Teacher Autonomy Pt. 2

In the first post, I discussed that despite Spain’s seemingly high level of teacher autonomy, I didn’t see the type of curricular innovation that advocates of teacher autonomy typically promise. Instead, Spain seemingly lived up to its reputation of having a traditional “by the book” instructional style, relying on rote memorization and textbook learning. Of course, in recent years educational policy has aimed to improve this—the official standards of Spain consist of ‘competencies’ to be developed and usually shy away from prescribing certain content standards that must be hit, ostensibly allowing more room for creativity and innovation. And in my personal experience, I do notice a marked generational difference among teachers and their willingness to try out new activities and ways of doing things.

However, in a conversation with one of my teachers, I asked her about what she felt was the greatest constraint on her autonomy as a teacher and she answered that the expectation to follow the textbook was a big obstacle. Even in private schools, she noted that she was expected to complete the textbook in a given year and this inhibited her ability to innovate or be creative in lessons. English departments get to choose which textbooks they use, but once it's given to teachers the expectation is that they use it to a T. She was happy that she liked the textbook she was using, but she noted that she’s had to use some that she disagreed with, which she thought was a shame. So while I do think it’s true that in Spain they are becoming more progressive and trying to go beyond this textbook style teaching, at the same time, it still seems to be an expectation of the profession to teach the textbook as faithfully as possible.

Even in my bilingual sections, which purportedly benefit from freedom to do more projects and different activities, teachers still don’t seem to be able to innovate or be creative in the way they want to. At least in my English department, the reigning consensus is to do things as they’ve been done: one teacher noted her frustration with an assignment she believed was unengaging and unproductive for students’ learning, but as it was “the way it’s always been done,” the assignment stood. And to be fair, she was right– students ended up wasting a month of class time writing a newspaper article only to bring it home and rewrite it with AI. But her resigned tone suggested to me that she felt unempowered to challenge the assignment even though she disagreed pedagogically. Though technically she has the requisite autonomy to make her own pedagogical decisions (it's highly unlikely that she could ever be dismissed for going against the department’s wishes) she would essentially be isolating herself in the community, so she made the decision to just “go along with it.”

I have seen teachers in my school go ‘rogue’ so to speak, and it’s true that they’ve socially suffered for it. One teacher at my school consistently causes issues, allowing students to be disruptive, use phones despite their prohibited use, and frankly, she doesn’t do much teaching. Another teacher noted her unpopular teaching style but admitted that, since she has a permanent placement, other teachers would “have to get used to her.” It is true that her autonomy allows her to teach as she pleases, even if it’s unpopular with others, but she has paid socially. Ostensibly one could go “rogue” in a similar way and use their autonomy for good, but one can hardly expect teachers to go against the grain when it may carry high social costs.

Here it’s perhaps important to note one criticism of the Spanish system. Chiefly, it provides little upward mobility for teachers, meaning, since they’re not evaluated professionally, they have little incentive to innovate or experiment. Essentially, they won’t be positively rewarded for experimentation or innovation, so there is little reason to do so. Doing things as they've always been done is the safer bet.

Cultural Expectations of Education

Once I noticed that autonomy didn’t produce the outcomes I expected, however, I began to think that perhaps my framing was flawed. The idea that schools ought to be sites of innovation and teachers ought to be the chief innovators is not immediately obvious nor an intrinsic part of any given educational system. We must remind ourselves that educational systems rest upon a whole host of cultural values and assumptions, and the U.S. expectation that schools be sites of innovation may be none other than a manifestation of a culture that values efficiency and optimization. A different culture may prioritize transmission of cultural knowledge and traditions, so schools must necessarily not be a site of innovation. In any case, I began thinking that perhaps my expectation that autonomy produces innovation in schools was merely a product of my U.S. cultural assumptions and was not a fair expectation to put on the Spanish education system. I recently read a study that backed this idea up. It examined the relationship between teacher autonomy and innovative work behavior (meaning, a willingness to try out new teaching methods and strategies) The findings suggest that teacher autonomy does not in itself lead to innovative work behavior, but is mediated by the school’s climate towards innovation. In other words, autonomous teachers in a school environment that doesn’t encourage innovation will not engage in innovative work behavior.

As I stated previously, in the U.S., many schools are expected to be sites of innovation, which ideally, would include a culture hospitable to experimentation and innovative work behavior. In these schools, it appears that teacher autonomy would in fact translate into innovation in their methods and strategies. Though in Spain, there might not be the same cultural expectation that schools ought to be sites of experimentation. So it's not surprising that there wouldn’t be a very robust climate of innovation in Spanish schools. This might explain my observation that, despite having high levels of autonomy, teachers in Spain do not tend to emphasize innovation in their work. This is not to say that teachers are not creative; many of my teachers plan fun and engaging lessons for students. However, generally, the assessment remains relatively traditional and Spanish schools still maintain the reputation of “by the book” teaching. This might also be a result of generational differences, as I’ve noted, younger teachers seem more resistant to traditional textbook style teaching, but are constrained by the climate of their institution that prefers traditional teaching styles. So even if the expectation that schools be sites of innovation is becoming more normalized in Spain, if that expectation hasn’t yet translated to the general climate of the school, then teachers will be unable to use their autonomy for innovation and experimentation.

This discussion led me to the greater realization that my entire question—“what positive outcomes does teacher autonomy produce in Spain?” — is similarly informed by U.S. cultural assumptions that autonomy is instrumentally valuable: it is a tool used to produce favorable outcomes like innovation, or reduced teacher burnout, or improved student engagement. I mentioned previously that the differences in teacher autonomy in Spain vs. the U.S.A is one not just of degree, but one of kind.

Spanish teachers are institutionally guaranteed autonomy by being granted permanent, tenured positions, while in the U.S. this is practically unheard of. U.S. teachers can be granted almost unilateral control over curriculum or methodologies, but they don’t have permanent civil service placements that guarantee them a ‘job for life.’ To land a permanent placement in the Spanish educational system, teachers must pass immensely difficult civil service exams called opposiciones which often takes years of preparation and multiple attempts. So, when they finally pass, it's assumed they’ve earned their position and have proved themselves as a competent professional. In other words, autonomy is a condition of their professional respect: they’re entitled to it. In the U.S., while autonomy can similarly be articulated as a condition of professional respect, it's often framed in more instrumental terms—it produces certain outcomes.

Of course, teacher autonomy in Spain does produce certain results that I’ve discussed— some good, some bad—but the debate is structured differently. In the U.S., we often ask, “what degree of teacher autonomy will produce the most motivated educators, innovative practices, and engaged students?” In Spain, the debate often centers on “do current levels of autonomy reflect the professional dignity of educators?” Of course, as I said, people in the U.S. similarly criticize autonomy in the sense it degrades the professionalism of teachers, and in Spain people similarly discuss the positive and negative effects of broad autonomy. However, this distinction of autonomy of an intrinsic or instrumental good helps remind us that discussions about education are always a discussion about culture and values, and understanding what assumptions underpin our educational systems can help us achieve a deeper understanding of the systems that we participate in.

I think in the U.S. we’re often attracted to policy discussions that allow us to optimize and maximize efficiency, so we feel more comfortable talking about something like teacher autonomy solely in terms of quantifiable statistics like student performance, engagement, or job satisfaction. The more difficult discussion is to talk about what it means to be an educator and what students deserve, which is far less cut and dry and forces one to articulate their beliefs and values. But I think that it’s worth the messiness. As I’ve hoped to establish in this post, cultural assumptions and expectations are always lurking under the surface of supposedly ‘objective’ discussions—it’s better to have a real discussion about cultural values and beliefs than let them subtly guide our policy.