Teaching Without Class

ABC News wants to grab your attention by announcing that a teacher was arrested for murder, but they don’t tell you what kind of teacher she was until you read the story.

________________________________________

Upon entering the field of education, one thing that I had to grow accustomed to is having people dislike me simply because of my job. That’s not to say that everyone dislikes me because of my title, but rather that it’s become acceptable—at least where I live—to be negative just for the sake of being negative.

The justification for it is one that many people who receive their paychecks from tax dollars can relate to: the “I-pay-your-salary” mentality.

The idea is that if one person pays another person’s salary, the element of human decency can be suspended. In lay terms, you can treat the other person like an asshole if you choose to, since you’re paying their salary.

I’ve also had to grow accustomed to how the media waits with bated breath to report on any and all indiscretions that might be perpetrated by those in the field of education. In some cases, as I’ll show, the term “teacher” is stretched to make the situation all the more eye-catching.

A year ago I was scanning the headlines of my local news Website and my eye caught the headline “Teacher Arrested for DUI.” The article was actually a list of 10 people who had court hearings at my local courthouse, but what stuck out for me was that the other nine defendants—whose offenses ranged from other DUIs to drug possession to trespassing to receiving stolen property—did not have their occupations listed. The only one who had an occupation listed was the teacher.

Were the other defendants construction workers? Were they mechanics? Were they cashiers? Were they newspaper reporters? I’m not sure because only one had an occupation listed: the teacher.

The judge in the case rightfully excoriated the woman, whose blood-alcohol level was twice the legal limit. The report did not, however, say if he excoriated any of the other criminals. Does that mean that he did and it wasn’t reported or does it mean that he didn’t and his view was the “boys will be boys” view? I’m not sure because it wasn’t reported.

With that as a preface, it brings me to the way that ABC News has recently set up the presentation of the recent story of eight-year-old Sandra Cantu, whose body was found in a suitcase in a pond.

ABC News lists a headline of “Teacher Booked in Sandra Cantu Murder” under their “Top Stories” column on their homepage. It’s not until one clicks on it and reads the actual article that one discovers the “teacher” is really a Sunday school teacher (and that’s not to say that it makes the murder more acceptable—it’s still evil). That’s not exactly the “teacher” that one would think of upon reading the homepage headline, is it?

While I love doing what I do, it has taken me some time to grow accustomed to knowing that people are always going to be waiting for me—and not just me in particular, but everyone in education on some level—to make some kind of mistake in an effort to pounce on it. Will I be caught watching a bad movie? Will I be caught reading a controversial book? Will I be caught listening to unpopular music? Will I be caught using a dirty word off school grounds? Will I be caught wearing a tie that doesn’t match the rest of my wardrobe? It might sound absurd but after I was hired I was told to be ready for any possible criticism no matter how silly it might seem.

What I’m still trying to grow accustomed to is the notion that I need to be as close to moral and ethical purity as possible, but I’m supposed to simultaneously feel guilty if I get a raise in salary.

Ω