I have read this thread with great interest. As always, I am impressed by
the wise and thoughtful insights offered by readers of this list.
However, I can't help but comment that we seemed to have missed the most
creativity stifling pressure facing many of our members: The College
Admission Process.
Most of us include the term "college preparatory" in our mission statement.
College preparatory implies two things: where our students are accepted and
how well they do once they are enrolled. I believe that colleges are
beginning to change in a way where innovation of the nature discussed here
will help our students achieve success. The college admission process,
however, is an albatross around the neck of any school or educator trying to
become innovative. As long as we consider ourselves "college preparatory",
as long as our constituencies judge us on successes in college acceptance,
and as long as the admission process itself remains focused on AP classes,
GPA's, and SAT's, our creative efforts are destined to be throttled.
Just a thought.
P
Peter Richardson
Director of Technical Services
Rutgers Preparatory School
1345 Easton Avenue
Somerset, NJ 08873
732-545-5600 x238
On Tue, Jan 12, 2010 at 8:05 AM, Fred Bartels <fredbartels@gmail.com> wrote:
> Thanks to all who have participated so far in this difficult discussion. I
> knew it would be a challenge for our community but you all have been great
> about calmly and openly exploring the issue. The subject has a kind of
> taboo
> about it and it is never easy to broach cultural prohibitions. Private
> messages I've received may indicate that there are many others with
> opinions
> on this subject who do not feel free to speak openly.
>
> So why bring it up? Why disturb the community equilibrium?
>
> I can assure you it is not done lightly. I've been teaching for 27 years,
> I'm successful at my job, and am one of the higher paid educators at my
> school. But I'm a teacher. I value the search for the truth, even when it
> involves wrestling with difficult questions. I do not believe we should
> turn
> off the constructive skepticism we work to instill in our students when we
> turn to examine our own institutions.
>
> So, with that being said, I have some questions.
>
> One of the arguments that has been put forward to justify the growing
> disparity between median head salaries and median teacher salaries is that
> the headmaster job has grown to be more complex, difficult and full of
> aggravation. The job, as described by many, sounds really terrible!
>
> This leads to my first question. Virtually all heads started out as
> teachers. Given the apparently incredibly unpleasant nature of headship is
> there a long list of heads who have gone back to full-time teaching? If so,
> it would be great to get one of these people to participate in this
> discussion.
>
> After reading a number of the rationales using the job difficulty argument
> to justify the growing inequality in head /teacher median income, the
> following thought experiment occurred to me.
>
> Picture a room full of headmasters, most of whom are males. Now imagine
> addressing them, and saying something like this. "It has come to our
> attention that your job really isn't very pleasant anymore. We think we
> have
> a great solution for you. There are not enough male teachers in most lower
> schools. We can place any of you, who want to bail from your depressing
> headmaster job, into a full-time teaching position in a self-contained
> lower
> school classroom. But wait, it gets better! You know how that rapidly
> increasing headmaster salary has been narrowing your focus and stifling
> your
> creativity? Well, we can take care of that too. When you go back to the
> classroom we will make your compensation one quarter of what it is now,
> right in line with the other classroom teachers. What do you say guys? Any
> takers for this wonderful opportunity?"
>
> If you have read this far, and played through the scenario above, what do
> you imagine the reactions of the heads would be?
>
> I have many more questions but those two are probably enough for today.
>
> Fred
>
> [ For info on ISED-L see https://www.gds.org/podium/default.aspx?t=128874]
> Submissions to ISED-L are released under a creative commons, attribution,
> non-commercial, share-alike license.
> RSS Feed, http://listserv.syr.edu/scripts/wa.exe?RSS&L=ISED-L
>
[ For info on ISED-L see https://www.gds.org/podium/default.aspx?t=128874 ]
Submissions to ISED-L are released under a creative commons, attribution, non-commercial, share-alike license.
RSS Feed, http://listserv.syr.edu/scripts/wa.exe?RSS&L=ISED-L
