Skip to main content

Introducing a New Plan for Public Education: Put Educational Practitioners (Teachers) in Charge


The author, Kent Grusendorf, served as a member of the Texas House of Representatives for 20 years (1987-2007), all but two as a member of Public Education Committee, which he chaired for four years (2003-2007). His prior elected experience was as a member of the Texas State Board of Education for three years (1982-1984). In addition to this blog, Grusendorf is author of an 1889 Institute report also based on his forthcoming book.

Saving Public Education: Setting Teachers Free to Teach is the title of my forthcoming book, which explores a potentially new professional opportunity for teachers. Most teachers are in the profession because they love to teach. However, far too many leave the profession due to lack of respect, excessive external pressures, and general frustration. Many teachers stay in the profession, but yearn for greater freedom to just do what they love: Teach. Much of that frustration comes from mandates, and a lack of professional freedom.

Well Intentioned, but Wrong-Headed, Reform

Well-intentioned education reform advocates (including me) have attempted to reform the American education system for more than half a century. Most of these reform efforts have been designed to impose top-down mandates on our schools and teachers.

Now, half a century later, despite much hard work by educators, the minority achievement gap remains at unacceptable levels. According to the Brookings Institution, no progress has been made in literacy since the inception of the National Assessment of Education Progress in 1971. Low-income students perform three or four years behind grade level, and far too many teachers are frustrated with a system that fails to treat them as true professionals. 

Perverse Results

Virtually all meaningful reform efforts over the past few decades have either failed to produce the desired results, or have been undone over time due to political pressure. It is time to acknowledge one simple fact: Top-down reform efforts and mandates on teachers have not worked as intended.

Over the past three decades, teacher pay, after adjusting for inflation, has decreased. This has occurred even as spending, also adjusted for inflation, has increased dramatically. Today, Americans spend about $4 billion per school day on public education. Annually, we spend about $350,000 per classroom of 25; however, we only pay teachers about $60,000.

Over the past seven decades, administrative staff has increased by over 750 percent, indicating the system simply has its priorities wrong. It emphasizes process and control over the actual practice and success of teachers actively engaged in educating future generations.

America’s political leaders need to understand the subtle yet distinct difference between what is best for institutions and what is best for student success. Unfortunately, in America today, school funding is based primarily on institutional needs rather than student and teacher needs. Formulas are designed to fund the system rather than fund education within the system.

Today, teachers are paid less than their true market value, in part due to monopsony power, and often due to a lack necessary classroom supplies. Teachers are the backbone of the system, yet many are frustrated by lack of professional recognition, and lack of adequate financial support for their classrooms.

In public education’s early years, teachers were actually in charge of the school. They answered directly to parents and taxpayers. Most importantly, they had the ability to do what they thought best for their students. Today, teachers answer to multiple layers of school administrators, and to local, state, and federal politicians, all of whom impose top-down dictates on teachers and their schools.

A Better Solution: Free Teachers to Teach

It is time to acknowledge that top-down control has not worked well for millions of American students, and has not worked well for thousands of America’s teachers. The answer will not come from above. The answer is in the classrooms of America today. The solution is to set teachers free to teach. 

Teachers are the individuals who actually deliver education services. The system should be organized accordingly. If organized correctly, educators would be set free from politics and be allowed to focus totally on educating children. To accomplish that objective, teachers must be treated as real professionals, not just given lip service that they “are” professionals while they are denied the real decision-making power that other professionals possess.

Saving Public Education makes the case with simple data that the best way to reward teachers is to allow them to practice their trade as true professionals. Teachers would be empowered by allowing for a new optional component to the education system’s current structure.

This new option would be the professional teacher concept. The Professional Teacher Act would provide a new option for teachers – the freedom to practice as true professionals - that would be a win-win for the entire profession as well as for students and our society’s future. 

Once the money already held in trust for students, but sifted through a bureaucratic top-down system, is allowed to follow the child and teacher, there is no limit to the creative initiatives teachers could implement to achieve superior results for their students, for the education system, and for society.

The professional teacher concept would be a new option only available to certain public school teachers. It would allow a public school teacher who has been rated as proficient, or better, for three years to enter into “private practice,” much like a doctor, or lawyer, who is in private practice. Students would not be “assigned” to any teacher in private practice. If students choose a teacher in private practice, the state money would flow directly to the teacher.

This professional teacher concept is a win-win for the entire education profession, for children, and for society. Educators would be empowered to specialize and innovate to meet the individual needs of their individual students. Teacher pay would be enhanced as well, both for those who participate in the program and for those who remain in the current system. This is because the monopsony power, held by school districts, represses teacher pay to a level below market value. Setting teachers free to practice their trade would change that dynamic for the entire profession.

Bottom line:  The purpose of such a new professional opportunity would be to give education professionals the opportunity to function independently, with property rights similar to those afforded other professionals and the rewards inherent in those rights. Further, by allowing teachers to become the professional education practitioners they long to be, they will have the opportunity to innovate and create educational programs suited for the specific needs of their student clientele.

Comments should be addressed to bschlomach@1889institute.org. 

The opinions expressed in this blog are those of the author, and do not necessarily reflect the official position of 1889 Institute.

Popular posts from this blog

1889 Institute's Statement Regarding School Closures

The 1889 Institute, an Oklahoma think tank, has released the following statement regarding Joy Hofmeister’s proposal to keep schools closed for the remainder of the school year. We at the 1889 Institute consider Joy Hofmeister’s proposal to close Oklahoma’s schools for the rest of the school year a gross overreaction to the coronavirus situation. Even in the best of times and circumstances, suddenly shifting every student in the state from traditional classrooms to online distance learning will have negative educational consequences. This in addition to the economic burden on two-earner families forced to completely reorder their lives with schools closed. We believe many of our leaders have overreacted to worst-case scenarios presented by well-intended health experts with no training or sense of proportion in weighing the collateral damage of shutting down our economy versus targeting resources to protect the truly vulnerable. We say reopen the schools and stop the madness. ...

Can Government Force You to Close Your Business?

1889 Institute takes no position on whether any or all of these measures are warranted or necessary, or whether their economic fallout would inflict more human suffering than they prevent. We are simply evaluating whether they are legal.   With the unprecedented (in the last 100 years at least) reaction surrounding the outbreak of Covid-19, questions that few living legal scholars have considered are suddenly relevant.   Can a quarantine be ordered?   Can a mass quarantine, lockdown, or “cordon sanitaire” be ordered? Can businesses be ordered to change their behavior?   Can businesses be ordered to close? Can state governments order these measures? Can local governments order these measures? My legal brief addresses these issues from a statutory point of view; it is clear that state law gives the governor and mayors broad authority in a state of emergency. They must, of course, do so in a neutral way that they reasonably believe will help preve...

Past Performance Is Not Indicative of Future Results, Unless Government Props You Up

One January, a farmer decided to invest in the stock market. He’d had a bumper crop, and he wanted to shore up his financial future, planning for the time when providence would not be so kind. Knowing he wouldn’t have time to watch the market during the growing season, he did some research and invested heavily in a nice safe company: one that had a growth trend and had been named Fortune’s “Most Innovative Company” for six years.   That same January, a day trader wanted to make some long-term investments that he could keep on the back burner. He knew the experts were all abuzz regarding an industry-changing technology with huge growth potential. He invested in several up-and-coming companies based around this technology, certain he’d have a nice nest egg, should he ever fall on hard times.   Finally, a seasoned investor decided to divide his portfolio among dozens of strong companies. Wanting to keep his portfolio diverse, he also bought stocks in several small and str...

Lessons from a Soviet MIG Pilot about Public Education

On September 6, 1976, a fighter pilot from the Soviet Union named Viktor Belenko flew a MIG-25 fighter jet to Japan and defected. At the time, the U.S. and the Soviet Union were fully engaged in the Cold War. The MIG-25 was a super top-secret aircraft about which the Pentagon knew only enough to be frightened. Consequently, the MIG-25 impacted the development of the F-15 Eagle . Thus, Belenko’s defection had major implications for America’s national defense, allowing a better look into the true capabilities of the Soviet Air Force. But Viktor Belenko’s story is much richer than the fact of his defection. Belenko had some telling experiences, described in his biography, MIG Pilot . He related how, while he was stationed at a remote military base, his superiors were told that a dignitary high in the Communist Party was to visit. In response, large trees were transplanted to line the road between the air strip and the base’s living quarters and offices in order to make the base mor...