‘The Worst Rule I Ever Had to Live With …’: The Policies Teachers Hate (Opinion) – Education Week

Report on Educational Directives and Their Alignment with Sustainable Development Goals

This report analyzes several educational directives and policies to assess their impact on achieving the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), particularly SDG 4 (Quality Education), SDG 10 (Reduced Inequalities), SDG 16 (Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions), and SDG 8 (Decent Work and Economic Growth).

Disciplinary Policies: Fostering Inclusive and Just Learning Environments

The Conflict Between Zero-Tolerance Policies and SDG 4 & SDG 16

Zero-tolerance policies are fundamentally misaligned with the goal of providing inclusive and equitable quality education. These punitive measures hinder student development and undermine the creation of safe and supportive learning environments as mandated by SDG Target 4.a.

• Exclusion Over Education: Punishments such as suspension and expulsion remove students from the learning environment, directly contradicting the principle of inclusive education for all. This practice fails to provide an opportunity for students to learn from their mistakes.
• Undermining Justice and Strong Institutions (SDG 16): Instead of teaching accountability and responsibility, these policies impose harsh measures that can create lasting negative impacts and erode trust in the educational institution.
• Ineffectiveness and Negative Consequences: A case study involving a zero-tolerance policy on baseball caps demonstrated its unsustainability. The policy was unmanageable for teachers, created conflict between administration, teachers, and parents, and failed to impart meaningful lessons to students.

Restorative Justice as a Sustainable Alternative

In contrast to punitive measures, restorative-justice practices align directly with the SDGs by promoting a humanistic and developmental approach to discipline.

1. Promoting Accountability: Restorative practices require students who have caused harm to take responsibility and actively participate in repairing that harm.
2. Building Peaceful Communities (SDG 16): This approach fosters a healthier school community by focusing on reconciliation and understanding, contributing to the development of peaceful and inclusive societies.
3. Developing Lifelong Skills: By teaching accountability and repair, schools equip students with essential life skills that support their development as responsible citizens, a core tenet of SDG 4.

Assessment and Instruction: Ensuring Equitable and Quality Learning

Assessment for Mastery vs. Punitive Grading

Assessment policies must accurately reflect student learning to support SDG 4. The practice of averaging an original test score with a retake score is a significant barrier to this goal.

• Inaccurate Representation of Knowledge: Averaging grades does not reflect a student’s final mastery of a subject; it penalizes the learning process itself.
• Supporting Differentiated Pacing: SDG 4 calls for accommodating diverse learners. Recognizing that students learn at different paces is a form of differentiation. Assessment should reflect demonstrated knowledge, not the time it took to acquire it.
• Promoting Lifelong Learning: To encourage a desire for growth, assessment must offer a path forward. The most recent grade should be recorded, with remediation efforts noted, to accurately reflect a student’s current abilities and support their continued learning journey.

Differentiated Instruction and Reduced Inequalities (SDG 10)

Innovative instructional strategies are crucial for leveling the educational playing field. The forced discontinuation of a lesson-classification system (“must-do, should-do, aspire-to-do”) highlights a failure to support equitable learning outcomes.

• Enhancing Equity and Inclusion (SDG 4, Target 4.5): This system allowed students, including those in special education, to work at their own pace, leading to significant academic growth and mastery. Its removal disproportionately harms students who require structured support, thereby increasing educational inequality.
• The Impact of Non-Evidence-Based Decisions: The directive to cease this practice was based on a single complaint rather than evidence of its effectiveness. Such decisions undermine proven pedagogical methods and hinder progress toward equitable outcomes for all students.
• Addressing Systemic Divides: The incident underscores how administrative decisions can perpetuate the divide in education caused by social capital and socioeconomic status, directly opposing the mission of SDG 10.

Institutional Practices: Supporting Decent Work and Professionalism

The Importance of Teacher Autonomy and Respect (SDG 8)

The professional treatment of educators is a prerequisite for achieving quality education. Micromanaging teachers through archaic policies undermines their professionalism and detracts from the educational mission.

• Degrading Professional Standards: Dictating teacher attire, and in some cases charging them to wear comfortable clothing like jeans, is a disrespectful practice that treats educators as less than professional.
• Fostering Decent Work (SDG 8): Providing teachers with professional autonomy contributes to a positive and engaging work environment. This is essential for teacher retention and ensuring a happy, effective staff focused on impacting student lives.
• Strengthening Institutions: Empowering staff to make professional judgments about their work attire allows them to focus on what truly matters: delivering quality education (SDG 4).

Analysis of SDGs in the Article

1. Which SDGs are addressed or connected to the issues highlighted in the article?

The article discusses several issues within the education system that connect to multiple Sustainable Development Goals. The primary goals identified are:

• SDG 4: Quality Education: This is the most central SDG, as the entire article focuses on educational policies, teaching methodologies, and the learning environment. It addresses the quality, equity, and inclusivity of education.
• SDG 10: Reduced Inequalities: The article touches upon how certain policies and teaching methods can either exacerbate or mitigate inequalities among students, particularly those with special needs or from different socioeconomic backgrounds.
• SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions: This goal is relevant in the context of school governance, disciplinary actions, and decision-making processes. The article critiques punitive systems and advocates for more just, inclusive, and participatory institutional practices within schools.
• SDG 8: Decent Work and Economic Growth: The experiences of the teachers highlight issues related to their working conditions, professional respect, and autonomy, which are core components of the “decent work” agenda.

2. What specific targets under those SDGs can be identified based on the article’s content?

Based on the issues discussed, several specific targets can be identified:

1. Under SDG 4 (Quality Education):
   • Target 4.1: By 2030, ensure that all girls and boys complete free, equitable and quality primary and secondary education. The discussions on effective grading by Amber Chandler and differentiated instruction by Cecelia Gillam aim to ensure students achieve mastery and receive a quality education, which is fundamental to completion.
   • Target 4.5: By 2030, eliminate gender disparities in education and ensure equal access to all levels of education… for the vulnerable, including persons with disabilities. Cecelia Gillam’s case study on how her lesson-classification system helped two special education students achieve “great academic growth” directly relates to ensuring equal access and opportunity for vulnerable students.
   • Target 4.a: Build and upgrade education facilities that are child, disability and gender sensitive and provide safe, non-violent, inclusive and effective learning environments for all. Rebecca Alber’s critique of zero-tolerance policies and advocacy for restorative justice aims to create a “healthier school community” and a more inclusive, non-violent learning environment, moving away from purely punitive measures.
   • Target 4.c: By 2030, substantially increase the supply of qualified teachers… The article addresses teacher retention, a key factor in maintaining a supply of qualified teachers. Ryan Huels discusses how treating teachers as professionals improves morale, while Cecelia Gillam’s decision to “move on to another school” after 18 years due to a bad directive shows how poor policies can deplete the supply of experienced educators.
2. Under SDG 10 (Reduced Inequalities):
   • Target 10.2: By 2030, empower and promote the social, economic and political inclusion of all, irrespective of… disability… or other status. Gillam’s method of allowing students to work at their own pace is designed to promote inclusion and ensure students aren’t left behind, directly challenging the “great divide in education” caused by “social capital and socioeconomic status.”
   • Target 10.3: Ensure equal opportunity and reduce inequalities of outcome… The article argues for policies that provide equal opportunities for learning. Chandler’s stance on retakes ensures students are not penalized for taking longer to learn, and Gillam’s system is explicitly designed for “leveling the playing field and truly ensuring equitable outcomes for all students.”
3. Under SDG 16 (Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions):
   • Target 16.7: Ensure responsive, inclusive, participatory and representative decision-making at all levels. The article provides clear examples of this target not being met. Gillam’s story, where an administrative decision was made based on a single complaint without investigation or discussion (“administration should have afforded all parties involved a conversation”), highlights a failure of responsive and participatory decision-making.
4. Under SDG 8 (Decent Work and Economic Growth):
   • Target 8.8: Protect labour rights and promote safe and secure working environments for all workers… Ryan Huels’ argument against micromanaging teacher dress codes and demanding payment for wearing jeans speaks to the need for a respectful and professional working environment. He notes that degrading policies are “disrespectful to staff,” impacting their well-being and engagement at work.

3. Are there any indicators mentioned or implied in the article that can be used to measure progress towards the identified targets?

The article implies several qualitative and quantitative indicators that could measure progress:

• Student academic growth and achievement levels: Cecelia Gillam provides a direct indicator by citing that under her system, two special education students “showed great academic growth” and “earned A’s in the course.” Amber Chandler suggests that grades should “accurately reflect their current level of expertise,” which can be measured through assessments. This is an indicator for Targets 4.1 and 10.3.
• Rates of suspension and expulsion: Rebecca Alber’s discussion of zero-tolerance policies leading to “immediate three-day suspension” implies that a reduction in these rates would be a key indicator of a more inclusive and effective learning environment (Target 4.a).
• Adoption of alternative disciplinary practices: The article explicitly proposes “restorative-justice practices” as an alternative to punitive policies. The number or percentage of schools implementing such practices would be a clear indicator of progress toward Target 4.a.
• Teacher retention and satisfaction rates: The article provides anecdotal evidence of this indicator. Ryan Huels states, “A happy staff is often a more engaged staff,” implying satisfaction is key. Cecelia Gillam’s departure from her school after 18 years is a powerful example of teacher attrition due to poor management. Tracking teacher turnover and conducting satisfaction surveys would be indicators for Target 4.c and 8.8.
• Existence of participatory decision-making processes: The lack of consultation described by Cecelia Gillam implies that an indicator for Target 16.7 would be the establishment of formal processes where administrators “take the time to learn about the pedagogy” and base decisions on “facts and not feelings.”

4. Table of SDGs, Targets, and Indicators

Source: edweek.org