How can American educators regain a status in the professional class?

    In the past twenty years, the United States and Finland’s public education systems developed along completely different trajectories; while the formidable superpower repeatedly tests in the middle of the pack on international assessments, the relatively small Scandinavian country has become a powerhouse and a model for the world. American attempts at increasing accountability for individual educators stagnate growth and stunt progress whereas Finland’s model of shared responsibility promotes teacher autonomy and creativity as well as measurable success for students.  What can the United States learn from an international model of excellence like Finland? How can American educators regain a status in the professional class on par with other white collar professionals like lawyers and doctors? 

American teachers increasingly found themselves drawn into the political sphere this year during an already trying experience of teaching during the pandemic. From the initial lockdown through the one year point in the pandemic, public opinion on teachers has gone through a kaleidoscope of changes. Despite the variable view of teachers in society’s eye, educators as a workforce have largely adapted to teaching in this new environment of virtual, hybrid and socially distanced classrooms. For many teachers, being publicly vilified and used as political pawns seem de rigeur at this point. Regardless, the included stressor of a worldwide crisis has only added to the amount of pressure on America’s teachers to perform herculean tasks that are far beyond their pay grade. Thus, more teachers are reporting burnout and contemplating leaving the profession entirely than ever before.

 

While conditions within American public schools have been exacerbated by the

coronavirus lockdowns and restrictions, there is an underlying ideological malady that predates

interruptions by any literal disease. The ideological shift from responsibility toward “accountability” in public education has been one of the hallmark symptoms of the disease

plaguing public education, (ESEA, Statement of Purpose, Sec. 1001). While the two terms are

related and often used interchangeably, accountability puts the onus on individuals and their

actions, oftentimes measured by output. Since the introduction of No Child Left Behind legislation in 2002, or its successor, Every Student Succeeds, educators have been

evaluated based on their students’ performances on high-stakes state exams, such as the PARCC,

district-wide initiatives like benchmark exams, or even individual coursework through SGOs

(student grown objectives).  Much like other public policy initiatives, the way of

approaching public education has been dominated by neoliberal, “third way” socioeconomic

theory, “The social theory of the Third Way argued for integrative thinking—linking the best of government leadership with innovative markets in educational change. In practice,

though, many Third Way policies have drifted from the Way's original ideals—alienating

students, corrupting classrooms, manipulating educators, and deceiving the public,”

(Hargreaves & Hurley, 21).

As educational theorists Andy Hargreaves and Dennis Hurley note, while the third way can offer

objective numbers that can be compared across school districts, there has been an overemphasis

on those raw scores rather than considering the human aspect of the teaching profession. 

The obsession with accountability has roots much deeper than the influence of corporate paradigms within education. A misapplication of the Protestant work ethic is at the root of this pathology. Elements of the Calvinist strain of Protestantism at the foundation of Anglo-American colonization remain a cornerstone for defining “core American values.” The thrifty and hardworking Puritans are but one group in a long line of stoic endurers of difficult times in the American mythos - from homesteading pioneers to the Depression era savers to pandemic bread makers and DIY-ers; there have always been survivors and thrivers. This persistence through obstacles, while originally attributed to God’s saving grace, has been secularized into part of the American character. 

This perseverance has been co-opted by corporate America into another selling point for potential employees. Marketability of one’s self now must include some sort of grit, “x” factor, or charisma that remains difficult to define or quantify. What is it that makes one employee thrive but another wilt? Those who cannot keep up may be provided with constructive criticism or a corrective action plan, but the onus of success remains on the individual and not the institution. The lie perpetuated here is that those “graced” with grit will perform well, despite any hardships. 

The concept of accountability under the guise of “grit” even swept through schools as a way to market personal accountability to individual students. Valorizing this nebulous but clearly individual trait turns education into a competitive exhibition of academic success earned through grit - and measured through gains on quantitative assessments - which in turn allows access to highly-rated colleges and highly-paid careers. Life within and beyond the classroom is reduced to the pursuit of the “score.” Such practices prime students for their future as obedient players in systems that continue to “grade” them throughout their lives - from their school to  employment careers. Accountability provides employers with a mode to quantitatively measure job performance without explicitly saying so. 

Accountability (and measures of it) is a tool. The emphasis on accountability as the bellwether of health of an institution like public education is problematic, however. Schools do not exist in a vacuum and while an individual teacher or district can be measured through evaluative standards on how well they perform, there are multiple variables that remain outside their control, despite their potential impact on the outcome, (for example, socioeconomic status of students in a class or district). Accountability as a measure stems from the corporatization of the public sector in the US. Both major American political parties embraced neoliberalism in their own ways in the wake of the Cold War, but always with an end goal toward protecting profit margins. As noted by education researcher Marianne Larsen, “...the imperatives of global capital have imposed neo-liberal economic discipline on all levels of government...characterized by managerialism, these policies entail the introduction of business values and practices in the public sector,” (Larsen, 293). 

While teacher quality can and should be assessed, what would be the most effective and

productive way to do so, and would that make a difference in professional satisfaction and for

student achievement as well?  On an international level, the evaluative model for teacher

professionalism and expertise varies from nation-state to nation-state; international comparisons

have shown that the more high-stakes and punitive teacher evaluations are, the more likely they

are to provoke counterproductive distress within the evaluee, “Like other fields of study, education has been influenced by market-driven global forces, and stakeholders with administrative powers started questioning whether their investment, financial or otherwise, was getting its worth…accountability-based teacher evaluation models, despite their popularity nowadays, are more likely to ‘increase stress, anxiety, fear, and mistrust amongst teachers and limit growth, flexibility and creativity’ (Larsen, 292) and that teachers are oftentimes struggling with trying to meet the requirements defined by various stakeholders.” (Tarhan, 37).

Yet, the problem may not be with accountability itself, but the cultural climate surrounding accountability; what foundational ideologies surround accountability in the US versus Finland?  While their research focuses on accountability for students, the differing sociopolitical context in the US and Finland frames the usage and interpretation of accountability as a tool. Furthermore, the researchers illuminate the stark contrast between the Finnish teacher training programs and associated professional evaluative systems, which are standardized across a handful of universities, all with the same objectives to meet the national requirements for professionalism, with the American accreditation programs, which not only vary from state to state, but may vary from district to district within a state.

          

The Hermit Paradox

“Americans no longer talk to each other, they entertain each other. They do not exchange ideas, they exchange images. They do not argue with propositions; they argue with good looks, celebrities and commercials.”― Neil Postman, Amusing Ourselves to Death: Public Discourse in the Age of Show Business


Strange as it may seems if you've heard me talk about the comfort of anonymity and my desire to live on a mountaintop far, far away from people, I'm a conversationalist at heart. This paradoxical identity as both someone who wants to be a faceless body on the crowded streets of New York and the only face you're actually focused on while engaged in conversation is embodied within me. It's probably why my dream is to just be able to read all day long - a conversation with someone that isn't there, but that can be accessed as easily as flipping open a page. But truly, I do enjoy unadulterated conversations with the people I feel comfortable enough to reveal more personal details about myself, and most importantly, with people who are actively listening. Being able to express whatever pops into my head without self-censorship births flow and I'm willing to ride it out until the end, even if it means being vulnerable. In the barest way, my desire is to be able to think aloud and express myself without encountering judgment.

As much as I hate being at work sometimes, it helps me think so much more than being at home. Yet, there is no denying the need for a two month break after the intense intellectual stimulation of being a public school teacher for ten months every year [...that's what's wrong with every other profession in America - there's not enough meaningful time off. Everyone's annoyed at teachers for having the time we do in the summer. And to everyone I say - the answer isn't to take it away from us, it's to get it for yourselves, too]. Besides dealing with pedagogy, each day I take on the responsibility of 100's of someone else's children - teaching them subject content, yes, but also life skills and on top of that, keeping them safe. I don't take any of that lightly.

There are a lot of jobs that can be broken down like I just did to teaching -especially in ways that make them sound heroic and deserving of praise. But that's not actually what I was trying to elicit from the reader here. There's no need to praise me for choosing a job that I enjoy doing. The point is that humans themselves are amazing and capable beings, and we all express our capabilities differently. Unfortunately, as a society, we tend to oppress the shit out of each other through societal norms. Completely abstract notions of what is "good" and "valuable" replace what is good and valuable for thriving as a living being in this world. The ol' Protestant work ethic should have withered away long ago, because it's neither relevant in a society where we could begin automating so many menial tasks nor in one where if wealth was (re)distributed more evenly, it would erase the need for such an endlessly demanding stream of "productiveness"  from everyone.
Productive by whose standards? Is sitting at a desk crunching numbers more productive and valuable to society than digging trenches for water pipes? Clearly not, but we've abstracted worth and meaning to support intellectual tasks so much more so than physical ones. Teaching is one of those unusual professions that straddle a line - there's a huge intellectual component and on the other hand, this wholly practical one of being a member of a community that contributes to the raising of children. And that practical side has led teachers to be set apart from other educated professionals, as a "lesser" sort. Plus, the preponderance of women in the profession - 77% female in public schools nationwide - adds an additional layer of disregard in a patriarchy [Ooh, yes, the United States is indeed still a patriarchy - there are obvious improvements to conditions women experience on a whole, but let's not live in a world where we see those successes and hang up our picket signs for good. Women's success is still measured by how well she fits into a man's world].

As a teacher, ultimately what I want to cultivate for those present in my room is the space to explore thoughts without ridicule. If I ever do leave teaching, it's the access to so many conversations that I will miss most. Each school year, each class, each student, is an opportunity for a new relationship, and therefore, a new conversation. On top of that, as a history teacher, I want students to be in discussion with the past because not only does it make it more personal, but it could help people feel more invested in participating in the dialogue of society and politics. If they can leave my room with the understanding that there is more to explore on any front, I'd chalk it up to a win.

Craft Your Life In Ways It Will Be Shown

"Craft:  a form of knowledge, but not just knowledge of making, but a knowledge of being."*

Reading a book review of a history of crafts - in the sense of handicrafts or practical arts as well as time-worn, but increasingly rare practices, like sheep-herding - I was reminded of my obsession with the idea that teaching falls under this umbrella. For people who always felt teaching was the job that made sense to them, despite lower salaries or life in the panopticon (in which bureaucrats and your neighbors alike could have an opinion about YOUR job!), the common refrain that 'it's a calling' likely resonated with you, even if you rolled your eyes to the sentimental cheesiness so many would imbue such a statement with.

As I've expressed beliefs about the craft of teaching previously, the focus of this post is the concept of "craft" itself. In an era of instant gratification, the thought of putting time into such mundane tasks as weaving a basket or even chopping vegetables becomes ludicrous in the face of time savers like purchasing "pre-made," "pre-packaged," "pre-cut," etc. Yet, in light of all of our innovative ways to save a few minutes her and there, major consequences arise: the impact of the "use and toss" culture on our environment, the fact that no one seems to have achieved any long-term contentment, and the effect not engaging has on our minds.

Did our ancestors have more fulfilling material and spiritual lives? In some respects, yes....(?!). There was more likely to be a purpose to life, especially when it came to work. Crafting was life for a weaver, a shepherd, a potter. Of course, infant mortality rates were through the roof and a drink of water might lead to death. It's dangerous to romanticize the old and remove these practices from the societies in which they existed. That doesn't mean we can't find something to take away from them either.

In a post-industrialized world, where most hold service jobs, and even those who still work in manufacturing now have an idea their jobs come with an expiration date after which their positions will be automated, humans have to be cognizant of the limitations of the all-tech, all-the-time milieu. Our biological evolution has not caught up with our social. Human bodies have remained relatively unchanged as far as composition since 300,000 years ago. We tend to forget such realities when our species has woven a wonderfully progress-oriented narrative for ourselves in the form of a collective consciousness. And with a focus on the future (and a "now is better than then" attitude) we've lost sight of what it means to experience our humanness in many ways.

Must we, as individuals, craft to survive as a species? We're made to believe so many aspects of our society are "bedrocks" of civilization as we know it when likely they're not. Beliefs that take away our desires to "do," as in experience, the world around us. Instead we sit in inertia, rather than endure hard feelings. The fear of change and anxiety associated with non-conformity to a "normal" way of life keep us in jobs, homes, relationships, behavior patterns that rob us of our (admittedly, very little) agency to effect change in our own lives.

The only answer that satiates any desire for a solution (though it is paltry in comparison to the size of the problems facing our species) is to live , in the face of oppressive bourgeois norms, blasphemously. Whatever that word conjures up in your mind - try it out. The repression of our selves in learned from myriad sources and from an early age. Parental examples, religion, schooling, media and popular culture all send messages to continue the narrative, to preserve it for future generations. And sure, the levels of oppressive social messaging today are less restrictive and more open to new possibilities, but always it's a new amendment added to a list of many others versus. Rather, those new iterations can be intertwined into a wider web of human possibilities, furthering chances of a new configuration.

Thus, our nature calls us to craft - and not solely in the sense of gluing popsicle sticks together to make a frame. "Craft" in the older sense of the word - to know how to "be" whatever it is you're doing. Enrich your experience and life with full engagement in an activity.



*the review of the book, "Craeft" in the NYT Book Review

Finland's education system, again

Look, I know Finland doesn't have "the diversity" the US does, but how do economic , social and/or racial differences play into appropriate programs for the developmental age of children. Piaget didn't say, "Oh, only Swiss children benefit from play and social discovery at young ages."

Sure, there have always been shifts in how children and their education should be viewed - from seeing them as stupid or likely to die and therefore ignorable to mini-adults that can be trained to act properly (think Mozart and his sister). In the wake of the birth of psychology and modern democratic societies, the importance of an educated electorate became more clear. John Dewey's beliefs on education, while liberal compared to many education reforms we see being put into place today, also had the practical purposes of preparing people for life on their own, out in society, both in the here and now AND the future. In an almost Zen-like focus on the present day, Dewey sought to make education in the US beneficial the development of children INTO adulthood, not just for adulthood. On the contrary, today's overall goals for education often seem to be focused on the future. Ends-focused reforms that look to expand the eligible workforce in particular areas, such as STEM fields are not bad. In fact, they are also practical when thinking in the long run. What is not good practice are the reforms that use standardization through testing and curricula to ensure that certain goals will be "measurably" reached.

I am not calling for teachers to have no accountability to some higher standard. What I would like is that teachers, if given a certain benchmark to meet before being hired, such as particular educational requirements (Masters degree, classroom experience, etc), should be entrusted to know what is going to work in their classroom for their students. With the additional layer of actual supervisory guidance (and not check the box, standardized observational systems), teachers can grow their practice into an art, rather than be penalized for a random assortment of missed checked boxes on a rubric. All of this reminds me of the scene in "Uncle Buck" where Buck goes to talk about his niece's progress in 1st grade:

The VP's attitude is not uncommon in public education. The desire to mold children into good little citizens from day one seems to be, for people of this mindset, something that is done through having children sit in one place for a long time beginning at a young age. Some children ARE predisposed to sit and listen, others are not. In fact, many are not, especially in early elementary education.It can be argued that sitting and not doing actually impairs their ability TO learn.

Today, we know so much (and still so little) about how the human brain and body function - more so than any other time in human history, and yet, we still continue to stuff everyone into the same sort of boxes that continue to fail percentages of the population. No one is asking the education system to wholly embrace Howard Gardner's "multiple intelligences" model as scientifically tried and true, but by just being in the world, anyone observant enough can see that people approach problems in different ways. What always kills me about many of the administrators that I come across is that they will spout the importance of differentiated instruction and respect for various learners in the classroom while forcing their faculty to act in lock step. The panopticon-style, mass institutionalization of children will lead to the ultimate end of public education in the US in two ways- it will crush children's ability to adapt through being able to explore, try and fail in the safe confines of a classroom and it will eradicate a teacher's capacity to creatively express the importance of sociocultural and content based learning.

For those who see this as another "public school teacher complaining about shit" post, well maybe consider this- it will also contribute to an electorate who votes in an extremist- whether you see that as Trump OR Sanders- due to their 'tiredness' of the establishment.

Being and Nothing

One evening at dusk, as I was returning to my room along a narrow path through the pine forest, carrying a blue plastic bucket slopping with water that I had just collected from a nearby source, I was abruptly brought to a halt by the upsurge of an overpowering sense of the sheer strangeness of everything.

It was as though I had been lifted onto the crest of a great wave that rose from the ocean of life itself, allowing me for the first time to be struck by how mysterious it was that anything existed at all rather than nothing.

"How," I asked myself, can a person be unaware of this? How can anyone pass their life without responding to this? Why have I not noticed this until now?" I remember standing still, trembling and dumb, with tears in my eyes. Then I continued on my way before night fell.

This experience made me uncomfortably aware of a chasm between what I was studying and something that had happened to me in my own life that struck me as vitally important. The Buddhist texts with which I was familiar did not seem to speak about, let alone value, such experiences as the one that had just shuddered through me.- Stephen Batchelor, Confessions of a Buddhist Atheist

I have been reading voraciously for the past two weeks. i went through 2 novels, a bunch of magazines I had been putting off and then I started the book from which the above quote is excerpted. This passage gave me pause when I read it. How many times have I been overcome by the same feeling of doubt about the world? What is the point of it all? And why does this thought come to me at the most random of times? Batchelor was a Buddhist monk, studied under various famous leaders and still rejected it all in the end. Why? What was lacking from his teachings? There was enough certainty, that's for sure. All of the beliefs he rejected had an air-tight response to his doubts, yet never actually addressed his doubts. 

Think about a great "teacher" (parent, religious leader, classroom teacher, professor. etc) you had, that you looked up to because they seemed to know everything. When you asked them about something that wasn't their forte, instead of telling you they didn't know, they instead brushed off your question as inconsequential. And perhaps, if you were younger, or less experienced, you might have believed them, and beat yourself up for being "stupid" in front of their great presence, but as it turns out, this teacher was just more like you than you thought. They were fallible. They did NOT know everything there was to know. But that's OK. Unfortunately, they were just not OK with it. 

I went to a teacher workshop and the instructor was talking about this exact situation. How, we, as teachers, need to accept that we do not know everything. How the students can see that it's OK to be continually learning and shaping the mind throughout life. The teacher is not an authority, but a guide. This is something that I take pride in doing. I did not need a workshop to tell me that, though, I think it is important that others hear and embrace the uncertainty of everything, especially in regards to knowledge. When a teacher sets themselves up as an omniscient authority, s/he's not only setting themselves up for confrontation and failure, but their students as well. 

Spiritually, the beauty of Jesus and Buddha as teachers were that they were open to experiences. They personally did not adhere any rigid dogma that their followers constructed in their wake. Their experiences and guidance, not commandments, are valuable tools. Similarly, one of the reasons that I am drawn to Zen Buddhism in particular is that there is an air of mystery to teachings like the koans. These logic puzzles leave breathing space for interpretation. What they ultimately mean to you is important. 

Another meaning that I think Batchelor also gets at in this quote, is what I find to be one of the great mysteries of the modern world. Do people really stop and think about their existence and why they're here? Is there a larger group of people out there than the few I have disclosed the uneasiness of being aware of my mortality to? How many people suppress that uncanny feeling he's describing? By time one gets to adulthood, I would say there is a good chance that people are more and more unwilling to talk about these feelings because....well, they're set in their ways, one step closer to the inevitable end, thinking about it would get in the way of their "plans" and their "life." But that feeling IS life. All of the other stuff we create is wonderful, but it's what Buddhists call Maya (illusion), and it distracts us from the realities of our finitude. 

The finite space of an art form like the haiku also works to help us get in touch with something deeper than the distractions of television, consumer products, relationship drama, etc. The master Japanese poets of yore so often encapsulated deep sentiments and experiences in carefully chosen, and placed. words. The one below appeared in one of those two novels I recently read. The narrator was discussing mono no aware, the Japanese aesthetic value of the transience of all living things - how we're filled with feelings of great awe and sadness as we view the world around us. Mono no aware is essentialized by the cherry blossom festivals in Japan. The beauty of the flowers is ephemeral, yet, to be enjoyed nonetheless. 

Thinking of the morning dew, it will pass away into the dry high noon of the summer, and yet we revel in those few minutes anyway. Life is a lot like that -when we revel in being alive, we can pay no mind to the fact that we will pass beyond this world in due time.

This dewdrop world

Is a dewdrop world –

And yet — and yet 

-Kobayashi Issa

Educational Quality

“First and foremost school boards look out for students. Education is not a line item on the school board’s agenda—it is the only item. When making decisions about school programs, school boards incorporate their community’s view of what students should know and be able to do. School boards are accessible to the public and accountable for the performance of their schools. School boards are the education watchdog for their communities, ensuring that students get the best education for the tax dollars spent.” (Role of the School Board, Center for Public Education, National School Boards Association website)

Essentially the role of a Board of Education is…education. The quality of the education within a school district is its primary objective. Saving money is a boon to tax payers, but if it will be at the cost of the students’ experience in the classroom, then that takes precedent over anything else.

The Boards of Education for many Monmouth county school districts , and New Jersey school districts in general, have displayed, through tense contract negotiations in the past few years, a lack of understanding of their role in their communities. As a teacher, I represent a member of the community I serve. Yes, my address may fall out of the "district," but a community is not so arbitrarily defined as to be within city limits. My salary, like all other public employees, is paid for by the taxpayer, which is true. Yet, if you are not a public employee, your salary does not come magically from the sky. Maybe your salary is due in part to taxpayers choosing to spend money at your establishment, which, yes, is a choice and not a decree, but both represent participation in a society. We all choose to participate in a society because we would rather not go it alone. The concept of a social contract is not new, nor is it jeopardized by public schooling that is funded by property taxes. Ultimately, there may be a better way to fund schools, but that would be an argument for another time.

Furthermore, a quality education is an investment in the future of our country. By denying students quality teachers and a dedicated staff, you are not only doing the next generation a disservice, but yourself one as well. Working for Boards of Education that devalue the effort their teachers put forth, when coupled with the stressors of stalled contract negotiations, pay freezes, "0%" raises, rising benefits costs and an ever-increasing cost of living, may force the hands of many quality and prudent teachers to leave the profession outright for their own well-being.

If there is a way that we can broach the discussion of education and in particular, contract negotiations, without it coming down to the same tired arguments, the staff at these schools would be much more productive and able to achieve further greatness than they have in the past. If you are not a teacher, but know one, you might have noticed that they fall silent when the topic of education arises in a group setting. Why is that? Do they have nothing to say? Or is it futile for them to express an opinion in the particularly hostile environment created by the current politicians in office?

What would we, as a people, be able to achieve if our schools had more competitive salaries that attracted the best and brightest graduates and seasoned teachers from not only NJ, but around the country? How can we hold to a standard of excellence without competitive compensation? With various new initiatives, like new observational templates, NJSMART, Common Core and PARCC, teachers are already feeling the immediate heat of change in their classrooms and school communities. New curricula may be more demanding and require more preparation time. New accountability requirements now link student growth to individual teachers.  For the lot of us, these changes are something we will take on willingly. To ask us to do it while being demonized as not working our fair share, a reckless and untrue claim, is unconscionable.

If you are still not convinced by anything said above, Chris Christie and Barack Obama both send their own children to private school; the idea that spending money for quality education is not lost on them. They just do not care to ensure that it happens for your children at an equitable level to theirs. If we are going to be able to have a productive, vibrant democratic republic in the future, the continued focus on education needs to be at the forefront.