Re:What if Finland’s great teachers taught in U.S. schools?
by jacobolus on Sunday December 28, 2014 @04:11PM
(#8807492)
> the impact of both poor and excellent teachers is way overestimated, and the impact of poor and excellent administrations (both the school principal and the district leadership) is tremendously underestimated. A good principal, particularly one with strong school board backing, can almost single-handedly turn an entire school around (I've seen this happen twice now). An excellent teacher with a poor principal and negligent school board can do very little other than provide a strong role model for the most promising students, and (with great effort) pull a handful more of failing students up to the barely passing level than their less talented peers.
I think the way you’ve stated this somewhat misattributes the improvement in schools after the administration changes.
The culture of a school is set by the whole community, including the teachers, the parents, and the students. While a dysfunctional administration can absolutely wreck the school culture and stifle the teachers, it’s not like any principal who turns a school around is really acting “single-handedly”. More realistically, the teachers at such schools are (at least in cases where I’ve known such teachers) champing at the bit to try new things and bring excitement to their classrooms, but get blocked at every turn by petty bureaucrats in administration and forced to endure all sorts of bullshit, and then when the administration changes to be more accommodating and progressive, it’s like the gate lifts and the teachers can run free.
As an example of the opposite, my elementary school was an amazing and wonderful place, with a strong and dedicated teaching staff, and a strong sense of collective purpose. When I was in first grade, the principal left, and the new principal came to the school with rigid ideas about structure and organization, and struggled continuously with several of the more passionate teachers for the first several years (to the point that a couple of them left). But by being surrounded by the culture of the school (teachers, staff, parents, the community at large), over the course of four or five years the new principal became slowly indoctrinated, and learned to appreciate the way the school operated and support the teachers and their methods. By the time I was in 6th grade, and for the following 10 years or so he was principal there, he was one of the strongest advocates and defenders of the school’s unique culture and value system.
In other words, I think your comment places an excessive emphasis on the principal and administration per se, sort of like Carlyle’s “great man” theory of history applied to schools.
I think the way you’ve stated this somewhat misattributes the improvement in schools after the administration changes.
The culture of a school is set by the whole community, including the teachers, the parents, and the students. While a dysfunctional administration can absolutely wreck the school culture and stifle the teachers, it’s not like any principal who turns a school around is really acting “single-handedly”. More realistically, the teachers at such schools are (at least in cases where I’ve known such teachers) champing at the bit to try new things and bring excitement to their classrooms, but get blocked at every turn by petty bureaucrats in administration and forced to endure all sorts of bullshit, and then when the administration changes to be more accommodating and progressive, it’s like the gate lifts and the teachers can run free.
As an example of the opposite, my elementary school was an amazing and wonderful place, with a strong and dedicated teaching staff, and a strong sense of collective purpose. When I was in first grade, the principal left, and the new principal came to the school with rigid ideas about structure and organization, and struggled continuously with several of the more passionate teachers for the first several years (to the point that a couple of them left). But by being surrounded by the culture of the school (teachers, staff, parents, the community at large), over the course of four or five years the new principal became slowly indoctrinated, and learned to appreciate the way the school operated and support the teachers and their methods. By the time I was in 6th grade, and for the following 10 years or so he was principal there, he was one of the strongest advocates and defenders of the school’s unique culture and value system.
In other words, I think your comment places an excessive emphasis on the principal and administration per se, sort of like Carlyle’s “great man” theory of history applied to schools.