letter to the Big Boss

Bratislava
10 January 2007

Dear Mr. BIG BOSS

Recently I received a registered letter signed by MAGGIE THATCHER informing me that my contract with THE PRETTY GOOD AMERICAN INTERNATIONAL SCHOOL would not be renewed.

There was no explanation of this decision. In fact, since the letter went on to thank me for the work I had done in the past, and since I’ve been working forPGAIS for three years, that naturally raises the question why my contract will not be renewed. My work has been good enough for three years, but, now, suddenly, it’s not good enough? Has MAGGIE suddenly really discovered the truth that everyone else missed? (I don’t think so.)

However, before I address that question, I would like to point out that MAGGIE'S letter was very irregular and, in fact, disrespectful.

When you hire an employee you require him to provide evidence of his qualifications, and you provide information about your school. The employee is encouraged to ask questions and learn about the school. The beginning of the relationship is one of mutual respect.
An employee deserves no less respect at the end of the relationship.

Furthermore, it is standard practice among many American companies to have an “exit interview”. This allows employees to comment upon their time at the company.

So, MAGGIE'S was irregular both from the standpoint of decent human relationships and from the standpoint of standard business practice.

And that raises the question of the basis of her negative judgment. How did she decide I should not have another contract?

Since MAGGIE did not say, I must speculate, but I have little doubt that I know MAGGIE'S true reasons. I don’t know what she told you, or anyone else, but I know MAGGIE THATCHER.

MAGGIE THATCHER is neither polite nor tolerant. During her time at PGAIS, I heard her use the word “please” exactly once, and I heard her use the word “thank you” exactly once. And, she never used those words in conversations with me. When she makes a decision, she is not interested in hearing about other possibilities.

MAGGIE THATCHER had no use for me because I was unwilling to be totally passive and accept whatever she had to say. I wasn’t willing to shut up and let MAGGIE walk all over me.

There were cases where her judgments were in error, and I pointed that out to her. For someone with her character, that means I was a threat. She doesn’t tolerate anything (which she interprets as) a challenge to her power—even when the “challenge” (as she thinks about it) is coming from someone who has no other goal than saving her from making a mistake, or correcting a gap in her knowledge. MAGGIE is like a tyrant. There are some things she doesn’t want to hear. She is intolerant of original ideas which don’t fit her game plan.

I will only mention one incident which illustrates how MAGGIE was unable to comprehend that there are limits to her knowledge and competencies.

MAGGIE openly confessed to me that she knew nothing about the subject “Theory of Knowledge” or TOK. TOK is an International Baccalaureate class which draws heavily from traditional philosophy and mixes it with cognitive psychology.

I received my Ph.D. in Philosophy in 1989. I’ve taught at universities in the United States and in Europe. I’ve been to the IB’s workshop for TOK teachers. I have, in fact, presented original research in the States and in Europe, and I have a modest list of publications in professional journals, as well as in more popular forums. No previous employer has ever had a bad word to say about my teaching.

MAGGIE came unannounced to one of my TOK classes, and she couldn’t understand what was going on. She could not understand my methodology, and she could not understand the subject-matter.

How she imagined she could evaluate my teaching performance when she knew so little about the subject is a mystery to me. After she had visited my class, when I met with her, and had explained a little bit about the purpose of the course, MAGGIE asked a question like, “How do you grade that?” I chuckled to myself when she asked that question. Yes, it’s hard to grade a subject like philosophy. But I’ve been doing it since the 80’s when I was a teaching assistant. It was hard at first, but eventually you figure it out. I understood her question very well because that’s the sort of thing I myself would have once asked—about twenty years ago.

But my point now is that MAGGIE was so ignorant of the subject that she couldn’t even imagine how to evaluate it. She didn’t even know the most basic thing. And, despite this ignorance, she thought she could walk into my classroom and somehow evaluate what was going on there. That indicates a kind of blindness, a kind of ignorance amounting to arrogance, a stubborn refusal to admit that one has limits.

On several other occasions MAGGIE visited my classroom—always unannounced. She always went away unsatisfied because she never saw what she wanted to see.

I draw the conclusion that she doesn’t understand my teaching methods.

Plainly, she has a different approach to teaching, and it’s probably a good one for elementary students. (I teach teenagers, and most of them are college-bound.) But, I will tell you now what I told MAGGIE in different words: I have no reason to think there is one universal teaching method that MAGGIE THATCHER has discovered and which everyone good teacher must follow.

In fact, since MAGGIE THATCHER is, as a person, very close-minded and doesn’t like free and open discussion, I doubt whether her favorite methods would have any relevance in a classroom where the goal was to encourage free discussion and the examination of ideas.
And, I told MAGGIE that too.

To make a long story short, I don’t think MAGGIE THATCHER liked it when I told her that. And she probably even hates me because I would not slavishly following “her” teaching methods. (I don’t for one minute think there is only one way to teach, and I don’t think MAGGIE THATCHER has discovered any original teaching method. In fact, as I told MAGGIE, if she thinks she if following Madeline Hunter, she’d better think twice. What I’ve read about Hunter is that she didn’t like cookbook teaching. But, as far as I can tell, that’s what MAGGIE is advocating.)

In fact, I’ll go further. I have done a bit of reading in psychology and cognitive science in the past fifteen years. And, I don’t see that anyone has discovered a one-size-fits-all way to teach. Anyone who thinks they’ve found such a method is kidding themselves. The cognitive sciences are just not so far developed that anyone can say they know exactly how the brain works. No one knows exactly how we learn. It’s all a big mystery, even though the research trying to figure it all out is fascinating, and it does contain lots of hints and suggestions that can inspire a teacher.

But MAGGIE THATCHER would not like to hear that. She acts as though she knows the way we learn, and the way to teach.. She acts as though all of the questions have been answered. What I found myself trying to do, in a very small way, was trying to point out to her that there are limits to what she knows….But MAGGIE didn’t want to hear that. For her it was a personal challenge.

That’s why MAGGIE wrote me such a cowardly letter.

Now, it is true that one time when MAGGIE visited my classroom I was unprepared. I spoke with her about it at the time, and I explained to her why this happened. I will not repeat to you what I told her then. I am not going to make excuses for myself because I am sure that every professional has a bad day. MAGGIE visited my classroom on four different occasions. In the same calendar year, xx visited my class twice and YY visited my class once. On one of those seven occasions I had a bad day. That’s not a good enough reason to decide not to renew someone.

But, I’ve already explained to you the real reason why MAGGIE reached a negative judgment about me. She could not accept the idea that I have my own ideas about how to teach. She could not accept the fact that I would not blindly follow her. She probably resents the fact that I showed a little bit of independence. Unfortunately, what MAGGIE doesn’t understand is that criticizing someone or disagreeing with someone is, itself, a form of respect. When two professionals meet, some disagreement is to be expected. (Excuse me for saying the obvious, but that’s one way we learn.) I am no less a professional than MAGGIE, and it would be irresponsible of me to blindly follow every opinion that MAGGIE has.

If I think about normal standards of decency and politeness, MAGGIE’s letter is surprising. When I think of MAGGIE THATCHER the person, the letter is not at all surprising. It was, unfortunately, totally in character.

Sincerely yours,