Spheres of Influence

Jim Grant is sort of a jack of all trades these days from what I gather, but here’s what I know I like about him: he’s an educator with 20 plus years experience and he recognizes that the NCLB act is a scam.

Though he makes his living in the education field, he pulls no punches when it comes to this topic. Instead he points out little things, like the fact that a kid, from the time he starts kindergarten until he graduates, spends a total of about 13% of his time in school. 13%. To some, that may sound like a larger number than you would have guessed. To most, it should strike you just how small a figure that is, and yet, in that 13% of the time, teachers are increasingly being called upon to perform more and more of the roles that rightfully fall somewhere in that remaining 87% of a kid’s time.

Here’s how Grant looks at it. He calls it the “Sphere of Influence Inventory” wherin he helps remind educators what many politicians, and even more of their confused followers seem to forget – that their influence is much more limited than modern society is willing to accept.

You can download a copy of this in PDF form from his web page:
www.sde.com/Teacher-Resources.asp#freeDownloads
Seriously, check it out… another PDF listed there (also free to download) is the Parent Report Card… I’ll list it in a post dedicated to my No Parent Left Behind proposal.

(hint: if you want to just skim through and find the important stuff, the activities traditionally covered during that 13% of a kid’s time spent at school are at the bottom of the list. Keep in mind; however, that teachers don’t control many of those factors either.)

Instructions
Using a checkmark, please indicate your degree of influence (sphere of control)
when addressing family factors, societal circumstances, and school policies and
practices contained in this inventory. Space is provided for comments.

Family Factors
1. The family’s socio-economic level
2. The family type (note: there are over ten different types)
3. Homelessness
4. The neighborhood where the family lives
5. The family’s housing arrangements

Birth Issues
1. Traumatic birth
2. Low birth weight
3. Premature birth
4. Damage prenatally, i.e. Alcohol/drugs, smoking, adverse stress,
undernourishment, chemical toxins, sexually transmitted diseases, etc.

Life’s Circumstances
1. Innate capacity (I.Q.)
2. Gender
3. Right/left handedness
4. Chronological age at school entrance
5. Learning disabilities
6. Physical disabilities
7. Conduct disorders
8. Emotional problems
9. Childhood depression
10. Learning styles(s)
11. Maturational level
12. Emotional I.Q.
13. Transience
14. Attendance
15. Tardiness
16. Culture
17. First language (primary language spoken at home)
18. Traumatized, i.e. divorce, family dysfunction, move, school change,
parent incarcerated, death of a family member, violence, neglect, terminal
illness of a family member/friend, etc.

Health/well-being outside of school
Do educators have any control over whether the child:
1. Is exposed to environmental toxins, i.e. lead, pesticides, fertilizers, etc.
2. Has proper nutrition (three balanced meals daily)
3. Has access to timely medical care
4. Suffers from abuse or neglect
5. Receives 9-10 hours of sleep per night
6. Is properly clothed for the occasion/weather
7. Receives positive attention daily
8. Receives daily affection
9. Maintains appropriate personal hygiene

Parental Supervision
Do educators have any control over whether the parent:
1. Pays attention to how much time a child spends watching television
2. Monitors television programs the child watches
3. Tracks the amount of time their child spends on the computer
4. Monitors their child’s computer activities
5. Keeps track of time spent on homework

Parental Involvement
1. The number of books in the home
2. How often is the child read to
3. How often is the child sung to or with
4. Whether the child receives assistance with homework
5. How much time is spent talking with the child each day
6. Whether the child is supervised at all times

Deportment Prior to School
Do educators have any control over whether:
1. The child has knowledge of basic manners
2. The child is disciplined and well behaved
3. The child understands delayed gratification
4. The child knows right from wrong

Parent Character
Do educators have any control over whether:
1. The child is exposed to an alcohol/drug filled environment
2. The child is exposed to second hand smoke
3. The child is exposed to domestic/societal violence
4. The child is exposed to profanity
5. The parent models appropriate decorum
6. The child is disciplined in a non-physical, non-abusive manner
7. The parent supports the school

Societal Circumstances
Do educators have any control over whether the child:
1. Is exposed to songs with inappropriate lyrics
2. Has access to adult websites, i.e. hate groups, pornography, sex, violence,
bomb making, etc.
3. Is pressured by the media and peers to be thin
4. Is pressured by the media to be materialistic, i.e. brand name clothes,
personal products, toys, jewelry sunglasses, etc.
5. Has access to violent video games
6. Has access to movies and videos with an adult theme, i.e. sex, violence,
pornography, mayhem, rudeness, profanity, etc.
7. Has access to television programs with adult content
8. Has access to 900 telephone numbers
9. Access to tobacco products
10. Has access to drugs and alcohol
11. Is exposed to adult advertising
12. Has access to harmful weapons
13. Has access to adult diet products
14. Has access to magazines with adult material

School Policies and Practices
1. Class size
2. Automatic social promotion
3. Full inclusion “at all costs”
4. Adoption of a “whole math” program
5. Age/grade specific group standardized testing
6. Age/grade specific standards
7. Age/grade specific textbook adoptions
8. Lock-step, time-bound school structure
9. Adequate staff support, i.e. social worker(s), guidance counselor(s), aides, etc.
10. Adequate school funding
11. Adoption of Developmentally Inappropriate Practices

The S.I.I. is designed to help educators identify factors and circumstances along with school policies and practices that are within their sphere of control and then act on them. This unique inventory is a useful tool to clarify the role of the parent/guardian, the school, and the greater society and which roles should be shared. The author’s intent is to help school officials gently remind the public that our schools cannot solve the problems of the world single handedly.

Published by Staff Development for Educators
10 Sharon Road • PO Box 577 • Peterborough, NH 03458
1-800-924-9621 • 1-800-337-9929 (fax)
copyright 2002


I know that was a lot of reading, and if you even skimmed most of it, thanks. I didn’t want to remove any of SDE’s context. Grant’s approach to this topic is unique in that it offers little in the way of common sense information, yet much of America OUTSIDE of the world of education seems to have forgotten these important little details. Some, however haven’t. Three states have come out boldly against NCLB by refusing federal funds during a time of near crisis in school funding so that they may be free of the ridiculous rules of the ridiculous program. Several others have decided to work with the program’s requirement for arbitrary, statewide testing by developing their own tests in each district. Nebraska, for instance, could require all of its public school students to write a two-word essay like “Buy corn.” in order to meet the testing requirement! Sounds about as useful as the tests NCLB recommends.

Utah, Colorado and Hawaii have passed legislation opting out of the program, giving up millions of dollars in federal education funding in favor of creating their own standards for their own students. Thirteen other states have considered similar bills, and Connecticut was the first state to join the National Education Association in filing suit against the Federal Government arguing that NCLB, as an unfunded mandate, is unconstitutional. Massachusetts, Ohio and, by now, a growing handful of others have joined the suit.

One interesting note, the drafters of the NCLB must have seen this coming, for in the language of the law is an anecdote that protects itself from this particular argument. It says in section 9527, “the federal government cannot ‘mandate, direct, or control’ a state or a school district to spend any funds or incur any costs not paid for under this act." Or, as NEA lawyer, Robert Chanin puts it, “In other words: NCLB cannot become an unfunded mandate: The law itself forbids it.” Are you kidding?! Someone please tell me the lawyers for our nation’s top educational consultants didn’t really go to law school to learn how to do this.

NCLB requires schools receive report cards that must be published to a general public who has no say in what is measured or how on those report cards. One old argument is that we don’t really need those tests to figure out who won’t pass. There’s a story about a school district in Ohio that determined that students from households with annual incomes below $55,000 were most likely to fail a previously used test. The success of their prediction was uncanny. Of course, they won’t say that publicly because they’re not allowed, but the story is the same in most districts. Not coincidentally, the districts with the lowest household incomes are the ones most likely to end up on the endangered list as districts as well. My point? The only thing really measured by the tests NCLB mandates is economic status. So why spend the money on the tests, use the results to belittle the only people who are actually working on student performance when we already know the only thing the tests tell us?

OK. I guess that’s enough of that for tonight. Here’s what’s really on my mind:

As I stare down the end of what I used to refer to as the school year, but which I’m now starting to call “subbing season,” as this “season” comes to a close, I have to start thinking about summer work. As I start thinking about summer work during the point in the season when, thanks to public, political and economic pressure, schools stop teaching and start focusing on the tests, I’m really asking myself why I got myself into this, and how much longer I want to work this hard to stay with it. I guess I’m confused about what’s really valued and where my experience, interests and talents fit into it all. I’d never really thought of education as an industry, but I suppose that’s the result of the same idealism that made me think I should do it in the first place. I’m torn now because admitting I was crazy to think that way, that I was wrong, means admitting that my idealism has died. I don’t know how anyone could continue to put up with what teachers put up with without that. I’m pretty sure I couldn’t. So now that I find myself wondering about all that, wondering if my idealism has died therefore allowing me to even consider other careers, I can’t help but wonder if that’s at least a symptom that said idealism is at best terminally ill. Ah well, my little chunk of that 13% probably represents less influence on a student's life than the clerk at the video store where he rents games.

I guess we all have to grow up someday.

Luth,
Out.