Know Power, Know Responsibility: How to unleash the potential of every child in America

Part 1 — Chapter 15: A Dozen More Reasons

Author’s Note: I will publish additional sections of this book each week. You can find previously posted sections at the following links: Note to Parents of School-Age Children and Note to Teachers, School Administrators, and Other School Staff here; Introduction here; Prologues Part 1 and 2 here; Prologues Part 3 and 4 here; Part 1-Chapters 0 and 1 here; Chapter 2 here; Chapter 3 here; Chapter 4 here; Chapters 5 and 6 here; Chapter 7 here, Chapter 8 here, Chapter 9 here, Chapter 10 here, Chapter 11 here, Chapter 12 here, Chapter 13 here, and Chapter 14 here.

CHAPTER 15 — A Dozen More Reasons

This chapter provides twelve additional reasons the factory model of school needs to be replaced by a model and structure designed in and for the twenty-first century. The explanations are shorter and not explored as deeply, so they don’t justify full chapters, but each is compelling and contributes to the overall rationale.

Gender Equity

The importance of gender equity could justify its own chapter, but the explanation is straightforward and pretty brief.

Nearly all other reasons the factory model needs to be replaced contribute to or perpetuate gender inequity. Such inequity was the societal norm in 1893 when the current model was created. Consequently, it is inherent in the design and nearly impossible to address without implementing a new model that specifically ensures equity for all students — which can only occur through a model that respects the unique aspects of each student.

The compliance-centric nature of the current model perpetuates biases and inequity, many of which are based on gender and other traits. Further, the elements that inhibit critical and creative thinking and that discourage students from challenging norms, paradigms, and authority also discourage students from challenging the causes of gender inequity.

There are ongoing efforts to instill female students with a greater sense of self-worth and self-advocacy so they will graduate with the knowledge, skills, and — most importantly in this context — the disposition to become leaders in business, government, and communities. Yet the compliance-centric model and the lack of integrity this model forces upon students has severely limited achieving these goals. A community designing a new model of schools with the specific purpose of moving every child toward her or his potential would, by default, address gender equity — as long as the design and implementation were done with integrity.

The disproportionate impact of the factory system of schooling on female students alone would be sufficient to consider redesigning our schools. Every citizen — and therefore every high school graduate — should be able to help address challenges and advance our culture and technology. All should contribute in ways and to the extent of which they are able. We need to redesign our educational model to ensure all students — of any gender — are able to approach their potential in school and beyond.

Social-emotional learning and developing resiliency

School leaders are increasingly emphasizing social-emotional learning (SEL). These are skills associated with understanding and dealing with emotions, being empathetic, being patient, working with others, and setting and pursuing goals. Such skills allow people to deal with new situations and work through trauma and other challenges.

For over a decade, the US Army has been training units and individual soldiers in resiliency in an attempt to counter challenges such as post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), depression, and suicide. Resilient traits and using various resiliency skills allow people to be happier, more content, and better able to survive traumatic events as well as avoid their disabling long-term effects. Essentially, social-emotional learning is a means to developing resiliency.

While we hope students will not be subjected to traumatic events, we know many will be. Groups of students may face traumatic events such as school shootings or natural disasters, while individual students may face traumatic events such as a family member’s death, severe illness or injury, abuse, assault, or homelessness. Such events can lead to the same outcomes as those faced by soldiers. Consequently, if students can develop and strengthen resiliency through their school experiences, they will be better prepared when faced with traumatic events.

A key element of resiliency is mental flexibility — being able to deal with results that are counter to our expectations or that challenge our core beliefs and values. As noted in chapter 4, stress is created when reality doesn’t match expectations. When that stress reaches a critical level, it can manifest itself in debilitating ways, including PTSD, depression, and suicidal thoughts.

The current school structure purposely limits opportunities for students to use mental flexibility by limiting choices and standardizing nearly everything. Consequently, it is a challenge to foster actual social-emotional learning. Instead, students are often subjected to contrived situations to practice SEL-related skills, which does not lead to deep adoption of these skills. Further, infusing mindfulness and whole-child education (or other SEL skills) in the current model often requires removing or reducing something else.

By replacing our current structure, we can provide real opportunities for social-emotional learning. We can design the model so that most or all educational activities contribute to developing mental flexibility and mindfulness. This, in turn, will contribute to improved responses when faced with traumatic events along with other important benefits as noted throughout other chapters.

Intellectual and emotional well-being of future generations

All humans are born vulnerable. We leave the womb incapable of surviving on our own and depend on others to protect us and provide us with all we need to survive until we are self-sufficient. Yet even as we become able to perform all the physical tasks necessary to survive, we remain vulnerable until we develop the ability to fend off threats to our intellectual and emotional well-being.

In many parts of the world — and to many people in our country — threats to the basic human needs of food, shelter, clothing, and general safety are the greatest concern. However, for most Americans, the biggest threats fall higher on Maslow’s hierarchy. We remain vulnerable to threats to our self-worth, independence, and potential — which can restrict our ability to meet the more basic needs.

Unfortunately, there are people who strive to influence and intimidate those who are vulnerable. This may be for self-serving purposes or because they have been mentally and emotionally abused themselves. They may mistakenly believe their only salvation will come through making others suffer as they have. Essentially, they are bullies.

The best defenses against mental and emotional threats are thoughtfulness and resilience. Like any strength and skill, these can only be developed through meaningful practice. One cannot become fit and healthy just by reading about fitness and health, nor can one build and strengthen thoughtfulness and resilience this way. All require applying related knowledge and skills regularly and in meaningful ways. While teaching and simulations may raise awareness, they will not lead to real skill development and certainly not mastery.

Many children have opportunities to learn and practice these skills, but they don’t come through academic school activities. Rather, they come through sports, extracurriculars, and their families and communities. Schools cannot provide these opportunities until they provide meaningful power and authority to their students. That is, they must have students take charge of their own learning and development.

Fostering institutional adaptability and resilience

Like individuals, institutions and organizations need mental flexibility to be resilient. When a natural disaster, such as large-scale flooding or a tornado, makes a school building unusable or shuts down an entire community’s educational system, there is usually a scramble to figure out how the students will be able to attend school.

Most schools rely on the structure of a building and the school model to deliver instruction and struggle when these structures are not available. However, many schools discover that fostering student learning outside the usual limiting structures can be liberating. They may be surprised — though they shouldn’t be — at how well students can adapt when forced into these unexpected situations. Imagine what they could do if their educational model actually prepared them to thrive when confronted with sudden change.

The current school model is designed to limit surprises and typically becomes dysfunctional when the structure is removed. By discarding the factory model of schools, it’s possible to design an educational system that is fully adaptable to any changes, whether those changes are planned or unplanned. In fact, the system can be designed to use such changes to enhance student learning rather than being hindered by them.

Fostering cooperation, collaboration, and respect for differing ideas and beliefs

It seems that if ever there were a time our society needed the ability to cooperate, collaborate, and respect different ideas and beliefs, it’s now. We are technologically advanced and have the highest standard of living in history, yet countless challenges continue to inflict our country and world. What could we accomplish and how many challenges could we vanquish if we were better at these skills?

Parents, teachers, employers, and broader society all seem to agree that helping students develop skills in cooperation and collaboration is extremely important. Most also support developing respect for different ideas and beliefs. Toward that end, almost all schools include these in their goals for students, and many include them somewhere in their curriculum. As with most skills discussed in this book, these can’t be taught, and our current school model does not allow the experiences necessary for them to be developed. For students to truly develop, strengthen, and build an appreciation for these skills and their related attributes, they must have ongoing opportunities to apply them in ways that are personally meaningful and through which the outcomes are of significant, personal value.

We need a school model through which students (not teachers) create teams based on shared learning goals and purposes, combined with common or synergistic interests. The students would practice effective communication, teamwork, cooperation, collaboration, and responsibility with immediate, relevant, and natural consequences around something of intrinsic value to the students. This could be a regular, ongoing element of the school model so that these attributes become deeply ingrained and practiced.

In addition to learning and practicing cooperation and collaboration, students would learn the value of diversity on their teams — not just racial or ethnic diversity but diversity of all sorts. When the outcomes of their efforts are personally important, students will develop a real appreciation for the value of different perspectives, experiences, opinions, and beliefs. Only in personally meaningful forums will students come to understand how such differences foster growth and progress. They will also, then, discover the shortcomings of relying on their self-supporting ideas and opinions and how it limits their ability to grow and improve.

Teacher shortages and attrition

Due to fewer people choosing to become teachers and the career’s high rate of attrition, there is a growing shortage of well-qualified educators. Numerous reasons have been cited for this, (Sutcher, Darling-Hammond, & and Carver-Thomas, 2018) but I would argue that a principal element underlying many of these factors is what it means to be a teacher in our current school model.

Within our current educational model, being a teacher almost always requires adherence to a set schedule and calendar and a prescribed methodology for delivering instruction. Teachers are typically required to use an approved curriculum for all classes, and their classes may be cancelled if they don’t achieve a minimum enrollment. The level of student commitment to any of a teacher’s courses or school in general will vary greatly. The working conditions in some schools can be extremely challenging. And teachers spend a significant portion of their day doing things other than teaching.

Such a situation is not very attractive to potential teachers even before considering pay and benefits. Those willing to jump into such positions are likely dedicated and doing so for reasons beyond pay; they often see being a teacher as a calling more than just a career choice. However, if the pay and benefits are not sufficient, many potentially high-quality teachers will opt for alternative careers that offer flexibility, provide a better work environment along with better pay and benefits, and fulfill the three elements that fuel human motivation as discussed in chapter 13.

As noted in that chapter, to be motivated and do their best creative work, people need autonomy, the opportunity to master challenging skills, and to be part of a bigger purpose. On their surface, schools offer these things, but digging deeper we find that the current structure places severe limits on all of them — especially for the most creative and driven teachers. We need a school structure that actually leverages these elements so that they contribute to increasing student opportunities.

Such a system could provide flexibility that allows teachers to foster student learning. Rather than being limited to teaching between eight and four, teachers may be able to flex their schedule or offer their expertise in an on-demand model as they pursue other endeavors that will improve their expertise. Rather than requiring teachers to base classes on an approved curriculum, they would constantly be challenged to assist students in achieving individual learning goals through means that are most effective for each student. Rather than focus on “classroom management” and student compliance, teachers could focus their entire effort on facilitating student learning.

The result would be “teaching” positions (that title may need to change due to the implications it holds) that are exceptionally rewarding beyond pay and benefits. The best and brightest would be clamoring to fill these positions the way many now want to work for cutting-edge companies. Many entrepreneurs — especially those creating socially conscious products and businesses — would see the field of education as enticing.

There are plenty of people who would love a job that contributes to a better society by preparing future generations, but many are put off by the current environment and culture of schools. Changing that culture so that students are excited about and committed to being there will create an environment that attracts highly skilled teachers who will stick around for the long term.

Accommodating diverse family situations

The current school structure — in particular the annual, weekly, and daily schedule — is a relatively good fit for families on a schedule that was the norm in the ’50s through ’80s — that is, where the parents work Monday through Friday, eight to four, and can figure out childcare during the summer. Parents who don’t work such schedules have always needed to make adjustments to deal with childcare, parent-teacher conferences, school events, a sick child, or any number of other school-related activities.

Many schools try to accommodate parents and families with extraordinary circumstances, but our current structure means such families will almost always be less connected to the schools. That has an impact on their children’s school performance. Even families who fit a more traditional schedule may have to compromise when planning vacations and other activities that would take students out of school.

A new model could provide flexibility that benefits all families, including those with limited transportation options, families of military members who may be deployed for extended periods, families that are transient and frequently move within or between school districts, parents facing significant health problems that limit their mobility or ability to attend public events, or any number of other situations. This would also benefit families who are faced with emergencies and unforeseen circumstances that would, under the current model, create numerous challenges and typically compromise a student’s learning.

Such a model would also be attractive to a broad range of potential teachers and be better able to leverage volunteers, engagement of parents and other family members, and learning opportunities that are outside of the classroom and school building. Designing a school model that accommodates families would accommodate numerous situations that could improve student learning.

Countering societal challenges

Despite incredible advancements in science and technology, our world remains flush with challenges such as poverty, death in vehicle accidents, shooting deaths, crime, violent crime, drug-related crimes and deaths, costly health care, heart disease, cancer, and general divisiveness. I believe a primary reason for the continuation of these tragedies is that we are collectively stuck in a paradigm of limited ways to address most of them. When other options arise, they often cause controversy due to partisanship or misinformation or because they seem to threaten some aspect of our lives.

I am a true believer in humanity and our ability to come up with solutions that can satisfy everyone’s actual concerns and fears. This, however, requires looking beyond our strongest biases and being open to thoughtful conversations with others, including those with whom we regularly disagree or even have open disputes. It also means, eventually, being able to trust these same people.

Unfortunately, the current school structure actually models this very challenge. The message to students, parents, and everyone else is that there is one way to do school — one model and structure. This structure requires that all students adhere to the norms and requirements of the school. When someone proposes a different approach, it is often rejected and turns into a contentious issue within a community.

As noted elsewhere, the current structure also fuels the divisiveness that stops us from having thoughtful, productive conversations about these challenges. Concurrently, the almost universal acceptance of this structure reinforces the acceptance of existing paradigms, processes, and expectations while discouraging changing paradigms, innovation, and higher societal expectations.

Instead, we could design a school model based on current research and created through an innovative, collaborative process that uses practices similar to those used in creating cutting-edge organizations. That model could be a learning organization that models flexibility, adaptation, innovation, and risk-taking for its students, staff, and the community. Such a model could ensure students learn and practice the skills that would allow them to flourish in a dynamic, uncertain world. These students would be better prepared to confront new, challenging situations they encounter and to address numerous societal challenges, both as individuals and working collaboratively.

ONE SOCIETAL CHALLENGE: THE OPIOID EPIDEMIC

Consider how a compliance-centric nature might be contributing to our nationwide opioid epidemic. A primary source of this epidemic is patients becoming addicted after being legitimately prescribed painkillers by their doctors for an injury or illness. Many patients misunderstand the risks and alternatives and don’t question their physicians, due to a learned deference to those in authority or a lack of confidence.

Some doctors fail to volunteer information about how using such narcotics could lead to dependence on the drug or other opiates, even when asked about side effects. Patients may be unaware that some doctors receive incentives from companies supplying the drugs being prescribed.

Numerous efforts are underway at the local, state, and federal levels to find legislative solutions to address the opioid epidemic. I would argue the long-term solution is to ensure our students learn to think critically, advocate for themselves, and know that there are times it is expected they will question and even challenge authorities. Then, when a doctor recommends a narcotic painkiller, patients will be able to ensure they are fully informed before making any decision.

Increasing and decreasing student enrollments

Districts and schools that have dynamic student enrollment numbers face numerous challenges that are primarily a result of the current school model. Funding sources and formulas are often tied to student enrollment, so when student enrollments decrease, districts may face a funding crisis. However, the costs to the school and district usually don’t decrease proportionally. The decreased enrollment is typically spread across several grades and schools, making it difficult to reduce staffing. Consequently, staff costs remain fairly steady while funding drops. The operational costs of the schools don’t drop proportionally either, so the gap between costs and funding grows as well.

When student enrollments climb quickly, adequate space must be found that is conducive to instructional activities, and funding needs to be procured for this space and associated costs. Funding sources and formulas may or may not adequately offset these costs, and rarely do existing funding sources cover construction costs. Thus, the districts must often pass a community referendum to build additional facilities. Schools either need to increase class sizes or hire more staff, although they may be unable to find enough teachers to maintain a reasonable student-to-teacher ratio.

The worst situations occur in districts that see a substantial enrollment increase requiring new construction but then see a later enrollment decrease, leaving them with new construction and other costs while facing decreased funding. Similarly, districts may act and budget based on enrollment projections, only to find the projections don’t pan out.

Our current educational model leaves very few options for districts facing changing enrollments, and nearly all the options compromise student learning. A new model of education could be designed to account for this volatility without compromising learning. In fact, it might be designed to leverage the volatility in ways that contribute to opportunities for learning. The model could also be designed to reduce or eliminate the cost challenges that typically arise from volatile enrollment numbers.

Creating a true sense of community for all students

Our current educational model is an obstacle to developing a true sense of community among students and staff. For a true sense of community, there must be mutual respect and real trust among the community members. This develops through shared experiences — in particular, experiences that are meaningful, sometimes emotional, and occasionally traumatic — and in an atmosphere of integrity. Although many schools develop such a sense of community, there are almost always some students who end up being excluded.

A primary obstacle to building community stems from our ongoing efforts to improve learning within an outdated system. As educators, we constantly try to convince students (and ourselves) that everything we’re doing is necessary and important. We continue to operate in a model that most people, on reflection, would recognize is out-of-date and ineffective. And students can see through all of this.

We implement activities and events meant to build community and strengthen relationships because we know they are important. However, to have integrity, our efforts need to honor student individuality and trust them by ceding power to them. The current school structure simply cannot accommodate this. The students see through it and, rather than creating community, the school’s integrity is diminished. While many students recognize the good intentions of the school and staff, they also sense how the school structure is not conducive to community or learning and wonder why this isn’t addressed.

Of course, the current model itself creates challenges to meaningful relationships and a sense of community. With its rigid structure and organization, it’s difficult to get to know students and allow them to get to know us. At the middle and high school, this becomes even more challenging, as students in most schools move from classroom to classroom several times each day and change classes each semester or year (sometimes even quarter).

Recognizing this, many schools implement homerooms or advisories to provide opportunities for relationships and community to be built. However, in many cases, this is actually counterproductive because the efforts lack integrity. Students are assigned to a teacher or group rather than selecting one with whom they might better connect. Some students will end up with an advisor or homeroom teacher who is just not up to building relationships and creating a sense of community. Activities are often directed and contrived with no opportunities for organic relationships to bloom and trust to build. No matter how genuine the intention, some students will be worse off from this experience.

It’s not for lack of care or effort that schools lack a sense of community or that some students feel disconnected. A new model of school could be designed to foster true community and real trust and do so with integrity.

COMMUNITIES EASE TRANSITIONS — TO AND BETWEEN SCHOOLS

One of the biggest challenges families face is the start of formal schooling. Deciding when a child should begin kindergarten can be overwhelming for some parents, and there is no absolute means of determining the correct age. The change to an entirely new environment — whether from a preschool or in-home care situation — can be traumatic. Later transitions, from elementary to middle and then to high school, can also be challenging and can inhibit learning — especially in larger districts where multiple schools feed into the next level school.

A sense of community among students, staff, and others can significantly ease such transitions. In small districts, where all students know each other and move from grade to grade and school to school together, the transitions are much easier. The size of these districts facilitates a greater sense of community. This can be done in even the largest districts, if the school model is designed to do so. In addition, a new school design can take transitions into account and make them significantly less challenging. Transitions could be part of a process that enhances learning rather than inhibiting it.

Economic vitality and the “skills shortage”

Our country’s economic stability and vitality depend largely on having the necessary workforce. We need sufficient workers with the necessary skills and who are willing to work for the offered wages and benefits to fill the available jobs. As businesses grow and need new workers and as entire new industries emerge, workers who have or can develop the necessary skills will be needed. Those workers then become consumers, continuously feeding money into the economy.

Anyone paying attention over the past few years has heard the term “skills gap” or “skills shortage.” Even at the height of the recession, when unemployment was high and jobs were in short supply, there were numerous stories about tens of thousands of available jobs for which there weren’t people with the necessary skills. This is not, however, a recent problem. This claim and similar terms have been around for decades. There have been reports, task forces, and recommendations created over the years aimed at closing the “skills gap,” apparently without much effect.

The current school model and the paradigm about what students should do after high school graduation are primary reasons for this situation. While we expect those who advise students to have their best interests in mind, they are too often trapped by old paradigms about college and careers. Concurrently, those marketing their colleges and programs are often self-serving, as are those industries marketing their career opportunities.

This is another reason students must develop critical thinking skills — so they can see through the hype and marketing and get to the facts. While knowledge of personal financial literacy and labor market information will be crucial to informed choices about employment and careers, it is skills in critical thinking and information analysis that give this knowledge value. Further, students need self-assurance and adaptability. With the rapidly changing job market and economy, students must have the ability and confidence to prepare for and pursue new opportunities.

These skills must be a focus of the new model of education that will replace our current factory model. In addition to developing graduates who are able to leverage skills gaps and adapt to changing job markets and opportunities, these skills will help address another looming challenge — the general shortage of working-age adults.

A low birth rate in the US means we are not creating enough new workers to replace those who are aging out of the workforce, let alone to fill the new jobs being created. Since it is unlikely the birth rate is going to increase, future generations must understand this challenge and its implications and then work collectively to adapt our society. Being part of the solutions to this challenge — or being able to objectively support electoral candidates who will help develop solutions to this challenge — will require critical thinking and analysis skills and the ability to adapt. We need to create schools that can turn out such graduates in order to ensure our future economic vitality.

Strong, effective national security and defense

As a senior military officer, I regularly encounter service members that reflect the shortcomings of our educational system. Chief among these is a struggle or inability to think critically. Some may think the military is an inflexible hierarchy that values compliance and discourages critical thinking. The exact opposite is true. Today’s military missions require service members at all levels who can think critically. They must also be intrinsically motivated and have the confidence to express ideas and opinions that could improve our operations and avoid disasters.

The military needs service members who follow orders because their own critical thinking and their experiences with a given leader provide confidence the orders are necessary and right, not blindly out of fear of the leader. Military history is filled with examples where blindly following orders has led to disasters. We also need military leaders who inspire this sort of confidence.

Of course, the vast majority of our service members went through the same educational system as everyone else, a system that, for twelve to sixteen years of their lives, rewarded compliance. Consequently, service members of all ranks and positions often fail to think critically, and they readily fall into mind traps. Even worse, our military as an institution has its own serious structural and operations challenges due to an inability to consider large-scale reinvention that could make it much more efficient and effective. The military tries to develop these skills in service members, but it battles institutionalism and inertia similar to what is found in public education.

For strong national security, the general population also must be able to think critically and be willing to challenge things when they don’t seem right. Our entire population must be able to discern accurate, objective information from opinions, biased data, and outright lies when they may impact our lives. This is especially true for things that affect national security, such as choosing whom to vote for, what legislation to support, where to spend our money, and balancing liberty with security. We must be able to recognize when someone is trying to manipulate us, especially when this might be foreign governments, criminals, or terrorist organizations.

Nearly every reason stated in this book is relevant to ensuring future generations are able to contribute to our nation’s defense and to national security, whether as citizens or as members of the military.

The next chapter of Know Power, Know Responsibility will be posted soon. To be notified when it is posted and when I publish other new stories, select the “Subscribe” icon under my profile on the right.

Kevin Miller is a Boomer who joined the Army during the Cold War and continues to serve. He has spent 30-plus years working in K-12 education as a teacher, administrator, and consultant and is now on a mission to reinvent our school model. His book Know Power, Know Responsibility provides the imperatives for a complete redesign of schools and the way to get there. See his website knowresponsibility.com to learn more.