This commentary by Frances Brock of Burlington, a retired Burlington High School history teacher, former president of the Burlington Education Association and an active National Board Certified Teacher.
This is a response to John McClaughry’s column, “The teachers union’s new pupil indoctrination plan.”
Mr. McClaughry’s complaint against the direction of education in Vermont places much blame on teachers, seemingly because they are members of a teachers’ union. You argue that the union, the National Education Association, has endorsed teaching to the critical race theory, which you suggest creates an imbalanced curriculum with indoctrinated values.
You also argue that parents need to regain control of the education of their children and state legislators need to make changes that offer more support for private or independent schools. Curiously, you concede the sweeping generalization that independent schools offer “more balanced curriculum, including curricula built upon moral and religious values.”
Setting aside, for a moment, your misunderstanding of critical race theory and its application — if any — to classroom teaching, the problem with your argument is straightforward. Your argument is based on the premise that what is taught in public schools is based on bad values, while independent schools teach good values.
Religious schools teach within the framework of their religion. (I’d be curious how broad the teaching of the medieval crusades is in a Catholic school.) While the state Agency of Education and publicly elected school boards provide oversight of public school curricula and teacher professionalism, little to no such oversight is offered or required of independent schools.
Your argument is less about whether and how critical race theory can or should be taught in schools but more about your apparent distrust and dislike of public schools. You openly claim public schools are a monopoly, which you oppose. The argument is weak because a monopoly is an economic term that defines a profit-making operation that prevents any competition within an industry.
Historically, Americans have accepted the “monopoly” status of service providers that offer universally needed — not wanted — services, like city electric and water companies, a city or country transportation system. These types of business, like public schools, are not driven by profits but are driven by providing services that all citizens need.
Further, your economic argument promotes expanded school choice options by couching your defense in a claim that public schools losing students “because of radical indoctrination will seek to regain their market share (and lost union dues) by making their offerings more appealing.”
Your premise is wrong. You are wrong to assume that parents don’t have any say in the curricula offered in their community schools. School boards are composed of community members elected to serve their community. And with any properly functioning democracy, citizens need to support candidates they believe will best serve their interests, but accept the vote of a majority.
The other side of this equation is that elected officials need to remember that they must serve the entire community, not just the faction that enabled their election.
You also are misguided about public school teachers and administrators. They are licensed based on their professional training and knowledge. They work to support the educational needs of all students.
In Vermont, the licensing process includes endorsing a set of high ethical standards that speak to behaviors, attitudes and respect of all. Teachers are evaluated and must regularly renew their licenses. The state has pulled licenses from those teachers and administrators who have violated those ethical standards.
Complaints against public schools that you raise do not actually discuss the curricula that are taught or the pedagogy teachers use to teach in their disciplines. Rather, your claims are red flags that ignite fear and distrust designed to build animosity toward teachers and diminish their effectiveness.
You just want to dismantle the public school system, which is odd, since one of the most admired institutions the United States has developed and exported to other countries is our public school system, which dates back to the requirement of the early New England Puritans that communities with 50 or more citizens must support the public education of all its children.
And in those public schools designed to serve all students, good teachers present lessons that consider multiple viewpoints of the various issues under study. Good teachers work to have students develop critical thinking skills by examining and analyzing different points of view in order to reach valid, defensible, fact-based opinions.
I urge you and others who are quick to criticize to take a closer look at what is actually taught and how issues are actually taught before raising alarms.
