From my travel journal.

We left Walden and headed to Gann Academy, our sister school in Boston. The purpose was not to meet with fellow Jewish high school students, but to talk about gay marriage with Kim Crawford Harvie, the senior minister at Arlington Street Church, a Unitarian Universalist congregation. She showed us a clip of her performing the first legal gay marriage in Boston (click to view a photo album of the wedding). It was really inspiring. The students asked very thoughtful questions. My students are so much more open-minded than students I have taught in the past. I really get the impression they were being sincere with Kim when they said they didn’t understand why people were so opposed to gay marriage. It occurred to me that so much of the hatred directed at homosexuals — limitations on their freedoms, verbal abuse, so-called protection of marriage amendments — mirrors the civil rights struggles of other groups — women working for suffrage and African-Americans. On the one hand, that gives me hope that we can one day overcome the roadblocks to equal rights for gays, but at the same time, it makes me sad that others don’t see it. Instead, they point to the Bible — the Bible also advocated slavery, and we don’t think that is right. I mean, the Bible has been used in defense of slavery and of denying the rights of blacks. Kim and the kids discussed the passage in Leviticus that most, well, I have to say it’s mostly conservative Christians who mention it: “Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it [is] abomination (18:22).”

I mentioned a passage by Paul in the New Testament that many point to as well (1 Corinthians 6:9-10) that refers to to the “effeminate.” I admit I find that translation unclear. Some versions of the Bible use homosexual, but that isn’t the same as effeminate, so why was it translated that way? Whatever the case, Kim was right about one thing: Jesus never had one word to say about homosexuality. He spoke about adultery, for example, but never homosexuality. In all, I have to say it was very interesting to hear her speak.

Another entry from my paper journal of my trip to Boston.

I had an incredible day. I am so glad I came. I feel closer to the kids. I really enjoyed the feeling of, well, I guess communion seems a funny word to use when speaking of Jewish kids, but it fits for me. I enjoyed joking, talking, taking pictures of everything they did. I had so much fun.

“A child is not a vessel to be filled, but a lamp to be lit.” ~ Hebrew Proverb.

I’m back from Boston, and I had an incredible experience. I am too tired to unload all of it now, but over the next few days I will post entries from the paper journal I kept on the trip. I will not be posting pictures, because I do not want to compromise the anonymity of my students. They are all underage, and I don’t have their permission, nor that of their parents, to expose them to the masses on the WWW. Please don’t be disappointed about that.

The following comes from my paper journal and was written while I was en route to Boston and had just flown over New York City.

2/13: The Flight

Flying over New York was amazing. N- and I were looking for landmarks. I recognized the shape of Manhattan from all the maps I’ve studied. I could pick out several building and Central Park. J- found the Statue of Liberty. Conspicuously absent, of course, was the World Trade Center — we could see very clearly where it had been. As we flew over Long Island, I recognized Fitzgerald’s East Egg and West Egg (Manhasset Neck and Great Neck) — they looked just like the maps in the The Great Gatsby. N- told me all about how much fun New York is (I’ve never been). But he said New Orleans (where the 9th graders are going for their trip) is a must. The kids are all talking about food. Clam chowder is number one on their list. I did my civic duty as an educator of Jewish children and reminded them it wasn’t kosher. Beyond that, I can’t stop them.

Before we took off, E- reminded me I was going to Boston with 21 16-year-old boys. Yikes! As we took off, N- said it was too late to turn back now. I’m already glad I came — just to share this with the students.

Aerial view of Manhattan posted at Wired New York.

We have two visiting students from the Pardes Institute in Jerusalem who are doing (I think) their practicum with us. They seem quite nice. Both British gents. They are absolutely aghast that America does not have a national curriculum.

We had a lively discussion about America’s lack of a national curriculum at lunch today, and I think they remain unconvinced of the benefits of state and/or local curricula. Sparker and I also discussed the issue briefly after school. Her thoughts were that we don’t really remember content we learn in high school, we remember the critical thinking and writing skills, the analysis skills, the skills we later apply to success in life. I said something about teaching students and not subjects, and she agreed. I love the content I teach, but frankly, I know that most of my students are not as crazy about what I do as I am.

Oddly enough, the matter came up with yet another person, this time a student — an upperclassman (can’t recall if she’s in the 11th or 12th grade). She said she studied hardly any Southern literature when she took American Lit. with a different teacher (who is, by the way, from New York). I tend to focus on Southern lit. when I teach American Lit. Frankly, I would hate it if someone gave me an absolute list of works to teach and didn’t allow me any autonomy to choose.

I think I do a pretty good job of selecting literature selections that represent the concepts I am teaching. I teach a lot of the canon, too.

The Pardes interns had the point that teachers might really focus on what they love at the expense of something else students really need to know. I wonder if that’s true?

I used to be a proponent of a national curriculum. In fact, I did a presentation on this topic in my Foundations of Education class. I moved around a lot as a kid, and I felt like I missed out on whole chunks of stuff. But Sparker made a great point when she said, “Well, you’re okay now, aren’t you?” She’s right. I missed out on lots of grammar, The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn, and too much other stuff that I personally consider vital to a proper English education. But now I teach English.

So does content matter that much? Or does it matter more to teach what you love, being sure to be representative and comprehensive, knowing you might inspire the kids to learn the other real skills that underlie what you’re teaching?

What are your thoughts on a national curriculum?