1. The four (doesn't have to be four, but it sounds like a good number) houses would start out as a club under the ASB umbrella. That way it is not completely official, coming from the administration, but still open to everyone.
2. Membership would be open to all faculty and all students (including ILP) on a voluntary basis. Students would sign up. I'm not sure how students would be assigned to a house, but it seems like it needs to be somewhat random to prevent groups or cliques from joining a particular house en masse.
3. Most of the activities would probably be extracurricular, taking place either before school, at lunch or after school. Teachers that participate could potentially agree on ways to assign and subtract points from the houses for academic reasons, as this would eventually be an important component if it was to ever become a schoolwide organization.
4. Many of the activities would potentially be financed by ASB, as they would be open to all students, not just those participating in these houses. House-specific activities would have to be paid for by the house members themselves.
5. There would be a need for a few general meetings in the beginning, probably in the theatre. The participating teachers would lay down the rules and try to set the tone. After it is clear that the students understand the process, each house could meet on its own when it chooses.
6. Houses could potentially adopt their own uniforms. Shawn says he has a friend at Balfour that could potentially get us a deal on bulk orders of graduation gowns.
It seems important that those that want to participate come to an agreement on the general structure of the organization before starting to get too much into particulars. That is difficult, as the details are much more fun to discuss.
4 comments:
Okay, Jonathan, since you keep directing us to this post for responses, I'll dive in to start the discussion. Using your initial thoughts as a base:
1. Four houses sounds manageable, unless there is some reason we should have an odd number. The ASB oversight is a good idea right now because the program will be voluntary and extra-curricular.
2. As I stated in the post above, we should select a short list of significant criteria and use it to sort students into the houses, at least for the first year, perhaps two. This is the only way to even the playing field in terms of talent; student personalities within each house will provide the variety. One of the goals of this program, as I understand it, is to encourage students to form connections outside of their usual cliques. So, break up the AP groups - they see each other all day long anyway. Break up the football players and the cheerleaders. If these students want to join the House experiment, they'll go along with it.
3. This part about meetings may be the crunch. We all know students who are incredibly busy, and as teachers we have demanding schedules as well. I think we need to take it easy at first, trying to build group identities without demanding too much of everyone's time. What is the limit? I don't know - another point for discussion. But, having a short list of objective behavioral and academic standards to apply will start the ball rolling and keep everyone mindful of their membership on a daily basis. We could probably set up some house competitions once or twice a month to foster team building right away and generate interest among students who have not joined. (Here's a good opportunity to let people see that Academic League is not dorky.)
4. Concur with your points here. And, I hope that we will forevermore shun dues of any kind.
5. General informational meetings are a good idea. The teachers involved must absolutely agree on the guidelines beforehand because with this many people involved, well, it's going to be lively to say the least - which is what we want. It's also our most ambitious club program ever, so there will be some surprises. Whoever heads these houses really should have an assistant, and perhaps a teacher mentor to act as an analyst.
6. Uniforms - yuck. How about house pins, or badges, or lunchboxes instead?
JT, to answer your question in the post above concerning the high expectations: I think the first list of standards should be concise and clearly objective. For instance, we could use exam scores, attendance, tardies, detention referrals, dress code infractions, etc. I just want to avoid confrontations over points detracted for "pet peeves" in the heat of the moment. (I know, this could NEVER happen at Charter, so why bring it up?)However, awarding points for excellent behavior, such as a thoughtful act, or rewarding shy students for speaking up more in class, could certainly be exercised within the subjective rationale of any teacher on campus.
JP - What about a tie in with the Alumni Association? Some of the grads will no doubt want to get involved in some way.
Lastly, I enjoyed reading the various proposals for house names. While I loved the different tiger titles because they sound so cool, there isn't much to work with in terms of deeper meaning. If we want to reinforce American values, I think we should lean more toward the Founders (yeah, go ahead, think it, but this is not about Social Sciences establishing dominance - really!). We can use the different viewpoints of the Founders to form themes for each house. I think the "plank owner" students should have some say in this, too. Over time, as Mel pointed out, houses will develop their own pet nicknames, but the serious focus will be established. (I want to be part of Madison House!) We can always have subthemes like house animal (tigers), house element or color (science), etc., to bring in as many disciplines as possible.
1. I think we're all agreed that we should start with a trial run like this. Four, I agree, sounds like a good number, for whatever reason. More than four and I think it would be harder for inter-House relations with more than four.
2. Definitely, it is open to all faculty. My hope would be that all the faculty would ultimately become part of a House. As for sorting... I think random would obviously be likeliest to make the Houses most even. However, Jackie's idea of a shortlist of criteria could work, too. Just a thought--perhaps we could get an initial list of students who intend to join, and then the Heads of House could meet and divvy them up by those criteria. In the future, we could either add new students randomly to a House, or by some other selection criteria. The personality test Mel mentioned in another post, perhaps.
3. I think perhaps more than House meetings--which will be necessary at times, of course--is just the idea that each House should have some central connections. Perhaps once or twice a week, the House eats lunch together in a certain spot, or something. Activities and competitions would obviously have to be not during class; however all participating teachers can and should agree on a system of points. I really think we need to get one of those programmable electronic signs that scroll messages. I saw one at Office Depot for about $250 that had remote keyboard entry. This would be a neat way to keep the running House totals on constant display. Although, I don't know who would be in charge of it. Perhaps we should try to get four of them (or perhaps something with a similar function, but cheaper) and the Heads of House can keep control of them.
4. Using ASB funding is a good idea, when possible. Of course, House events would have to be funded by the Houses...but you wouldn't have to spend much. You could have a monthly event like a House movie night or something in the theater; and kids could all be responsible for bringing snacks or something. There would really be no cost associated with things like that.
5. Yes, we'd need some general meetings; and the rules would definitely have to be very clearly laid out. I think that definitely, every teacher who wants to participate should become part of a House. You could have the Head; and however many "official" positions you wanted to create; and other teachers could just be teachers who are associated with that House, if they don't want a specific role.
6. Uniforms on a daily basis, I'm not sure about...but uniforms for special occasions, or for House meetings, or whatnot...Jackie, I think what Jonathan is referring to (since Shawn's representative is from Balfour) is more like black robes or like a graduation gown type of thing, along the lines of the school uniforms in The Books That Must Not Be Named. Badges, scarves, pins, etc., are also a great idea, and could be worn when not using the full uniform. I have to say, though...I like the idea of having those robes for certain occasions. I wouldn't say no to a nice set of black robes with my House colors accentuating them.
Jackie, I like the idea of incorporating disciplines by having House elements, etc. And I understand that it's an attempt to more seriously connect to the idea of American heritage and not an attempt at Social Studies domination--but personally, I would have a hard time connecting to a House named after a figure from history. My own high school education in history being woefully inadequate, and having taken no history courses in college, I really have no idea what it is about Madison that you are drawn to; nor what historical figure I would be most strongly connected to. Hopefully our students, given the education they have here, would have more of a connection. But my preference would still be to have House names that are not affiliated with any specific discipline; or at least, not with any specific real historical figures.
If we could think about other potential House names using American history that aren't people, I'd be more up for that (though I still like the tigers...but each House could have a House Tiger...and as long as I can have a Tiger, I'll be happy).
I was thinking of something along the lines of using the Preamble...but not actually doing that, because those names would either be loaded with too much potential prestige (Justice House, Liberty House), come off in ways that could be taken in potentially undesirable ways (Tranquility House)...or frankly, just be downright bizarre (Defense House, Welfare House). So I'm NOT suggesting using the Preamble...just maybe something along those lines to dissociate it from specific people, to whom some students, and historically challenged people like myself, wouldn't necessarily feel a connection, or get what their deal is.
I also think, Jackie, that the Alumni Association idea is fantastic. I can think of more than a few alumni who would be exceedingly bummed that they had not gotten to participate. They could be retroactively sorted as emeritus members of Houses; though in that case, we should probably just let them choose their own Houses.
I think perhaps what we should do is that someone should propose a basic structure and perhaps even set of rules, as a starting point; then we can all rip it to shreds, find the good parts, scrap the bad parts, and reassemble the good parts with the glue of constructive criticism, or whatever other really cheesy metaphor you want to make up.
I don't mind having my work ripped to shreds (it would make it shorter, for one thing), so unless someone beats me to it in the next few days...be on the lookout.
Noah, Thanks for the thoughtful, detailed comments. One happy result is that I'm not so bothered about all the science I have forgotten! Another result is that I would like to discuss two points for you to consider while drafting the proposal.
The first area deals with student selection for the first year (at least). Here's how I envision the process:
1. Hold a couple of general meetings to make sure all of the interested students can attend and ask questions.
2. Give students a few days to a week to decide and sign up.
3. Use some list of criteria to assign students, such as class (this one is crucial, in my opinion), AP or honors status, sex, football/cheerleading, and perhaps students with a track record of gnarly behavior problems. Some of these categories will overlap, so we prioritize the categories and then fine-tune the groups at the end. The result should be four Houses with similar demographics based on our selected distinctions. (And by the way, this is perfectly constitutional according the Supreme Court - universities do it all the time!)
4. Once the groups are chosen, they are designated by letters or numbers, and the House Heads choose their groups AT RANDOM. We can use the "magic hat" for this one if you like. This will preclude favoritism and empire-building by the staff. One possible modification would allow House Heads to choose perhaps one senior and/or one junior they feel comfortable working with as a student leader, but I don't think the students should be told about it.
5. Once the assignments are announced for each House (and this should be done with GREAT fanfare and celebration), the doors are closed, so to speak, until the following semester. House Heads focus on learning about their members and building team spirit. I think that adding new members will be a distraction, and the students who took the leap deserve our full attention.
The second area deals with House names. The right theme for titles will influence everything from intial student interest to subthemes such as House mottoes, colors, animals, and all that brand merchandising to alumni 50 years from now. If we misstep on the titles, we can always overhaul them later, but what will we do with all of those pencils and mugs?
So, taking into consideration your valid points about not using historical figures, or the Preamble, or one theme that pays homage to a particular discipline, I have been searching the attic (i.e., wracking my brain) for some feasible alternatives. I rejected concepts from the Declaration (too unwieldy) and the Pledge (too limited); discarded famous battle and place names (lack of meaning); and I also threw out "American-sounding" terms like "freedom" and "union" and "liberty" because, well, they're general terms and overused.
I was left with two categories based on my belief that House titles should be inspiring, specific, and provide a sound basis for developing themes. The two lists below were taken from NASA space programs, US Navy ships, and the British Royal Navy (those Brits have a real flair for this kind of thing).
The first category could be called titles that describe types of people or purposes. Some sound vaguely American, but not necessarily. They are: Ranger, Pioneer, Explorer, Voyager, Vanguard, Pathfinder or Tracker, Patriot, Sentinel, Defender, Challenger, and Contender.
The second category are titles that describe characteristics. Some of the names overlap, but I'm not about to withhold the kitchen sink at this point. They are: Intrepid, Endeavor, Valiant or Valor, Tenacious, Zealous, Resolute, Reliant, Vigilant, Relentless, Hazard, Gallant, Daring, Audacious or Audacity, Dauntless, and Implacable.
That's it. Mainly, I hope these proposals spark ideas from all of our compadres because more variety now increases our chance of making the right choices.
(Mel, if this exceeds 20,000 words, bill me.)
Jackie,
I think we're getting closer with those names; although many of them are also (because, I'm certain, of the fact that they're Navy vessels) names of starships in Star Trek.
(My favorite starship, unfortunately, would not make a good House name: Defiant.)
Anyway, a lot of them sound really good.
I was thinking of perhaps adopting a Latin motto for the organization, and that each of the Houses could have a single one of the four words as its own motto:
Veritas, equitas, fidelitas, civitas.
Essentially, for those who don't know Latin or don't want to go to an online translator like I did: truth (knowledge), justice (fairness), loyalty, citizenship.
Perhaps even we could find House names that start with the same letters of such a motto?
(Although I like those words, I'm not overly attached to them.)
Some of Jackie's suggestions fit:
Veritas=Valiant, Valor, Voyager, Vanguard
Equitas=Endeavor...and it's not on Jackie's list, but I like Excelsior
(even though it's another Latin word)
Just another idea.
I'll be posting a segment of my proposal soon for everyone to tear into.
Post a Comment