Update: Authoritariansm Avoided (for today)

This past week, I had the pleasure of once again attending the Florida Music Education Association’s annual conference. To update on a previous posting: On Thursday evening, at the FBA business meeting, the contentious issue of restricting marching band performances arose. This came in the form of a motion, already passed by the board, which would have required district secretaries to monitor the activities of other directors, tally the number of marching contests (note: not football games, parades, or other performances), and report violators to the Florida Bandmasters Association. Violators of the rules would have faced financial penalties of up to $500 in addition to referrals for mentoring and re-education to correct deviant philosophies. I am happy to say that this measure was defeated soundly by the membership of the FBA, and that the slippery slope towards authoritarian practices has been averted for now.

That being said, there are real issues regarding marching band which are not going away any time soon. I was privileged to hear a wonderful clinic on the topic of “Building a Band Curriculum Your Way” by Dr. Bentley Shellahamer. Dr. Shellahamer touched on the value of academic freedom: how this has been such a huge part of our heritage as band directors, how this has been lost in most public school classrooms, and how this is in danger in music education classrooms if we don’t take care to build a strong music curriculum for our programs. And I agree that an over-emphasis on competitive marching band/winter guard/indoor percussion will lead some administrators to view band as simply another sport/activity which utilizes a disproportionate share of limited resources. Surely a good music program should teach a student more than a series of 3rd clarinet parts; too many students leave American band programs with memories of a shelf full of trophies and no desire to ever pick up their instrument again. The trick is to find a way to inspire a love and understanding of music without imposing a one-size fits all curriculum approach. All band teachers need to find their path through the polarizing extremes of “all competition is bad” and “I’m a failure if I don’t win state marching championships”; even with the best of advice there are no concrete answers to this one for every situation. Here’s hoping that our profession can maintain that freedom to develop individual programs and philosophies for the indefinite future.

Real Education: Ability Varies

How does our society deal with controversial ideas? Our first reaction (regardless of our place on the ideological spectrum) tends to be to label those with whom we disagree in order to cast them in the worst possible light. If the ideas of those we disagree with happens to have empirical backing, another successful strategy is to simply ignore their arguments. A great example of this is Charles Murray. I hesitated to pick up his new book, Real Education, because of memories of intellectual pressure from my college days: The Bell Curve was supposedly the work of a reactionary, and by extension anyone who read and engaged with a work by such an author was guilty by association.

This knee-jerk reaction is truly unfortunate, as Real Education is an important book which deserves interaction, regardless of where we fall politically. Short, readable, and with a good bibliography, Murray proposes “Four Simple Truths for Bringing America’s Schools Back to Reality.” These four truths are:

• Ability varies


• Half of the Children are Below Average


• Too Many People are Going to College


• America’s Future Depends on How We Educate the Academically Gifted

I plan on addressing each of Murray’s ‘truths’ one at a time, as each is important and deserves consideration.

The first point, “Ability varies”, seems obvious yet offensive at the same time. Murray starts by describing Gardner’s theory of Multiple Intelligences. This is a good point to start, regardless of the theory’s validity, as most educators accept the concept as a matter of faith. Some students excel and have a natural ability to perform well in sports. Others have strong interpersonal skills. Others have a greater degree of musical ability. In many ways this seems to be common sense. I am not gifted with athletic ability and never had “professional athlete” in my future, even though I enjoyed sitting the bench with my basketball team in high school. Similarly, I recognize that some of my students have a greater musical aptitude than others; one student may be capable of majoring in music in college while others might simply enjoy the experience of participating in a high school band. Most people would not find such a perspective controversial.

Suggest that some students have greater mathematical or linguistic abilities, however, and a rotten can of worms has been opened. Making a statement such as this contradicts the Romantic ideal at the heart of our education system: that children come into the world as clean slates and are profoundly malleable by society and the State. Consider the educational truism: ‘All children can learn’. Perhaps so; learning is part of what makes us human. But can all children learn the same things equally well? Our current educational system seems to think so, and operates under the assumption that this should be true. Can every child achieve proficiency on a government test, or will there always be a spectrum of results? I would argue that an approach which confuses equity with sameness (identical results) is fundamentally unfair to all students as it ceases to treat them as individuals.

An additional point which Murray makes which deserves consideration is his contention that ‘abilities’ tend to be linked, citing research which shows a correlation between six of Gardner’s seven ‘intelligences’. In other words, students with a high ability in linguistics tend to also have high spatial and logical-mathematic ability as well. The logical conclusion here is that educators are engaging in mythical speculation when we posit that Gardner’s theory stipulates that every child must have at least one ‘intelligence’ with which they can be labeled ‘gifted’.

At this point I think it is important to avoid falling into the trap of equating ‘intelligence’ or ‘ability’ with ‘value’. Every individual is unique and has value as a human being regardless of their I.Q., or what they are able to “do”. Recognizing that there is always someone who is smarter or more talented is as essential in learning the virtue of humility as is working with individuals who are not. As educators, perhaps we should students to the best of their ability, recognizing that results can and will vary…and that’s okay.

Book Review: Smart Kids, Bad Schools

Brian Crosby has been in the “trenches” of the education system for a long time. As a twenty-year veteran of the Los Angeles school system and a National Board Certified teacher, Mr. Crosby brings a bluntly honest perspective to the topic of education reform in his latest book, Smart Kids, Bad Schools: 38 Ways to Save America’s Future.

Mr. Crosby’s book contains a little bit of something to offend everybody. This is a good thing when dealing with a system as entrenched and archaic as the public education system. His book is literally packed with ideas on ways to make the school system work better, such as creating career ladders for teachers, curtailing the power of teachers unions, modeling administration training on MBA programs, increasing vocational education, and near and dear to my heart, mandating arts education.

Smart Kids is at its best, however, when Mr. Crosby tackles all the little indignities which pile up on teachers to destroy their sense of professionalism. His blood truly boils as he describes the “Sweatshop Schoolhouse”. Anyone who has ever worked in a public school will immediately sympathize with his description of buildings and schedules which are nearly indistinguishable from prisons, teachers denied keys to their own offices (classrooms…as if most teachers had an office!), and administrators who take meticulous roll at faculty meetings but never visit classrooms. In what other profession do adults with masters degrees need to ask permission to use the bathroom? What other profession asks employees to put in countless hours of overtime without financial remuneration? Mr. Crosby hits the nail on the head as he describes the lack of trust afforded classroom teachers by administrators, and the lack of respect given by parents and communities.

Those who have never taught yet think that teaching is an “easy” job with great perks and benefits owe it to themselves to read books such as Mr. Crosby’s Smart Kids, or his first book, The $100,000 Teacher. The stark reality of what teachers face every day can truly be a shock for those who have never stood on the teacher’s end of the desk. If we are ever to truly reform our educational system to provide students with the opportunities they deserve, we need more brave educators like Brian Crosby to stand up and be honest about the failings of our system.