The Hierarchy is Wrong at all the Schools

Edward J. Dodson

[23 April, 2012]

How we as a society choose to provide formal education to our children is and always has been a controversial issue. As the nineteenth century progressed, an increasing number of communities voted to establish and pay for a system of publicly-administered schools. Taxes on the assessed value of real estate were levied to cover the costs. As a consequence, a strong correlation developed between the value of the real estate tax base and the quality of the schools in individual communities. Some residents choose to send their children to schools operated by private or religious organizations. In recent years, so-called "charter schools" have been created to provide what proponents see as a more rigorous curriculum in a more disciplined environment than is available in the other public schools in the community.

What I want to suggest is that even those schools with a best records of achievement (as measured by graduation rates and the percentage of students who go on to earn a college degree or other post-high school training) are hampered by their organizational structure. Those who provide the direct teaching experience to students are consistently at the bottom of the schooling hierarchy.

In the public system, an elected school board hires administrators who hire classroom teachers. In the private schools, an appointed board of trustees hires administrators who hire classroom teachers.

This hierarchical structure is exactly upside-down. A far more robust model would have teachers who share the same philosophy of education able to come together to form a professional partnership and open a school. As with other similar organizations, these partners would hire administrators to handle the non-teaching responsibilities. The school would succeed or fail based on the ability to attract and retain students. Teachers would finally obtain their appropriate status as professionals rather than as interchangeable members of a trades union.