A Reflection of My Own Thinking

In the United States, the freedom that teachers have to design their own curriculum and choose the books they teach varies widely depending on region, district, and school. I have been grateful to PPS and Lincoln for allowing me great choice in terms of the focus of my classes, having the faith in my education and ability to guide students into developing as better readers, writers, and thinkers. I am always curious about my colleagues working in other states and in schools that provide texts and curriculum. Even our school and district are now implementing textbooks and educational frameworks as requirements for English teachers. Like many teachers in my district, I believe that teachers should be held accountable, should have standards that allow for equity in learning and representation, and should be able to demonstrate that students are uplifted and supported in school. We also know that often these frameworks tend to do the opposite of what they promise, that teachers often feel unable to provide the same quality of education as a school in a wealthier district that does not implement a one size fits all approach to teaching. This issue has become even more vital considering the charged political environment of the United States, one in which many conservative states are passing laws that heavily restrict what a teacher can say or introduce into curriculum.

For this reason, I wanted to know about freedom in the classroom outside of the US, so I decided to focus much of my questioning on Morocco to explore what teachers are allowed to do in their classrooms. This query was actually a little elusive, partly because of the differences in how the government and educators even conceive of teacher choice. Many people I asked in the first days of the trip, including our liaison, had trouble answering my questions about designing curriculum because it’s seen as obvious that this is something outside of the teacher's responsibilities. There was a hint of the similar logic that you see in the US, mentioned above, that if teachers created their own curriculum, chose their own books, there would be no accountability and students would get widely different educational experiences. I think that there is some truth to these ideas; however, I often want to follow up with “How equitable are schools now?” Much like in the United States, it’s clear that poverty and wealth inequality have more to do with the quality of schools than teachers having too much freedom in the classroom. In fact, like America, the school where teachers and students clearly had the most freedom was the more affluent private school.

In the first week, the group visited the Ministry of Education in Rabat and spoke with the director who mirrored much of the talking points I have heard from administrators. He pointed out several issues that he wanted to address in Morocco including achievement gaps between boys and girls (girls are vastly outperforming boys), dropout rates (especially among students living in rural areas), and stereotypes about women. He argued that one of the biggest stressors for his administration was getting teachers to follow the curriculum set out by the Ministry of Education. I want to be clear that though I do clearly have a bias towards an education system that allows teachers more freedom, one that has to do with cultural differences, regional differences, and the ideology of the specific institution that I attended in Portland. I think there are clear benefits to having an education system that can focus priorities, for instance language is a national priority, so all schools ask students to become multilingual, some students speaking 4-5 different languages. Curriculum itself is taught in different languages depending on the grade level of the student. The heavy regulation of what teachers do in the classroom means that Moroccan students all have some sort of access to the same education, though of course, this doesn’t always translate to equality of opportunity. 

The tracking system not only plays into the restrictions of teachers, but limits student freedom. In every high school I went to, students expressed frustration about being tracked too early, unable to fully decide what they wanted to do. More so, there exists a deep stigma towards the “letters” track, much of the public, especially parents in this case, convinced that a science and mathematics track will ultimately prove more financially worthwhile and stable. Many students who simply struggle in their early years are often placed in this track, never being able to find their path a little later. Many of these students are also expected to have more advanced language skills, so students who struggle with many subjects often don’t have the skills to succeed at all. Students who love language, writing, and reading, but excel in most subjects, expressed frustration that they would not be able to study any of the subjects they love. This seemed to be the educational issue that was being most debated between teachers, students, and administrators, questioning whether students were fully served by this system. An art teacher in our cohort continually asked about art and drama classes, electives that might offer students the opportunity to explore other areas and disciplines, and pretty much always was told that schools did not offer such programs. In a pretty joyous moment, in a wealthier private school where students clearly had more freedom and confidence to speak out, an entire class brought up the issue, telling us in front of their teachers and principals that they have no freedom to study what they want, to find their passions. Ironically, these students and teachers probably had the most choice than any other school I visited on the fellowship.