I read with interest the March 2 story Building a Better Teacher and was troubled. If this approach to improving education in America were the single focus of changing our system, our students would be in trouble. Reform has been the status quo for the last several decades, and one of our main obstacles to truly transforming education has been pouring taxpayer dollars and teachers’ efforts into reforms that made incremental progress in an industrial-model system.
As an education consultant, and former curriculum assistant superintendent and classroom teacher, I’ve been on many sides of this debate. Mr. Lemov’s industrial model of teaching paints the picture of a room where teachers lecture to rows or circles of students, sitting upright at their desks, all equally absorbing the lesson of the day. This method is more about controlling a classroom than it is about engaging a classroom. To Mr. Lemov, I ask:
- If we are crafting learning experiences where students are engaged and see real-world application, why do we need to focus so much on classroom management for primarily teacher-directed instruction?
- If we only base results on standardized test scores, aren’t we simply doing the wrong thing better? True, they are our current measures of success, but are they the right measures or the only measures?
- Does the responsibility for effective learning fall only on teachers? Surely community support, district goals and strategy, curriculum, resources and design of a school building all impact student success.
For a brighter picture, envision a classroom where teachers are the facilitators of student success. Where teachers understand standards and real-world connections, and can craft experiences that empower students to be problem solvers. These classrooms are a reality across our country in public and charter school settings. For example, the New Tech model offers engaged, project learning where students not only grasp the basics and score well on standardized exams—many times outperforming comparison schools http://www.newtechfoundation.org/about.html, but they’re gleaning the skills that employers desire as described by a 2006 Conference Board study: work ethic, oral and written communication, teamwork and collaboration skills, and critical thinking or problem-solving skills.
Mr. Lemov and I do agree on two things: public education needs to change and the solutions aren’t easy. But instead of getting better at antiquated models, we need to be progressive in our thinking, redefine success beyond standardized testing, and help districts plan instruction, design buildings and grow teachers that equip students to be successful in their higher educational pursuits and their life-long endeavors.
Sincerely,
Shannon Buerk
Education Design Strategist
Cambridge Strategic Services
As submitted March 2009 to The New York Times
Posts
