Though the Board election is ongoing, the results are already assured by the absence of any new ideas. Three of the individuals running are on record as opposing the teacher majority. Two felt so strongly that they sought to have the Board of Teaching deny community expert licenses to two teachers serving on the Board. Such a denial might have cost those teachers their jobs. Their letters to the Board of Teaching, along with those of six other parents, alleged some vague incapacity or disqualification regarding Board service, although one shamelessly repeated an unsubstantiated slander. When that didn’t work, one harangued MDE until they got what they wanted: two teachers off the Board and the rest put on notice that dissent will not be tolerated. The only good teacher is an intimidated one.
One other candidate for the Board felt last year that teachers represented a “shallow pool” from which to draw talent. Now we see evidence that the next Director will be less than inspiring. The well-rehearsed vitriol has served it purpose. No one who questions the sacking of the Director or the behavior of the barbarians at the Board meetings is comfortable running for the Board. The teacher majority will soon be eradicated. Control has been achieved.
What lies at the root of this animus against the teacher majority? Ultimately, it is nothing more than American society’s long-standing devaluation of teachers. Its pestilential presence here is evidence that after all the drama and hard work, ERA is just another conventional school with conventional leadership.
Teachers are unwelcome on the Board because they are considered unintelligent in the real world. What would a teacher know about reading a balance sheet? About reading a lease? After all, they are only teachers. No doubt they know some math or some history, and that helps in the classroom, but of what use is it really? It is very similar to the old prejudice against blue collar workers. Their profession proves that they have little to offer in terms of higher faculties. After all, if they were intelligent, they’d be lawyers, doctors and accountants, right? If you are wondering about the wisdom of a government policy, don’t ask your plumber.
The ERA Board, like all others, professes to love teachers. But not as professionals. The reason pay for teaching remains low is that it is not considered a real job. ‘Higher salaries’ sounds nice, but there is a ceiling. No teacher, it seems, ought to make more than the accountant or lawyer on the Board. In the last analysis, the cliché still has legs: “Those who can’t do, teach.” It’s important that teachers provide the soft skills that parents and students respond to. They are “nice” or appropriately “tough” or somehow considered good at what they do. But what they do is pitch a curriculum, and that is something that has cache. A curriculum can be bought for a set price. It has reviews on the home school websites. The fact is, there is a market for curricula. Teachers merely deliver the curriculum. And the better the curriculum, the more it teaches itself.
This is a destructive misapprehension of the teaching profession. Long before there were curricula, there were teachers. All of the classically-based curricula have been written by teachers. Only the new and useless ones have been written by the so-called “educational professionals” with their training in group dynamics, self-esteem building and project-based, multicultural, oh-so-relevant, holistic drivel. Teachers are the educational professionals.
The term “classical curriculum” is, for a trained teacher, a pedagogical principle. For most parents, it’s a commodity. Many parents choose a classical curriculum for the same reason they choose Lands End for their students backpack needs; its familiarity and popularity among the right people gives a vague impression that it’s of a higher quality. A handful of parents understand what teaching is: its an art honed over years of practice and experience. The teaching in the classroom ought to be the highest priority of the Board. That is why it is good to have teachers on the Board.
There is a reason that the term for the collection of teachers at a school is “faculty.” The faculty guides the enterprise, and having a good one is vital. An insane person “loses his faculties.” An insane school does the same.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
6 comments:
It’s not about qualifications. It is about fairness.
I spoke against mandated teacher majority not because I don’t value teachers. I spoke against the mandate and in favor of an exemption because I value individuals, not classes of individuals.
In every other school board in the state of MN it is against the law for employees of the district to be board members. What is so special about Charter Schools? Are the teachers at a charter school the Philosopher Kings and the rest of us are… what? If the Charter School Law required the majority be comprised of lets say … white men …Catholic Priests…or lawyers…how about accountants…maybe…bloggers. I know, how about this…the rest of us slack jawed parents, we get to vote, but we only count as 3/5ths of a person. Better yet, why don’t we build separate (but equal) towns where us less enlightened "parents" can live and work and pay taxes but don’t get to participate in the process. I know, lets let them think they are participating in the process by letting them sit on the board, but have no ability to govern. Lets pick the majority from a “shallow pool” of select individuals who are set apart. We must now ascend to the Oracle and let it pick from our elite few, the leaders of this fine institution. We cannot be bothered with those…”parents” what do they know? As far as we are concerned, they are merely breeding stock for our students. We need to solve this …parent… problem. We need a final solution.
Of course that very enlightened talent pool was once comprised of wonderful, enlightened Philosopher Kings (or Queens) like Josh Garvin and Susan Reid. (I’ll let you decide who the Queen was).
To be clear. I don’t like the Charter School law the way it is because it think it was put in place as a concession to the All Powerful Teachers Union (pay no attention to the lobbyist behind the curtain). It is a poison pill designed to hobble Charter Schools. To think otherwise is …”unintelligent in the real world”. However it is the law and until changed, it is the system we have to operate under. God forbid as a 3/5ths citizen we slack jawed “parents” influence our elected representatives and get the law changed.
Tossing Rockcastle and Austin from the board was stupid and those parents who manipulated the system to get them tossed were wrong. If it were up to me they would still be on the board.
Conspiring to have Judy fired was wrong, stupid and (hopefully) criminal. I still don’t believe the mercury spill was accidental.
Teachers are not unwelcome. Let them run and win on their own merits, not because of a set aside program brought to us by the enlightened Teachers Union and their lap dogs the state legislature of Minnesota.
Affirmative Action and quotas is a morally bankrupt idea that is demeaning to those it is trying to lift up.
Elenchus I am disappointed, Socrates (I am an Aristotle man myself) would never have let you get away with so many straw man arguments.
(Now I understand the Lesser part of your pen name)
I hope that wasn’t too passionate for ya!
Keep up the good fight, get out of your pajamas and get back to your students.
J Capello.
Correction. Tossing Rockcastle and Nieman (not Austin). Sorry, I was cought up in the passion of the moment.
One more thing. You said:
‘Higher salaries’ sounds nice, but there is a ceiling. No teacher, it seems, ought to make more than the accountant or lawyer on the Board.
Why did the Teachers Union in WA turn back $13,000,000.00 from Bill Gates because it was viewed as merit pay because teachers were given bonuses based on the number of students that qualified for AP math and science courses. And then turn around and sue the WA Department of Education for lack of funds?
By the way, based on criteria from the Teachers Union, Bill gates is not qualified to teach in a MN public high school
...not intelligent in the real world...hummm?
Sitting here minding my own business I was struck by a bitter irony. Rockcastle and Nieman were tossed because they weren’t teachers (or rather the right kind of teacher). Had the law not stipulated that teachers be part of the majority they wouldn't have been tossed for not being teachers.
…..Wow, this is like one of those Star Trek episodes where they go back in time to stop the Borg from going back in time in order that the human race not get destroyed….my head hurts!…..
I’VE GOT IT!!!! Lets go back in time by flying around the world really really fast, then we save Lois Lane and she writes a really explosive article about the idiocy if a teacher mandated school board designed by Lex Luthor (AKA the teachers union) to destroy charter schools. The article is hailed by the great unwashed (that is us parents) and there is a huge public outcry and the law is reversed. Now set your time machine to a few months ago and Nieman and Rockcastle are still on the board. (by the way I voted for both of them!)
Man my head hurts. I need a break., I think I’ll go to Lands End and pick up some nice pants, a backpack, and a core knowledge curriculum a copy of The Republic….yeah that’s the ticket…… I feel much better now.
A straw man fallacy misrepresents an opponent’s position because the misrepresentation is easier to refute than the real argument. I have made no such misrepresentation. The clear import of the remark made last year by the passionate parent was that teachers were a liability on a board. The “shallow pool” could be understood no other way. Perhaps the same could be said of having five realtors on the Board. I suspect, based upon what I have seen in my life, that five realtors, or five bankers, or five accountants would not have generated the ‘shallow pool” comment. If I am mistaken, I apologize. But the sentiment is out there and has been out there.
So let’s dispose of the straw men. There was no mention of Oracles, Philosopher Kings and Final Solutions in my post. The hyperbole is yours.
And while we are disposing of misconceptions, let it be known that I have never been in favor of the teacher majority as a concept. I never advocated it (until such advocacy was necessary). I strongly suspect few teachers did. And the teacher majority hasn’t done much to inspire that wouldn’t have been done in much the same way if we’d never had the drama. I disagree that the teacher majority clause is a poison pill, but there is strong evidence to suggest that it was a tool to please the almighty teacher’s union and to keep that union’s fingers in these crazy new schools. The teacher majority at ERA was, in my own view, preferable to the existing Board’s direction. And this is with particular emphasis on that Board’s disposition toward teachers, a disposition that is generally shared across this nation and is, I assert, accurately represented in my post. What is “so special” about charter schools is that they are supposed to break the cycle of mediocrity. Nothing has so far. What do parents know? They know mediocrity when they see it (usually). The teacher majority clause is one of a handful of tools that can be used to leverage charter schools away from the norm. My thesis is that a) we will lose the teacher majority by this time next year; and b) the quality of instruction will decline at ERA.
But I must grant that not every teacher is worth putting on a Board. And some aren’t worth putting in a classroom. But who makes that call? For the last three years, every teacher has received the same percentage salary increase. The Board is unwilling or unable to engage in the kind of meaningful analysis necessary to distinguish the good from the poor. In my experience, this is precisely what occurs in the world of state employees. Punch in, punch out, collect your pay. Is it really the case that every teacher contributed equally this year?
However, I am a parent with children to educate. I would be the last person to denigrate parents. But many, many parents don’t get it. You want your pipes fixed? You call a plumber. You want your dream home designed? You call an architect. You want your children educated? America, as a rule, calls an impersonal bureaucracy of pencil-pushers. Charter schools are supposed to function as an alternative. This one doesn’t.
This is the good fight. My point is that the fight cannot be won relying on good teachers to work for low pay.
Outstanding. It looks like we agree on many things. I argue from definition. The State (and I mean that in the most negative way possible) at the behest of a powerful and misguided special interest (Lord are we going to be sick of that term by November) decided to mandate the composition of a particular type of school board, not all of them mind you, but the type of school board that threatens their enrollment and by extension their coffers. By definition that is objectively immoral and wrong. You argue from circumstance. The circumstance being that the current composition of the board was a mess; that trying to get an exemption from the law would only make things worse. Yup, no argument there. However the change in circumstance does not change the moral issue. It is still wrong. No matter how crappy the board is/was, I still cannot argue for the continuation of an unjust law/rule ….whatever.
Now, on to the shallow pool thing. You are right. A stupid choice of words on the part of the passionate parent. My intent was to demonstrate the inherent error of forcing majority control from a powerful minority. How is it fair if the control of the board is dictated by a small selection of elites? It brings to mind a very ugly word that people my age had to deal with…. apartheid. My words implied as you pointed out that the pool of teachers was by definition lesser. And that is not what I intended, and for that I am sorry. I meant that restricting to just teachers limited our ability to choose the best. Like I said I care about individuals, not classes of individuals. You are right. Limiting the pool to only realtors, bankers, butchers or candlestick makers is as dumb as limiting it to teachers. And you are also right, in pointing out that the sentiment is out there. I DO NOT SHARE THAT SENTIMENT. Austin Rockcastle and John Nieman are more qualified to be on the board than I am. However that qualification is not a result of the mindless decision of the State. It is a result of their capacities as men.
Here is the straw man as I see it. In an earlier post you stated that there was no conflict of interest because the law permits the board to be controlled by employees of the school, therefore no conflict. Using the same reasoning, then apartheid was not wrong either. I may be hyperbolic here but I think the comparison is fair. The teacher majority law was unjust then, it was unjust last year and will be unjust tomorrow. Arguing for its continuation even though it would improve the circumstance is not good enough for me.
For the record I did not then nor do I now agree with Judy’s termination. I thought at the time it would be a good idea for the board and Judy to resign en masse, hold a special election and then decide on the future after we tossed the bums out. Well, that idea was strangled in the crib, and in retrospect was probably not a very good one. Boy…it would have been fun!
Teacher pay. Yup pretty crappy. I have 4 kids at a Catholic school in St Louis Park. They have several heads of household as teachers whose spouses don’t work outside the home. I don’t know how they do it. But you know what? They don’t complain. They offer it as a sacrifice for a higher cause (it’s a Catholic thing). Setting that aside, teacher pay needs to be addressed. Maybe we can get some of Bill Gate’s money sent our way. The board needs to investigate that and other non-public solutions. But you know what? I don’t want to hear any bitching about merit pay. You work smarter and generate better results based on objective standards, you benefit. I work hard every month for my bonus, and I don’t begrudge my peers for doing better than me on any given month, and they don’t begrudge me for doing the same.
I disagree with your conclusion that the teacher majority going away necessarily means declining standards. What is the Latin saying? Post hoc ergo proctor hoc. Just because one thing happens it doesn’t mean the other thing will.
I think that folks of good character can make this experiment work.
You gotta admit, there were some pretty rotten characters on both sides of this mess. Teachers and parents. I think your blog and this whole ugly episode may have purged us of this problem. At a minimum it has made us all aware of some of the less than admirable character of our fellow men.
I will make a bargain. I’ll bust my ass for higher pay for teachers you figure out a way we can get around the stupid law.
You gotta admit the hyperbole was good stuff! That whole time travel thing was pretty funny.
“we shall fight on the beaches, we shall fight on the landing grounds, we shall fight in the fields and in the streets, we shall fight in the hills; we shall never surrender,”
Winston Churchill
Post a Comment