Now that you know what my challenges were coming back into the classroom at my high school and a basic understanding of why I stayed, let's look at what I am doing differently.

As I have said numerous times, things had to change for me to make a difference for my students.  As we opened this school year, I asked all of my colleagues on all of the campuses to join us for a professional book club.  The response was not overwhelming, but a strong core of individuals have joined us to read and discuss books that will hopefully help us find new ways of doing what we do and helping our students and our district move forward.

The first book we are reading is called Multipliers:How the Best Leaders Make Everyone Smarter by Liz Wiseman and Greg Mckeown. I was introduced to this book at the Annual Convention of Learning Forward in Annaheim, CA last December.  Liz Wiseman was one of the keynote speakers.  As she spoke to the crowd at lunch, what she said spoke to something in me that knew I was being a diminisher instead of a multiplier. 

As we are reading this book I am having flashes of how I can use the concepts in my classroom, but the biggest flash came today as I was reading Chapter 4.  I am currently reading The Crucible, the play by Arthur Miller in my English 11 American Literature class.  I have been trying out a bunch of different processes for reading and acting out the acts, but I am still acting as main director of the play.  Instead of letting my students figure out the meaning and the actions of they play for themselves, I am doing it for, or to, them.  I want them to get it, so I am getting it for them.  I keep trying to take myself out of the equation, but I keep failing miserably.  Some of that is the director in me.  In the chapter there is a story about a leader who knows all of the answers, he only asks questions he knows the answers to, and when he doesn't know the answer he asks "stalling" questions in order to find the answers.  He forces his workers to do unnecessary work that he deems necessary rather than asking them for their expertise.  It struck me that we do this to our students from kindergarten through graduation and then get frustrated with them when they don't know how to solve problems or answer questions for themselves.  Actually, standardized tests are the epitome of this because it doesn't matter how the students themselves have interpreted the answers to the questions, it only matters that they can find the "right" answer, but I digress.

So as I was reading this chapter I realized that I need to put the challenge of interpretation to my students.  Is this going to take longer, yes.  Is it going to produce better results, it should.  I want then to think for themselves and to visualize and explain their interpretation of what they are reading.

How am I going to do this?  I am going to put the challenge on their shoulders.  On Tuesday, we are going to do the study guide for Act II to review what we know already.  I am going to ask them to summarize what has happened in the play so far.  Then I am going to present an overview of what is coming in Act III, the book actually does this for me.  Then I am going to present to them the parts of the act and have them form teams around specific sections with how many characters are in that section.  Their challenge will be to determine who in their groups are best suited to which parts, not just which parts have the fewest lines.  Then they need to read the section, determine the props they will need by making a prop list, and then design the set as they see it.  They will then have to figure out how to use the furniture in the classroom to create the stage in the front of the room and block the play.  They have to transcribe all of their lines onto paper or note cards.  No one can take the book to the front of the room.  They then have to practice the play.  I will give them the rubric for the acting portion on Wednesday, after they have had a chance to look over their section and run through it at least once.  They will act out their part on Friday.

The key here is that I am giving them basic directions.  I am not telling them how to do any of it.  We have read enough of the play and acted out portions of the first two acts that at this point they should be able to figure out what they need to do.  I have to believe that my students are smart enough and have learned how to read subtext and clues in the text to know how to act out the play.  Miller is a master playwright who ingeniously incorporated an allegory of the Red Scare into a play about the Salem Witch Trials that was very accurate to history.  I have to trust that the background and the discussions we have had up until now will inform them to do the work. 

I will, of course, monitor and answer questions, but I am going to remove myself as much as possible from the process, asking questions to clear up misconceptions instead of telling them the misconceptions and addressing them.  Asking the whole class only when necessary. 

The results I believe I will see is a deeper understanding of the play and Miller's message as well as interpretations that differ from how I see the play.  In other words, I expect to see their thinking.