Do Teachers Have the Will to Be Accountable?

In his useful book Results Now, Mike Schmoker probes the connection between teacher isolationism and the difficulty in bringing about whole-school improvement. In Chapter One of his book, which is subtitled How We Can Achieve Unprecedented Improvements in Teaching and Learning, Schmoker speaks of the "buffer" or protective barrier "that discourages and even punishes close, constructive scrutiny of instruction and the supervision of instruction." Its primary effect, he says, is to protect these two activities, which lie at the heart of successful schools, from outside inspection, interference, or disruption. He writes:

Unlike other professionals and despite near-universal agreement on the importance of teaming, teachers do not work in teams. They do not prepare lessons and assessments together and they do not test and refine their lessons regularly on the basis of assessment results.

Schmoker then offers some evidence of the consequences of teachers’ failure to work together to improve instruction:

A sobering recent study based on 1,500 classroom observations puts a fine point on these trends. If you care about student learning, these findings are chilling:

• Classrooms in which there was evidence of a clear learning objective -- 4 percent

• Classrooms in which high-yield strategies were being used -- 0.2 percent

• Classrooms in which there was evidence of higher-order thinking -- 3 percent

• Classrooms in which students were either writing or using rubrics -- 0 percent

• Classrooms in which fewer than one-half of students were paying attention -- 85 percent

• Classrooms in which students were using worksheets -- 52 percent

Schmoker speculates that “things have improved — slightly" since this survey was done four years ago. “I would expect more teachers to be using rubrics, for example," he says. "But if even these numbers  [have] DOUBLED, look at how far we have to come....”

Summing up, Schmoker writes:

These observations and statistics, taken together, explode the old myths and excuses. They clearly show that our current results have to be a reflection of a school culture that, in too many cases, has an alarming tolerance for mediocre instruction, worksheets, and busy work — at the expense of effective, intellectually viable reading, writing, and learning activities.

Surely, we can make significant changes here, but not unless we're willing to take on this buffer, which prevents us from seeing these realities. At its heart is an unexamined addiction to [teacher] privacy and isolation.

A TLN member offered these comments after reading Schmoker’s frank appraisal of teacher isolationism and a general unwillingness to support mutual accountability:

We truly are a nation with entrenched classroom methods, whether they work or not for our kids. I keep hoping it's because teachers don't know any different, which is why I keep banging the drum of active learning and student engagement. Too often, unfortunately, both new and experienced teachers aren't really jiving to the beat. Is it because this music requires a lot more time and effort than lecturing, worksheets, and tests? I know it did for me.

I'm a "teacher leader" as a reading and literacy coach, well-respected and welcome at my school — up to a point. After a half-dozen years I've finally gotten a foothold on group change within the English department, despite a few holdouts.Through professional development, I'm still working on the other departments (even though they're not in my job description) because in some departments we have no teacher leadership -- no teachers interested in making any changes to their individual practice.

I'm still looking for that "critical mass" of teacher leaders in my school who might hold all teachers accountable, because it seems clear the impetus is never going to come from outside. Outside, the battle between central administration and union leadership keeps us at an impasse. Mandates are often put forth but rarely enforced. Teachers who should not be in classrooms remain, supported in their mediocrity (or worse). We tried out a process of consensus leadership in our district. It fizzled and we’re back more than ever to a top-down approach.

Teachers are feeling very disenfranchised and disenchanted. Are we the only ones who can change this direction? I do believe real positive change is dependent upon teachers themselves, but do we have the will?

Comments

[Mathew]

I don't think that having all teachers plan together would necessarily improve instruction. I think you would just have more consistency in the use of worksheets and lower level thinking.

I agree that the responsibility generally falls on teachers to take their own initiative to change instruction.

However, why is it always this way?

Where are the administrators who can inspire as much as they enforce? Who can support and encourage as well as punish? Who are familiar enough with the curriculum and current educational research to offer suggestions that are valuable?

Most discussions around schools tend to focus on "bad" teachers and what teachers aren't doing but in any other organization when the workers aren't performing you look to the top for a management change.

I also think we need to take a look at teacher education programs as they are surely not making the grade in terms of training future teachers.

[TeachMoore]

Matthew raises some important questions: Where are the administrators? Teachers, even those who really want to teach 21st Century skills, need support in the form of time, resources, and opportunities, first, to develop their own competence; then, to extend that learning into the classroom experience of students. Sure, some will venture to do this on their own, but it can be done more efficiently and systematically with thoughtful planning and leadership. Teacher ed programs are starting to pick up the slack, but it will take awhile to see results.

[Heather]

Matthew and Renee I agree with both of you. It comes back to each individual teacher, but we all need the support even with our grade level teachers. Teachers can plan and work together, but how it is taught and delivered comes back to the teacher.
I agree that teacher education programs need to make sure they are up to date and current and that teachers are given more opportunities to be prepared.

[Bill Fitzgerald]

I also wonder about the role of high stakes testing here (in addition, of course to wondering about the role of observer bias in generating these numbers -- objectifying and quantifying evidence of "high-yield strategies" and "higher-order thinking" seems difficult under the best of circumstances).

High stakes testing with punitive outcomes for "failure" (and it's golem, curriculum sold to districts as a means to improve scores) discourage innovation by teachers. In this climate, sticking to safer paths is a form of job security. Innovators are easy targets for criticism precisely because they stand out, and while teacher isolationism could be blamed for a paucity of new ideas/strategies, there are other factors at play here.