An article in the October 2009 issue of Fortune was recently brought to my attention. The article was based on an interview of Joel Klein. It took me several tries to actually finish the article because it made me so incensed. The sheer arrogance coupled with the nearly complete ignorance displayed toward education is only surpassed by the power this man has over the education of 1.1 million children. I was appalled; and now I’m going to tell you why.
Education is NOT a Business:
I should have been tipped off how much I wasn’t going to like this article when it starts with “Joel Klein’s title is New York City School Chancellor, but he’s really a CEO.” Education is not a business and it could never be if it tried. [Sidebar: why would education want to be run as the business sector? Does anybody else remember the rampant corruption and giant recession we are currently in? Why would we want out students and schools to emulate that? How could a broken system fix another broken system.] Using business solutions in education doesn’t work because education doesn’t have the control and freedom of a capitalist corporation, as anyone who has read the Blueberry Story knows. Now, I have read some dissent of this story but I stand by the idea that the education of children should be the goal in public schools and the social, emotional, and physical condition in which students arrive at school impacts the success of all academic endeavors.
By: D Sharon Pruitt
Given that Klein wants to judge teachers based on student performance I would say that the businessman approach to education does view students as the product to be shaped and molded by teachers. Which ties in nicely to my second point of conflict with Joel Klein.
Teachers Performance based on Students Performance:
I was raised by a family of teachers so I was indoctrinated to believe that teaching is a profession to be respected. Until I joined the profession myself I did not realize this was not the case for most people. Joel Klein looks at teachers an sees a group of over-protected slackers who do the job for summers off or because they couldn’t hack it in the ‘real world’. While he does acknowledge that the success in schools comes from the teaching force motivating and encouraging student learning, he believe the way to inspire teachers is to pay them more. Now I am all for paying teachers more, as a profession we are underpaid. The national average educator salary is $49,530 while the LOWEST Major League Baseball team average salary is $420,000. Teachers as a whole aren’t in it for the money or even for tenure; we don’t expect the crazy bonuses the business world feels due to them. You might get a couple of bad eggs, every profession has them, but really if you’re looking for an easy job with good benefits teaching sure isn’t it. I am particularly fond of Taylor Mali’s poem What Teachers Make.
In addition, Klein not only insults teachers by saying that we will be swayed by extra money but he proposes to pay teachers based on student performance.Klein ignores the impact of societal cultures and individual student interest, not to mention budgetary constrains, class size issues and program support and lays all the hope of reform on us awful teachers.
By: Daryl Cagle
Paying teachers for student’s performance, presumably on standardized tests – whose accuracy and ability to measure student ability is a whole other issue, just shows Klein’s a lack of understanding of the function and value of teacher. Those motivated by money are not the ones you want in schools.
The Evil Tenure System/ Lazy Teachers:
Klein goes on to attack the tenure system and teacher unions saying “when teachers don’t perform well, we have to figure out ways to move them out of the system.” While Klein does address the leadership training given to administration, there is no discussion of teacher support system and professional development as a way to improve tenured teachers. The support available to teachers has an amazing impact on teacher performance. Teachers who teach overcrowded classes with limited to no supplies are not going to be teaching the best they can.
It is not just the students who are being failed by the public school system.
The tenure system is vital to the school culture The ability to take risks and expand curriculum in order to individualize education to a student interests isn’t possible without the job security that tenure provides. The new teachers that are graduating currently express the belief that they will have to toe the line until they get tenure and then if they haven’t been burnt out by the political agendas and bureaucratic red tape they can really start teaching. Klein assertion that “most people who came into public education think that if you show up on day one and just stay out of trouble, you can be there forever” is not a sentiment I have found rampant in the school cultures I have been exposed to. This is not to say that their aren’t some teachers in the school who rely on tenure to get away with the least amount of effort, but I have found this negative stereotype to be fairly rarely, and I believe that this view of teachers comes from remembering the negative interactions with greater fervor than their positives interactions.
Global Competition:
The last of my complaints addresses this myth of global competition and the American school system failing. All education reformers have been screaming about the U.S. falling behind this country or that country in math or science since A Nation At Risk was published during the Reagan administration. Of course all of these findings are based on standardized testing with no investigation of the societal factors, such as China’s higher parent/adult family member to child ratio allowing for more adult involvement in education, or the longer school terms, or the general culture of valuing education and the teaching profession thereby leading to greater funding and support of the programs than is seen in American society. I don’t believe the main failing of our education is shown by test scores but by the difficulties with which our students face in life beyond school. While some competition is appropriate in schools, the competition of standardized tests does not lead itself to collaboration and community, two qualities/abilities that American society is in desperate need of in its citizens which are also vital to student learning and development. Of course, these can’t be gauged on a standardized test and so fall by the wayside.
This reliance on standardized testing results in a system of subject hierarchy (which Klein suggests as a good thing- and it’s not) placing the core subjects at the top, with math and science at the very peak and leaving the arts, music, theater health and physical education at the bottom. In what world do American children need LESS exercise? Not to mention that by taking away the importance (and eventually funding) of the subjects that encourage multiple learning styles and modes of expression in students you are telling those students who learn best in non-traditional styles that they are of less value. In addition, in today’s world the industrial revolution’s dependence on math and science is over, and the creative problem solving championed in the ‘lesser’ subject areas are paramount for student achievement later in life. The way to compete with other countries that have more of a focus on education is to diversify not specialize on math and science. Not only will you engage more students in a natural, non-contrived manner, but you are preparing your students for a future in which they might hold more than 10 jobs. But we can’t use standardized tests to measure them so how would we compare ourselves to the rest of the world thereby drumming up a false crisis?
Klein’s Success:
Much of the ‘new’ techniques Klein wants to implement (a.k.a. the ones I have just been trashing) he claims it is too soon to know if they are working. Of the successes that Klein does claim responsibility for, most have more to do with increased attention, financial support, and restructuring of schools resulting in smaller class sizes (allowing all teachers, good and bad, more time for individualized student attention). Klein even admits in the article that “politically this [changing the New York Public school system] was an enormous challenge, so it was great that we didn’t have to use public monies to do the retooling.” And yet, he doesn’t acknowledge that perhaps this political red tape might be something that is holding back education reform or that not all districts have the access to private funding the likes that Klein has procured. Joel Klein brags that he got a $150 million donation based on his persona but doesn’t acknowledge the fact that just maybe funds should be given based on need. Klein also acknowledges that having smaller schools with a lower student to teacher ratio is immensely helpful to student performance but doesn’t consider that a high student to teacher ratio might be a contributing factor to why some teachers are performing as well as they could. Maybe that’s too harsh, he has actually lowered the ratio in many of his school so he probably does believe in it however he doesn’t highlight this strategy for improving education half as much as his other misguided proposals.
In addition, Joel Klein has shown himself to be an ardent supporter of education reform, which I believe is good and important qualities in education leadership, however he ignores the Heisenberg principle which notes that the act of observation will effect the observed. The attention and esteem that Joel Klein is trying to instill in the culture of his donors is a pro-education culture. In a pro-educational culture, students will improve because they have the idea that education is to admired in their native culture. Why should children have respect for their teachers and their education when most of society views them as people who have followed a back-up plan because they “can’t” perform in their field. Ironically, Klein was actually raised to respect education by his parents and yet he does not admit this to be a factor in American education reform’s ability to succeed. I leave this article with the conclusion that Joel Klein means well, but he is misguided when it comes to the issues of American teachers in the education system.
