The following comment was written by a young man just returned from teaching in the Peace Corps. Responding to a request from the Network for Public Education, he wrote a letter to Congress about NCLB:
Diane-
I would like to share the letter I wrote (at the urging of NPE) to my congressional Representative concerning H.R. 5:
This time last year I was a recently returned Peace Corps Volunteer, coming home from service as an English teacher in a Cameroonian public school. Shortly before I left Cameroon I attended a disciplinary hearing convened for the purpose of meting out punishment. I sat with other teachers in a ring at the edge of the principal’s office while students were shuffled in by grade level, given the chance to explain their infractions, then made to lie on their stomachs on the dusty floor while an administrator whipped them. It was against the law, but they did it anyway. This policy was intended to regulate student behavior, and it was shamefully successful. They followed an ideology of control and never have I seen such a passive group of students. My colleagues and the administrators managing us weren’t bad people–or even bad educators. I still marvel at their drive to impart knowledge, but their instructional model followed a paradigm that mirrored their discipline: students are, to lean upon a cliche, vessels to be filled, objects to be acted upon.
It may be hard for us to see, but their ideology is our ideology. By conventional standards I was a good student; in me the systems of reward and punishment accomplished their goals. My success, however, was bounded by its context. The social psychology research that claims traditional classroom practices limit student interest, reduce depth of thought, and discourage a challenge-seeking orientation resonate with my experience. When I reflect on my education I feel the deep tragedy of my untapped potential. Here was the refrain of the times: “Why would I put more effort into this? I already have an A.” I was lucky because many other students repeated its more destructive corollary: “Why would I put any effort in to this? I’m just going to get an F.” No matter what a student’s place on this artificial spectrum, reducing performance to an externally imposed measurement of a pseudo-objective standard constitutes control. When, later in my academic career, I did fail one class, I imagine the emotional pain I felt was a close cousin to the physical pain of my future Cameroonian students.
Whether or not there are legitimate uses for standards in today’s world, the current political environment has paired standards with a toxic accountability. There’s an or else. Pay teachers following our formula or we won’t send federal money your way. Raise your students’ scores to the level we say or we’ll give your school a failing grade. Do better or we’ll close it entirely. As a country our greatest shames have been perpetrated under contingency and duress. This is no different. My educational history has been filled with motivated teachers who didn’t require bribes or threats to seek self-improvement, who didn’t need standardized tests to gauge student proficiency.
If we want our students to learn to function in a democracy, why are our classrooms structured like dictatorships? Why are we pursuing a path that further alienates students from content by adding additional separation between teachers and curriculum? Why, if we expect students to learn independence, are we stripping it from educators?
Best Regards,
Jakob Gowell
B.A. English, Grinnell College 2011
RPCV Cameroon 2012-2014
Education Volunteer (TEFL)
Diane Ravitch's blog 
A huge possible consequence of what has been going on is that our potentially most capable future teachers will choose another career. Why would they choose profession that would not use their creative talents?
I can’t believe that this can just go on. Reason must eventually prevail. I have seen columns highly critical of “Liberal Arts Majors.” How can persons in such positions of responsibility be so daft? Darwin was wrong!
LikeLike
I’m critical of Liberal Arts majors who attend college with no thought or clue of a profession once they graduate. I guess that comes from being wealthy enough not to worry about working once they graduate. I have no problem with their choice of major, only that they feel they are better than those of us who study and graduate in the actual field in which we hope to spend our careers.
Liberal Arts majors are the ones now pretending to be educators for two years and then getting degrees in Public Administration or Public Policy. They then feel entitled to set education policy and administer it for the rest of us.
LikeLike
Robert, I can think of no reply to your posting. My head is spinning from what you wrote
LikeLike
There is nothing wrong with Liberal Arts. In fact, if more people participated in Liberal Arts programs, perhaps more would realize the importance of actual education, instead of demanding career training as the be-all, end-all of colleges.
Blaming that kind of a major for TFA is disingenuous, because TFA doesn’t care what the person’s undergraduate major is, as long as that person comes from the “right” schools.
LikeLike
This recipient of a degree from a liberal arts college went on to get a master of architecture from Georgia Tech. Ga Tech recognized that liberal arts graduates were often more successful in the “extended degree” program than those who had focused on architecture in their undergraduate years and were pursuing the professional extension.
Correct me if I’m wrong, but I’m not sure that “liberal arts” is actually a major. While I went to a “liberal arts” college, and received an undifferentiated BA degree, my undergraduate major was Communications, with a minor in Art.
Students exposed to a rich liberal arts education, regardless of their eventual “major”, learn philosophy, history, literature, science, psychology, sociology, foreign language, statistics, critical analysis, and the list goes on.
Those graduates are able to communicate well, relate well, manage, adapt, and comprehend. All critical skills that employers continue to list as essential, regardless of field of discipline.
I strongly object to the previous poster’s characterization of liberal arts yielding TFA recruits (which is not what Robert Tellman said in so many words, but what I interpreted. Please correct me if I’m mistaken.).
LikeLike
Very sad. The truth is that our country is a plutocracy, ruled by the 1% and the politicians in both parties they have bought. To ensure their continued reign over the masses, the powers that be don’t want independent thinkers and problem solvers teaching at or coming out of public schools. They want the same kind of compliant workers that totalitarian governments want, and just the elite private schools will produce heirs to join forces with the oligarchs’ progeny.
LikeLike
Genius is not limited to the 1%. We need divergent thinkers and problem solvers regardless of social class. Who knows from where the next big idea will come? That is why we must do our best with all of our students. Even if they don’t have the next big idea, they can make a better contribution with a comprehensive education. Our president, raised by a single mother and grandmother, should realize this more than most.
LikeLike
Obama’s parents were highly educated and he was sent to private schools, just like Arne Duncan. Both are from privileged, elite backgrounds, as are many of their cronies, including Rahm Emanuel. These are not regular people. Maybe if they’d had personal experience with the ongoing struggle for survival that people less fortunate have to face daily they’d have more genuine empathy for humankind and be less enamored by the 1% they so adore.
LikeLike
From your logic, FDR and his wife Eleanor, and JFK and LBJ did not have “genuine empathy for humankind”?? And Obama and his ilk are “enamored” by the 1% ?? And Boehner, who IS from people who had to struggle, is a man of the people, and no of those such as the Koch brothers who fund his campaigns?
OK Chi, if you say so.
LikeLike
I was referring to my fellow privileged Chicagoans who have participated in turning a city that was once a hub of organized labor into a playground for billionaire profiteers who get tax funds intended for the poor, who could not care less about the hard won rights of unionized workers, and who took their show to the nation. You extrapolated this unique time in history to others, not I. These are our DINO leaders today. With such wolves in sheep’s clothing and the new GOP Congress, you had better watch out for what is coming to your area, too, because very few in either party care about the 99%.
LikeLike
Welcome to the United States of China…or Cameroon…or Haiti. (Haven’t you all been wondering exactly why Arne Duncan & Paul Vallas visited there–&, most like, on our dime?) I strongly suspect–aside from smelling newly-minted earthquake $$$ & selling Gates’ & Pear$on crap (“technology”–to a country not even capable of having clean water or electricity!)–that, instead of bettering Haitian education, the carpetbaggers were seeking the ways of Haitian government (ala the Duvaliers), trying to figure out how to make America more like Haiti, rather than the other way round. After all, that’s the direction we’re moving in, isn’t it–an oligarchy sans middle class, billionaires vs. peasants, by controlling the press, the banks and, of course, our public school system.
LikeLike
And everything else they’ve privatized, such as health, and whatever they seek to get their hands on next, like Social Security and USPS.
LikeLike
Jakob, your letter resonated with me as few writings have. Thanks to you for your articulation and conviction, and to Diane for sharing, and to NPE for encouraging this. I am trying to figure out how to use this piece with the pre-service teachers I help to develop.
LikeLike
If you do use my letter, I’d be curious to know how it goes.
LikeLike
At the risk of sounding like the sour note, I feel compelled to respond:
on failing: “I imagine the emotional pain I felt was a close cousin to the physical pain of my future Cameroonian students.”
I highly doubt that.
“If we want our students to learn to function in a democracy, why are our classrooms structured like dictatorships? ”
This is so far different from the reality I see that I have considered writing something in praise of charters to allow good students to escape from those who are disruptive and obnoxious, and who, when faced with any consequences – even the most mild, such as telling them during class that they need to stop – will whine to mama how unfair the teacher is, and mamazilla comes in with veins popping and spittle on her lips. She knows the teacher is far more likely to be admonished than is her child.
Maybe some of you don’t work in schools like this. Lucky, lucky you.
The cited situation in Cameroon is a bad extreme; so are our out-of-control-with-lack-of discipline American schools.
This is one reason the reformers are winning and will continue to win. Despite the heavy damage they’re doing, they’re on target, in my opinion, in supporting an escape to charter schools for those who want to learn and can follow basic rules to make that happen. I would rather see regular public schools developing and teaching self-discipline, rather than indulging the opposite, but it is not happening. In fact, it gets worse and worse.
We need a happy medium on discipline. We are not getting it. The situation is much bigger than simply discipline, and the pie-in-the-sky academic standards are still absurd, but, honestly, as long as so many American classrooms function with the low standards that ours do in terms of behavior alone, what hope is there?
And I speak from experience. This is my work life, and I wonder why I became trapped in such an absurd place. It’s a terrible atmosphere in which to work, it’s not exactly the ideal atmosphere for good students to learn. And it’s certainly not just me. My co-workers also wonder at the indulgence of the disruptive students and their parents. (And sometimes they literally sneer when they feel they “got” you.)
If you are going to fight against reform, you also need to offer some solutions to this issue. I see many people promoting the professionalization of teachers, but where is the promotion of discipline for students?
It’s like I have a front-row seat to the collapse of the country, and everyone is out there running around with his or her pet ideological agenda, ignoring some of the most striking aspects of American education, one of which is the massive lack of discipline among our students.
LikeLike
correction: It’s a terrible atmosphere in which to work, AND it’s not exactly the ideal atmosphere for good students to learn.
That was an editing error, not a poorly-written comma splice, god forbid. (Why are comma splices becoming so common? Why do so many teachers write them?)
LikeLike
As the orginal author of the above letter I recognize I am in a minority, but I think there’s a much more nuanced approach to understanding student motivation (and thus discipline). Alfie Kohn writes eloquently, if sometimes abrasively on the subject: http://www.alfiekohn.org/article/self-discipline-overrated/. I recognize perfectly well that in some circumstances stricter school policy can impact student achievement, but we should ask ourselves at what cost.
We can view cellphone use in class as aberrant behavior to be rooted out (I’ve met one teacher who has dispensed with desks in favor of students sitting on the floor where phone use is hard to hide), or, alternatively, we can attempt to understand what drives the behavior and use its presence as a diagnostic tool for pedagogic practice. Is the lesson compelling enough to students that they willingly give their attention? Do students exhibit compulsive behavior in relation to technology? It may even be possible to turn cellphones into a resource, as tools for background information lookup, for example, to model a healthier relationship with technology.
As to the level of democracy in classrooms, my experience, apparently different from if no less valid than yours, clearly led me to make the claim I did. Some years ago I read what is still the most influential piece of writing about education in my life: http://www.ascd.org/ASCD/pdf/journals/ed_lead/el_195902_tenenbaum.pdf. With this account as an example for the level of choice in schools, I would challenge you to reexamine your experience. While some teachers do give students a wider range of choice than other teachers, I still believe it to be narrowly constrained. Mandates concerning what students will read, what will be tested (and how), rubrics for writing, grading practices, and classroom rules were, without exception during my time as a student, controlled unilaterally by teachers and professors. This was true even if some portion of authority was ceded to students: only those with initial control could give some away. Samuel Tenenbaum’s description of Carl Rogers’ class would seem utopian if his recounting wasn’t from a students perspective.
Please don’t mistake my advocacy for letting students do whatever they want because I don’t think that model translates evenly to a secondary school environment. It is provocative nonetheless.
Above all else that I may like to say in this response, know that I am as intent on answering the question of student discipline as you are. I believe ours to be a legitimate difference of opinion, and perhaps ultimately one subject to empirical study.
LikeLike
Thank you for your heartfelt and intelligent response. I think that it is an area of study that is not really being addressed. And understand that I am operating with the constraints of a system that I feel is akin to working in a Kafka novel, or something…These SYSTEMIC problems – many of which I feel have to do with the legal system, and lawsuits, and the cost of legal representation, or else with pandering to parents – are not even on the radar. Many people would not believe what it is like.
LikeLike
“Mandates concerning what students will read, what will be tested (and how), rubrics for writing, grading practices, and classroom rules were, without exception during my time as a student, controlled unilaterally by teachers and professors. ”
Several of these are mandated by the state or district in K-12. Teachers have little or nothing to do with things such as what is tested, or how. They are increasingly being told what reading to assign, and being given rubrics. Social promotion allows many unprepared students into classes, yet, when teachers fail the real number of students who do not meet standards, principals or other administrators are apt to call it, as did one I know, “a teacher failure.” That will get you on the hit list, as a teacher.
As for phones, we use them as tools at times, but it is becoming increasingly difficult to stop students from being distracted. For most students, there’s always something out there, accessible by phone, that will be more engaging than what they’re doing in school. It is impossible to devise learning activities for all year long that will cover all of the curriculum, teach it effectively, and keep all students engaged every minute. And every minute not engaged is a minute for potential problems.
Then there is the demand for “rigor” as one is still admonished for too many students having low grades. It’s nuts.
I have used alternative types of assessments often, but this can be very difficult and time-consuming. Many people outside of teaching seem to have no concept whatsoever of teacher time. Coming up with interesting, engaging, effective lessons and assessments is extremely time-consuming. It is not realistic to do it for everything. The demands are impossible, and one is expected to devote one’s entire being to it; if not, you are not a “real” teacher and shouldn’t be teaching. And, trust me, I am working an average of 50+ hours per week, but I cannot even come close to meeting the demands on me.
I wonder what your role in education is, because you clearly have not had the same sorts of experiences in the same sorts of schools that I have had.
LikeLike
I have no experience teaching domestically, though I have taken a number of education classes and worked extensively with high school students in extracurricular activities.
In making the claims I have, I rely on the work of Carl R. Rogers, Frank Smith, Carol S. Dweck, Alfie Kohn, Annette Lareaux, Edward Deci, Richard Ryan, the American Statistical Association (their appraisal of VAM specifically), the author of this blog, and others.
While you’re correct that some recent mandates have their source in policies larger than individual teachers, this wasn’t true for my experience as a student, with the exception of occasional state testing. Day to day teachers held the reins. Furthermore, if today’s lack of student self-determination is a problem, the locus of external authority, teacher, administrator, or legislator, isn’t the operative distinction.
Keep in mind, my original letter, written as it was to a legislator, was intended to influence policy through a well-recognized civil participation mechanism. You are not the primary intended audience.
I take your contentions of cellphone use and time constraints well. Ideally, education reform should bring teaching responsibilities more in line with peer nations in terms of prep vs. instructional time as well as reduce class size. Your comment troubles me, however, because it strikes me as overlooking the possibility of student engagement in lesson planning. Your stance seems to be, “If only I had time to create enough compelling content for the whole semester…” This thinking still seems, to me, to aim to act upon, rather than along side, students. A pair of professors of education in the book I’m currently reading make the claim that above content or concepts, students retain the attitudes that result from classroom experiences. What attitude do teachers model when they proclaim their lessons automatically more important than anything students may view on their cellphone?
Disengagement may, in fact, be a result of low levels of autonomy. Herbert Kohl’s article, “I Won’t Learn From You” (http://wikieducator.org/images/5/59/Kohl_I_Won%27t_Learn_from_You.pdf) presents a compelling argument for this. The lesson I take from it is that we must consider student identities and relationships while designing pedagogy.
For all this I still admire you. As you know much better than I, this is no easy time to be a teacher. Despite that, I still hope to join your ranks.
LikeLike
I wish I could remember the whole thing but there was a beautiful writing back many years ago:
If a child lives with ….
They learn ….
Children emulate pretty much that which they experience.
Under Hitler, Mussolini, etc., they learned that which the dictators wished taught
Under Socrates: that which Socrates wished for them to learn.
Nuff Sed???
My view: the letter written by the Peace Corps volunteer was superb.
LikeLike
I remember this as well, but am not going to look it up. I don’t agree with you about the letter; I do not think it was superb.
LikeLike