
I must confess I like the responses so far, most of them more than whatever I’m about to say. Scott Haselwood’s is one I could particularly get behind – I was tempted to simply cut’n’paste it here and claim it was ‘group work’.
But in the interest of adding to the conversation rather than simply standing on the shoulders of giants, here are the approximately two things I’d sweepingly reform were I sovereign #oklaed ‘King for a Day’, in, um… six hunmumblemurmer or so words (hey, Common Core math). I eagerly await the letter from Congressional Republicans reminding the rest of #edreform that my efforts will probably be reversed as soon as the next ‘King for a Day’ takes office.
#1 – Eliminate the Cult of College Readiness.
Not everyone needs to go to college. Not everyone needs 4 math credits, 3 science credits, 3 history credits, etc. Sure, in an ideal universe I’d endorse every United States citizen having a comfortable familiarity with every core subject. In that ideal universe, every child can learn everything about everything in their own unique way while held to universally high standards.
But you’ve all had those conversations, sometimes in conspiratorial whispers – “look, we’re just trying to get this kid through – we’re not doing him any favors by trying to go by the book…” We constantly circumvent the system even while demanding it be reinforced, because of all of the ‘exceptions’.
Which are MOST of our kids, if we’re honest.
We juggle our convictions regarding what SHOULD happen in theory with our concerns about what’s actually GOOD for the real kids in front of us. Let’s stop.
Our terror of tracking is valid, but it’s led us to overstandardize curriculum and students in a way which is not only harmful, but doesn’t actually work. We’re hurting the top kids in various academic and ‘extra-curricular’ realms in order to pretend that if we just grunt harder, the kids who can’t or won’t engage will rise towards excellence and discover how truly fulfilling it is to argue themes in a self-selected novel.
#2 – Get rid of semesters and required cores.
Four week units, one week off between each, teacher and student-selected. Students are offered a wide range of teacher and subject options created by teachers according to their own interests and abilities, and we do our best to work in some reading, writing, and other essentials through these.
But oh! The gaps in knowledge! The missing essentials!
Have you seriously talked to a single high school student or adult ever? They’re not all emerging as Renaissance Peeps, dear – there’s little danger of things getting worse and much potential that given the choice to teach something you care about or learn something you’ve chosen from actual options… well, real education might happen.
How do we maintain ‘high standards’ while we do this? I have no idea. But if you reject it on that basis, you’ll need to first demonstrate there’s something currently successful that we’ll be losing in the effort.
#3 – Allow kids to fail.
Yeah, I don’t like it either, but the problem with eliminating failure is that success becomes impossible as well. As I type this, March Madness is killing productivity in offices across the country. For every game played, the failure rate is 50%. Given those numbers, how are all of the teams involved SO good? Excellence matters, and that requires falling short be a real possibility.
School isn’t a competitive sport, but the mechanisms necessary for dragging everyone across the finish line willingly or not prevent anyone else actually running, or falling, or getting up, or getting faster or better at anything. You cannot be both a baby and an adult effectively.
We’re stuck in our efforts to maintain the illusion we’re promoting struggle and growth while focusing most of our energy and other resources towards dragging along the least engaged portion of our populations. Not only is it disingenuous, it doesn’t work – the bottom isn’t becoming the top and the top isn’t fooled as they sink towards mediocrity, frustrated by trying to beat a game whose rules most of them recognize as well-intentioned lies.
Other Responses from #OklaEd Bloggers (Please let me know who I’ve missed):
Fourth Generation Teacher / Claudia Swisher – #oklaed Queen for a Day
OkEducationTruths / Rick Cobb – Blogging from a Prompt: If I Were King
Teaching From Here / Scott Haselwood – If I Am The #Oklaed King for a Day!
Tegan Teaches 5th – Queen for a Day!
Nicole Shobert, Thoughts and Ramblings – If I Were Queen of Education for the Day
Choosing the Road Not Taken / Shanna Mellott – Another Brick in the Wall
A View From the Edge / Rob Miller – If I Were King of #Oklaed
The Principal’s Cluttered Desk – King for a Day of #OklaEd
Thoughts on Oklahoma Education / Jason James – King for the Day
RELATED POST: This Week in Education / Dr. John Thompson – Schools and L’Dor V’Dor; From Generation to Generation


After Sumter, the Union called for soldiers from the loyal states, some of whom actually sent them. Generals were often elected by their men or appointed for their political connections, so knowing what you were doing wasn’t really top priority at this stage. Men signed up eagerly for the good times to come – war was a mostly theoretical adventure, and defeating the silly South would be good times.
President Lincoln appointed Irvin McDowell to make this happen, but McDowell was skeptical about the supposed ease of such a mission. He’d done real war before, and was concerned about trying to send men into battle based on the harassment of impatient politicians and newspapers. He was famously reassured by President Lincoln, “You are green, it is true, but they are green also; you are all green alike.” 
Unfortunately P.G.T. Beauregard, our friend from the attack on Ft. Sumter, was waiting for him just outside of Richmond. He had a plan as well, once the Yankee oppressors arrived – fake to the right, attack hard on the left, flank the enemy. Once between the army and the capital, they’d have no choice but to surrender. War over – here comes the honor and the glory (and let’s use some discretion regarding the ladies).
People were getting SHOT! IN THE BODY! Cannonballs were tearing off limbs, and bullets were splattering the brains of friends. Many bowels and bladders were emptied in those opening hours, and shame quickly gave way to survival instinct for some as this glorious adventure turned out to suck majorly. This was NOT GLORIOUS AND WHAT THE HELL THEY’RE TRYING TO KILL US ALL! 



Mrs. Chesnut has been recording for posterity the events surrounding the so-called “Battle of Fort Sumter.” Except she’s mostly not. 
That Chesnut always returns to the sincere – the experience – anchors her prose in a way mere observation or fiction could not. Her ability to grab descriptive slices of people and events and weave them in so transparently makes this something more alive than most find mere history to be. 
“A satisfying faith” – once again, understated layers of meaning. Chesnut doesn’t directly comment, she portrays – with precision. I think she’s aware of us, all these years later, reading her through this… ‘documentation’ of events. Do you feel her Mona Lisa smirk on us?
The standard American History book will tell you the South was overconfident after First Bull Run, etc. I’d argue Colonel Manning and his ilk were way ahead of the crowd on this one. 
Mary Boykin Chesnut was a Southern lady in the purest tradition, born into South Carolina’s political nobility and educated at one of the finest boarding schools in Charleston. Her husband was the son of a successful plantation owner and an upwardly mobile politico himself.
The diary of Mrs. Chesnut is one of the essential primary sources of the Civil War, and still readily available if you’re interested. It’s quite accessible to the casual reader – you won’t even know you’re learning history, I promise.
Never has a better case been made for teaching reading and writing, although her keen observations on human nature are perhaps harder to mandate.
“Men were audaciously wise and witty.” What a marvelous phrase. It sounds like the Mad Hatter’s tea party, but instead of pure chaos, her description is redolent of forced fearlessness and social gilding. F. Scott Fitzgerald has nothing on the wealthy belle when it comes to writing dinner parties.
While the rest of the city – and, by proxy, the South – celebrates the opening rounds of what will no doubt prove a majestic little melee, one anonymous voice just out of view notices that they’re firing land weapons at a fort designed to withstand attack by foreign navies. 