The Defensible Position: How School Districts Made Good Teachers Become Betty Crocker

Somewhere along the line, we became afraid of the parents. Maybe it happened after A Nation at Risk, maybe it was before. I was too young at the time to remember. But somewhere, we lost the parents trust and we became afraid that the parents would judge us and say we were doing a bad job. Once we became afraid, we changed from having unique classrooms where we were doing unique things to needing to do the same. Maybe it started at the top in some curriculum director's or superintendent's office, maybe it started at the bottom in some pair of pre-school teacher's classrooms, but it started. We said to ourselves. If I am doing the same thing that you are doing at the same time, they can't tell both of us we are doing the wrong thing. It's ok if I give page 37 as homework to all of my students if you give page 37 tonight as homework to all of your students. They won't judge us because we are both doing it. The sameness spread like wild fire. Recipes were created. This is what unit 7 looks like. Here is the pacing guide. I think Joe Average, our students can get 80% on unit 7 if we all take 12 days. We have curriculum integrity if all of our 4th grade students do all of the same activities in all of our schools at the same time. Over time, we had a recipe for each grade. Oldest children in a family received the same input of experiences as their younger siblings 2-3 years later. For each grade, we had a back of the box recipe. This is what the learning experience for 8 year olds will look like. This is what the learning experience for 6 year olds will look like. They can't judge us because we are being fair. Everyone gets the same thing. Oh, your kid is a high achiever? We give all of those high achiever this slightly more difficult story on the same topic. It has seven letter words in it instead of five letter words. We differentiate for that. How can they judge us? We are all doing the same. I'm no different than my colleague in the room next door, the school next door, or the district next door. Yes for a long time Betty Crocker instruction has won and innovation has left the building.

The defensible position, this need for doing generally the same thing for the majority of our students at generally the same time has led to a repression of student growth and a decimation of creativity within schools. When one analyzes the instructional staff, one can identify a myriad of similarities but also a myriad of differences. To require each teacher to do all of the same activities would put some teachers in advantageous positions because their strengths fit within those activities and others in positions of deficit because those activities require instructional techniques in their areas of deficit. The impact to children would be that some children would grow more and some less. Even though programatically we believed we were providing the same learning experience at the first point of implementation it fails to support student growth.

The analogy fails further when we actually look at the student's needs. The assumption built upon "born on" dating that the majority of 7 year olds need this and the majority of 9 year olds need that, most children have similar strengths and similar deficits and can maximize growth by following this pattern of learning experiences with that sequence of activities doesn't match the reality within a family unit much less a classroom, school, district, or community. Ask a parent, do their children have the same strengths and growth areas. A majority will identify some similarities and some differences. If we do Betty Crocker teaching for the two kids, can we possibly maximize growth for them?

It'll be ok. As long as we are doing the same thing, we can't be judged. It must be right.

It's just not true. Neither children or teachers are widgets. They can not simply role of the assembly line floor, having gotten the same treatment and have grown to their maximal potential. As school, district, and classroom leaders we need to embrace a different defensible position, one that acknowledges the strengths and growth areas of our staff and students. Instead of the Betty Crocker input hypothesis, we need to look at outputs. Instead of every student and every teacher participating in the same activity, we need to develop systems in which children have common goal areas such as development of geometric knowledge and common curriculum objectives such as we will understand that a triangle is a shape or we can identify the sides and verticies of a triangle and allow teachers and children to move up the ladder of geometric knowledge as they are ready to take on the next challenge. We need to embrace teacher and student differences, allowing them to develop different learning experiences to meet these curriculum outcomes and encourage them to move up the ladder as they are ready for the next step. We need to recognize that it is ok for me to be at a higher rung in geometry and a lower rung for computation, my teacher can provide me with great opportunities to help me move up each of those ladders.

If we allow for this diversity. Allow teachers to have outcome integrity instead of input integrity. We may see something marvelous, children growing at a quicker rate because their teacher had the freedom and support to meet each of them at their instructional level. Instead of some children feeling bored because they had done this and other children feeling frustrated because the activity was beyond them, each child can have an instructional experience that is ready for them.

It's not easy. We can't have 25 different activities going on at the same time as we teach geometry. As we analyze our students we will find that there are similarities. I may have 5 groups of students in my class in geometry. My teaching partner may have 4 groups in their class. If we combine the classes, we have 6 groups. Each teacher could do three groups. That could be doable. Together we can do it.

It is a new defensible position, one based on student outcomes instead of instead of input recipes.