EMAIL SIGN UP!
Most Popular This Week
- Corporate Win: Supreme Court Says Monsanto Has 'Control Over Product of Life'
- Patent Filing Claims Solar Energy ‘Breakthrough’
- Disaster Capitalism Strikes as Hedge Funds Circle Near-Bankrupt Municipalities Like Vultures
- In 'March Toward Disaster,' World Hits 400 PPM Milestone
- Ignoring Bee Crisis, EPA Greenlights New 'Highly Toxic' Pesticide
Popular content
Today's Top News
Want Better Schools? Exalt Great Teachers
When we demean teaching, we perpetuate mediocrity; when we exalt teaching, we bring about great education
I recently gave a talk to students in a Peace Studies course at the University of Maine. My book, Most Good, Least Harm, had been required reading, and they had also watched my TEDx talk, The World Becomes What You Teach. They were a great audience with wonderful insights, excellent critical thinking skills, and very interesting questions. My talk was based on my book and not on the field of education, but when I was discussing the need for each of us to work for changes in systems in order to create a better world, I mentioned my own personal work for change, which is to help bring comprehensive humane education into all schools and graduate a generation of solutionaries, and this seemed to strike a chord. When I opened for questions, all of them revolved around teaching. The first was whether I thought that teachers were paid enough. Since I’d recently written about this, I enthusiastically responded that I thought that master teachers ought to be earning six figure salaries (while bad teachers are fired). There was a question about private school versus public school salaries and another about tenure. Then one student described an incompetent teacher she had whom she felt was grossly overpaid, and given her description I had to agree.
We were running out of time, but I wanted to ask them a question of my own – one I ask people frequently: How many of your teachers in elementary and high school were great? Awful? Mediocre? More often than not people respond that only 10% of their teachers were great. This is usually the same percentage that they classify as awful, and the rest fall into the middle. One person in this audience, however, felt that 40% of his teachers had fallen into the awful category.
This is always a distressing evaluation, and given the consistency of responses I’ve received, it’s no wonder teachers are excoriated. We all have our stories of bad teachers. Most of us have memories of being bored, frustrated, anxious, and often miserable at school. We love our great teachers, and we remember them fondly and with gratitude, but for too many of us, they are too few in number to offset the bad and mediocre ones. Thus, teachers as a whole are commonly vilified, and the field of teaching is often perceived as a “semi-profession.” The incompetent teachers really do have seemingly cushy jobs where they work little and get paid far more than they’re worth. And the great ones are often perceived as heroes and saints, but not as the standard toward which we should aim, nor as professionals worthy of six figure salaries. And thus we perpetuate the cycle of mediocrity.
It is obvious that we cannot have great schools without great teachers, but what is less obvious is that we will be hard-pressed to build a preponderance of great teachers while we are demeaning the profession in the public sphere; diminishing the status of teachers, and paying them salaries that are not competitive with those of other professionals. This is why I believe that we must transform our discourse on teaching. We should exalt the profession.
As we transform people’s perception of the profession of teaching, and as we reward great teachers with status and better salaries, we will inevitably attract more capable and inspired teachers. But this will not happen unless we simultaneously commit to ensuring the removal of incompetent teachers. It is up to each of us to participate in this two-fold process whether we are educators ourselves, or parents, or simply citizens. We all have a stake in education. To accomplish this challenging task, we need to help people distinguish between the profession of teaching, its nobility and importance, and the bad apples who give it a bad name. Having zero tolerance for incompetence allows us to have infectious enthusiasm for the field itself. This won’t be easy given the reality of less than stellar (and sometimes atrocious) teaching in too many of our classrooms, but I can think of no other way to break the cycle of mediocrity that pervades our schools and build a vision of schooling to which the brightest and best will flock to serve.
After my talk was over, I was thrilled to meet Chris, a senior studying to be a teacher. He gave me hope. He was a thoughtful, engaged participant during the talk, and so eager and enthusiastic about the field he was preparing to enter. It is the Chris’ in the world that we all need to work for. They hold the future in their classrooms.
- Posted in
Comments
Note: Disqus 2012 is best viewed on an up to date browser. Click here for information. Instructions for how to sign up to comment can be viewed here. Our Comment Policy can be viewed here. Please follow the guidelines. Note to Readers: Spam Filter May Capture Legitimate Comments...
32 Comments so far
Show AllThis article could have been written by Michele Rhee or any of the school privatizers. Nothing mentioned about the 20% of US kids who live in poverty. Nothing mentioned about the administrators and principals who hire the teachers in the first place and who keep these teachers on during the 3 year trial period. And they can get rid of teachers after that trial period if they can document the reasons why. Tenure guarantees due process not a job. As for paying great teachers six figure salaries, is she delusional. Teachers are being fired by the thousands and programs are being cut back. Public education is being attacked and dismantled and she's talking about six figure salaries?! Teachers will be lucky if they have a job, never mind six figure pay packages. Who decides if a teacher is great and deserves the big bucks, the principals, the kids, the test scores or the parents? This was a very disappointing article.
The flaw in this article is in assuming that students' perceptions of their teachers are meaningful estimates of the teachers' work. It does not matter if a class likes its teacher if the students actually learn what they are supposed to learn.
It is asking too much for every teacher to be charismatic. How many business executives are? No one talks about firing the CEO of a company just because his subordinates don't like him.
This article strikes me as being rather superficial on several fronts:
1. Many of the teachers I would have rated lower on the scale of excellence, when I took their classes several decades ago, I would rate much higher now that most of my life is behind me. Their wisdom eluded me when I was younger, but became clearer to me when I had the benefit of hindsight. Great teachers are often recognized in retrospect, not at the time students are taking their classes.
2. No Child Left Behind and virtually all of the political intrusions into our education system virtually guarantee that even the greatest teachers will be mediocre at best. When even the greatest teachers are denied the opportunities to be creative and innovative in their classrooms, it is the system that breeds mediocrity--not the teachers.
3. As for the student Chris who "is a senior studying to be a teacher," I have known many equally talented, potentially great teachers. Many of them change their career goals after a few days of student teaching. They quickly recognize that much of their time will be devoted to disciplinary issues and parents, politicians and administrators who will quickly make them the scapegoats for every real or perceived problem in their classrooms. The potentially great teachers who make it through student teaching usually quit within 3 to 5 years for the same reasons listed above. (Foreign students from Finland, Norway and other countries are often stunned and bewildered by the disciplinary problems American teachers have to deal with in their classrooms.)
Any attempt to reform our educational system needs to start with an acknowledgement that anti-intellectualism is as American as apple pie. There are various historical and cultural reasons for this. (See Richard Hoftstadter's book, Anti-intellectualism in American Thought, as well as many other books on the same subject.)
The problem becomes overwhelming when our politicians, as they have done quite frequently throughout our history, fan the flames of this anti-intellectualism to garner support for their political causes. Arousing a nation's anti-intellectual fury in a culture that has deep anti-intellectual roots to begin with is the easiest thing in the world to do. However, it also sends destructive echoes reverberating throughout society and into our nation's classrooms that make it extremely difficult, if not impossible, for even the most well-intentioned and talented teacher to teach effectively.
If we really want to reform our schools, let's first of all reform a political culture that takes too many cheap shots at our teachers--and renders virtually all of them scapegoats for the problems the politicians themselves have created.
If so, maybe the many talented students who want very much to be teachers would not be driven out of our nation's classrooms by the politicians who know absolutely nothing about teaching and who persistently fan the flames of anti-intellectualism.
Sadly, what we have in both political parties are politicians who are so shallow they don't understand that they have become the problem, or so self-serving they don't care if they destroy an entire profession--so long as it gets them reelected.
Don't blame teachers, blame bad parents!
It's so simple, we will have better schools when 'parents' begin to realize that raising children is different than raising puppies. Children are a full time responsibility that cannot be delegated to teenage baby sitters and people with degrees in teaching.
Successful children are the results of parents that love and nurture their children, parents that take part in the education of their children, 'without exception'.
The Old Guy has it right here:
"The problem becomes overwhelming when our politicians, as they have done quite frequently throughout our history, fan the flames of this anti-intellectualism to garner support for their political causes."
Consider how embarassingly stupid George Bush is and he had a lot of dumb supporters.
Consider how embarassingly stupid Sarah Palin is and she has a lot of dumb supporters.
I agree with JerzyJoe and Old Guy.
It's beyond question that the teaching profession ought to be respected and exalted, not demeaned and derided.
But regardless of the author's worthy sentiments, one must look askance at any writer who bewails a "cycle of mediocrity" in the same paragraph in which she employs the abominable buzz-phrase "zero tolerance".
"Great Teachers"?
Never met one. Neither have most people and most students.
Sort've a big problem with this lady's concept.
I had several great teachers throughout my educational career. Most were average and one was a complete dud. I don't believe my experience was that exceptional.
You are comparing your teachers to...Socrates? How about your first or second grade teachers? Your kindergarten teacher? No one like my ninth grade teacher who read "Lady of the Lake" to us--and we were all fascinated? Let's have real expectations: If the teacher made you happy you were in school and if she helped you to learn and want to learn more, she is a good teacher--perhaps a great one.
Seriously? Dude, it's really sad to hear that you've never had a "great teacher".
I've had a number of them. A shout-out, right here and now, to Steve Kivel, to Letty Owens, to Lee MacDonald, to Steve Dunn, to Bill Dietrich, to Steven Boyes, and to that awesome social studies teacher in 9th grade whose name, tragically, I can no longer remember. You guys rocked, and really contributed to my curiosity and my education.
Mediocre teachers, I've had many more.
Lousy teachers, you know who you are. I'm afraid there were a few too many of you. Hours of my life I will never get back.
I believe that teachers, in general, ought to be paid more. But I also believe that great teachers, in particular, should be paid way more. It's only fair. And it will benefit all of us.
Last but not least, I believe that hedge fund managers --who produce nothing of lasting value for society -- should have their income above $1,000,000 taxed at a goddamned 50% rate. At least. Talk about leeches on the system! If 50% is a hardship, they can move into the projects.
I agree with JerseyJoe as well. Too many people are focused on details and single-issues while being blind to the larger strategic issues. (Can't see the forest for the trees).
With the political and economic dictatorship, run by the Oligarchy, is busy asset-stripping the country, we peons run around squabbling over the symptoms. We need to crash this f-ed up sytem and build a new one. We are all on the reservation now
Check out this clip from Russel Means (Republic of Lakotah)
http://www.republicoflakotah.com/2011/russell-means-welcome-to-the-reservation/
This "great teacher" meme needs to be critically examined. Very, very few teachers are "great" with respect to all students. I know teachers who worked well with potential dropouts, others who worked well with the gifted, still others who had a gift and patience for working with special needs students. It is nearly impossible to find someone who can do it all. Each teacher is an individual and speaks to a set of individuals, his/her students. As in any profession, teachers can be arranged upon normal distribution curves which measure all the parameters of teaching. Not all teachers are "great"--some are, and some are not.
The author's facile insistence of "zero tolerance" for "bad teachers", implies a single standard is applied to all of them, that standard imposed most likely by authorities in education who may have no direct involvement in teaching/learning, themselves. That set of criteria will only make young people less enthusiastic about adopting teaching as a career. We don't hear about "zero tolerance" for bad lawyers, bad civil engineers, bad doctors--only teachers deserve that ignominious boot out the door after they have demonstrated their incompetence. What about training teachers to do better? What about mentorship programs? What about making teaching conditions such that creative teachers can be successful?--like getting rid of the class loads of thirty-five with six special ed students mainstreamed in? No, this article is clearly written by someone outside of ordinary schools, someone who communicates regularly with reformers in the mold of Bill Gates, a man with no experience with ordinary schools or students. She needs to be led back into her cubicle to produce yet another report that backs up her parochial thinking.
How about "zero tolerance" for corrupt politicians in Washington D.C.? Just a thought.
Judging teachers is a-lot like judging ice skaters (it is subjective to a good degree). Parental involvement and student engagement are exceptionally important for output success. My wife teaches chemistry in a suburban environment and while the Asian population makes up 15% of the school they make up 85% of her honors chemistry students (great parental involvement and students that value education). She has to work hard, but with hard work can easily look like a super star teaching those engaged students. She also teaches a chemistry class best described as "you need a pulse to pass" chemistry, she can work her butt off and off and off teaching it and still look like a dud (Students and parents just don't value education and will not engage).
Politics in some schools determine who teaches what and what/who you are teaching can easily determine how successful you look on paper.
In my personal opinion we as a society have determined that everybody should graduate and as a response have severely lowered our standards as to what level of subject matter competence is acceptable.
I agree with you that there is strong pressure placed upon teachers (by administrators) to pass the undeserving. I do not think we can get away with establishing high standards and then challenging students to meet them. Most will give up because of their perceived lack of intelligence, ambivalence about school, drug and alcohol problems, the social liability of being a "brain" as well as fanciful notions that their livings are to be made in rock music and sports. We've got to be smart about involving kids in study--having them stay at school until homework is done, allowing multiple chances to pass difficult tests, supplying technology (internet access) to some, mentoring others, modifying curriculum to make it more user-friendly for those from non-academic families, enlarging the curriculum to make sure all student talents are recognized: music, construction, sports, art, and more. All of this, of course, requires resources, resources which are in scant supply right now. It is easier (and cheaper) to pass them on to the next class with a "gentleman's or a gentlewoman's C." It costs less anyway.
drosera,
I have a huge problem with the concept of "passing" and "failing". What constitutes "passing" and "failing"? These are false concepts in that since it is impossible to "measure", i.e., it's impossible to quantify a quality of which learning and teaching are, what a teacher does and what a student learns. Each and every teacher has their own "scale", "methods", "standards" (a term I despise in relation to education), etc. . . even if the courses are "standardized". Give a student's test to a couple of teachers and you will get different "grades" unless it is a multiple choice/true-false format and even then one can find discrepancies in questions (I have yet to see a "standardized" test in which I have not found problems with many of the questions).
Why not forsake this concept of grades for more holistic assessments? Or if one insists on giving "points for performance" why not just put the total number of points possible for a given course and then show what the student's total points are without any accompanying "grade" scale and let those who use this information for decisions outside of the class to interpret them for themselves?
OYE
Interesting idea. Some classes--in science, mathematics, music, and foreign language (would that be you?)--have clearly defined concepts students must understand before they can go on to the next level. A student must understand "place value" before they reach higher levels in math. He/she must understand atomic structure before beginning a topic on bonding. Presumably she must know basic vocabulary in Spanish before attempting Cervantes. Maybe a sort of "checklist" of concepts mastered would work, though the time involved in constructing it seems overwhelming.
There should be some independent standard to indicate whether a student understands the concepts embedded in a discipline. It could be, simply, "pass-fail", I suppose, but "pass" should mean something. A student who has passed chemistry should be able to explain certain things and solve certain kinds of problems. The understanding he/she has should have meaning to schools and individuals in Indiana and in Louisiana and in London, England.
History, art, or literature might have different means of evaluation--in fact, should have different kinds of evaluation. It is, frankly, not important the student should know the dates of the Civil War, but it is important that he/she should be able to make an argument in favor of a position, criticize a particular point of view, write a paper that lays out the student's thinking, create something new, at the same time seeing both its strong points and weaknesses. That kind of evaluation should NOT be about grades, but about a teacher's written comments and suggestions. The student's work should be the evaluation.
Drosera,
"Maybe a sort of "checklist" of concepts mastered would work, though the time involved in constructing it seems overwhelming."
That is an interesting idea. In the past it was called "mastery learning". I'm sure you remember. Unfortunately it devolved into a rote learning type of system. And the time I spend devoted to grading, which takes up a lot of class time checking students work, could be better spent. Yes there are some subjects that it is important to master basic vocabulary to learn the next concept and the teacher should be the one developing the checklist. Each subject is different in what needs to be done and not all methods work in all subjects. However we are expected to incorporate every new silly little educational practice that comes along and that can be overwhelming. I don't even bother with that as I believe that the methods (which include some rote memorization and translation which have been considered "bad" practices by many in foreign language instruction gurus in the USA) I use are appropriate and work for my Spanish classes.
I'm not sure why you believe that "there should be some independent standard". I have referred to Noel Wilson's "Education Standards and the Problem of Error" many times here and I thought I remembered you saying that you would look into it. If you have, what are your thoughts on what he has to say? What are rebuttals to his arguments against "standards"?
I like your idea about the "student's work should be the evaluation" as long as the student is involved in assessing the work. And "assessing" does not mean "grading" at all.
OYE
In an ideal world, the teacher could critique students' work as an accomplished artist would critique a beginner's, pointing out errors in both execution and concept. That, of course, cannot be done in a public school setting since it demands too much time.
Maybe some courses are okay for pass-fail grading--like math, for example. Students do like to work hard to achieve recognition so "with distinction" might satisfy that desire. Other classes need a portfolio sort of assessment--or a performance-based assessment--like music--or foreign language, for that matter.
Always nice to talk to you.
Think you better start concentrating on getting rid of the politicians who live off these huge budgets. Massive budgets and students are left sometimes without school books. Tell me what's wrong with this picture. Read Dr. Rudy Crew's "Only Connect." When head of the New York City School system, he found out that the people were stealing the money from the Music Department. Based on the large sums that were allocated, he asked where were the students going to Juilliard. The students hardly had instruments. The criminals, as bold as the Mafia, criticized Dr. Crew for finding out. Yes, concentrate on the politicians and administrators. Now that's a witch hunt I can get behind.
I could go on and on. But I've already done that. My opinion is that this article is basically sound; yes, there are difficulties to be dealt with, but the main ideas articulated here sound reasonable to me... after twenty years in "the system."
http://open.salon.com/blog/daniel_geery/2011/03/01/trying_to_squeeze_a_tear_for_the_nea
http://open.salon.com/blog/daniel_geery/2011/01/24/no_childs_behind_left_part_1_of_2
http://open.salon.com/blog/daniel_geery/2011/01/24/no_childs_behind_left_part_2_of_2
http://www.opednews.com/articles/Letter-to-NEA-Leadership--by-Daniel-Geery-101027-833.html
Actually, I'd settle for this, in the author's bio: Above all, be kind.
Nice sentiment. But great, bad, or ugly, a lot of us will be satisfied just to have a profession of some sort to return to in the fall.
It is possible to make a bad teacher just by hiring a bad person or a good person who does not belong in a classroom or who belongs in a different classroom. But, as with most things, we would get farther faster addressing the systemic underpinnings of this kind of thing.
People disagree over what constitutes a good teacher, and as usual, the people whose opinions most matter are those least likely to have a voice in the issue: the students. Most other opinions have been unproductive:
- Parents, to generalize very broadly, want more "3 r's" and more discipline, approaches that have long been identified as counterproductive
- Politicians running state and local governments want to reduce overhead, with very little concern as to the effect on students.
- Taxpayers tend to want to pay less taxes
- Harried school administrators wish to teach as many as possible for the funds they are given, and frequently work to expand class sizes and thereby reduce attention to individual students
- Corporate interests, by and large, want graduates who have demonstrated dogged subservience and the ability to avoid ethical questions.
The one demographic besides students who wants small classes, low cost to students, a flexible and varied curriculum, and lots of personal interface are instructors. Outside of the occasional university student union that becomes truly active, the one body that regularly negotiates for these things is the teacher's union.
When students think my classes are great, I am happy to hear that. When they think my classes suck, I hope they can make use of any of the various ways provided to them to complain anonymously. But the only responses that hold the potential to change my career in any meaningful way are the complaints. And if 2 students of 150 complain about gratuitous nudity in the 2005 Merchant of Venice, whom do you imagine a well meaning administration is most likely to hear? How badly do I want to gamble that an administrator will see Al Pacino's performance and agree that Yes, it is more educational to see this piece played this way?
When 25% of my income was flicked away last year, it had no relation to the film--I think. (I am *almost* certain: hey, it's Shakespeare, right?) Given the difficulties, is it not obvious why all this talk about cutting funds and crippling unions makes instructors cautious and dull?
Speaking very, very generally, when adults out of school talk about "good teachers" in a loose way, when they remember people who inspired them, they remember teachers who saw something in their students and who found at least a little bit of adventure in teaching, in their topics and in their students.
Sadly, the institutional requirements and the pressure brought to bear by recent waves of self-styled reformers of education all militate against that. Against such pressures, teachers' unions are imperfect protection, but they are the best we have.
As a teacher the ones I listen to most about how I am doing as a teacher are the students. Now this is more possible to do at the secondary level than at the elementary level. I survey my students at the end of the year to get their input. I have made changes to things I do in the class because of student comments. I have also been reinforced in what I do by their comments. I hardly ever listen to the administrators, but every now and again I have gotten little bits of positive actions to take in the classroom from some.
OYE
The comments posted to this article are in many cases more cogently formed and insightful than those of the writer of this article. I think I will write an article after 30 years of teaching about the number of GREAT students I have taught over the years. Perhaps that article would identify 10% as GREAT, and 10% as AWFUL, and the vast majority as average. Who would be surprised that most of us are just average? Americans aren't big on statistics so I guess I will skip it. I think we should have zero tolerance of silly, self-important bloggers.
HHHHHhhhhhhhhhmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm! Great food for thought.
Think, I'll have an apple.
Twenty-seven years, in the "hole", "mill", Public Schools.
N.C.L.B., finally convinced me to, "bail/bale".
I miss the Students and families.
Ms. Weil has some good, valid ideas yet her thesis essentially reinforces a largely right-wing meme. It focuses on "bad" teachers to essentially blame educators for poor test results, along with the net residue witnessed in many young lives of quiet desperation. (These are the product of sociological & economic gaps that deprive so many of necessary rights and privileges... like a warm bed & a good meal. Yet they're never figured into the calculus of what's gone wrong.)
When similar memes and associated testing mechanisms are used as litmus tests to measure the productivity of CEOs & politicians, then all the noise about teachers would be fair. Until then, blaming teachers (and union workers, "illegal" aliens, and Muslims) is just another way to keep the public's attention away from the TRUE forces that are actively undermining so many common elements of life at break-neck speed. Yeah, it's the bad teachers fault... hardly.
Good posts: Drosera, Old Guy, Vet Teacher & Jerzy Joe
"Good posts: Drosera, Old Guy, Vet Teacher & Jerzy Joe"
Same to you, SR, on your post, especially about repeating the "bad" teachers are the problem meme.
Good article.
Zoe, you just don't get it! Our heroes are soldiers and bomber pilots and CIA assassins, not teachers and nurses and firefighters. Our movies glorify those who slaughter and dominate, not those who help and empower. Serving our country means killing, not caring. Try Costa Rica or Switzerland.
Phillip K. Howard who wrote "The Death of Common Sense: How Law is Suffocating America" says that if you want to get great education, you eliminate all the laws that govern schools and let teachers teach. You can find his TED talk too.
I think he said there's 54,000 hundred pages of laws that govern what happen in the classroom (don't quote me on that number, but it is an obscene amount).
It's the curriculum, stupid.
Teachers now, thanks to governmental control, are beset by endless paperwork to assess the students, taking time away from actually teaching them. They are forced to teach to tests, meaning that, as "Waiting for Superman" avows, educating a student is supposed to be like filling a jar with facts, which are to the students meaningless factoids.
Our educational system is a great one for dispersing propaganda and turning out docile worker-consumers, but really not designed to make our students smarter or engaged in the material. As long as teachers are hobbled by current standards and assessments, they won't have much time to do that making-them-smarter thing. Intelligence, I've become convinced, is the product of interest, and making students interested has to come first. Until those who make policy understand this, I don't see much hope for improving our educational system, no matter how much we pay our teachers.