The arrogance of "accountability"
If you don’t pass inspection, you’re gone. (Image by Bilderandi from Pixabay)
I’ve written in the past about “the real world” rhetoric and the fact that many teachers feel it’s their job to prepare their students for a mythical future boss who won’t let you do any work over again or negotiate a deadline. Who are these bosses that act like fifth-grade teachers? Let’s all steer clear of them.
Beyond the silly notion that the teacher’s job is to prepare students for some mythical future job where a boss cares more about deadlines than the actual work product (“Nope! It’s a day late! I don’t even want to look at it,”) is the dark truth that these teachers are doing that very thing under the guise of “teaching accountability.”
If I, as a teacher, permit assignments to be turned in late and allow retakes of tests, I am indeed sending the message that the content of what I’m teaching is more important than accountability and responsibility. In other words, I’m focused on making sure students have the opportunity to learn the material and demonstrate that they understand it before they move on from my class. I would argue that ensuring that the student is actually learning the material is my primary role, not “holding them accountable” with strict deadlines and only one chance to show what they’ve learned.
The counter-argument, which I heard just yesterday, is that a student who becomes accustomed to flexible deadlines and multiple chances to test their understanding will not be able to adjust to the harsh real world in which, supposedly, “one chance is all you get.”
Setting aside, once more, the notion of the schoolmarm-like boss, I ask you: If a person has so much trouble with nuance that they are unable to adjust to different circumstances, shouldn’t we work on establishing that critical real-world skill? Why is meeting the deadline the most important thing?
Deadlines and test scores are easy to measure — they bring order to the world. As a teacher, it’s easier for me to evaluate someone’s compliance and obedience in an established system. It is much harder to look at the nebulous world of math or history or literature to determine how much someone really understands from what they have been taught, and the degree to which I, as the teacher, am responsible for what has not been learned.
A sixth-grade student of mine, prior to working with me, got a 37 on a math test. Her teacher expressed no concern about the student’s level of understanding or the circumstances surrounding the test. This teacher, who taught the material to the student himself, suggested that the student should have studied harder. But lack of study time outside of class isn’t what causes a 37. A 37 happens when a student has very little understanding of the material in the first place, despite diligently doing the required homework. Who is accountable for that lapse? The twelve-year-old or the adult? Under such circumstances, is it more important to mimic “the real world” and let the grade stand, or should the teacher make sure the student understands the material and let her take another test after sufficient additional instruction has been given?
Obviously, I believe that the teacher is accountable for the low test score, not the student, and that the he is responsible for continuing to work with the student until she understands the material. The traditional system is not set up to facilitate that, because the system itself is focused on compliance and obedience. That’s why so many of us, from an early age, believe that there’s something wrong with us if we don’t understand something. It takes us a long time to realize that the system, which prevents students from getting the additional support that they need, is the problem, not us.
The good girl who was on time, compliant, and studied diligently — she functioned well within that system. She functioned so well that she grew up to become a teacher, and now she continues to work within that system to punish the students who don’t, calling it “accountability.” Certainly, this dynamic is not universal, but it shows up often enough. Such a teacher needs healing as much as those who were traumatized by the shame of “not getting it” (or not being able to get it together) and getting poor grades as a result. All of us are damaged to a degree by a framework that values conformity over humanity.
The way forward is messy and uncomfortable for everyone, especially teachers who think that they are serving students by making deadlines paramount. We all have to let go of our belief that difficulty in school means you are unworthy, bad, and headed for a sad life, while success in school means you are superior, good, and destined for success in life. School is only one aspect of life and, in fact, only one aspect of education. Teachers are important, but their deadlines really aren’t.