I sat on the sofa and watched Waiting for Superman with my husband. I hugged a pillow against my chest to keep from pulling out my hair. Bill Gates and Michelle Rhee are superheroes, along with superintendents and principals of charter schools and university professors. I didn’t know they had the answer! I’m supposed to be relieved. They’ve identified the bad guys: teachers. And the perfect one size fits all solution: charter schools. Certainly, public education is failing most students, especially in urban areas and among minority groups. But… a few things bother me:
It's Not the Truth
It's Not the Truth
1. Unions aren't the problem. But in the film, teachers can’t be fired because the unions protect their jobs through tenure and a refusal to change. Because of tenure, teachers sit around reading the paper and collecting their paychecks instead of teaching. Okay, but is this true everywhere? That’s what the film implies, but it isn’t true in my state. Unions have very little power here; there is no such thing as tenure for K-12 teachers. Firing a teacher may not always be easy: principals must do their jobs with observations and documentation of course. And teachers have a right to union representation. So what? I think the superheroes might want to talk to teachers and principals in Rockville, Maryland. They have a system in place, a collaborative effort that’s worked for the past 11 years, where teachers are given assistance as needed and a fixed amount of time to improve before they are fired. And teachers there do get fired. (The New York Times, June 6, 2011).
2. No one talks to the teachers! Only one teacher was interviewed on camera, the National Teacher of the Year for 2005, Jason Kamras. He talked only about a teacher evaluation system for no longer than a couple of minutes. I think the point was to show how teacher evaluations as outlined in union contracts are outdated and cumbersome. But I expected someone like him to have much more to say. The rest of those who were interviewed included administrators, principals and superintendents, professors at universities, Bill Gates, and Michelle Rhee, none of whom either really understand or have experienced the real work involved in teaching children in a classroom every day. But they are superheroes. They have money or connections along with the power to influence others and make a name for themselves. God help us all if teachers talked. They were filmed teaching in charter schools or reading the newspaper or sitting with their arms crossed at union meetings. They were asked no questions. Maybe the superheroes had a momentary lapse because, they are, after all, busy saving the world. And, of course there’s only one way that can happen.
3. Not every child has a family that supports education. The children profiled were smart and deserving students who had a great deal of family support. Parents and grandparents sat with their children at the kitchen table, offering help and encouragement. What about those who don’t have that support, or have learning disabilities, or who are homeless or on drugs or pregnant or being hit or raped or starved? What if they are angry or sad, and have trouble finding adults they can trust? What about the kids who drop out, who don’t believe school matters because they aren’t offered one thing that stimulates their interests or their curiosity? The difficulties in education are so much more complex than the film suggests. (See also Precious: Based on the Novel “Push” by Sapphire). I certainly remain hopeful that Bill Gates might try teaching for at least a week, any grade level, at any urban school. This would be interesting, no?
4. Charter schools are not miracle factories. Certainly, the schools shown in the film were impressive: clean hallways, colorful bulletin boards, strong discipline, a rigorous work ethic, and high expectations of both teachers and students. But where was the innovative teaching? In every classroom filmed (with the exception of a science experiment), the teacher talked to the whole class or to individuals, and the children listened. I did not see any demonstration of children actively engaged in their own learning: completing projects, engaged in book group discussions, using math manipulatives, sharing their work or presenting their thinking. However, there was a graph that claimed the test scores at these schools were amazing! But are test scores a reflection of what children know? The superheroes would have us believe this is so, and yet I’ve found in my experience that while skill and drill can produce great test scores, it doesn’t mean children can think and innovate and create and design. They know how to find a right answer. Is this the best we can do for children?
Lots of people go to college, but it may not be right for every child. Those who can think, those who are curious, those who know what they love, and what their gifts are will contribute far more to our society than a system that insists the sole purpose of education is to provide a corporate work force. Diversity is powerful; uniformity and sameness is the death of innovation.
The superheroes and their focus on data as a measure of school effectiveness will not save education.Teachers are not the problem, they are the solution. The man of steel eats only numbers, the modern version of kryptonite and children are the victims. Look instead for the Incredibles, the ones who do great things when they stop trying to be like everyone else and learn to be themselves.
