A School Is a School

Sooner or later, your principal is likely to encounter someone who thinks schools should be run like businesses. It may be a member of the parent group—or worse, a new board member—but whoever it is doesn't really matter. It's in everyone's best interest to refute that argument quickly. Here are some counterarguments that you'll want to pass along or use yourself.

The suggestion points to a difference. The very fact that someone suggests that schools be run "like" businesses shows that at some level there's recognition that schools are not businesses. The functions of schools are different from those of business in profound ways.

There's no agreed upon bottom line. Unlike business, there's no universally accepted definition of school success. Just ask 30 people what they think are the most important things students should know by the end of the 12th grade. After basic reading and writing skills, the answers will be all over the map. Additionally, schools carry a socialization burden that businesses don't. Schools are not only charged with providing opportunity and assistance in learning, but with seeing that every child takes advantage of that opportunity, despite personality, ability, community values, and socioeconomic status. At the same time, schools are called upon to teach youngsters democratic values, a sense of community, how to work with others, tolerance, and an appreciation of diversity. Defining the nature and quality of a school's product is a lot more complicated than a bottom line expressed in dollars earned or units produced.

There's no universally recognized technology. "Technology" really means technique or process. In most businesses, there are recognized protocols and practices. However, as much as we try to quantify what makes a good teacher, there's no definitive model. Different approaches—such as inquiry learning and team teaching—are all around us. Each generation of teachers is trained in the most promising techniques of their time. Most importantly, there's always an indefinable connection between teacher and student. Teaching is as much an art as it is a science. Think of the best teachers you ever had. Was it their technical skill that made them what they were, or something else in them that touched something in you?

Participants are transient. Schools have no long-term customers. Unlike enterprises that thrive on repeat business, schools work to move their customers along. Repeating grades or classes in school is a sign of ineffectiveness in the student, the school, or both.

Schools are organizationally less flexible. Unlike business, where a product line or service is discontinued due to a shrinking customer base, schools cannot change their product lines or discontinue programs. They're required to address each student's individual needs. By their very nature, schools defy economic efficiency because they face a continual tension between competing values of efficiency, excellence, and equity. To achieve educational excellence, you need to offer smaller and more expensive programs for gifted and disadvantaged students. Promoting excellence and pursuing equity are expensive undertakings. All of this is compounded by the state and federal government practice of enacting unfunded mandates that force districts to redirect dollars into programs and activities not of their own choosing.

Schools can't provide many of the financial incentives that businesses can provide. Even the best performing teachers aren't given bonuses or individual raises. Salaries are based solely on academic preparation and years of teaching experience, neither of which determines the quality of classroom performance. Promotions are given only to teachers who leave the classroom for a supervisory position, and when that happens, their instructional skills are lost to the school and students.