LISTEN — Class Disrupted S3 E11: What is Driving Parent Frustration with Schools?
Receive stories like these directly to your email inbox. Subscribe to Newsletter.
Class Disrupted is an educational podcast that airs every two weeks. Hosted by author Michael Horn and Diane Tavenner from Summit Public Schools, the podcast features discussions with educators, school leaders, students, and other members of the school community. The aim is to explore the challenges facing the education system during the pandemic and find solutions for the future. You can listen to all episodes by bookmarking our Class Disrupted page or subscribing on Apple Podcasts, Google Play, or Stitcher. New episodes are released every other Tuesday.
Michael and Diane delve into the frustrations experienced by parents and educators towards schools. They discuss how the misalignment between different groups can lead to a more personalized education system where grace and gratitude are valued.
You can listen to the episode below. A full transcript is available.
- Class Disrupted S3 E11: What is driving parent frustration with schools?
Diane Tavenner: Hello, Michael.
Michael Horn: Hi, Diane. It has been a challenging few weeks for me, as you know. However, it has also given me the opportunity to reflect on grace and gratitude, which are recurring themes in our podcast.
Tavenner: Michael, I understand that you have been dealing with a lot, and I appreciate your ability to stay present through it all. So, if I understand correctly, there is something you would like to discuss this week.
Horn: No surprises there, Diane. You know me well. As we have discussed, the surge of the Omicron variant has disrupted schools and caused even more frustrations. In some cases, these frustrations have turned into anger, which is the opposite of grace and gratitude. It seems like many parents and educators have reached their breaking point. However, as our listeners know, our podcast is not just about highlighting frustrations during COVID. We also want to explore the opportunities presented by these frustrations to transform education more broadly.
Tavenner: Indeed, Michael. This season, we are trying to answer important questions about schooling, such as who, what, where, when, why, and how? We want to examine the design of schools and follow our curiosity. Right now, I am curious to hear what is on your mind.
Horn: Great. Let’s dive deeper into the "what" question today. Specifically, what is driving parent frustration? Maybe their lack of gratitude or grace is not irrational. If we can understand their perspective, it could have implications for how we shape schools. Let me provide some context, and then you can explore it further, Diane.
Currently, I am observing and hearing various reactions to the disruptions and efforts made by schools. Some parents are determined to have in-person schooling no matter what.
Tavenner: Yes, I’ve noticed that.
Horn: They are tired of having their children stay at home due to close contacts or testing asymptomatic children. On the other hand, we see pockets of educators, particularly in Chicago during the recent teachers’ strike, who are reluctant to be in the classroom. Some schools don’t have enough teachers and staff to remain open due to COVID infections. So, there is this contrasting situation.
Then we have parents who have been advocating for schools to close again and switch to remote learning.
Tavenner: I understand.
Horn: They are concerned about the rising numbers of COVID cases, overwhelmed hospitals, reports of children being hospitalized, and the disruptions caused by close contacts. They are frustrated with schools that have carefully considered the evidence, as we discussed with John Bailey in a previous episode, and have concluded that in-person learning can be safe for the majority of children.
So, these different perspectives and frustrations are what I want to explore further today.
And perhaps there exists a fourth group, Diane, comprising people like my spouse, who essentially say, "I understand that there will be times when my children cannot attend school. It’s incredibly frustrating, but please, please do not resort to remote schooling when the school is closed. It puts too much strain on the parents." I’m not entirely convinced that I belong to that group, but it is a valid perspective. These dynamics seem to be the key elements at play. Of course, there are likely many nuances that I may have missed, but it appears that families fall somewhere on this wide spectrum.
Tavenner: I really appreciate that within your own family, you all have differing viewpoints. It reflects the diverse range of perspectives we are encountering, Michael. From what I have observed, you have done an excellent job of highlighting these different stances. It reinforces what you’re discussing.
Our families are currently divided on what they desire. As you mentioned, some strongly advocate for virtual learning, questioning the decision to hold in-person classes during a surge in COVID cases. They find it absurd. On the other hand, there are those who cannot imagine returning to virtual learning and firmly believe it is not an option. Some are primarily concerned about their children’s physical health in relation to the virus, while others worry more about the negative impact on their mental well-being due to social isolation. Then there are those who prioritize their children’s academic progress. Each family weighs these factors differently, according to their own circumstances and perceptions. Everyone holds varying opinions on the numerous health and safety measures in place, including masks, testing, contact tracing, and isolation and quarantine. This leads to a vast array of viewpoints within the school community. So what does this mean for those of us leading schools? How does it affect us?
To be honest, Michael, it feels like an impossible situation every single day. It truly seems impossible to satisfy everyone, or even anyone for that matter. You may make someone happy in one aspect, but it will likely upset them in another.
Horn: I understand.
Tavenner: And trying to cater to the majority is a monumental challenge. When individuals feel strongly and act upon their beliefs, as we’ve seen and as you expressed your frustration and anger earlier, even if you prioritize the majority, who exactly constitutes the majority on each dimension? The individuals in the majority keep shifting. So, you find yourself back where you started, where nobody is content, let alone satisfied with the decisions being made. Even if they appreciate one aspect, there will always be something they dislike. And we haven’t even considered the opinions of faculty members. You mentioned educators earlier, but they too have their own complex and diverse perspectives. The bottom line is that, using a technical term, it really sucks to be a school leader in these circumstances.
However, I have noticed that many educators do not share the fundamental perspective that most parents seem to hold, which is that one of the primary purposes of schools is to provide childcare. In my opinion, this is a significant disconnection. Parents believe that schools offer a safe haven for their children during the day, allowing them to work and support their families financially. However, this is not how most educators perceive their role.
I believe it is overly simplistic to say that the main purpose of schooling is to provide custodial care. While I understand that educators may argue otherwise, research shows that parents expect schools to fulfill four roles in their lives. These include providing an escape from a negative situation, being part of a community that shares their values, focusing on the holistic development of their child, and helping them achieve their child’s college aspirations. However, a different model called the Kano Model might offer a helpful perspective here, Diane.
Tavenner: Huh? Okay, Michael. You have given me a chance to express my thoughts a few times, so I believe it’s your turn now. Alright, I’m curious. What is the Kano Model?
Horn: I thought you’d never ask, Diane. The Kano Model is essentially a method of determining which features an organization should invest in. It helps organizations create a product roadmap and prioritize the most valuable features. Visualizing the idea is relatively simple, though explaining it in an audio format can be challenging. Imagine a graph where the Y-axis represents user satisfaction. The higher you go, the more satisfied the users are, while the lower you go, the less satisfied they are. The X-axis represents the sophistication of each feature. Moving further to the right indicates more investment in perfecting a particular feature, making it more advanced and complex.
In the 1980s, Professor Kano identified three types of features through this model. To build up to my main point, let’s discuss them in reverse order. The first type is what we call excitement features.
Tavenner: I see.
Horn: These are features that users don’t necessarily expect, so the absence of these features doesn’t bother them. However, when these features are present, they create unexpected delight and excite the users. For example, a school that offers exceptional connections to local community organizations for after-school internships or projects that allow students to work with renowned professionals in their field.
The next type is what Professor Kano referred to as pro-performance experiences. Investing in these features results in a one-to-one improvement in user satisfaction. For instance, a parent who is dedicated to helping their child get into college might find each additional AP class offered by the school highly satisfactory. On the other hand, the absence of any AP classes would lead to significant dissatisfaction for that parent.
Lastly, there are basic features. These features are essential, and their absence leads to complete user dissatisfaction. However, investing more in these features does not necessarily result in increased credit or recognition. They are the opposite of excitement features, as they are simply expected to be present. For example, think of seat belts in cars. The manufacturer doesn’t receive any extra appreciation from customers for improving seat belts. However, if seat belts are missing or malfunctioning, customers will be highly dissatisfied and choose a different option.
Tavenner: Yes, I understand. I quite like this framework, Michael. It’s making me think about various things. According to this model, it seems that childcare is considered a basic feature for the majority of parents.
Horn: Yes, that’s correct.
Tavenner: It’s not an excitement feature or a performance experience, but rather a fundamental requirement. Without adequate childcare options, most parents would opt out and become either frustrated or angry because they wouldn’t have a safe place for their child to be taken care of.
There may be a root cause behind this disconnection, which is the pandemic that has completely disrupted the fundamental aspects of schooling. As a result, everyone’s perspective on this issue has shifted. In the absence of reliable childcare, families have become acutely aware of its importance as a basic necessity that is currently missing.
Horn: Yes, I agree.
Tavenner: Families used to take this for granted, I assume. I’m curious to know if these basic aspects often become overlooked.
Horn: Yes, that’s true.
Tavenner: However, due to the pandemic, parents now recognize that the responsibility of supervising their children falls on them, rather than the school. This is something that they probably didn’t think much about before. It makes me wonder if these basic features were often overlooked.
But I still believe, Michael, that many educators have taken a different perspective. This might be where we’re seeing a growing divide. Suddenly, educators experienced a work-life that didn’t require them to be physically present in a school building every day, with all-day childcare responsibilities. And I think many of them actually enjoyed it. If they didn’t view themselves as childcare providers before the pandemic, but rather as educators, they started to think, "Wait a minute. My job is to teach, not to babysit. There are other ways to do that which are more flexible and less stressful, and I quite like it." They began to question whether providing that basic function should be part of their job. It didn’t feel completely real or explicit before, so it’s understandable.
I also believe that the societal context has a significant impact here, Michael. There is a large percentage of people who are reevaluating their jobs and careers, and many are even quitting. Work flexibility has become a top priority for many individuals. Let’s face it, working in a school isn’t a flexible job. It simply isn’t. The current design of schools doesn’t work if teachers and educators aren’t physically present every day from start to finish. So, we’re experiencing a significant tension here.
Not everyone will be affected in the same way, though. If you’ve been an educator for, let’s say, 15 or more years, a year of virtual teaching probably won’t fundamentally change how you view your role. You can easily return to the routine that worked for you. However, for newer teachers, if half or all of their teaching experience has been virtual, it will be a profound shift. Since they represent the future teaching workforce, we have a significant misalignment between what families expect and what teachers expect. Currently, I don’t see them coming together to understand the basic element that you’re helping us realize.
Horn: Yes, Diane, I think you’re right. One thing you just mentioned that I hadn’t considered before is that the Kano Model is dynamic. A performance defining feature can eventually become taken for granted and be considered basic. What I hadn’t realized until now is that because the basic element was suddenly taken away, it may have become a performance defining feature for some families. They never realized the extent of their need for childcare.
But another intriguing aspect of the Kano Model is that it is relative to an individual’s circumstances and their specific needs. So, for some parents, childcare may not be one of the basic features. They had never thought about it before, but their situation is different. They may not require custodial care and instead prioritize health and safety as their baseline need. Custodial care might not be important to them at all, or it could be an added bonus. I just don’t know.
In most households, childcare is a necessity. It’s a given. However, there are families who have chosen traditional brick and mortar schools for their children, but now want them to remain closed because they don’t require the childcare aspect. In my opinion, it’s unreasonable to expect individual schools to simultaneously offer both in-person and remote learning options. It’s a lot to ask for.
Therefore, I believe we need to make room in the education system for different options and specialization. I recently had a conversation with Pat Brantley, who leads the Friendship Public Schools in Washington DC. She explained how they have a portfolio of schools and are embracing the concept of micro schools. What I found interesting was that they already had a successful virtual school before the pandemic, and its enrollment has actually increased. Meanwhile, their other schools continue to operate fully in-person and are also thriving in terms of enrollment. This demonstrates that there is a wide range of preferences among people right now.
Tavenner: Well, Michael, it’s no surprise that our discussions often circle back to personalization. The truth is, the traditional one-size-fits-all school model no longer works. As you have mentioned, we live in a time where people can customize almost every aspect of their lives. They have countless choices and options available to them, sometimes to the point of being overwhelmed.
However, when it comes to their child’s education and development, they are forced to accept whatever is offered by a particular school. It’s a package deal with little room for customization. And so far, the only alternative has been to switch to a different school.
Horn: Exactly.
Tavenner: But simply choosing another school doesn’t guarantee that it will be the right fit for their family. There are many nuances and elements of the school experience that can’t be addressed by just selecting a different institution. This model no longer works in a world where people have so many choices and are accustomed to comparing and contrasting their options. It’s a strange experience for them.
To me, this indicates that school choice alone is not enough to address the need for personalization. While many people are enthusiastic about the idea of school choice, especially during the pandemic, I don’t believe it’s sufficient. We’ve both believed this for quite some time. It’s a great concept but not the complete solution. So, we need to think about how we can personalize the day-to-day educational experience with more nuanced choices and opportunities.
What excites me is that this requires new designs and models, which could also provide educators with the desired flexibility. This is where these two groups can find common ground and work together. I truly believe there is incredible potential here. However, it will require courage because people are resistant to change, especially when it involves schools and children.
So, it will take courage and collaboration to meet the diverse needs of individuals. My hope is that this frustration can be channeled into something positive, encouraging people to approach it with grace and work together. We need to be willing to take a leap of faith and create something remarkable.
Tavenner: Continuing with my theme of preparing for our trip to Germany, I have my fingers crossed right now. As someone who loves fiction, I recently started reading The Book Thief by Marcus Zusak. I must admit, this book has been on my list for quite some time. I had initially planned to read it with my book club back in 2006. However, there was an opening scene that, as a young mother, I didn’t feel ready to read at that time. So I put it aside and just recently picked it up again. This book is highly regarded as a young adult novel, and being a fan of the genre, I’m really appreciating it. It follows the story of a young German girl during World War II, and it beautifully captures everything I love about YA literature. How about you?
Horn: That’s fantastic. That’s fantastic. Shifting gears to TV, I just finished watching the NFL playoffs. By the time this episode airs, it might be a bit outdated, but I have to mention that the four nail-biter games were absolutely thrilling. I had a great time watching them. I’ll admit, I found ways to sneak in some viewing on my phone instead of the TV just to have a few minutes to myself and take a break from book editing over the weekend. It was a fun distraction, and judging from social media, it seems like many others enjoyed it too. Maybe that’s what we all needed right now – a little distraction.
And with that, I’ll leave you all with the idea of finding moments of distraction and returning to a place of peace and gratitude. Thank you all for joining us on Class Disrupted.
Michael Horn is a prolific author who has written numerous books about the future of education, including Disrupting Class: How Disruptive Innovation Will Change the Way the World Learns. He works with various organizations to help revolutionize education and empower individuals to pursue their passions and reach their full potential.
Diane Tavenner is the CEO of Summit Public Schools and a co-founder of the Summit Learning Program. She has dedicated her life to education, is an innovator in the field, and has authored a book titled Prepared: What Kids Need for a Fulfilled Life.
