lfullnergrennan.files.wordpress.com · web viewthe power to make a difference. change in our...

Running Head: TEACHERS PROMOTING CHANGE

Promoting Change from Within: The Power of the Teacher

Lara Fullner-Grennan

Seattle Pacific University

EDU 6120 American Education: Past and Present

Winter, 2012

TEACHERS PROMOTING CHANGE

Introduction

Has naivety swept the teaching profession? When asked why one becomes a teacher,

most educators will respond with a student-centered response: love for kids, love for learning,

desire to make a difference. It is this last response, one heard so often, that got me thinking: Do

teachers truly have the power to make a difference? Upon first glance, it appears not. Federal

mandates and corresponding state guidelines have created a system that undermines student

needs and teacher knowledge. While the goals around accountability, choice, and flexibility, as

outlined in the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, appear desirable, stringent standardized

testing emerged (Kohn, 2004). With accountability directly tied to these state tests, best teaching

practices are exchanged for rigorous test preparation, while systems intended to support

struggling students are minimized (Darling-Hammond, 2004). Meanwhile, steady improvement

is not always recognized, therefore questioning the good work being done across the nation

(Darling-Hammond, 2004). However, No Child Left Behind, or any other accountability

measure that may materialize in the future, should not hold teachers back from implementing

instructional strategies they know are best for students. Standing by their beliefs is the only

control teachers have. Hence, I believe that knowledgeable and prolific teachers deserve the

power to make a difference. Change in our education system needs to come from within – the

heart of the school system – the students and their accomplishments. Educate the individual –

educate society. Educate society – change the system.

The Political, Social, and Moral Principles that Guide My Teaching

Teacher Quality

Improving student learning begins with improving and maintaining teacher quality. This

process begins with rigorous and focused teacher education programs. Teaching is a unique job. I


am charged with the duty of imparting a set of base knowledge, as outlined by state and national

standards, to a variety of students. This implies the need for expertise in a specialized content

area, as well as pedagogical understanding of how to effectively disperse that knowledge to

students with varying levels of ability, diversity, and personality (Webster, 1790). Therefore, in

order to be knowledgeable in making decisions based on student needs, a balance between

understanding of content and pedagogy is needed. As presented in the Elementary and Secondary

Education Act, Lyndon B. Johnson (1965) discussed the importance in moving beyond content

when considering teachers of high quality. He stressed the need to focus on the three T’s: “The

three R’s of our school system must be supported by the three T’s – teachers who are superior,

techniques of instruction that are modern, and thinking about education which places it first in all

our plans and hopes” (p. 320). Programs that maintain this focus will produce teachers who are

inventive, imaginative, and have developed quick perceptions (Beecher, 1835). Instructional

qualities like these will support the development of curriculum and lesson plans that reach the

fluctuating needs of students.

While preparation programs should be held accountable for the quality of students they

produce under these standards, they do not hold sole responsibility in selecting teachers who

enter the work force. School districts must also be held accountable for the quality of teachers

they hire (Urban & Wagoner, 2009). With high standards established at the training level,

districts must increase their hiring expectations and begin making careful selections in regards to

teachers (Counts, 1932; Meriam, 1928). These selections should be based on both teaching talent

and experience and should aim to focus on students who exceled in teacher education programs

(Beecher, 1835).


Furthermore, quality teachers maintain high moral character. While it may be impossible

to assume that teachers will have an unblemished reputation, as Noah Webster (1790) desired, it

is reasonable to expect teachers to be sensible, friendly, and respectable (Beecher, 1835).

Children enter a vulnerable world when they begin school. For many, it is their first experience

in a cooperative environment. It should be expected that teachers establish a welcoming

classroom where students feel safe enough to take risks in their learning. Furthermore, new and

unknown experiences, such as school, can expose a variety of behaviors – not all desirable.

Therefore, these characteristics must be tempered with self-control and calm judgment so as to

respond to all situations in an efficient manner (Beecher, 1835). Adaptable classroom

management practices will ensure each situation is dealt with appropriately. Students of all ages

are impressionable and should be given role models to which they can aspire to imitate in

society. A teacher who is loved and respected will not only foster these characteristics in their

students, but will build stronger connections with them, therefore capturing students’ attention

for effective instruction (Webster, 1790). Moreover, this push for the best will establish a new

vision of what the teaching profession requires: individuals dedicated to making a difference in

the lives of all students.

With student needs as the focus for quality teachers, it is natural to want to keep learning.

In order to improve student learning, I must be a learner myself: “For principals and other

leaders, the direction is clear: schools that succeed are schools in which every participant is a

learner (Zepeda, p. 1). Learning, however, should not take place in a vacuum; it should take

place in a collaborative environment. Dufour (2011) presents the following on the impact of

collaboration: “We have known for decades that students benefit when the teachers in their

schools work in collaborative teams, establish a guaranteed and viable curriculum to ensure all


students have access to the same knowledge and skills, monitor student learning on a frequent

and timely basis, use formative assessments to identify students who need additional support for

learning, and demonstrate high expectations for student achievement through a collective

commitment to help all students learn. These concepts represent more than ‘ideas worth

considering’: they continue to represent best practices for meeting the needs of all students” (p.

161). Sustainable collaboration offers teachers a safety net when learning. Fostering an

environment where teachers are willing to “ . . . take risks, to learn from mistakes, and share

successful strategies with colleagues leads to teachers having a positive sense of their own

efficiency, beliefs that their children can learn, and improved outcomes” (Zepeda, p. 79).

Meaningful reflection occurs in a safe collaborative environment, which leads to growth.

Through this growth, teachers make decisions based on the reality of their students’ needs

(Zepeda, 2008). When taking initiative, there should be freedom to make curriculum and

instructional decisions based on these needs (Haley, 1904; Meriam, 1928). If teacher quality is

maintained through collaboration, it is safe to trust that teachers are experienced enough to

contribute to the education system (Haley, 1904). The end result is internal accountability. The

achievement gap will be narrowed because superior teachers are working together to make

instructional decisions for their students (Urban & Wagoner, 2009). Thus, it should be assumed

that teachers are in this profession for the students and will take all necessary measures to lead

them to success. When working and learning together, knowledge of such esteemed teachers will

spread, furthering the quality of the profession (Beecher, 1835).

Student Focus

In order to close the achievement gap and educate a diverse set of individuals, students

must be the focus of instruction. While this gap denotes students at varying levels of


achievement, I do not believe teacher expectations should deviate from anything other than the

highest. Whether a student is preparing for college, career, or both, high expectations should be

maintained. In support of the general diffusion of knowledge, Jefferson (1783) wrote: “The

general objects of this law are to provide an education adapted to the years, to the capacity and

the condition of every one, and directed to their freedom and happiness” (p. 24). In other words,

all students, regardless of their life path, need the same things – skills necessary to understand,

analyze, and evaluate the world and to be critical consumers of everything it has to offer. This

does not imply that students will reach this point in the same manner, however. As mentioned

earlier, quality teachers understand the need for differentiated instruction and provide just that.

Student interests, ability levels, and learning styles are used to guide instruction in a way that

works for each student. The end result is the same; it’s how each student gets there that is

different (Urban & Wagoner, 2009).

Societal success will only be reached, however, if students take on the role of self-

directed learner. While educators provide guidance during the school years, ultimately,

individuals are responsible for their own achievement. Jefferson (1783) referred to this notion as

people being “guardians of their own liberty” (p. 25). Students of all ages are making discoveries

about themselves; young students are beginning to experience freedom and choice; older

students tend to have an overt awareness of self. Regardless of their age, students are searching

for and desiring self-identity and independence (Hass, 2010). Therefore, it is the role of the

teacher to foster the discovery and development of self. Benjamin Franklin presented the belief

that students be instructed in the “art of self-education and self-responsibility” (Urban &

Wagoner, p. 61). Additionally, students must be instructed on the importance of determination

and learning from one’s experiences (Urban & Wagoner, 2009). John Dewey (1897) also


focused on the necessary habits and dispositions of individuals: “To prepare him for the future

life means to give him command of himself; it means to train him that he will have the full and

ready use of all his capacities; that his eye and ear and hand may be tools ready to command, that

his judgment may be capable of grasping the conditions under which it has to work, and the

executive forces be trained to act economically and efficiently”. We live in an ever-changing

society. In order to meet the demands of this cyclic society, students must posses self-

knowledge, which demands that students question their way of seeing the world in order to see

beyond themselves (Wiggins & McTighe, 2005). Self-knowledge can be cultivated through

reflection and goal setting. As Wiggins and McTighe so clearly state, “The most successful

people in life not only have this capacity, they have learned to do so in the most timely and

effective ways possible: They self-monitor and self-adjust as needed. They proactively consider

what is working, what isn’t, and what might be done better” (p. 216). Quality teachers recognize

and promote this essential need.

Cooperation

Schools are a reflection of society and should be designed as such. Therefore, the

classroom should be a learning community in which students share in both the intellectual and

moral resources (Dewey, 1793). Designing instruction in this way gives it purpose. When

students discover knowledge on their own, they have a greater chance of generalizing what

they’ve learned to other areas in life (Bruner, 2010). Inquiry begins by bringing students into the

decision-making process. Furthermore, it ensures that instruction is focused on what students

believe they need, in addition to what the teacher identifies as a need. In order to foster personal

and social responsibility, learning communities must be responsive: allowing time for students to

share ideas and question the content (Inlay, 2010). America’s schools are becoming increasingly


more diverse, the extent of which has positive benefits on the members of a learning community

(Nieto, 1992). Working with and learning from those who have different cultural backgrounds

and life experiences will encourage students to emerge from their narrow thinking (Dewey,

1793). Moreover, interacting with others leads to personal growth as the reflection that emerges

contributes to a more realistic perspective on ones’ strengths and weaknesses (Urban &

Wagoner, 2009). Conclusively, bringing students into the learning process will help instill

values needed to be an effective citizen in today’s society.

Clearly, learning communities require that teachers be active participants in the learning

process. Participation should come in the form of a guide, rather than a leader (Kohl 1967).

However, in order to be an effective support system, teacher as guide must establish and foster

positive relationships with students. The foundation of such a relationship lies in respect (Kohl,

1967). When establishing relationships with students, teachers must remain unprejudiced and

open-minded (Kohl, 1967). Rumors of bad reputations must be dispelled at the door. Doing so

will show students respect, which is the first step in earning it. Furthermore, teachers must

maintain fair and consistent classrooms (Kohl, 1967). When issues do arise, they should be dealt

with honesty and openness (Kohl, 1967). Additionally, the fruitful guide doesn’t hide from their

students; they show their vulnerability (Holt, 1964). This includes putting academic struggles,

such as drafting an essay, on the forefront for students to see the reality of problem solving,

which is a daily encounter in society.

Central Challenges and Strategic Solutions

Resistance to collaboration

One of the most significant challenges in fostering a system of education where high

quality teachers spread their knowledge is a colleague that is resistant to collaboration. Whether


it is lack of trust, limited time, or mounting tension, not all teachers desire to work with another.

This practice must end; the barriers must be broken down. Educators must approach the teaching

profession as a collaborative effort, rather than an isolated endeavor (Urban & Wagoner, 2009). I

believe the way to conquer this resistance is through action. Making assumptions about best

practices being employed in other classrooms will not get teachers anywhere; the only way to

develop shared understandings is to take action and lead the collaborative efforts; complacency

will not change the system of education. Understandably, if teachers are going to devote their

time to collaboration, they want to make sure the work being accomplished is meaningful. In

order for this to occur, student learning must remain the focus of this work time. As Dufour

(2011) so notably mentioned, the focus of these discussions should be on learning, not teaching:

“A school staff must focus on learning rather than teaching, work collaboratively on matters

related to learning, and hold itself accountable for the kind of results that fuel continual

improvement” (p. 162). Analyzing student work, rather than teaching practices, will lead to

sustainable collaboration. Effective collaborative groups question, wonder, and explore how

students achieve success and the strategies that best support learning (Nelson, Duel, Slavit, &

Kennedy, 2010). This approach will not only add validity to collaborative time, but it will

eliminate any fear of judgment based on teaching abilities. Subsequently, with student learning at

the forefront, teacher understanding will also be increased, which will have a lasting impact on

students. Participating in a sustainable and successful learning community is easier said than

done, though. In order for this process to run smoothly and for all members to feel secure, norms

and protocols must be established. is just too easy to continually talk around the issue, rather than

face it head on.


Weak professional development

A commitment to change means a commitment to professional development. In order to

catapult this change through collaboration among quality teachers, professional development

opportunities need to be prevalent. The difficulty lies in the quality of these professional

development opportunities. It is safe to say what is being offered in many school districts is

weak at best. However, teachers are in a unique position to engage in professional development

that is purposeful and significant to the needs of the local school system. Teacher education

maintenance can be enhanced through job-embedded learning opportunities. Such engagements

need to be relevant to each teacher and rife with feedback (Zepeda, 2008). Furthermore, change

becomes lasting when given the opportunity to transfer job-embedded learning to new situations.

Taking time to reflect is the catalyst for transferring new knowledge and seeking and utilizing

feedback is a part of the process. However, skills will not transfer into practice if those applying

them do not find them relevant. One substantial way to ensure that educator learning is relevant

is to bring teachers into the decision-making process. Zepeda (2008) states that “ . . . collective

decision-making results in increased morale, ownership, understanding about the direction and

processes of change, shared responsibility for student learning, and a sense of professionalism,

all of which help sustain improvement efforts” (p. 7).

Lack of respect for the teaching profession

In collaborative environments, teacher leaders emerge. This development in leadership

respects teachers and their ability to contribute to school improvement. It is this revelation that

will crush the lack of respect many educators experience. If desired, teachers can take on

leadership roles that allow them to be active change agents. I honestly believe that the negative

assumptions about the teaching profession are based on the actions of a few. Therefore, I trust


that strong teacher leaders can help alter others’ perspectives: “ . . . (teacher leadership is a)

social influence process aimed at achieving some collective or organizational end. As a social

influence process, leadership permeates organizations rather than residing in particular people or

formal positions of authority. As a result, leadership can come from and be exercised by a wide

range of organizational participants . . . The first approach to leadership sees leadership in

teachers’ efforts to develop new knowledge from inquiry into their own schools and classrooms”

(Smylie, Conley, & Marks, pp. 268-269).

Conclusion

Does our education system need to see change? Yes. Are teachers’ naïve in their

understanding of the role they play in instigating this change? Possibly. But, this does not mean

that we should not try or that we do not deserve a larger role in accomplishing this change. It

must be acknowledged that teachers can make a difference. That difference is realized through

student achievement. Action will influence the key determiners of change – the heart of the

school system – the students. Educate the individual – change society.


References

Beecher, C.E. (2010). An essay on the education of female teachers for the United States. In J.W.

Fraser (Ed.), The school in the United States: a documentary history (pp. 57-60). New

York, New York: Routledge.

Bruner, J.S. (2010). Structures in learning. In F.W. Parkay, E.J. Anctil, & G. Hass

(Eds.), Curriculum leadership: Readings for developing quality educational

programs (pp. 329-332). Boston, Massachusetts: Pearson.

Counts, G. (2010). Dare the school build a new social order? In J.W. Fraser (Ed.), The school in

the United States: a documentary history (pp. 247-251). New York, New York:

Routledge.

Darling-Hammond, L. (2010). From “separate but equal” to “no child left behind”: the collision

of new standards and old inequalities. In J.W. Fraser (Ed.), The school in the United

States: a documentary history (pp. 384-387). New York, New York: Routledge.

Dewey, J. (1897). My pedagogic creed. School Journal, 54, 77-80.

DuFour, R.. (2011). Professional learning communities: A bandwagon, an idea worth

considering or our best hope for high levels of learning. In E.B. Hilty (Ed.), Teacher

leadership: The “new” foundations of teacher education (pp. 159-165). New York, New

York: Peter Lang.

Haley, M. (2010). Why teachers should organize. In J.W. Fraser (Ed.), The school in the United

States: a documentary history (221-224). New York, New York: Routledge.


Hass, G. (2010). Who should plan the curriculum? In F.W. Parkay, E.J. Anctil, & G. Hass



Holt, J. (2010). How children fail. In J.W. Fraser (Ed.), The school in the United States: a

documentary history (pp. 273). New York, New York: Routledge.

Inlay, L. (2010). Values: The implicit curriculum. In F.W. Parkay, E.J. Anctil, & G. Hass



Jefferson, T. (2010). Notes on the state of Virginia. In J.W. Fraser (Ed.), The school in the

United States: a documentary history (pp. 23-25). New York, New York: Routledge.

Johnson, L.B. (2010). The elementary and secondary education act and the great society. In J.W.

Fraser (Ed.), The school in the United States: a documentary history (pp. 319-321). New

York, New York: Routledge.

Kohl, H. (2010). Thirty-six children. In J.W. Fraser (Ed.), The school in the United States: a

documentary history (pp. 264-272). New York, New York: Routledge.

Kohn, A. (2010). NCLB and the effort to privatize public education. In J.W. Fraser (Ed.), The

school in the United States: a documentary history (pp. 380-383). New York, New York:

Routledge.

Meriam, L. (2010). The problem of Indian administration. In J.W. Fraser (Ed.), The school in the

United States: a documentary history (pp. 190-194). New York, New York: Routledge.


Nelson, T.H., Deuel, A., Slavit, D., & Kennedy, A. (2010). Leading deep conversations in

collaborative inquiry groups. The Clearing House, 83, 175-179. doi:

10.1080/00098650903505498

Nieto, S. (2010). Affirming diversity: the sociopolitical context of multicultural education. In

J.W. Fraser (Ed.), The school in the United States: a documentary history (pp. 354-357).

New York, New York: Routledge.

Smylie, M.A., Conley, S., and Marks, H.M. (2011). Exploring new approaches to teacher

leadership for school improvement. In E.B. Hilty (Ed.), Teacher leadership: The “new”

foundations of teacher education (pp. 265-282). New York, New York: Peter Lang.

Urban, W.J. and Wagoner, Jr., J.L. (2009). American education: a history. New York, New

York: Routledge.

Webster, N. (2010). On the education of youth in America, Boston. In J.W. Fraser (Ed.), The

school in the United States: a documentary history (pp. 29-38). New York, New York:

Routledge.

Wiggins, G. & McTighe, J. (2005). Understanding by design. Alexandria, Virginia: Association

for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Zepeda, S.J. (2008). Professional development: what works. Larchmont, New York: Eye on

Education.

lfullnergrennan.files.wordpress.com · web viewthe power to make a difference. change in our...

Documents