However, the next IAL survey was administered in 2003, and the next one is due either this year or the next one. However, comparing the 1994 and 2003 IAL survey, a very worrying pattern emerges. Some highlights (find the full report here):
- Nationally, 48 percent of the adult population – 12 million Canadians aged 16 and over– perform below Level 3 on the prose and document literacy scales (about 9 million or 42 percent of Canadians aged 16 to 65). Level 3 proficiency is considered to be the “desired level” of competence for coping with the increasing skill demands of the emerging knowledge and information economy.
- Overall, there has been little change in literacy performance between 1994 and 2003.
- Contrary to expectation, the report finds little improvement in literacy proficiency since 1994. The new survey shows almost nine million Canadians aged 16 to 65 (12 million if Canadians over 65 are included) score below the desirable threshold of prose literacy performance.
- The established patterns of literacy proficiency continue to prevail, with higher performance among the young and the educated.

Hey, that last point is great, right? Young people are continuing to perform higher! Not so fast. The young people growing up in 1994 scored higher that year than the older people that year. But those people who were young in 1994 grew up in time for 2003, so shouldn't their earlier successes carry over into mature adulthood? Apparently not. Huh, that's strange. What it suggests to me is that this pattern will reemerge in the 2013/2014 IALS, and will not show any marked improvement in literacy despite the young people supposedly "reading again". While we are waiting for that survey to be administered and results compiled, evaluated and revealed, we can turn our attention to ALL - Adult Literacy and Life Skills survey. The last one was in 2008, and it uses identical questionnaires, data collection and statistical methodology as IALS, so the results are pretty much comparable. You can find the full report here (scroll to pages 45-46 for the interesting stuff). You'll find Canada lagging only behind Norway and Bermuda for prose reading (so basically reading news and creative writing) and only behind Norway and Netherlands for document literacy rates. That's good news right? Nope, because unlike IALS which is administered on a truly global scale, ALL is administered only in select countries, and when stacked against other countries in the survey Canada is looking pretty good. The problem is that Norway has the lowest literacy rate among Scandinavian countries, and Netherlands isn't doing so hot compared to many of its European neighbours either.

Clearly there has been no progress on the literacy front between 1994 and 2008, Harry Potter or no. Maybe education is to blame? Perhaps, except that since the devastating findings of the 2003 IALS more money, time and effort in education has gone towards raising the reading and literacy levels than anything else, save perhaps various technology-related courses. It's not matter of mismanagement either. There are specialized qualification courses for teaching reading and literacy that many teachers now take. There are many truly talented and intelligent teachers and academics studying and working on the problem. Reading is one of the overall curriculum goals across Canada, fostering reading and literacy is priority number one in most subjects. School libraries have never looked so good. Bookstores are brimming with books for young people. Heck, there are so many books available for free through regular libraries, ebooks, on tablets and phones. So why aren't kids reading more? Didn't they read Harry Potter? Didn't they get the memo that they're supposed to love reading now?!

(OK, sorry I keep ragging on Harry Potter. It's nothing personal, it's just that this is the go-to book that people bring up when arguing that kids are reading again. Back in 1960s it was Dr. Seuss and Sesame Street. Same difference really.)

On to anecdotal evidence and to come back full circle to the NPR article. This year I was blessed with many intelligent, hard-working and genuinely curious students. Vast majority admitted that they do not read books outside of the ones they have to read for school. One student, a pretty intelligent guy, admitted that he did not read any books in the last 3 years, including the ones assigned at school - he relied on Sparknotes, Yahoo Answers, wikipedia, and movies. I have two Grade 12 students, one Grade 11 student, maybe two Grade 9 and 10 students, who I see regularly reading unassigned books for enjoyment, or asking my advice on what would be a good book to read. With one exception they are reading books that are technically below their reading level, but at least they are reading! The rest grumble. Assigning 40 pages to read over the course of a week is a huge challenge. Lord of the Flies proved very challenging to a Grade 9/10 class. Catcher in the Rye was at best skimmed-through by a Grade 11 class. Great Gatsby was challenging to a Grade 12 class. For shits and giggles, after introducing the book I divided the class in groups and asked them to paraphrase and explain in their own words the first three paragraphs of the book (yes, it's the one with the convoluted 'secrets of wild and young men' passage). They couldn't, even though it wasn't written in German or Elizabethan English. Over the last three years I've taught (not counting Shakespeare obviously): Brave New World, Of Mice and Men, The Crucible, 1984, Handmaiden's Tale, Great Gatsby, Lord of the Flies, Frankenstein, All Quiet on the Western Front, The Wars, Oedipus Rex, Antigone, parts of the Odyssey, Huckleberry Finn, Ender's Game, and more. With most students and most of these books I saw the same story. Skim reading at best, heavy reliance on copied notes and Internet, complaints about the book being too challenging, incomprehension of vocabulary (sometimes really frightening gaps!), insistence on constant hand-holding through the book, lack of original thoughts about the book at all. Every year (or semester as the case may be) I conduct a little survey, asking students what they've read last year, what they've read during the summer, how much they read each week, what is their favourite book, and - what did they read when they were 6-10 years old. To that last question the answer is in 90% of the cases - Harry Potter. The answers to the rest of the questions are just depressing.

There's a sucker born...

I am genuinely curious - how many other professions are out there that do one or more (or all!) of the following:
- demand you have a specialized university degree to get a job in the profession on top of your previous university education;
- demand you pay fees to get member standing with a "professional college" of members (whatever that's supposed to be) after obtaining the said specialized university degree for the privilege of applying to jobs (protip: said college doesn't actually do anything for you aside from shiny glossy monthly newsletters and some library in some building somewhere in downtown Toronto, and of course the previously mentioned privilege);
- demand that you volunteers as much of your free time as possible to basically work in your profession without pay in return for vague assurances of an interview at some later undetermined date;
- demand that every year or two you spend 600-800 dollars of your own money on "additional qualification" courses without which you will never (or so you're assured!) get a job in the profession (note: you pretty much have to do this whether you already have a job in the profession or whether you're just trying to get one);
- demand that when you do finally get that interview, and then hopefully that job, that you work part time for a few years (until a full-time position somewhere opens up), but continue to also do all of the above as well as pay union fees.

So, my dear Ministry of Education of Ontario, Ontario College of Teachers, and various Ontario boards of education - this is why I do my best to dissuade any and all of my students, friends, relatives, and acquaintances from pursuing a career in public education in this country - it's a con game and the deck is stacked against the future graduating teacher. Teacher colleges are an incredibly lucrative source of money for universities - high return on investment, low cost (part-time profs and guest lecturers teach at Teacher Colleges), combined with steady cash flow (those additional qualifications are taken by tens of thousands of teachers every year without fail). They have zero interest in: a) matching the number of graduates to the actual jobs out there, and b) providing the future graduates with realistic expectations about their future jobs or lack thereof. So to paraphrase Ambrose Bierce:

University (n.): An ingenious device for obtaining profit by creating unrealistic expectations.

(For an actually brilliant and incisive examination of universities as the giant corporate profit machines and hedge funds that they are, check out this post by The Last Psychiatrist - the entire entry is brilliant but for the specific discussion of the system and higher places of learning in it scroll down to part V)

The Classroom of the Future... tomorrow!

Spurred on by Margaret Wente's shrill diatribe against teachers and their unions in Ontario (not wholly undeserved - I could say two or fifty unpleasant things about the Ontario College of Teachers), and by the end of the school year, I started thinking about what would an effective classroom look, say, 7 years from now. A lot of this is going to be generalizations though, but I think the numbers bear out. So given that:
- the supposed purpose of education is to provide valuable skills and knowledge to the new generation
- the costs of education per student are going up, while enrollment is actually slowly decreasing, and education is consistently the second highest portion of government spending not just in Ontario but across Canada
- education is seen as being vital to a 'successful' career
- teenagers are busier than ever with part time jobs, community hours, trying to find internships to help with business/pre-law/pre-med/etc. applications
- all phones will be equivalent to today's cutting-edge smartphones
- Internet access will be ubiquitous (it might be heavily censored in the future, but at least access to it will be a given in Canada)
... I think that the current model of education will be dangerously unsustainable and counter-productive in every way. The province is already trying to cut $70 million this year in under-used schools (see link above), and this number will only increase in the future even as class sizes increase. Education as it is right now is unsustainable. It is unsustainable economically, it is unsustainable environmentally (the cost of power, the cost of fuel to transport students to the school, the tremendous waste of supplies created by ever school, cost of constant renovations), and it will soon become unsustainable morally.

"Wait, what?!" Hear me out. Schools no longer have a monopoly on information for young people, nor do they any longer have much of a moral ground when it comes to teaching some kind of objective knowledge and giving useful skills. Maybe up to a certain point (say Grade 6 or 8) the institutional, structured, orderly classroom is preferable, but afterward the students are wasting time and potential. I'm not talking just about gifted students, I'm talking about students in general. The only reasons the lesson periods are as long as they are is because we (education system and society) need to: a) keep them from 9 to 3, b) because the classes are damn big and much of the lesson gets lots in the static and needs to be repeated. The high school years as they are structured now are a big waste, and the amount of time spent on transmitting the curriculum requirements into their fragile young minds can be condensed. Even if we keep 12-grade system, the amount of time per grade could be reduced without sacrificing quality. Assuming that we are willing to do some radical changes, that is.

So here we go, let's put our futurology hats on:
- Education needs to be far more virtual and distributed than it is now. Rote memorization of knowledge in the age of ubiquitous internet access and smartphones is laughably obsolete. A smartphone with net access is for most intents and purposes a crude exocortex memory. The age of polymaths and encyclopaedics is over - you can either be an expert in a very specific field, or you can know a little about a lot of things and depend on freely accessed knowledge for anything that requires greater detail. What we really need to focus on is the development of research, search and analysis skills. We assume that young'uns today are super-duper tech savvy because they spend so much time on their damn phones, but nothing is further from the truth. I can do things with browsers, spreadsheets, word processors, or PowerPoints that leaves their mouths gaping, and I'm not even especially computer-literate.
- To make education more virtual and distributed than it is now, reverse classrooms need to be implemented widely, from Grade 9 on. What is a reverse classroom? The teacher posts the lesson in the form of a document, a YouTube video or podcast (typically 20-30 minute length), Smarttech lesson, etc. online and assigns work related to the lesson. The students watch/read the lesson on their own, and come to class to work on their homework, assignments, or get further assistance from a teacher. Only we need to gradually push the envelope further. The work can also be completed online - a simple bot could watch the completion of work and compile a report for the teacher on which students did their work and in what time. What does the teacher do with the rest of his/her time? Well...
- The class sizes will become bigger. That is inevitable as the governments (witness McGuinty's slow about-face on teacher wages going on right now) will reduce education expenses. With reverse classrooms, however, the class sizes will approach mid-range university classes (40-50 students per teacher). The teacher, however, will spend most of his/her time evaluating work, preparing lessons, assisting with any inquiries, and facilitating. Facilitating what...?
- Student apprenticeships. This is not a new idea and indeed many schools already implement it, but rather stupidly only for those students who have no chance at all of academic success. Well, we should replace those community hours (so many of which end up being faked anyway) with meaningful and varied apprenticeships. Build a professional online network of Ministry-of-Education-approved local businesses in each school area. Let students have a large degree of freedom when selecting their apprenticeships, let them try out a different job every month, maybe even hold bidding competitions on who gets what position.
- A typical student day might be something like getting up in the morning, checking messages from guild members (read on!), teachers, heading off for a few hours of apprenticeship. While on the way, listen to a lesson or two, fire off a couple of questions or quick homework. After work meet up with guildies online or IRL, raid some lessons (OK OK, I'll get to it in a second), complete the work. Once or twice a week come to progress meetings with the teacher, or remote in.

Alright, so here's my crazy/maybe-revolutionary idea of the day. Education needs to start taking cues from the psychology behind social networks, facebook games, and Massively Multiplayer Online Games (MMOs). All three of these are so wildly successful because:
a) we connect to other people and we can share our success and brag about it
b) the tasks are broken down into small incremental steps, and the completion of each step rewarded with small but increasing rewards
c) as rewards increase, so does the difficulty
d) they create a community built around common interests and goals
I think it's all too plain how the MMO/social network can apply to education. The requirement for teamwork and cooperation and social learning is already written in the curriculum, but it's not very meaningful in the current homework. Students can complete work in short bursts, with each successful completion opening up new challenges, but also rewards. What rewards? Maybe preferential bids on apprenticeship gigs, grades, whatever. Even money (see the effect financial rewards have on grades - heck universities and colleges already do so with bursaries and scholarships)! So while the overall grades and performance of the student will be assessed on an individual basis, progression through curriculum and additional perks will be possible through social interaction and actual teamwork. Heck, plug in augmented reality eventually and it will really be like something out of science fiction!

Simple words

So I just finished reading and marking the first batch of essays from my Grade 10 class, which is a mix of students from very different backgrounds, a lot of recent immigrant students and ELL (English Language Learner) students. The topics were fairly personal and oriented towards that age, but the results were revealing. A couple of students wrote about their difficult relationships with their (the topic was the things that make me happy). Another student confessed afterwards that he has never written anything on what he wanted to be, and how good it felt to put thoughts down on paper. Finally, another student (and this one was somewhat emotional) wrote on the difficulties of adapting to life in Canada, missing old friends, being picked on in school and community, and not having a voice to speak up (the student is very shy speaking around classmates). This is why English is an important class - it can provide a place for students to speak their mind, even if it is just simple words on paper.

Literary love and hate

I wonder how many English teachers genuinely like the novels they teach. How many of us actually enjoy some (or even all) of the literature we teach? How many would prefer to teach the books they actually like? How many would trade Shakespeare for Danielle Steel, George Orwell for G.R.R. Martin, Scott Fitzgerald for Stephen King? I wonder how many of my own teachers taught what they did because they had to, or because they thought it was important, rather than because they actually thought that their material was actually good.

Personally, I selected for the most part the books that I consider somehow important first, and enjoyable second. It's a cop-out I know, but I do genuinely believe that some books are important, that they inform the reader of something greater than they would otherwise be aware of. In many cases I would say that I also enjoy the book on some level. "Hamlet" is amazing and I never get tired of teaching it. "Brave New World" was both funnier and interesting to teach than I expected (I hated the book in high school). "Fight Club" is still as ever my favorite but was very difficult to teach effectively (if anything I would say that I failed to teach it effectively). But I have to say that I strongly dislike "Catcher in the Rye" even as I acknowledge its important. Same goes for "Frankenstein" and "Of Mice and Men". I intensely dislike "Great Gatsby" and I rather think it's vastly overblown.

Pondering about the books we teach, I'm beginning to strongly suspect that the books on the curriculum are not there really because of their supposed greatness, or as examples of great prose, but because most books on the curriculum are easy to teach. They're easy to take apart and put it back together and show the students how it all works on the inside. It might possibly make many English curriculum books useful for developing student skills, but it can also make the English classroom that much duller.

Enough coddling

Inspired by a Globe and Mail article on shorter summer holidays for students and instead spreading the holidays more evenly throughout the year (here's the link), here's what I think are necessary changes to fix education system in Ontario:

- Let students graduate with a certificate at 16 to start work earlier, or continue to 18 and graduate with a diploma which allows them to go on to University or College, and let their last year count as University/College credits (in the same fashion as CGEP in Quebec). This is the system in Great Britain and it seems to produce some good results. It lessens the burden on the system (less students in higher grades), prepares the students better for post-secondary education or for workplace, and lets those students who are interested in starting to work early to do so without penalizing them for dropping out of high school.

- Shorten summer holidays (again, the way it's done in Britain), or get rid of them and spread the holidays throughout the year. We need to compensate for loss of OAC, help knowledge retention, and allow students and parents to enjoy more time together throughout the year rather than stress the parents with having to find babysitters, summer camp, or summer school during the summer. Systems with shorter holidays, or year-long programs (whether public systems abroad, or some of the private schools right here in Canada) show much better academic results and graduation rate.

- We need to bring back meaningful assessments and evaluations, and to implement stricter guidelines on academic performance. Under the current system it's next to impossible to give a failing grade, and meaningful deadlines for assignments (and indeed course completions!) are non-existent. Students are also being pushed through the system without regard as to their actual progress, resulting in situations where a Grade 12 student who has been in a Canadian system all his life reads and writes at a Grade 2 level (personally witnessed).

- I think we need to at once make the curriculum more flexible in some areas and more rigid in other areas. First of all, the vocational courses need to be accessible to students earlier (so that they can graduate with a certificate at 16 and start working). Secondly electives need to be available in earlier grades. Thirdly certain core subjects (English and Math primarily) need to be not only mandatory throughout all grades, but also be year-long. Otherwise the results are just embarrassing. Finally we need to give technology and computer courses earlier. We often take it for granted that the young generation are tech-savvy, but in reality they are woefully ignorant. They know how to text, use Facebook, post YouTube videos and chat, and that's it. When it comes to actual practical knowledge of computers and software even 40-50 years olds can run circles around 16-year olds. I've seen it myself. The amazement of "You can do that in word processor?!" is funny only the first couple of times. Afterward it's sad.

Given the trajectory that our education system seems to be on right now, I think within 10 years we're going to hit a crisis in the work force, practical and pure research, and education in general. It's going to take some drastic changes to avoid it.

Election Lessons

There are lessons that I want my students to learn for the rest of their lives. They do not have anything to do with math or chemistry, English or geography. These are lessons on how to be a decent human being: don't lie, don't cheat, be polite, respect other people, don't gossip or lie about other people, tell the truth even if it hurts you, respect other opinions, admit when you are wrong. It is unfortunate then that certain politicians - our representatives, the shining beacons of democracy, public figures - teach us entirely different lessons. Lie, cheat, slander the other guy, twist facts until no truth remains, never admit you're in the wrong or have ever been anything less than perfect, sling mud on other opinions, and argue until you're red in the face as long as it confuses people and shut up your opponent. Every election I hope that Canadian politicians, as representatives of us mellow, democratic, polite Canadians, will rise above attack ads and slander and conduct themselves in a calm, respectable and reasonable manner that we could all be proud of.

Private school frenzy

Toronto Private School Expo was an interesting experience to say the least. Probably the most interesting aspect of it were the attendees, the vast majority of whom were parents or parents-to-be. Strollers were dominating the convention floor of Ron Thompson Hall despite the abundance of five-step stairs and lack of easily accessible ramps. The strollers were dominated by offsprings of anywhere between 6 months and 3 years - so this is a clear indication of how early some parents (call them responsible, well-prepared, obsessive, or worry-wort) start worrying about their children's education. Children of older ages were surprisingly few and far between, majority of parents there I guess weren't interested in considering their spawns' input on the choice of schools. The facial expressions of the parents betrayed a mix of desperation (how hard is this school to get into? How do I choose a school? How do I pay for it? Will it be good for my son/daughter? What do I do if I can't get my child into this school/afford to pay for it?), incredulity (38 thousand a YEAR? The uniforms cost HOW MUCH?), weariness (jeez that's a lot of private schools), and hope. Not quite as heart-breaking as the faces of parents waiting for lottery results of a charter school in "Waiting for Superman" documentary, but very interesting nonetheless.

Then there were the booths of the private schools themselves. If the booths and stands are any indication, there are clearly the 'have' and 'have-not' schools. Just about every booth had a laptop running some sort of demo, or showing the school's website or whatever. The crests, logos, and mottos were on prominent display, even as the PR people practically tried to pry potential customers away from competitors' booths. What I found faintly sickening or pathetic were the number of schools that trotted out their students to either give out brochures, model school uniforms (at least that's what it looked like to me), or demonstrate some sort of artistic commitment that the school has (usually music). Overall the effect was probably the opposite of what was intended: rather than highlighting the schools' commitment to student success, it presented a picture of the schools using the students for their own means. OK, so private schools are of course more interested in students as a source of revenue, but these displays drove that home. "We're going to use your child to get more parents to send their children to our school so that we can make even more money." And then there was the usual spiel about the limited spaces availability, and how important it is to make the choice ASAP and register your child, or else it's too late and the spots will be filled and oh my god what will you do then send your child to a PUBLIC school how can you possibly do that to your dear Johnny/Betty and oh my god the sky is falling!!!!!!!!!!!!!11111!!!111ONEONEONE

OK, take deep breaths you poor breeder. Take nice deep breaths. Everything will be fine. But oh no, here comes the solicituous vulture from one of the financial institutions attending the expo! (I won't list them, but rest assured that a variety of both general banks and credit institutions, as well as companies specializing in education loans) And then the panic really sets in, pitches a cooler and a lawn chair, and cracks open a brewski. Because your child's education will run you anywhere from 12 to 40 thousand a year depending on the type of school, programs, uniforms, lunch options, trips, school locations, and so on. But never fear, these helpful folks from Insert-Your-Debt-Here company will help you take out a second or third mortgage on your house, or advance you a nice 10 year line of credit. Because we wouldn't want to risk your child's future, now would we? Because clearly if you throw money at your child's future, it'll turn out better, won't it?

Dear parents: I'm very critical of some of the methods and reforms in public and Catholic education, but it's not nearly so bad that you need to sell yourself into debt slavery to send your offsprings to a private school

What I learned from Teachers' College and my practicums

From Teachers' College:
- Busywork is the cornerstone of education. If you need to keep the students in the classroom for four hours because the regulations say so, giving them useless busy work is essential.
- Reflective exercises and assignments are a life-saver when you don't really have anything to talk about/assign.
- It is possible to reflect on a reflection assignment. No, there is no irony or circle-jerking tautology in this.
- While the student teachers might get outraged at the notion that teachers are not allowed to fail students anymore, they will not blink an eye at the mutual understanding that all student teachers will receive As and will graduate Teachers' College. (unless they fuck up their practicums)
- If there is absolutely no filler left (not even reflection), put on some YouTube video somehow related to education and talk about that.
- While student teachers are required to affirm that they're in the profession because they like to teach/they want to give back to the community/they want to be inspirational figures, it is understood by everyone that the vast majority are in it for the salary and the benefits.
- A corollary to the point immediately above: a student teacher should never ever admit that she/he went to Teachers' College because she/he didn't have any other options after receiving a bachelor or master's.
- You will remember why you've hated groupwork back in high school.
- You will learn that the saying "those who can't, teach" has many additional layers of meaning in Teachers' College.
- The best instructors in Teachers' College are the ones who are the most cynical about the profession.

So as not to leave on an entirely gloomy note, here's what I learned about teaching, myself, and children from my practicums:
- The first time you walk to the board and start a lesson you will feel sick.
- They (the students) can see, hear, and smell fear.
- You might feel like a fraud in front of the board, but as long as you wear a shirt and tie (skirt and blouse, etc.) and don't show fear they will take you seriously.
- Learn their names ASAP (at least first names, preferably last names) - it will be your greatest weapon.
- There are two things that students love, from age 12 to age 18: a good story, and candy. NEVER underestimate the motivating power of candy.
- Develop a sense of humour. Learn to laugh at yourself first and foremost, learn that it's ok to poke fun at your students from time to time as well. Figure out who the class joker is and use him/her to best advantage!
- Another powerful weapon in the teacher's arsenal is the seating plan. Even the merest threat of moving the students around is enough to shush them up for a lesson.
- Group work is heaven-sent for teachers! Even if nothing productive comes out of it, you still managed to waste a whole class.
- Be prepared to change your plan for the day on the spot. Maybe it'll take the whole lesson to cover what you thought should take only 5 minutes. Maybe there's an assembly that you completely forgot about. Maybe someone was sick in the class. Maybe you forgot about some religious holiday and now half the class is absent.
- Learn to talk loudly without shouting. Learn when to talk, and when to shut up.
- Learn to respect your students. They might be functionally illiterate, flighty, surly, opinionated, easily distracted, dense, slow, and a host of other things, but they're still people, and they still have potential and self-worth. Plus it will make your job easier too!

The next generation

One of the more challenging and interesting things about teaching English in general, and poetry specifically, is coming up with material that students would enjoy, think, and talk about. I quite enjoyed the premise and structure of this poem, plus it also made me think - which generation will my students become? Will they be the 'lost generation', or will the reverse be true?

Lost Generation (by Jonathan Reed)

I realize this may be a shock but
'Happiness comes from within'
is a lie, and
'Money will make me happy'
So in thirty years I will tell my children
they are not the most important thing in my life.
My employer will know that
I have my priorities straight because
work
is more important than
family
I tell you this
Once upon a time
Families stayed together
but this will not be true in my era
this is a quick fix society
Experts tell me
Thirty years from now I will be celebrating the 10th anniversary of my divorce
I do not concede that
I will live in a country of my own making
In the future
Environmental destruction will be the norm
No longer can it be said that
My peers and I care about this earth
It will be evident that
My generation is apathetic and lethargic
It is foolish to presume that
There is hope.

And all of this will come true unless we choose to reverse it.