Climb Itinerary

Thanks to everyone who is following this quest so closely and for all the well-wishes.

As many of you have asked, here is a copy of our rather detailed projected climb Itinerary I have inserted the dates so that you can have an idea of what we are supposed to be doing each day.

As I have shared, I will not be able to post updates during my climb and am not sure that I will be able to get to wifi before I get back into the country.  At the latest, though, watch for at least one teaser picture when we land late in the day on July 8th in Atlanta.

 

Advertisements

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Kili – 6 days and counting

This post is for everyone who has expressed a personal interest in my trek and in the details of it.

First, background.  I’ve been sharing about this adventure on social media in connection with my campaign in support of school libraries. But my brother and I have had plans for this for a very long time – since before I even knew I wanted to be an educator.  I wouldn’t call myself an outdoorsman in the way you probably think about it but I did spend most of my childhood outside.  Barefooted.  Routinely engaging in “play” that makes gardening and working in the woods seem downright pedestrian.  Matter-of-factly engaging in massively challenging things was one great lesson I learned from my father.  Don’t get me wrong; he’s been training for this like crazy – which is probably a good idea since he turned 70 a couple of months ago.  The point is, Maxey Mens Retreats are a thing and have been for a while. This is just the first one that includes summiting a legit mountain.

Some stats:
Mt. Kilimanjaro is the tallest free-standing mountain in the world at 19,341 feet above sea level.  Of the “Seven Summits” (highest mountains on each continent), it ranks number 4.  However, it does not require any technical climbing skills and is (essentially) an exceptionally strenuous hike.

While the record for fastest ascent and descent was completed in under seven hours, for mortals like us, a much longer journey is recommended.  The primary danger is acute mountain sickness (AMS) – the most dangerous of which is “high altitude pulmonary edema”.  This can be life-threatening but most often results in less severe symptoms many of which are similar to those one could experience with the common flu.  The cause of AMS is typically a climb that is too rapid.  As a result, we have opted for a very leisurely nine-day hike.

We will not be setting any records on this trip, a seven-year-old summited earlier this year (in spite of park rules prohibiting anyone under ten from attempting the summit); my dad will have to go back in 17 years if he wants to set the record for oldest.  On the other hand, this will be a personal best for me and the first of the Seven Summits.  Perhaps this will get me moving towards that bucket list item to do them all.

One of the amazing things about the Kilimanjaro climb is the fact that the mountain has a huge range of temperature zones.  We will essentially experience all four seasons in those nine days.

We will be guided by a group of professional climbers who were highly recommended and have made the accent dozens of times.  All but the last two items on my detailed packing list are ready to go.  With the help of my young assistant, my backpack and duffle are scheduled for packing on Wednesday.  Watch for an update.

 

P.S.  Do you think I have enough socks?

d9MWC-Vd

1 Comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Kili4Kids

I’ve written, spoken and worked a great deal in advocacy for public school libraries. While we have no shortage of hypocrisy in our society and in public education, one of the more egregious examples is the way in which school libraries are ignored, starved or outright closed. Once again I assert that we never will accomplish much in the way of producing proficient readers if we do not commit ourselves to rehabilitating our libraries and treating them like an indispensable part of our schools.

But these are all just words. How about some action?

This June, I will be climbing Mount Kilimanjaro with my dad and brother. It is the tallest mountain in Africa and the tallest free-standing mountain in the world. Although summiting does not require great technical climbing skills, walking to 19,341 feet above sea level is no joke.

Here’s the connection. The total amount needed to bring every library in my school district up to the national “exemplary” standard is about $1.9M. I’m paying all the expenses for my trek up Kilimanjaro but I wonder if you would consider “sponsoring” me. I want to raise $19,341 for the school libraries of Tuscaloosa City Schools. That’s 1% of what we need. It could be one small step for Literacy in my town and one giant trek up a mountain for me.

If you’d like to help, you can make a donation through this link.  Every dollar counts.

Here’s another thought: I’m willing to carry five items up the mountain with me: t-shirts or tiny banners to take a picture with at the top or small (painted?) rocks. The first five people to reach out to me (amaxey at tusc dot k12 dot al dot us) and contribute at least $1,000 can take me up on this offer. You’ll need to provide the object and I’ll need to check it out before I agree. Or let me know if you’ve got another idea.

I plan to have an amazing trek with my dad and brother. It would be incredible to do something to support school libraries while I’m at it. What do you say?  Join me in making this climb up Kili truly about kids?

Update: If you prefer to donate directly, you can write a check to “Tuscaloosa City Schools”. Write “#Kili4Kids” in the memo line. Mail or deliver it to my attention at: 1210 21st Avenue, Tuscaloosa Alabama 35401. We can handle cash or gold bullion donations as well.

Leave a comment

Filed under Libraries and Literacy

Subtexts: A postscript in support of stronger libraries

In the first three blog posts in this series, I suggested that an effective focus on literacy must include both the science and the art of reading, that most public schools are woefully under-equipped to produce proficient readers (through the neglect of library collections) and that librarians and the libraries they manage are incredibly powerful but generally forgotten agents to produce the results schools want.

This final post is meant to be an afterward, an appendix or a postscript.  A written “…and another thing!” If you were not already convinced that your school’s library should be stronger than it already is, let me share some reasons why it should be.

As I have already mentioned, funding for libraries has been a mixed bag in my state.  There is funding for a librarian for every school – a commitment better than that of other states.  Funding to maintain library collections has been abysmal for the last ten years. If you have been paying attention, you will recall that our world and society has changed significantly in that time.  Here are just three ways in which conventional wisdom has shifted that should be reflected in our library collections.

  1. Most reasonable thinkers today acknowledge the importance of having access to texts that include protagonists and other characters like the reader.  Even a cursory review of the literary “canon” reveals the fact that the hyper majority of protagonists have been male and white. In the last ten years, the publishing world seems to have finally awakened to the importance of producing texts that feature a diversity of characters that more accurately reflects the diversity of humans likely to read those texts.  The twin shift has been the proliferation of texts by a more diverse range of authors. If schools are truly to prepare students for the world they will live in as adults, the texts to which they are exposed must be as diverse as the humans around them. I have no doubt that your librarian is fully aware of the importance of this issue and has made heroic efforts along these lines.  If the funding available is as limited as it is for the libraries I work with, that effort has probably produced no more than a ripple on that ocean of need.
  2. In the last two or three years, the discussion about the work of schools in my area has finally begun to shirt seriously and systematically aware from elevating test scores to actually lifting student learning.  In other words, I am at last thrilled to be part of work to produce thinkers instead of merely answerers.  In the past I have been absolutely transparent about my position on standardized testing both in the blog and in my professional conversations: during this Age of Accountability, public education made the decision to value higher test scores over more learning.  The failure of that movement is well documented by thousands of scholars and voices in the profession.  It was no mistake that libraries have been starved, marginalized and (in some places) literally abandoned: we were spending the resources that should have been allocated to them on the latest magical solution for better test scores.  So the choice seems clear to me: to truly produce young women and men who are critical thinkers, they need a massively wide range of ideas to think about.  There are simply not enough hours in the day to provide students exposure to enough content in the classroom.  They must have access to high quality, relevant, powerful texts that they select to read.  A healthy library directly supports the core mission of producing engaged, thoughtful citizens. 
  3.  Finally, a study of the history of education in America reveals the explicit purposes for which the education of the young has been set.  Too often in our past, the purpose of school has been the training of the young to fill the role set for them in adulthood – roles heavily pre-influenced by class, race, religion and other factors.  In short, education has been the instrument of control. At the risk of being entirely disregarded as alarmist, let me point out that at many, many points in history a recurring strategy for increasing control on a population has been the wholesale destruction or harsh censorship of books.  If public education simply refuses to prioritize funding for libraries in a way that measurably leads to the slow decay of their collections into irrelevance, how can we in good conscience avoid the conclusion that we are denying students access to a resource absolutely essential to their intellectual and social formation?  Many students do not have access to a library other than the one in their school. By allowing those libraries to fall far below reasonable standards of operation, we undermine the efforts we public insist we are committed to undertaking.  Instead of being instruments of control, our schools and libraries should be catalysts of agency in our youth.  Weak libraries can provide no such support.

And there’s more…  There are probably dozens of other ways in which school libraries should advance the core mission of schools but do not.  I would love to hear your ideas. Above all, do something.  If you can’t solve the entire problem, start somewhere. Our children deserve our action.

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

The Silver Bullet We Always Had

In the first two blog posts in this series, I made the case that literacy is much more than a science to be executed and that nothing short of an avalanche of books for students to select freely from is enough to develop strong readers.

In a profession that seems obsessed with finding the answer, it seems ironic that the mechanism for igniting and nurturing the art of literacy has been so often forgotten, downplayed or outright abandoned.  No teacher can possibly handle the crushing weight and range of instructional duties assigned and allocate enough time to curate, acquire and manage a collection of books diverse and extensive enough to serve the individual needs of the students he/she serves.  Fortunately, just such a professional educator is available to serve the needs of students – the school librarian.  Most school librarians are exceptionally well qualified to serve as a school’s lead in nurturing the art of literacy. Many hold a degree in library science that provides specific training in skills particularly relevant to developing readers, many of which go well beyond what teacher preparation programs provide.  They can be counted on to celebrate reading, to serve individual students’ developmental needs, to collaborate closely with classroom teachers and to provide both innovative and research-based recommendations for improving reading in their school.

But somehow, far too often, they are not the strongest voice in the conversation about how to build strong readers.  Many times, they are not included in the decision-making process of the school at all.  Some schools do not even have a librarian.  As the spaces in which they work have become known as “library-media centers”, they have been expected to be tech “gurus” – a role which most have embraced enthusiastically, even as it has forced them to spend less time on what should be their essential function.  In some cases, the library has become a space in which students are encouraged to learn and collaborate and innovate – with technology.  While technical and digital literacy are particularly essential to the success of everyone entering the workforce now and in the future, to allow this focus to come at the expense of reading is exceptionally dangerous.  Many librarians have also been tapped to support the task of reading instruction – often in the form of “small group instruction”.  Again, direct and even individualized instruction in reading is an important part of becoming a strong reading.  Structures that prioritize that objective at the expense of equally important work are evidence of the imbalance we have been discussing.

The evidence is clear that public education and decision-makers in the public arena are willing to allow libraries a long, slow death by ignoring them.  While there are doubtlessly examples of this around the country, I will limit my examples to those in the environment where I work.  In my state, librarians are funded at the state level like teachers – with a formula based on student enrollment.  If a school’s enrollment is too low, they do not earn a “full” librarian.  School districts in such situations must either assign librarians to serve multiple schools or find money to pay the missing portion of the salaries required to have a full-time librarian in each school.  Students most likely not to have a full-time librarian in their school are naturally those who are in school systems with the least available resources – children who are almost all part of poor families.  On the other end of the spectrum, very large schools do not receive funding for an additional librarian.  Even elementary schools with more than 1,500 students receive state funds for one librarian.

Funding for the library itself comes from the state as well.  Under the current formula funding structure (a per-teacher allocation), a school can purchase about 1.5 books for every teacher in the school per year if the entire amount is spent on books and not on the other supplies that are necessary to keep a library running.  This amount is certainly not enough to maintain that avalanche we talked about earlier.  But it is more than the $0 libraries were allocated for eight of the last ten years.

It seems impossible to excuse this abysmal lack of funding as a function of “budget pressures”. At the same time that we have spent literally nothing on libraries, we have poured hundreds of millions of dollars into other educational priorities.  Educators and leaders everywhere spoke up and spoke out on lots of issues – as well they should; the voices calling for attention to this most basic resource in schools – books – were few and completely ignored.

To avoid misunderstanding, massive credit goes to the hundreds of librarians who have been speaking out all along and who have found increasingly creative ways to keep their libraries healthy.  Hats off to the school principals and system leaders who have made reading their core mission and who have found and invested funds to make their libraries strong.  As a rule, their schools are strong as well – along with their students’ literacy skills.

For most of us though, we are here in this quandary that we may not have created but that we have definitely exacerbated by foolishly focusing on just half of the equation.  To be clear, it would have been equally foolish to abandon reading instruction and focus all our efforts on independent reading.  In today’s educational climate, that course of action seems inconceivable.  The way forward, however, should be simple.

Restore the balance.  Make both sides of literacy the focus.  Continue to apply excellent, evidence-based practice to reading instruction.  Take steps to build a culture of reading by making truly independent reading a part of the school’s DNA.  

Here are five suggestions for getting started:

  • Accept that literacy is not one dimensional.  Control the things that are meant to be controlled.  Stop trying to control (or quantify or “track” or just ignore) the things that aren’t.  Recognize that the lopsided approach we have been taking just. does. not. work! Let the joy and the passion and the magic of reading be your best friend. Crazy little secret – when kids love to read, they do. A lot.  When kids read a lot, they get better at reading.  When kids get better at reading, they can prove it on a test.     
  • Invite your school librarian to be the school’s “culture of reading” director.  Trust her/him to lead the process of figuring out what your school needs to do to become a community of passionate, strong readers. Folks trained in the science of literacy can help with this work too.  They should not be leading/doing this work instead of the librarian though.
  • Evaluate your school’s library collection.  Organizations such as the American Association of School Librarians offer resources and recommendations. The key questions are “Do we have enough books” and “Is our collection young enough”.  If you have thousands of books so old students will not read them, they aren’t helping. As we pointed out last time, this is especially important with non-fiction books.  Be ready to hear that your library needs help.  My children’s elementary school has valued and support their library for decades.  Seriously, someone raises money for it literally every day of the year … and that library’s (amazing) collection still does not meet the national standard of an “exemplary” collection.
  • Find money for your library.  It’s that simple.  Ask the generous members of your community.  Sell concessions at the ball game.  Write grants.  Make the case to your board.  We are doing all this and more.  By the way, it’s working for us.  But that’s a story for another day. Figure out how to make this a priority and make it happen. The good news is that “we need books” is one of the statements your community members are most likely to understand and accept.
  • Recommit your classroom, school, district to a focus on literacy that makes actual results the goal.  Keep in mind that test scores are symbols; our goal should be to improve the reality those symbols signify.  Young people who are actually strong readers will display behaviors and provide evidence of their excellence in ways that go far beyond what a test can measure.  That outcome is one to be excited about and work towards.

 

  • Bonus: Get the adults in your school/district involved in modeling a culture of reading.  Share with others what you are reading, host book talks, make specific recommendations to students, show what an adult who reads looks like.  Give students an example of someone who reads when s/he does not have to.  If you are not on fire for reading, why should they be?

In the first two posts in this series, I tried to make the case for change like this.  Next time, I will wrap up the series by pointing out a few more positive effects this change is likely to have.

2 Comments

Filed under EdLeadership, education, Libraries and Literacy

The Missing Avalanche

In the first post in this series, I set out to make the case that public education has fallen into the trap of believing that it is possible to develop great readers (from the struggling readers we often serve) by focusing on reading instruction.  Even when that focus actively crowds out the other half of literacy: independent reading.

While the drive to fix our problem (vis-a-vis low test scores) is understandable, the problem is that we know better.  We know how growing into a strong reader works.

We have known for a long time that

  • in order to become a proficient reader, you have to read a lot. Emerging readers need to read every day. It takes hundreds of books to become a great reader, not dozens.
  • since being different from each other is a key part of being human, readers are interested in different books (from each other). Readers only get better when they read books that aren’t too easy or too hard. As reading ability develops, a reader is able to read increasingly difficult books comfortably. In order to provide students enough options to interest and challenge them, we need a lot of books.  
  • the best way to get a human to read that many books is to let her/him choose her/his own books because humans (particularly emerging readers) will only read lots of books if they find them interesting.

The facts are simple.  We have to let students choose what they read and to do so they need both autonomy and options.

Unfortunately, in far too many cases, our zeal for ensuring student success has allowed us to violate these principles.  We try to quantify and control the art of reading. By degrees, we strip the independence from independent reading. We find ways to put a rank and value on each book. We dictate how much and how often students read. We make reading into a pursuit of points.  For many students, these practices conspire with the honest difficulty of school to make reading a chore to be first dreaded, then avoided, then abandoned at the first opportunity.  Incidentally, it is worth considering the possibility that our fervor to stamp out illiteracy among the young is contributing directly to the precipitous rise of aliteracy in adults.

The reduction of literacy to a science has had another direct impact on our practice in public education.  It has given rise to a climate in which books themselves have become dispensable to the process of developing strong readers.  In an astonishing leap of logic, we have been perfectly content to abandon one of the cardinal rules of this process: ensuring students have access to enough books.  We (most public schools) have stopped buying books at anything near an appropriate rate.  Kelly Gallagher, noted speaker, advocate for effective literacy practice and author of several books including Readicide (a book that examines how schools are systematically killing the love of reading), suggests that students need not hundreds of books to chose from but thousands. He says that only an avalanche of books will do.  But instead of fighting to ensure funding to sustain a school environment that has that many books available to students, we have decided to spend our precious resources elsewhere.  

The problem with diverting funding away from book purchases is that the age of a school’s collection of books matters.  Consider two more things we know:

  • It is important for emerging readers to read both fiction and nonfiction. The recent conventional wisdom is that well more than half of reading should be nonfiction.
  • Nonfiction ages faster than fiction. For example, Magic School Bus and Dr. Seuss books still appeal to young readers just fine. Books with topics like “When We Get to the Moon” and “Today’s Hottest NBA Stars: Magic Johnson and Larry Bird” were probably written later but no longer appeal to young readers.

The science of literacy has starved the art of literacy for resources. When students do not benefit from the emaciated book collections that exist as a result, that fact is taken as further proof that “recreational” reading is not essential to the process of developing as a reader but is a luxury in which those who are already proficient readers may indulge.

So the question is this: how is the balance in your school?

  • Do students get to pick their own books for independent reading?
  • If students are allowed to pick, do they have to follow certain rules (point/level restrictions)?
  • Is your reading system really about scoring points or about reading?
  • How many years in the last five has your school spent more money on books for independent reading than on either a reading program or a reading teacher?
  • What’s the average age of the books your students have access to?

Do your students have an avalanche of books available to them and it is used to nurture a passion for reading?  If we produce students who can read perfectly well but chose not to, we will have failed.  Sadly, the statistics on adult aliteracy suggest that we have already made this mistake.  Even more alarming is the fact that our strategy has done little to reduce the problem it was designed to solve.  We have sacrificed a deep passion for reading in favor of reading “achievement” and have not accomplished even that.

Let’s find the balance that has been missing by tapping into an amazing resource we have always had.

3 Comments

Filed under EdLeadership, education, Libraries and Literacy

The neglected side of literacy

Warning: this series of posts is likely to offend.  Look away if you don’t want that. If you do read on, give the following claims thought before you dismiss them out of hand. Chocolate is usually good for hurt feelings.

This is the first of what is intended to be a four-part series exploring a pretty fantastic “knowing-doing gap” in public education right now.  We know what is right and have always known it; we just act like we don’t know.  To my shame, while I have striven to live and work by the principles I mean to advance here, I have only very recently begun to advocate for a radical change on this issue.  So I include myself in the “responsible party” category.

Next, a disclaimer.  I am not a literacy “specialist” or “expert”.  I have not been trained by my state or a university in the technical knowledge and skills associated with this area of practice.  I am not a librarian, unless you count the work I do to curate my personal and professional libraries.  But I am a non-stop reader.  I have read the literature.  For years I have read the writing of the professionals from all around the world who have written on this topic.  There are more qualified, more polished and more experienced voices making this case.  But their voices are being ignored, willfully misunderstood or given patronizing lip service by far too many in education.  Perhaps by adding my voice to theirs, I can help make the case for just one more educator who can in turn impact just one student.  That will be good enough for me.

We have a problem with literacy in public education.  We can’t get kids to “read at high levels”.  Scores on all manner of standardized tests consistently indicate that high percentages of students fall short of “proficient” attainment, no matter what that mark is.  Much higher percentages of minority students and students who are poor fall short of these marks.  For skeptics of standardized testing (like me), there is still no denying the fact that loads of students in high schools across the country cannot read at all or read so poorly as to make the distinction irrelevant.  We’ve known the problem for a long time. We’ve been trying to fix the problem for a long time and we haven’t.  

It would be disrespectful of me to suggest that there is a silver bullet for this problem that we have simply refused to see.  Our problem is not astigmatism though, it’s myopia. We have been hyper-focused on just one half of what it takes to become a great reader.  

In this age of accountability, we have focused more and more of our energy on reading instruction.  Individuals more experienced that I am can trace this (inappropriate) narrowing of focus in more detail, but the facts of recent trends in education are clear: we believe that the solution to the issue of poor reading is more and better reading instruction.

Recently, I had the opportunity to serve on an interview panel for a position that requires extensive knowledge and expertise in curriculum and teaching.  One question asked applicants to identify the two most important parts of an effective literacy program.  To my great dismay (but not to my surprise), only two applicants event mentioned books.  Every other applicant focused his/her answer on some aspect of reading instruction.  The significance of their answers was not at all lost on me and mirrors our decision-making at all levels of education: a focus on literacy means teaching students how to read.  This is the science of reading.  It breaks the act of reading and learning to read into its component parts and determines the “research-based” way to execute each part.  It tracks student progress against specific metrics meticulously.  It requires teachers to follow the reading program “to fidelity”.  It believes in the power of the basal reader.

And this part of literacy is not wrong.  There is a science to reading.  We can understand how it works and we can apply that understanding to our work to teach young minds how to read.

The problem is that this part of literacy actively seeks to deny the value of the other side of the coin.  The cult of the science of reading is deeply skeptical of the art of reading.  It demands that students’ “independent” reading be tightly controlled – for their own good, of course.  It insists that students document their reading – through a standardized test whenever possible.  It calls time spent in class on independent reading “wasted” if it is not organized and documented.  But mostly, it starves the art of reading but demanding all the resources.  It needs all the personnel, all the funding and all the time.  It is happy to give stickers and cupcakes and even free books to the kids who find a way to read a bunch anyway.  It even makes a show of promoting a “culture of reading” with special events like reading days – which, by the way, also provide amazing photo opportunities for adults.  But on every other day, it is very specific about how many minutes must be spent on reading instruction.

Because science is easier to quantify and measure than art (whether the results are good or bad), we accede to the demands of the science of literacy.  The numbers look bad so we use other numbers to fight the first set of numbers.  We hire more people.  We buy more programs.  We budget more minutes.  We take more reading tests.  

And nothing really changes because that’s not how reading works.  It takes both sides of the equation to grow proficient readers.

Part II: The Missing Avalanche

3 Comments

Filed under Uncategorized