As any science fiction fan can tell you, the Borg are relentless foes, conquerors of thousands of civilizations, a persistent nemesis that won’t take no for an answer. “Resistance is futile.”

Well, the Borg never met an American teacher.

My review of Robert Evans’ The Human Side of School Change continues with an examination of school culture, a culture that is resistance to change at the most fundamental, sub-conscious level. Evans calls such conservative forces “invisible, and nearly invincible.”

…”one of the chief benefits people seek in the organizational affiliations is protection from change.” In this short phrase, Evans sums up why one must understand the culture of a school before attempting to change its practices. Agents of change must earn their admittance to the school culture, which does not “admit newcomers freely, especially those who challenges its values and practices.” Evans cites a portion of the American Declaration of Independence that I had completely forgotten. (My apologies to Mr. Montgomery, my junior high history teacher).

All experience hath shown, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed.

Cultural changes take time, often a generation or more. Evans ends his chapter on “The Culture of Resistance” with a rhetorical question: “Is there any hope for rapid culture change in school?—the answer is no!”

What a downer!

I never thought I’d want to be a Borg, but those of us who favor change in schools can learn from their persistence, their single minded (or hive-minded) striving toward a goal. If you want to change schools you better commit yourself to the long haul.  But nothing is more important than our children. If that’s not enough of a motive to persevere, I don’t know what is.

I suppose I should start with my bona fides.

I graduated with a Bachelors degree in English education from Central Michigan University, received a Master’s and Ph.D. in Curriculum and Instruction  from Michigan State University, and for seven years was the Director of Teacher Education and Associate Professor of Education at North Dakota State University (NDSU). In that capacity, I was in charge of our student teaching program, taught foundations programs and graduate-level courses, and worked closely with the state to assure that our students were qualified to obtain a teaching license in North Dakota. While at NDSU, I was part of our department’s self-study team went through a successful re-accreditation process with the National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education (NCATE).

As a high school teacher, I was a member of the Michigan Education Association (MEA), a branch of the National Education Association (NEA). The MEA actually went to my defense at one time and benefited from their legal team. While at NDSU I was a member of the North Dakota Education Association (though the campus was not organized), and the faculty adviser to the Student  NEA.

Which means that I know whereof I speak, at least a little bit, when it comes to teacher education, unions, and licensure.

Make no mistake, teacher education, licensure boards, and unions have done much to improve the state of teaching and learning in the United States and the world. I am a better person because of my association with them and, I hope, that in some small manner I was able to give back to them as well.

But make no mistake as well that such organizations have hindered real educational reform. They have not done this out of malice. Rather it is due to their nature as mature organizations that have come to that point where they can no longer see the world except through their own lenses—lenses which like the aging human eye can form cataracts or lose their ability to see ahead due to macular degeneration. As bureaucracies they protect and covet power, when the healthier response to the accumulation of power is to give it away.

Within independent schools I have noted occasional disdain for faculty candidates who come from teacher education programs, thought to be less rigorous in their academic expectations. And indeed there are embarrassing instances when fully licensed teachers cannot pass the same basic skills tests we expect their students to have mastered. But these are fortunately rare circumstances, and the vast majority of America’s teachers are working hard to do the best they can. But their best efforts are not good enough, and our children deserve more. And our teachers do to.

Great teachers sometimes have no formal training in education. But these same great teachers nonetheless have a gift for reaching children. And sometimes teachers with Master’s degrees in Education have checked-out and, are just going through the motions, moving their yellowed transparencies to PowerPoint slides and calling it a day. Teacher unions may offer outstanding professional development programs, and at the same time have a knee-jerk  reaction to any promising practice that they perceive to threaten their power base, such as charter schools, vouchers, pay for performance, or tenure reform. State licensing boards sometime equate formal training with knowledge and skill, conflating degrees and coursework with the extraordinary craft and artistry of teaching.

We in independent schools need closer ties with unions, colleges of education and yes, even licensure boards if we are to create 21st century schools that truly work for all children and teachers alike. For too long we have stood apart and aloof from the business of education that holds sway with the overwhelming majority of America’s schools. We are independent for a reason, and we are not beholding to these groups. But we all share an interest in making all of our schools better, and that can only happen when we are in dialog with one another.