Conspiracy Theory

The discontent with “school as is” is palpable, not just in the blogosphere, but throughout the press. From Bill Gates plans for high school reform to Alvin Toefflers suggestion to tear it all down to the voucher movement to the excesses of NCLB, the call for school reform is as loud as I have heard it my 30 years in education.

So why, with all these very smart people thinking about and advocating for major changes in the educational system, does so little (positive, anyway) seem to happen?

James H. Nehring in  "Conspiracy Theory: Lessons for Leaders from Two Centuries of School Reform." (Phi Delta Kappan, February 2007 - members only online) attempts to answer this question. Nehring has had a variety of school leadership roles including starting three public high schools and has some realistic answers.

He identifies “six conspirators against thoughtful school practice:”
1. The tendency to view schools as factories. “the intellectual and social development of children is vastly more complex than the production of goods, and to the extent we think of schools this way, we diminish conditions for learning.”
2. The tendency of community fears to drive school activity. “situations that ought not be governed by impulse -  situations such as school governance, which ought to be driven by thoughtful deliberation – fear leads inevitably to decisions that are impulsive and reactive.”
3. The tendency to impose plans that look great from above and make little sense at ground level. “decisions made at the top that fail to take into consideration their effect at the point of impact are likely to have unintended consequences that are antithetical to an organization’s central mission.”
4. The tendency of the system to crush promising innovation. “a tendency on the part of school leaders to assess new programs not by their effectiveness but by the degree to which they fit within the existing system.”
5. The tendency of schools to say yes to all legitimate requests. “the tendency to try to be all things to all people is that we end up doing nothing well.”
6. The tendency to promote favored groups to the detriment of others. “to the extent that we advantage those groups that are already advantaged, we erode the foundations of democracy and civil society.”

I’ve seen those conspirators in action. They, among other things, keep everyone K-12 in a school building from 8-3, devise state-wide computerized tests that prevent kids from using the computers for research and communication, and block social networking sites because of hyped-up news stories. I am sure you can think of other examples where these conspirators are at work in your organization.

To be fair, I have participated in the conspiracies a time or two myself. Thankfully Nehring ends the article with some practical lessons for today’s school leaders. I will try to take his advice to heart.

Other conspirators that are out there waiting to be disclosed?

The Oath of Brutus

Gavin Hamilton, 1763-64
Oil on canvas, 213 x 264 cm
Yale Center for British Art, New Haven

Comments

[Diane Chen]

One problem I encounter when I attempt anything innovative involves both points 4 & 6. They can be conflicting.
4. The tendency of the system to crush promising innovation. 6. The tendency to promote favored groups to the detriment of others.
The IT dept of my district presented their newest proposal regarding technology and dismissed some of the activities I pursued in the past 10 years as those of "early adopters." When the IT dept became more active and actually funded, they removed all opportunities including collaborative grants for the "early adopters" in order to make everything equal. Does putting a computer on every teacher's desk preclude allowing special projects for the "early adopters" because it will continue to enable one special group to succeed over the rest? What I have witnessed is that some people continue to be innovative, but rather than use technology collaboratively in their school with school sponsored innovations and funding, they are using Web 2.0 technologies with their individual classes and seemingly bypassing the district. No longer am I attempting to be innovative in ways that I will then share with others in my district officially because I don't have the opportunity to provide workshops on topics of my own choosing. Instead I have informal meetings to explore topics with others. Less innovation has resulted because "early adopters" are discouraged. I think it is an illustration of the dumbing down of professional development and technological innovations. But, in the eyes of the IT dept., they were able to make sure that every teacher had a computer to take their attendance. The situation still remains that we don't have enough computers for our students and they are forbidden to touch the teacher's computers due to security issues. I worry as I watch my 8 & 9 year old iMacs running OS9.22 begin to break down. I can't upgrade to iMovie 6 or even OSX because these machines don't have enough RAM. How can I be innovative if the students aren't the ones directly benefitting?

[Andrew Pass]

In his book, School Teacher, Dan Lortie identified an "apprenticeship of observation" that slows or paralyzes reform in schools. School is, well you know, it's what you went to when you were a kid. Anything that differs from this image is unacceptable.

Andrew Pass
http://www.pass-ed.com/Living-Textbook.html

[Doug Johnson]

Hi Andrew,

I was about to add one of my own called "sentimentality" which is exactly what you described. I think one reason high schools don't change is that radical reform might mess up the football schedule!

Thanks for writing in,

Doug

[Doug Johnson]

Hi Diane,

Good points. It seems to me we always have to keep a balance between encouraging people to work under the "best practices" mantle, but to allow innovation as well. Where would the medical science be if there was never experimentation allowed?

I appreciate the thoughtful comment. I hope you get a chance to read the article itself.

Doug

[Doug Johnson]

from Andy Pass...

Hi Doug,

In your comment to Diane you mentioned the fact that the medical field
evolves with innovation.

There's another way to think about school innovation than no innovation
occurring. In their book on the history of American school Tyack and Cuban
point out that lots of little innovations have taken place. But these
innovations did not effect the core processes of schooling or the
interactions that take place between teacher and students. Perhaps we could
argue that on the one hand there is too much innovation in American schools,
every half decade brings a new practice or strategy. The problem is that
these new practices are rarely well researched or thoughtfully directed.
They are then given up as soon as the next one comes along.

In medicine it often take a lot longer for innovations to stretch from the
laboratory to the doctor's office. There's a lot more testing and
retesting. But once these innovations reach the practitioner they have
some level of credibility and are not quickly dispensed with.

If medical innovations were more like educational innovations, doctors would
not wash their hands between patients in even numbered years.

Just some thoughts.


Andy

[Kenn]

Great article Doug! I am blessed to work at a school that really does listen to my needs and thoughts, but see the stagnation all around me at other schools. Andrew Pass' comment hit home - however, my school no longer use bells to start and finish classes, and we do have a modified block schedule (8:00 am to 3:10 pm, though...)