I have no idea what reaction this diary will elicit. Read it as a rant, read it as semi-serious. Are some of the things I say ridiculous? Yep. Is there a problem with education? Yep. Read with caution.
I don’t see black helicopters coming. I don’t wear a tinfoil hat to block the incoming signals from HAARP. I don’t think the illuminati secretly order the universe and are on a path to one world government. However, I do feel that there are deeply ingrained reflections of the patriarchy and corporatism in our society. I feel that male-dominationism is at the core of various beliefs that guide our cultural mores. Mainly, as a male teacher, I see the overweening patriarchy running a system and using that system as a scapegoat.
Part One: The patriarchy’s role in education
Teaching is a strongly female dominated profession. I look at the classrooms of the schools where I teach and I see women in most rooms. I have a female principal, and three female assistant principals at the two schools where I teach. However, stunningly, only 13% of superintendents nationwide are female. So, on a school to school basis, women are in charge of the classroom, and varyingly in control of the school, but rarely in charge of the district.
So what, right? I’d like to give you a thought project/word association game: who do you think of first when you think of declining schools? Who gets called out in the media for problems in schools? Who gets salary cuts first, who gets programs cut first? Which story would play on the local news first: a teacher inspiring a class of children or a teacher abusing a student? Here’s the core question: why are teachers the first group blamed for all the ills in the education system?
I’ve had conversations with fellow teachers about this very topic. At first, I jokingly brought up that maybe the people who hate and blame teachers as adults had that teacher that REALLY sucked when they were a kid. Now, that teacher that they hated is the personification of every teacher. In other words, the school sucks kids took over once they were out of school and dominate media. As LOL as this idea is, is it possible? Sure. Why not.
But then, I turned the subject to the patriarchy. Could it be that our male-dominated history has influenced our society’s attitude towards teachers in general? Teaching was one of the first professions that women were allowed to participate in. Over the years it has become more and more female-centric. Teaching is one of the lower paid professions. Teachers as a group are rarely taken seriously (see percentage of female superintendents and consider that superintendents are the real ruling force in education). Even superintendents who claim to be open to suggestion from teachers rarely actually listen, and move to the most teacher unfriendly decisions. In Savannah, we’re facing a $37 million budget shortfall. The plan: cut teacher salaries, cut programs (including teenage pregnancy assistance programs, band, and school safety officers). Since all those cuts only make up a part of the shortfall, they’ll have to raise the property tax rate (called the millage rate), but even then, they’ll "have" to cut teacher salaries even further through furloughs. Meanwhile, high level, redundant administrators (majority male) in the board office retain their six digit salaries.
Teachers are generally blamed for all the ills within a school. At the high school where I teach, the entire staff was "renewed" (the newspaper headline read "Fired", but since we didn’t lose our jobs overall, we just have to relocate, that’s not totally accurate). Why was the staff renewed? Student performance didn’t meet state and federal growth standards. So, who do we remove? The teachers. Is there going to be any change in the student body next year, a shuffling in of talented, motivated students to help encourage success? Nope. Just completely restaff the school, offer performance bonuses for school wide improvement, then hold breath. It’ll work! Why? Because the superintendent says so. Also.
I should note at this point: there are BAD teachers. There are VERY bad teachers. Every district has them, and finding a way to remove the bad and keep the good is a constant and nearly insurmountable problem for every district. With that in mind, the next slap from the patriarchy comes in the form of merit pay. In Georgia, a merit pay bill died in Senate committee, only to be resurrected as an amendment two weeks later. But, Aureas, what’s wrong with paying teachers who do well more? The problem is how to find out who is doing better. And what’s the proposal? Teacher pay will be based on student performance. Of course, teachers have a massive impact on student performance, but to base a teacher’s pay on whether a kid scores well on a test is a sick idea. I won’t get into too many of the arguments against it (read this), but there are innumerable reasons to hate this idea. Most merit pay bills (see Florida) are actually meant to break teacher’s unions. If there’s no other reason than this, I would oppose merit pay.
Back to the main idea here: could it be that because teaching is a female-dominated field, it is used as a whipping boy by the patriarchy. I mean, doesn’t the patriarchy desire that women should hold the submissive position in society: so we pay them less, blame them for major problems and deride them at the first sign of weakness (the local news stories about teachers doing stupid things). I know I’m not the first to posit this notion. Teacher’s unions are constantly fighting uphill battles and see first hand the teacher bashing notions of the power structure.
Part two: the corporate overlords and the dark side of teach to the test
OK, remember earlier when I said I don’t see black helicopters, etc. After this, maybe you’ll call me a liar. The testing industry is a huge money making operation. The corporations that have sprung up to write and score tests are making huge profits under NCLB laws and now are seeking to make more under new merit pay systems (again, see Florida and Jeb Bush’s role in the new law that Christ vetoed). But could there be a darker side to this increase in interest in teaching to a test. What long term effects might there be on our society and what kind of system are we setting up for the future?
Standardized testing causes teachers to form their lessons around those tests. The focus is not on establishing deep instructional patterns or long term fascination with learning, but instead the rote tools necessary to memorize specific information. In other words, teachers are narrowing the focus of their teaching to the point where there is not time to explore higher level thinking skills. Who does this benefit? I posit that it complements a corporate work structure/society. The less apt a worker is at thinking outside the box, or using problem solving and reasoning skills, the more likely the corporation can get away with less and less subtle offenses against society. Here’s the scenario: corporation A hires low-level rote learners to do low-level rote work. Since these workers have not been trained to think at higher levels, they feel no need to question the work that they are doing and do the corporation’s bidding. Anyone read Hard Times? We’re talking about a return to the Hands here. Brainless cogs in the grist mill of corporate America.
Teaching higher level thinking skills is hard. It’s hard to teach, it’s even harder to measure. I’m hopeful in my more reasonable moments that this is the larger factor in the test-centric educational system we are dealing with now. That last paragraph is some Orwellian nightmarescape. Pray that I am wrong.
Regardless of whether the darker scenario is true or not, it is time that we take a deep breath and reassess education in the US. There must be a way to improve our school system that does not involve punishing hard-working teachers and students. I have advocated for higher millage rates to cover money gaps locally, a more progressive tax system (for individuals and corporations) that means that our state and federal treasuries are able to properly fund education. Two big steps back from the brink of all testing all the time would be a beneficial move. But what else can we do?
Well, isn’t this apropos. I just received an email asking for suggestions on what we as a district can cut. <facepalm> This is the dominant idea in our district: cut cut cut. My response:
Stop giving the CRCT [our district’s standardized test]. Until the state and federal government fund the school system fully as they are supposed to, until the municipality takes the step of raising the millage rate, stop standardized testing. It’s a huge cost that does nothing to benefit our students. But seriously, why isn’t the professional senate talking about ways to raise revenue for the district? Why aren’t they discussing who to lobby to raise the millage rate? Why aren’t they fighting tooth and nail against furloughs and teacher salary reductions?
For some reason, I’m not able to click send. I guess I want a job next year.