Blogg-Ed Indetermination

Curriculum developers (often college professors and researchers who are not now and may not have ever been classroom teachers) are frequently the creators of curriculum innovations designed to redress some shortcoming in public education, such as poor performance in the basic skills of mathematics and reading. In order to prove that a certain instructional approach or set of materials make a statistically significant difference in the performance of students, they attempt to control for as many variables as possible. One of the variables that is most difficult to control is that of the behavior of the teacher. So to decrease the variation of teacher behavior, the researchers provide carefully scripted lessons and encourage (or demand) that the teacher not deviate from the script. If and when the program proves to be a success (and many times this is the case, since children seem to respond to almost any change in their routine), the research project is commercialized and sold to districts desperate to improve scores and meet the goals of NCLB. Show me the money! Show us the scores first!

While no longer in vogue, the term “teacher-proof” was coined decades ago with the advent of direct instruction models of teaching such as DISTAR and Open Court to assure school administrators that no matter the background, creativity, skills, or knowledge of their faculty, the program would work as long as the teachers stuck to the script. The curriculum was fool-proof, even though (most) teachers are not fools.

It’s a wonder to me why this model has not been applied elsewhere, such as medicine, foreign relations, the budget deficit, and other persistent problems that have resisted all attempts at being definitely solved. Why don’t doctors practice “doctor-proof” healing? Or lawyers create “attorney-proof” contracts? Or presidents deal in “politics-proof” health care, financial, and environmental reform?

I can’t think of anything more insulting to faculty than to bring in a “teacher-proof,” scripted curriculum and tell them that they are expected to follow it to the letter, and forget about exercising any professional discretion, creativity, spontaneity, or ambition. But this happens, thousands of times every day in American classrooms. Is it little wonder that education is in shambles, teachers dispirited, and why so many beginning teachers leave the profession?

In a previous post, I questioned the role that AP courses play in education. In many ways, AP courses are simply prettied-up versions of teacher-proof curricula.

I am blessed to work among colleagues that I consider to be the most gifted teachers I have ever seen assembled in a single school. I cringe when I think of constraining their gifts with the types of shackles placed on public school teachers (especially elementary grade teachers). And I am similarly convinced that we can and will develop courses that are superior to the AP courses that are the hallmark and shackles of college preparatory institutions like mine.

Standards of excellence? Yes. Accountability? Yes. Measurable student performance? Yes.

A teacher-proof curriculum? I’ll pass.