Entry #35 - May 24, 1999

"Not all teachers need, or want, to stay in the same neighborhood school for 30 years -- but we ought to make staying for 5 or 10 a much more attractive proposition, one where the teacher 'wins' by growing personally and professionally, and where the school and community 'win' by benefiting from the special skills and strengths these teachers have to offer."


Although we have five weeks of school left, things are winding down. Of course, we don't want the students to know we're doing their report cards already! It's hard enough to keep them focused and productive these last weeks as it is. Besides that, we have to try to think ahead and plan for next year.

Staff turnover is a fact of life in urban schools, ours not least. People know this is a "tough" school, and it's not often that experienced people come here by choice (I admit I was an administrative placement, myself, after enrollment changes at my previous school). It's too bad, because this is a school that definitely needs both the energetic young and the seasoned .... uh... I better not say "old!" -- I don't FEEL old!

"Old-timers" can have a stabilizing effect on staff and students alike, and help the new teachers adjust to routines, deal with some of the more egregious problems, and (very useful!) whisper surreptitiously which of the myriad make-work imperatives can safely be ignored. They maintain a sense of school tradition and continuity.

We have quite a few teachers who have successfully obtained voluntary transfers -- generally to schools which will allow them to specialize a bit more (all our teachers have a homeroom for the core subjects, in addition to a specialty), and one senior teacher, to our great relief, has opted to retire. We had noticed him growing more and more disengaged all year, so it did not come as a surprise -- and for the sake of the students, it's a good thing. Several others are close to their exit dates, but are still going strong and have lots to contribute, and they are staying.

I gave serious thought to looking for a move myself. However, I committed to staying next year to help get a whole-school math initiative (which was partly my idea) off and running, and I have a commitment from the principal to a revised organizational model for the seventh and eighth grades next year which will -- I HOPE -- be less fragmented:

I calculated that the kids were losing five full WEEKS of instructional time to class changes, and more block scheduling could significantly reduce this. I'm nosy, though, so I just HAD to see what the job openings were. I had my nose buried in the vacancy list book when the principal passed by and gave me a severe look. "You wouldn't!" she said. I grinned and said, "Only if MY SPECIAL JOB is on the list!" She raised a quizzical eyebrow. "Chief Board of Education Gadfly and Know-It-All," I teased (I'm infamous in our office for having "too darned many ideas!!" -- they must rue the day I discovered MIDDLE-L).

I'm going to attend a Fred Jones workshop this summer on Positive Classroom Discipline -- I like the focus on developing student responsibility and time management as well as "good behavior" -- and will be an evaluator for the provincial exams, so it will be a busy time. I'll have plenty of new learning to assimilate without trying to change schools. Besides, although changes are slow and incremental, there ARE changes and I feel they are positive. I might as well help keep the forward momentum going -- at least for now.

Constant staff change is a serious issue that is not often addressed, I feel. How can schools develop a particular learning climate, a focus that will lead to a better outcome for the students, if there is unending flux? It's hard to envisage ongoing staff development, improvement in teaching techniques and so on, where many, if not most, know they are at the school for a short time only.

Statistics indicate that as many as half the new teachers who start their careers in schools like ours will be out of teaching entirely within five years. Some burn out and many more vote with their feet. With demographic experts forecasting a severe teacher shortage within the next decade, we can't afford the loss of these gifted young people. How can we entice them to stay?

This is something higher levels of management should be addressing. What kind of incentive system could make teachers WANT to give schools like ours a try in the first place? Some kind of schoolwide program, in-service, professional growth. Some access to a wider learning community and opportunity to network with others involved in urban education. Perhaps access to some central resource libraries of teaching materials and aids. Above all, some some opportunities to form collegial and professional relationships -- classroom teachers can find themselves very isolated, especially in schools with no teams or joint planning time.

In these days of cyberspace, much networking could take place online. But young teachers certainly leave our school because they feel (and rightly, I'm sad to say) that they have been "dumped" themselves -- sent into the field of battle with no preparation, no supplies, and no tangible assistance or meaningful support. They feel abandoned, they struggle to meet the multifarious needs presented by the kids, and eventually they become discouraged, depressed and angry. They realize that the system which has so long shortchanged our urban students does not value them, either.

Principals make a big difference in the school, but the kinds of changes needed go beyond what a principal can do. "Whole school reform" efforts need to be supported from higher up (and need not be packaged programs) with a long-term commitment to staff development and resource support. If politicians and others are serious about "improving schools" they must target the lowest performers for intervention and assistance.

Statisticians will tell you that "reducing variance" (that is, the range of difference between the top and the bottom) is a good indicator of "system" improvement. That means instead of tinkering with the "OK" schools, special efforts should be made to bring the less successful up to the standard. I'm convinced this can be done, but it would take sustained effort and real, long-term commitment: NOT what people want to hear, in our age of the "quick fix" and instant everything.

Continuity is essential to community, though. Even in our neighborhood, which has a lot of transients due to demographics (recently arrived immigrants get acculturated, then move on), we have a core stable blue-collar residential area, where parents fondly (?!?) recall attending the school themselves, and often ask to have their children in the classes of the teachers they remember. Not all teachers need, or want, to stay in the same neighborhood school for 30 years -- but we ought to make staying for 5 or 10 a much more attractive proposition, one where the teacher "wins" by growing personally and professionally, and where the school and community "win" by benefiting from the special skills and strengths these teachers have to offer.

I find a sad irony in the current political rhetoric about "raising standards" and "improving teacher competency through rigorous recertification exams every three years" when the fact is that talented people are bailing out of the profession at an accelerating rate, and fewer and fewer young people are choosing teaching as their field.

Without a multifaceted plan to attract, support and maintain creative and competent young people, where will we be in ten years -- or twenty? Who will be in those classrooms? I don't hear anybody talking about THAT.


Read next week's entry >>>

<<< Read last week's entry


Post a comment about this week's diary entry

Find out more about Susan

Back to Middle School Diaries index