Random Thoughts

My Reflections, Balance is the Key

AdminLeave a comment

This series began with a simple but uncomfortable question: Is tech really the problem, or could it be something else? The teachers care, the students can learn with technology, and technology isn’t inherently bad.

However, the system moved faster than the support.

Across these past few weeks through these posts, we’ve explored how learning science favors retrieval, explanation, and production; how screen use is complex and nuanced; how professional development was often the missing bridge; and how teachers are still finding ways, quietly and creatively, to make learning meaningful within real constraints. It’s not easy, but teachers are doing it.

If there’s one thread that connects it all, it’s this: education doesn’t fail because educators fail. It falters when tools, policies, and expectations lack the support the systems need to sustain them.

Teachers were asked to learn and integrate platforms without pedagogy, manage mandates, and personalize learning without time. And yet, classrooms remain places where curiosity, care, and learning persist. We need to support this with pedagogy and giving time.

This series was never meant to argue for less technology or more technology. It was meant to argue for better use, grounded in research, shaped by pedagogy, and tempered by reality. Balance doesn’t come from extremes. It comes from thoughtful choices, small shifts, and shared responsibility.

Let me leave you with some final thoughts of hope.

Hope lives in teachers who start small.
Hope lives in students who explain their thinking.
Hope lives in leaders who listen before they buy or jump to a new mandate.

And hope lives in the understanding that change doesn’t require perfection: it requires intention.

If this series sparks conversation, reflection, or even quiet validation for someone navigating these tensions, then it has done its job.

A final question: What if we centered learning over tools, trends, or timelines? What could education become?

What Teachers Can Do Now (Without Burning Out)

AdminLeave a comment

Post 5 in the Teaching in a Digital Age series. See previous post.

After research, reflection, and hard truths, the question many teachers are left with is a simple one:

What can I actually do, right now, without adding more to my plate?

It’s the question we are often asking ourselves. This post isn’t about sweeping reform or perfect implementation. It’s about small, realistic shifts that rebalance technology use, protect teacher energy, and put learning back where it belongs: with students. As they say, the person doing the work is the person who is learning.

Start With Choice Boards (Without Overthinking Them)

If you’ve read my blog long enough, you know that I am a fan of choice boards. But choice boards don’t have to be complicated or beautifully designed. In fact, many teachers already use a version of them without calling them that: a “must do” and “may do” list.

A simple way to begin, and what I do:

  1. Choose the skill you want students to practice or master.
  2. List familiar ways students can show understanding (write, draw, explain, build, record).
  3. Decide how students will share—digitally or not.

That’s it. I’m a fan of having students share their work, not just turn it in.

The focus stays on skills and mastery, not the tool. Technology becomes an option, not the driver. A student might choose to draw a model, make a poster, record an explanation, design a game, or write a short reflection. Over time, these low-tech options can naturally lead to digital creation, but only when it makes sense.

Choice builds ownership. Ownership builds engagement.
And none of this requires a new platform (unless you want one).

Lean Into Student Explanation

It’s easy to feel like there’s no time for student talk. There’s content to cover. Pacing to manage. Standards to meet. It all can feel overwhelming at times.

But explanation, oral, visual, or written, isn’t extra.
It is the learning. I know it sounds simple, and the time can feel like extra, but it’s really not. Remember: start small.

Short, structured opportunities for students to explain their thinking, turn-and-talks, quick presentations, sketch-notes, and exit explanations, strengthen understanding and surface misconceptions faster than silent work ever could.

These practices also align naturally with ELD standards, but they benefit all students. Being able to explain clearly, listen actively, and respond thoughtfully is a skill worth protecting instructional time for. And when a student can explain the material clearly, you know they understand it.

Sometimes the most powerful move is simply to stop and let students talk.

Build Simple Routines That Shift the Cognitive Load

When students know:

  • where to find materials
  • what success looks like (success criteria or proficiency scales)
  • how to make choices
  • where finished work goes

…the cognitive load shifts from the teacher to the learner.

This isn’t about losing control; it’s about creating systems that run themselves. As an instructional coach, I have found that having systems in place is valuable for teachers. It lowers your stress and makes for a more peaceful classroom. Once expectations are clear and routines are established, students work more independently, collaborate more naturally, and take greater responsibility for their learning.

That shift frees you up to do what matters most: conference, observe, intervene, and support students who need it most.

You already do much of this instinctively. The key is being intentional and letting go just enough. And if you are thinking to yourself, “I already do all of this,” then you should feel validated.

Start Small (Really Small)

This might be the hardest part.

Teachers are learners. We read blogs, attend conferences, watch webinars, and leave inspired. The temptation to do all the things is real. I am one of those who want to do all of the things right away.

But change works best when it’s edited. And I get it, I have trouble editing. But here are some things I have learned and would like to share with you.

Choose one shift:

  • One new routine
  • One way students explain
  • One choice opportunity

Let students become comfortable. Let yourself adjust. Once it’s working, then layer in something new.

Doing too much too fast overwhelms students and teachers alike. Sustainable change is slow, and that’s not a flaw. It’s the point.

Where MathReps and EduProtocols Fit

Strategies like MathReps and EduProtocols fit naturally into this work, not as mandates, but as examples.

They emphasize:

  • showing thinking over choosing answers
  • explanation as learning
  • repeatable routines that reduce planning load – This is probably the biggest bonus.

Used thoughtfully, they can support production without requiring perfection or constant novelty. But they’re options, not requirements. What matters most is the principle behind them: students actively making sense of their learning.

A Final Thought

You don’t need a new platform. (And if you’re like me, you want the newest, shiniest tool)
You don’t need a complete overhaul.
You don’t need to do more.

You need permission—to start small, to focus on thinking, and to build a classroom that works for you and your students.

That’s where balance begins.

So, what is one low-lift shift you could try this week that moves students from consuming to producing, without adding to your workload?

Was Professional Development the Missing Piece?

Admin2 Comments

This is part 4 in my series about the impact of technology on education. The previous post regarding research was profound. If you would like to read the whole series, you can start with Part 1, which provides an overview before subsequent posts dive deeper into the nuances.

What if the problem was never the tool, but the lack of sustained support? Or support from the onset?

For years, classrooms have been flooded with platforms, programs, and promises. New tools arrive with excitement, urgency, and often good intentions. Teachers are (sometimes) trained briefly, then sent back to their classrooms to “make it work.” Sometimes there is no training, and expected to “make it work”. When outcomes fall short, frustration follows. Fingers point in every direction.

But perhaps the most honest explanation is also the least controversial: we asked educators to transform instruction without giving them the time, space, or support to truly learn how to do so.

One-Time PD vs. Sustained Learning

Most teachers recognize this pattern immediately.

A new tool is introduced. There’s a short training – here’s what it does, here’s where to click – and then: Go use it. Sometimes there’s follow-up, but it’s often months later and/or focused narrowly on features, not instruction. Other times, PD becomes so repetitive that it feels disconnected from classroom reality.

The spacing matters, just like it matters with our students. When training sessions are too far apart, teachers naturally fill in the gaps themselves. They figure out what works (and what doesn’t) through trial, error, and time; often without a shared pedagogical vision guiding those decisions.

Add to that the reality that many schools roll out multiple new tools or curriculum adoptions at once, sometimes with little dedicated time at the start of the year to learn them deeply. And sometimes there’s too much information coming at the beginning of the school year. The result isn’t resistance, it’s overload.

There has to be a better way.

Pedagogy Must Come First: We Can’t Pretend the Clock Rewinds

In theory, most educators agree: pedagogy should come before platforms, curricula, and pacing.

In practice, that train has already left the station long ago.

Teachers are knee-deep in platforms that were adopted years ago. Pedagogy often became secondary, not because educators didn’t care, but because survival required learning to manage the tool with students in the classroom in real time before reflecting on how it shaped instruction.

So the question isn’t Should pedagogy come first?
It’s How do we re-center pedagogy now, given where we are?

One possible answer isn’t adding more tools, but pressing pause. Limiting new adoptions. Creating space for a pedagogical reset using the platforms already in place. Asking not What else do we need? But how can we use what we have better? Or how can I use what is already available? How will it help me/my students?

This isn’t easy. It can feel overwhelming. But if the goal is student thinking, understanding, and transfer, not just task completion or student compliance, then the work is necessary.

What Meaningful Tech PD Actually Looks Like

I know, this is a loaded question. We want it, we know we need it, but are often loath to attend, myself included. This is especially true when it’s district-provided. Why is that? (That was more of a question to myself, no sarcasm, just a real thought/question)

If professional development is meant to change classroom practice, it must be manageable, relevant, and immediately useful.

That starts with focus. If a district introduces three new tools, meaningful PD might center on just one—and even then, on one or two high-leverage instructional uses, not every feature. Depth matters more than breadth. I’m a fan of showing how it is relevant to you, right now.

PD also needs to be differentiated. Some teachers are ready to explore advanced applications. Others need a strong foundation. Meeting teachers where they are isn’t a luxury; it’s how learning works. The trick is to do this well. I’m not sure what the answer is, but I know it should be a goal.

And perhaps most importantly: teachers need to be able to use what they learn immediately. I am passionate about this point. If something isn’t implemented within a week, it often never will. This isn’t a failure of commitment; it’s the reality of teaching in a system filled with mandates, assessments, and competing priorities.

Ongoing support matters too. Not once a semester. Not when schedules allow. Consistent coaching, collaboration, and feedback help teachers refine their practice at a pace that feels sustainable rather than rushed.

Teachers invest in what moves their students forward. When the impact is visible, the motivation follows.

The Cost of Not Investing in Teacher Learning

When professional learning is shallow or fragmented, classrooms tend to drift toward extremes. Again, this isn’t a criticism of teachers; it’s a reality.

In some cases, technology becomes a digital babysitter, students consume, click, and complete without deep thinking. That’s the compliance factor. In others, technology is avoided altogether. Of the two, opting out may be the more responsible choice, but it still leaves potential untapped.

A middle ground exists.

When teachers are supported in learning how and why to use tools, technology can amplify good pedagogy rather than replace it. Tools that provide immediate feedback, surface misconceptions, or help analyze student thinking, like Snorkl or Wayground, can lighten the instructional load while keeping learning active and visible. I know I keep bringing up these two tools. They are ones I have available in my district. There are other tools that achieve the same things.

But even the best tools can’t compensate for a lack of investment in teacher learning.

A Shared Responsibility

This isn’t about blame. We are where we are, and reflection is necessary.

Teachers didn’t ask for constant change without time to adapt. Administrators didn’t design systems to overwhelm. Policymakers didn’t intend to sideline pedagogy. Everyone involved is operating within constraints and doing what they feel is best.

But if we want classrooms where students think, explain, and truly understand, then professional learning can’t be an afterthought. It has to be central to how we implement change.

Teachers and students deserve better than “I have to do this.”
We’ve tried that. It doesn’t work. It’s time we try something different.

So, my question to you is, if professional development were designed around learning rather than compliance, what would change, for teachers, for students, and for the system as a whole?

Coming Next:
If professional learning is the bridge between research and practice, the final question remains: what does balance actually look like in real classrooms? In the next post, we’ll step back to examine what sustainable, thoughtful technology integration can, and should, feel like for teachers and students.

What Science Says About Technology

Admin1 Comment

As we continue this series, it’s important to ground our reflections in the science of learning and brain research. Teachers make daily instructional decisions that research can illuminate but not fully prescribe. What neuroscience and educational science show us are principles that help explain how students learn best and how certain practices support long-term understanding. Previous post

Active Retrieval Is More Powerful Than Passive Re-Exposure

Cognitive psychology has consistently found that retrieval practice, that is, actively bringing information to mind, deepens learning more than simply re-reading or re-exposure. Research spanning laboratory and classroom settings shows that engaging students in retrieval (quizzing, explaining, recall exercises) leads to better long-term memory retention than repeated study or review alone. (source 1, Source 2)

This is often referred to as the testing effect or retrieval practice effect. The retrieval practice effect is an effective strategy for combating the Ebbinghaus Effect, aka the Forgetting Curve. While it is sometimes misinterpreted as “more tests,” it is really about effortful recall, getting students to retrieve and rethink information. It’s retrieval itself, not just repetition, that strengthens memory traces.

In other words, this means that asking students to produce explanations, to summarize in their own words, or to write and discuss thinking aloud builds deeper learning than simply having them repeatedly read material or answer DOK 1-type questions. This aligns closely with production-based approaches like #MathReps and #EduProtocols, which encourage students to reveal their thinking rather than simply select answers.

Cognitive Load Matters Both With and Without Screens

Science also reminds us that our brains have limited working memory capacity. Cognitive Load Theory explains that when students are overwhelmed with too much information or poorly structured tasks, learning suffers. This is why #EduProtocols recommends starting with a fun, low-cognitive load (non-academic) subject when introducing a new protocol.

Some research on multimedia learning, how information is presented with visuals, audio, and text, suggests that poorly designed digital content can increase cognitive load, making it harder for students to focus on what matters.

Importantly, cognitive load is not caused by screens themselves, but by how information is presented and how much unrelated or distracting material competes for attention. Even when we don’t use technology, we have all experienced cognitive overload from information, especially when it is new or ‘meaty’. This is why it is important to use well-designed tasks that chunk information, reduce unnecessary complexity, and scaffold thinking, helping students allocate mental energy to deep learning, whether on paper or on a device.

This is where tech can help: platforms that analyze student errors, present information in multiple representations, or guide students through step-by-step reasoning can reduce unnecessary load and help students focus on what matters most. Tools like Snorkl and Wayground (which provide instant feedback and class-wide analysis) can lighten the teacher’s load while still requiring students to produce and explain their thinking. This isn’t to say that the use of technology is better. If a teacher needs to learn a platform to lighten their load, it can lead to cognitive overload; that’s not good either.

It’s about balance for both students and teachers.

Explanation Strengthens Learning Across Contexts

Research and classroom evidence agree upon a central idea: students learn better when they must explain their thinking. This is true whether explanations are verbal, written, visual, or recorded. Explanation forces students to organize, articulate, and refine their understanding, something that passive or consumption tasks rarely do.

This finding is supported by the English Language Development (ELD) standards, which highlight explanation as crucial for language learners; I would argue the same holds for all students. The act of explaining requires higher-order thinking, connecting ideas, making meaning, and justifying reasoning, and is linked to stronger understanding across domains. We know that if a student can accurately explain their thinking, they understand the concept. And if, while they explain their thinking, they have a misconception, we, as teachers, can address the issue immediately.

Whether students are explaining mathematical reasoning, composing a paragraph, or teaching a peer through a screencast, the cognitive work of explanation activates deeper learning processes.

What Neuroscience Says About Screen Use

Neuroscience research and cognitive development studies paint a layered picture of screen use, especially in early childhood and developing brains. As teachers, we have all seen our fair share of young children passively watching something on a phone or tablet. I have my own personal thoughts on that.

Some findings suggest that excessive screen time, especially passive, unstructured exposure, can be associated with reduced development of executive functions (such as working memory, inhibitory control, and attentional networks) and changes in brain connectivity during critical developmental periods. (Source 3) Other work points out that heavy screen exposure in young children can replace activities like conversation, play, and social interaction that are essential for the development of attention, language, and executive skills. (Source 4)

I will acknowledge the limits of this research:

  • Most studies on screen use and brain development focus on quantity and context of use, not technology per se.
  • Research does not support simplistic claims that screens alone “ruin attention” or permanently damage cognition; effects depend heavily on the type of engagement, content quality, and context. (Source 5)
  • There is no consensus that screens are inherently worse for learning than other media; rather, the design of tasks and interactions matters most. I would be curious to see any studies on the effects of social media on attention spans, how they relate to perseverance and productive struggle.

Screens can be part of effective learning when they prompt students to think, produce, interact, and explain, not just watch or click. I still advocate for common sense. Personally, I don’t think plunking students down in front of a computer for extended periods of time every day is healthy.

What Research Doesn’t Claim

As educators, we must be careful not to overinterpret research into simple slogans like “technology is harmful” or “screens destroy brains.” The science shows that how we use technology matters far more than whether it exists in the classroom.

Studies on cognitive load don’t condemn all digital tools. They simply remind us that well-designed tasks that minimize the load and maximize meaningful engagement lead to better outcomes.

It’s all about balance.

What This Means for Classrooms

The science of learning supports production-based work, tasks that get students to retrieve, organize, and explain content. It also supports varied modalities and repetitive practices, whether via paper/pencil or smart tools that help with feedback and analysis. This was discussed in the Consumption vs Production post of this series.

Here’s what teachers and leaders should keep in mind:

  • Retrieval practice (active recall) strengthens long-term retention more than repeated exposure.
  • Cognitive load matters: thoughtful design matters more than screens.
  • Explanation builds understanding: making students’ thinking visible is powerful.
  • Tech can help, but only when it supports thinking, not replaces it.

Tools like Snorkl and Wayground illustrate this well: they can provide instant feedback and class analysis, helping teachers target instruction while students practice articulation of thinking. But these tools are most effective when teachers know what they want students to produce, not just consume.

Educators deserve systems that support this deeper work—not just devices to fill time. They also need support to accomplish this successfully. Leaving teachers to figure things out on their own time isn’t an acceptable solution. Schools and districts need to invest in their teachers.

What are your thoughts on this research? What have your experiences been?

Coming Next:
Research may tell us what works, but oftentimes, teachers are left to figure out how to put it all into practice successfully. Post 4 explores what happens when pedagogy is expected without proper time, training, or systemic support.

When Technology Entered the Classroom, What Did We Lose Along the Way?

Admin2 Comments

Technology was introduced into classrooms with the promise of innovation, access, and equity. Chromebooks became commonplace, and suddenly every student had a screen. On paper, it looked like progress.

What rarely came with those devices, however, was a shared vision for how technology should support learning.

Years later, many educators and families are noticing something unsettling. Teachers are detecting declines in certain skills: critical thinking, problem-solving, perseverance, a sense of wonder, and even basic fluency, such as memorizing math facts or understanding procedures deeply.

This is not a claim rooted in blame or panic.
It’s a reflection grounded in lived classroom experience.

And it’s critical to say this clearly: teachers did not cause this shift.

Teachers Were Put in a No-Win Situation

When Chromebooks were first rolled out, many teachers were handed powerful tools with minimal training, limited pedagogical guidance, and enormous expectations. The message was often implicit: Use the technology. Figure it out.

What followed was predictable.

Most available tools at the time were consumption-based:

  • Students practiced skills through programs
  • Computer-generated assessments
  • “Learning” games
  • Watch videos and click through content

These tools promised efficiency, and in some ways, they delivered. Teachers could quickly gather data, assign differentiated work, and manage classrooms stretched thin by increasing demands and limited time.

For many teachers, this wasn’t laziness or lack of creativity.
It was survival, as they were told to use technology, follow pacing guides, differentiate, improve test scores, etc.

When Consumption Became the Default

Photo by Ryutaro Tsukata on Pexels.com

Over time, consumption-based technology became mainstream. Students spent more time interacting with screens and less time explaining their thinking, constructing arguments, or grappling productively with struggle.

This matters because consumption alone does not build deep understanding.

Selecting an answer is not the same as defending one.
Completing digital practice is not the same as reasoning.
Engagement is not the same as learning.

Still, teachers used these tools because they were what districts purchased, what schedules allowed, what was expected, and what, if any, professional development supported.

Arguments for the Opposite Can Be Made

Some teachers pushed against this trend. I was one of them. This was a luxury and an interest for me.

Technology has always interested me, and I had the time, energy, and inclination to learn how pedagogy and technology could work together. I gravitated toward production-based uses of technology: students explaining, creating, representing, and discussing their thinking.

When tools like Prodigy became popular, many teachers saw motivation and engagement. I saw more game than practice and chose not to use it. Instead, I decided to use programs like Fog Stone Isle to help build capacity with fractions. That doesn’t make one choice morally superior; it highlights how context, interests, and capacity shape decisions.

Many teachers did see value in those tools for their students. And for those teachers, it made complete sense. There are times when consumption-based technology is appropriate and works. As teachers, we do what we feel works best for our students.

The Larger Systemic Issue

The deeper issue isn’t about individual tools. It’s about a system that often invests in products instead of practices.

Districts and lawmakers frequently purchase or mandate programs, platforms, and devices without funding the time and training teachers need to use them well. Pedagogies like HyperDocs and EduProtocols emphasize student production and thinking, but learning them is often left entirely to individual teachers.

And teachers already carry an impossible load.

Technology changes yearly. Research evolves. Expectations increase. Teachers are asked to adapt constantly, often without sustained professional learning or structural support.

When systems fail to lead with pedagogy, companies fill the gap. Many tools genuinely aim to help, but convenience can quietly override cognitive demand if we aren’t careful.

What Research Actually Tells Us (And What It Doesn’t)

To be clear: there is no definitive research proving that technology has caused a universal decline in student skills. What we do have is:

  • Research showing that active learning and retrieval are more effective than passive consumption
  • Cognitive science emphasizing the importance of productive struggle, explanation, and practice
  • Multimedia learning research (like Richard Mayer’s work) demonstrating that technology must be intentionally designed to support learning, not overload it
  • Large-scale assessments (such as PISA and NAEP) showing stagnation or uneven growth, which educators interpret through classroom experience

What teachers are reporting should not be dismissed, but it should be understood as contextual, nuanced, and systemically influenced, not a simple cause-and-effect story.

Moving Forward: Balance, Not Backlash

This is not a call to remove technology from classrooms.

It’s a call to use it differently.

Production-based strategies don’t have to be complex. They can start small:

  • Choice boards instead of one-size-fits-all programs
  • Students explaining their thinking orally or visually
  • Simple routines that prioritize reasoning over speed

These changes can be technology-based or not technology-based. For example, explaining thinking can be done in a class setting, in groups, or with the use of tools like Snorkl.

Frameworks like MathReps and EduProtocols offer powerful examples, but they are not mandates. They are models. Entry points. Proof that technology can amplify thinking when pedagogy leads the way.

A Message to the Public and to Decision Makers

Teaching today is not the same as “when you were in school.”
Technology has changed. Research has evolved. Students’ needs are different.

Educators are not resisting change; they are navigating it in real time.

If we want technology to improve learning, then teachers need more than devices. They need time, training, and trust. Districts and lawmakers must invest not just in tools, but in the pedagogy that makes those tools meaningful. And all of this needs to be done without adding more to teachers’ plates.

The goal isn’t balance sheets or dashboards. It’s thinking.

And the question we should all be asking is not whether technology belongs in classrooms, but whether we are brave enough to demand that it truly serves learning and teachers are put in a position of power, not left scrambling to figure it all out.

This has been a subject that has been weighing on me heavily lately. I think this will be the beginning of a series. I would love to hear your thoughts. I am not here to persuade anyone one way or another, but rather have open discussions on where, as a community, educators, parents, districts, and policymakers, we can do better.

Public Education: More Than a Viral Post

AdminLeave a comment

Lately, it feels like my social media feed has been sprinkled with negative takes on teachers and public education. Over the summer, I noticed an uptick in posts that painted educators in an unflattering light. Some parents shared that they didn’t want to purchase back-to-school supplies, suggesting that the teachers should go buy them themselves or go to donation drives and do the legwork themselves. Others shared stories of classrooms that weren’t ‘cute enough’ or didn’t have rugs, implying that the lack of decoration somehow reflected poorly on the teacher – “how dare they not make the room perfect for my child.”

And then there are the posts about rules and policies – things like cell phone bans in classrooms that teachers have no control over. In some cases, parents have gone as far as encouraging their children to disobey those rules, placing teachers in an impossible position.

Viral posts don’t tell the whole story of public education: our communities do.

I’ll be honest, when these posts go viral, it can feel disheartening. But here’s the thing: I don’t believe they reflect the majority of families across the United States. Instead, they seem to be part of a louder narrative that seeks to chip away at public education and those who dedicate their lives to it. And this is a problem.

The truth is, public education is one of the cornerstones of our country. It has always been, and should always be, a place where every child has access to learning, growth, and opportunity. Funding cuts at every level – from Kinder through universities – have made the work harder, but the mission remains the same: serving students and setting them up for future success.

And here’s the good news: in my community, I see something different from what goes viral. I’m sure you do too. I see families who send their students to school with supplies. I see kindness, collaboration, and a shared commitment to doing what’s best for kids.

That’s the story we need to remember and share. Viral posts may grab attention, but they don’t represent the heart of our communities. Let’s not fall prey to negativity; there’s already too much of that. Instead, let’s lift up the good, celebrate the work being done, and continue to build strong schools for our students. They deserve the best, no matter their zip code.

Because in the end, when we support public education, we’re not just supporting teachers, we’re investing in our children and in the future we all share.

Death by Laminator: A Cautionary Tale

AdminLeave a comment

There I was, in the staff lounge, ready to take on a brand-new school year. The 3rd-grade teachers were gathered in a semi-circle, swapping stories and laughing about their summer and getting ready for the new school year. I, meanwhile, was at the laminating machine — fully impressed that we had the good stuff this year. You know… the thick laminating plastic. Premium.

I was happily feeding in Clever Badges for the Kinder and 1st grade teachers, feeling oddly proud of my laminating skills, when suddenly… I felt it.

The pull.

Not an emotional pull. Not the pull of destiny.
A literal pull — from the laminator.

At first, I thought, “That’s weird.” Then I tried to step back and realized… I was stuck. In. The. Laminator.

That’s right. I almost died by laminator.

What’s left of my dignity, laminated for all eternity.
What’s left of my dignity, laminated for all eternity.

I squeaked out a panicked little “Ahhh!” and the entire 3rd grade team leapt into action like a squad of heroes in a very low-budget action film. Turns out, my lanyard — with my keys and name badge — had been sucked straight into the machine.

We slammed the stop button.
We breathed a sigh of relief.
And then… wave two of panic hit me.

My keys were lodged between the rollers. If you know anything about laminators (and honestly, who does until disaster strikes?), you know that messing with the rollers is basically laminator homicide. I did not want that on my record.

This is when I remembered the genius of my breakaway lanyard. I unclicked it, freed myself from the beast, and began the slow, shame-filled walk to the office. Head hung low.

Now, it’s the beginning of the school year, which means the secretary is juggling about 47 fires at once. I very gently asked for her help. She looked at me and said, “You didn’t break it, did you?”

Inside, I was thinking, Goodness, I hope not… because I like having friends here. I also like the secretary.

Could I have tried to fish out the keys myself? Sure. But that would have almost guaranteed turning a mildly embarrassing story into a full-on “Lisa killed the laminator” legend. And listen — school secretaries are magical. They can fix nearly anything. Copier jam? Fixed. Wi-Fi down? Fixed. Laminator holding your keys hostage? Also fixed.

She followed me in, took one look at the situation, then at me, and asked, “What in the world did you do?” Then she freed my keys — which, fun fact, were now scorching hot.

Lessons learned:

  1. Always watch your lanyard.
  2. Know when to call for backup.
  3. If we get a safety video on “proper laminator use” next year, my bad.

Oh — and when I didn’t return to my room (which I share with two other coaches), one of them came looking for me. She found out what happened and laughed so hard she was crying, and I’m pretty sure she needed a minute to breathe.

And that’s how I started my school year: by nearly becoming a cautionary tale in the staff handbook. Hopefully, yours was or will be better than mine.

I’m Totally Crying

AdminLeave a comment

So often as teachers, we hope to impact students’ lives for the better. As an elementary teacher, I oftentimes am unaware of what my impact may have been. But every now and then, I am fortunate enough to learn about my impact.

On one of my Socials, I posted a picture celebrating the number of years of service to my district (25!). A former parent saw it and commented. And yes, I have many former parents as mutuals on my Socials. I live in a small town and it’s not uncommon. She shared that her youngest, a former student of mine, was graduating this year and their plan is to study Computer Science in college and it was thanks to me. They are also graduating high school with a CSE sash. Which was all very nice to hear. THEN, she shared out a writing that the student did. I’m not sure what it was from but the focus was on an experience that the student had while in my class and the impact that experience had on their life.

Background:
For many years, the students participated in ‘Genius Hour‘. This is a time when students can explore their passion, learn something they are interested in, or explore subjects/concepts. There are rules and expectations that accompany this time. Part of the procedure has students reporting out to the class. Therefore, my students were giving weekly presentations. These presentations were then scored by the class. We focused on clarity, volume/eye contact, and overall presentation (did they slump, lean against things, stand tall, etc).

And for years, others side-eyed me and didn’t quite understand the power and impact this precious time held. From an outsider’s viewpoint, it looked like ‘free time’ or playing. To be fair, there was a good amount of slime and goo that was made through the years. I struggled with this for many years. I was hoping for more meaningful projects. Then, my good friend, Nancy Minicozzi, put it all in perspective for me. She said, “This is what they need and it’s okay. Let it go.” She was right. After all, there were many outstanding projects through the years. Techie Chicks were a group of girls who created a website of tech tools and tutorials. They even had their own Chrome Extension. There was another year, a group of girls got together to create a ‘business’. Well, it was more of a charity fundraiser. We had a student with health issues who was spending time in a Ronald McDonald house. This group created a website, sample products, and a Google Form all in an effort to raise money for the Ronald McDonald House. These 3rd-graders, raised around $300.

Back to the former student who will be studying CS. In an effort to help students explore subjects and projects they may have never thought of for themselves, I had some resources bookmarked for them to explore. The one resource that caught this student’s eye was Gamestar Mechanic. To say that the student was obsessed would be an understatement. This site allowed students to design their own video games. It was very basic pixelated images, but everyone enjoyed trying out the games this student created. The presentations grew more and more interesting as well. The student would invite another person up to play the newly created game while explaining how it was built and the skills needed to pass the level. It was so much fun watching this student dive into this newly found passion.

Fast forward 7 years. That student is now graduating and going on to study programming. Now, cue the waterworks. This was the reflection that was shared with me.

To this student and so many others, you are extremely gifted and, yes, here you are! You possess the drive and passion to build, create, solve problems, and make this world a better place. I can’t wait to see where you go and what you accomplish. I am so proud of you.

To educators and parents, allow students to explore new avenues. Allow them to spread their wings to try new things. Stand back and let them amaze you!

And yes, I’m tearing up again.

NOTE: I kept the pronouns neutral on purpose. It is nothing deeper than a habit to be neutral out of respect for others in the event they don’t want to be highlighted.

Eff Teachers

AdminLeave a comment

The opinion heard around the internet. On Meghan Trainor’s podcast, Workin’ on It, she spoke with Trisha Paytas. She and her guest began speaking about schools. Megan stated that she was homeschooling her children. They also brought up issues like school shootings. Then, things took a turn. Trisha began talking about bullying. This led to teachers bullying kids. Which led to Meghan saying, “Fuck teachers, dude.” Without hesitation, without stuttering, and with her whole chest.

Needless to say, this didn’t sit well with teachers. Look, we know that not every teacher is amazing. We recognize that we are human and have bad days. We acknowledge we have made mistakes. We also apologize, stand in front of bullets, buy food and supplies for our students. To be so easily and quickly dismissed was hurtful. What’s even more hurtful are the hundreds of people who also feel this way about teachers.

There was an apology. After the backlash, after the podcast was edited, after the podcast went through production. But an apology was given.

Why?

Photo by Image Hunter on Pexels.com

Why is it so easy to trash teachers? Why are teachers expected to be superhuman? Why is it encouraged to give students grace, which we should, but not extend that same grace to teachers? Why am I now expected to understand that being shot while teaching is a ‘hazard of the job’? ⬅️That one is absurd!

I know the answer to most of these questions is politically motivated. But can we PLEASE leave politics out this? We are all doing our best.

Back to Meghan

Dear Meghan,

We appreciate your apology. You say that you weren’t talking about all teachers, but felt good enough with what you said to keep it in the published podcast. You say you respect us. You say you fight for teachers. How? How do you fight for us? I’ll admit that you may and I just haven’t seen the reciepts. I’m open to seeing what you have done. Will you now take up inititives to fight for our, and our students’, safety? Many times, I have told my students, “If you are really sorry, your behavior will change.” Many teachers will be watching to see if your behavior changes, Meghan.

One of THOSE Teachers

AdminLeave a comment

I am one of THOSE teachers.

I will always fight for my students.

I will speak out when I feel something is wrong.

I will point out issues.

I. Will. Speak. Out.

I will fight for equity, fairness, and what is right. While I am labeled as ‘one of those teachers’ and it’s meant to discredit my words. It’s meant to silence me. It’s meant to send a message to others.

So, yes, I am one of THOSE teachers. I can only hope that the right people, those that CAN make a difference, ignore the label and do the right thing.

Photo by Andrea Piacquadio on Pexels.com

NOTE: This is not about one thing in particular. I have been labeled this several times over the years and felt the need to express my frustration at this label which is meant to encourage others to ignore what I say.