| SEARCH OnWEAC |
|---|
Opinions expressed in articles posted to the "From our readers" section do not necessarily reflect those of WEAC. If you would like to contribute to this page, please send your e-mail to OnWEAC Editor Bill Hurley at hurleyb@weac.org. Not all articles submitted to OnWEAC will be posted, and some may be edited for length.
Below is a commentary former Wisconsin teacher Nancy Gray sent to Wisconsin Public Radio in response to a program titled "Two Steps Back," which was part of the "This American Life" series (http://thislife.org) She describes the program as "an excellent follow-up to an issue covered by Ira Glass 10 years ago in the Chicago schools, namely why a very excellent elementary school teacher was considering leaving the profession."
"The program was both enlightening and frustrating to listen to, especially for me with my 22 years in the system," Gray said.
* * *
By Nancy Gray
Thank you so much for the wonderful program today (WPR-WERN FM). It so illustrated one of the big things that is wrong with America's public schools. A school board and administration can suck the life out of an innovative school that is succeeding – no matter what size the district might be. I taught high school English for 22 years in North Central Wisconsin and I ran up against a rigid administration from the get-go. "This is the way we've always done it" and "We're accountable to the taxpayers in this community" were comments I faced in my first few years. I stayed with teaching because I had no other career to pursue. I stayed in the same school district because teaching jobs were few and far between – and I needed a job. (To be honest, I almost cried at several points as I listened to the frustration in Cathy's voice as she struggled to decide whether to remain in teaching. I understood that frustration.)
Thankfully, I found my comfort zone within the system. No, the system didn't change appreciably, but gradually we witnessed an increasing interest in improving educational experiences for kids. Partly it was because more young professionals were relocating to the area (for new jobs) who demanded improvement, partly it was because of mandates at the state and federal level (for students with disabilities and in Title IX legislation). Imagine that.
I survived because I discovered that I actually was a good teacher. I was willing to take on assignments with students NOT on the college track and experienced some successes. I had the respect of most of my colleagues and many of my students (and their parents). And while I wasn't among the teachers who got all the recognition for their honor roll students, I gradually gained some satisfaction in my career.
Why did I finally leave teaching? The handwriting was clearly on the
wall.
With continuing budget cuts at the local, state and federal level, my
ability to teach competently was gradually eroding. My average class
size was rising slowly with each new school year, and more special needs
students were part of that increase (with less and less support for
me). My budget was frozen each year at a "0%" increase starting
in the 1980s. And the mindless mandates from "on high" were
multiplying.
There are two types of successful schools: the fully participatory school (such as early Washington Irving Elementary in Chicago) where teachers and administrators work together to solve problems and implement improvements, and special top-down managed schools where all the teachers respect and look to the direction of the principal. In a survey conducted in the 1990s, it was discovered that the most successful schools were the ones where the staff knew that the principal supported their efforts and would do what was necessary to protect their good efforts. As long as staff members feel that their concerns will be heard and dealt with fairly, either of these two systems can work to the betterment of kids.
It is when dramatic change comes (even when it happens gradually) to the system that things fall apart. As with any organization, successful change can only happen in a school with the buy-in of the staff that must implement the change.
Nobody likes to be told that what he/she has been doing for years is not acceptable/appropriate/successful/allowed (you choose the ending). This is especially true in such situations as Irving school. If change is to occur, the staff must see that the change is a good thing: it will help in the education process, or it will make planning and preparation more efficient, or it will make education an all-inclusive process (involving the parents and community). When the answer to the question of "Why must we change?" is only "Because the administration (or school board) has decided," or "Because it will be good for you," you will see extraordinary unwillingness among the staff. Resignations, transfers, and outright non-compliance take place.
Thank you for letting me vent to you. It is my opinion that public education works when a school can assemble a good staff with a good administrator. (I personally prefer the group decisionmaking process of implementing improvement, perhaps even with student and parent representation on the panel.) Adequate funding is necessary to provide students with educational opportunities. And community involvement is a MUST. Once people from the community, business leaders and parents take part in the education process, amazing things can happen. Certainly, paying a good wage attracts the best teachers, but in an excellent school teachers are willing to forego large pay raises in lieu of professional satisfaction.
Best wishes and thank you for many entertaining and thought-provoking
programs.
Posted November 4, 2004