In the Box, Out of the Box

FRIDAY, FEBRUARY 25, 2011

OK, so I'm a little schizophrenic on the whole "let's improve public schools" thing. That's because I am so torn between working within the current system and developing a real public education system. I know that if I decide to play volleyball, I have to play by the rules. But I also know the rules in our current system are based on assumptions that are false, though widely believed. Hence, many of my rants are against current structure, i.e. "in the box" rants, and others are more about what a different structure might look like, i.e., "out of the box". This post will hopefully quantify the box. I'll work hard to label future posts as ranting against an "in the box" provision, or raving for an "out of the box" development.

First, the current "in the box" assumptions that I perceive to be false, though widely believed:

• Competition improves schools. False. There is no evidence that teachers feeling a sense of competition between and among themselves, or between and among other schools, in any way improves the quality of instruction. The research shows that teachers who collaborate on a professional level are much more likely to have kids that learn more.

• Choice improves schools via competition. False. See argument above, plus, the kids who choose to go elsewhere likely have efficacious if not affluent parents and are more likely to perform better wherever they go. Regardless, the students who do not opt for choice may be the lowest performing kids. I remain deeply saddened by the amount of public dollars spent on charter schools, but I already have a rant on that topic.

• High Stakes testing improves student learning. False. High stakes testing improves teachers ability to teach to the test, game the test, get some kids to not take the test, improve student test taking ability, etc. Amazing that test scores in Texas keep going up while the same students' national scores remain flat or are declining. I love the old adage that you can't get the cow to gain weight by weighing it.

• Merit Pay increases teacher performance. False. I devoted an entire post to this notion, and I will stand by it. Makes no sense outside of assembly line workers or salespeople.

• Standardized curriculum, implemented from above, tested and reported is the only way to ensure learning and hold schools accountable. False. All this has done is create a false sense of accountability that results in kids who can pass multiple choice tests with greater ease, but may not be able to think their way out of a wet paper bag.

• Schools should be boxes, adult employees in schools should have clearly defined job descriptions, and learning in school should be in clearly defined morsels of information digested discreetly at defined times. It is 9:00 on Tuesday, this must be math. False. We know that reality is not standardized or bureaucratized, and yet that is what we do to prepare kids to face reality. No one 20 years ago could have developed a teacher preparation program that would allow a teacher today to maximize the use of smart phones or iPads. The entire structure of a school is based on how adults construct knowledge, not on how kids learn.

• Since we have compulsory attendance, we should use the schools to cure the ills of society. False. We have a childhood obesity problem? Cure it with the schools. We have a teenage pregnancy problem? Cure it with the schools. We have a teenage smoking, drinking, drugging, sexting, ganging problem? Cure it with the schools. None of the major problems facing our kids are caused by behaviors at schools. In fact, the more the state increases the accountability and standardized testing the less human connection we have with our kids, and the less likely we are to make a difference in their personal lives. It's OK by me to test vision, hearing, spinal chords, etc. But don't hold the schools accountable for fixing what we find with the health screenings or any other major ill. Give those problems to the Tiger Moms.

When I seek solutions to funding problems, etc., I am ranting against the current "in the box" thinkers who are convicted of the above beliefs. We could have a highly successful public school system if we built it on fairly simple beliefs, albeit currently way out of the box:

• All kids want to learn, are gifted in a variety of ways, and learn differently and at different rates. There is no standardized kid. Every effort we make, whether we group by age, by performance, by gender or by height, fails to account for the uniqueness of each child and future adult. We must create an atmosphere staffed by adults who get that, assume responsibility for the learning of all things by all kids. It's not that I don't like libraries or librarians. It's that I do like adults who are willing and able to promote learning for all kids across all areas. Maybe what I want is for everyone to be a librarian.

• For the first time in history, kids know more than their teachers, know how to get information faster than their teachers, and know how to use or discard unimportant information. Kids are wired, and I mean that in a good way. If ever we needed to be the guide on the side rather than the sage on the stage, it is today, and yet, all the "in the box" beliefs outlined above force us to ignore this critical truth. Kids are problem solvers, they are critical thinkers, they are creative, and we have to force all that out of them at school so that we can improve our performance on a bubble test.

• Kids can not be forced to learn the irrelevant without a great deal of wasted effort. In the box schools are boring and spend a great deal of time on classroom management and discipline. Schools should be a place where kids who do not understand self-control, focus or postponement of gratification can learn such skills, but schools should even more be fertile places for learning, exploring, following roads not previously taken, etc. If doodling on a scantron sheet results in a lower grade, then shame on us.

• Public school administrators should be charged with creating and protecting the environment where such real learning can occur. To do that, they will have to know real learning when they see it, forgo the "I am my position" mentality, and get out of the way.

• Legislatures, communities and parents must help create and protect this learning environment as well. Tiger Moms, though they really are successful parents of "in the box" kids, are not so neatly tuned in to the creative, innovative, and wonderful differences in each child. States have got to fund this effort, and wait 10 years to see what happens, not 10 months.

• If we do not graduate thoughtful, reflective, creative thinkers who can access a vast array of knowledge effortlessly, then we are not educating human beings to be practitioners of democracy, much less economically successful citizens.

You now have the outline of my schizophrenia. What we are currently doing is a high stakes, high dollar effort to get kids to successfully fit in all the round holes we have designed.

Every highly complex problem has a simple solution, and it is wrong. I will continue to rant against the box and dream of the day when the trumpet sounds and the walls of the box collapse.