Imagine that you are hiring a new English teacher. None of the people who apply have any of the qualifications to teach English. No teaching degree. No English degree. No experience in the classroom. Would you hire any of them? Probably not. Now here is the irony. Many of the people making curricular and legislative decisions about education don’t have the qualifications to be hired within education. This is a problem. In this episode, we hear how standardization, high-stakes testing, and policy decisions made by non-educators may be contributing to teachers’ decisions to leave education.

Music: 

Theme Song By Julian Saporiti 

“So Stark (You’re a Skyscraper” by Matt LeGroulx is licensed under a CC BY-NC-SA license.

“Cat and Mouse” by Scott Holmes Music is licensed under a CC  BY license.

“Space (Outro)” by Andy Cohen is licensed under a CC  BY license.  

“Home Fire” by Nul Tiel Records is licensed under a CC BY-NC-SA license.

“Press Conference” by Blanket Music is licensed under a CC BY-NC license.

“Things Change” by HoliznaCC0 is in the Public Domain. 

“Living Life” by Scott Holmes Music is licensed under a CC BY-NC license.

“Boulevard St Germain” by Jahzzar is licensed under a CC BY-SA license. 

“Hungaria” by Latche Swing is licensed under a CC BY-NC-SA license.

“Business Getaway ” by Scott Holmes Music is licensed under a CC  BY license.

Transcript:

I used to listen to the Dixie Chicks’s song “Wide Open Spaces” before wrestling matches because I would get too wound up. It helped me slow down my breathing and relax. 

In junior high and high school, I was fixated on winning and losing. I’d get a pit in my stomach, psyche myself up and out, all to my detriment. I was terrified of failing, of being a disappointment or an embarrassment. 

Then I went to college. I walked-on to the University of Wyoming’s wrestling team. During my meeting with Steve Suder, the head coach, he told me, “You know, you’ll be walking into a room with a bunch of state champs. Are you worried about that?” I told him, “No, I’m not” because those were the guys  that I wanted to be wrestling against. I was a two-time state placer and I had nothing to lose. Suder said, “Good,” and then told me that he never won state either, but he ended up being an All-American for the University of Wyoming, so there was hope for me. 

During our conversation, in between adjusting this chewed up yellow cushion he used as a back support, he told me that I was like the pretty girl’s funny friend at a party. I’m not someone he noticed right off the bat, but once he got to know me, he was happy to have me around. He meant this in the best way possible, and I didn’t mind. 

I made the team, worked my butt off, won some matches, and lost more than I won. And I hate losing, but it felt different. I was excited to be wrestling, not nervous. Suder made it clear that his expectations were low, but he was happy to have me. I focused on gaining experience and the process and growing as a wrestler and a person. And I got to wrestle a guy named Brent Metcalf, who is the only person I wrestled that had a documentary made about him. When someone asked Metcalf why he didn’t celebrate wins, he said, “I don't want to give my opponent the satisfaction of watching me celebrate, which would make it look like a big deal that I beat him.” This dude is a monster. 

It was an extraordinarily humbling match. I had no control of my own body - his fingers were in my mouth at one point, but I learned what it was like to wrestle the best. It was eye-opening. 

My tenure as a collegiate wrestler only lasted that year,but I remained in contact with Coach Suder off and on until his passing in 2019. And I had changed. My priorities shifted from valuing product to process.   

When I became an assistant high school wrestling coach, the head coach had also wrestled for Coach Suder, and so we continued his tradition of emphasizing process. And what I noticed is that the wrestlers felt less pressure. They only tried being better today than they were yesterday. And when they have that mindset, success, though not guaranteed, is more likely. They are wrestling to compete and to score points. And even if they don’t have success, they do the best they can do at that moment, and that’s always worth being proud of. 

In education, we focus on the product, on assessment. There is an obsession with passing or failing and we seem to have forgotten the value of process, which is where many teachers live. So today, we are going to look at how a structure of education that values standardized assessments could be contributing to teachers deciding to leave the profession, and because some of the frustrations with standardized assessment is a federal issue, which is too much to address here, we’ll explore a possible solution to the high stakes assessment issue in Wyoming, which would hopefully keep teachers in education. 

This is Those Who Can’t Teach Anymore, a 7-part podcast series exploring why teachers are leaving education and what can be done to stop the exodus. I’m Charles Fournier.

Here is part 5: “Education has a Tourist Problem”

Mark Perkins: I do think that for a lot of teachers who are leaving, and this is speculative, but I think it's reasonable to assume that if you alleviated some of the assessment requirements within their schools, their satisfaction would increase. I don't think that that's a jump. 

This is Mark Perkins, he is an Assistant Professor of Education Research Methods at the University of Wyoming and he is talking about the survey results he gathered about teacher attrition in Wyoming. So many teachers, both teachers leaving and teachers staying, reported that they were not happy with assessments.

As we’ve heard from teachers that left teaching, there wasn’t one thing that pushed them out of teaching. It was the layering of factors. And if we want to keep more teachers from leaving, it would be worth trying to address some of the most consistent factors. Aside from overall well-being and feeling supported, assessment is one the most consistent teacher frustrations.

Now before we get into what specifically teachers don’t like about assessment, I think it’s important to think about why education currently has assessments, and this goes back to what we talked about last episode: the purpose of education and needing to be able to measure success for whatever that purpose is. Simply put, we need to reflect on what we want kids to know and how we can measure what they know. Mark explains.

Mark Perkins: And so what does school success really look like? That sounds like an interesting, easy question. It's like, Well, kids know how to do math. Well, okay. What does that look like? Well, they can add, subtract, divide. All right. So what? When you start drilling into the actual requirements to exist and inhabit the world, the factors become much more latent than what we measure. But we fixated ourselves purely on content.

During our conversation, Mark explained that there are a ton of other things that we want for students: self-awareness, identity development, civic consciousness, the ability to have some gumption and as Mark phrased it, drag a horse through the mud. But none of those qualities are easy to measure, which means it’s more difficult to measure a teacher’s overall effectiveness. This brings us back to the focus on content. 

Mark Perkins: But all of the focus has been on reading math, science and somewhat government. How does a teacher who navigates let's call it the multivariate universe of being an educator. How do you evaluate teaching for the holistic aspects of the job? While we don't? 

It would be difficult to assess students and teachers in the Multivariate Universe of education, as Mark puts it, so we assess a few content areas, and only a few things in those content areas. Many mission statements want to acknowledge the whole student, but we only assess a fraction of the student. 

For example, I have a grant application unit for my sophomores. They do research and write a grant to receive hypothetical funding that they can use to address a real problem within our community. I don’t limit students on what kinds of problems they want to address, so students have looked at drug use or homelessness or access to sports or social justice issues. 

When students submit their grant applications, we go through a selection process. Students read each other's grants anonymously and identify ones that meet all of the grant requirements and would, in their minds, best serve our community. By the end of the process, all of my classes vote on the one grant that should receive the hypothetical funding. Every year I’ve done this, the grants that make the final vote, the ones that all of my students have pushed forward, are philanthropic and genuinely kind. And I tell my students this, usually as I tear up, that this project gives me hope for the future because through their research, writing, discussions, and voting, they prove that they are empathetic humans.

I learn much more about what my students can do through this project than any standardized assessment that I’ve been required to administer. And this is a frustration echoed by teacher after teacher. If the thing that is used to reflect a district’s success is a bubble-sheet test, that can feel pretty disheartening. Because from the teachers’ perspective, the results of those tests, the results that are reported in the paper and raise community questions like, “What are they even teaching kids in school?” those tests lack validity. They’re not the best way to measure whether the kids are alright, and Mark has questions about how well these tests show what kids know and how well they predict the future success of students, which is often how standardized tests are used.

Several teachers pointed to the frustration that rather than getting students ready for life beyond high school or to be a life-long learner, they are forced to think that the be-all-end-all was the ACT or SAT.  So engaging and authentic instruction gets replaced with teaching to a test. From Mark’s research and work in assessment, he sees that those assessments might not be worth the time we are putting towards them.

Mark Perkins: And I have a suspicion that the predictive validity of these tests is not that good. And my suspicion comes from a very large body of literature that has looked at ACT/SAT versus high school grade point average and college level English math and general college grade point average. And yet, we invest an amount of time, pressure and money on these measures.

What this means is that a grade point average, though imperfect in its own right, is a better predictor of future student success, whether they are college or career bound, than a standardized assessment. So what a teacher measures in their classroom is a better indicator of future success than what a standardized assessment shows. 

And if this isn’t enough, the amount students are tested is tremendous. This saps their energy and the energy of teachers who have to say, “I know this is the 573rd test, but you’ve got this.” 

Mark Perkins: We need to simplify and make assessment parsimonious. We do need to assess, but we certainly only need to take our temperature one time and evening, maybe two, when we have a cold because we know that it's going to say the same number every time. Measuring is not teaching.

I want to reiterate what Mark just said - measuring is not teaching. I also want to clarify something about assessment. Teachers use informal assessments all of the time. And these are different than the high-stakes standardized assessments.

 Good teaching makes use of valid and authentic assessments often. When I was writing this episode, I got talking with my wife, Jennie,  about assessment, because this is what you do when you marry another teacher. When she taught Advanced Biology, she created these elaborate group tests that students would get excited about. She used assessment as a learning tool. Her thought is that you don’t know what you know until you need to apply your knowledge. 

This is why I like the writing process because it's an act of creating and synthesizing. It’s a great form of learning. 

So the right assessment can be an informative learning tool, but the high stakes, fill-in-the-bubble, standardized assessments that teachers are frustrated with are not that. Mark explains that in order for those standardized assessments to be more valid, there should be some adjustments. 

Mark Perkins: I think that we could more wisely use measurement, and education. I think one of the first problems with high stakes testing, is the fact that the majority of these tests have no impact on students. Now. You don't have to be draconian about it .But we make intelligent decisions based off of test scores. And we provide students with logical and rational incentives. 

From the teacher’s perspective, it’s hard to convince students that the tests matter because students don’t see how they are relevant to their lives. I try to give students some perspective before tests, like “No it doesn’t impact your grade, but  if you go through and randomly click answers to finish early, the people who care about these tests will think you’re not learning anything, and then they will change curriculum and make you guys only learn from a textbook. Do you want that?”

They usually shake their heads no, but that doesn’t mean they care any more about the test. Many teachers struggle to care about the tests as well. They don’t like the kind of standardization the tests force that does not allow for freedom in the classroom. Shane Atkinson, who we heard from in the first episode, left teaching after 13 years, and part of his decision to leave had to do with a lack of autonomy, some of which is tied to standardization. He pointed out that there are some districts that are so standardized, their days are mapped out in a binder.

Shane Atkinson: This is what you do, then you do this, here's the question you should ask, have them fill out this worksheet. Day two… I think that's been done under the guise of equity. You don't want a kid in this classroom at this school to get a much different or better education than a teacher in the classroom next door. And I get that. So the idea is, well, to keep it equitable, they should be doing the same thing in both of those classrooms during that period of their US History class. Again, you're making decisions based on a minority and applying them to everybody, even if you're doing good work. That does everybody a disservice. 

The hope is that every kid will receive the same quality of education, so teachers are expected to stick to a curriculum, and in some instances, stick to a script. Much of the push towards national standardization came from the George W Bush Administration’s, 2001, No Child Left Behind Act. Jaye Wacker, whose voice we heard in the first episode and who quit teaching after 31 years, felt like the No Child Left Behind Act did a lot to undermine public trust in education. And it did it through standards. 

Jaye Wacker: No Child Left Behind set impossible targets. And basically year after year after year, it undermined public confidence in education. So then we needed the standards we needed to prove that we're doing something and yeah, I get it and I agree with it. You know, let's prove what we're doing. But this homogenization that we've talked about _____ High School in their curriculum, the most diverse curriculum in the state, and their kids are outperforming all these homogenized curriculums. 

Part of the impossible targets from the No Child Left Behind Act included a 100% proficiency rate for all students by 2014 - this meant that all students would be able to perform at grade level by 2014. This sounds nice, it is great rhetoric because of course no one wants to leave any kids behind, but this goal disregards so many variables. Many students are below grade level because of severe physical and or learning disabilities, and some will never make it to grade level. This doesn’t mean an effort to get all students to proficient is a bad goal, it’s a great goal, but not reaching this goal made it look like schools were failing. But the Act made it so schools were destined to fail. Though this Act has since been replaced, along with the unrealistic proficiency rates, its negative impact on the view of education is still present.

Wacker also pointed to the reality that homogenized education doesn’t necessarily produce the best results. This is a pretty common view of standards. A teacher who wanted to remain anonymous said. "On a societal level, I think standards are the worst thing about education, and that’s a wide-open race... In my opinion, standards have lead to a homogenization that is stunting our growth, and solve problems that don’t exist. I don’t want education to be the same everywhere; I want to be a local restaurant, not a McDonald’s."

For a more scientific point of view, my wife, Jennie, who left teaching after 7 years compares standardization to evolution.

Jennica Fournier: So I think that standards homogenize things. So I don't know if your high school teacher was too afraid to teach you about evolution. But in general, we evolve best as a species if we have a really diverse gene pool. Basically if our education system was a gene pool, we’d be fucked.  

So from an evolutionary perspective, species that are standardized or homogenous, don’t survive adversity very well. Diversity is necessary for survival, and this includes diversity of curriculum. Jennie explained that we might struggle as a country to solve problems when everyone has been exposed to the same standardized curriculums. Jennie points out that there would be benefits to having students prioritize local issues.

Jennica Fournier: So essentially we need kids to have a set of skills that match their environment at a local level in order to solve problems at their local level versus everyone in the US only knowing how to solve a generic set of problems.

So many teachers see standards as an impossible bar to be reached that stifles their ability to be creative in their classrooms. Another part to the frustration with standardization and standardized assessments comes from the preparation required to take them and the pressure associated with the results. This is preparation and pressure that Mark, who discussed assessment earlier in this episode, says might be unnecessary. Molly Waterworth, who we heard from in a previous episode and who left teaching after 8 years, explains how frustrating that process of preparation was. 

Molly Waterworth: ACT/SAT prep, hated that. Totally hated it. And I never really figured out a way to do it super meaningfully. It just felt really meaningless because I just couldn't connect it to anything relevant. I just have to say to the kids, “I'm doing this so that you know the format of the test, and that's why we're doing this.” It's not fun. There's no way to have a discussion about whether or not somebody answered the correct question on ACT/SAT practice. My biggest motivator and the thing that brought me the most joy in teaching English was discussion and parsing through complexity and finding our collective way through something big and doing ACT/SAT prep just didn't ring that bell.

Having to teach towards a test that doesn’t seem valuable, or to work towards standards for the sake of standards can leave teachers feeling powerless. I don’t know that anyone likes to feel powerless, to feel like their hands are tied behind their backs. Several teachers decided to leave education for jobs that gave them more autonomy, where they didn’t feel like they were jumping through hoops. 

 I personally have never been a fan of doing things just because. If I am required to give a test, I want to know that it matters. I do the same for my students, I want all of their work to feel relevant beyond the classroom. Most teachers are the same. They want to know that what they are doing is relevant, and many don’t feel like the layers of standardized tests are relevant.Students, like most other humans, want to feel like what they do matters.

 At least that’s what Anjel Garcia wanted from her education. 

Anjel Garcia: Kids just don't have any respect or like reason to care about school, and I think that connects back to they don't know what they are doing there. 

Anjel took my college-level English class and graduated last year. She is a phenomenal artist - I have one of her paintings hanging in my classroom - and she is going to college for art. For Anjel, she thinks school should help students find a direction for their lives. 

Anjel Garcia: I think it's to find a passion and to find something that you want to pursue in life. But we're at the point where you're only doing it so that you can cram and learn that information, and then forget it the day after the test. They're not actually doing it in a way that's teaching kids how to find interests.

Which is something that many teachers enjoy. Engaging students in the joy of learning to find their interests is such a gratifying part of the job. And helping students identify interests means teachers would be able to individualize education for students. As we heard last episode, this is what many students want in their education - individualization. So a shift in the mission and a deprioritization of standardized assessment could create a structure that ends up valuing individualization. If we don’t make this shift, we will continue with a structure that devalues individualization and does not promote the joy of learning. This is what that feels like to Anjel.

Anjel Garcia: It's kind of extreme…with the prison system, they treat everyone the same way. They treat them like animals. They aren't treated in a way that rehabilitates them to be better people or to be prepared in the world, and I think that sort of connects to school. 

Students shouldn’t feel like this, and teachers often feel powerless when it comes to assessment. To ease student pushback they rely on the district, state, or national mandate. The “Sorry guys, we have to do this.” So a shift to prioritizing the joy of learning will be a positive shift not only for keeping teachers but for making education something that students find joy and value in. 

Still, despite teacher frustrations and the possible lack of validity of standardization and standardized tests, they are present because there has been a historic problem with equity in education in the United States. This is why Marguerite Herman sees value in standardization. Marguerite has a master’s degree in education, has some experience teaching, and served two terms as a School Board Trustee. And she agrees that there are some downsides to the standards, but she was pretty adamant that they are necessary. 

Marguerite Herman: To standardize things, you lose a lot, but you also have these assurances that again… I use the term bean counter. I don't want to be dismissive of that responsibility - bean counters have to answer themselves to others.

I’ve known Marguerite since I was in Kindergarden - she used to help with religious ed when I was little, and I went to high school with her kids. When she was on the school board, I could always count on her to attend events I put on for my students - author visits or student projects. Marguerite is involved and someone I knew would be well-informed and honest with me about her role on the School Board and about education policy. 

When I told her that teachers are frustrated with standardization and assessments, she acknowledged teacher frustration but defended assessments because they offer quality assurance and a way to make educational funding decisions, even if the standardized assessments are imperfect. 

 Marguerite Herman: You know, with funding comes accountability. And to some extent, people want a number, especially legislators who are not educators. They want to know, what's your competence here, what's whatever you're proficient in. Anytime you index a number, there's just a lot of data that's lost because you're reducing, you're obscuring, a lot of nuance. You don't get any nuance, frankly. It's imperfect, but you need something, and I’m not challenging that. 

Marguerite explains that something is needed to ensure that all students are benefiting from their public education. And her job as a Trustee on the School Board was to ensure that. 

Marguerite Herman: Well, once again, the statute kind of lays it out. At the school board, we are elected as trustees, and let me just dwell a moment on the word trustee, which is that you have undivided loyalty to a beneficiary. That word was picked. It's not like a delegate and something like a representative. You don't represent a sub constituency. You represent every child in this district - they are the beneficiaries. So everything you do, you should have in your mind, “I am using all the possessions, the assets of our district, to provide for the educational benefit of every child.” 

I want to pause on this definition for a moment because there has been some divisiveness on school boards across the country. Marguerite’s definition is succinct -  Trustees serve their beneficiaries, so Board Members serve kids. This means the tribalism that has moved into school boards across the country should get left at the door. School boards serve students and no one else. And when I say students, I mean all students across the religious, racial, sexual, gendered, intellectual, and political spectrums. This is no small feat to serve such a diverse spectrum of students, but that should be the goal despite what interest groups think or who is in the capital. And this is why Marguerite is adamant that even if our current system is imperfect, we need something.

I agree, we need something, but I don’t think what we have currently is that something. And Marguerite explains that the data  that the legislators  want don’t come from what a teacher sees. 

Marguerite Herman: The feds want their numbers, and the legislature wants its numbers. “This is the teacher’s honest opinion of the learning that went on” and said, “Yeah, that's fine. But you know, show me the test score, show me the performance I want to see”. And so, you know, we dance to a lot of different bean counters.

 So the people that want to track progress, as Mark pointed out earlier in this episode and Marguerite reiterates here, don’t necessarily want to hear what a teacher has to say about a student’s success - even though a teacher is an expert and is highly aware of their students’ capabilities. And even though, as we heard Mark explain earlier, a student’s gpa, made up of teacher grades, is often a better indicator of a student’s future success than the results of a standardized assessment. But teachers aren’t trusted. The feds, the legislature, whoever it is that is running quality assurance wants an easily read progress report that covers a few content areas. 

Remember the idealism about the purpose of education from last episode - it often fizzles at the feet of a standardized structure that takes the word of a test over that of a teacher, the human who actually knows the kid. Idealism and authentic learning and genuine human growth are harder to measure than the few content areas that can be measured on a bubble sheet. Still,  I know Marguerite is right - the assessments and the standards are a way to document, in an easily measurable way, that an effort is being made to assure an equitable education for all. That does not mean the way we assess nor the assessments themselves are valid, good for kids, or good for teachers.

So let’s change them! Let’s make our purpose of education, our assessments, our measurements good for kids and good for teachers! Right? It should be easy! We know that kids want to feel like what they do matters, that they want curriculums that are more individualized. Right? So we need to talk with someone who understands how these things work, and how changes could be made to the current system.

Here’s Chris Rothfuss. Chris has been a college professor, he has run a college summer program for high school students, and he is the father of kids in the public school system. He is also the Senate Minority Floor Leader in the Wyoming State Senate and a member of the Joint Education Committee. Chris was one of two Wyoming legislators to get back to me, and the only one who agreed to meet with me. 

Chris Rothfuss: The intent of that Accountability Act, as it ended up looking, was to figure out which districts and specifically which schools were struggling, and then provide them with the resources, a system of supports, to build them up and make them better. 

The Wyoming Accountability in Education Act was adopted in 2013. It took over federal accountability requirements established by the No Child Left Behind Act and preceded by the Every Student Succeeds Act or ESSA. ESSA requires states to give annual statewide tests in reading/language arts and math to every student in third through eighth grade and once when they are in high school, and in science at least once in each of grades 3-5, 6-9, and 10-12. So the Wyoming Accountability Act, through the Legislature and Wyoming Department of Education, interprets federal requirements and sets goals for student and school achievement. So what assessments are used, how students are assessed, and how many assessments are given beyond the federal requirement is dictated by the state. And Chris acknowledges that there might be an issue with assessments. 

Chris Rothfuss: We may be overtesting. If there were a way that we could do sampled testing if we could be a little more thoughtful about how we're doing it, if we're not using it as a direct educational instrument, then we don't need every student tested, we really just need a statistical representative sample. 

But at this point, testing for a statistical representative sample is not how assessments are being used. Federally we have to test every student in most grades at least once a year, but many students are tested much more than this. Even so, I like the idea of shifting to a statistical representation especially if it means less tests. Statistical representative sample testing is already used at the federal level by the National Center for Educational Statistics - an entity of the US Department of Education. The National Assessment of Educational Progress or NAEP tests, also known as the Nation's Report Card, are given every two years to randomly selected fourth and eighth graders to test English and Math. So we already have a model for using these statistical representative sample tests, and it might be worth seriously considering how to do this - to quit overtesting. Chris calls the amount of tests part of the unintended consequences of standardization. 

Chris Rothfuss: So we in Wyoming adopted some world class standards. The unintended consequence, though, as you set that as your mission, teach all of these students all of these standards, is that you've only got so much time in a day. And you've got more standards than you're capable of teaching in a school year. So when that becomes your priority, and you know, you're going to be tested on your knowledge of those standards, and you know, you're expected to improve your knowledge of those standards. As you're thinking through our well, what are we going to do with each of our days, you don't think head to the mountains?

I think about heading to the mountains on a daily basis, but that doesn’t mean we get to go to them. These unintended consequences of standards and assessments are a reality. The individualization of instruction and the exploration that teachers talked about last episode are often a casualty of an overwhelming amount of standards that must be covered. But a move towards individualization, and less emphasis on standardized assessments is possible. But it will require a legislature that is informed and understands what adjustments should be made in education.

Chris Rothfuss: I don't think there's necessarily a misconception that the folks that are making decisions about education, don't understand education. That's regrettably probably accurate.

Chris points out that many of the people with the power to make policy decisions about education think they are qualified to make decisions about education because they once went through the education system. Many of these people want to run education like a business, like a factory. They use words like stakeholders and incentivize, and they want annual progress reports. These are people that don’t necessarily acknowledge or make decisions about education based on best practices.

Chris Rothfuss: I spent the first I don't know how many years of my time in the legislature trying to ensure that our Wyoming education model did not utilize that pay for teacher performance. Because the literature makes it very clear that that is the wrong approach. Best Practices make it very clear that that's the wrong approach. But policymakers so often choose that approach because they don't take the time to really understand why it's an awful approach. 

Folks like legislators disregarding best practice or research-based practice is a foundational aspect of why teachers are leaving education. Teachers are experts in their field, but education has a tourist problem. You know, those people who are close enough to education to feel like they are a part of the system, but the actual educators, the educational locals if you will, don’t see it the same way. 

And  teachers are tired of being dismissed or treated like they aren’t experts. The educational tourists assume that their time as students makes them an expert in education - policy is put into motion by folks who aren’t informed enough about education to be making decisions. 

This is so frustrating as an educator. Nothing irritates me more than a non-educator, upon finding out I’m a teacher, starts telling me how I should do things. It’s almost as bad as sitting next to an arm-chair quarterback trying to explain how Josh Allen should be throwing the ball differently. 

Chris is aware of this frustration of having unqualified people making decisions about education, and he is at a loss as well.

Chris Rothfuss: Education is certainly not a business. But at the same time, imagine you were a business and you were hiring for the job. Instead of electing for the job, you would immediately eliminate the entire slate. And this would be true of so many of the things so many of the positions, so many elected officials. If it were a list of applicants and you were the hiring officer, you’d just be like not qualified, not qualified, not qualified. How did we get to the point where our elected officials And the folks that we put in charge could never even get a job at the institution they're being put in charge of.

Think about that. Many of the people in positions to make policy decisions about education do not have the qualifications to be hired within the education system. Why do we accept this? 

When the people in charge of the institution aren’t involved in the institution, they aren’t informed enough to be making decisions that are in the best interest of those people, the students and teachers and administrators, that are in that institution daily. This results in bad policy or policy fueled by animosity towards education or animosity towards any federal institution. 

Chris Rothfuss: We've moved away from having a supportive team of pro-education legislators on the education committee that was struggling and working to do what was best for K-12 public education and really working hard to now over the last few years, embracing this mentality that our public schools are failing, and that somehow, for profit, religious charter schools from out of state will solve our problems, or decreasing funding will solve our problems, or belittling teachers and calling them out. Maybe holding them responsible for tiny actions or making them post everything that they're doing every single day online for parents to nitpick is somehow going to help. We haven't really in the legislature seen anything that I would call a strong positive pro education proposal in probably the last four years,

But what we have seen are policies that attack educators or education as a whole, and this is exhausting as a teacher. For many this adds to the feeling of being disrespected. If our elected officials, people who are seen as community leaders, are attacking education from an uninformed platform, it perpetuates a devaluing of education, thus a devaluing of teachers. And teachers are tired of it, and it’s contributing to why they are quitting.  

Chris Rothfuss: We have some of the least informed policy makers shouting the loudest about their beliefs in education, that they're entirely unqualified to bring forward and promote. And yet, by being the loudest voice in the room and an angry voice, it's just easy to generate a mob mentality of support behind you, and to advance what is effectively bad policy and bad legislation, so we're seeing that. 

And what’s scary is that these poorly informed policymakers are in positions to make policy change, to make lasting impacts on education that will further ostracize teachers, hurt students, and likely make more teachers leave the profession. 

Marguerite gave an example of a policymaker putting a footnote in a budget bill that tried to reject teaching Next Generation Science standards, which, as Marguerite put it

Marguerite Herman: Which is like modern science. We hear about evolution, you know? I think we kind of got that one settled. Let’s question gravity, shall we? Okay. I'm making fun of it, but it was, teachers had no idea it was awful. That's what happens when the legislature, which is politics, let's face it, folks, gets into the curriculum, they do not have the expertise. And then Pollock's politics doesn't always produce the greatest results, let's just say.

Chris had examples of bad bills too.

Chris Rothfuss: Teachers Not in Legislature In fact, when we hear when we when we bring legislation when we got some horrible bill that's coming before us in the legislature, like the horrible bill we had last year that would have required everything that teachers were doing, be posted on the web. Awful bill, bad premise, and certainly awful motivation. As far as I can tell, the only motivation is, you know, we don't know which books to burn if we don't have a full list. 

So that awful bill, we didn't have a lot of teachers come up and provide public testimony against that bill, you think the whole classroom would be full, right up until you realize that no, all of those teachers were teaching at that moment in time, and would have had to take time off from teaching to come provide testimony against that lousy bill. So we don't hear the chorus of voices from the expert educators, we hear the chorus of voices from the folks that have the free time to come and yell at us.

This is a great irony. Teachers who would have strong opinions about such a bill and who would be impacted by the bill, are not able to advocate in person because they are doing their jobs. And at a moment when substitutes are in short supply, leaving school to attend the legislative session is even more difficult.  

Still, teacher advocacy was something that both Chris and Marguerite pointed to in terms of making a difference in policy. Policy includes curriculum choices and assessment choices. But for a teacher to speak up about assessment or curriculum requires a level of vulnerability that many teachers don’t feel comfortable with. 

Chris Rothfuss: Well, it's certainly understandable that when the teaching community has its strong supportive views for diversity of educational materials that are and that view is effectively contrary to a school board that again, is usually not expert, or particularly proficient in pedagogy or or education. It's going to be disconcerting for the teachers to step up and advocate because again, they're in fear for the protection and preservation of their job, and it's a flaw with our system. 

I have felt this constantly over the last eight months as I’ve interviewed folks, researched, written, and produced this podcast. I don’t know who I might offend or upset - Wyoming has a mighty small population And I don’t know what impact this series could have on my job. It’s a risk, but dammit, I’m tired of seeing teachers at the end of their tethers. I’m tired of being a teacher at the end of my tether. Something has to change. We need to fix this. 

We need to listen to the experts, to teachers who know what they’re doing, who know what good assessment looks like, who know what engagement looks like, who know the power of relationships, and who know that teachers are stretched thin. And Chris says, teacher voices could make an impact. 

Chris Rothfuss: And public testimony does make a difference. And believe me if those 250 educators were able to show up and weren't obligated to be teaching at that point in time. That'd be very compelling.

Beyond speaking up in legislative sessions, part of the solution to retaining teachers, might require some reflection on the roles of everyone in the multivariate universe of education.

So my question to both Chris and Marguerite was if teachers should have more of a role on school boards. I asked this because many teachers point to the reality that school boards are made up of non-teachers. Not many other professional boards are run by people outside of the particular field.

Marguerite was adamant that teachers should not be on school boards - she explained that’s not how the statute is written. And Chris worked through the question in a very diplomatic manner, but he acknowledges a problem with people getting on school boards who are there for the wrong reasons. 

Chris Rothfuss: This gets back to the question of who should govern whom and how. You'll have some people on an average school board, typical school board, that know something about education, hopefully. And then you've got people that are just mad about education. And then you've got people that are pointedly trying to slant education towards specific interest groups interests, that might be fully counter to K-12.

Chris sees value in teacher expertise, but like Marguerite, he points to the possible conflict of interest with having teachers on the board.  

Chris Rothfuss: It is hard to have someone on a governing body that is in the role that the body is governing as a voting member, although that can be dealt with, you can have some votes that they're there for, like the policy decisions they are included in, but maybe not the personnel decisions, there's a lot of possibilities there. So I'm one that certainly is concerned that we do not have anywhere near enough expertise on our school boards. There's no obligations for qualifications. So a lot of the problems we have stem from that lack of expertise. And ideally you want to balance. 

Having some balance is a step towards a system that will retain teachers. In order to keep teachers in education, it will be important that teachers have a voice in education policy and decision making. Teachers shouldn’t be a scapegoat when things go wrong, nor should they be excluded or put in positions where they exclude themselves from decision making positions because they fear retaliation or because they are so busy that they can’t make room for something else. 

We need to reimagine and consider the roles of everyone tied to the education process because right now, the teachers working with kids and engaging in the education process are often left out of the conversation. Dylan Bear, a teacher we heard from a few episodes ago, had the best analogy for how we should think about everyone’s role in education. 

Dylan Bear: Imagine, a fence, you know, like a round pen for a horse. The respect has to come from all angles for someone to learn. And you have to have the community showing respect of the education system, you have to have parents showing respect, you have to have the students show respect to the teacher showing respect for that. And so this ring of respect has to be there, of the education system. Or else if one of those falls out, like have a parent, dad or mom say, I'm not dealing with my kid at school, I call the principals and then once that happened, that kid got out of the pen because now he goes the path of least resistance to leave the education system. 

The key image that Dylan is presenting here is the ring of respect that requires everyone associated with education to have a role, and trusting each other to cover their role. And for Dylan, even though he points to an analogy of a horse pen, he says this could take place anywhere.  

Dylan Bear: And it doesn't have to be four walls and bricks and the fence at the school. I think that's such a weird way to learn. I love going to the mountains and going on trails where now you're vulnerable, and you want people to respect you and trust you. You look at the different environments for education, so different. But yeah, trying to get what needs to change to me is you have to have communities that value teachers that don't want to use that negative language. You have to have kids who value it.

So education has to be a collective of support with and around kids. To gain that support and trust and collectivity we need to have a clear purpose of education - this echoes last episode. Right now, we base the purpose of education on how we evaluate students or how we can cover a tremendous amount of material.

An unintended consequence of having so much material to cover is that education might feel like a grind to students. A grind without a sense of purpose makes it difficult for students to care. So to shift what is happening in the classroom and to create a structure in which roles are clear and supportive of one another in education, Chris thinks legislators should start by listening to teacher concerns.

Chris Rothfuss: So when we hear from our teachers, what their real concerns are right now, and when they come back to me as a legislator and say, mental health is the problem for both students and teachers. We should listen. And we should adjust because at the end of the day we're not these rulers that are supposed to be at a distance and making proclamations. Our job is to listen and to learn from folks that know what they're talking about. And then try to put in place policies that affect change that enable everyone to do what they want to do and are trying to accomplish. And particularly in the public education system, we have that constitutional obligation to provide this high quality education for all. 

For Chris, the role of legislators is to seek out experts to inform their decisions about policy that will impact those experts. So, for policy about education, legislators ought to speak to educators. And to do so in a way that is welcoming and doesn’t just put more work on teacher plates. Chris also pointed out that to help mental health, which would contribute to keeping teachers, he thinks there should be a push to shift our priorities away from developing workers, which ideally means a shift away from high stakes assessment.  

Chris Rothfuss: Honestly, if our first priority was joy in learning. As job number one, just imagine how much more we would learn. And that's the message that comes if we want to set it at the legislative level, we want to set it at the school district level. It does come from the policy leaders setting what is the mission? And right now our mission is develop workers.

Chris explained that the role of legislators is to set the education mission, which could be seen as a purpose of education. And he thinks, especially at this present moment of teacher attrition and teachers and students both struggling with mental health, that the mission should prioritize the joy of learning. And if that mission is set, evaluative practices and accountability models can be adjusted. This will then dictate how school boards will work to achieve the new mission’s objectives. It’s a top-down shift, but if the top (legislators) consult the bottom (teachers and students) then it’s more of a down-top-down shift? Whatever it is, it might help.

Chris said that he would even be willing to take a drop in proficiency if we have happy kids and happy teachers. 

Chris Rothfuss: My absolute ideal is to heavily prioritize joy in the classroom, and to focus our efforts, our resources, our activities, and our prioritization towards building joy in the classroom, with the expectation that with that joy, you would be addressing mental health issues, both for the teachers and for the students. And I'd love to see where that takes us. And what that means is ratcheting back this prioritization to build robots and the prioritization of score high on tests. And I'll take a 10% less proficient happy group. I will. At the end of the day, they can learn a little more math later. And if they're happy about education, then I think they'll have an opportunity to learn a little more about math later. 

This mission would also shift the roles of us, the collective us, parents, teachers, administrators, legislators, community members, everyone, to not think of our K-12 experience as the only time we should be learning. If there was an assumption that learning was a lifelong process, Chris believes that we might have a cultural shift that results in valuing and enjoying learning, which would have a major impact on how teachers are viewed. 

Chris Rothfuss: We think that you have an education phase in life. We've built a system around the idea that you have an education phase, phase one. Phase two and beyond never get any more education. Avoid, if possible. I would love a system where everyone just kind of keeps going back to school. 

The move towards life-long learners that Chris is proposing would be a conceptual shift, but it could be supported concretely by a move away from overtesting or overemphasis on testing. Because our current system requires testing, this might mean we reimagine what testing looks like all together. Could it be a conversation? Something more authentic than a bubble sheet? Federal regulations have some flexibility there. Either way, the amount of attention given to Summative or End of Course testing is focusing on a product and not the process. Focusing only on the product is not creating a culture that loves learning - it’s kind of the opposite. It’s creating anxiety and pressure around learning. So if we can lessen the stress by drastically cutting back the amount and pressure of assessments, maybe we can focus on process and create a joy of learning. 

So, by shifting priorities away from high stakes testing, we can stop structuring education in a way that prepares only for tests. This might mean loosening the grip on what curriculum can look like or what courses can be offered. For example, I once taught a course at the University of Wyoming called the history of Swing Dancing. We looked at the correlation of historic events and their impact on popular culture. When the class ended, a group of girls continued their final project and created a club on campus called Real Women Real Bodies. This class encouraged students to continue learning beyond the restrictions of the semester. 

When I proposed to create this class for the high school setting in my district, it was declined because it didn’t fit within the Guaranteed and Viable Curriculum. So a shift might allow us to create new, novel courses that might inspire students to continue learning and growing well beyond the course. Such a shift will likely reinvigorate teachers who almost all have unique expertise and would love to incorporate such things into a course. 

So, as Chris pointed out, to adopt a new educational direction, it must start with a shift in mission at the legislative level - hopefully fueled by teacher input. And I think it can happen, especially in a state like Wyoming that wants to be a national leader in education - it even says so in the Wyoming Accountability Act.   So creating a mission that prioritizes the joy of learning by focusing on process over product could happen. 

Then how the decision is implemented should trickle down. Hopefully, this would result in teachers wanting to stay in education. And if all of this happens, if we can make that allegorical ring of respect and support that Dylan mentioned,  just imagine how much better the education will be for our students. Students will ideally feel that joy of learning and feel like what they do in school has purpose because that’s what many of them want from school. 

This is idealistic. But when making changes, we need to strive for idealism and not be guided by fear. Because what we have now is not working. Many people are aware of this and are already taking steps to make changes that will hopefully make education better and help keep teachers in education.

Next episode, we’re going to take a look at what people are doing to help keep teachers in education. This includes Task Forces, Mentoring Programs, Fellowships, and more.

That will be next time on Those Who Can’t Teach Anymore. Thank you for listening. Be sure to subscribe to our podcast, leave a review, and share episodes with everyone you can think of.

This episode was produced by me, Charles Fournier. It was edited by Melodie Edwards. Other editing help came from Noa Greenspan, Sarah-Ann Leverette, and Jennica Fournier. Our theme song is by Julian Saporiti. All other music can be found on our website. A special thanks to Anjel Garcia, Mark Perkins, Shane Atkinson, Jaye Wacker, Jennica Fournier, Marguerite Herman, Chris Rothfuss, and Dylan Bear for taking time to sit down and chat with me. If you are interested in seeing Mark Perkins’ full report, “Teacher Attrition in Wyoming: Factors to Consider” you can find the link in the transcript for this episode and on our instagram page @thosewhocantteachanymore.  This podcast is funded in part by the Fund for Teachers Fellowship.

Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

What’s the purpose of education? If you were to ask 10 different people this question, you may get 10 different answers. Education shouldn’t be this complex, but getting people to come to a consensus on anything right now is a challenge. This can be a problem. If teachers are expected to meet ambiguous goals, it can lead to burnout and frustration.  In this episode, we hear how conflicting values in education may be contributing to teachers’ decisions to leave. 

 Music: 

Theme Song By Julian Saporiti 

“Your Paradigm Dial” by Origami Repetika is licensed under a CC  BY license.  

“Room With a View” by Jahzzar is licensed under a CC BY-SA license. 

“Business Getaway  ” by Scott Holmes Music is licensed under a  CC BY-NC license.

“I Was Different” by Ov Moi Omm is licensed under a CC  BY license. 

 “Sunny Afternoon” by HoliznaCC0 is in the Public Domain.

Transcript:

In the spring of 2016, Julian Saporiti, the guy that made the theme song for this podcast, asked me if I wanted to help him teach a summer road trip class for the University of Wyoming. It was easy to say yes, and this class ended up being one of the most influential educational experiences that I’ve ever had. 

Many of our students felt the same way. One of them, Sam Mallory, even talked about it in his graduation speech. 

Sam Mallory: Two years ago about this time of year, I was officially enrolled in the most influential course in my college experience

And what made this class so significant likely had to do with the fact that we valued experience over product, which is a pretty non-traditional approach to a college course..

Our Syllabus included the following: 

• Introductions: Julian Saporiti -  Instructor /Guitarist. Charles Fournier Advisor/ Contemplation Mentor

• Music: Songs and lyrics for sing-alongs

• Assignments: This list included items like helping a stranger, keeping a journal, and dancing in the moonlight

• Safety Measures: Information about bear country, how to react if lost, and how to create a cross-draft in your vehicle to fart rather than holding it in and risking feeling sick 

• Traveling Recommendations for Women: A list focused on hygiene and affirmations created by wife, Jennie, who is a brilliant traveler but opted to stay home to plan for classes and manage our new ornery dog

• Lastly: “Be Amazed. Be Present.”

We set out for two weeks across Wyoming, Idaho, and Montana. We danced to music by firelight in the Tetons under the Milky Way. I taught a pair of girls how to build a fire and when they asked what I thought about feminism, we read parts of The Vagina Monologues while lighting things on fire- one of those girls just wrote an award-winning screenplay. We observed the wildlife of national parks and saw some animals as well. 

I love this model for education. A kind of structure of non-structure that gives students a chance to grow autonomy and learn on the go. It was an experience, and the students were, if not changed, greatly impacted by that course. Julian and I were too. 

I tried to apply some of the elements of this course to my high school classes the next school year. I wanted kids to sit around a fire and have conversations, to worry less about grades or tests, and to focus on collaborative experiences that result in knowledge acquisition. 

Then the school year started. My fire pit idea was struck down, and the weight of standardized assessments, and everything else settled into place. My idealism was smothered by bureaucratic reality. There’s nothing quite like having your grand plan for the new school year get deflated by October. And this brings me to a question that I have continuously returned to as a teacher when this happens - What’s the point of education? Why are we here?

The answer is ambiguous, and that uncertainty has led to conflict and confusion in education. So on the show today, we will ask “What’s the purpose of education?” Because if we can’t come to a consensus, teachers will continue to be expected to meet all of the competing thoughts about for what education is for. This is frustrating and adds to the stress and burnout that is leading teachers to find careers that might have more clearly defined parameters. 

This is Those Who Can’t Teach Anymore, a 7-part podcast series exploring why teachers are leaving education and what can be done to stop the exodus. I’m Charles Fournier.

Here is part 4: “Why Are We Here?”

Why we educate kids seems like it should be an easily answered question. But in my conversations with all levels of people involved in and around education, there wasn’t a clear consistent answer: 

Gary Martin:We have to work on their cognitive skills, you know, the critical thinking.

Christy Chadwick: I think we have this idea that the purpose of education is to raise the next generation. But now, it sort of feels like a control factor. It feels like we're just controlling society through education.  

Caskey Russell: Fostering creativity in the students, critical thinking, removing kind of cultural blind spots, providing kind of an equal access all across the board, regardless of class race, getting an idea of community, American community as the kind of multicultural tapestry.

Lindsey Freeman: I mean, that's a big part of it is workforce development. But just citizens, I mean, our government or politicians, like everything that our world needs to continue starts in the classroom. 

Jaye Wacker: Oh, my gosh, to protect a democratic republic. You know, pure and simple. We have to be educated, we have to be able to see through the bullshit, you know. 

Jennica Fournier: I thought my role was to teach students about chemistry and biology. But I think sometimes there's the expectation that you're babysitting them. or that you're keeping them safe. 

Shane Atkinson: I really tried to make it about the human connection. 

Elizabeth Smith: The purpose of education is to train our people to be worker bees, and to have the skills necessary to devote their entire lives towards the betterment of a few elite versus the greater good of all. 

It’s a lot, and that can be a problem. And there is a split between the ideal for what education is for and the reality that often stifles idealism. What we do know is that an educational system is inherently political because it reflects a country’s values. But what is valued in the US is continuously evolving and hard to pin down. 

Education started in the Americas as a way to teach kids how to be a part of their community. Then it started to shift with colonization. Education went from being morality focused - teaching literacy so that people could read the Bible. To Democracy and assimilation focused - forcing people to fit a standard ideal while emphasizing being an active citizen. To worker focused - creating industrialized systems to set people up to enter the workforce. To academic and standards focused - standardizing curriculum with the intent to compete on the global scale. 

But now, as demonstrated by the crazy political climate, what we value as a country is unclear, so what education should look like is also unclear.  

This lack of clarity is landing at the feet of teachers. And having a job with no clear and agreed upon objective is frustrating. Should teachers be focused on standardized tests, on learning, on mental health, on social health, on morality, on graduation rates? It’s not clear.

But what is clear, is that having more of a shared value system would be valuable. A shared vision of what education is for. This would give teachers a clear objective that does not leave room for the petty arguments that are at the heart of so many educational dilemmas that are driving teachers out. 

I think we can get there. I spoke with people from all over the political spectrum for this podcast, and I am certain that we can get to a shared set of values.  

Juan Laden: Fundamentally, we need to make available within our teaching environment the understanding of other people and the possibilities for children to do so many things.

Juan Laden sat down with me at the Lander Bake Shop. I had set up a microphone and taped up a sign with two questions: Why are teachers leaving Education? And What is the Purpose of Education? Because I don’t want to hassle folks, I sat quietly with my dirty chai and waited for people to come to me. Juan sidled over in a dutch cap, still chewing on a pastry, and starting answering questions before he even sat down. 

Juan Laden: I think they're good teachers, and that's why they're leaving. And so that's, are you recording this? Good, good?

Juan is a lot of things. He has never been a public school teacher, but he was an experiential climbing instructor for the National Outdoor Leadership School or NOLS, he has traveled around and lived in Europe, he is knowledgeable in many things including plumbing and photography, and he knows a lot about pedagogy, this is a word educators use to talk about the method or practice of teaching:

Juan Laden: And basically, I think the concept in America of education is filling a receptacle, and that is not what it's about. 

What Juan is referring to is also called the banking method - the idea is that a student’s educational experience is to get packed full of information, and that’s it. The banking method is not a popular pedagogy because it lacks a need for critical thinking and creativity and disregards the fact that students come to school already possessing knowledge. Many folks I spoke with push against this focus of education - to pack kids full of information. Juan agrees, and he explained that he thinks education should feel more like caving. 

Juan Laden:  I'm a caver and talk about exploration. Most people don't like the idea of caving. I tell them they just had a difficult birth and never got over it. But you know, it's like, what a trip. You're exploring to the max. When you find a new cave…the dream of all cavers is to find the big, going cave, like, “Wow, there's a hole and you go in there, and it goes, and it goes, and there's more.” The idea that you're actually going where no one's been before, and that's what exploration is. It is a very deep drive in all humans to start out with - that curiosity, that emotional need to explore is driven by curiosity.

Exploration was a tenet of that Road Trip class, and something I wish my high school classroom had more of now. We gave the students the freedom to choose where they wanted to go and how they wanted to get there. This is how we ended up at a hot spring called Chicken Soup in Idaho. Idaho wasn’t even in our original plan. 

The desire to explore was also an ideal across many of my conversations with teachers about what education is for - to help students jump into a metaphorical or literal cave. But the reality of teaching in a public school setting is that this ability to delve into curiosity is often devalued by what is required in the curriculum, community pressures, or a lack of resources. And the breadth of information that needs to be covered in a curriculum sometimes does not allow for depth or the chance for student exploration. 

I know of several projects that students would learn from and enjoy that were dead on arrival because they did not meet a curricular requirement or wouldn’t work for a specific standardized assessment. Such limits can take away from the joy of teaching and we’ve already seen that it can lead to teachers quitting. 

Exploration is something worth valuing, but based on how our system is currently structured, it isn’t valued enough. 

To get another idea about this question, we’re going to take a step back and start with what an educational jack-of-all-trades says about the purpose of education.

I met up with Colby Gull at his office. Colby is the Managing Director for the trustees education initiative in the College of Education at the University of Wyoming. I asked him what the purpose of education is:

Colby Gull: That is too complex of a question for your podcast, probably. 

This shouldn’t be the case. To me, this is part of the problem. I wish education could be simpler. For instance, for their final project during the road trip class, a pair of students designed and printed a t-shirt for the class. And they created a slogan for each person in the course. Mine read “Just trying to teach people not to be assholes.” And you know, that sums up my pedagogy pretty well. 

But Colby’s right. Our country’s current view of education is very complex. We can’t easily say that education should be for exploration like Juan says, or that education is trying to teach people not to be assholes like my t-shirt motto says. And our system might be too complex. We might be trying to layer in too much. 

And Colby, who was a teacher, principal, and superintendent, is aware of that. Here he is again with another answer that tries to better address the complexities for what he sees as the purpose of education:

Colby Gull: I think we have to help our students to gain some basic knowledge, some basic skills around academic areas. We want them to understand how to read and to ask good questions. And we want them to understand some mathematical things and solve problems. But we also want to give them opportunities to explore new ideas and new ways of thinking about things and to analyze their own thinking, and , ”Why is my opinion that? Maybe it should be something else?” But I think the purpose of all of that is to help students to be prepared to go out and reach their potential, and to do great things and challenge thinking and make things better for themselves and for the people around them.

Colby’s answers show his expertise. He is a guy that spends his life thinking about education and helping to train and retain teachers, and through all of his roles, he has had to deal with the bureaucracy and politics of education more intimately than most teachers ever do. What a teacher might value does not include the political nature of education

And this is where the conflict comes in. Something like the Road Trip Class, is my ideal education structure because it also reflects my values. But that does not work in public education. Teacher values and idealism often collapse against the layers of the education system’s bureaucracy. And it’s disheartening. So we end up with statements like Colby’s second answer. 

It covers a lot but it is also pretty generalized. It sounds like an institutional response to the question, or a mission statement - their purpose of education proclamation. To compare, here is the mission statement from the United States Department of education: 

“The United States Department of Education’s  mission is to promote student achievement and preparation for global competitiveness by fostering educational excellence and ensuring equal access.”

And here are a few more mission statements to compare to from districts across the country. Try to guess where they’re from:

“We ensure equitable access to a transformative educational experience grounded in the assets of our students, staff, and community.”

Here’s Another:

“To ensure high levels of learning for all students. To continuously develop our capacity to function as a collaborative culture.” 

One more:

“Our commitment is to prepare each student to become a career and college ready citizen. We will partner with families and the community to provide an engaging and challenging education in a safe and positive environment.”

Each of these mission statements, from the US Department of Education to districts from three different time zones across the US have similar and vague declarations. They feel like a fortune - “You are about to rediscover a lost connection to your past.” 

I get why the mission statements are vague. They are meant for a diverse population, and each family within that population should be able to see some value in these mission statements because public education is for everyone. 

But this is also where we can run into problems. The way I read “preparing each student to become a career and college ready citizen” is unique from what the administration, or students, or parents, or even other teachers may think. Do I think a person needs to avoid spaghetti straps to be a productive citizen? Not really, but I do think knowing how to work towards and meet a deadline would help.

So why does a vague purpose of education lead to teachers leaving the profession? Because many educators are finding that their interpretation of these missions and goals are in conflict with those of the administration, school board, or community. Values are not aligning. Which creates stress and sometimes forces a choice, do what they believe in and create conflict, or compromise their values and feel miserable.  

Every now and then there are times when idealism aligns within the classroom, which can create amazing moments. 

For Allison Lash, who was an art teacher in New York City that we heard from last episode, building community and learning in her mind require providing students with new experiences and opportunities.

Allison Lash: That's the kind of thing that I love bringing to kids like these little snippets and experiences that they might not get in the classroom. 

When her second graders were learning about rocks and gemstones from books, Allison organized a field trip to the Museum of Natural History because she knew they had an amazing collection.

Allison Lash: And I took all the kids out of the Bronx and into Manhattan. And as we're and I rev them up, like for the field trip, and I told them we're leaving the Bronx, we're leaving the Bronx because so many of them have never left the Bronx are there. So many of them never left like many of them lived in the projects, the building. And so they only traveled from the building to school a block away in the supermarket like this. These like four streets, basically. And the kids when we were driving over the water and on the bridge to get to Manhattan, they were all screaming when they said we're leaving the Bronx. So I love, I love being able to do that.

The ability to leave the space of the school often creates authentic learning experiences for students. These are experiences that connect students to their communities, which is a common value presented in school district mission statements. But there are limiting factors to leaving the space of the school. This is where idealism can be deflated because much of the modern purpose of education is now tied to keeping kids safe. This is why we practice having lockdowns. 

Lauren Schumacher spoke to me about how fear and wanting to keep kids safe impacts how we view the purpose of education.

Lauren Schumacher: And I think, sadly, with all the violence, you know, the school shootings situations, continue to make our country want to fence our buildings in and put doorbells on and all that which I understand. But in the same breath, we need to be removing them from the fences and getting them out into communities. I think that is more of the direction we need to move education.

I was really excited to talk to Lauren. I set up an interview station outside next to the Valley Bookstore in Jackson Hole, Wyoming. I didn’t meet Lauren first, I met her whole family. Her daughter saw my signs about teachers leaving and said, “My mom is going to want to talk to you” before she ran back from the direction she came to get her mom. 

Lauren was on vacation with her family. She is an administrator in Florida, and she had previously taught in both Missouri and Florida, but everything she talked about matched what teachers in my home state brought up.

In terms of the purpose of education, Lauren echoes the idea of wanting more experiential learning that gets kids into their communities.

Lauren Schumacher: I think we need to step away from the traditional brick and mortar, and get our kids out and learning. 

But, as Lauren pointed out earlier, with threats of violence in schools, education might be moving the other direction.

I hate this. We desperately need to be moving towards mobility and freedom and exploration - not away from it. When I reflect on that road trip class, there were elements of risk - absolutely - but we didn’t structure our educational experience around fear. Nor did threats feel looming like they do in modern education. 

When I answer my classroom door, I always have a pen in hand - it’s the sharpest object in my room, and I look through the window to check who is at my door, and what is in their hands before I let them in. Every time I answer the door, I play through a scenario of an active shooter. Our doors stay locked and shut because the statistics show that locked and shut doors save lives, and we value student lives. But this is the setting in which we are trying to teach exploration and wonder. It’s hard to have idealistic values and believe the purpose of education is for exploration in a locked room. So I have to return to the question, “What is the purpose of education?” Because if it’s to protect kids from violence and shootings, this is a heavy burden to ask teachers to carry. And the weight of it is becoming too much for many educators.

Such expectations make teachers feel like their job descriptions have shifted. And this is where more complexity comes in. Rather than being facilitators of learning, critical thinking, and exploration, teachers are having to do any number of things.

Ron Ruckman: I think that's the awesome part of teaching is that you get to be all those things, you know, but it puts a huge mental drain on teachers. 

This is Ron Ruckman, we heard a little bit from him in the second episode. Ron taught for 23 years and quit to run his construction business that he has with a friend. A business that does not require Ron to have to engage with much other than completing projects. Part of why Ron left had to do with a purpose of education that required too much from him.

Ron Ruckman:That's the problem. I think that for me that that has finally just kind of wore me out. The needs of kids beyond way beyond science, just the stuff I teach my subject matter. I do so much more. I spend so much time and it seems like I've spent more and more time as my teaching career has gone on. Kids seem to be a lot more needy of that kind of attention, and then we have one counselor. She can only do so much. She's got a line at her office most days, and it's like, you just have to wear all those hats to be the teacher, be the counselor, be the be mom and dad. That's the reality for some kids.

Ron recognizes that these kids need more than content. Mental health matters, even more so with the pandemic. In 2021, the CDC reported that nearly half of teenagers reported feeling sad or hopeless over the last year, and schools are a great resource for students who are struggling, but most school counselors are constantly busy because they have so many students needing help. Some of that overflow lands on teachers. For some teachers, who are not qualified or professional counselors, this is too emotionally taxing. So is this the purpose of education? To support the mental health of students? If it is, how does this match the structure of our education system? 

For Ron, he knows students need support, and he also believes that education needs to focus on things that are relevant to his content. 

 Ron Ruckman: It's important that we keep teaching critical thinking.

My district recently held a professional development day where local business people explained what they want our schools to prepare students for. One of the things they pointed to was the ability to think critically and problem solve. Another was the ability to value and communicate with other people. To actively engage in a civilized manner and recognize not everyone shares the same perspective. 

Ron Ruckman: If you're not willing to feel cognitive dissonance, if you're not willing to feel that uncomfortable feeling of what you thought, and then realizing that maybe that wasn't the truth. I had an uncle that always taught me you can learn something from everybody. And that includes every little fifth grader that I've ever had come through my room. Every single person I meet, I learned something from. That's what a teacher should be doing is teaching kids that you need to make your own opinion, but you need to consider all the data and all the opinions of others and put it all together and then make your own educated opinion.

Ron values critical thinkers that have a growth mindset. He does not want learning to stop for people once they graduate. For Ron, if the purpose of education is to grow an active and informed citizenry, which harkens back to what the founding fathers wanted of education, then learning should be lifelong. 

Ron Ruckman: It's okay to change what you believe in. When you consider more evidence, you know, and as you go through life, you learn more things and you see more things and, you know, and that I think a lot of people don't like that. We can't just be stuck in one way of thinking all of our life, otherwise, you're just gonna be very unhappy.

So through science, Ron was helping students think critically and communicate with one another and form opinions all while addressing students’ other needs - which ended up wearing him out by the time he left his job. For Ron, the purpose of education isn’t finite,  and it became too much for him to continue. 

One last thing about Ron. When considering the purpose of education, there is some speculation that teachers are using education as a place to spew a political agenda. Ron is adamant that this is incorrect.

Ron Ruckman: Well, and that's part of the part of my, just kind of my disgust with the public right now is the image of teachers being, you know, we're out there to indoctrinate kids or whatever that bullshit is. And I'm sorry to use that word, but that it is, it's bullshit. That one will get me fired up more than anything else, you know, we're there to just teach them about the subjects that, you know, that we're in, you know, and we're not out there to indoctrinate.

No teacher that I spoke with or know of is actively trying to indoctrinate students. That is not the purpose of education in their minds. Some teachers even joked that they wished they could indoctrinate students - then maybe students would do their homework and turn things in on time. But this fear of indoctrination from non-educators is a problem, making it more difficult to define the purpose of education simply.

In my ideal for education, I get to act as a facilitator of curiosity. I help students explore their interests by guiding them towards relevant resources, and I feel like it’s my job to not be offended. I want students to be able to ask honest questions about whatever they’re interested in. And at no point will I stop a curious student and say, “I’m sorry, you cannot address that in this room. This room is for English content only.” or “That does not fit within our mission statement.” 

I want to be able to stray from content in my classroom, but it does not match a view of education that is content specific and easily measured. There seems to be a fear that anything outside of a content area is indoctrination or a deviant plot to warp the minds of children - muwahahaha. It’s asinine and disregards the fact that expecting teachers to only teach content and nothing more is missing a big part of what education is.

Ron Ruckman: I think the expectation, honestly, is that that's all you do is teach your subject, and that's all you should ever, you know, and what they don't realize is, these kids need so much more. And I think there's so much more on our plate as a teacher than what the public thinks is there or even expects us to do, but we don't have a choice. We, you know, we would have, you know, we'd have no, we'd have utter chaos. You know, if we didn't wear all those hats

Going into a classroom and only trying to teach content, while addressing nothing else, rarely works. This is why guest speakers sometimes flounder - they assume their expertise is enough to engage students - and they get eaten alive.

But the focus on content can’t be dismissed. Standards and standardized assessments are a constant quality of modern education. Is this what we value? Content that will be assessed on a standardized assessment? In reality, assessments are the main measurable expectations that are placed onto schools. And for many teachers, if the purpose of education is to only have students do well on a test, then that is enough of a reason to quit teaching.

Teachers are having to balance teaching content that students will be tested on with their values and ideas about the social, emotional or cultural things that are harder to measure but necessary for a well-functioning classroom. And having to be responsible for a list of ambiguous immeasurables is draining and pushing teachers out.

Ron Ruckman: I mean, now we are basically caretakers of those kids. 

We met Rachael Esh last episode, she left teaching to write children's books, and she felt like the foundation of her teaching experience was based on relationships: 

Rachaeel Esh: And even when you learn when you go into teaching, you know this. The number one thing they teach you is relationships, build relationships, don't worry about the content until you have the relationships because we know they're not going to listen to you if they don't respect you or care about you to get that other information. So you've got to build that. You've got to have your expectations.The purpose of education, I mean, it's just, it's all encompassing. Raising a kid takes a community and I feel like teachers are a big part of that community.

Rachael wants to foster kindness and curiosity and empathy. This sounds like it would fit the tenets from the mission statements from earlier, but what stands out to me is her point that content is secondary. Many teachers recognize that without a relationship, it’s very difficult to teach any sort of content. Relationships are part of what made that road trip class so successful. Relationships are what those guest speakers are lacking. I’ve even heard kids specifically say, they will refuse to do work or try to learn from a teacher they don’t like. So to get to content, some of these other things are having to be addressed, which adds to what teachers are already doing and are hard to measure or track.

There are also a few differing views on what makes up content. Several teachers drew a line between content tied to learning and exploration and content for standardized assessments. 

Rachael Esh: So just being like, hey, good job on all your hard work. We're number one for our scores again, and it's like, I don't care. And so if that's what we're celebrating, I don't really want to work here. Because that's not what's important to me. And so like, how about we celebrate this the teacher that tried a new lesson and fell on their face? Like Good job family? Because that's what we teach our kids. But do we let our teachers fail? No. So I just don't agree with it.

Rachael wanted to teach in a space that allowed for teachers to experiment in their classrooms. To try things and fail, but she felt like the test scores were what her district valued. They prioritized high scores over experiences and what Rachael thought of as authentic learning. 

I understand this. Getting a taste of a structure like the road trip class that allowed for authentic learning because it was exploration based makes it really hard to go back to prioritizing high scores.

Rachael Esh:  I cannot stand another freakin meeting talking about. But does the standard say that? What does modeling mean? What does this mean? I don't care. I'm sorry, I don't need to break down the exact definition of a word in order to teach the general concept. And I am going to make time to teach what these kids really need to know in life, which is not that.

The focus on standards hasn’t always been the norm. As I said earlier, education has shifted its focus as our country's values have shifted. 

And part of the confusion could have to do with modern education holding onto outdated values for   public education. Values that don’t match a modern world or modern ideals. Though that may be true, teachers are still having to work in this environment that lacks clear objectives. This is stressful. 

We often hear, just do what’s best for kids when it feels like bureaucracy is getting heavy. But what I think is best for kids might include calling them by their chosen name, holding them accountable for their actions, pushing them to reach high expectations, or providing them with various pieces of text that give unique perspectives. 

These might sound great, but for each of the examples I just listed, I have had a situation where a parent, student, administrator, or fellow teacher disagreed with me to the point that we needed to have a meeting about our perspectives. And the reality is, I can’t say who is right or wrong based on our educational system, there’s no clear answer. For many teachers, having to defend why, in their professional opinion, their view of education is valid, is just not worth it. And being accosted by parents or administrators or school boards gets old really quickly.

Ron  talked about the lasting impact of these conflicts:

Ron Ruckman: Yeah, it's scary to me still, I mean, parents, parents, I, when I have parents get in my face, I hate it even now. And most of the time, and well, like, I would say, 99% of the time parent goes away happy. And I sit there and dwell on it for the next five days, you know, and it totally wrecks my whole mental state for a long time. You know, and I just don't think parents realize, you know, they come in, and they're fired up, because they hear one story from their kid, and then they come in, and they're all fired up, and they leave and they're, they're fine. But I've, you know, it's, it's almost like, you know, you're almost traumatized by it for a little bit, you know, and that I know, that sounds dumb, but that, that is something that just kind of happens, you know, and I feel like because I like to make everybody I'm kind of a people pleaser, you know, I like everybody to be happy with me all the time.  

Every teacher I know has a getting chewed out story - when a parent cornered and then screamed at them in their own classroom or demanded retribution because they refused to believe their child would ever lie to them so the teacher must be lying. These moments leave scars And this shows that even if there isn’t a shared view for the purpose of education, there might be a consensus that devalues teachers making it acceptable to treat them this way. 

And when it comes to making changes to keep teachers, I don’t know what the answer is. But I know that valuing teachers and education would help. Because I do know that a lot of teachers that left education love teaching, but many of them didn’t feel like they or their work were valued. 

I also know that education is for students. So to identify what the purpose of education should be, it might be worth asking  students what they need? What do they value?

Jonah Zeimens: I feel like education has lost real world application in a lot of things. 

This is Jonah Zeimans. Jonah was a student of mine a few years ago. He took my college level English course, and we’ve stayed in contact since. Jonah is currently going to college to become an Ag teacher. He was a high achieving student. He was involved with FFA at a national level. He even spoke at graduation. And with all of these accolades, he still wishes his high school experience could have been a little different. 

Jonah Zeimens: I wish it was a lot more individualized. What I don't love about our school system right now is that we're so standardized and trying to get everyone to meet the same requirements every step of the way. And I can understand maybe while students are younger, the importance of that, but once folks start figuring out what they want to do with their life a little bit more, it'd be nice to have a little bit more experimentation there. I think about this a lot going, the ag education, I would have loved to have taken more ag classes while in high school. 

Jonah hit on an issue many teachers talked about in frustration with standards and standardized tests. Students value individualization. With individualization comes exploration and the ability to get excited about their futures. 

Teachers love fostering this work, and if we look back to the mission statements from earlier, individualized instruction meets several of their requirements. But this is not  feasible in our current approach to education. Even if teachers want to create individualized instruction, they often run into the issue of navigating standards, or having time, or managing huge classes.

But what Jonah is saying is an ideal. I would get behind a purpose of education that focused on students’ individual goals, and I know of a lot of teachers that would do the same.. But a few things would have to change to make this approach feasible and not burn teachers out.  Teachers would need smaller class sizes. Building in-depth individualized learning plans for 150 students isn’t practical or healthy. So if we value teacher well-being and individualized learning, education needs funding for more teachers and more facilities so classes can be smaller. That would be a start to reaching a consensus on what education  is for. 

I spoke with another recent graduate about the same issues. Landon Trujillo was a wrestler of mine. I coached with his dad for several years, and when Landon graduated he gave me a picture from state wrestling. Someone caught the moment when Landon melted into my chest right after he won the state championship. The picture frame says family on it. It’s on my desk as I work on this podcast.

Landon didn’t love the structure of school. 

Landon Trujillo: Um, I'm a pretty social person. So I really liked the social aspect. And just a bunch of friends there people to talk to all the time. Some things I didn't like is like, how, by the book, everything is. 90% of teachers teach the same, in my opinion. It's just work for a grade, and then get your grades and that's pretty much it.

I can see why Landon thinks education is about getting a good grade. As a teacher, this is disheartening. When working towards standards is the priority, the things that foster the joy of learning feel like they get pushed aside. Grades become more valuable than experiences or individualized instruction. These are the times when I look back to that road trip class I told you about and think about how far away I am from that wonderfully structured course. From the things I value as a teacher. From being in a setting with a shared purpose - to explore and not be assholes. 

If teachers do not think what they do has purpose, it will be hard to keep them in a job. Part of what gives teachers purpose is autonomy and trust and an ability to explore authentic learning experiences. Things that everyone I spoke with values. But teachers are having to prioritize things that are considered measurable.

Assessments and standards are used as tools of measurement, but the things I and many teachers value are hard to measure. I could not measure the impact that roadtrip class had on students in any tangible way, but I know it had an impact. I can’t measure my relationships, and if I tried, they would feel superficial. This is why some education feels superficial, because it values measurement over authenticity.

And teachers are leaving this system, but our country can keep teachers if we shift our values to what teachers and students already value, which does not include high stakes testing or standardization.

Next time, we will take a look at the impact standardization and high stakes testing have on the classroom, and how this impact plays a role in teachers’ decisions to leave education.

Chris Rothfuss: They switched to a standards oriented approach where they were targeting competency and individual standards as their evaluative structure for student success, as opposed to a grading format. And I think that's a more sophisticated and more thoughtful approach to evaluating educational needs and educational accomplishment.  

That will be next time on Those Who Can’t Teach Anymore. Thank you for listening. Be sure to subscribe to our podcast, leave a review, and share episodes with everyone you can think of.

This episode was produced by me, Charles Fournier. It was edited by Melodie Edwards. Other editing help came from Noa Greenspan, Sarah-Ann Leverette, and Jennica Fournier. Voice Acting by Chris and Haylee Brayton, Britni Shipman, and Ben Zoller. Our theme song is by Julian Saporiti. Road Trip songs were performed  by the Great American Roadtrip class of 2016. All other music can be found on our website. A special thanks to Elizabeth Smith, Juan Laden, Colby Gull, Allison Lash, Lauren Schumacker, Ron Ruckman, Jonah Zeimans, Landon Trujillo, Gary Martin, Caskey Russell, Jaye Wacker, Jennica Fournier, Shane Atkinson, Lindsey Freeman, Christy Chadwick, and Rachael Esh for taking time to sit down and chat with me. If you are interested in hearing more about Rachel Esh and her books, check out our instagram page @thosewhocantteachanymore to see a video of her.  This podcast is funded in part by the Fund for Teachers Fellowship.

Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

The most easily recognized teachers in our culture are on the big screen. So when we think about good teaching, it’s almost impossible not to think of Robin William’s character in Dead Poets Society standing on a desk and inspiring his students. This might be part of the problem. When teaching is associated with unrealistic Hollywood characters, it can create impractical or ridiculous assumptions about what teachers do. In this episode, we hear how the stereotypes of teachers may be contributing to teachers’ decisions to leave education.

Music:

Theme Song By Julian Saporiti

“NPC Theme” by HoliznaCC0 is in the Public Domain.

“Sunny Afternoon” by HoliznaCC0 is in the Public Domain. 

“Infrastructure” by Scott Holmes Music is licensed under a  CC BY-NC license.

“Just a Blip” by Andy G. Cohen is licensed under a CC  BY license.

“Room With a View” by Jahzzar is licensed under a CC BY-SA license.

Movie Clips:

Freedom Writers (Paramount Pictures)

Dead Poets Society (Touchstone Pictures, Walt Disney Studios Motion Pictures)

School of Rock (Paramount Pictures)

Ferris Bueller (Paramount Pictures, United International Pictures)

Transcript: 

Episode 3: “What Would Robin Williams Do?”

There is a picture-day-esqu photo on my parents’ fridge of me sitting on my dad’s lap. I am wearing a tie-dye shirt and my orange hair is in its natural state of an Eddie Munster widows peak. My dad is in a blue button down and has on a tie. My cheeks crowd my eyes, my smile is so big. My dad, who doesn’t always smile for pictures, has a cheeky grin. 

This picture was taken around the same time that my dad squatted down to eye-level with me and said: “When people ask you where you got your red hair, you tell them the milkman. Okay?”

He didn’t make a big deal about telling me this. It was just a directive, and I said okay. I figured, yeah, that makes sense. 

So as adults would come by, ruffle my hair and say things like, “Oh my, what pretty red hair. Where did you get hair like that?”

I’d look up at them, smile, and tell them, “The Milkman.” 

They would guffaw, cough down a drink, blush, and I’d try to explain, “You know, because he delivers things.” 

And they’d laugh out an “I’m sure he does!” and find my dad who would have a grin settled between his bouncing shoulders as he muffled a laugh, and my mom would say something like “G-uh, Darcy Joe”

Not to be heavy handed, but the stereotypes of what a milkman may or may not do when visiting people’s homes is what makes the joke land. This joke was lost on me until high school. I didn’t understand the baggage associated with being a milkman.

Language matters. Words like milkman have connotations - they carry weight or have stereotypes attached to them. That’s why I can’t flip someone off and say, “Why are you upset,this means joy to me.” There are too many representations of middle-fingers that situate the digit as a symbol of the obscene. Repetition and representation give meaning. 

The middle finger or terms like milkman or teacher, carry a history of expectations and stereotypes. Last episode we heard about the historical inheritance of teachers, which is significant in how we view modern teachers. But history isn’t the only thing that impacts how we view teachers. Today, we’re going to look at the teacher stereotypes in pop-culture and how these stereotypes can be contributing to teacher attrition.

This is Those Who Can’t Teach Anymore, a 7-part podcast series exploring why teachers are leaving education and what can be done to stop the exodus. I’m Charles Fournier.

Here is part 3: “What Would Robin Williams Do?”

Molly Waterworth: I've gotten to the point where I see any TV show or movie where some sort of plot device hinges on the inspirational teacher. And I just roll my eyes.

This is Molly Waterworth. We heard from her last episode, and she just left education after teaching English for 8 years. She points out a stereotype of inspiring teachers in media:

Molly Waterworth:I just can't.  I can't stomach it because it's so saccharin. It completely obscures the fact that these inspiring teachers that are either drawn from real life or the product of someone or someone's imagination, it completely obscures the fact that their inspirational teaching is very likely the outgrowth of massive mental health deficiencies. And like a complete imbalance of where they spend their time and where they're getting like their soul fed. Inspiring teacher stories make me feel awful. 

That shouldn’t be the case, right? Inspirational teacher movies should INSPIRE. And they can and they do - they inspired me - but what Molly points to is a nagging reality in many inspirational teacher stories. 

Dead Poets Society Clip

As you can hear in this scene from Dead Poets Society, Mr Keeting, played by Robin Williams, pushes his student, Todd Anderson.. And in this unconventional way Mr. Keeting helps Todd start to gain some confidence and see his potential. Similar scenes occur in other famous teacher movies, like Mr Holland’s Opus, or Freedom Writers. 

These movies project a fantasy of heroism onto education, and people love it. Inspirational teacher movies are usually underdog stories: A  teacher rails against convention and inspires and does amazing things for others no matter the personal cost. We are attracted to this as a culture. We want heroes that are selfless. We want to see ourselves as capable of being like Robin Williams’ character in Dead Poets Society. 

And the way these movie teachers influence kids…man, that’s the dream.  But, several if not most of the teachers in those stories that inspire don’t have the healthiest work-life balance. They give everything to their students - time, energy, love, inspiration. And these movie teachers inspire in the public comments like, “We need more teachers like this” or “I wish teachers would be more like (whatever movie teacher).” But we need to ask, what is expecting teachers to fit a stereotype asking of real teachers?

Think of Freedom Writers, a movie based on the real-life Erin Gruwell, who is played by Hillary Swank. She is the epitome of the inspirational teacher stereotype. Halfway through the movie, her husband leaves her because she is spending so much time focused on her students, 

Freedom Writers Clip 

The film creates a feeling that the husband might be unrealistic. As an audience, we’re rooting for Erin Gruwell because she does amazing things - her husband points this out. And don’t get me wrong, Ms.Gruwell is phenomenal and her story is amazing, but there might be danger in presenting this story as a precedent for what good teaching looks like. Yes, she is a good teacher, but at what cost? In most other films about different careers, it’s likely the main character would realize that work is taking too much and family is more important, but not in inspirational teacher movies. Expecting teachers to do what Gruwell does is expecting teachers to forfeit their own lives for students. It’s expecting martyrdom. This is a stereotype.

And the reality is different.

Molly Waterworth: We're not martyrs, and we're not perfect. And there are things that can be said about the profession as a whole and certainly about individual teachers that needs improvement, absolutely. But I think a lot of it maybe stems from just this sense that teachers aren't entirely human - that we are saints. And so therefore, we shouldn't worry about all of these factors that are making our jobs harder, because we have this big calling on our lives that turn us somehow into people that don't have needs.

This language that surrounds teaching is significant. It feeds the stereotype of selflessness, which in turn has an impact on how teachers are treated. Right now teachers are feeling burned out because this stereotype is unrealistic - it’s creating an expectation that makes teachers want to leave education. 

I met up with Rachael Esh at Welcome Market Hall in Sheridan, Wyoming on the eve of her very last day as a teacher.

Rachael Esh:  It's a bit of a stereotype with teachers. It’s like, Oh, this has been your calling since you were this age, or since this teacher impacted you.

This idea of a calling is that you don’t teach for the money, you do it for the kids because it is what you were meant to do. It is your destiny or purpose. A quote unquote “calling” can create a sense of guilt in teachers when they realize, crap, I’m not getting paid enough for this, which is in contrast to the narrative surrounding  teaching like Molly points out:

Molly Waterworth: People don't get into this for the money, why would they? But they're in it for the kids, and they're in it for that sense of purpose and mission. That's like, “Yeah, but I also would like to be paid.”

So to have a calling is to feel like teaching is more than a job, more than a paycheck, it is a clear directive from some higher power for the direction your life should take in service of others. Rachael didn’t feel like that stereotype matched her experience.

Rachael Esh: And I don't feel like that's usually the case. It's more of a roundabout zigzag pattern.

This surprised me. I grew up wanting to be a teacher because, as Rachael said, I had some amazing teachers leave an impact on me, but I never thought teaching was my calling. It was something that sounded cool, and it was made cooler by movies like Dead Poets Society. I wrote the movie’s motto, “Carpe Diem” on all of my notebooks. And I liked reading and writing and teaching people, and teaching would give me a chance to coach. Not once did I get the sky part and shine a light on my career path. It wasn’t a calling, and of the 30 teachers that I interviewed, hardly any of them felt like teaching was their calling either.

For Rachael and Molly, they had different plans with where their lives were going to go.

Rachael Esh: So my undergrad I actually got at Ohio University in environmental biology, and so I thought I was gonna maybe do field work or something like that.

Molly Waterworth: I declared my major as geography, but I did it with the intent of being able to go into the forest service. But I found out pretty quickly that I really didn't care about any of my classes. And I found out that I was going to have to take calculus and I wasn't interested in doing that. So I kind of bounced around into various humanities areas.

And both Rachael and Molly landed in education because they each had a summer experience in college that put them in front of kids. Rachael took an internship teaching environmental education and Molly went to China with a group from college and got to help kids with their conversational English. They both found their way to being educators because of positive experiences teaching kids.

Rachael Esh: So I knew I either wanted to go on to park service or education after working with kids then. And so it kind of just worked out that getting my degree in education was just more accessible, and I kind of wanted to separate my fun time, which was like outdoors, from my work. So I decided to kind of go into education. And I mean, the kids are never boring. So you're like, well, heck this. This beats an office job any day of the week.

And when Molly returned from China, she declared first as an elementary teacher. 

Molly Waterworth: I think that when I envision myself being a teacher, I thought of myself reading with kids, and talking about literature and talking about books and big ideas and stuff like that. And so at that point, I had the very obvious revelation that I should be a secondary English teacher because that would afford me that opportunity most often. So that was kind of my meandering path into into

There was no bright light for either of these teachers, no calling. Nothing so profound. Like most people, they stumbled onto their desire to do a job because they took advantage of an opportunity and realized, “Hey, this isn’t bad.”

And Teaching wasn’t a last option for either of them. They weren’t failing at other things in life, which is tied to another stereotype of teaching. If teachers aren’t depicted as martyrs, they’re often seen as selfish or deviant or lazy or dumb or boring, like in Ferris Bueler’s Day Off.

Ferris Bueller Clip

And this image of teachers perpetuates the idea that teaching is a last ditch option for people that can’t do anything else. This stereotype often leads to a willingness to discredit teachers as experts in their field. Not being seen as experts in their field is a major reason teachers gave for leaving teaching. 

For Molly or Rachael, they became teachers by choice. They didn’t need to fall back to something easier. It wasn’t a School of Rock scenario, where Jack Black’s character, Dewey Finn, hits rock bottom before becoming a long term sub proving that someone with no qualifications can be a better teacher than trained and dedicated teachers - a trope that we see over and over again. 

In the film, Jack Black’s character even draws attention to a common saying that is tied to education. 

School of Rock Clip

Dylan Bear is a PE teacher in Pinedale, WY. We sat at a picnic table in front of his house with a view of the Wind River Mountain Range, while we drank coffee, snacked on a loaf of banana bread he was gifted from a student, and talked about these sayings and images surrounding education. 

Dylan Bear: I think another thing, we've gotten a lot of quotes, like funny quotes in the society, like, oh, teachers, they take these jobs for June, July and August. I think that's something that needs to stop. 

What Dylan has noticed is the negative lens with which culture and Hollywood has viewed teachers. Like I mentioned earlier, we stereotype teachers as good or bad, the marty/savior type that saw teaching as a calling or the boring/lazy person who saw teaching as a backup plan. 

But, Dylan, like Molly and Rachael, didn’t see teaching as a calling. He didn’t see teaching as a fall back career either.

Dylan Bear: So I started off as an engineer, and those were just not my people. And I was looking more for a little more social environment, a little more high energy versus analytical, consistently, day in and day out. And so I went from engineering to math in secondary math education because I liked working with kids. And then after a few years of that three years deep, looking at all the papers all the time, I just couldn't do it, so I switched from math. I was actually sitting in Prexy's Pasture and Laramie. And the special ed teacher came and sat down next to me and she said, What are you thinking about? Instead, there was my longboard. I said, I don't know if I can do math the rest of my life. Would you rather be teaching math or out playing a field, you know, and I thought like instantly.

Dylan would rather be out in a field. Teaching was a good path for Dylan - not a calling and not a last ditch option. He takes his job seriously, and he is someone that plans on teaching for some time. And when Dylan started feeling a little burned out, he moved towns and got a change of scenery, so that he could keep teaching. He isn’t naive to the reality of burning out or how difficult the job is, nor is he jaded in thinking that anyone could do this job.

The key word here is reality. The reality of a teacher is that teachers are human, not a stereotype. We make mistakes and we have successes and we make some profound impacts on kids and we make some mediocre impacts on kids. 

Dylan Bear: Some teachers are really good, and some are really lazy. And some kids are really good, and some are really lazy. So it's like, we don't want to paint a broad brush over everybody. And I think sometimes we do an education because there's so many people in education. It's like one of the leading job forces out there. So you hear these stories that are negative about one or two teachers, and then you say all I'm doing the same with kids. I hate when people say, kids are always on their phone. It's like, no, no, some kids are on their phones. Some of them are waiting for you to talk and give them a good lesson. I think education gets those broad brushes which devalue people. And that's a dangerous world. 

Dylan recognizes the need for grace and the danger of broad generalizations of any groups. He recognizes the fact that people are human, but sometimes we only get a snapshot of education, which creates these generalizations that feed into the stereotype of teachers as either good or bad. Dylan experienced this first hand when he had a student continuously refuse to take off his hat. 

Dylan Bear: I was like, This is absurd. So I'm a climber, and so he was playing badminton, and I popped his hat off and ran up and jumped up the basketball hoop and climbed in the rafters and hung it from like, the highest point in the gym, like, 50 foot up. And yeah, not very smart, but it was like, I didn't think about it, but kids Snapchatted it. And all the kids came like, “Oh, we saw you but it was out that was so funny. That it's like you have to be aware of that.” 

The snapchat of Dylan only includes his climb. It doesn’t include the warnings he gave the student from that day and previous days. It doesn’t include Dylan’s positive relationship with the student and the students’ family, or all of the normal/positive interactions Dylan has with his other students, or the mundane aspects of his job that he does everyday. The Snapchat lacks context, and this is how stereotypes begin and are fed. A single image becomes the representation of the whole - even if it is a fragment of the reality.  

This is the kind of thing that becomes an overgeneralization - a stereotype of teachers. These stereotypes are on social media and in movies and they contribute to cultural narratives about education that are unrealistic. Some of these glimpses and snapshots might be part of what teachers expected education to be, which is misleading and could be contributing to the disillusionment leading to teachers quitting. Here’s Molly again.

Molly Waterworth:  I think that the image probably came from a couple of places, a selective memory of my high school and middle school classrooms. So thinking back to those good experiences that I had as a student, I was like, “Okay, I want to create that for other people.” But I also had it in my head, the the image of the cool, thoughtful, worldly literary teacher that you see in like Dead Poets Society or any number of  other movies like that - opening up doors and exploring identity and figuring out who we are all along the way. 

Dead Poets Society Clip

I love Dead Poets Society, and Freedom Writers, but I remember telling my wife, after our first week in real teaching jobs: “This sure as hell isn’t Dead Poets Society.” I had been fooled with what teaching would actually be, and this is also an image of what the public seems to see of educators. They want the engaging classroom, the teacher that inspires, and don’t we all. Or they expect the lazy, boring, slacker who got into teaching because their real goals didn’t pan out. But education is more complex than a movie. 

Molly Waterworth:  The crushing reality of grading was something that I hadn't quite prepared myself for. I think that I knew going into teaching, because obviously, you know, that you're going to have to grade and that's part of the job. So the grading part was overwhelming. You never see in movies, like staff meetings, or having to figure out the copier or the deeply existentially difficult process of figuring out the culture of the building in your first year. Just the kind of mundane but deeply tangible on a daily basis struggle of making sure that everything fits in your lesson plan. Like that's not glamorous. But it's, it's the part that makes or breaks you as a teacher of just balancing the day to day and making sure that you're hitting your standards and teaching the stuff that you don't care about, but you have to do anyway. Like, Robin Williams isn't gonna do that.

I would love to have a b-roll version of Dead Poets Society where Robin WIlliams’ character, John Keating, sits for 4 hours grading papers, intermittently standing up to stretch, get a coffee, shake his head and mumble things like, “I swear we went over that.”

Molly Waterworth: You never see an inspiring teacher movie where they are tracking missing assignments. You never see them answering the onslaught of emails at the end of the semester, asking how to get my grade up. You never see that. You see the inspiring parts and that's it. Never the work that it takes to get there.

So we see teachers that either act as martyrs like Keating who, don’t forget, gets fired at the end of the film after a student kills himself, or we see teachers that make real teachers cringe.

Molly Waterworth:  I remember watching Glee when that was out.  And it was not just unrealistic, but it was just so I thought it was insulting the way that the teachers were showing their like, as just unserious. Too involved in teenagers' lives. And, like, really, really concerned about both of those things. That I was just I couldn't do it. I couldn't put up with it. 

And again, why does this matter? Why does it matter that depictions of teachers are unrealistic? It honestly wouldn’t matter if these depictions didn’t seep into how teachers are currently being treated. If the cultural view of education remained realistic. But this is how stereotypes work. We may recognize a stereotype as wrong or dangerous, but they can still seep into our behavior. 

And they influence what parents expect from teachers, what students expect from teachers, and even what teachers expect from themselves. If teachers buy into the stereotypes, they may be striving for a sense of perfection and martyrdom that is unhealthy and unrealistic. So it’s up to us, all of us, to push against these stereotypes. Like any other cultural stereotype, we need a massive cultural shift in how we think about teachers, which often starts with how we represent and talk about teachers. 

Unless we become conscious of our biases or of these stereotypes, things won’t change, and in the context of teaching, teachers will continue to quit. 

The misconceptions surrounding teachers and education are very much influenced by what folks see on a consistent basis. This isn’t to say that there haven’t been realistic depictions of teachers. I love Tina Fey’s character in Mean Girls. She was quirky and smart and imperfect. Her character felt more real to me, but this is an outlier in teacher representations. 

Stephanie Reese: Culturally, I think the media shows teachers as “Man, they just work tirelessly.”

You might recognize Stephanie’s voice from last episode. I met up with her at Blacktooth Brewery in Cheyenne, she’s the general manager there. Stephanie taught PE from kindergarten to college, and she left education after 8 years.

She points out how some of the perceptions of education bleed into the expectations placed on teachers. 

Stephanie Reese: They just love what they do so much. They love kids. They're willing to put in all these extra hours, because they just love what they do. And they're okay with that. And, and that doesn't actually give teachers a voice. And that, to me is bullshit because teachers are tired, they're exhausted, they're stressed to the max there. Some may love it. And fine. If you have that intrinsic motivation to love something without getting anything back. That's amazing. You are a superhero. 

When being a teacher is associated with loving kids as Stephanie points out, does that mean that leaving education means a loss of love for the kids? Or that not wanting to put in the extra hours is because teachers don’t love the kids? This rhetoric is dangerous and it isn’t helpful when thinking about why teachers are leaving. When teachers decide to leave education, they often hear, “You can’t, you’re so good for the kids” or something to that effect. This is said in praise, but it actually ignores what teachers are dealing with and it pushes this cultural stereotype that teachers ought to be willing to give everything for the kids. The reality is, the list of what teachers do, the extra work teachers have, is tremendous and all of that work rarely makes it into films.

Here’s Dylan.

Dylan Bear: It’s funny when you asked me to do this, I looked up, like, what are the job requirements for teachers and there was like, on the, on the description, it was, like 30 bullet points. It was incredible, like, lift 50 pounds, walk 100 yards. When Does anyone do that? We think teachers are just this, like square. But it's not, it's this open ended job that you can work your tail off forever, you know, or you can do the minimum and you still get paid the same. So it's like, I think a lot of people want to know, like, here's your job, and here's what you're gonna get for it. And that's not the case in teaching. 

And that list of job requirements is long and ambiguous and continuously added to. A big portion of what it means to be a teacher isn’t simply “to teach” or “to inspire.” It’s to manage a huge amount of expectations, which doesn’t often get included into the stereotype of teachers, and if it does, it’s only for a moment.  Stephanie had strong thoughts about what teachers are expected to do. 

Stephanie Reese: This isn't going to be a positive one, Charles, I hope that you're not like, brace yourself, right? I'm not gonna sit here and say, oh, yeah, teachers are here to inspire teachers are here to you know, try to spark some sort of love or interest in something and help every single kid and blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, like all that sugar coated shit. Fine. That might be the case. But to me, and I know a lot of teachers who agree, it's babysitting. So our roles are just sit tight, do your best, try to get in something that's worth value. Or maybe try to teach his kids to be decent human beings.   

The stereotype often clashes with the reality of teaching. Still many teachers try to live up to the inspiring teacher stereotype, which can be contributing to the sense of burnout lots of teachers are experiencing. 

Many teachers, whether they intended to or not, have wrapped their identity around education, which is kind of a cultural expectation - they are one with the school. This can make being in public and trying to have a personal life kind of awkward especially in small towns. 

Rachael Esh:Anywhere we would go. I'd be like, I can't go there. All my kids are gonna be there, you know? Or like, do you want to go bowling? No, I don't want to go bowling. So I have to talk to seven of my students online, like no, like, you know, so there's just places that I don't even want to go because I just get bombarded with children. Which is, I love them. But you know, you want to like, be away from work for a while and you're like, I've done this all day. I want adult time. It's adult time now. they'll walk by when I'm having a beer. I'm like, don't, don't you look at me. 

The teacher advocating for healthy boundaries or focusing on mental health in a genuine way is not a common teacher stereotype in pop-culture. This has only started bubbling up more recently on social media with teachers and former teachers drawing attention to their struggles in the classroom. There have even been some new television shows that have started to address what teachers are struggling with. They are pushing against the stereotypes. This kind of representation can help restructure how we think about and discuss teachers. 

Seeing teachers as stereotypes either creates standards so high it is absolutely unrealistic or we are creating a villain to be a scape-goat for all of our worldly problems. Both of these images are contributing to teachers leaving the profession, and both of these images are very common cultural tropes. To break free from stereotypes, we need to first recognize they are there and how they are working. 

I teach about stereotypes when I teach rhetoric. One of my favorite lessons to teach is about binary opposition. We get to address stereotypes and how we, as humans, often categorize ideas and language into this or that, and how such categorization is often a logical fallacy.  Here’s a quick look at how the lesson goes. 

I start by asking students what a binary star system is, then draw it on the board. Binary stars are two stars that orbit each other. They rely on each other for survival. If one dies, the other dies. In this binary, one star is larger than the other, it carries more weight. Even so, if the other star dies, the larger star will also die. 

How we categorize language and ideas is similar. Things are good or bad, and we often privilege one side of that opposition. And we wouldn’t know good without bad. The poet Wallace Stevens wrote, “Death is the mother of Beauty,” which means, without death, we wouldn’t know beauty. 

At this point, a few of the students are nodding, others are usually staring, but as I move around the room, their eyes all follow me. This is when you know that you’ve got ‘em.

Now, I move to the board again and ask the students to picture the perfect and stereotypical 1950s couple. I give a few seconds - they don’t need long. Then I ask, “So, who are they?” Right away, students establish a white, able-bodied couple, made up of a man and woman. This is when I turn my back, marker ready, and say, “Okay, tell me about the woman.” They yell over each other rattling off the same image of a blond-haired, blue-eyed woman with a light color poodle skirt, wearing minimal makeup. She cooks, cleans, and takes care of children. Her only vices are gossip and the occasional cigarette. I then have the students describe the man. He’s tall, has dark hair, wears a dark suit, and works in an office. His vices include drinking, smoking, fighting, and adultery. 

In less than two minutes, my students always describe Don and Betty Draper perfectly. Then we continue with other opposing stereotypes under men and women. We agree that these are stereotypes as a class, but I point out that they came up with these opposing lists in about 5 minutes total. It takes that long because I can’t write as fast as they yell out ideas. I tell them, even if they don’t believe in these stereotypes, they are ingrained in their brains because of the culture in which we live, and if they’re not careful, they might unconsciously let them dictate their behavior

At this point, I pause the class and take a different colored marker and circled  qualities on both sides of the list. Then I tell the students, these are things that make up who I am. I have a lot of qualities under both men and women circled: I cry more than my wife, I am emotional, I like to cook, I’m terrible with vehicle maintenance, but I am also a woodworker, I was an industrial ironworker,  I’ve been in fights, I was a college wrestler. We talk about monoliths, and the reality that in a binary, most people live in the gray. We’re not one or the other, and that doesn’t make us less-than. 

Even so, we tend to categorize ideas based on binary opposition. 

Thinking back to the binary of men and women, I ask the students who is good and who is bad. Kids argue and defend, but we don’t have a consensus. Then I ask who wears what on a stereotypical wedding day. Men wear black, black is associated with bad. Women wear white, which is associated with good, (which is problematic in its own right). 

Inevitably one of the students says this isn’t fair. 

They’re right - it isn’t. That’s the danger of binary logic, of assuming things are either good or bad. It creates an all or nothing scenario and double-standards.Binary logic is a fallacy. 

Now, if we only think of teachers as either good or bad, we are forcing them into unrealistic stereotypes. 

When teachers are associated with being martyrs, saints, nurturers, or people following a calling, and if all of this is seen and represented as good, then as soon as a teacher doesn’t want to give their life to education or be like the teachers in the inspirational movies, then there is a cultural damnation that they must be bad or selfish or deviant or lazy or mean. It sounds ridiculous, but teachers are either leaving because the expectations for being a teacher are more than what they’re willing to give, or they are seen as lazy and unintelligent. Either way, teachers are leaving as a result.

As my students point out every single year, binary logic is simplistic and unfair and most things aren’t simple enough to be one or the other. But, this is often how we interpret the world, it’s good or bad, Democrat or Republican, wrestling or basketball. You get the idea. 

So what can be done? As I said earlier, we need to first recognize that there is a stereotype and why that stereotype might be dangerous. Then, the next step would be to listen to real teachers and be able to differentiate stereotypes from reality.  The way teachers are talking about leaving education is not cinematic, it’s real, and it’s happening. 

Unlike the stereotype, real teachers are listening to their friends and family. 

Molly Waterworth: And I was talking about it with Ryan, and he was like,” Molly, you cannot keep teaching. You just can't because it ruins it ruins you emotionally.” And I'm like, Yeah, you're really right because I live for months with just dread, dread, and exhaustion. And you don't want to see anybody that you love feel that way. And it sometimes it takes that external viewpoint of like, No, this is wrecking you to to actually recognize that like, Oh, this isn't just something that I feel internally terrible about. It's obvious to other people. So this is a problem.

They realize that education doesn’t have to be a life sentence of martyrdom. 

Rachael Esh:  I've given this job and these kids everything that I have, and I don't have anything left. And that's just the reality. And it's like, I had to pick myself over them. And it's, it's like, I love them dearly, and I care about them. But I can't put my mental health on the backburner for the rest of my life. 

When people decide to become a teacher, I think everyone thinks like, oh, my gosh, you're a teacher, and you're going to be my kids teacher. And you're going to be a teacher forever. And like, that's your, that's your identity. 

I've always felt like  this wasn't necessarily my forever career, like some people have. I was like, I'm gonna do this and I want to see how it goes. And the first few years, I was like, yes, like this is, this is my jam. I'm learning so much. I just started thinking I was like every year is just the same. I'm like  a permanent sixth grader, and I was like, I am not the kind of person that can stay in a job for 30 years if I don't have any room to grow in it. I just started seeing that cycle. And, when summer comes, it's like, such a huge relief. And then when you start going back to school, just the anxiety about thinking about that already. I was like, no, I would rather have a job all year that I am not going to be completely stressed out about. 

What I heard teachers tell me is that they are dynamic humans, not cultural stereotypes. I feel that too. Teachers live in that liminal gray space in-between, just like everyone else. They are neither wholly good nor bad. So it would be great to see a cultural shift, teachers included,  in how we discuss teachers - it can start by framing them as complex humans rather than cultural tropes. This will include allowing teachers to voice concerns they have about the profession, so that things can be addressed and we can keep great teachers. 

Now, a common cultural reaction to this last statement and to teachers airing their grievances in general, is to say that, “Well, they’re just whiners.” So, if this was your reaction, it is a good time to review that lesson on binaries. If you thought the teacher sharing a concern was a whiner, then it seems like  you would prefer that teacher to remain silent. To, in essence, be a martyr. But just like binary logic, expecting teachers to be martyrs is not helpful and is based in stereotypes. 

So it would be worth reflecting on our own stereotypes about teachers, and try to humanize them. They really are just humans.

But if folks continue to struggle to separate real-life teachers from the stereotypical, dramatized, fictionalized, news-worthy, or social-media teachers, we’ll continue to struggle with holding onto brilliant teachers who won’t fit into the restrictive categorization.  

 Next time, we will talk about the purpose of public education. Many teachers are leaving because our country cannot reach a consensus on what public education is for and who it’s for. 

That will be next time on Those Who Can’t Teach Anymore. Thank you for listening. Be sure to subscribe to our podcast, leave a review, and share episodes with everyone you can think of.

This episode was produced by me, Charles Fournier. It was edited by Melodie Edwards. Other editing help came from Noa Greenspan, Sarah-Ann Leverette, and Tennesee Watson. Our theme song is by Julian Saporiti. All other music can be found on our website. A special thanks to Rachael Esh, Molly Waterworth, Dylan Bear, and Stephanie Reese for taking time to sit down and chat with. This podcast is funded in part by the Fund for Teachers Fellowship. With movie clips from Freedom Writers (Paramount Pictures), Dead Poets Society (Touchstone Pictures, Walt Disney Studios Motion Pictures), School of Rock (Paramount Pictures), Ferri Bueller (Paramount Pictures, United International Pictures)

Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Many of the problems modern teachers are facing aren’t new, so we’re going back in time to find out how our education system became a system that teachers are currently fleeing. Come to find out, modern teachers inherited low pay, limited respect, and a system that strips communities of their cultural traditions. In this episode, hear how Indian Boarding Schools and the American Industrial Revolution have left traces on modern education, and how these traces are contributing to teachers’ decisions to leave education. 

 Music: 

Theme Song By Julian Saporiti

“Sonata No.13 in E Flat Major, Op. 24 No. 1-II. Allegro, Molto, e Vivace” by Daniel Veesey is in the Public Domain.

“Railroad’s Whisky Co” by Jahzzar is Licensed under a CC BY-SA license.

“Ugly Truth” by HoliznaCC0 is in the Public Domain.

“Upsurge” by Jonah Dempcy is  a  CC BY-NC license.

“Green Lights”  by Jahzzar is licensed under a CC BY-SA license.

“Pizz” by Andrew Christopher Smith is licensed under a CC BY-NC-SA

Transcript:

I had a band teacher once hold me after class and force me eat a beef and bean burrito. He sat in front of me on the piano bench to make sure that I ate it. I was a freshman, in the middle of the high school wrestling season, and I was cutting weight for my first varsity tournament – where I’d end up getting my lips knocked off. My teacher, Mr. Duran, was short, wiry, wore jeans with a braided leather belt and a button-down shirt. He had round-framed glasses, combed his hair to the side, and more than once told me to listen to the greats like Chick Webb and not just the white guys that made it on the radio. 

He was in his 30th year of teaching, and he was not shy about giving advice. While I ate the burrito, Duran talked about playing baseball in college and how abruptly a life of sports could come to an end but how long a life of music could last. This was mature guidance, albeit, guidance that I see more value in now than I did then.

Duran would garnish each class with stories that worked to guide us towards being kind human beings. There were days in Jazz band where he would sit in the center of the tiered room, legs crossed, saxophone neck strap still on, and tell us about his past.

When Mr. Duran was in college at the University of Northern Colorado in the 1960s, the Count Basie Orchestra went through town and stopped at the university. UNC was known for its jazz programs and one of Basie’s saxophone players dropped out and they needed a replacement. Count Basie was one of the most influential musicians from the Swing Era – he was like a swing minimalist. Duran jumped at the opportunity. He got to travel and play with the band and experience life as a musician – more specifically as a musician of color. One time he and a buddy from the orchestra went into a diner and were refused anything more than water. Duran was Mexican and his friend was Black, and it was the middle of the 1960s. In protest, they sat in the big window of the diner for 3 hours, sipping their water, putting themselves on display for anyone who walked by.

I love that story – this man, my teacher, saw inequity and faced it with defiance.

Duran’s lessons were eye-opening. I didn’t realize that those stories served as parables on ethics and kindness until I became a teacher and started telling stories of my own to serve the same ends.

Duran used his history to help us become better humans. And isn’t that why we turn to history? Well, today, we’re going to take a lesson from Duran and examine the history of education in the U.S. And because the history of education is tremendous, we have to narrow it down. So we’ll focus on two aspects of history that set precedents for modern education, for the current system from which modern teachers are exiting.. We are going to start with Indian Boarding Schools, and then we’ll take a look at the American Industrial Revolution.

This is Those Who Can’t Teach Anymore, a 7-part podcast series exploring why teachers are leaving education and what can be done to stop the exodus. I’m Charles Fournier.

Here is part 2: “Inheritance”

Caskey Russell:  I'm going crabbing this weekend. I own a boat with my brothers. And yeah, we go out and catch crab. And there'll be salmon season soon. So I kind of got back into the ocean style lifestyle.

This is Caskey Russel. I got to catch up with him over a zoom call this summer. He is the Dean of Fairhaven College at Western Washington University. He grew up in Washington and is from the Tlingit tribe. I know Caskey because he taught for 17 years at the University of Wyoming, he was a dean of American Indian Studies, and he was my thesis chair and educational guide when I was at the university. Some of Caskey’s research for his PhD program dug into the history of Indian Education, specifically Indian boarding schools.

Caskey Russell: My grandmother and her brothers, aunts and uncles, all went to Chemawa Indian School, in Salem. And it was a mixed bag.

If you are asking yourself, wait, who’s this Caskey guy and what do Indian Boarding Schools have to do with teachers quitting? Here’s how. We know that historical atrocities leave a trace on modern institutions, so we need to recognize that Indian boarding schools have left their mark on modern education. They are a  part of the system of inequity modern teachers have inherited. Indian Boarding Schools are an example of the deculturalization that has occurred in education. One of many. Attempts to strip communities of their cultures happened with just about everyone in this country at some point that didn’t fit into the male, able-bodied, straight, white, Anglo Saxon Protestant category. Traces of these inequities remain in education, deculturalization still happens, and teachers working towards inclusion in a system that was based on exclusion often run into roadblocks – think book bans or accusations that teachers are trying to indoctrinate kids - and these roadblocks are pushing teachers out of education. So to better understand the inequities in modern education, this thing that is frustrating teachers to the point of quitting, we need to look at where some of those attempts at deculturalization originated. We need to look at Indian Boarding Schools. And we need to listen to someone like Caskey. 

Caskey Russell: They liked the sports. They like some of the music, but my uncle Stanley Pradovic, I remember he said, “I used to dream of feasts, seafood feasts that they had in Alaska.” And  my grandmother was able to keep the Tlingit  language because she didn't go to boarding school, but her brothers did not. 

You step back and look at the whole system and how destructive and just kind of the cultural genocide aspect. My grandmother would say she didn't know her brothers because when she was born, her brothers were gone away from her earliest memories. And so she didn't get to know her brothers right away. It did break families up. And I was just chatting with my mom last night. My mom said the other family had no control over what it was determined for them. And again, not having control over that seems to be the key to it, nor having input in the education nor valuing…and then having a different model, different cultural notion of success. And then the military and the Christianization, all that together, just adds problem on top of problem, instead of being empowering and enlightening, that really becomes conforming, sort of thing.

What happened to Caskey’s family was a result of centuries of efforts to deculturalize tribes. Early European colonizers of the US  set a precedent of trying to assimilate tribes into a single monolithic culture. Colonizers disregarded tribal traditions and languages and failed to see that tribes already valued education for their youth. So the assumption that public education started with Horace Mann in 1837 is an assumption that values eurocentric education over the public education that was already in the Americas. 

Part of this is because the purposes of education differed. Many Native communities saw educating children as a means to pass on generational knowledge and teach children how to be a successful part of the community. 17th-century Plymouth settlers specifically saw education and literacy as a method to keep Satan away. Children needed to be able to read so they could read the Bible. A pilgrim minister explained:

“[There] is in all children, though no alike, a stubbornness, and stoutness of mind arising from natural pride, which must, in the first place, be broken and beaten down; that so the foundation of their education being laid in humility and tractableness, other virtues may, in their time, be built thereon” (42).

But tribes did not beat down their children, did not read the Bible, and were able to survive and thrive in what Pilgrims saw as wilderness. So Pilgrims worked to impose their educational priorities onto tribes as a way to cast out Satan, and ultimately gain control of Indigenous people. This effort to assimilate and control only compounded over the next few centuries

By the 19th century, congress was also making efforts to deculturalize and assimilate tribes. Thomas Jefferson who had a big role in the removal of Native Americans from their lands also had a One Nation idea when it came to Native Americans – an assumption that required assimilation through education.

In 1816, Jefferson explained the value of education:

“Enlighten the people generally and tyranny and oppressions of body and mind will vanish like evil spirits at the dawn of day. Although I do not, with some enthusiasts, believe that the human condition will ever advance to such a state of perfection as that there shall no longer be pain or vice in the world, yet I believe it susceptible of much improvement, and most of all in matters of government and religion; and that the diffusion of knowledge among the people is to be the instrument by which it is to be effected” (101)).

Jefferson believed a democratic, not a moral education which was what kids were getting at the time, was essential to democracy and he’s right, but his One Nation idea required a monolithic ideal that did not value other cultures. He wanted tribes to conform to his image of being American. This focus on conformity was baked into the American educational philosophy.

The Civilization Act of 1819 saw Thomas McKenney, the first head of the Office of Indian Affairs begin a process of Native American deculturization  – they created a tribal school system run by white missionary teachers hoping to gain control of tribes through the power of education and assimilation. When Andrew Jackson became president in 1829, he saw some of the educational progress made by tribes as dangerous to America’s goals of gaining control of lands. 

 So, in 1830, America passed the Indian Removal Act, which brutally uprooted tribes and relocated them. Thirty years later, the Indian Peace Commission began reservation schools or day schools. But again, the cultural genocide that all of these acts and efforts had hoped for weren’t as effective as the government Wanted. This is when the government stepped in again. Paired with the Dawes Act of 1877 that worked to split reservation lands into private property began the start of the boarding school movement in 1879. Each step was a process working towards killing cultures in an attempt to control land, people, and ideas – all largely through some form of education. The start of the boarding school experiment can  be attributed to Captain Richard Henry Pratt.

Caskey Russell: Pratt actually had a number of prisoners of war under his charge at St. Augustine, Florida. Besides being given military uniforms, they would teach them. And so the way he sold the first  boarding schools was that instead of being at war with natives, you can educate them. The US could educate them, and kind of eradicate native culture through educating towards whiteness.

Caskey explained that the thought was that education would help the government avoid the expenses of war.

Caskey Russell: So there are a group of Plains Natives that were transported to St. Augustine, that was his kind of first experiment. And then he was able to go to Congress and get some money. And he took them to The Hampton Institute and eventually to the Carlisle Indian Industrial School

So Pratt’s experiment led to the establishment of the Carlisle Indian Industrial School in Pennsylvania in 1879. This was around the same time that Pratt made a famous statement to congress:

Caskey Russell: He says to Congress, “You have heard Sherman say the only good Indian’s a Dead Indian. I would agree with this one kind of difference that you can kill the Indian save the man.” That's what education can do. That's the motto. And so, there was based on military kind of military boarding school style, and they opened up across the country. And they were often religiously affiliated, and religious institutions given  them control of them. Which, you know, was another part of the boarding schools was the religious education, the eradication of tribal cultures, tribal religions, and the inculcation of Christianity, the various sects of Christianity across the country.

Each step taken by congress, in the name of education, was an effort to prioritize one culture over others, one idea of success over others - often through religious means, because again, early education was morality based. And they did this through legislation and through educational policy. Even though many of these efforts are pretty old, we still feel the educational effects of prioritizing a single culture or single idea of success.. Elizabeth Smith, a veteran teacher of 20 years who teaches on a reservation still sees this today. 

Elizabeth Smith: Even though I can count on my hand, the number of students that I've taught that have graduated and have a white culture, sort of experience with what would be known as success, quote, unquote 

 Caskey sees this idea in what is tested or valued as a bottom line in public education. These are things that dismiss differentiated cultural values.

Caskey Russell: Did the schools reward students let's say for instance, this the schools Wind River  reward students for knowing the traditional clan system,  speaking Arapaho or Shoshone for knowing traditional ways, whether it's kind hunting, traditional use of land, traditional plants respond medicine, knowing being prepare, or being an apprentice for ceremony, none of that none of that culturally important stuff that was really important to Native people, especially young people they could dream of, you know, I'm going to fulfill these goals, these roles, these social roles one day, none of that's important, it seems like an American school system, right? When you're going to take the SAT or the ACT, are they going to value the hours you spent with your grandparents trying to learn the language or learning stories or learning traditional ways? Of course not.

This is a part of the inheritance of modern education, something teachers have to grapple with consistently. How can we educate students to be a part of a community that through legislation or policy doesn’t seem to value all traditions and cultures within that community? Or how to reach a measure of success that isn’t culturally misaligned or based on morality?

Caskey Russell:A handful of them might be successful in kind of the white American ideal. But that's not the only measure of success, nor is it maybe a healthy measure of success, right, for Native people. It would be wonderful to let other ideas of success, community success, success as a human being within a community flourish in the school setting.

This question of how to honor a diverse spectrum of students lands on teachers in the classroom. Though legislators and school boards may make efforts to dictate what can and can’t be taught in the classroom, the reality is it’s teachers and administrators who are working with kids – and kids from a wide spectrum of communities who have often been forced into a specific, standardized idea of success, which might not be culturally conscious. This is exactly how Indian boarding schools started, they forced kids from diverse tribes into a standardized idea of success initially using arguments for morality to do so. We recognize this as bad now, so why are forms of it still happening? 

 A big concern of some of the teachers who have decided to leave teaching was the start of limits and  restrictions about what can and can’t be taught in the classroom. Many of these limits originate from argument about morality that are backed by religious groups that want to dictate what is happening in the classroom. Think of Mr. Wacker from last episode who is still frustrated with the banning of Toni Morrison’s The Bluest Eye for moral arguments or Mr. Atkinson who felt his curriculum being squeezed by people who didn’t appreciate class conversations about varying cultural perspectives on current events. 

And, as we saw with the history of Native American education, this is not new – even though many founding fathers, who were deists themselves, advocated for the separation of church and state and were adamant that education focus on democratic values rather than religious values.

John Adams wrote to his wife Abigail: 

“I must study Politicks and War that my sons may have liberty to study Mathematicks and Philosophy. My sons ought to study Mathematicks and Philosophy, Geography, natural History, Naval Architecture, navigation, Commerce and Agriculture, in order to give their Children a right to study Painting, Poetry, Musick, Architecture, Statuary, Tapestry and Porcelaine.”

John Adams does not reference education and say study the Bible. And fellow former president James Madison did not mince words in a letter that pushed against church use of government land, which would later include schools:

“The purpose of separation of church and state is to keep forever from these shores the ceaseless strife that has soaked the soil of Europe with blood for centuries.”

And these beliefs worked their way into legislation with the inclusion of the Establishment Clause in the First Amendment, which Thomas Jefferson said was “A wall of separation between the church and state.” And though we know Jefferson’s view of education wasn’t very inclusive, if we combine this idea of the separation of church and state with a modern inclusive reading of Jefferson’s thoughts that education is to “Educate and inform the whole mass of the people. They are the only sure reliance for the preservation of our liberty,” We get a pretty good idea that education is a means to inform a free-thinking, diverse population that has different belief systems. 

The founders knew the danger of letting religion seep its way into government - they just broke free of a country that allowed that to happen. So to have a system of education that would inform the whole mass of people without perpetuating the deculturalization we saw with the Indian Boarding schools, which have their origins in religious schooling, that system would need to accommodate the diversity of that mass of people. 

This means that teachers would need the trust of the public and  freedom to use their expertise to do their jobs, which would likely include selecting a wide range of materials to accommodate a diverse student population. This freedom and trust is not something being granted to modern teachers. There is currently a trend of parents, legislators, and school board members criticizing teacher efforts to support diverse student needs, often through moral critiques. Which stems from a lack of trust and the same morality based fear that sparked early deculturalization efforts in the United States. So, this isn’t new.

This is another part of what teachers have inherited from previous generations of educators, a lack of professional respect that translates to a lack of autonomy in the classroom, low pay, and a smattering of other things that are driving teachers from their jobs.

Here’s Elizabeth again:

Elizabeth Smith: And let me clarify, you know, when I say I love teaching, I do love teaching. To say that I love where I'm at right now, no, I do not. I am not satisfied with the way my job is going. I'm not satisfied with the way I feel inside every single day coming home from work. It's like a battlefield. It is intense. It is stressful. My family has noticed it and made comments on it, you know, and I don't have the patience to deal with my own children. And what am I going to do if I don't do this? I've got 20 years of expertise invested in this. And I've spent a lot of time learning how to do the things that I do and I enjoy improving it.

As of now, she is planning on staying in education. And all of those 20 years have been spent teaching on reservations. She attributes this in part to why she loves her work so much, why she’s planning on staying. There is a different level of respect that she sees in these schools and a higher level of appreciation, which goes a long way. But this doesn’t mean that there still isn’t a lack of professional trust or respect that she feels from being a teacher. 

Elizabeth Smith: There's so much micromanaging and so many expectations that are put on us that are really insulting, actually, to our intelligence and to our professionalism. And I understand that there are teachers who are unaware of the ways that they're doing things are unprofessional and unintelligent. So I get the admin has to make some allowances and come up with some plans for how to deal with teachers that are not as aware of themselves and their skills as they should be, you know, so I understand that but the blanket statements..

To address where these blanket solutions may originate from, we are going to take another look at history through a little different lens than what we’ve been using so far. 

When I asked teachers about what pushed them out of education, they echoed Elizabeth’s frustrations. Lack of respect was a major reason people left. But this is not new, like the history of inequity in education, the lack of professional respect has been a thread through public education’s history. So we are going to pull on that thread and look at the tradition of not valuing or respecting teachers.  

Stephanie Reese: As a teacher, you're going to be marginalized, and you're not going to be taken seriously.

Ron Ruckman: I think a lot of administrators, They just don't have any idea there, and they don't really think of us as professionals, you know, they don't really think of us as being able to do our job.

Christie Chadwick: As a teacher, we're managing all these expectations. And I think that that's not acknowledged by the general population.

Teachers want to be seen as professionals. This came up in interviews in reference to being trusted to make decisions about curriculum, in being more autonomous, and in getting paid better. When thinking about why teachers have inherited a lack of professional respect in the present, it might have to do with the American Industrial Revolution:

Colby Gull: We were built on an industrial model. Get them in, stick the widget on him and get him out the other side of the door. Right. And that's just not how humans work.

This is Colby Gull, he is the managing director for the Trustees education Initiative in the College of Education at the University of Wyoming. Colby has been a teacher, a coach, a principal, and a superintendent. He’s run the educational gamut. And he points out that the structure of education does not necessarily promote the growing and sharing of ideas.

Colby Gull: And we live in now the idea economy. And we're still not teaching in the idea economy. We're teaching in the industrial economy where you buying and selling goods. But our economy now is based on ideas and sharing of ideas and debating and discussing, and I don't know, people make a lot of money with their ideas.

 And this structure of education, this factory style model, which looks similar to the military approach seen with Indian Boarding Schools, started and gained popularity during the American Industrial Revolution at the end of the 19th century. Along with this more industrial model the precedent for the amount of respect teachers received was set. I see several ways in which history has handed down a dismissive attitude toward teachers. 

As Common Schools gained popularity in the mid-19th century, young women were also moving to cities for better economic opportunities. And these women were hired as teachers in droves because they could be paid substantially less than men. This compounded since teaching was seen as respectable employment for women - it matched the stereotype that women were naturally nurturing. Both the image of teachers as nurturers and the trouble with pay is consistent with what we see today. 

Here’s Stephanie Reese, a former PE teacher who left education and became the general manager of Blacktooth Brewing Company.

Stephanie Reese: Absolutely money matters. I was in so much debt. You know, with loans, whether they're student loans, or just credit card, or whatever it is, I had a lot in college, had a lot while I was teaching. and teaching just doesn't give you that opportunity.. And  level increases are a fucking joke. Unless you've been in, you've been in I call it like, like you've been in the pen. You've been in for 34 years, you've given one kidney, you have four degrees, master's degrees, preferably doctorate even better, and you've given up your will to live, and those those things will give you more money.

Part of the consistently poor pay has to do with the hierarchical structure in education. After the Civil War, the first iteration of the department of education was created, in order to track what the nation’s schools were doing. So there was an expectation for the availability of public schooling. Once the American Industrial Revolution hit towards the end of the 19th century, factory jobs boomed. More people flocked to cities meaning there were more kids and more of a need for teachers. With more men transitioning to better paying factory jobs, even more women were moving to the classroom. The large number of women serving as teachers was accepted at a time when women weren’t given many professional opportunities. Administrative roles – principals, superintendents, and the like – were held by men. And many high school positions were still held by men. So a hierarchy that prioritized male control and male decision making was very clearly in place. Mark Perkins, a former teacher and administrator and current parent and professor of Educational Research methods at the University of Wyoming, points out that this hierarchy has remained even if the original gendered reasons for its creation haven’t.

Mark Perkins:  I think there's a power hierarchy. And I don't think that teachers have been empowered enough to express their professional expertise. I think that teachers are approached as a service industry. And so, we want teachers to parrot curriculums. We want them to be experts in their content, as long as their expertise doesn't contradict with our preconceived notions of reality. So I think there's a sociological phenomenon that goes on in schools.  I think it's a common phenomenon.

The system of becoming an administrator in some cases  was once based on seniority. So the most senior teacher would inherit the role of principal. This changed when a degree was required to become a principal or superintendent, which also prevented women from gaining access to these administrative positions by making them require a degree because women weren’t often able to access such an education. So these days, some administrators are in the position without having had a tremendous amount of time in education, which can make administrator impact or insight into the classroom difficult. Ron Ruckman, who just left teaching after 23 years, explains that the lack of experience can be glaringly obvious for some administrators who are disconnected from the teachers.

Ron Ruckman:  You know, and then there's other administrators that just don't want to have anything to do with your classroom, you know, and they want to make decisions, but they don't want to, they don't communicate with you or ask you things. There's a lot of that especially in rural districts. We've spent so much time and money in this district doing initiatives and buying products. And, you know, I can't imagine how much money we've just wasted, you know, buying stuff that, you know, on, based on a good salesman that convinced somebody that they needed it. Whereas had they come and asked us would have been like, no, no, that that would be a really dumb thing to do. That's not going to work. You know, but there's just that kind of an apt idea that teachers really are, you know, don't really know what they're what, you know, they don't really know anything other than their subject. And we're, we're pretty smart. Most of us, you know. (Beeping)

This was perfect timing. That beeping was for a fire. Ron is the Battalion Chief for the Pinedale fire department - he has a lot of roles in his community because he is intelligent and capable and because of not being respected for being intelligent and capable, he quit teaching to pursue the other things he’s good at. 

Some of the ways teachers are not seen as capable has to do with how education is standardized. In the late 19th century, as cities got larger and more and more kids were put into schools, urban schools started to split students into grade levels. Around this time and into the early 20th century, there was a development of what historian David Tyack (Tie-yak) described as the One Best System of education – this saw a focus on specific, easily assessed, and easily sequenced subjects of study. This also did more to highlight non-academic items like good attendance, behavior, and willingness to follow directions, which all aid in creating people who would fit into an industrial economy. This structure was useful when more and more students were placed into a class. And by the early 20th century, politicians and administrators were seeing schools as being a solution to the nation’s woes. Traces of these industrialized values are very present in modern classrooms, and it makes Allison Lash, who taught art in New York City and Austin, Texas, sad at what she sees.

Allison Lash: A friend of mine had said one thing about why he's doesn't like education is just that you go to school to learn how to work, basically, to get you ready to go out in the world and work. And that's sad. Like, I just want to live. I don't want to worry about working and how to make money and pay your school loans and your bills.

It used to bother me that kids would get rewarded for being in school every day. And it's all about money. It's all about how many kids are in their seats every day for the school district to make money. And it was sad, it was sad that kids would win awards for like, being their everyday awards. Like who really cares? They're totally ignoring mental health and even if the kid is sick, you stay home. It's really sad when you go into elementary school and you see the kids quiet and lined up in a line and like “shhhhh,” and I remember teaching that and  I know that I guess order is not wanted, and I don't know if needed is even the right answer. Teach kids to be a good person.

The rise of industry during the American industrial revolution also saw a rise in unions and strikes. Because teachers were mostly women, and many of the strikes of the time were more militant and potentially violent, women were less likely to take part in strikes and efforts to gain better pay. This was not helped by the fact that men held leadership positions in education, so they did not make efforts to better the work environments of teachers because these men just weren’t affected. The  National Education Association, which was founded in 1857, wasn't just for teachers, so administrators, men, were also in charge of Union happenings. It wasn’t until 1910 when Ella Flagg Young was elected as the NEA president that the union started taking more steps to help teachers. But the difficulty in changing and revising educational structures is still present. Chris Rothfuss, a parent and Wyoming State Senator and member of the Senate Education committee, knows this all too well. While we have a coffee in Laramie, Wyoming, Chris explains that change may require a cultural shift inspired by younger generations . 

Chris Rothfuss:  I think a large part of the reason why we develop into what we are really is the way this country industrialized and grew and had a middle-class work ethic through the mid-20th century, that shaped a lot of the way things are done. And the philosophy about why things are done, the way they're done, where there is a common viewpoint that I think is handed down from generation to generation that if you just work hard, put your nose to the grindstone, that you will be successful, and things will go your way, and you'll have a good life. I think part of what's changing that, is that this emerging generation is realizing that while that may have been true, a lot of what allowed that to be true, was frankly, taking on debt that is generational debt and handing that debt down to the next generation. So effectively exploiting the future for the benefit of the present. This younger generation isn't enthused about that as they're learning more about it, and rightly so. And they don't see a path to a traditional life as being what they aspire to.

A potential reason for major shifts not having occurred in the past might have to do with economic uncertainties. For every economic depression and war to occur in the 20th century, money was pulled from education to help the war or economic problems, but that money was not necessarily given back to education. Teacher pay was often cut when other unionized jobs like factory work was not cut because there was an assumption that teachers, being mostly women, would not need to support their families. During WWII, when more women went to work in factories, those women who were still teaching saw how much better the pay was for the women who went to work in factories. The impact of war and economic troubles also resulted in  a more factory-like structure in the classroom. This was often a result of trying to accommodate a larger student population with less resources, and it was also an easier way to measure student achievement. This created an educational structure that overwhelms teachers, which makes best practices more difficult and stretches teachers thin. Molly Waterworth, who just left teaching this year after 8 years in the classroom, explains the reality of being overwhelmed as a teacher.  

Molly Waterworth:  The reality is that if you have 150 kids, there's no way that you're going to grade all of their work in seven and a half hours that you have with them during the day. There's no way. It's just a mathematical impossibility.

 The truth is, teachers have inherited being paid poorly, being overworked, and not being treated with respect. Sadly, much of this is associated with the trend of women in the profession within a patriarchal society. And the teaching profession is still dominated by women. The NEA reports that about 3 quarters of teachers are women, and teachers still get payed about 74% of what equivalent degreed professions earn.

 So, teachers are leaving education, but the reasons they are leaving are a result of problems that have been percolating since the start of public education in the United States. Efforts at deculturalization seen with the Indian Boarding Schools have left an impact and pattern on modern education, just like the treatment of women and industrialization of education has left an impact on how teachers are currently treated. 

This does not mean that public education needs to end, but like any inheritance, we need to acknowledge and deal with the problems. We need to see that there have been attempts to address inequity in education with efforts like Brown v Board in 1954, Title IX in 1972,  and the disabilities act of 1975. But continuing to return to a standardized, one-size-fits-all approach that matches an industrial structure of education just does not work – it doesn’t value teacher expertise, nor does it meet the students with unique cultural backgrounds or needs where they are. And because teachers have been tasked with addressing these inequities with limited freedom and trust and resources, many are calling it quits. This needs to change – teachers need to be able to disclaim this inheritance for their sake and for the sake of their students.

 Next time, we will look at how the perception of teachers might be influenced by pop-culture.

 TEASE: “Robin Williams isn’t going to do that.”

That will be next time on Those Who Can’t Teach Anymore. Thank you for listening. Be sure to subscribe to our podcast, leave a review, and share episodes with everyone you can think of.

This episode was produced by me, Charles Fournier. It was edited by Melodie Edwards. Other editing help came from Noa Greenspan, Sarah-Ann Leverette, and Tennesee Watson. Voice Acting by Rory Mack, David Whisker, Rick Simineo, and Markus Viney who also offered editing help. Our theme song is by Julian Saporiti. All other music can be found on our website. A special thanks to Elizabeth Smith, Caskey Russell, Stephanie Reese, Ron Ruckman, Molly Waterworth, Christy Chadwick, Colby Gull, Mark Perkins, and Allison Lash for taking time to sit down and chat with me. This dive into history was greatly aided by two books: American Education: A History by Wayne J. Urban and Jennings L. Wagoner, Jr. and Deculturalization and the Struggle for Equality: A Brief History of the Education of Dominated Cultures in the United States by Joel Spring……This podcast is funded in part by the Fund for Teachers Fellowship.

Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

We are witnessing a mass exodus of teachers from education. My wife, Jennie, is one of those teachers that left. She, like many educators, was tired of not being treated like a professional. Even for me, a high school English teacher, the job is getting harder. So I go in search of answers. In this episode, we hear from Jennie and two other former teachers about why they left teaching. From struggles with mental health, to low pay, to a lack of autonomy in the classroom - they give insight into why we are losing good teachers across the country.

This episode was produced by Charles Fournier. It was edited by Melodie Edwards. Other editing help came from Noa Greenspan, Sarah-Ann Leverette, and Cody Fournier. All music is by Julian Saporiti. A special thanks to Jennica Fournier, SA, and Jaye Wacker for being inspiring teachers and taking time to sit down and chat with me. This podcast is funded in part by the Fund for Teachers Fellowship.

Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Brilliant teachers are leaving education in droves, and they will continue to leave unless something changes. In February of 2022, the National Education Association reported that 55% of teachers were thinking about leaving education earlier than they had planned. The history and politics surrounding education, portrayels of education in pop-culture, and difficulty of teaching conditions have been feeding into why teachers want to leave. If we don't take time to listen to teachers and work towards fostering an environment that makes them want to stay, great teachers will continue to leave the profession. 

Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices