If a school is in a farming community and those in the community see farming as a terribly important subject, should that school’s focus be on farming as a response to the community’s values? Or should those that have studied education and learned the ins and outs of how education systems work be entrusted with creating a focus for such a school?
In a sort of response to a blog entry I read about schools, community involvement, and putting the “public” back in the public school system, I have to wonder who knows the job of educator best. While I like the idea of communities more directly involved in their schools, I have to wonder if some level of expertise and knowledge should be required before such involvement. Should someone who doesn’t know about the way schools work be involved in deciding how the local school will work? If the answer is yes, then the suggestion is that anyone is smart enough to put together a working school. If the answer is no, then the suggestion is an elite class of decision makers needs to exist.
I’m not a big fan of either suggestion.
Should schools emphasize the general public’s conception of what a school should do or a set of standards agreed to by educational experts (I’m thinking of state standards, here)? Is it possible to do both in 180 days, the average length of a school year? Is it fair, then, that a school system with an emphasis on technology delivers a different education than a school system with an emphasis on the canning industry, depending on the local community voice?
Much discourse over public education involves people outside of education, quite often arguing that they know the education system best because they are not directly involved in it. Business folk rail against the public education system, claiming that teachers aren’t doing their jobs, administrators don’t have enough power, and district offices are run poorly (since this is all anecdotal, I don’t have any links for you, but just pop into a conversation about education and see where the participants are coming from). I’ve had several discussions with people who think they are experts on the subject simply because their son/daughter is attending school. Am I, by virtue of knowing someone who runs a business, an expert on running a business? Then who are experts on educational systems?
And just as often as those who aren’t in the educational community complain about what has gone wrong, those in the educational community say it’s all working just fine. There are teachers who will say their union is flawless, that test scores are bogus, that graduates really are prepared for life after high school, and that it’s the parents who have fallen down on the job. While some of that may be true, educational community members are too quick to defend the system and any real change is hard to come by. A few years back, I voted against block scheduling at our school and I’ve regretted it since, even though some studies have come out to show that block scheduling isn’t a good idea. I’ve regretted it because I voted for the status quo and I don’t believe the status quo is working. I also voted against it because I honestly didn’t think it was in the best interest of the students, but now that I want to be involved in educational reform, I wish we had done something different here.
So, look, both parties need to start singing a different tune. How is it possible that an accountant can know more about my job than me? Simply because we’ve all been through high school does not make us all experts. At the same time, I am blind to some things because of the very fact I am a teacher. Those outside the system may, indeed, be better prepared to point out ways it can work better.
However, it’s not necessarily that easy. The job of “teacher” has as many different definitions as people you ask; everyone thinks it involves different tasks. As a teacher, where can I decide my job begins and ends?
Is it my job to challenge every kid in the classroom or just the majority of them? Is it my job to teach morals or only content-area knowledge? Is it my job to prepare every student for college, community college, or just to pass the high school exit exam? Should I work overtime every day to prepare for tomorrow or only some days? Should I work weekends, too? Am I expected to always be a teacher or can I cuss when I’m out of the classroom even if I see a student? At one point or other, I’ve been told these things.
Does an uninformed populace get to decide what teachers should and should not do? Or does it take expertise to put together a school?
I just came back from an awards ceremony for the Martin Luther King, Jr. contest at our district office. Seeing those kids there, so proud of what they had put together for this contest, obviously so happy to collect money and certificates for their work, it struck me that we need to be in the business of providing more of those opportunities. I have a student who records his own music at home and I suspect he has the hopes of putting out an album. He’s a rapper and words are what he spends a lot of time working on, crafting them in a way. If he’s working on an album, given certain parameters, wouldn’t that be an appropriate project for him throughout the semester? Should I look for individual projects for all of my students? All 165 of them? Some will say yes and others will say no. So what’s a teacher to do?
Aside
Happy birthday, Vanessa!
3 comments
2. Todd says:
But what about standards in education? Should the community desires about education be met AND any state standards? An education in California should be equal to an education in Montana and New York, right? Shouldn’t they basically cover the same concepts? Without any standards, we have virtually no chance of that. Even with standards, we have little chance of that, but a little is better than none.
I like your idea of the difference between “what” and “how,” though. I like the level of professionalism it creates and the level of community involvement it encourages. Now, how about the logistics of getting the community in on creating that “what” to be taught in a timely fashion so teachers and school sites can prepare to offer such curriculum? And the local universities with teacher training programs need to be in on that, too. Of course, those programs are controlled by state credentialling departments and they might have a problem with community-specific education.
Further, as far as your discussion of justifying the course of action, you’re assuming that teachers are up on the latest research. I can say that, honestly, I am not because I am spending all my time teaching (grading, planning, observing, etc.), not reading research. I don’t know any teachers who are prepared to offer that level of justification and I don’t know many parents or community members who want that level of discourse. I don’t even know principals who want to get that specific.
If teachers want to use method XYZ, that falls into the “how” of material taught and there needs to be a line for the community, kind of like that line in the auto shop: you cannot cross this line to observe everything (you know, don’t cross this line into the auto shop because insurance forbids it). Community members micro-managing how things are taught and demanding an explanation for why it’s done that way is a bit much, even in the face of percieved failure due to poor performance on standardized tests, something that community-specific education may make moot. Expecting teachers to stay current on best methods, textbooks, etc. is a bit much, too.
There’s a way that could happen, though. If there was a person or persons responsible for spreading that kind of information out to teachers, we could have the latest and greatest. A friend of mine did just such a thing in Texas for a while; he’d read research and present ideas to teachers about how they could do what they do better. It’s my understanding that the term “principal” comes from “principal teacher” and that role used to be filled by someone who did much the same thing. This was before the principal was saddled with so many other responsibilities and the “principal teacher” aspect fell to the side and “principal administrator” became the order of the day.
3. brett says:
Hi Todd,
Interesting conversation. Personally, I don’t see any conflicts between standards and the top-line goalsetting of the community. The community isn’t going to be able to offer expertise on the specifics, so it’s up to the teaching profession to fill in the details, and standards are just one tool they can use, as professionals to follow national benchmarks and/or best practices, just like most other professionals do.
To use an example, the community could say that they want students to be financially literate when they graduate: they’ll say that strong money skills increases the ability of their children to live independently, and strengthens the community through reduced bankruptcies and the like. But I don’t think they should be the ones to list out specific classroom requirements: that’s the role of education, to take community mandates, define them, and execute them. Standards are just a tool for the educators to go to the community and be able to say “professional consensus in this field on what’s important can be found in the JumpStart personal financial education standards, so here are the things that will comprise this personal financial education class. By teaching these things, students will know x, y, and z before graduating. Does that fulfill your interest in having financially literate graduates?”
And I completely understand that teachers are not in a position to independently seek out the latest research, studies, resources, and so on. But as you say, it is possible to institute this, and in fact I think the infrastructure already exists in the form of PD requirements and district-level curriculum coordinators. These two channels should be used to disseminate this kind of information, and it’s a shame that they’re not being used that way now. (And that’s a generalization – I’m sure it’s happening some, and more in some places than in others.)
A great commentary on the lack of reseach usage in education comes from Ronald Wolk, founder of Education Week – read http://www.edweek.org/tm/articles/2005/10/01/02pers.h17.html for great additional perspective.
1. brett says:
[1/12/2006 - 8:24 pm]
Hi, and thanks for the link. I would propose that we separate “what” is taught from “how” it is taught. Personally, I do think it’s appropriate for the community to determine what they want their childen to learn – what a successful graduate looks like in terms of knowledge and skill set. That’s the “what”. As for the “how”, I do think that’s where the education professionals take the lead: determining methodology, resource requirements, personnel, etc. needed to accomplish community objectives.
When I hire a marketing consultant, I set the objectives for the engagement: I want to drive sales, build awareness, whatever. But I don’t tell him how to do his job: he knows marketing better than I do, so if I’m smart I’ll defer to his expertise on methodology. Seems that education should be the same way: community sets the objectives, schools determine how to make it happen.
To follow that analogy, I’m going to be engaged in the consultant’s work, since I’m invested in the goals and I’m paying the bills. The consultant is held against the clear objectives I’ve set.
What’s more, once he determines a course of action, he needs to be able to justify that course of action, which means he needs to be able to provide evidence, best practices, etc. Same with teachers: if they want to use method XYZ, they need to be able to justify its use to the customer – as with any other profession (marketing, medicine, accounting, etc.), this ensures that practitioners stay current on the best methods, best textbooks, and so on. And that focus on best practices and research-based decisions is also critical, in education or any other field.