Paul Bonner is a retired teacher and principal. He consistently posts wise insights about teaching and schools.
We spend a significant amount of time bemoaning the existence of charters, vouchers, and privatization, and deservedly so. However, what we don’t challenge is the the misguided culture that drives much of the leadership within public school bureaucracy. I have read untold articles, attended conferences, and sat through meetings with my superiors where the validity of school boards is questioned. I have watched politically tone deaf school board members, politicians, and citizens question the role of superintendents. I have heard little from elected or appointed leadership that shows real concern for the needs of individual schools. The circular firing squad comes to mind. Superintendents across the country along with School Boards should take some blame for the rise of privatized initiatives. Citizens get frustrated because the district apparatus too often comes off as aloof and disengaged from the issues facing communities. The disjointed efforts of school policy makers has given an opening to corporate interests who see the chance to make a buck through lobbying district leaders and various politicians because, too often, school districts seem incapable of carrying out their mission to serve children. Where are parents to turn? Finland famously turned their schools around by focusing on preparing and providing for teachers. We in the US continue to organize through top down bureaucratic models that contribute to the profound inequality of student opportunity while perpetually searching for the Superintendent who can fix it. The wasted resources spent on the ongoing dance in large city districts with failed superintendents, as evidenced by an average service time of 3.76 years (k12insight.com), will only continue if policy makers focus on “the one best system” over investment in the foundation of teacher driven instruction. Data clearly reveals that superintendents have almost no impact on individual student achievement, whereas teachers given the tools to establish relationships with students and their parents have a life long impact.
Diane Ravitch's blog 
“Superintendents across the country along with School Boards should take some blame for the rise of privatized initiatives. Citizens get frustrated because the district apparatus too often comes off as aloof and disengaged from the issues facing communities.”
Are you one of those few I see at board meetings? This diagnoses it exactly.
Let’s continue…
“The disjointed efforts of school policy makers has given an opening to corporate interests who see the chance to make a buck through lobbying district leaders and various politicians because, too often, school districts seem incapable of carrying out their mission to serve children.”
Heck, corporate interests need not lobby Atlanta Public Schools Leadership (APSL), when it is APSL lobbying corporate interests with the superintendent’s “CEO Adopt-A-School” initiative.
Much of the opinion I offer above comes from a school board meeting I attended in Charlotte, NC about 25 years ago. I was there to observe for my masters in school leadership. The topic was teacher attrition, that was almost 20% per year. The conversation was carried on by HR specialists, the superintendent, and school board members. Not a teacher or principal involved in the conversation. The lack of teacher autonomy was perhaps the most significant reason teachers were leaving and yet that was never discussed. Testing was at full bloom in North Carolina and press about particular schools had become toxic. I have never attended a school board meeting where teachers were asked for input.
My husband teaches English and every year there are 10 new things that are expected of teachers. Nothing is ever dropped but new things are always added. He comes home exhausted. That’s another reason why people leave the profession. It gets to be a decision between your job and your sanity and health.
Mamie, when I start listing the administrative mandates laid on teachers at my last job, people can hardly believe it. It’s insane, impossible. So much crap to do that has nothing to do with teaching. Loads and loads and loads and loads of it. Just listing it all takes pages and pages.
Amen, Paul. So well said!
If you want really smart, really learned people to stay in the profession, then you need a) to pay them decently and b) give them autonomy. I taught many years ago, had a long career in educational publishing, and then returned to the classroom. WHAT A SHOCK!!!! In the intervening time, teacher autonomy had almost disappeared. Teachers were routinely herded and demeaned and micromanaged. NO ONE WORKS WELL IN CONDITIONS OF LOW AUTONOMY. This was one of the key insights of the quality control movement in U.S. industry in the 20th century. Our educational leaders are slow learners.
This has happened in a drip-by-drip fashion over the intervening years–a boiled frog phenomenon, but the theft of teacher autonomy was kicked into overdrive (No, I’m not mixing my metaphors here; I’m piling them on; Shakespeare did that!) by the Gates/Coleman insistence on testing the garbage on their vague, untestable, almost content free, puerile bullet list for ELA.
To teach K-12 in the United States today is to commit to being micromanaged by semi-literate, barely educated morons.
QUESTION: Is there an educator in/on this board that has dealt with “cameras in the classroom”?
I’m in a school district in Oklahoma that has recently passed a bond that will provide money for cameras in every classroom— no history of student violence in the district (last 8yrs) at all… genuinely don’t recall even a single incident.
Any insight/experience with this would be useful.
Aie yie yie!!! So, the ultimate in total surveillance. Welcome to the machine.
You want great teachers? Prepare them well, pay them well, and get out of the ___ing way and let them do their jobs as they see fit.
Good morning Diane and everyone,
I always kind of chuckle at the proposals to get more people into teaching. Some of those proposals (easier pathways into the profession, tuition reduction, etc) may get people into teaching but they won’t help people STAY in the profession – especially when you have to work 40 years in it to get full benefits (here in NY). That’s a long haul in any profession and an even longer haul in a stressful profession like teaching. Plus, people now are rarely tied to one career like our parents often were. Many people now may want to work remotely and that’s something that teaching usually doesn’t offer. Add that to lack of autonomy, violence in schools, lack of discipline, political battles, etc. and it’s a recipe for disaster for encouraging people to stay in the profession.
Classroom discipline? Forget it. A thing of the past. I have, as part of my work, been in schools all across this country. It’s truly shocking. It’s a zoo out there, and the AP supposedly in charge of discipline typically NEVER backs a teacher. He or she has no job security and is scared to death of the parents.
A zoo. It’s a zoo out there.
Same for the principal. Scared to death of the parents. No job security. Almost never backs the teacher.
And the kids KNOW THIS. They laugh about it.
We desperately need principals who are facility managers and for other functions now performed by admin to be taken over by faculty-elected faculty councils.
The lack of professional autonomy among teachers in U.S. schools has gotten so bad that I cannot in good conscience recommend to young people whom I care about that they go into the profession. This makes me literally weep. Teaching OUGHT TO BE the best of all professions to be in. Along with nursing, it is certainly the noblest and most valuable.
True, Bob. One school in my area is dealing with discipline problems. 30 teachers are ready to quit because of it. My husband and I were at the bank one day and we overheard a retired teacher from a nearby school tell how she had seen guns, stabbings, fights, vandalism, etc. over her 30 years at the district. Truly crazy.
As usual, brilliantly observed, Mamie!
In Illinois, Tier II teachers (those hired from 2011 on) must work until age 67 to collect full benefits. If a teacher retires at age 62, s/he will lose 30 percent of their pension benefit. Annual increases are limited 3 percent or half of the CPI, whichever is less.
Those who stick it out for 10 years will receive a pension equal to 22 percent of their salary, minus early age retirement penalties. Illinois will fail the federal government’s “safe harbor” test and will find itself on the hook for paying into teachers’ social security accounts so they do not have an impoverished old age.
Other elected officials and LEO’s continue to have much more generous pension benefits.
I can’t imagine anyone – no matter how idealistic and committed they are to teaching – spending 45 years in the classroom under the conditions we must work today.
That’s just horrific, Eleanor!!!!
Bob Shepherd writes:
“Classroom discipline? Forget it. A thing of the past. I have, as part of my work, been in schools all across this country. It’s truly shocking. It’s a zoo out there, and the AP supposedly in charge of discipline typically NEVER backs a teacher.”
Over the last 15 years I’ve talked to many dozens of parents who sent their kids to charter or private schools even though they really preferred to send them to the neighborhood public school. The #1 reason – by far – was the appalling student behavior that was tolerated by administrators, even when kids or teachers were physically assaulted. The learning environments for many classes were appalling, as Bob notes in his comment.
This blog wants to force all kids into traditional public schools. Do you see why so many parents, including secular liberal parents, choose other options? They are not going to wait until public schools improve because their kids are growing up and are too often unsafe RIGHT NOW.
Wendy
Say no more. The inability or unwillingness of school boards, superintendents, and building administrators to deal decisively with disruptive (active and passive) student behaviors is THE driving force behind the charter, voucher, choice movement. And it’s only going to get worse.
The one thing every parent knows regarding the behaviors of children and young adolescents is the importance of setting limits. Ironically it is the fear of setting concrete limits that dooms every code of conduct ever written to failure.
And the proof is in the pudding. Look at how well limitless discipline codes are working to effectively deal with the chronically disruptive students – and their followers.
Bob hit it on the head: Fear and cowardice are the prevailing guidelines for policy and enforcement.
Actually, it is well documented that the “driving force” behind vouchers, choice, and charters is greed. The supporters of such an effort use school discipline as a weapon to drive people out of the public schools. Is school discipline a problem? In some circumstances, yes. Mostly because principals and teachers are not provided the tools needed to serve those students. I would also posit that many of the disciplinary problems that supposedly exist are a direct result of a teacher shortage that ends in far less experienced teachers unable to handle over-crowded classrooms. No form of punishment has been effective in reducing disciplinary challenges in underserved schools, because districts do not use, or in many cases have, the resources necessary to relieve the conditions that cause such disruption.
As for the discipline problems, this could all be resolved if CC/testing was nixed and teachers were allowed to write appropriate curriculum. My 1st started public school in 2007 at the height of NCLB and things weren’t perfect, but the behavior problems were minimal at that time (the 1 class clown). As testing increased and test prep became the curriculum and CC took over, the behavior problems increased. When children/teens aren’t engaged for hours at a time, tied to desks in boredom, they will find a way to physically occupy their time and the result is always bad behavior. Add to this the test/punish atmosphere of school in general and kids who feel “stupid” (according to inane testing mandates) will always find a way to make their mark in the child/teen social hierarchy….usually in the form of bad behavior. Teachers can’t change this and Administration can’t/won’t deal with the number of students presenting with bad behavior. I don’t believe in “bad children”…..I believe children act poorly to bad situations in which they are placed…unfortunately, it’s public school classrooms.
The TYPICAL reaction of building-level administrators to a teacher’s attempt to discipline a student these days is, “Well, you [the teacher] say one thing, and the student says another. So, it’s your word against his.” Students typically deny that they were involve in inappropriate, disruptive behavior, and administrators are afraid to discipline students because of parent reprisal, so they use this lame excuse to avoid having to do anything. And the kids know it. They know that they can get away with anything. This lack of enforceable teacher authority and the lack of any real consequences for poor behavior in the classroom have turned A LOT of classrooms across the country into zoos. THIS VERGES ON THE CRIMINAL AND NEEDS TO CHANGE.
Wendy– This blog is actually dedicated to the improvement of traditional public schools [this blog post is an example]. Yes, many posts are against fragmenting limited public resources into 2 or even 3 tiers of publicly funded schools. The idea: if everyone is in the same community system, we have a unified & far larger voice in changing things for the better [like discipline policies!] Funding escape-hatches only worsens conditions for the large majority in the traditional system, and 30 yrs of stats show that those who “escape” fare little better [most same some much worse].
Ginny, thank you for your clear explanation of a foundational principle of me and this blog.
Folks let’s please remember to give a big thumbs-down to Obama’s 2014 “Dear Colleague” guidance on school discipline. Among other things—reading between the lines—it questioned the use of in-school or out-of-school suspensions at all, and made it clear DofEd/ DOJ will investigate [threatening funding sanctions] based on stats suggesting “disparate impact” on racial minorities.
Had Obama’s DofEd had the slightest familiarity with how such mandates are interpreted at the local level, they could have predicted the results. Schools stopped doing anything that might invite investigation. Regardless of how ineffective their discipline policies may already have been in 2014, they backed off, failing to back up teachers &/or hiring SRO’s on whom to delegate their own responsibilities. So conditions in classrooms got even worse.
I am not so naïve as to think there were not travesties of racism hidden in the stats cited in that letter. But this is obviously not how you approach the problem if you’re trying to solve it.
Cardona issued revised guidance last summer. He eliminates talk of race and focuses on stats suggesting “disparate impact” on SpEd students. Is this really a change? EdNext says “Black and Hispanic students are placed in special education more often than their peers when they are in majority-white schools. But in predominately minority schools, when surrounded by other non-white students, Black and Hispanic students are less likely to be placed in special education.” So, in mixed-race school populations where stats might suggest “disparate impact” of discipline on racial minorities, they are [handily] highly represented among SpEd students.
There was a lot to admire about President Obama, especially his eloquence. But his education initiatives were a disaster, starting with the appointment of Arne Duncan, who was a true believer in charter schools, TFA, evaluating teachers by test scores, closing schools as a reform strategy. He was a puppet for Gates, Broad, Walton and implemented every bad idea they had, based on their complete ignorance of classrooms and teachers.
I attribute Obama’s tone deaf education policy to the fact that he, nor Duncan, graced public schools as students. This has become a significant challenge to any meaningful school improvement because too many of our lawmakers lack public school context. It made sense that Ted Kennedy would sign on to NCLB because he was a product of boarding schools and the Ivey League. Too much time reading the economic theory of Adam Smith, John Keynes, and Milton Friedman while not enough effort to walk in our shoes.
One of my epiphanies when I entered the principalship was seeing that teachers have meaningful impact while I, when deciding to get in the way, actually have detrimental effect. I became a principal about four years after NCLB. My training and preparation as an assistant principal came at the end of the era where school house leaders believed their role was to lead interference so teachers could do their jobs. I left the profession because my perspective on the school I lead no longer mattered. All organizations in our country, whether public or private, suffer from the misperception that the people at the top always know best. Our inability to listen to and act on contributions provided at the school house is perhaps the greatest fault of the education establishment.
We need a LOT MORE PEOPLE JUST LIKE YOU, Paul! Brilliant. Perceptive.
But in the current situation, I would settle for simply sane and empathetic.
Again, I was a “teacher” in my twenties at two cushy, privileged schools. So I really was not a teacher like any of you; I was spoiled and had no idea I was because I had nothing to compare it to except for my own schooling. My colleagues just made it feel natural and my classes were small enough to never allow me to lose sight of any student.
Having engaged principals who pay attention to their teachers and let them teach is–and this is surely naive–as important as autonomy (for which one needs a good principal to let it thrive) and small class sizes. I was incredibly fortunate to have coached at a school in college because it led to the headmaster “telling” me I was going to teach there after I graduated. He consciously wanted young, snot-nosed teachers who were sure they knew everything and veteran master teachers who they didn’t. He had a mix of personalities, interests, told some younger teachers when it was time to go on to law or medical school, and, most of all, made sure he had teachers who disagreed with him but could show they were effective and passionate. I see none of these qualities in the leadership in my local public school system. They have made a disinterested enemy out of a potentially supportive, constructive advocate. So I guess I can kind of relate to what many of you report in your experiences.
My oldest daughter taught in a Title I middle school in Charlotte for five years (95% poverty and around 50% hispanic). In that time she started a Model UN program, the only one in the district, and began to win the competitions against Independent schools. She had a supportive principal who helped her develop a debate program that she taught full time for a year. When that principal was moved to a high school, the district brought in a Teach for America alum who focused completely on test scores, oversaw a discipline disaster, and ran off the many veterans who had followed his predecessor. My daughter now teaches at an independent school where she is valued, getting help for her masters in school leadership, and she is thriving. I attended public schools through high school then went to a private liberal arts college where I befriended numerous independent school alum. I learned then, and believe now, that the school leadership model we should be following in the public schools could borrow from the site-based practices of our best independent schools. We could do this, but too many of our policy makers are blind.
Paul– “the end of the era where school house leaders believed their role was to lead interference so teachers could do their jobs”…
This is so sad. That old-era method was exactly my approach when I worked in an engrg corp [in one of the admin support disciplines to the project engrs]. Even then you had many honchos who felt they were the experts & chose team members who would docilely kow to their micromgt. My “stealth method” was to choose those with long experience in the trenches– usually passed up by others for fear of being shown up– & let them do their thing. My job was to soft-shoe mgt & buy us as much flexibility for them as possible.
Before I became a school administrator, I remember having a conversation with a wise experienced counselor who told me it was her experience that the best principals were the ones who focused on supporting teachers because they spent years in the classroom. The state of North Carolina made a poor strategic move when they began to give leadership fellowships to teachers with only three years experience because principals identified their leadership potential. I taught for 17 years and loved the classroom. Principal used to mean “principal teacher”, inferring master proficiency in the classroom. Now principals are basically non-commissioned master sergeants expected to carry out the orders of their superiors without the necessary ammunition.
GregB—that was exactly my experience in my first sally at teaching—a few yrs, just out of college, teaching 5 levels of French at a private academy in upstate NY. Our principal was a conservative kind of guy in many ways, but he had just stepped up from #2 at Collegiate School (NYC), so he had breadth of experience, and his attitude was much as you describe (& faculty also as you describe). The 5 preps/ work was grueling, but the autonomy was incredibly rewarding.
And I had a supportive mentor: our Latin/ ancient-Greek teacher was dept head for our tiny group including another Fr as well as Spanish and German teachers. He had knowledge of all those languages (as well as Italian), & most importantly was a seasoned teacher who occasionally observed & always had good advice. The biggest class I had was 18—others 15– & AP Fr V was like a tutorial (2 or 3 students).
We were so lucky to have that experience, no?
Paul @ 3/4 9:44am– Yes of course but how can it happen? See GregB & my experiences teaching in such schools in this sub-thread. We’re talking about small classes, mentoring, admins who are free to give academic autonomy to teachers because they’re not being micromanaged from higher level—allowed to use their own good judgment [which means they are not bean-counters but drawn from ranks of seasoned teachers who worked their way up into admin].
I can see one aspect of this I’ve always felt was needed and long seemed doable in tradl pubschs: mentoring, collaborating, team-teaching. But I wonder if today time for that is circumscribed by all the excess duties laden on teachers—many of which don’t relate directly (if at all) to effective teaching.
“Where are parents to turn?”…..Private schools in the suburbs and Charter schools in the city (I live in MD). The private schools (Independent faith based and Archdiocese….all accredited) are filled with children who once attended public school (even if that means saying a few “Amens” in a differing religion). Parents are willing to do whatever it takes financially to have their children educated humanely (whole child centered learning). Many teachers from public school systems now teach in these private schools. The buildings are well maintained and the atmosphere is welcoming and happy.
In the city, Charter schools are staffed with certified teachers and are run mostly like public schools, but having a lottery for admission. They are still subject to rules/regulations by the state as they receive public money. The buildings are newer, have A/C and heat, computers, decent plumbing etc. There are still lots of shiny new deforms from our faithful leaders.
Why did/do we leave the public system? Fighting the system gets old. Too much testing/test prep, dreadful CC curriculum-in-can, excessive data collection, inane purchased SEL curriculum, loss of arts/music/PE/recess/field trips, too much emphasis on STEM/STEAM and test scores, too much emphasis on College and Career Ready (they start this mantra in K!!). All of the shiny new things in ed-deform while children sit in over crowded classrooms in crumbling buildings/trailers.
The voucher crowd is winning because public school education has become its own “marketplace” of bad ideas.
This is where I have to disagree. There are volumes of literature, including Dianne’s work, that identify intentional efforts by independent sources acting to dismantle our public schools. Are we struggling now? Certainly, but not after profound efforts by interests that see public schools as a threat to their power and income. It’s quite ironic that in spite of the current struggles in public schools, polls still reveal public support above 75%. Yes, we have problems with discipline, resources, and poor leadership. However, it is not a reach to see where this could be turned around. When the public schools began in the early twentieth century it was motivated by a need to prepare adolescents for adulthood and to standardize school environments for teachers to do their jobs. (In too many places in this country, one room school houses were a nightmare). This led to the US becoming the most resilient economy in the history of the world. We need to promote schools as environments that allowed prepared teachers to teach. I think one way to do this is to get the Democratic Party to give up on experiments for privatization and get behind teaching. This may seem polyannish to some, but Democrats were successful when they discovered affordable healthcare is popular. Popular can still win elections. Although my 38 year career included struggling schools, I still saw miraculous things happen for children, even at the end of my career. When these schools gave lip service to testing and focused on the wonders of learning for children we experienced what schools could become.
I mean early 19th century…
Thank you, Paul. Love it when people who know what they’re talking about explain clearly.
The average high-school principal in the United States has a tenure of less than four years. All this comes back to the fact that principals have zero job security. The moment parents start to complain, they are sacked. And the parents all think that their children are incapable of any wrong.
It’s not just parents who cause this. Many states moved to make Principals perpetual scapegoats when they determined it to be ok to remove tenure. It is my experience that this developed a “my way or the highway” leadership model on the part of superintendents who saw this as their way to appease school boards and the public that they are doing something when they remove principals. I learned the hard way that improved test scores are no protection to those who are perceived to challenge the status quo. Although parents can be a challenge, principals often find themselves watching fellow educators who make principals convenient fall guys for institutional incompetence.
My students would joke about the fact that NOTHING WOULD HAPPEN IF THEY WERE SENT TO THE PRINCIPAL’S OFFICE for disruptive behavior. And then the principal would basically say, you deal with it. What’s the matter, can’t you control your classroom? ZERO support. Once a principal said to me of a student, “Well, what can one do? Do you know who his father is?”
Bob, I have been thinking a great deal about your comments on this thread. I enjoy the interaction. I find I am almost schizophrenic on the topic of teacher and school administrative conflict since I spent many years in both spheres. When I was a teacher I was helped to the conclusion that the best principals were good teachers. I found it more and more difficult to serve my teachers as my time as a principal came to an end. I was expected to follow district directives and require teachers to do the same although I saw how such compliance was almost counterintuitive to the perspective of good instruction. Teachers and principals are too often in a bad place and proximity does not help in developing alliances for the good of students in the school. Infusion of TFA and other such initiatives has made matters worse because of the misguided assumption that the academic prowess of TFA recruits automatically makes them better teachers and, by extension, natural school leaders. Instead of funding teacher and school leadership preparation, state legislatures decide it is better to throw ideas against a wall to see what sticks. The unwillingness of politicians and education policy makers to do the hard work of investing in preparation and support keeps educators from supporting one another. Too many districts treat teaching as if it is mission work and expect principals to work miracles when the missionaries leave. All at the school hose struggle when resources are inadequate.
Principals are front-line supervisors or middle managers. Any review of the literature will show how stressful that position is – little real authority, demands from above and below.
Working in the corporate (publishing) world, I long ago came to the conclusion that most problems in organizations are not attributable to individuals but to issues with the SYSTEMS in which they work. Solve the systemic issues, and you solve the problem. Principals and APs need a LOT more job security. They can then buck parents and support their teachersl
Back in the day (the early 1990s), there was a huge debate in this country between supporters of building-level and district-level control. Well, the latter won out, BIG TIME. This was a TERRIBLE mistake. I support management by faculty committees and faculty votes.
In the late 1980’s, “A Nation at Risk” seemed to promote a site based management ground swell that was very exciting. I was involved with one of those committees at my first junior high school. Our struggle was that the principal could not let go of control and many of our initiatives were left unfulfilled. I have run into many district leaders who simply saw themselves as the organizational intelligentsia. The few incompetent teachers they encountered convinced them that teachers in general were incapable of organizational insight. So much of our struggle is hindered by equating position with capacity.
In my ideal world, there would be a principal who is bascially a facilities manager, a CFO, and a legal complaince officer. But the folks making the decisions about matters regarding curricula, pedagogy, instructional materials, discipline, classroom management, extracurriculars, and so on would be faculty, via voting and via faculty committees.
I really liked both of my last two principals, but these were good people working for a sick system.
Paul @ 3/5 9am– I see from googling that the trend to remove tenure from principals began nearly 30 yrs ago! This is part of the “accountability” movement, which started moving from districts down to school level back then– 5 or 6 yrs before NCLB, which caught teachers up in the net, too.
We still have it in NJ: “To earn tenure, a new principal, assistant principal, or vice principal must be rated either effective or highly effective in two annual summative evaluations within the first three years of employment, with the first effective rating on or after completion of the second year.” But tenure for supts went by the boards sometime prior [if they ever had it]: they are hired for 3-5yr contracts. I see NYS still has tenure for principals too, but brief googling suggests it’s not so common nationwide.
Putting the loss of admin tenure together with the accountability systems that started with NCLB [doubled down under Obama, cast in concrete by 2015 ESSA law], this is all & only about annual state-stds-aligned test scores. We in US have an edsys that looks to punish for low test scores, as opposed to finding better ways to (a)measure ed achievement (b)provide better ed.
One of the conditions that allowed teachers to pursue the vocation was job security. This benefit has eroded significantly. Add this to the ongoing din of criticism for teachers and principals and there is little motivation to become a public school teacher or administrator.
Paul @ 3/5 12:36pm– You’d be hard-pressed to find any pubic schools in the early 19thC outside of NE and the former Dutch-colonial areas. It wasn’t until mid-century that most states had accepted that schools should be free/ tax-supported, with trained teachers, & children reqd to attend school. By 1870, all states had tax-supported elementary schools. Toward the end of the 19thC century about 1/2 of hischs were tax-supported – we were following a trend set in industrialized Euro nations.
And the progression wasn’t about correcting “disastrous” one-rm schoolhouses! They continued for decades after, in farming communities that didn’t have enough kids to put together for more than one teacher to handle. I myself am the product of the last 1-rm schoolhouse in our rural area [built 1823 serving 1st-3rd grades] & thereafter attended 4th-6th grades in a K-6 school with 3 teachers– & went to an Ivy League U!
LisaM,
I can’t say you are wrong, although many charters have uncertified teachers and high teacher turnover. There exceptional public schools that manage to sidestep most of the deforms you mention. My grandson attends one.
What you describe is a systemic problem in which Congress, governors, legislators, mayors, civic leaders, and corporations have decided that they know more about teaching than teachers.
So Bob will rant about the awful the HS CC aligned ELA standards that he had to teach (scripted, bullet points, test preppy) and everyone will agree with him. He clearly states that he quit teaching because of it and he is heralded. If Bob doesn’t want to teach this way and he knows that it’s not good for students, why, as a parent should I tolerate it for my children? I honestly think that because of my location to DC, MD gets to be the incubator for all the bad deforms that come out of the K Street, education stink tanks in DC. The apple is rotten at the core. Every single class here in public school, is CC aligned with bullet points and test prep galore. Of course if you are Mike Petrilli or John King living (in MD) in the 100% wealthy areas, they can talk about how great their children’s public schools are…..because those teachers have autonomy and can get through the “bullet list” crap in a matter of a few minutes.
Believe me, I really did not like paying for private HS when our high taxes support well funded public schools and well paid teachers (compared to other states!), but “well funded” here just means more De-forms, more testing, more data collection etc. Teachers aren’t happy (lack of autonomy and more work piled on) and the kids are suffering emotionally from all of this……My friend, a LCSW is booked solid with tweens/teens suffering from anxiety/depression and a Pediatrician that I know would like to get back to practicing medicine because she is booked with children suffering from psychological/anxiety/depression issues.
The voucher folks are winning the narrative because no one at the upper levels of public school management will stand up and say “NO” to those pedaling the snake oil of education deform. Parents are tired of fighting this and never getting a win…..so we just leave. Teachers are tired of their lack of autonomy and abuse….so they just leave.
“What you describe is a systemic problem in which Congress, governors, legislators, mayors, civic leaders, and corporations have decided that they know more about teaching than teachers.”
Compounded by the fact that those teachers and adminimals have been GAGA (yeh, you guessed it’s coming Robert/Greg) Good German implementers of the educational malpractices (no thanks to the NEA or AFT who have been part of that ‘systemic problem’). They have and continue to lack cojones to stand up those who think they know more about teaching than the teachers. Until the teachers take it upon themselves to reject and refuse to implement said systemic problems that are harmful not only to the teaching and learning process but to the children themselves the mind slaughter will continue.
LisaM—I am glad you have access to a reasonably-priced Catholic school when you need it [as I recall that is for 1 of your kids? or maybe you have just 1]. That is true in my pricey NJ town as well: it costs barely more than the local Montessori Pre/K—not cheap! But doable for many middle-class families, with some sacrifices.
Our local hisch does not suffer from much of what you describe– but only because the preponderance of kids come from hi-income dual-profession families. [Residential segregation by town is fierce in NJ & each town has its own district.] The multiple tests are easily aced by students, which means no test-prep time, & class curriculum can ignore stds and do deep dives into subjects as teachers please.
This is by way of saying that the system is ludicrously imbalanced. The onerous testing, top-down [questionable] stds et al bureaucratic crap falls heaviest on the lowest-income kids, dumbing down the education of those who need it most. Those like you who live in areas where school districts are enormous [county-wide] will have large proportion of needier students & all schools will be dumbed down to their level.
Areas like mine are highly inequitable in a different way, meaning few in my town need to seek any alternative to local pubschs, but pay through the nose for the privilege. Our RE taxes could put 3 kids through priv Catholic schools every year if we had those 100% per-pupil vouchers like in AZ—and they are that high not just cuz excellent schsys: we in NJ have “Robin Hood” state school financing: state pools taxes & redistributes to poor schdistricts. We get 6% state school aid; Newark gets 80%.
Yes, if we do not address funding inequalities, none of the problems in public education will be resolved. Conservatives like to cite US spending largess in public education, but refuse to acknowledge that little of that goes to the schools that need it the most.
Lisa, I didn’t quit teaching because of CC$$. I had figured out how to give lip service to it for the benefit of administrators who basically ignoring it in my classroom and teaching English, to the best of my ability, DESPITE IT.
I left educational publishing because it had mostly devolved into test prep based on the puerile Gates/Coleman bullet list. Talk about the tail wagging the dog!!!! Every K-12 publisher, print or online, was beginning every project in ELA and Math (and many in Social Studies) by importing a list of the idiotic Gates/Coleman “standards” into an Excel spreadsheet and then filling out the rest of the sheet with the places in the proposed work where each “standard” would be “covered.”
This led, OF COURSE, to profound curricular and pedagogical incoherence, and many of the finest content creators in the industry quit in disgust at having to work in this way–churning out activities and exercises and instruction based on the vague, untestable, and breathtakingly random and incomplete or overgeneralized and almost entirely content-free (in ELA) bullet lists.
I quit teaching because I was sick to death of working 70 hour weeks just to meet the insane, uncompensated demands on my time–demands that had almost ZERO salutary effect on my actual teaching but, rather, simply took time away from it. The job was exhausting. I worked MUCH harder at it than when I was a C-level publishing executive. And also because I got really, really tired of being micromanaged by idiots who knew ALMOST NOTHING of my subjects of expertise but believed they had the knowledge and right to tell me what to do in the most minute detail. And I got really, really tired of dealing with entitled parents certain that their kid was a genius and a saint and couldn’t possibly have disrupted class or gotten a B on a test.
cx: while basically ignoring it
“Data clearly reveals that superintendents have almost no impact on individual student achievement, whereas teachers given the tools to establish relationships with students and their parents have a life long impact.”
⬆️ THIS, right there, why doesn’t everyone see this? Teachers need tools and training. Districts go years without investing in teachers. Throw another program or a computer system at them and see where we land. Give teachers support, pay them for the important work they do, and get the heck out of the way!
Dare I mention Finland? Teachers are respected and paid as well as other professionals. The national curriculum is broad and leaves them leeway about how to teach. Collaboration is valued. No standardized testing from k-9. Teachers are trusted to do their job.
Finland seemed to understand the importance of this investment. We need leaders in the US who understand this and are willing to act.
It is a myth that an incredible superintendent can turn a district around from the top down. This is even more true when districts bring in some Broad or business trained hitman to get those lazy, naughty teachers in line.
Real change involves systemic change that is inclusive and respectful of all stakeholders including the community, parents, teachers and support staff and perhaps even some students from the local high schools. The good superintendent will provide leadership, community awareness, support and funding for the effort. The only real change that can occur is when there is a team whose members have a common mission and are willing to work together to improve the education of the district students. My district successfully went through this process in the “golden ’90s” before dystopian NCLB arrived, and teachers were considered professionals that were valued.
Here’s a current local tale of woe from DeSantis’ own Florida dystopia. In a neighboring district, the community voted to change the superintendent position from an elected post to an appointed one. DeSantis appointed his own toady to lead the district. Parents are unhappy with discipline, the general management of the district and the fact that a middle school is being converted to a charter school. Community members have called for the superintendent’s resignation, but he refuses because” he has a job to do.
Lesson learned; never give up your vote.
In the 1980s, the Charlotte-Mecklenburg Schools began to get national attention through intentional efforts of a “hey, look at me,” leadership culture. Prior to this time, superintendents typically came from within the community. This began a long line of superintendent searches attracting “the best and the brightest” who usually left a disappointed district within 3 years. While I discovered an overhyped district reputation a national conferences, families and teachers were becoming more disgruntled with results within the district. In my time in Charlotte, 1982-2012, the district grew from around 77,000 students to 140,000. We gave up on integrating students and were declared unitary as the result of a rigged court case mediated by a Reagan appointed judge who had written a brief against the case that brought busing to Charlotte. The unitary designation was enthusiastically cheered on by the superintendent at the time. The growth of a prominent banking industry resulted in a mass immigration of white collar families used to small districts. In the early 1990s we adopted magnet schools as a strategy to continue a successful desegregation legacy, but political pressures drove us to become one of the most segregated districts by the 2010s. Meanwhile, our county continued to seek superintendent saviors while our economic inequality prevented any meaningful improvement. Broad has its fingerprints all over leaders brought into Charlotte. You’re right, we have neglected input from the communities being served for far too long and our children are paying for it.
I agree that parents are upset that schools do not always respond to their concerns. But I do not place the blame on local school administrators and districts.
Here is an example: In a local elementary school classroom, a mainstreamed student with emotional problems loses control and becomes agitated and then violent. The school policy in this situation, based on advice from the school lawyer who is keeping up with the latest court rulings, is to evacuate the classroom. Due to privacy rights, parents are not informed about the incident or the name of the student. When the children arrive at home they inform the parent about both of these things.
The particulars can change. Sometimes in a similar incident the student will be acting out sexually or using just be loud. Sometimes the room is trashed.
Parents do not understand why they have not been told there was an incident. They do not understand why their child, whom they assume is safe at school, is in class with a potentially violent student. The school cannot discuss the incident without potentially violating federal privacy law. There are other similar things involving federal policy that the school is not allowed to change or modify. This is not always a bad thing. But all too often when a school is “unresponsive” it is because no response is allowed.
It is my experience that we have some school leaders who are exceptional communicators, meaning that they are both great listeners and that they respond in a coherent manner that explains school system practices. As in any human endeavor, there are not enough of these people to go around.
The voucher crowd not really winning. Their cause would have died out long ago except for the mind boggling amount of money that they have spent and continue to spend. In our area we have had out-of-state funding into five figures for local school board races that were once run for a few hundred dollars at most. This is a national trend.
I could go on. It is true that some school boards and local admins do not understand the need for better communication. But there is no mistaking the fact that local errors in judgement are now national news because of an intentional effort to make it seem like problems are greater than they are. Probably the most extreme is the case of the transgendered female that was wearing a dress in the girls restroom and attacked a girl. Of course, nothing about this case was true. We still have people repeating the rumor about schools in our state providing kitty litter in the restrooms for students who identify as “furries.” Perhaps this was originally a joke, but people actually believe it. A noted sports commentator repeated this as fact.
Yes, we need to do better. No, the main reason for all of the attacks is not anything based in reality.
I think you make good points. I too have worked with inspired leaders at the school and district level. I think this is why teacher training and support is critical. Bringing teachers into the profession who understand parental and community politics would not only lead to better results at the school house, but stronger empathetic leadership in the public schools down the road. As a principal I was often confronted with young teachers who did not have the maturity or experience to understand parental perspectives. There is a reason parents prefer experienced teachers for their children. Difficult parents and schools in struggling communities need teachers who can work with them. We need a preparation, support and planning culture that helps teachers get there. My point is that we are not going to improve the public schools from the top down, but the bottom up.
I agree that most new teachers lack sufficient empathy for parents. This level of understanding is one of the things we lose when we fail to keep teachers in the classroom.
Paul @ 3/3 1pm– Paul– “As a principal I was often confronted with young teachers who did not have the maturity or experience to understand parental perspectives.”
This was me, in my first sally into teaching, in my early 20’s. I had no problems with parents; they thought I was terrific. But I knew I was too young for the job—barely 5 yrs older than the seniors . [I had to drive down to consult with my Mom on occasion for advice on how to deal with a disruptive student.] I could see how much better I had to be, to do the job justice.
Many newbie teachers are not like I was, & some have preternatural talents from the get-go. But I knew I would do far better if I did something else and came back after having parented my own kids. I returned to the profession at age 50, & was an excellent teacher for 20 yrs.
I think if our vocation was able to step back and take a look at the plethora of struggles and dexterity required in the classroom, it would be obvious that we need to introduce young teachers first as interns who gradually, over a period of three years, work toward teaching a full load. This would give them opportunity to learn from veterans and observe how students learn. I visited an IB school in China where this is what they do. The class sizes were still around 30, but there were three teachers in the room attending to students, one a novice, one experienced and one considered a master teacher. When I was a principal, we worked to use professional development funds to provide meaningful time for teacher collaboration and interaction. At our best we did this for a full or half day once a month. This had profound effect on the confidence of our young teachers and our veterans were often inspired by the youthful energy of our “newbies.” Regretfully, most, if not all, attempts at improvement are initiated from above with little concern about conditions at the individual school house. Initiatives are promoted based on general data versus individual school community conditions. There is a way to make real improvement if the educational establishment would put in the work.
“But I do not place the blame on local school administrators and districts.”
I do!
reckeuph– “local errors in judgement are now national news because of an intentional effort to make it seem like problems are greater than they are. “
Great insight. For various [political] reasons the eye of press is now on K12 ed. Local stories are ballooned into “typical of US edsystem” [as tho we had some lockstep edsys as opposed to 16,800 highly decentralized schdistricts].
It’s not my district superintendent, nor school board, who wants to give checks to the children of millionaires so they can continue to attend exclusionary private schools.
The blame in Florida belong far higher in the chain – JebBush/Scott/DeSantis and the lapdog legislature.
From what I read in the press– correct me if I’m wrong—your governor already has a lock-hold on district superintendents and local school boards. Doesn’t matter what they [or you] want.
The principal that hired me for my first full-time teaching job after earning a teaching credential through a year long urban residency and then subbing for two years was Ralph Pagan.
Ralph was hired to turn around Giano Middle School in La Puente
California that was in the Rowland Unified School District.
Ralph’s management style was bottom up. He asked for teachers and students to volunteer to join management teams that made most if not all of the decisions at Giano. When we made a decision, he supported us. I don’t remember Ralph ever overruling any of our decisions. Ralph was a soft spoken Korean War veteran, an army officer when he was in the military.
In the few years I had the pleasure of working with Ra (not working under him), Ralph’s management style turned Giano into a model middle school that had been considered the worst and the most dangerou smiddle school in the San Gabriel Valley. When I saw it was dangerous, I want to emphasize how dangerous it was outside of Giano’s fence. In short, one thing Ralph did was to contact and then have dinner in the homes of every gang leader in that area and asked for their support.
What the teachers and students didn’t know, until Ralph had a heart attack and almost died, was the immense pressure he was under from district administration to change his management style from bottom up, to top down, once he had achieved what they wanted by improving Giano and making it a safe place for students and teachers.
He was the first and last principal I worked under that used that management style. During the thirty years I taught in that district, I worked with about 10 principals, some were okay, some were horrible, one was a brutal dictator that would make Traitor Trump and Putin proud. Still, none were Ralph Pagan.
“(not working under him)
A key point whether in business and/or education.
A great story, yet a sad one– in the sense of how few have the sort of cajones and dedication to make that sort of change happen.
Understandably, the revolving door in many school districts has and is a problem.
HA! And, now one of them is in a run off for Mayor of Chicago!
However…
Where have all the parents and supporters been before now.
The tactics of the moms for this and anti-astroturfers come out of the woodwork with the sound of a few acronyms. CRT. DEI. SEL.
Where have all the progressives and public school supporters been all these years?
In all those districts where there is a revolving door… what was the voter turn out for board elections? How many parents showed up at board meetings to demand information about the new programs or lack of teacher development? Where were the unions demanding attention to what matters?
Chicago teachers went on strike a few years ago – not about money! Social workers. Class size. Resources and facilities.
If school districts have not used wide-open public engagement sessions, public discussion about curriculum processes or where and why the new xyz program is throwing out the two-year old abc program, that’s a leadership problem. Board. Superintendent. Union.
But where are those parents?
Too trusting. Complacent. Maybe satisfied. Asleep at the wheel.
I’m not sure what your alternative is to a superintendent and elected board. Somebody has to run the place and has to be accountable to the kids, profession, and public.
The reformers have an answer to that.
The professionals need to kick it up a few notches.
I do not recommend and end to school boards or superintendents. What I advocate is a change in priorities actually backed up by research. We certainly need management to run school districts, but our current public school crisis will not end until leaders learn that a profound investment in our teachers and respect for their work is required.
Dear Public Schools,
Ignore these at your own risk. We do have options.
– Signed, Concerned Parents Everywhere
1) Rampant cell phone use combined with 40+ million Chromebooks and 7+ million iPads that dominate our classrooms have completely transformed the secondary education landscape (all screens, all the time) – and not in a good way.
2) Photomath, Calculator Soup, Chegg, Write My Essay and countless other apps and websites have normalized cheating and made it readily accessible in the classroom. (See #1)
3) Human (child) sacrifice on the altar of standardized test score data has produced an unprecedented expansion of the K to 8 (and beyond) null curricula, closing doors and shuttering windows of opportunity.
4) Embracing debunked methodologies such as discovery learning, constructivism, project-based learning along with the mistaken notion that 21st century thinking, and problem-solving skills can be taught in an intellectual vacuum. All while rejecting and even ridiculing the importance of content and procedural knowledge.
5) Ignoring cognitive learning theory and our understanding of developing young brains has pushed advanced, subjective, and often abstract standards
down into elementary classrooms in lieu of teaching fundamentals/basics.
Collective failure to understand that, with few exceptions, students throughout the K to 12 public school years remain at nearly every level, concrete, novice learners.
6) Failure to create fair, just, and redemptive disciplinary codes that include concrete limits of student disruption, misbehavior, and apathy.
7) Retaining 20th century school year schedules and grade level promotion policies that shun any sense of urgency or student responsibility – and that have produced a path of least resistance to the graduation stage that is laughable.
An excellent post.
What bright, experienced, interesting people come to this blog to post. It’s simply delightful to read this material!
I do miss Laura Chapman, though! RIP, Laura.
I wish I had told her more how much I treasured her!
I don’t know how bright I am Bob, but I sure have learned a great deal from this blog.
Always a great pleasure to read your insightful comments, Paul! The comments of a smart, reflective fellow with lots of relevant experience.