By Guest Commentary By John E. Deasy
Nothing captures a public’s fascination like a crisis. It is one of the most overused words in the parlance of education. The descriptions of educational practice, culture, policy and data-results often times contain the characterization of a crisis. In education, we are either having a crisis of confidence, a crisis of leadership, a crisis of social adjustment, a crisis of safety, achievement, learning, advancement, retention, stagnation or reaction — all depending on the moment and the media’s construction of reality for us.
Crisis management has now been raised to the level of high art and mandated skill training for school leaders. We must plan for them, expect them, recognize them, budget for them and, of course, respond to them — even those crises we do not acknowledge or know to be real. There are, of course, true crises, which unfortunately happen in public schooling. A school shooting, the death of a student or staff member, an earthquake, fire, flood or storm are a few examples of the obvious. The not so obvious include the explicit demonstration of gaps in achievement between white and non-white students, rich and poor students, native English speaking and non-English speaking and the most tragic: The crisis of failed promises and false expectations made to our students.
One of the frequent cultural tendencies within a community or society during a time of crisis is the drift towards chaos — the idea that the same old rules do not apply anymore. This is inherently one of the most significant fallouts of crisis modus operandi. And, it is this that a leader is responsible to help the organization avoid. The dual sets of responsibilities of a school leader to manage and lead through the crisis and prevent the erosion of the fundamental work and purposes of the organization are essential. The current situation for public schools is the same, except with one dramatic difference.
Our society has come to establish norms of behavior that a community, city, state or nation expects when a crisis befalls the society. We have polished responses and protocols for dealing with these infrequent disasters. We have FEMA and Federal/State disaster relief agencies; we rush rapid emergency response teams to a site. We promise to keep on the lights, to protect and to safeguard the health and welfare of our citizenry. We rush much needed supplies and money to the victims of a crisis. We put blankets around the homeless and those left out in the cold. We rebuild infrastructure that is damaged in a disaster with money from other sources and with extraordinary haste.
So, now we have an acknowledged state budget crisis that is having a disastrous effect on local public schools. We have the crisis of enacting draconian cuts of services, supplies, programs and promises. During the last decade, we made clear promises to all students and communities, we set priorities, we strategically planned, we aligned spending with priorities, we vigorously pursued equity and we told everyone that we would leave no child behind. There is one small problem; now, we have no money to pay for any of this.
There are no Hazmat teams rushing towards school districts. There are no Red Cross shelters being set up on school campuses. There are no photos of millions of children saying the collective expression, why us? There are no massive telethons, concerts or other fundraising or collection events scheduled to rush much needed resources to our schools.
The difference in this crisis is that, currently, the destruction is not visible. But, you will not have to wait long to witness the effects of the near-total abdication of the covenants and promises of public education. When these begin to manifest themselves, we can all watch the outrage and collective public designation of, well, you guessed it, another crisis in education.
Public schools stand in the remarkably unenviable position of attempting to manage the state’s fiscal crisis with few tools at their disposal except to dismantle previously supported (albeit under-funded) programs. We have to keep the priorities and expectations of the public because of the explicit promises made — though no longer funded. Now, this is what I call a crisis — the reneging on the covenant made between a child and the community school.
Therein lies the paradox, you cannot do both. This is not the case where less is more. Less from Sacramento means less in our schools. We cannot both realize the promises and expectations of public education without the resources to fund them. I respectfully suggest that our schools are obligated to the same fiscal treatment (at an outrageous minimum) as our prison system!
With the decisions proposed in Sacramento, let’s cut the rhetoric of “Leave No Child Behind” and ‘fess up to the reality that all children will be left behind. This despicable, startling situation need not be; we have a crisis, but we still have choices. The full funding of public education is not a choice, it is not an option. It is a state’s mandate and a community’s imperative! (John E. Deasy is the superintendent of the Santa Monica-Malibu Unified School District.)
Originally published in the Santa Monica Daily Press print edition on January 23, 2003. Read the original PDF.