Saturday, June 04, 2011
The Teacher's Digital Soapbox
Although I haven't quite forgiven the New York Times for the introduction of its new business model, my status as a graduate student at a well-respected university means that I can continue to access its content free of charge via the computers at the library. It was there that I discovered this editorial by Jonathan Zimmerman criticizing teachers who post negative accounts of their classroom experiences on the Internet. As you might imagine, this topic piqued my interest, and I was curious what Zimmerman, a professor of education and history at NYU had to say.
The focus of Zimmerman's discussion are teachers who have been penalized for lashing out against their students in public forums, such as blogs, or social media sites like Facebook. These comments range in vitriol from claims that a student "dresses like a streetwalker" to the exclamation of one teacher regarding her fifth grade class that "I hate their guts." As Zimmerman correctly notes, these teachers have received attention from various online commentators, most of whom applaud them for exposing the poor work habits and disrespectful behavior they face on a daily basis. These teachers, according to their online advocates, are being unfairly attacked for exercising their freedom of speech.
Zimmerman devotes the bulk of his editorial to attacking these bloggers and their cyber-supporters, claiming that such speech restrictions are the least of teachers' worries. Indeed, he counters, "[t]he truly scary restrictions on teacher speech lie inside the schoolhouse walls, not beyond them. And by supporting teachers’ right to rant against students online, we devalue their status as professionals and actually make it harder to protect real academic freedom in the classroom."
To illustrate this point, Zimmerman lists several teachers who were fired in recent years for deviating from officially sanctioned curricula. Their offenses varied from encouraging students to learn about banned books to admitting their own political beliefs. At a time when public educators have come under increasing attack from state and local lawmakers, Zimmerman asserts that teachers undermine their status as professionals through the intemperate and ill-considered use of language. He compares the situation of teachers to those of lawyers and psychologists, both of whom have an obligation to avoid disclosure of private details about their clients as well as an expectation to avoid public disparagement. By the same token, teachers "should not lob gratuitous barbs at her students, which contradicts her own professional duty: to teach the skills and habits of democracy."
The "skills and habits" alluded to in that final sentence include "reason, debate and tolerance," concepts which I agree merit are essential to active participation in public life. Yet while I can endorse Zimmerman's conclusion that teachers have a responsibility to avoid political indoctrination, his claim that teachers should abstain from "public language that mocks, demeans or disparages the children they instruct" is trickier for me to embrace. Indeed, I would be a hypocrite were I to do so, given the content of some of my blog posts during my time at Underwood.
Even if one agrees that professionals must accept certain restrictions to their freedom of speech, the sad fact remains that teachers are not generally treated as professionals in today's society. The full extent of their responsibilities--the hours spent preparing lessons, grading homework, dealing with administrative and disciplinary matters, etc.--are rarely understood by those outside the classroom. The burden of these tasks is only likely to increase as state and federal education budgets are slashed, class sizes increase, and teachers find themselves under the gun to prepare students for an ever expanding battery of standardized tests. Surrounded by administrators who expect their employees to do more with less, students who increasingly expect to be entertained rather than educated, and parents who treat the teacher as solely responsible for the educational or behavioral shortcomings of their children, it is understandable that teachers, especially new teachers, would feel smothered.
Teachers unions and professional development workshops offer venues for educators to discuss these concerns, but the audience which most needs to hear about the challenges confronting the American education system lies outside the walls of our schools. And it is here, I would argue that the blogger or the responsible user of social media can make the greatest difference. Through their dispatches from the front lines, these individuals capture the obstacles confronting the American education system with a vivid, emotional intensity beyond the reach of scholars, government officials, and even traditional print journalists.
This is not to claim that aspiring teacher-bloggers should not adopt norms of their own to ensure that their classroom remains a safe, nurturing environment for students to grow and develop intellectually. As I recently argued, Zimmerman's warning to avoid "public language that mocks, demeans or disparages the children" can be reconciled with the need for honest reflections upon classroom climate if teachers embrace anonymity. There is precedent here, I would argue, in case studies which are regularly utilized as teaching tools in various other professions. By camouflaging the names of their workplace, employers, coworkers, and students, teachers can avoid alienating their colleagues or students while continuing to shed light on the education system. If teachers are careful, avoid active promotion of their blog and do not post material on less discreet social networking sites, it is possible that they will be able to further their cause--the recognition of teachers as professionals who deserve greater respect from students, parents, and the general public--without having to sugarcoat the difficult realities they face each day in the classroom.
(0) comments
Although I haven't quite forgiven the New York Times for the introduction of its new business model, my status as a graduate student at a well-respected university means that I can continue to access its content free of charge via the computers at the library. It was there that I discovered this editorial by Jonathan Zimmerman criticizing teachers who post negative accounts of their classroom experiences on the Internet. As you might imagine, this topic piqued my interest, and I was curious what Zimmerman, a professor of education and history at NYU had to say.
The focus of Zimmerman's discussion are teachers who have been penalized for lashing out against their students in public forums, such as blogs, or social media sites like Facebook. These comments range in vitriol from claims that a student "dresses like a streetwalker" to the exclamation of one teacher regarding her fifth grade class that "I hate their guts." As Zimmerman correctly notes, these teachers have received attention from various online commentators, most of whom applaud them for exposing the poor work habits and disrespectful behavior they face on a daily basis. These teachers, according to their online advocates, are being unfairly attacked for exercising their freedom of speech.
Zimmerman devotes the bulk of his editorial to attacking these bloggers and their cyber-supporters, claiming that such speech restrictions are the least of teachers' worries. Indeed, he counters, "[t]he truly scary restrictions on teacher speech lie inside the schoolhouse walls, not beyond them. And by supporting teachers’ right to rant against students online, we devalue their status as professionals and actually make it harder to protect real academic freedom in the classroom."
To illustrate this point, Zimmerman lists several teachers who were fired in recent years for deviating from officially sanctioned curricula. Their offenses varied from encouraging students to learn about banned books to admitting their own political beliefs. At a time when public educators have come under increasing attack from state and local lawmakers, Zimmerman asserts that teachers undermine their status as professionals through the intemperate and ill-considered use of language. He compares the situation of teachers to those of lawyers and psychologists, both of whom have an obligation to avoid disclosure of private details about their clients as well as an expectation to avoid public disparagement. By the same token, teachers "should not lob gratuitous barbs at her students, which contradicts her own professional duty: to teach the skills and habits of democracy."
The "skills and habits" alluded to in that final sentence include "reason, debate and tolerance," concepts which I agree merit are essential to active participation in public life. Yet while I can endorse Zimmerman's conclusion that teachers have a responsibility to avoid political indoctrination, his claim that teachers should abstain from "public language that mocks, demeans or disparages the children they instruct" is trickier for me to embrace. Indeed, I would be a hypocrite were I to do so, given the content of some of my blog posts during my time at Underwood.
Even if one agrees that professionals must accept certain restrictions to their freedom of speech, the sad fact remains that teachers are not generally treated as professionals in today's society. The full extent of their responsibilities--the hours spent preparing lessons, grading homework, dealing with administrative and disciplinary matters, etc.--are rarely understood by those outside the classroom. The burden of these tasks is only likely to increase as state and federal education budgets are slashed, class sizes increase, and teachers find themselves under the gun to prepare students for an ever expanding battery of standardized tests. Surrounded by administrators who expect their employees to do more with less, students who increasingly expect to be entertained rather than educated, and parents who treat the teacher as solely responsible for the educational or behavioral shortcomings of their children, it is understandable that teachers, especially new teachers, would feel smothered.
Teachers unions and professional development workshops offer venues for educators to discuss these concerns, but the audience which most needs to hear about the challenges confronting the American education system lies outside the walls of our schools. And it is here, I would argue that the blogger or the responsible user of social media can make the greatest difference. Through their dispatches from the front lines, these individuals capture the obstacles confronting the American education system with a vivid, emotional intensity beyond the reach of scholars, government officials, and even traditional print journalists.
This is not to claim that aspiring teacher-bloggers should not adopt norms of their own to ensure that their classroom remains a safe, nurturing environment for students to grow and develop intellectually. As I recently argued, Zimmerman's warning to avoid "public language that mocks, demeans or disparages the children" can be reconciled with the need for honest reflections upon classroom climate if teachers embrace anonymity. There is precedent here, I would argue, in case studies which are regularly utilized as teaching tools in various other professions. By camouflaging the names of their workplace, employers, coworkers, and students, teachers can avoid alienating their colleagues or students while continuing to shed light on the education system. If teachers are careful, avoid active promotion of their blog and do not post material on less discreet social networking sites, it is possible that they will be able to further their cause--the recognition of teachers as professionals who deserve greater respect from students, parents, and the general public--without having to sugarcoat the difficult realities they face each day in the classroom.
