If your plumbing is stopped up, do you call an electrician?
In 1968, Canadian educational scholar, Dr. Laurence J. Peter, wrote "The Peter Principle", in which he put forth a theory which has since been proven empirically -- "In a Hierarchy, Every Employee Tends to Rise to His Level of Incompetence." In the world of public education, "incompetence" is perhaps too strong a term. In the Education Establishment, individuals are hired and promoted based on credentials. While those credentials are intended to prepare them for administrative positions, those positions give them authority to meddle in things they know little about, such as how to actually teach a particular subject. A Principal or Assistant Principal, who may have taught Biology has no business meddling in the affairs of an English, or Math, or History teacher. Yet, they do so simply because they have risen to an administrative position and suppose themselves to be "in charge".
Because they are allowed to elect members to their local school board, the general public believes that the system is "democratic" when, in fact, everything, particularly credentialing, is dictated by the government. In Texas, we have the Education Code, set in law by the Legislature. We also have the State Board of Education (SBOE), and the Texas Education Agency. The former is elective. The latter, an appointed bureaucracy. In actuality, the public education system, particularly in Texas, is an autocratic, hierarchical, control system which would have made Joseph Stalin proud.
Since those elected to the SBOE and the Legislature come from varied backgrounds, they rely on those who consider themselves "education professionals" to enact laws, policies, and procedures. But, like all bureaucracies, those "professionals" tend to put forth ideas and recommendations that expand their authority, costing taxpayers millions of dollars on various educational "fads" that come along.
Take the fad about which I've written before. This is the artificial "need" for local school districts to create and staff the position of Curriculum Coordinator, or Assistant Superintendent for Curriculum, or whatever title is chosen. 2 years ago, the Fredericksburg, Texas ISD posted a job listing for just such a position. In looking at the Minimum Qualifications, the only educational requirement was a Masters of Education Administration degree. Nothing was said about a candidate's undergraduate major field of study or their teaching experience. What does someone actually learn to obtain that degree?
Tarleton State University in Stephenville, Texas offers that degree in its School of Education. There are various degree "concentrations" from which to choose:
Tarleton also offers the following certification:
Note that none of those classes has anything whatever to do with an academic subject in the public school curriculum. So, it begs the question "Other than being given the authority to do so, exactly WHAT qualifies a Curriculum Coordinator to even comment on a particular teacher's pedagogy in a subject other than that in which the Coordinator majored as an undergraduate and taught?"
Then, there is the Doctor of Education (EdD) degree which leads people to believe that the holder is automatically qualified to makes judgments on everything that goes on in a school district. But, what is the history of this credential?
The first Doctor of Education (EdD) degree was granted at Harvard University in 1921. Henry Holmes, an educator at Harvard College, raised funds to establish the Harvard Graduate School of Education. Holmes saw value in increasing Harvard’s role in the professional training of educators and established doctorate of education, or Ed.D., for students who had had a successful teaching experience, possessed a “working knowledge of biology, psychology, and the social sciences”, and who sought a higher position within the school system.
However, Barbara K. Townsend, Professor of Higher Education and Associate Dean for Research and Development at the University of Missouri at Columbia, suggests the doctorate of education is most frequently sought for vanity purposes and to improve one's status, citing a 2000 survey of California school superintendents in which they identify the greatest value of the EdD as being its "symbolic value (credibility and respect as basis for leadership)", further adding that there is scant research or evidence to suggest that possession of a doctorate in education improves one's ability to be an effective administrator.
Not only does the EdD not necessarily improve one's ability to be an effective administrator, it certainly does not qualify the holder to have any control over an academic discipline, other than the original undergraduate major.
When he retired from the Presidency of Harvard in 1933, Abbott Lawrence Lowell told the Board of Trustees that Harvard's Graduate School of Education was "a kitten that ought to be drowned." Of greater import to the current discussion, in 2013 Harvard stopped conferring the EdD degree. The Board of Trustees finally came to the same conclusion that Professor Townsend did. The EdD is not, and never was, equivalent to the PhD. So, the very institution that created the degree in the first place has stopped awarding it. THAT is, or should be, very instructive for those who have been simply deferring to the holders, simply because they use the title "Dr."
Members of the general public must begin demanding of their elected school board members empirical proof of both the effectiveness and necessity to create these administrative positions having nothing to do with an academic discipline. Stop wasting the taxpayers' money by creating positions and giving authority over curriculum and pedagogy to individuals based solely on their credentials.
While these individuals may not have risen to their level of incompetence, as described by the Peter Principle, they have no business sticking their noses where they don't belong - in the classroom, particularly a classroom teaching an academic discipline in which they received no education.
In 1968, Canadian educational scholar, Dr. Laurence J. Peter, wrote "The Peter Principle", in which he put forth a theory which has since been proven empirically -- "In a Hierarchy, Every Employee Tends to Rise to His Level of Incompetence." In the world of public education, "incompetence" is perhaps too strong a term. In the Education Establishment, individuals are hired and promoted based on credentials. While those credentials are intended to prepare them for administrative positions, those positions give them authority to meddle in things they know little about, such as how to actually teach a particular subject. A Principal or Assistant Principal, who may have taught Biology has no business meddling in the affairs of an English, or Math, or History teacher. Yet, they do so simply because they have risen to an administrative position and suppose themselves to be "in charge".
Because they are allowed to elect members to their local school board, the general public believes that the system is "democratic" when, in fact, everything, particularly credentialing, is dictated by the government. In Texas, we have the Education Code, set in law by the Legislature. We also have the State Board of Education (SBOE), and the Texas Education Agency. The former is elective. The latter, an appointed bureaucracy. In actuality, the public education system, particularly in Texas, is an autocratic, hierarchical, control system which would have made Joseph Stalin proud.
Since those elected to the SBOE and the Legislature come from varied backgrounds, they rely on those who consider themselves "education professionals" to enact laws, policies, and procedures. But, like all bureaucracies, those "professionals" tend to put forth ideas and recommendations that expand their authority, costing taxpayers millions of dollars on various educational "fads" that come along.
Take the fad about which I've written before. This is the artificial "need" for local school districts to create and staff the position of Curriculum Coordinator, or Assistant Superintendent for Curriculum, or whatever title is chosen. 2 years ago, the Fredericksburg, Texas ISD posted a job listing for just such a position. In looking at the Minimum Qualifications, the only educational requirement was a Masters of Education Administration degree. Nothing was said about a candidate's undergraduate major field of study or their teaching experience. What does someone actually learn to obtain that degree?
Tarleton State University in Stephenville, Texas offers that degree in its School of Education. There are various degree "concentrations" from which to choose:
- EC-12 Principalship
- Higher Education Leadership
- Post-Masters Superintendent Certification
Since we're focusing on the public schools, let's take a look at the course work for the M.A. in Education Administration, EC-12 Principalship:
§ EDAD 5300 - Foundations of Educational
Administration
§ EDAD 5309 - Legal Issues in School Leadership
§ EDAD 5316 - Instructional Leadership
§ EDAD 5339 - Leadership Processes of
Educational Leadership
§ EDAD 5360 - Educational Leadership
Applications
§ EDAD 5399 - Practicum for the
Principalship (required for certification not the degree)
Additional Course
(with consent of advisor taken from) — 6 semester hours
§ EDAD 5307 - Leadership of Programs and
Procedures in Supervision
§ EDAD 5342 - Leadership of Campus Resources
§ EDAD 5345 - Leadership of Curriculum Systems
§ EDAD 5355 - Leadership of Diverse Learning
Communities
Tarleton also offers the following certification:
Post-Master's Degree
Superintendent Certification
Curriculum
Students will complete
15 semester credit hours at Tarleton in five interactive (face-to-face)
sessions and corresponding online sessions for a total of ten face-to-face
class meetings.
§ Superintendent Leadership and Communication
§ Superintendent Leadership and Human Resources
§ Superintendent Leadership and Resource
Allocation
§ Superintendent Leadership and Accountability
§ Superintendent Practicum
Note that none of those classes has anything whatever to do with an academic subject in the public school curriculum. So, it begs the question "Other than being given the authority to do so, exactly WHAT qualifies a Curriculum Coordinator to even comment on a particular teacher's pedagogy in a subject other than that in which the Coordinator majored as an undergraduate and taught?"
Then, there is the Doctor of Education (EdD) degree which leads people to believe that the holder is automatically qualified to makes judgments on everything that goes on in a school district. But, what is the history of this credential?
The first Doctor of Education (EdD) degree was granted at Harvard University in 1921. Henry Holmes, an educator at Harvard College, raised funds to establish the Harvard Graduate School of Education. Holmes saw value in increasing Harvard’s role in the professional training of educators and established doctorate of education, or Ed.D., for students who had had a successful teaching experience, possessed a “working knowledge of biology, psychology, and the social sciences”, and who sought a higher position within the school system.
However, Barbara K. Townsend, Professor of Higher Education and Associate Dean for Research and Development at the University of Missouri at Columbia, suggests the doctorate of education is most frequently sought for vanity purposes and to improve one's status, citing a 2000 survey of California school superintendents in which they identify the greatest value of the EdD as being its "symbolic value (credibility and respect as basis for leadership)", further adding that there is scant research or evidence to suggest that possession of a doctorate in education improves one's ability to be an effective administrator.
Not only does the EdD not necessarily improve one's ability to be an effective administrator, it certainly does not qualify the holder to have any control over an academic discipline, other than the original undergraduate major.
When he retired from the Presidency of Harvard in 1933, Abbott Lawrence Lowell told the Board of Trustees that Harvard's Graduate School of Education was "a kitten that ought to be drowned." Of greater import to the current discussion, in 2013 Harvard stopped conferring the EdD degree. The Board of Trustees finally came to the same conclusion that Professor Townsend did. The EdD is not, and never was, equivalent to the PhD. So, the very institution that created the degree in the first place has stopped awarding it. THAT is, or should be, very instructive for those who have been simply deferring to the holders, simply because they use the title "Dr."
Members of the general public must begin demanding of their elected school board members empirical proof of both the effectiveness and necessity to create these administrative positions having nothing to do with an academic discipline. Stop wasting the taxpayers' money by creating positions and giving authority over curriculum and pedagogy to individuals based solely on their credentials.
While these individuals may not have risen to their level of incompetence, as described by the Peter Principle, they have no business sticking their noses where they don't belong - in the classroom, particularly a classroom teaching an academic discipline in which they received no education.
