Peebles

Sometimes people let loose with a mouthful other than the mouthful they intended to unleash. So it was recently with the superintendent of the Minneapolis public schools. Her name is Thandiwe Peeples. On the job for less than a year and under fire for a number of reasons, she let loose with a number of mouthfuls, one of which was more curious than any other. Trying to account for the difficulty of her job, she summed up her plight by declaring that her district’s “twenty-first century children” were being taught by “twentieth century educators.”

My first reaction was, “huh?” Just what the heck was she getting at? Was it just a throwaway line? Or was it simply some sort of educatorese? Or perhaps it was an attempt to curry favor with the parents of those oh, so modern children by calling into question the credentials of their oh, so hidebound teachers? Or maybe, just maybe, she was accidentally calling into question the entire enterprise that she represents, leads, and otherwise attempts to preside over.

Maybe the question at hand isn’t whether Superintendent Peebles is the one to lead the children of Minneapolis. Maybe the question is can—or should—anyone among her (my) generation lead these children. Or maybe the question is how to pick the best among them to lead all the rest of us.

As I was pondering all of this, my teen-aged son tossed in his own two cents worth on Ms. Peebles’ plight. “Isn’t that the way it’s supposed to be?” he offered. Well, yes, as a matter of fact, it is — or was.

Of course her students are charging their way into this century. And of course Minneapolis teachers were born in the last century. And of course that’s the way it’s always been. After all, isn’t education supposed to do have something to do with the young learning from their elders? And wasn’t that what education was once very much about?

Once upon a time there was something called western civilization. Once upon a time it was thought that this civilization was worth passing on to the next generation. Once upon a time public education was entrusted with the critically important task of doing just that.

No doubt there continue to be public educators in the city of Minneapolis who continue to do what has long been done—and who do it very well indeed. But apparently they are doing it in spite of a leadership that seems bent on telling them that we’d all be better off if these troglodytes followed the lead of their 21st century charges. What else is there to conclude from her statement? Either it’s pure drivel or it’s driving her agenda.

And what is that agenda? Would it be too much to suggest that it might be the logical consequence of multiculturalism run amok? There was a time when I used the word “well-meaning” before “multiculturalism.” But no more. If multicultural education means respect for various cultural traditions and languages, who could possibly be opposed to that? If it means that large American cities are salad bowls of various races, ethnicities, and nationalities, who could deny that? If it means that all of us can benefit from this great variety in a great variety of ways, who could think otherwise?

But perhaps it means something more than that. Perhaps it means that the western tradition in general and American history in particular just aren’t worth passing along any more. Perhaps it means that what was once called western civilization is just one more of the many “multis” in multicultural. If that’s the case, then we’ve got problems, yes, problems right here in our own River City. That’s problems with a capital “P” that could stand for pool which rhymes with school.

Oh, for the bad old days when pool was the problem. Or for when a marching band was the solution. Actually, it still is—or could be—a partial means to a solution. Think of a band as a metaphor for western civilization. Think of the great variety within that band. And then think of the wonderful result when that band functions together.

Now I’ve never met Superintendent Peebles. From the sound of things she’s hell on wheels when it comes to raising test scores. Good for her. Raising test scores is also of critical importance. But what good are higher test scores, if those who earn them share nothing more than, well, having earned higher test scores?

Our public schools ought to be places where we produce more than fresh candidates for the meritocracy. It ought to produce good citizens as well. And good citizenship ought to have something to do with something more than test scores. Good citizenship begins with children who know that they are part of a long tradition, yes, a long western tradition. It also ought to have something to do with character formation. And both of those enterprises are best left in the hands of their elders, especially those who are confident enough to assert that 20th century teachers have something to say to their 21st century students.

To turn that around, to contend that saddling 21st century students with 20th century educators is actually part of the problem, is to take us off into Alice in Wonderland land. It’s also either an act of cowardice or meaningless drivel—or part of a larger effort to undermine the very foundation of a once-proud public educational system that was once part of a once-confident western tradition. Take your pick.

John C. “Chuck” Chalberg teaches American history at Normandale Community College.