Cyclical Nature of Education

* Our state has just approved new curriculum frameworks in reading and mathematics. In both areas we are leaving an emphasis on literature and math concepts to an emphasis on phonics and skill development.

In my 35 years as an assistant superintendent for instruction in one of the 20 large districts of the state, we have gone through at least three such changes. We will do skills and phonics now, but in six or seven years we will return to a more “big ideas” approach. We used to say in jest that if you just kept doing what you are doing, you would be right 50% of the time.

It appears to me that the educational leaders and citizens of the state have not learned much in the past 40 or more years.

They still believe that you can dictate a change and that change will occur in every classroom of the state. They have not learned that this does not happen. What does happen is that the teacher closes the door and does what he or she thinks is best for the student, which may have nothing to do with the designated program.

I would be willing to bet that in most schools in California, principals really do not know what is going on behind the classroom door.

They have some general idea about classroom environment and student behavior, but I seriously doubt that they can tell if a teacher is teaching the desired program as it should be taught.

I believe that it is time to stop this business of the curriculum cycle and focus on what is good teaching to ensure that it is taking place.

We have not done this for 40 years because it is hard to do. There is a danger that you will alienate teachers. Principals will have to sharpen skills to help teachers improve without losing good morale.

If this is not done, however, I can promise you that in about 10 years we will go through a new curriculum cycle change and still be dissatisfied with student learning because we have not improved the teaching act.

ROBERT J. SCHILLING

Newport Beach