Galapagos Bound
As a student, the situation appeared quite unfair. I always dreamed of giving the teacher a test and then enjoying marking all of the incorrect answers. As a teacher, I took no joy in the marking of tests or work that was incorrect. Even in a question as straightforward as, “ Four students share a cake equally. What Fraction does each student eat?” I gave credit to Krishad’s answer of “One fifth.” “Simple,” he told me, “They saved a piece just in case another person showed up.” Right and wrong answers can really be a question of perspective.
Last week I spent a day in Washington DC “grading” teachers’ papers with two others. Unfortunately there could be only four correct papers out of the fifty that I had to go over, and no matter what the perspective, that was all that could be right. We were one of eight panels choosing the next 30 teachers that will travel to the Galapagos Islands this November as a part of the Toyota International Teacher Program. There were a record 900 applications from all over the US from classroom teachers from 6th to 12th grade, and teachers of all subjects. It was our charge to decide who would “pass” on to the trip of a lifetime, and who would not. While I felt privileged to be asked to participate in the process, I did not relish the idea of giving what would turn out to be a failing grade to those who would not be visiting Las Islas Encantadas.
The process starts with the staff at iie perusing the entire application for completeness. Not following the basic rules of requirements and word counts, and submitting all the requested information. To be fair to all, the rules must be followed strictly. They then take a slightly closer look to see if anything is just outrageous such as “ I will bring back a Galapagos Tortoise and a Marine Iguana to use in a travelling presentation to bring to the fore the importance of conservation.” But the reviewers at this stage are fairly lenient, leaving most decisions of merit to panelists like myself.
At the panel stage, three people, usually including one teacher, somebody in an environmental field, and somebody from an international organization, are given 50 applications to read and rate. For this particular application, the four sections were: personal statement (why you should go), Impact statement( how you will use what you learn), a lesson plan( how you present environmental issues in a hands on manner in your classroom), and reference letters. The most heavily weighted parts were impact statements and lesson plans, but the personal narrative would often inform how you reviewed the other sections. It was not the writing itself that would make a story compelling, but the heart and relevance that the teacher portrayed. Impact statements had to cover students, school and community and be feasible. Lesson plans had to be hands-on, innovative, even if you admit getting the idea from somewhere else, and extendable into various disciplines. It also helped to write in the future perfect, leaving out the maybe’s and might’s.
Strange as it sounds for a trip to what people consider a science teacher’s dreamland, being a science teacher did not work in your favor. Toyota wants environmental education to be interdisciplinary and requires a diversity in subject matter taught by the teachers that are chosen. Almost sixty percent of the applicants taught science. When you consider that a high estimate would be fifteen science teachers, that means that the science teachers are vying for, at best, a one in forty spot. Teachers in any other discipline are up against the odds of one in twenty. I don’t gamble, not even on a one dollar lottery ticket, but my money would be on the teachers of other disciplines.
What it finally came down to was a fight for somebody that a panelist took on as cause. You said to yourself, “This person not only deserves this trip (All really did), but would be an asset to the other US teachers, the galapagueño teachers, the Toyota program, and their school and community.” Then we had to duke it out, give in a little and hope that others believed your arguments.
When all was said and done, we chose a stellar group to take advantage of the program, but had to let go an equal number that were on a par with them. Bittersweet is one way to describe it but the biggest discussion on the way out the door was the applications were all amazing. There were twenty people that I wanted to contact immediately to share ideas and use as resources. For privacy, however, all materials that I was given were destroyed on site, and I have to hope to find those people by happenstance at a later date.
So I got my wish: To grade teachers papers. Unfortunately I could not listen to the explanations as I could with Krishad. But, for those that were not chosen, there will be another round soon enough, and all that can, should apply.
DG
Add comment June 26th, 2008
