Much of what happens in classrooms across the country seems to be dictated by teachers who appear to have a great deal of autonomy with respect to what is taught and how it is taught. At times, it seems that the culture of schools—which goes largely unchallenged—permits little administrative oversight and few opportunities for meaningful instruction and effective change. While in the psychological literature a buffer is described as a protective factor that weakens the positive relationship between a negative influence and its impact on some aspect of functioning, Schmoker’s use of the term seems to strengthen it as ineffective instruction works to the detriment of students.
Schools appear to be closed and isolated systems in which mediocrity is tolerated. While many teachers look to improve instruction, others seem content in doing what they have always done with little regard to how it affects the students they teach. To be sure, all professions include those who resist change and are free to operate as they choose, yet no other profession seems to allow for it to the degree noted in teaching. Poor and ineffective instruction and the failure of the profession to police itself in any meaningful way is the elephant in the room that no one talks about. Few seem willing to step up and say that the emperor isn’t wearing any clothes. Instead, ineffectiveness is permitted to flourish as administrators and others allow instruction to go unchecked. Teachers often seem to close ranks and protect their own even at a cost to others. The blue wall of silence noted in law enforcement found its match in education. While teachers know which teachers are good and which teachers need to find another profession, they rarely do anything about it. While collaboration is promoted and some do it very well, much of what I see in collaborative and team meetings are teachers reinforcing the bad ideas and ineffective practices of others.
It appears that the essential elements of instruction are lacking in many, if not most, classrooms. In classroom visits I make to see how well special needs’ students are being integrated into the general education setting, I see little evidence of a clearly defined objective, modeling, student engagement and assessment of learning—at least in certain classrooms. While school administrators are taking a closer look at what takes place in classrooms by visiting them on a regular basis and having teachers document what they do through folders they keep, instructional change is slow and is met by resistance from some who feel their professionalism and competence are being questioned. For the sake of harmony, administrators let certain things slide and long for the day ineffective teachers leave or retire. Few administrators are willing to confront ineffective teachers and demand changes in instruction. The teaching profession may, in fact, attract those who are less comfortable with change, but administrators support this discomfort through their willingness to allow resistance to change and by the watered down evaluations they sometimes produce.
While people want to have the autonomy to do things their way, they need to be held accountable for what they do and must make necessary changes. Administrators are often paper tigers with seemingly little recourse to address ineffective instruction—particularly as tenure and unions provide what appears to be impenetrable protection. Although no one wants to step on their colleagues' toes or make waves, teachers need to work together to improve instruction—promoting good practices, techniques and strategies and discarding bad ones—instead of operating solely on their own. A classroom is just one part of the overall system yet some teachers expect to captain their own ship. When did the rights of teachers to run their classes as they please override the rights of students to receive the quality instruction they need and deserve?
Schools appear to be closed and isolated systems in which mediocrity is tolerated. While many teachers look to improve instruction, others seem content in doing what they have always done with little regard to how it affects the students they teach. To be sure, all professions include those who resist change and are free to operate as they choose, yet no other profession seems to allow for it to the degree noted in teaching. Poor and ineffective instruction and the failure of the profession to police itself in any meaningful way is the elephant in the room that no one talks about. Few seem willing to step up and say that the emperor isn’t wearing any clothes. Instead, ineffectiveness is permitted to flourish as administrators and others allow instruction to go unchecked. Teachers often seem to close ranks and protect their own even at a cost to others. The blue wall of silence noted in law enforcement found its match in education. While teachers know which teachers are good and which teachers need to find another profession, they rarely do anything about it. While collaboration is promoted and some do it very well, much of what I see in collaborative and team meetings are teachers reinforcing the bad ideas and ineffective practices of others.
It appears that the essential elements of instruction are lacking in many, if not most, classrooms. In classroom visits I make to see how well special needs’ students are being integrated into the general education setting, I see little evidence of a clearly defined objective, modeling, student engagement and assessment of learning—at least in certain classrooms. While school administrators are taking a closer look at what takes place in classrooms by visiting them on a regular basis and having teachers document what they do through folders they keep, instructional change is slow and is met by resistance from some who feel their professionalism and competence are being questioned. For the sake of harmony, administrators let certain things slide and long for the day ineffective teachers leave or retire. Few administrators are willing to confront ineffective teachers and demand changes in instruction. The teaching profession may, in fact, attract those who are less comfortable with change, but administrators support this discomfort through their willingness to allow resistance to change and by the watered down evaluations they sometimes produce.
While people want to have the autonomy to do things their way, they need to be held accountable for what they do and must make necessary changes. Administrators are often paper tigers with seemingly little recourse to address ineffective instruction—particularly as tenure and unions provide what appears to be impenetrable protection. Although no one wants to step on their colleagues' toes or make waves, teachers need to work together to improve instruction—promoting good practices, techniques and strategies and discarding bad ones—instead of operating solely on their own. A classroom is just one part of the overall system yet some teachers expect to captain their own ship. When did the rights of teachers to run their classes as they please override the rights of students to receive the quality instruction they need and deserve?
3 comments:
Well written post. I like your analogy to the "Blue Wall of Silence" in law enforecement. Do you suppose that is a by product of unions in schools or simply that no one wants to upset/"rat out" a colleague? Or is there another reason?
In many cases, I think administrators feel powerless to change ineffective teachers and the snactions they have available are few once they are tenured. Itis amanzing that a teacher can lose tenure for striking a child or for sending pornography, but sanctions are rare for not doing their job effectively. Both hurt kids. (Albeit in very different ways.)
What got my attenion in your article was how you wanted to know how well special education students are integrated into the regular curriculum? One would think that in this day and age immersion would be easier and the transition accepted. No matter where one goes the segregation of Special Education, ELL and regular education will still be segregated. Everything looks great on paper, but in actual practice it is not done.
I went to a PD the other day and one would think what a great thing to go to a PD to enhance classroom tactics, etc. Well, it was a PD to have regular education teachers and special education teachers work together. What happened there was not anything different than what our students experience during their careers at school. First of all, the dept. chair was having a meeting and left 10 special education teachers wait outside. When the teachers were finally allowed in, they sat on one side of the room and the regular teachers on the other. What made it worse was that the dept. chair said there were too many of us in one room and went on to divide us into two rooms for no reason. He also failed to give the special education teachers the instructions that he had given his own team. That day I knew what our students experience.
I feel like I am repetitive in my posts and my comments, but I agree with yoru point of view about the fact that teachers carry on their jobs and seem to not take too much time to develop themselves and that they should be held accountable. I believe in allowing educators a chance to teach to their best ability, however I agree that many teachers do not actualyl teach to their best ability. I think the main culprit of this is that teachers get lackadaisical following their receipt of tenure and that needs to change. I enjoyed your post.
Post a Comment