We want great schools and great teachers. We want everything. That's high-flying rhetoric. It's harder and harder today for teachers and schools to be great. But they can be competent. That's what we ought to be talking about. Even that is no small thing to expect.
When great teachers are defined, words like these are used: high expectations for students, being prepared, organized, clear, smart and in touch with parents. While all of these characteristics are necessary to be a competent teacher, they are not sufficient to be a great teacher.
A graduate student told me her definition of a great teacher: "He or she inspires students to look at the world in new ways."
I thought to myself - how much harder these days it is to be great teacher - a passionate, creative personality who takes detours now and then through the curriculum.
Great teachers always have been rare. What they need is the freedom to use their ideas in unique ways to inspire children. I fear these days that, with more rigid curricula, we are going to lose whatever great teachers may still be hanging on.
Last week I visited open houses at schools in the Washington area. I surveyed the bulletin boards, enjoying children's writings and artwork. Then I noticed that next to each was a code from the "mastery list." The codes probably connect to state tests. Everything gets labeled.
More than a decade ago, I was the public member of the National Assessment Governing Board. When the student proficiency standards were voted on, I was the lone voice questioning them. I abstained, but not because I am against standards or proficiencies. It was because I did not know how these cut-off points would work on behalf of children.
Now we know. They are not working as hoped, and the overall goal of every student reaching 100 percent proficiency in a few years seems farther away.
How about "great" schools? There have been many learned papers written on this topic. Perhaps the inimitable Yogi Berra (referring to baseball) came up inadvertently with one of the best definitions of great schools: "They (fans and students) ain't going to show up if they don't believe that anything good is going to happen."
When I walk into a school, I can tell right away if it's good - and that's not because of the clean halls, attractive bulletin boards or test scores. These are nice, but they are not sufficient.
Mostly, I look and listen for the interactions between people. Is there a hum of activity coming from each room? Are children moving about, talking, sharing and working with each other?
When teachers present a lesson, are students encouraged to speak up and to speak to each other? You know when this happens because you see children looking at each other and not just at the teachers. Is there a sense of respect you observe as teachers talk with children, children with each other, teachers with administrators and vice-versa?
I observe what happens when there is a problem. When a child misbehaves, how is it handled?
I listen to how staff responds to parent questions and concerns, I visit parts of the school beyond the classroom:
The front office: How am I greeted?
The gym and sports field: How are the kids playing together?
The cafeteria: What does it look and sound like?
What makes schools happy places? The answer is people. Curriculum and computers are nice, but the real answer is people who are responsive, caring and supportive. To keep students from dropping out, either from school physically or while sitting in the classroom, schools have to be places where there is hope that something good is going to happen.
Dorothy Rich is founder and president of the nonprofit Home and School Institute, MegaSkills Education Center in Washington. Write her at the Home and School Institute, MegaSkills Education Center, 1500 Massachusetts Ave. NW, Washington, D.C. 20005.