The debate between educators, bureaucrats, educational theorists, and parents about how American public schools should be run is far from over. Some parents have pulled their child(ren) from the system and begun home schooling because of the perceived deterioration and invasion of students’ and parents’ rights. Politicians are waving funds in the face of public school as a carrot to raise standards and test scores. Teachers are lowering standards because “Success for every student” mantras are being heard all across the country. Educational theorists are bashing the system from all sides and calling for the abolishment of the federal Department of Education and state education departments (Sykes, 285). Sykes is even calling for the elimination of undergraduate schools of education in state universities (Ibid).
Moving on to the privacy issue, Sykes calls for a removal of mandates. “Schools should be free from requirements that they solve society’s social, environmental, economic, and sexual problems and be permitted to get back to the business of teaching children to read and write” (Ibid). Unfortunately, Sykes lays forth what is wrong with schools and gives little example on how to change the system. He asks teachers to break ranks with politicians, try honesty, quality, demand raises for excellence and allow for competition in the field of education (290). He sees that “the public expects too much from teachers because educationists have led it to believe teachers could be substitute parents, psychotherapists, cops, social workers, dieticians, nursemaids, babysitters, and nose wipers and still do a decent job teaching kids to read, write, and do math” (Ibid). He and others (Phyllis Schlafly, et al) believe that when teachers get back to the basics (reading, writing, and arithmetic) the teachers will no longer be invading student privacy because time will be spent on learning the basics rather than on how a child feels about war, abortion, what mommy and daddy did last night. He recognizes that students have been asked these questions for a long time in American education. Back in the 1920’s schools began adopting the “child-centered” classroom approach. So where does that leave us?
Trying to do both jobs at the same time: encourage students to utilize prior knowledge and real life experiences while not focusing on the content but on the quality of writing. Today, teachers want to encourage real life simulations, as will be shown in the CAPT, but have to be careful about what they publish. With the advent of the Internet and the desire to compete in the global world, students and teachers are excited about the opportunities to publish online; however, with privacy issues at hand it is hard to determine exactly what the law denotes as private and in need of consent. Is publishing a student’s name because it is part of his/her record an invasion of privacy? Does it become an invasion of privacy once it goes on the Internet? Is asking a student to write about his/her family life in preparation for learning about different types of families an invasion of privacy? These are all questions to reflect upon while teaching.
Some guidelines to avoid controversy might be to (1) create a blanket statement about what will be done in the classroom that parents will sign; in the letter encourage parents to come observe and even participate in the classroom, (2) never ask a student a question that you yourself wouldn’t want to answer, (3) always allow a student to pass his/her turn to speak on private issues but demand that work be done (grade amount/quality rather than content), (4) give an alternate writing assignment, (5) never share information with others unless required by law, (6) have the students keep a journal of personal experience and a portfolio of academic writing, and finally (7) make sure that the environment is safe and secure from sarcasm, put downs, and any negativity that might hamper learning and sharing. Edward Pauly, in The Classroom Crucible, delineates what he has observed about classrooms.
-
“Teachers’ and students’ actions are continually exposed to examination by every person in the classroom, in an unrelenting mutual scrutiny that gradually reveals each person’s sensitivities and limitations to everyone else in the classroom, and greatly increases their susceptibility to influence by their classmates…. Teachers and students know that their contact with the other people in their classroom will be lengthy and sustained. For the whole school year, the quality of teachers’ and students’ lives is controlled by a single group of people, those that make up their classroom. They are always there” (40).
This alone leaves little room for privacy and is why teachers must create the feeling of a secure environment for interaction.