I have been reading the book Why School by Mike Rose. I admit that I found the early part rather slow going, but as I have persevered, I have begun to find rewards.

Of particular note, I think, is Rose’s even-handed approach to NCLB. Most of what I read or hear either lauds it unceasingly or offers unmitigated criticism. Rose takes a bit of a middle ground, although obviously he is no true fan of the program. He does note, however, aspects of the policy that he feels are beneficial, particularly the need to be accountable for the educational progress of minorities, both racial and economic. The method, he contends, at least as it is manifested in NCLB, leaves much to be desired. I thought his contention that in many ways NCLB negates a democratic education particularly thought-provoking.

Of what I have read so far — and I am not  quite half way through the book — I am intrigued by his criticism of business’ role in the educational debate. He points to “photo op” situations, like “Principal for a day,” that allow important business people or politicians to come into the classroom and conduct a lesson in front of the cameras. Rose criticizes the practice as propagating the idea that teaching is no important deal, that anyone can “teach.” His point here resonates with me. I see our society continually calling for teacher accountability yet consistently denigrating the role of teacher. Anyone can do it. Those who can do. Those who can’t teach. Those who can’t teach, teach PE. Ha Ha! Most people imbue this old joke with far too much truth. Society want teachers to be accountable for near-impossible tasks, yet society assumes any moron can “teach.”

Not only does NCLB feed into this idea, but I find it more manifest in the “Teach for America” program. While I am sure some solid teachers have come out of this program, the underlying assumption seems to be if you can’t find a “real” job, you can go to TfA. As a result, we are sending underprepared and non-dedicated “teachers” to our most at-risk schools. And to what end? Our son’s friend decided to do TfA for many good reasons, but she was sent to a rural elementary school in southern Louisiana where she was met with resentment by her students, the community in general, and, most tragically, the administration of the school. While she cared deeply about improving her students’ lives, she ended up leaving in the middle of her second year because of what had become open hostility on the part of the school administration, making her working conditions ultimately untenable.

Rose is raising some interesting if not ground-breaking issues. In the end, what I believe he best provides us is a call to step back and re-define not only the issues of public education but also the language we use to couch the arguments.

Advertisement