As the editor of Teachers As Owners, I couldn't be happier with the conclusion in the recent Gadfly review, namely that "one can't put the book down without noting the chasm between these ideas and the reality of most American schools." (See http://www.edexcellence.net/gadfly/issue.cfm?issue=51#770.) Notwithstanding my agreement with the conclusion, however, there are some aspects of the review that I feel compelled to comment on.
The thesis of the book is that, like doctors, lawyers and other professionals, teachers should have the same opportunity to work for themselves. In a professional partnership, the teachers are the leaders and decision makers. They control their own work, including determining the curriculum, setting the budget, choosing levels of technology available to students, determining their own salaries, selecting their colleagues, monitoring performance and hiring administrators to work for them.
Ownership, however, is not the same as "democratic employment" as suggested by the reviewer. Without going into the detail of the book, it asserts that leadership is needed, not that everyone is in charge. The book does not propose a leaderless organization. It does propose an organization where the leader is accountable to the teachers themselves. There are many examples in law, medicine, consulting and accounting of firms where the professionals govern themselves and select leaders from their own ranks
As the reviewer points out, the book suggests that success requires an uncommon culture and uncommon leadership. To say that it is uncommon, however, should not be interpreted to mean that it is impossible. The processes required of ownership include developing a common vision, mission and set of values, choosing colleagues, establishing quality and performance standards and choosing leaders help to build the uncommon culture that is required.
As the reviewer points out, teachers who have experience in teacher ownership suggest that it usually works best when the group of teachers and students is relatively small. That is when there are 100 to 250 students. The key is the ability to create a community of learning characterized by mutual interdependence, good communication, as well as a common culture and a true sense of personal responsibility and accountability. The book points out that there is no magic size. And it discusses the pros and cons of large and small professional groups.
Teacher ownership is not for all teachers or settings. It is a powerful means for some teachers to create a professional life that has great potential to improve student performance and to improve the teacher's own professional satisfaction.
Finally, history is replete with examples of people thinking and saying it can't be done because it is a change from the past or difficult to accomplish. Teacher ownership has been proven to work. We ask that it be considered with an open mind and that, instead of developing reasons why it can't be done, to think of what it would be like if it were done.
Edward J. Dirkswager
Center for Policy Studies
St. Paul, MN