Top Down, Outside In or.....Inside Out?

Tyack and Cuban suggest that reformers should look at change from inside out and not top- down or outside in. Reform should involve teachers before politicians because it will eventually anyway when the classroom doors are closed......It is foolish not to include teachers in policy decisions because they have ultimate control over what and how things are taught. Teachers can simply respond to proposed reform by simply 'waiting it out.' Tyack and Cuban state that reforms should be "hybridized." They believe that changes to instruction should be adapted by educators by collaborating with their peers, communities and students. I also believe that this type of collaboration is of utmost importance and should yield the most successful results. I believe, that as people, we are doing one of 3 things at any given time; and 2 of them are not good. The first thing we can do as a person is to learn and grow. The second thing that we can do is stay the same. I call this being complacent. (Of course I am only voicing my own opinion here but these are the thoughts that came to mind with this text).........I even feel that the reason that I am a part of this program is because of this complacency. I felt as though I was in a rut and doing the same thing over and over; menial tasks that were never really challenging. This rut had become a ditch which over time had become a huge pit; a dark pit void of any purpose or meaning; despair and complacency come to mind and I just wanted to do more with my life; something more fulfilling and I had a desire to make a difference..a need to fill this void by teaching.I needed major reform in my own life. The third thing that we could be doing as people is dying. (like I said....2 of the 3 are not good). I just feel that if we are not learning, we are either staying the same or losing ground. As teachers, I feel one of our most important tasks is to learn. We are life long learners. Fads will come and go. Just as the architectural reform of the classroom that Tyack and Cuban talk about. I am a graduate of York Comprehensive High School. This building was constructed in the 70's and was a part of the "open classroom" design fad. Of course, this design was not conducive to learning or instruction and was modified not too long after so that classrooms could have private instruction again. Walls were built and these rooms with this circular design were separated by permanent sound proof walls. We as students, still had to walk through 2 other classrooms sometimes to get to our own classroom because of this design. Don't get me wrong, I am not saying that by including teachers in all types of reform that it will be successful, but I feel that the idea of excluding teachers completely is appalling. Tyack and Cuban state that the main purpose of reform is to improve learning and to provide rich and intellectual and social development for children. I feel that unless teachers are included in defining problems and designing solutions, lasting improvements or change will not occur. Tyack and Cuban also believe that under the hybridizing model of instructional reform, change may vary greatly from one classroom to the next. Also under this model, flexible leadership is important in allowing teachers greater autonomy. Greater efforts must be taken in the teacher recruiting process to obtain effective teachers and weed out the ones who are inadequate. After this is accomplished, reform should begin with asking the teacher what bothers them the most and start there. By assisting teachers to adapt new ideas to their own circumstances and their own students, the opportunity for positive learning experiences is dramatically increased. Thus, reform should not start from top down or outside in, but inside out. This proves the most effective means of change. Teachers might only adapt or fit in part of a new idea into their classroom at first....but true change begins here. Americans are guilty of the "utopian" ideals when it comes to public education and these great expectations have led to the huge gap in what is and what is believed to be ideal. However, public school is essential for a successful democratic society and helps promote the common good for society. Public schooling in America has always been about more than test scores or economic advantage. It was created with the purpose of creating good and moral citizens and promoting religion. It is this tradition of promoting the public good and the good of an ever changing society that Americans continually seek to reform public education.

Reading Analysis

According to Tyack and Cuban, policy talk happens far more than actual change in educational practice. Policy talk, by definiton, is the diagnoses of problems and advocacy of solutions.
The second phase in educational reform is usually policy action, or the adoption of reforms-through state legislation, school board regulations, or decisions by other authorities. The third and slowest phase is implementation which just means putting the reforms into practice. Throughout history, calls for reforms have varied between asking for small changes to radical changes. History has shown that smaller changes had a much better chance of being implemented than those that were radical because the reforms calling for the smallest changes fit more readily into the existing structure.
A few of the changes that reformers have called for throughout history include: student-centered pedagogy, teacher-centered instruction, attention to academic or to practical knowledge, and centralized or decentralized governance of schools. A common complaint among reformers is that teachers sabotage innovation and in turn, teachers complain that there are no new ideas just old, recycled ideas.
There have been several times in our nations history when the calls for reform skyrocketed because of events such as Sputnik, and the Cold War. Also, in the near and distant past policy talk about education has stressed a struggle for national survival in international competition- with the Germans(1890s), Soviets(1950s), and Japanese(1980s). Conservative political climates favored policy with an emphasis on competition and quality, while liberal policy makers stressed an ideology of access and equality.
One of the reasons that there is so much conflict over how a school should be run is that many Americans do not agree on the needs that a school should meet. For example, many parents want their children to be socialized and taught to be obedient but also to be critical thinkers. Parents want their children to be educated with the best academic knowledge that the past has to offer, but they also want them to have marketable and practical skills as well. Parents want their children to have the ability to cooperate but they also want them to be competitive.
Some successful and universal reforms that no one really thinks about is indoor plumbing, central heating, and blackboards. Of course, we have marker boards and smart boards in most elementary school classrooms today instead of blackboards as the text mentioned.
In the past, policy implementation was largely based on who was talking. Professional educators such as superintendents and professors had a much better chance of getting their reforms implemented while "outsiders" had little chance of even being heard. Hopefully, now and in the future a more diverse group of people will be able to join in the discussion about how to make our schools the best that they can be for all of our children.