WEBVTT 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:02.940 OK, let's unpack this. You know, we've all been 00:00:02.940 --> 00:00:06.980 there, I think, whether it's in our work lives 00:00:06.980 --> 00:00:08.880 or just trying to figure out everyday stuff, 00:00:08.980 --> 00:00:11.599 that moment when you're asked to go along with 00:00:11.599 --> 00:00:14.759 something, but well, you fundamentally disagree 00:00:14.759 --> 00:00:17.780 with it philosophically. It creates this real 00:00:17.780 --> 00:00:21.460 tension. It really does. And what happens when 00:00:21.460 --> 00:00:25.460 that exact conflict pops up in education where 00:00:25.460 --> 00:00:28.500 it's not just about you, but it directly impacts 00:00:28.500 --> 00:00:30.730 students? That's exactly where we're headed today. 00:00:31.230 --> 00:00:33.070 Yeah, our source material for this deep dive 00:00:33.070 --> 00:00:35.689 comes from a really insightful piece. It's by 00:00:35.689 --> 00:00:39.509 Gary Ackerman called Should Educators Judge Initiatives 00:00:39.509 --> 00:00:42.270 over on hackscience .education. Great. And it 00:00:42.270 --> 00:00:44.950 gives this compelling look at those uncomfortable 00:00:44.950 --> 00:00:47.590 spots educators get put in, you know, when school 00:00:47.590 --> 00:00:49.670 leaders bring in changes that the educators just 00:00:49.670 --> 00:00:51.969 don't believe in. So our mission today is to 00:00:51.969 --> 00:00:54.350 really get into Ackerman's own experiences, his 00:00:54.350 --> 00:00:56.369 observations. Exactly. See what the implications 00:00:56.369 --> 00:00:58.729 are when you take a stand. or maybe when you 00:00:58.729 --> 00:01:00.869 don't take one. And really question what good 00:01:00.869 --> 00:01:03.030 leadership and sound practice actually look like 00:01:03.030 --> 00:01:05.230 in education today. Okay, so here's where it 00:01:05.230 --> 00:01:07.250 gets, well, personal and really interesting. 00:01:07.670 --> 00:01:12.790 Let's start with Ackerman's own moments of courage, 00:01:12.849 --> 00:01:14.829 I suppose you'd call it. Yeah, you share some 00:01:14.829 --> 00:01:17.390 powerful one. Imagine being an educator, right? 00:01:17.769 --> 00:01:20.269 You believe really deeply in a certain way of 00:01:20.269 --> 00:01:23.969 teaching, a philosophy, and then you see it just 00:01:23.969 --> 00:01:26.739 tossed aside. It's tough. He talks about specific 00:01:26.739 --> 00:01:29.640 situations like his opposition to replacing middle 00:01:29.640 --> 00:01:32.219 school practices he knew worked. OK, tell me 00:01:32.219 --> 00:01:33.939 more about that. What was the change exactly? 00:01:34.040 --> 00:01:37.980 Why was he so against it? Well, the shift was 00:01:37.980 --> 00:01:40.599 away from what he saw is these really effective 00:01:40.599 --> 00:01:43.040 middle school approaches, things like, you know, 00:01:43.180 --> 00:01:44.819 being student centered, connecting subjects, 00:01:44.920 --> 00:01:47.000 focusing on how adolescents actually develop 00:01:47.000 --> 00:01:50.060 the holistic view. Exactly. And moving towards 00:01:50.060 --> 00:01:53.640 a more. traditional maybe compartmentalized junior 00:01:53.640 --> 00:01:55.900 high model, he just saw it as a step backward, 00:01:56.180 --> 00:01:58.019 bad for the students. And he pushed back? He 00:01:58.019 --> 00:02:00.959 did, quite strongly. And it had consequences, 00:02:01.540 --> 00:02:03.620 professional ones. Like what? Well, ultimately, 00:02:04.239 --> 00:02:06.359 he ended up looking for a new role because the 00:02:06.359 --> 00:02:09.379 philosophical gap was just too wide. And what's 00:02:09.379 --> 00:02:12.520 fascinating, really fascinating, is that even 00:02:12.520 --> 00:02:14.560 when a reference check came back saying he was, 00:02:14.560 --> 00:02:18.300 quote, uncooperative. Ouch. That label. Right. 00:02:18.460 --> 00:02:20.900 But that very stance, his commitment to those 00:02:20.900 --> 00:02:23.759 middle school ideas was exactly why he landed 00:02:23.759 --> 00:02:26.979 his next job. Wow. So the thing that labeled 00:02:26.979 --> 00:02:30.219 him difficult in one context was seen as a strength, 00:02:30.539 --> 00:02:33.340 a sign of conviction in another. It really shows 00:02:33.340 --> 00:02:35.840 something about finding the right fit professionally. 00:02:36.139 --> 00:02:38.060 It's like that phrase, damned if you do, damned 00:02:38.060 --> 00:02:40.740 if you don't. But in his case, standing firm 00:02:40.740 --> 00:02:42.919 actually led him to a place where his values 00:02:42.919 --> 00:02:45.789 were. Well, value. Absolutely spot on. It's a 00:02:45.789 --> 00:02:48.090 powerful illustration that integrity, even when 00:02:48.090 --> 00:02:50.530 it causes friction, can guide you to where you 00:02:50.530 --> 00:02:52.889 really belong. OK, so that's one powerful example 00:02:52.889 --> 00:02:55.389 of personal conviction. But then he shares something 00:02:55.389 --> 00:02:58.270 even more direct involving the students themselves. 00:02:58.729 --> 00:03:01.449 Ah, yes. This one is really poignant. The real 00:03:01.449 --> 00:03:04.310 tears story. Tell us about that. He describes 00:03:04.310 --> 00:03:07.270 being in a computer lab situation where students 00:03:07.270 --> 00:03:09.689 were doing these really engaging explorations, 00:03:09.909 --> 00:03:13.639 coding. video game design, stuff they loved and 00:03:13.639 --> 00:03:15.819 were actually learning from. Sounds great. Hands 00:03:15.819 --> 00:03:18.939 on relevant. Exactly. And then suddenly it gets 00:03:18.939 --> 00:03:22.379 swapped out, replaced by a test preparation site. 00:03:22.539 --> 00:03:27.979 Oh. And he literally saw students crying, real 00:03:27.979 --> 00:03:30.639 tears, because these activities they found meaningful 00:03:30.639 --> 00:03:33.960 were just gone. Heartbreaking, really. It hit 00:03:33.960 --> 00:03:36.560 him hard. And seeing that, it convinced him he 00:03:36.560 --> 00:03:38.340 couldn't just go along with it. So what did he 00:03:38.340 --> 00:03:40.800 do? I mean, test prep is often pushed for practical 00:03:40.800 --> 00:03:42.900 reasons, metrics, accountability. Right. But 00:03:42.900 --> 00:03:45.780 for Ackerman, seeing those tiers, it crystallized 00:03:45.780 --> 00:03:48.740 the issue. This was prioritizing abstract metrics 00:03:48.740 --> 00:03:51.520 over actual meaningful student learning. The 00:03:51.520 --> 00:03:53.699 human cost was just too visible, too high. So 00:03:53.699 --> 00:03:56.060 he refused. He refused to support the test prep 00:03:56.060 --> 00:03:58.580 initiative directly. Instead, he actually worked 00:03:58.580 --> 00:04:01.039 with the teachers. to figure out ways to bring 00:04:01.039 --> 00:04:03.099 back more engaging, more worthwhile activities 00:04:03.099 --> 00:04:05.300 during that computer lab time, despite the new 00:04:05.300 --> 00:04:07.900 directive. That took some guts, I imagine, working 00:04:07.900 --> 00:04:10.419 around the official plan. It certainly did. And 00:04:10.419 --> 00:04:12.479 it really throws that question into sharp relief, 00:04:12.620 --> 00:04:15.259 doesn't it? What does the human cost when we 00:04:15.259 --> 00:04:17.720 let metrics completely overshadow meaningful 00:04:17.720 --> 00:04:20.540 learning experiences? It's not just about scores. 00:04:20.939 --> 00:04:24.240 It affects kids emotionally. Definitely. So we've 00:04:24.240 --> 00:04:27.160 seen Ackerman's personal stands, but he also 00:04:27.160 --> 00:04:30.750 looks outward. Observes other leaders. Yes, he 00:04:30.750 --> 00:04:33.610 widens the lens and he talks about this incident 00:04:33.610 --> 00:04:37.389 with a school administrator This leader was facing 00:04:37.389 --> 00:04:41.529 having to defend changes to The grading system 00:04:41.529 --> 00:04:44.329 grading always a hot topic always and Ackerman 00:04:44.329 --> 00:04:45.829 quotes this administrator is saying something 00:04:45.829 --> 00:04:47.610 like I can do what you want Just tell me what 00:04:47.610 --> 00:04:50.490 it is proficiencies. I can speak that language 00:04:50.490 --> 00:04:53.670 traditional grades. I can do that, too Okay. 00:04:53.769 --> 00:04:55.829 On the surface, I can almost see someone thinking, 00:04:55.990 --> 00:04:58.610 well, that's flexible, pragmatic. Right. It sounds 00:04:58.610 --> 00:05:01.029 adaptable, like they can roll with punches. But 00:05:01.029 --> 00:05:03.589 Ackerman says he found it very troubling. Why 00:05:03.589 --> 00:05:05.750 troubling? What's the problem with being adaptable? 00:05:06.050 --> 00:05:08.389 Because in Ackerman's view, this wasn't adaptability. 00:05:08.850 --> 00:05:11.769 It was an application of leadership. Especially, 00:05:11.910 --> 00:05:14.009 he notes, coming from someone who's almost finished 00:05:14.009 --> 00:05:17.160 with their doctorate. Ah, so someone highly educated 00:05:17.160 --> 00:05:20.220 in the field. Exactly. Someone qualified to actually 00:05:20.220 --> 00:05:22.800 analyze these different approaches like proficiency 00:05:22.800 --> 00:05:24.860 -based learning versus traditional AF grades 00:05:24.860 --> 00:05:27.540 to understand their research, the implications. 00:05:27.800 --> 00:05:30.079 And make an informed judgment about what's actually 00:05:30.079 --> 00:05:32.920 sound practice. Precisely. But instead of using 00:05:32.920 --> 00:05:36.279 that expertise to guide the decision, to argue 00:05:36.279 --> 00:05:38.220 for what they believe was best for students, 00:05:38.879 --> 00:05:41.959 this leader just offered to be a mouthpiece for 00:05:41.959 --> 00:05:44.120 whatever was decided elsewhere. Just tell me 00:05:44.120 --> 00:05:47.519 what to say. So Ackerman's critique is that leaders, 00:05:47.860 --> 00:05:50.319 maybe even highly educated ones, are taking their 00:05:50.319 --> 00:05:52.720 cues from politicians, maybe philanthropists, 00:05:53.040 --> 00:05:55.060 business interests, instead of trusting their 00:05:55.060 --> 00:05:57.459 own deep knowledge. their understanding of kids, 00:05:57.720 --> 00:05:59.959 of learning, of teaching. It's a really powerful 00:05:59.959 --> 00:06:02.899 critique. Yeah, it's just a kind of hollowing 00:06:02.899 --> 00:06:05.220 out of educational expertise at the leadership 00:06:05.220 --> 00:06:07.439 level. That's a good way to put it. This I can 00:06:07.439 --> 00:06:10.180 do what you want approach, Ackerman argues, shows 00:06:10.180 --> 00:06:14.040 a worrying trend. prioritizing, playing the game, 00:06:14.519 --> 00:06:17.879 maybe political expediency over pedagogical conviction. 00:06:18.160 --> 00:06:20.199 So it's not just about judging initiatives, it's 00:06:20.199 --> 00:06:23.240 about having the courage to act on that judgment. 00:06:23.600 --> 00:06:26.339 Yes. He feels that if you've studied education 00:06:26.339 --> 00:06:29.040 at the highest levels, you have not just the 00:06:29.040 --> 00:06:32.439 ability but arguably the responsibility to analyze, 00:06:32.759 --> 00:06:35.600 to judge, and to advocate for what you believe 00:06:35.600 --> 00:06:39.009 is sound. Avoiding that is. Well, it's avoiding 00:06:39.009 --> 00:06:41.370 leadership. We've covered a lot of ground here, 00:06:41.550 --> 00:06:43.730 really digging into Gary Ackerman's perspective 00:06:43.730 --> 00:06:46.149 on educators' judging initiatives. We have. We 00:06:46.149 --> 00:06:48.089 looked at the personal stakes, like Ackerman 00:06:48.089 --> 00:06:50.569 facing being called uncooperative, but finding 00:06:50.569 --> 00:06:52.750 a better fit because of his convictions. Right, 00:06:52.769 --> 00:06:54.689 and that really heart -wrenching story of the 00:06:54.689 --> 00:06:57.310 computer lab shifting focus from student engagement 00:06:57.310 --> 00:07:00.310 to pure test prep. And then that critical observation 00:07:00.310 --> 00:07:02.870 of the administrator, choosing perceived flexibility 00:07:02.870 --> 00:07:05.610 over taking a principled, informed stand on something 00:07:05.610 --> 00:07:08.019 as fundamental as grading. It really underscores 00:07:08.019 --> 00:07:11.360 a wider concern, doesn't it, that sometimes external 00:07:11.360 --> 00:07:13.899 pressures or trends can kind of overshadow the 00:07:13.899 --> 00:07:16.500 actual expertise of people in the classroom, 00:07:16.620 --> 00:07:18.879 people who really understand teaching and learning? 00:07:19.439 --> 00:07:22.060 Absolutely. And what really shines through from 00:07:22.060 --> 00:07:24.879 Ackerman's piece is the immense importance of 00:07:24.879 --> 00:07:28.079 critical thinking, yes, but also conviction, 00:07:28.839 --> 00:07:30.740 having beliefs grounded in knowledge and being 00:07:30.740 --> 00:07:33.459 willing to stand by them. As he argues, especially 00:07:33.459 --> 00:07:36.600 for those highly educated in the field, Analyzing 00:07:36.600 --> 00:07:39.160 and judging ideas isn't just an option, it's, 00:07:39.160 --> 00:07:41.759 well, it's part of the job description, a responsibility. 00:07:42.000 --> 00:07:43.720 Which leads to a really important question for 00:07:43.720 --> 00:07:47.220 you listening right now. In your own life, whether 00:07:47.220 --> 00:07:49.779 it's professional or personal, how do you handle 00:07:49.779 --> 00:07:53.259 that tension, that pull between adapting to what's 00:07:53.259 --> 00:07:55.389 asked of you, maybe a new directive? and holding 00:07:55.389 --> 00:07:57.910 firm to what you deeply believe is the right 00:07:57.910 --> 00:08:00.550 way, the sound practice. What does it genuinely 00:08:00.550 --> 00:08:03.490 mean to lead not just with knowledge, but with 00:08:03.490 --> 00:08:06.029 real conviction, maybe even moral courage, in 00:08:06.029 --> 00:08:08.329 a world that's just constantly throwing new information 00:08:08.329 --> 00:08:10.430 and initiatives at us? Something to think about.