The Importance of Hope

With another Presidential election cycle having come to a close, a large segment of the American public is experiencing doubt, despondency, and even despair. Questions abound. Where are we headed as a nation? Can political discourse become more civil and constructive? How might politicians and policymakers work toward putting the collective good ahead of special interests? These feelings and questions are all too familiar for U.S. teachers, who have grown accustomed to shouldering a lion’s share of blame for societal ills, having their professional qualifications questioned, and being asked to respond to one school reform initiative after another. Teacher morale is tenuous at best. And hope is fleeting.

According to research conducted over the past 5 years, teachers are reporting record high levels of occupational stress and record low levels of job satisfaction (Markow, Macia, & Lee, 2013). A recent MetLife Survey of the American Teacher (reflecting phone interviews of 1,000 K–12 public school teachers completed in October and November of 2012) revealed that one half (51%) of teachers report feeling “under great stress several days a week,” a sharp increase from the 36% of teachers who reported comparable amounts of stress in 1985. Stress levels are more pronounced among elementary school teachers than middle school or high school teachers. Workplace stress is commonly attributed to inadequate salaries (in relation to cost of living), lack of opportunities for growth and advancement, unreasonable workloads, unrealistic job expectations (i.e., tasked with new responsibilities but not given adequate training), and long hours on the job that extend well beyond the typical school day.

In that same MetLife survey, only 39% of teachers indicated they were “very satisfied” with their jobs. This represents a decline of 23 percentage points since teacher job satisfaction peaked in 2008, and the lowest level reported in the past 25 years. Teachers expressing less satisfaction with their jobs typically are those experiencing higher levels of workplace stress and working within high-need, high-demand schools that do not provide adequate budgetary support or sufficient time for professional development and collaboration. Job satisfaction also tends to be lower for midcareer teachers (6–20 years of experience) than early-career teachers.

Teachers continue to move between schools and leave the profession at alarming rates (Gray & Taie, 2015). A recent longitudinal study conducted by the National Center for Education Statistics showed that for a single cohort of teachers entering the profession in 2007–2008, 10% left teaching after the first year and almost 20% had left teaching by the fifth year. It is the compounding effect of this attrition for each new cohort of beginning teachers that eventually results in a net loss of 40% to 50% of early-career teachers over a 5-year period. Richard Ingersoll, who has studied teacher attrition for over 15 years, speculates that teacher attrition is driven by a combination of factors, but at the core of this issue lies lack of respect. “Teachers in schools do not call the shots. They have very little say. They’re told what to do; it’s a very disempowered line of work” (quoted in Riggs, 2013).

In several states there are now reports of sharp declines in teacher education program enrollments (Sawchuk, 2014). Nationwide, there were 10% fewer college students enrolled in teacher education programs in 2012 as compared to 2004. According to some analysts, teacher education program enrollments are simply mirroring market realities as shifting budgetary pressures occasionally constrain the number of teacher openings. Many educators, however, link the drop in teacher candidates to continuous scapegoating of teachers by politicians, policymakers, and the media. In their opinion, teaching has a “public relations problem” stemming from years of punitive education reforms aimed at boosting student achievement but resulting too often in deprofessionalized workplaces and demoralized educators. Secondary school students contemplating college majors and career paths have seen firsthand how the relentless quest for 100% proficiency, annual yearly progress, and value-added evidence has taken a toll on teachers. Put simply, teaching needs an image makeover. And educators need a more hopeful vision for the future.

What ideas emerging among political leaders and policy wonks hold promise for better tomorrows within schools? It is difficult to say given that education was seldom discussed during an election cycle that was heavy on vitriol and light on substantive talk about issues. President-elect Donald Trump has promised to rebuild schools as part of a plan to invest heavily in the nation’s infrastructure and will likely advocate for further expansion of parental choice, charter schools, and other market-driven approaches to education. But he is also unlikely to reverse the recent shift from federally driven testing and evaluative mandates (e.g., Race to the Top) to greater state and local purview for education policy and reform. This shift is manifest in the recently authorized Every Student Succeeds Act and came about as a result of a constructive alliance that included teacher association leaders on the left, Republican legislators on the right, and parents in the middle. Already, in several states, policies specific to student testing and teacher evaluation are being reformulated in ways that avoid the most rigid and unreasonable elements of No Child Left Behind (NCLB) legislation (Richmond, 2016).

In contemplating the future, I see the music education profession and teacher education community at a crossroads. Do we retreat into our classrooms and offices, clinging to the belief that all things must pass? Do we allow cynicism and contempt to spread like a contagion? Or do we draw on our personal and professional convictions to engage in big thinking and impactful behavior? I believe this period of uncertainty can yield opportunity if education leaders and teacher educators act quickly to shift the tone and tenor of rhetoric surrounding teachers and schools, while developing a research agenda that deepens the public’s understanding and appreciation of teacher work. We need action that is much more informed and deliberate and much less driven by naivety or impulsivity.

One option would be to draw on organizational theory and related research to better understand how music teacher roles expanded and work expectations intensified during the NCLB era. Part and parcel to NCLB reform, teachers were seldom consulted as to the viability of implementing so-called world-class standards across all schools, regardless of the population of students being served and their readiness to learn. Policymakers too often ignored timing considerations that distinguish meaningful change from change for the sake of change, or capacity considerations that address practical limits to the amount of work and number of responsibilities that a single teacher can absorb. By identifying implementation missteps, gaps in leadership and support, and unintended (negative) consequences for students, teachers, and schools associated with reforms of the past, new reform era policy directives might be implemented in more thoughtful, flexible, meaningful, and sustainable ways (Valli & Buese, 2007).

Another promising avenue for research is to conduct case studies on turnaround schools that have not only improved student learning and achievement but also developed a culture of professionalism and leadership among teachers. In recent years, we have heard a lot about the “Finnish Success Story” and how students in Finland have become achievement exemplars. Critics have duly noted the disparities between Finland and the United States in student diversity and poverty, national standards and curricula, and funding for education as a proportion of gross domestic product. But often lost in the discourse is careful consideration of Finnish teachers themselves—their paths to the profession; their working conditions (which emphasize time for reflection and collaboration as well as other critical supports); the autonomy, input, and respect they are afforded; and the opportunities for advancement and leadership they pursue. Not all these job accoutrements require more money. But they do require public trust and a mutual understanding of accountability as something that is shared by teachers, students, and parents operating within a school community rather than imposed from without (Abrams, 2011).

Finally, we need more empirical research specific to music teacher quality/effectiveness, evaluative processes, and direct or indirect impacts on student learning. The focus of teacher evaluation efforts must move beyond simply identifying and penalizing underperforming teachers. All teachers deserve feedback-rich evaluations tied to professional standards and based on multiple performance measures, including regular classroom observations conducted by principals and peer educators, valid student achievement/growth data, student artifacts or teacher portfolios, and student surveys/evaluations related to teacher performance. Principals—many of whom have been unwilling participants in implementing high-stakes evaluative systems based on less-than-valid effectiveness criteria—are key to reshaping the conversation and expectations surrounding teacher professionalism and evaluation. Coupled with strong induction/mentoring programs, robust teacher evaluation systems have the potential to improve instructional practices and career longevity among the vast majority of teachers in K–12 schools—those who want to improve and are willing to invest the effort necessary to do so (Goe, Biggers, & Croft, 2012).

This returns me to the question of hope . . . the importance of hope. I believe that K–12 music educators and music teacher candidates look to music teacher educators for hope (Llopis, 2013). Music teacher educators’ flexible work schedules and the complementary blend of teaching, scholarship, and professional service in which they engage provide for cognitive space, big-picture perspective, and evolving insight. The music teacher educator lens can and should be focused at times on identifying the problems and pitfalls of the music education profession. But there also is a moral obligation for music teacher educators to suggest solutions to legitimate concerns, create viable alternatives to common practice, and identify new paths to achieving future goals. In other words, we need to become purveyors of hope. Within the medical community, studies of patients who have beaten diseases or defied diagnoses have repeatedly demonstrated that hope is a powerful force. But hope requires more than inspiration. To be hopeful, one must also acquire information and knowledge and recognize that personal responsibility combined with supportive advocacy can change things for the better (Groopman, 2004).

Reinhold Niebuhr (1952), an American theologian, ethicist, and political commentator whose influence was most pronounced in the 1940s and 1950s, observed,

Nothing that is worth doing can be achieved in our lifetime; therefore, we must be saved by hope. Nothing true or beautiful or good makes complete sense in any immediate context of history; therefore, we must be saved by faith. Nothing we do, however virtuous, can be accomplished alone; therefore, we are saved by love. (p. 63)

Perhaps by demonstrating an unwavering love of learning and commitment to teaching, while cultivating public faith and trust in public education, teacher educators can collectively keep hope alive for teachers of today and generations of educators to come.