Matt,

Thank you for your response. I truly hope that I did not offend you, or cause you to think that it was my belief that your points are not valid. This was not the case, and if in my written tone this was derived, I apologize. I was merely seeking to drive discussion.

I feel it is important that “non-traditionals and non-educators” enter and co-facilitate the current debate/s in educational policy. They are just as much a part of the “educational community” as the instructors and staff within the school walls. It is their support from home that I applaud and am thankful for everyday when my students come prepared and ready to learn.

Just thought this post, linked below, was interesting Matt. It sort of goes along the lines of what we are discussing.

http://publiceducationdefender.blogspot.com/2007/08/public-education-is-not-getting-worse.html

“Obviously, Hanson’s point is that public education has gotten a lot worse than it used to be in “the good old days.” He then goes on to tell us how we can fix our problems. There are a couple of things that he says that I actually agree with, but it’s hard to take him seriously when his basic point is so clearly wrong.

It’s hard enough to read and hear things by public education bashers who twist facts and statistics to portray our schools in the worst possible light. But it’s downright agonizing to read a clever little opinion piece based on something that is widely believed, but demonstrably false.” - http://publiceducationdefender.blogspot.com/

Matthew, all I can say is that if you have to have credentials to blog on particular subjects, then I’ll have to either throw my hat in the ring as a presidential candidate, or I have to quit vilifying President Bush.

I don’t see either of these happening anytime soon.

No offense taken at all. I think it’s an interesting topic that seems to come up often - that combination made it worthy of a post.

A great feature of blogging is its meritocratic nature - as the old adage goes, content is king and I believe that most blogs succeed or fail based on the quality of their content. Some, like Rosie O’Donnell’s blog, do get by with fame and associations, but the average blogger needs to offer something of value or his readership won’t grow.

I personally think little of credentialism in most spheres [though I do like it for sectors like medicine and law]. The value of credentials tends to run parallel to that sector’s ability to define specific goals, approaches and rules - I think we’d all agree that education isn’t close to such a point. When we are, credentials will mean more.

As for Victor’s post on Town Hall, I thought that Dennis’s criticism of it was somewhat unfair and that he missed the point. It’s very difficult for VDH, Dennis or anyone else to make valid comparisons between past and present education in 750 words. Simply put, the populations just aren’t similar enough to compare that easily; for example, talking about ACT scores is largely fruitless and even comparing SAT scores limits us to a specific subpopulation.

Do I think that the average student 100 years ago mastered basic skills [up to 8th grade curricula] better than the average student today? Absolutely - and whereas evidence is tough to come by, many families have correspondence that proves at least writing skill was better.

Dennis says VDH’s points are “demonstrably false.” The problem here is that they’re demonstrably true as well.

I regard VDH as one of the finest history scholars alive and look forward to each piece he publishes. I would’ve liked the piece more if he’d focused on one or two of the problems instead of generalizing.

As far as what VDH says I really like how he put this…

“Our present ambition to make every American youth college material — in a way our forefathers would have thought ludicrous — ensures that we will both fail in that utopian goal and lack enough literate Americans with critical vocational skills.

The disintegration of the American nuclear family is also at fault. Too many students don’t have two parents reminding them of the value of both abstract and practical learning.

What then can our elementary and secondary schools do, when many of their students’ problems begin at home or arise from our warped popular culture?” VDH

These certainly challenges for educators. I think you do, Matt, more so than maybe others, at listening to educators like myself for our point of view on these type of topics. What scares me is when the average teachers (not those at either extreme) are silenced in regards to school policy. I just do not want the “voice” of the teacher to be covered by the “tale” of the politician/journalist.

I agree that average teachers aren’t given as much attention as they’d like when it comes to school policies. They, like anyone else, have to make themselves heard and deliver quality messages that people can get behind. Many teachers fail at both, and there’s little that other people can do about that. The teachers themselves have to grab the reins and run a good race when they’ve got them. Often times politicians and journalists are better at that [or better at making it look like they’re better].

I always say schools need better p.r. representatives. Or at least reach out to their communities and share more about the practices and policies within the school. Not just the “ra-ra” monthly bulletin.

Matthew, I don’t see where I’ve been unfair regarding Hanson’s Town Hall post, and I didn’t miss his point. As I said in my post, there were criticisms he made that I agree with. But his launching point is definitely his first two paragraphs which clearly push what Jay Greene calls “The Myth of Decline–Schools are performing much worse than they used to.” (It hurts me to use Jay Greene as a reference, but in this case, it works.)

I also understand where Michael is coming from. I wrote a post on this topic in February, and it generated 69 comments. I’m going to give shortened version of that post here:

Over the past several months, I have had blogging discussions with people like Rory, KDerosa, Crypticlife, and Steven. All of these people are intelligent, passionate about the subject of education, and all of them disagree with me a lot. I have found my discussions with these gentlemen, and also people like Elizabeth, who chimes in once in awhile, challenging and generally enjoyable. But I have also often felt frustration when I’ve gone back and forth with them, because they are not teachers. I know how bad that sounds on the face of it, so please let me explain.

Teaching is a demanding job; I don’t think even most of our critics would deny that. And I think most people would agree that there are aspects of any demanding job that are only understood by those who actually do it. Two of my sons are involved with computers. I’d like to tell you exactly what they do, but I don’t understand their jobs even when they explain things to me slowly and avoid using big words. I doubt that any of their neighbors would ever try to make even minor suggestions about how they should do their jobs. The same can be said to some extent for people who are doctors, nurses, lawyers, engineers, and even carpenters and plumbers. But that is not the case for teachers.

Most people have gone to school, and they weren’t there for just a little while. Anyone who has gone no further than graduating from high school has spent much of thirteen years of his or her life in school classrooms. We shouldn’t be surprised that many people who have done that feel like they have a pretty good handle on what goes on in a classroom, and what it’s like to be a teacher. As a result, I think there is a tendency for people who aren’t teachers to believe that they understand what happens in the classroom a lot better than they actually do.

This post was actually inspired by KDerosa, who made the following statement in a comment on my last post in response to a complaint I made about non-performing students: “I do not understand why teachers never consider the possibility that maybe the problems they see in their low performing students could actually be caused by their own teaching.” In fairness, I’m taking KD’s statement out of context, and misunderstandings are always possible, but this statement seems pretty clear. Now, KDerosa is obviously intelligent and articulate, and I’ve never seen anyone who can match him at researching educational issues. But that statement was clearly made by someone who does not understand the mind and the perspective of a teacher.

As I said to KD in my reply, I don’t know any teachers who don’t consider that–and consider it before almost anything else–anytime their students perform poorly. I think every school goes through cycles of good and bad students. A couple of years ago, my high school was at the top of a very good cycle of students, but the last couple of years we have definitely been on a downward trend. Right now, our school has a lot of frustrated teachers, and almost every one I’ve talked to about it has told me that they’ve sat in their rooms at times and wondered, “What am I doing wrong.” A lot of people in the public might have trouble believing this, but when things are not going well in the classroom, the first person a teacher looks at is himself. As I’ve already indicated, KDerosa is not a stupid person. But despite his obvious intelligence, there are some things about being a teacher in a classroom that he’ll never quite understand.

I am not saying here that people who are not teachers should never criticize education, schools, or teachers. I have learned a lot from KDerosa, Rory, Crypticlife, Steven, and Elizabeth, and they’ve also forced me to clarify my own thoughts. And despite my “special understanding” as a teacher, there been some arguments I’ve had with them where I’ve felt like I’ve been throttled. Let’s face it, the fact that they aren’t teachers gives them a perspective that teachers need to hear. I am not asking them to shut up (Like they’d listen to me if I did!), and I’m not asking them to concede any arguments to teachers just because they’re teachers. All I am asking is that they recognize the fact that because of our experiences, those of us who teach do have some understanding of education that a non-teacher can never have.

“All I am asking is that they recognize the fact that because of our experiences, those of us who teach do have some understanding of education that a non-teacher can never have.”

I am not even close to the education field, but I enjoy Matthew’s blog because of his great clarity in writing and generally scientific method of discourse.
The above comment is typical of one I’ve seen over and over again on this site and others it has referenced.
If one feels that the other parties don’t get it, please be so kind as to say what IT is. Otherwise such comments just look like a cognitive defense mechanism spring-loaded to parry criticism one does not consider or understand.

“Otherwise such comments just look like a cognitive defense mechanism spring-loaded to parry criticism one does not consider or understand.”

James,

Criticism from the outside is a good thing, the questions lead to challenges, and challenges lead to action (for the most part). Do you understand how it can be that educators are more receptive toward receiving professional criticism and advice from those in their field as compared to someone who is not. I am not talking about the “poor test scores” criticism, I am talking about the instructional design portion.

Matthew is not one for credentialism, but I am of the mindset that I would rather hear about instructional technique from someone who has actually carried out the process as compared to someone who has read about it in a book or on a blog. Pedagogies are theories waiting to be put into practice. So as far as “IT” is concerned, the practice and reflection that goes into the PROCESS of teaching is something someone who has not taught would not have a full experience based understanding of.

In no way am I an expert, just providing my P.O.V.

Michael,
I am the target of plenty of unsolicited advice in my line of work as well. Rather than saying “I’m sorry you cannot fully understand how I carry out my job,” I try to respond with a well-thought answer for why the issue has been treated the way it has.
When someone takes the time to offer potentially useful criticism, batting it away ends the educational process. If I take the time to support and defend my position then both parties have learned something.
I refuse to believe that teaching is such an intellectually complex process that there are aspects of it I COULD NOT understand if they were communicated to me by a teacher. Again and again the idea that non-educators are beyond comprehension looks like a defensive mechanism from the outside. If the protesting educators don’t justify their complaint with reason and specifics, it will continue to.

James, I find your comment frustrating. There is no one “IT,” and I’m not saying you shouldn’t enjoy Matthew’s blog or anyone else’s that deal with education, and I’m not saying that their points of view have less value than those of us who actually teach. I hoped that I had made that clear in my last parargraph, but apparently I didn’t.

I don’t know what you do for a living. But whatever it is, I might be able to make valid observations and criticisms from the outside. There’s nothing wrong with that. Nevertheless, you have some understanding of that occupation that I don’t have and never will. Once in a while, when I make a criticism, you might realize that it falls into that category of “you don’t know what it’s like.” When that happens, it can be very hard to explain to someone who doesn’t do what you do. Those of us in education have been facing a lot of criticism over the past several years, and SOME of that criticism falls into that area, and that can be frustrating.

James,

I agree with what Dennis has to say. It is not every “point” that teachers “bat” away. It is those incidences where our experience as educators can cause us to have the “you don’t know that portion as well as I.” Say for example you and I had a sit down conversation for an hour on education. I could agree with, or respect and debate, 95% of what you have to say. There will come a point where that 5% will fall into my area of familiarity as far as my day to day practice as an educator.

My professional view is different than Dennis. I am an elementary school teacher. In no way do I envy high school teachers, and I am sure he feels the same way about elementary school teachers. Each pose their own set of positives and negatives. Am I saying that our jobs are the most difficult and challenging careers, not at all. Do I believe they deserve respect from non-practitioners…YES! But until someone has balanced the instruction, classroom management, and day to day grind, they are fit to question and debate but who are they to say definitively what works best. Who gives them the authority? Who makes them the expert? (DEFENSE MECHANISM TIME!)

You keep mentioning “defense mechanisms.” So be it. I am sorry that you feel this way. I feel your comments, suggestions, and queries are important additions to the academic debate. For me I just believe that I would rather learn about educational practice from someone who has had a successful 30 year career in the classroom, as compared to someone who merely reads educational journals, opinion articles, and relies on like- minded bloggers for forming their judgments of the educational system.

I love reading blogs such as Matthew’s, or Ken’s (D-ed Reckoning) because I am in awe of their writing and ability to challenge me. 95% of what each has to say is rich with well researched commentary. I thank them both, and others like them for the time and effort they put into providing this content. The other 5%…well, they don’t get it! haha. (DEFENSE MECHANISM TIME!)

I can’t solve the countries academic woes, but what I can do is teach darn well in my OWN classroom. My view are jaded toward my personal experiences. Sorry to be so blunt, but it is true. Our experiences frame our point of view, and I hope you don’t feel 100% discredited by me…maybe just 5%.

Thank you both for reading and responding. My point this entire time has been that if you took the time to try provide some insight into my field (social work), and you touched upon a facet that is heavily-colored by boots on the ground experience, my reply would be “you don’t have a handle on that, AND THIS IS WHY.” My frustration has been the lack of “this is why” in too many of these discussions. I would have the respect for you to explain that point because although you might not know intuitively, because you lack that experience, I’m confident enough in my ability to communicate and your intellect that we could easily bridge that gap.

James,

I totally understand and respect what you are saying. I see what you mean in regards to explaining oneself, I apologize for causing you to feel any ill will. My closest friend, my son’s Godfather, is a case manager for CPS in the Bronx. We speak frequently about our experiences in our professions and their are many connections that we share. I am sure you and I James share many of these similarities in our passion for our careers. We both are in professions that are harshly criticized. I thank you for the work that you do, because it is vital, and important.

[…] 29, 2007 pm31 4:42 pm Posted by jd2718 in Education, blogging. trackback Matthew K Tabor has been trying to explain why it is ok for non-teachers to write about education. But he needs no explanation for this: a truly first-rate Carnival of Education (#134).  See, […]

[…] Matthews hails from Cooperstown, New York. You’ll also want to read Matthew’s post, Another Qucik Note on Blog Critcism, that talks a lot about education […]

[…] post by one of my favorite bloggers, Matthew K. Tabor, about edublogging in […]

I’ve definitely gotta give this more thought. Good post.

And thanks for commenting by the way, sir. Peace …

I see both sides of this issue and I think it’s important for everyone to realize that we don’t know what’s going on in each other’s heads, let alone the entire inner workings of someone else’s profession.

A non-education illustrative example: Having never stayed in a hospital, and (thankfully) never knowing anyone who did until last summer, I made an offhand comment to a health care professional that our mutual friend was staying in room xxxx and the phone extension was yyyy adding somewhat sarcastically, “Because, it would be too easy to make them the same!”

My lack of direct experience (and therefore, lack of any reason to even *think* about the issue) caused my first reaction to be, “That’s so inefficient and confusing — certainly more complicated than it needs to be. Why isn’t the phone extension the room number?” It was explained to me that there are very good safety and security reasons for this system (so that you can let people know how to get in touch with you without necessarily letting them find you). Of course, I felt more than a little stupid. :)

I didn’t *know* this about hospitals, and my lack of experience meant that I would have been “behind” in a debate over how to issue telephone extensions or about patient safety. But, this lack of experience doesn’t mean that I’m incapable of participating when given enough information.

So, score one for the “non-educators can participate” side. But when they/we (I sort of fit into this category, but sort of don’t) do, it’s their/our responsibility to realize that they/we may very well be walking into a conversation “already in progress.” Non-educators, I believe, bear the responsibility of getting “up to speed” with the conversation so that they’re not viewed as annoying little yappy dogs barking in circles around the conversation.

At the same time, it’s helpful when educators recognize that there are several professions and professionals within the education industry that do not involve direct classroom teaching but do involve direct contact with students, the learning process, the schooling process and the education process. There are tutors, academic/guidance counselors/coaches, curriculum writers, administrators, test prep specialists, educational advocates, researchers, volunteers, journalists, parents and students who may not do exactly what you do, but who may bring essential perspectives to the teaching profession.

I agree that offhand, random comments by uninformed or misinformed outsiders are not only frustrating but are generally unhelpful. I don’t think that edubloggers fit into that category, though. They seem to put a great deal of time, thought and effort into writing about education, so let’s at least give them a free pass on the “random idiot” test for a moment.

What if we change the discourse from “does a non-educator GET it?” to “does a non-educator VALUE it?” Sometimes it’s not that a non-educator doesn’t understand; he may just ascribe a different level of significance to that point of discussion. For example, public school educator A says that non-traditional educator B doesn’t “get it” because B doesn’t know what it’s like to have to file requisition forms in triplicate to get supplies for his classroom. How then can B recklessly claim that he knows better because B can’t possibly imagine all the crap that A has to deal with?

B may not be disputing A’s claim, but simply choosing to ignore/downplay/dismiss it because B would rather work to create a reality in which bureaucracy is less of an oppressive force in his profession. B may consciously refuse to accept that it “has to be this way” and therefore, in the process, make it seem like A’s concerns are somehow invalid. Sometimes discussions get stuck because one side feels the need to insist that this is “how things are” because the other side doesn’t do a good job of first acknowledging that he understands the limitations of the current reality before demanding that “things could be better.”

The field of education and learning involves more than just classroom teaching, just as classroom teaching involves more than simply learning and education. (My kingdom for a Venn Diagram!) If everyone is open and responsible about the scope and limitations of their own and others’ individual perspectives, then I think teachers and non-teachers alike can engage in very meaningful conversations about education.

Sarah,

Very interesting comment. The hospital scenario is a funny way of showing that just because we don’t know about something doesn’t mean it’s necessarily arbitrary. This is why I lament the popularity of the word “random” - almost every time I hear it, it’s used inappropriately. Just because you don’t know the context of something, see a connection, etc. doesn’t mean it’s random.

I’m surprised as well at how some educators view specialization - as if they’re separated from all the other contributors to the education process. I don’t find it terribly useful to charge others with not getting it - your suggestion to focus instead on the “why” question is a good one. It’s simply far more productive to look at and compare different approaches than to argue whether one should be allowed in the club or not.

My thought is that someone who has not been subject to the classroom environment is not well equipped to comprehend how their ideas for reform would play out in reality. Unfortunately, a lot of the reform movements that make their way into classrooms are spawned by people who have little or no classroom experience. Often, because of the disconnect, they confuse their agendas. Having no realistic idea of the way a classroom works, they invest in beautiful notions that play well on paper but do not pan out in real life.

So many administrators, researchers and consultants have no idea of the special needs of a classroom, because they’ve spent very little time in one.

In the old days, your department chair would be someone who spent 15 years in the classroom. They would have a broad range of experience with different populations and a clear awareness that the needs of a 6th grader are significantly different from those of an 8th grader, that logistics matter, that subject know-how is relevant to reform. Today, a department chair may have as many as 3 years in a classroom.

Or how about a central administrator for curriculum and instruction who has never been a classroom teacher. His entire philosophy is received. None of it is field tested by him, and therefore he is subject to fashion and influence rather than informed by experience. It’s a problem.

Recently, our district has been subject to a host of consultants in trendy reforms (differentiation, literature circles..etc.) In every case, so far, our consultants have little experience in the classroom. They know nothing about how their ideas (most of which are regurgitated and repackaged) play in a classroom.

Their expertise is in marketing and selling ideas rather than implementation. Their priority is career nurture rather than in child nurture. It sounds like an indictment, and to some extent I suppose it is, but in the end… I don’t fault them. It’s the function of the market economy that ambition has primacy over expertise.

But that’s what I think about experts in a field who have never been in the field.

Audrey writes: “But that’s what I think about experts in a field who have never been in the field.”

They may be experts in “something else” while yes, you’re the expert in “classroom teaching.”

My problem with excluding the “other” experts from the discussion simply on the basis of lack of classroom teaching experience is this: we already know that being in the classroom isn’t the most effective way to learn. (referencing the work of Mark R. Lepper, Edward E. Gordon to name just a couple of researchers).

If these other people can bring to the discussion NOT mandates to you, about how to function in a classroom, but rather ideas about what we know about the learning process, then you as the “classroom” expert can evaluate and experiment to help improve the classroom experience.

By saying, “your ideas don’t translate well to the classroom, so they are not useful/effective” is failing to recognize that classrooms aren’t the models of education to which we aspire . . . they’re what we’re stuck with.

This is by no means an attack on classroom teachers, many whom I respect for making the experience as good as it can be.

But, it is a plea for everyone to recognize that one of these days, an idea that may seem to ignore the “realities of a classroom” ust might have the potential to initiate a paradigm shift for the better. We won’t be prepared to capitalize on it if we’re not ready to listen to it.

Also anyone interested in innovation or development of any field would find the following lecture by Ricardo Semler (author of The Seven Day Weekend) at MIT fascinating. In it, he mentions that (I want to say 73, but I’m going from memory here) percent of innovation comes from sources OUTSIDE the industry itself. Do check out the lecture, it’s really interesting:

http://mitworld.mit.edu/video/308/

Fair enough… I will certainly check out the lecture. There’s never reason not to be open to new ideas and there are always exceptions to any observed phenomenon. However, most people aren’t exceptions. The world is run by the average and shifted by the extraordinary. Since, extraordinary by definition is in shorter supply than ordinary, I’m going to suggest that in every endeavor most people benefit from experience. I’m old school on that score. I’m not a great believer in short cuts to the top. I think that it’s outrageous and usually detrimental when the people who make policy are people who have no personal experience of the workings of the machine they are making policy for. It’s a slower trip, but working your way through a structure is the surest way to know the variables and the players. Even generals go through bootcamp. If you’ve been in a trench, you don’t create a paradigm shift from an ivory towers. If you’ve played many roles (both lowly and exalted) in your chosen field, you are less likely to your career aspirations with educationally sound ideas. As Jimmy Hendricks said, “Are you experienced?”

edit: less likely to confuse your career aspirations with educationally sound ideas.

If I may, what you say seems to reference only educrats/policy makers who have a career ladder to climb and whose presence and top-down influence (rightly) ticks off teachers.

Your argument simply doesn’t apply to people like Matthew, me, parents, tutors and other paraprofessionals who don’t really stand much to gain from telling you what to do in your classroom and how to do it, other than creating a better learning experience for the students . . . which I know is a teacher’s goal, too. (And, to be clear, we wouldn’t really presume to do such a thing.)

Believe me, you have every right to be pissed off at someone coming in and micromanaging or setting policy that simply doesn’t work in practice. Who wouldn’t be? But, that’s not true educational reform, and that’s not the entirety of this larger discussion, which is, “Do we deserve to participate in the discussion?”

I think we can all agree, slimy people are slimy people, and they’re everywhere. Ambitious people are everywhere in every field. That’s not unique to this discussion.

To me, the fact that you have people forcing programs and policies down your throat is only further evidence that the system is broken, NOT that people shouldn’t be designing new educational programs and testing out new ideas and NOT that classroom teachers need to “circle the wagons” to protect a fundamentally flawed educational model.

A general may have been a foot soldier at one time, but wasn’t it a child that pointed out that the Emperor had no clothes?

edit to emphasize the word “discussion.”

Top-down implementation without support from below is not a discussion.

HOW outside ideas from “outsiders” are implemented is a different discussion than WHETHER these ideas should be allowed to get in to the system in the first place.

I’m investigating my ideas through discussion. My opinions are based on my experiences, but I’m just stretching and thinking here. I’m not of the belief that you (whoever you are) and Matt (whoever he is… since I actually don’t know a thing about either of you) fall into any specific category. I don’t even know what you do… although when I finish this comment, I will go and find out. But.. I don’t mean anything personal by it. You may certainly have something of use for me to listen to or think about. Nearly everyone is my teacher, as it turns out.

And… surely everyone has a “part” to play. But, here’s the thing… either you think teachers are professionals or you you don’t. If you do, then teachers likely have some specialized knowledge that non teachers don’t have. Or, although it would be politically incorrect to say so… perhaps teaching is not really a profession, but a generalized task like babysitting… some babysitters are better than others, but a warm, adult body in the room with a bit of sense and access to 911 is pretty much all you need for a night out.

If you believe that teaching is a profession with a specialized skill set that must be acquired, then the question is what does it mean to have specialized knowledge? I wouldn’t presume to tell a doctor how to do his surgery. However since it is my body that he’s working on, I do think I have the right to be informed and to do research to understand my conditions and my options better. I have the right to demand the best care and to vote with my feet if I’m not getting it. I also think that a doctor benefits if he listens to me, he may find out important information that he couldn’t find out without listening. If he’s really good at his job, I won’t tell him anything about his profession he doesn’t know, but I may tell him something about me… and he needs that information as well. In that sense, I have a part to play in my health care. However, the placement that I have in a discussion about my health is not a deciding role in which scalpel to use in an operation or what anesthesia to use to put me under.

In education, that is exactly the kind of role that non-educators who want to be in the game (for sleasy or altruistic reasons) play. In my view, the fact that non educators consider themselves expert enough to make policy is related to the fact that the teaching profession is historically a female dominated one that deals with children.

I’ve had the privilege to work for an unnamed, but well known for-profit educational institution that goes into failing public schools, takes them over and initiates their own curriculum. It was and from what I’ve heard around, is still run by people who had no idea how a classroom works. I was hired by someone who had a background in publishing to create curriculum for an age I’d never taught… In my view, neither of us were qualified for what we were doing at the time.

In any case, their program was a mess. The reason they could continue to garner the big bucks is because they were taking over schools in collapse, where the population was uneducated, disenfranchised and powerless… I think I heard somewhere that they may be going bankrupt, but that’s 13 years down the road… it’s a good run for a start up.

So… maybe I’m jaded. ;-)

ps. In fairy tales and as it relates to their refreshingly tactless honesty, children tell it like it is. But, in the real world… the emperor is a naked sports, music or media icon and the children don’t know he’s naked… they only know they want to be him.

pss thanks for the dialog … it’s much more interesting to engage with another person than to just have my stupid little say and move on.

Hey Audrey, glad you’re having fun, too! It’s always nice to know that the other person is as civil and interested as you are, not trying to offend nor getting offended. Glad that’s what we’re both doing here. :)

As for teaching being a profession, I don’t actually think it’s a clear question. And, it may sound like a cop out to say that it depends on your definitions (of teaching — notice how I’m very clear about when I mean “classroom teachers” since there are other teachers out there; and of “professional”) but our precise use of language makes a difference.

For example, you contrast “teachers” with “non-educators” but my point is there’s a whole area in the middle. Not all “educators” are “classroom teachers in a school setting.” And, issues of “classroom teaching” do not, in and of themselves, comprise the entirety of issues in “education.” Certainly it’s the most *common* situation, but by no means the only form/environment of education out there. I’m not diminishing the value of what classroom teachers do, but someone’s gotta keep hitting the point that there’s more to it than that!

So, it’s difficult for me to comment on “professionalism” without writing a book, since I can think of several different ways that word could be used. But, I love this quotation from a Canadian author that goes something along the lines of, “With good teachers, a compulsory curriculum is irrelevant. With bad teachers, no amount of compulsion will do the trick.” (Ken Osborne wrote in “Education: A guide to the Canadian School Debate”) I think we can agree that the teacher is infinitely more important than the curriculum, and one can argue whether teacher certification programs actually do a good job of getting the right people in the “profession.”

Your analogy about the doctor is a good one, and more well-developed than I’ve ever heard it expressed. But what I’ll add is, maybe the manufacturer of the scalpel (or inventor or designer) does have useful information for the doctor on its use, as well as caregivers (nurses, homecare workers or family members) who have experience with after-surgery care since they know what effect the surgeon’s choice of scalpel had on an individual.

I know we all write from our own experiences, and it’s only in sharing them that we can realize that what we take for granted as “normal” may in fact not be so.

As a non-traditional educator myself, (I have a couple of years of non-traditional classroom experience, but chose a career in tutoring instead) I have a different skill set to bring to the table than classroom teachers, but these are still skills related to teaching students, and a deep understanding of how people learn. I’m sure the best piano teachers know a thing or two about confidence-building, motivation, and getting the best out of their students. Driving instructors put their money where their mouth is, potentially putting themselves in physical danger if they can’t guide a student through a difficult “learning experience.”

Many teachers don’t realize that there are a whole whack of us out there training, mentoring, educating and guiding learners who aren’t subject to educrats, buzzwords, politicians and learning fads. Many of us are allowed to develop our “teaching” skills in relative peace, and we’re the ones you guys need showing you an alternate view of what teaching could be like, if you’ll let us. :)

I couldn’t agree more with the notion that not all teachers are in traditional classrooms, or even have the title of teacher. There are many ways to be a teacher and not all teachers have titles of any kind. Paras, aides, coaches in my school are all educational professionals who spend their days dealing with children and teaching in one way or another. They have less status than teachers — with the exception of coaches who often have more ;-) — but they’re all educators. I have great respect for the ones that dig in and do what it is.

[…] Non-educators in the Education Debate […]