Skip to main content

A Plan to Put Teachers in Charge, Give Parents Choices, and Benefit Children


How much confidence would you have in a law firm that was managed and run by legal secretaries and paralegals? Probably not a lot. Legal support staff constitute a vital part of their firms. A good paralegal can free an attorney to focus on the things only she can do. A bad paralegal can be worse than no paralegal at all. But even the best paralegal lacks the training and experience to formulate and execute a litigation strategy. You don’t want a paraprofessional running the show - their proper role is in support of the professional. So why aren’t teachers running our schools? 


The prevailing education model in this country is puzzling when compared to other industries. But it’s been this way so long it’s difficult to imagine anything else. We group children by age, not by knowledge or ability. We send them to schools based on address, not teaching methodology. Parents, except for the wealthy, have very little say over which school their children can attend. And teachers, the practitioners who are trained to teach, who are in the classroom every day, who are the soul of the education system, are answerable to more and more people who lack the skill and experience to accomplish what schools fundamentally exist to do. 


Teachers have always answered to the principal. He is almost always a former teacher, but does not interact with most students on a daily basis. His incentives are also misaligned. His metric for a successful day is to not have to deal with troublemakers. Rather than maintaining proper discipline and risk a phone call from an angry parent, he can simply shuffle them back to class. Unless he has a deep-seated sense of duty, this “easy” course of action makes the most sense.


Of course, the principal-in-charge model does track with other professional organizations. The senior partner at a law firm might spend so much time doing administrative work and meeting with important clients that he does little legal research. He’s still the ultimate authority within the firm. But he will also defer to an experienced attorney in matters of case strategy. The senior partner hasn’t been in settlement conferences, and hasn’t read the judge’s disposition in case management conferences. And certainly the IT staff, paralegals, and secretaries don’t tell experienced lawyers how to do their jobs. 


But a public school teacher might well be answerable to librarians, counselors, and technology staff, and receive relatively little deference from the principal. As schools have broadened their scope from education centers to one-stop-shops for child-centered social programs, the focus on education has waned. So too has the status of the teacher. They used to be the reason schools existed; now they are little more than cogs in the social-work machine. 


1889 has proposed a solution to put teachers back in the driver seat, and give parents a wide array of options when it comes to educating their children. In a Professional Teacher Charter, a teacher must be in charge of curriculum delivery. It’s in the law. The law gives experienced teachers in good standing the opportunity to open their own school, and be funded on the same basis as other charter schools. It could be a micro school - allowing pandemic pods to receive state funding. It could be a school designed to teach hundreds, competing directly with public schools. Teachers will be free to experiment with new teaching methods. Parents will be free to choose the school that best fits their child. 


Schools will be required to test their students once a year, using any of an approved list of norm-referenced national tests. They must make these results public. This will let parents see how their school stacks up to the competition. Failing schools won’t have to be disciplined by a board of education - parents will simply move to a better school the next year. Educate or die will become the order of the day. 


The freedom inherent in the model bill will allow Oklahoma to become a laboratory of pedagogy. Schools will be able to test and improve their teaching methods. Norm-referenced tests allow parents to compare the these methods based on actual output - how much students know. They will also be free to choose a school that they believe works best for their child, even if it doesn’t create the best test outcomes. Not every child learns the same way, and what works for nine students might not work as well for a tenth.


“More funding to the classroom” is the mantra and excuse for nearly every demand for more funding for public education. But the single most important classroom expense, and arguably the most expensive one, is the teacher. Yet the system, even in other types of charter schools, puts the teacher at the very bottom of the decision-making ladder.


1889’s model, which can be used in any state, flips the ladder and puts teachers in charge of schools and then empowers parents to choose the school that is best for their child. Ultimately, this can only benefit Oklahoma’s schoolchildren. 


Mike Davis is a Research Fellow at 1889 Institute. He can be reached at mdavis@1889institute.org. 

Popular posts from this blog

Lies We Tell in Government, and Our Debts to Truth

HBO’s mini-series,  Chernobyl ,  is a drama depicting  the disastrous  1986  explosion ,  and  hero ic efforts to control the  resulting  meltdown ,  of the Chernobyl nuclear power plant in Ukraine  (then part of the Soviet Union ).  A flawed man, but true hero,  Valery  Alexeyvich   Legasov , worked tirelessly to ameliorate the disaster’s consequences and  chiefly  investigated its cause. He was  Deputy Director of the  Kurchatov  Institute of Atomic Energ y , a Soviet elite, who  is portrayed at the end of  the  series making a dramatic speech at a trial about how the nuclear reactor exploded, when  such an explosion in that type of reactor  should not have been possible. In the course of the series, the audience  learns  that the reactor had a design flaw that had been covered up by the Soviet State (true).  The audience also learns  that...

The Problem of Diffuse Costs and Concentrated Benefits

Do you ever find yourself observing a seemingly illogical government program , spending decision, or other strange practice and ask “how is it that no one has fixed that?” If you are like me, you encounter this phenomenon regularly. This often takes the form of a curious headline (Save Federal Funding for the Cowboy Poets!) that most people see and can’t believe is real. I would like to suggest that this phenomenon often results from the problem of diffuse costs and concentrated benefits. To understand this concept, consider a hypothetical law that assessed a $1 tax on everyone in the United States with the proceeds to be given to one individual for unrestricted use as he sees fit. The people harmed by such a law—the individual taxpayers—will not be very motivated to spend the time and effort to convince Congress to change the law. They might resent the dollar taken from them for a silly cause they don’t support, but the lost dollar isn’t worth the trouble of doing something about i...

When It Comes to the Cox Center, “What if I Get to Meet a Movie Star?” Isn’t Good Enough

In a recent   post , 1889 Institute expounded on the fiduciary duty of elected officials “to act in the best interest of the people of the state as a whole,” a “high duty, executed as a public trust … wherein one puts the people’s interest above one’s own.” This fiduciary duty must not stop with elected officials. Once an elected body or an elected official – the legislature, a city council, the governor, or a mayor – has taken final action, the faithful implementation of each enacted law, policy, or program falls to an army of bureaucrats. Thus, a fiduciary duty to execute laws and policies with diligence and integrity, tantamount to that of elected officials, must extend to government employees. Recently, I had a few moments to sit down and watch a show with my children. Unsurprisingly, my son picked a series entitled “The Stinky and Dirty Show.” I was naturally skeptical that the show would yield any real value. However, as I watched, I found myself pleasantly surprised. Each ep...

Robbing the Poor to Give to the Rich: Corporate Welfare in Oklahoma

Imagine that someone forcibly takes your hard-earned money and then simply gives it to a multi-billion dollar corporation such as Home Depot, Wal-Mart, or Boeing. You receive no benefit from this forcible redistribution of wealth, and the sole beneficiary is the corporation. You would most likely be outraged, and justifiably so. Unfortunately, this forced redistribution of wealth happens in Oklahoma (and the nation as a whole) all the time via a variety of state and local corporate welfare schemes.   Policymakers either take your hard-earned money (via taxes), and directly subsidize large corporations or give those corporations tax breaks nobody else can get. All of this is done in the name of jobs and economic development, but these favors bring very little (if any) benefit to you. This is tyranny, plain and simple. In fact, it is not unlike the sort of advantage nobility took of commoners before the American Revolution, only the modern nobility is just very good at lobbying. In ...