This is the reflection paper I will submit tomorrow when IVLE opens for my reflection paper on the article by Angela Maynard Sewall: Teacher Liability. What We Don't Know Might Hurt Us. She is from the Department of Educational Leadership, University of Arkansas at Little Rock.
Leader Liability: Going Beyond what is Legal
Now I understand why Dani reacted that way when I insisted on the principles of education. God, they must have freaked out. Who is this person lecturing us on how a pop quiz is not meant to punish students but rather to evaluate your own teaching? The better question now is,
who is teaching, anyway?
I used to - well, in the past days - post comments, and rebutt answers from Tribe.net especially that one from "Education", what a name huh? And this paper that we have just read made me realize why the American teachers - the average ones - are mostly just compliant. They do not bother about instructional excellence. They are there inside classrooms to survive. Dani's words are "with your butterfly ideals, you wouldn't survive ten minutes in my class", mentioning about her "Mexicans". So that's it. For the average instructor of God-fearing America, home of the brave, land of the free, a teacher ought to take care of himself first. S/he believes that the priority in every jungle, I mean classroom in America is survival. Here is another piece in the puzzle:
The Twentyfirst Century Teacher Applicant(shared by Dr. Magno, in our Foundations of Educations, 2004)
"Let me see if I've got this right. You want me to go into that room with all those kids and fill their every waking moment with a love for learning. Not only that, I'm supposed to instill a sense of pride in their ethnicity, behaviorally modify disruptive behavior, observe them for signs of abuse and T-shirt messages..." See full text here: http://www.smiles2send.com/f_21ta0903.asp
I don't know if I sounded to you like I am not agreeing with the author, with her bemedalled arms of PhDs and researches. She is telling the truth. But this truth is something that we have accepted in the back of our heads when we were just starting. What is legal anyway? In our country, there is a great difference between what is legal and what is normal. In fact, in one landmark case that I read - I was then preparing our manual of operations - G.R. No. 82325 September 26, 1989 ESPIRITU SANTO PAROCHIAL SCH. vs. NAT'L. LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION, I was extremely petrified by the excuse of ESPS that "it is a common knowledge" in private schools, etc. that a probationary period for non-permanent teachers lapse on a schoolyear basis. What pertifies me is that it was also my belief. Until I read that case. I mean, the Supreme Court ruled here with finality that the Manual of Regulations for Private Schools from the Dep. Ed. has the "character of law" and to be followed, over manuals of operations of schools. But, I still have to see a copy of it on my desk. I emailed Dep-Ed to order a copy for my school, which should have been automatic in my opinion since we are accredited, and know what? They pointed me to FAPE. What? FAPE? Why FAPE?
As an educator for four years, I wasn't aware in all those years that there are such manuals that we need to follow. That we need to know and understand. Because, as Angela Sewall said, what we don't know will hurt us - a cross-double pun on "what you don't know won't hurt you" and "ignorance of the law excuses no one...etc."
So this is the sad plight of our schools. America, we care but a little. In our own backyard, our very home, we don't regard the law as something to be really serious about. We don't know our rights, and even if we know them, we are not willing to fight for them. I mean, we don't go telling smokers inside jeepneys not to smoke because we have the right to fresh air. We don't go out filing complaints against abusive government officials, or policemen. I don't go out in the middle of the night reading the article (155, Revised Penal Code) on Public Disorders: Alarms and Scandals, a criminal offense, to my noisy dumwit neighbors.
In America, we have another situation. In so much insisting on the law, they tend to let go of instruction. Go to discussion boards, web fora, blogspots, and what-have-you on educators and teachers. They regard their students as little devils and enemies. The classroom is viewed as a battlefield. On one hand, there is this insistence on educational principles. On the other, there is safety measures, legal complications. For fear of their very lives and careers, they tend to be self-preserving, guarding only on those things that might hurt them.
Now, according to Sewall, there are two basic duties of the teacher - first, the delivery of instruction; and second, as supervisors of the pupils/students. Hey, that's something. Teachers ought to teach first. But that is not the case anymore (a good pun on case). Teachers tend to be supervisors first before they are teachers. As early as 1969, Fuller already noted that novice teachers are concerned more on "safety procedures" and "survival" - items for classroom management, while experienced teachers are focused on instruction. Dani said she's been teaching for ten years now.
That is why, (Kober, 2002; Jones, et al.,2002) talk of teaching only for the examination, as a generally viewed bad thing in education. But that is the case, in general. There are stats to be maintained, and closure of schools due to the low exam scores is prevalent (see article in New York Times dtd. Jan.11, 2006 by Michael Winerip). What happens now on the "belief on the educability of all children" (Seyfarth, 1991) as a major component of Effective Schools (Edmonds, 1981 in McMackin,1991)? There's the rub.
Hence, as educational managers, we have to look beyond compliance. We have to look beyond lawsuits and requirements of district heads. We are here in education, because we chose to. Because we felt that a certain calling, a vocation leading us to a path of being ranked among the greatest people that have ever graced this planet, including (on the top of the list, of course) Jesus himself. We are in education to teach the young, to value their freedom through responsibility. We teach them not only to comply with the law but to love the law, to fight for the law because it separates us from the beasts (John L. O'Sullivan in Manifest Destiny).
As administrators, on the other hand, the move is not - for me - to educate the teachers on the things that might "hurt them", no offense for Ms. Sewall. This will only make them cower in utter fear for the accidents that might happen. And they do happen by the way. Pygmalion effect tells us that a negative expectation leads to a negative effect called Golem Effect. Rather, we must educate them on loving the law, and the proud heritage of our nation. If we love the
country enough, obedience and support of the law will be automatic for us, with or sans the lawsuits. (That is why, we need to register our XPs and McAfees).
To our educators, we have to inculcate to them the great vocation of education. It is not a job, for God's sake. It is a vocation. It is a calling. If we all love our vocation enough, we will look towards each child under our supervision with utmost care. Our directress in Dominican College Sta Rosa last year repeats that it is not anymore our role to act in loco parentis, but in toto parentis. We are in total parenthood to every child under us. It is our obligation not only to ourselves as teachers, but also to God who called us to be one. It's like, we must regard these kids as our own. If we do, then legal concerns will not so much frighten us. In a sense, we are behaving slightly better than what is expected of us by law. Having these in mind, we put forward the legal aspects to them so that they will have a bed of nails as a fallback. Something to guide them on the downside... what do you think? ...those creepy ones by the ways.
References:
Arellano Law Foundation. "PHILIPPINE JURISPRUDENCE - FULL TEXT - G.R. No. 82325 September 26, 1989 ESPIRITU SANTO PAROCHIAL SCH. vs. NAT'L. LABOR RELATIONS COM" The Lawphil Project.
Fuller, Frances F. (1969). "Concerns for Teachers" American Educational Research Journal, 6, 207-226
Jones, Chris; Freeman, Eileen & Tangney, Brendan. (2002). "By their deeds shall ye know them...teaching to the test: the impact of assessment on teaching and learning in secondary school ICT classrooms in England, Wales and Ireland". University of Sunderland: UK
Kober, Nancy. (2002). "Teaching to the Test: The Good, The Bad and Who's Responsible" Testalk for Leaders. Issue 1, June 2002 Center on Education Policy.
McMackin, Howard Michael. (1991). "The Influence of the Effective Schools Model on the Invention, Adoption, and Implementation of Innovations by a School Improvement Team: A process study" (dissertation). The University of Connecticut.
NBSI Editorial Staff. (2000). "The Revised Penal Code: Act. No. 3815, as Amended)" Mandaluyong: National Bookstore.
Rowe, W Glenn & O'Brien, James (2002). "The role of Golem, Pygmalion,
and Galatea effects on opportunistic behavior in the classroom" Journal of Management Education Thousand Oaks:Dec 2002. Vol. 26, Iss. 6.
Seyfarth, John T. (1991). “Personnel Management for Effective Schools”. Massachussetts: Allyn and Bacon.
Winerip, Michael. (2006). "Bitter Lesson: A Good School Gets an 'F'".New York Times, Jan 11, 2006.
No comments:
Post a Comment