A retired teacher and principal with thirty-eight years of experience
 in public education, Renato C. Nicolai, Ed.D., taught 6th through 12th 
grade and was both an elementary and middle school principal. In 
education circles, he was known as Dr. Nicolai, which eventually was 
shortened to Dr. Nick, and has stuck ever since.
Tyler:
  Thank you for joining me today, Dr. Nick. Obviously, the state of 
public education in the United States is of great concern to many 
people. To begin, will you tell us what you think is wrong with the 
public education system?
Dr. Nick:  Wow! What an opportunity! Yes,
 I would be pleased to tell you what I think is wrong with the public 
education system. My thoughts aren't in any order of priority; I'm 
telling you about them as they come to mind.
What I think of first
 is what I wrote about as the main emphasis in my book. Teachers 
desperately need to improve the quality of their teaching, so, 
specifically, what's wrong is that too many teachers are either 
incompetent or mediocre instructors at best. Yes, if you had the 
opportunity to stand by my side in the hundreds of classrooms I've 
visited in my career, you would be both amazed and horrified at how much
 poor quality teaching there is in our public schools. If parents only 
knew how much more their children could be learning with instruction 
from superb teachers compared to what they are most likely learning now 
from incompetent teachers, they would be flabbergasted. That's how bad 
it really is. This indictment of teachers, however, is not a major 
problem at the elementary school, but is a serious and rampant problem 
for sure at the middle school, junior high school, and especially the 
high school level of education. Parents, you'll want to read about the 
eight essential qualities most teachers don't possess. I've listed and 
described them in the first chapter of my book.
Tenure is another 
critical problem. Once tenure is granted by a school district, an 
incompetent teacher is a teacher for life. It's extremely difficult to 
dismiss a teacher who has tenure. What's wrong with tenure is that it's 
achievable so soon in a teacher's career (after only three years in most
 cases), so final (once it's granted it's irrevocable), and so long 
lasting (the teacher keeps it for as long as he/she teaches). What 
happens is that some teachers work very hard during their first few 
years on the job, receive tenure, and then slack off in their 
performance because they know they can almost never lose their job. 
Instead of tenure, public education should promote a system of 
performance reviews that teachers are required to pass periodically in 
order to keep their teaching position for the next two or three years.
The
 way a teacher is evaluated is all wrong within the education system. 
It's basically a sham and a joke. Collective bargaining contracts and 
union involvement in teacher evaluations has watered down the process of
 teacher evaluations to the degree that practically nothing worthwhile 
results from the process. In my book, I have a chapter titled "What You 
Don't Know Won't Hurt You," and the concept of teacher evaluation is 
discussed in that chapter. If parents and the public at large knew how 
ineffective and unproductive teacher evaluations are, they would demand a
 more efficient system. The system as it exists in most school districts
 today is a tactful process of saying the right words, doing what's 
anticipated, and not ruffling anyone's feelings. What it should do is 
help teachers improve the quality of their teaching to the degree that 
they help students learn better, but it doesn't do that at all.
The
 public education system is rooted in the false notion that all teachers
 are qualified educators who can be trusted to make good decisions, 
follow school district rules and regulations, work together in a spirit 
of collegiality, promote the welfare of students as a priority, and, 
generally, do what is just, moral, and professional. What's wrong is 
that this description is simply not true; yet, school districts 
throughout the United States allow teachers the freedom to work 
unsupervised because they are assumed to be well-intentioned, 
professional persons who have the best interests of students at heart. 
Don't misunderstand me, please. Of course, there are many conscientious 
teachers who do work well with each other and do have the best interests
 of students at heart, but I believe that there are many more who take 
advantage of academic freedom, collegiality, and lack of supervision to 
do whatever they want within the four walls of their classrooms. This is
 actually a very serious problem that is covered up by the educational 
hierarchy.
Another very serious wrong is the way in which school 
districts manage the use of substitute teachers. Substitute teachers are
 rarely observed to determine their competence, frequently assigned to 
subject areas they have no qualifications to teach, and regularly 
subjected to unbelievable disrespect and insolence from students. When a
 substitute teacher is present in a middle school, junior high school, 
or high school classroom, little or no learning takes place. That class 
is a waste of instructional time, the students' time, and the 
substitute's time as well. The three most common activities that take 
place when a substitute takes over a regular teacher's class are the 
showing of videos or DVDs, the administration of tests, and the 
supervision of long, boring written or reading assignments left by the 
regular teacher. The lesson plans left by most regular teachers for 
substitute teachers to follow are generally a set of instructions on how
 to occupy the time students have in class. The entire substitute 
teacher system needs to be completely overhauled. Students must be 
taught to respect substitute teachers, to assist them with the lesson, 
and to be responsible for their own learning. Expectations that students
 will cooperate with substitute teachers, that regular teachers will 
conscientiously prepare quality lesson plans, that substitutes will 
teach, and that administrators will monitor substitutes are so miserably
 low, currently, that the education system simply accepts the status quo
 of chaos, lack of learning, and disgraceful substitute teacher academic
 and professional performance.
Tyler, the public education system 
in the United States is really in trouble. It's inundated with problems;
 there are many things wrong with it. I could have written about lack of
 student discipline, emphasis on sports over academics, permissiveness 
throughout the culture of public schools, reticence about the problems 
that exist, and much more. I believe that it has deteriorated so much 
over the last fifty years, that mediocrity and incompetence are the 
status quo. Parents don't even realize that the system is so bad. What 
they see and experience is what they think is how the system should be. 
They don't understand how much better it could be and how their children
 could be receiving a more superior educational experience.
Tyler:
 Dr. Nick, will you tell us a little bit about your background in 
education-where you taught and the subjects you taught, as well as your 
experience as a middle school principal. What personal experiences have 
led to your current viewpoints?
Dr. Nick:   My first full time 
position in public schools was as a 9th and 11th grade teacher of 
English at El Camino High School in South San Francisco, California (a 
city separate from San Francisco). After teaching two years, my 
assignment changed to teaching English half the school day and 
counseling the other half. In my third year as a teacher at this school,
 I was elected president of the local teachers' union and the following 
year chairman of the School District Negotiating Council. In my fifth 
year, I was appointed Assistant Principal of Parkway Junior High School 
(7-9) in the same school district.
During the seven years I held 
this position as assistant principal, I enrolled in a doctoral program 
at the University of Southern California, and from 1969-1972 I achieved a
 Doctor of Education degree in Educational Administration and Secondary 
Curriculum. My dissertation, which researched the administrative 
behavior of superintendents of schools, was the first dissertation 
sponsored by the newly formed Association of California School 
Administrators (ACSA).
In 1974, I was selected Principal of Isaac 
Newton Graham Middle School (7-8) in Mountain View, California. You 
asked me to share my experience as a middle school principal, and I'm 
pleased to do so, but I want you to know that I could easily write 
another book about those experiences alone. So, I'll try to give you an 
encapsulated answer. I think I could best describe my experiences as a 
middle school principal as a continuing five year roller coaster ride 
because I never knew when my feelings, emotions, and experiences would 
be up or down. On the up side, I was thrilled to see many students learn
 to their potential as a result of the excellent teaching of some superb
 teachers. After all, helping young people learn is what education is 
all about. I also observed some outstanding teachers whose skills and 
methods motivated students to excel beyond their own personal 
expectations. That was extremely exciting. As the leader of a 
neighborhood school, I grew personally as an educator because I had the 
opportunity to influence curriculum, work for the educational benefits 
of students, and associate often with community leaders in various 
agencies (fire department, police department, recreation department, 
mayor's office, and so on). These experiences made me a better 
principal. On the down side, I learned quickly that many teachers should
 never have been allowed to enter a classroom to teach. They were not 
suited to interact with adolescents and teenagers; they didn't have the 
skills needed to help young minds understand concepts and ideas; they 
failed to devote themselves to learning how to teach expertly; they 
didn't know how to control and manage a class of thirty students. I also
 realized what some of the problems were that I had to deal with 
(incompetent teachers, low quality curriculum, collective bargaining 
contracts to name a few) but that I didn't have the power to bring about
 effective change. That was frustrating to no end. Finally, the lowest 
possible experience for me was to meet so-called teachers who had 
literally given up; that is, they had decided to go through the motions 
of teaching only. They were no longer eager to teach, didn't look 
forward to meeting their classes, and did as little as possible to meet 
their professional responsibilities. I left out so much that I feel my 
answer is inadequate. I can see the joy on the faces of students who won
 academic and sports awards, the enthusiasm of both staff and student 
body at our annual soft ball game, the annual parent club barbecue, and 
so much more.
I remained at Graham for five years and then moved 
on to an opportunity in southern California as the Administrative 
Director (Superintendent/Principal) of Chatsworth Hills Academy, a 
private school in Chatsworth, California. I preferred serving in public 
education, so I returned to Graham as a 7th grade core teacher, teaching
 English and social studies (world history). In October of my second 
year back from southern California, I was asked by three Santa Clara 
County superintendents to head up a "joint powers" school named The 
Institute of Computer Technology as an on-loan school administrator. 
Along with an on-loan administrator from IBM (Ken Butler), I helped this
 new educational enterprise get its feet off the ground. It was exciting
 work and I enjoyed hiring teachers, meeting technology experts at Apple
 and IBM, developing curriculum, outfitting a school with security 
systems, working with school superintendents, learning how to protect 
valuable hardware and software, and a lot more. After doing what I was 
hired to do, I returned to Graham, teaching English, social studies, and
 geography to 7th and 8th graders, including the 8th Grade Honors 
English program. I remained at Graham for the next twenty years and 
retired in 2001.
During my career, I've been a presenter at 
various conferences, in-service sessions, and conventions. My 
presentation topics were usually in the areas of teaching methods, 
literature-based instruction, discipline, and classroom management. I've
 also been a master teacher, chairman or member of numerous curriculum 
committees, and an adjunct professor in the teacher training program at 
National University.
My current viewpoints and attitudes toward 
public education developed throughout my career based upon my personal 
experiences as a teacher and principal, what I saw other educators do 
and heard them say, what I read, what I learned best helped young people
 reach their learning potential, what political reforms failed, and what
 I learned about how young minds gain knowledge. For instance, there was
 a time when I opposed vouchers; I'm adamantly in favor of them now. The
 more choices parents have in the education of their children, the 
better. I was a staunch supporter of tenure at the beginning of my 
career until I witnessed how many deficient teachers hide their 
incompetence under the protection of this law. Tenure should be 
abolished. I'm sure you get the idea. I hold the views, attitudes, and 
feelings that I do about education as a result of a life-long career in 
schools. You know, children aren't the only ones who learn while at 
school.
Tyler:  You mention that many teachers are not competent? 
What is the reason for this, and why does the school system allow them 
to remain in the classroom?
Dr. Nick:   Why are many teachers incompetent? Here are some reasons to contemplate:
Because
 they don't possess the personality needed to interact well with young 
people. If a person doesn't like kids, doesn't enjoy being with them all
 day long, doesn't look forward to teaching them, doesn't accept their 
immaturity and want to help them become more mature, can't stand 
constantly answering questions, can't accept individual differences 
(race, ethnicity, gender, religion, etc), can't cope with special needs 
(hyperactivity, behavior problems, and so on), then that person will 
never be a competent teacher.
Because they don't possess, exhibit,
 use, and treasure enthusiasm, and, so, they are truly boring to most of
 their students. Ask any kid at a middle school, junior high school, or 
high school in your community what they dislike the most about their 
teachers, and, I guarantee you the answer will overwhelmingly be that 
they are boring. And you know something, Tyler; the kids are right. Most
 teachers are insufferably boring in how they teach. Enthusiasm is a 
sine qua non for all competent teachers.
Because they don't know 
how to get concepts and ideas across clearly to their students. They 
don't possess the knowledge and skills needed to help students learn. 
They just don't know what to do and end up quite often being frustrated 
and saying something like, "Oh, those kids just can't learn this stuff."
 That's an expression equivalent to defeatism and incompetence. If the 
learning material is age appropriate and part of the accepted 
curriculum, of course a normal, healthy student can learn it. It isn't 
the student who is at fault; it's the teacher who doesn't have the 
competence to design lessons, activities, and programs to help students 
learn. The reason for this is that many teachers tell students but don't
 show and teach.
Because they can't manage and control student 
behavior. Teachers daily face challenging disciplinary and behavior 
problems. If a teacher can't effectively handle these problems, that 
teacher will never be a competent instructor-never! In this case, the 
incompetence is in not knowing what to do when a disciplinary or 
behavior problem presents itself because the teacher hasn't thought out a
 personal Educational Philosophy for Control of Student Behavior. Every 
teacher needs to do this to harmonize his/her personality with methods 
of discipline. I explain this in detail in my book.
Because many 
teachers don't manage classroom time efficiently. I devote an entire 
chapter to this topic: "Wasted Time - Inept Instruction  (Euphemism: 
Teaching Mistakes). How can anyone consider a teacher competent when 
that teacher tries to teach over the noise of unruly students, doesn't 
know how to quell effectively unnecessary noise at the change of a 
classroom activity, and allows students to talk whenever they want. This
 inability to control noise leads to as much as 25% of each class period
 being wasted. Many teachers can't even control the time at the end of 
class when students get ready to leave and waste the ten or fifteen 
minutes left.
Because many teachers can't effectively control 
group learning. One of the most effective ways for students to learn is 
to interact with each other, allowing students to help each other learn 
in groups. Sometimes, students have just the right words and 
explanations to help a fellow student understand a lesson. However, most
 teachers don't control student groups effectively and so waste 
tremendous amounts of instructional time.
Because many teachers 
don't have high enough academic and behavioral expectations and 
standards. In other words, many teachers don't challenge their students 
enough academically and don't expect them to learn to the level of their
 potential. Teachers must project an attitude of high expectations to 
motivate their charges adequately. Most teachers don't even understand 
this concept and need to learn it themselves. Not putting it into effect
 in classrooms is indicative of ignorance and incompetence. In Chapter 
Three, I wrote a seven-page description of the most important strategies
 used by teachers who truly understand how to teach high academic and 
behavioral standards. Teachers, you've never seen anything come close to
 this practical list of how to teach standards.
Because some 
teachers don't have a sufficient knowledge of the subjects they teach. 
They don't! They are assigned to teach a subject they don't know 
adequately or they don't even like. Many teachers are teaching subjects 
and they don't have either a major in that field or a valid certificate 
to teach it.
There are other reasons as well, but the few I 
mentioned are really significant ones, aren't they? Now, what are the 
reasons for these incompetencies and why do school systems allow these 
incompetent teachers to remain in the classroom? Well, the first part of
 the question can be answered easily. Students learning how to teach are
 not being prepared adequately by schools of education. You know who 
should teach prospective teachers how to teach? Not education 
professors! No! Excellent, experienced, current and retired teachers who
 know what a classroom is all about and who have a love for kids and 
teaching in their hearts should teach candidates for teaching. Give me 
proven experts at teaching young people, a group of twenty teacher 
candidates for a year, and I know we could do a much better job of 
teaching them how to be good teachers than any school of education in 
the country.
Answering the second part of the question leaves me 
with a heavy heart. The reason is that most school districts don't 
effectively monitor and evaluate the progress, competence, and teaching 
skills of new teachers. The procedures to do this are woefully 
inadequate and rarely result in new teachers being dismissed if they are
 incompetent. Teachers new to the profession learn more about teaching 
from their own personal experiences the first three years on the job and
 from other, experienced teachers than they do from any program 
presented by the school district they work for. School districts don't 
really know if a new teacher is mediocre or, worse yet, incompetent so 
they grant tenure because they need a body in the classroom. There is a 
tremendous shortage of teachers throughout our country today. Once 
tenure is granted, it is virtually impossible to dismiss a teacher on 
the basis of incompetence.
(Due to space constraints a portion of this review was omitted -- please see Reader Views website for the entire interview.)
Dr.
 Nick:   Parents must be involved in their children's education from 
preschool right through high school and, perhaps, even into college. The
 tendency is for parents to step back from involvement when their 
teenagers start high school. This is a serious mistake. Parental 
involvement is critical during high school because the high schooler is 
under tremendous pressure from peers mainly to experiment in many 
different areas: drugs, alcohol, sex, ideology, cults, etc. That 
involvement should take the form of proactive participation, diligent 
observation, and ardent questioning. I recommend that parents do the 
following to ensure that their children receive a quality education:
Parents
 must communicate regularly in person, over the phone, and via e-mail 
with the teacher throughout the school year about every aspect of their 
child's learning by asking questions and seeking information about these
 and other important aspects of schooling:
homework
math skills
language arts skills (reading, spelling, grammar, writing)
testing
behavior
grades
listening skills
attitude
participation and cooperation
Parents
 must frequently monitor the progress of their child's learning at home 
and act as the most important teacher in their child's life.
Parents
 should observe their child's teacher(s) to assess the teacher's quality
 of instruction. My book is filled with tips for parents to do just 
that. It also contains lists of questions for parents to ask and what to
 look for in a classroom to determine if a classroom's physical 
environment is organized as a valuable learning tool.
Parents should participate in the life of the school, if possible:
join the PTA or parent club and participate in its activities and governance
volunteer as an aide at school
offer to assist the teacher with paperwork
Parents
 must attend school functions: Back-to-School Night, Open House, music 
programs, special events, sports contests, fund raisers.
Parents must meet with the teacher at parent conferences and ask questions about their child's educational progress.
Parents
 should introduce themselves to the principal and other persons in key 
positions at the school to know who they are and to make sure these 
school personnel know who the parents are.
Parents should 
communicate their ideas and opinions to their elected school board 
members, and, on occasion, attend a school board meeting.
Parents must be sure their child is equipped to do the best possible work at school by providing:
necessary school supplies
a nutritious and balanced diet
enough sleep and rest
a positive attitude toward school and teachers
a distraction-free place for homework
Tyler:
  Does the concern over public education have a place outside the school
 system? What about people who do not have children? Why should they 
care about things like millage elections, or want to pay more taxes, or 
support the school system?
Dr. Nick:   Yes, concern over public 
education does have a place outside the school system. Most people who 
don't have children, are retired and have no contact with children, or 
whose children are now adults pay taxes and generally want a school 
system that produces an educated person. These people are automatically 
invested in the public school system as a result of their taxpayer 
status and expect to receive good value for their tax money. I know I do
 because 62% of my annual property taxes (nearly $3,800) goes to public 
schools in the community where I live.
Tyler:  Students often do 
not value the education they receive until years later. As a former 
college English professor, I taught many lazy students, and I was 
constantly in dismay that so many of them were even admitted to college 
when they could not write a complete sentence. I frequently wondered 
what they had done for thirteen years in the public schools? Do you 
think the college system is in any way responsible for the decline of 
public education in the elementary and high schools? Should entrance 
requirements into colleges be raised?
Dr. Nick:   I don't blame 
our college system in any way at all for the decline of public education
 in the elementary and high schools. State colleges and universities, 
community colleges, private and religious colleges and universities-all 
provide opportunities for students who are qualified to pursue them. 
It's the responsibility of the elementary and secondary schools to 
prepare students to take advantage of those opportunities and meet those
 qualifications. I do think these colleges and universities should 
regularly evaluate their entrance requirements, as I'm sure they do, to 
ensure that they maintain high standards of academic expectations.
These
 colleges and universities have a responsibility to graduate 
well-educated and highly competent young people. Watering down the 
entrance requirements to fill classrooms would be a disgrace and morally
 reprehensible. Not all high school students should be expected to 
attend a four-year college, although that's what many high school 
counselors and administrators tell them is possible. I do blame some 
schools of education, however, for the poorly prepared teachers they 
seem to turn out by the thousands each year. School of education reforms
 in recent years in teacher training programs, curriculum standards, 
course content, and subject matter proficiency have not produced quality
 teachers. If they had, our elementary and secondary school students 
would be exceptionally successful learners and you would not have asked 
this question. After all, teachers are supposed to help students learn 
to their capacity.
Tyler: Dr. Nick, how long do you think the 
public school system has been declining? Do you believe it has affected 
the American job force and economy?
Dr. Nick:  The American public
 school system has been declining over the last fifty to sixty years. 
All you have to do is look at the statistics to see that the reforms 
attempted during the past half century have not resulted in significant 
changes in learning, test scores, and student achievement. In fact, in 
most curricular areas, there has been little or no change at all, and in
 math and English there has been decline.
Perhaps your readers 
would be interested in an excellent article published in the September 
2007 edition of Harper's magazine. It's titled "Schoolhouse Crock (Fifty
 years of blaming America's educational system for our stupidity) and 
presents an excellent analysis of educational reform over the past fifty
 years.
This decline continues to affect the American job force, 
businesses, and our national economy as well. Many businesses and 
corporations have instituted their own systems of internal education to 
train their work force properly to do the work expected of them because 
they can't rely on the public schools.
Tyler:  The ones who suffer
 the most in this situation are the children, yet as children, students 
are unlikely to know what they are not learning and how it will be 
detrimental for them. Furthermore, they may be too intimidated by 
teachers to complain when they are given more free time or fruitless 
assignments or actual lessons. What if anything, can students do to 
improve the quality of their own education?
Dr. Nick:   At the 
elementary school, middle school, and junior high school levels of 
education, there is probably very little if anything the young people 
who attend these schools can do to improve the quality of their own 
education. They are too young, inexperienced, and immature. At the high 
school, however, some students are mature and serious enough about their
 own schooling to do something. I might add, though, that there are most
 likely very few who would actually challenge the powers that be 
(teachers, principals, superintendents, boards of education) for a 
variety of reasons. The two most significant ones, in my opinion, would 
be peer pressure and fear of retribution or retaliation on the part of 
teachers or administrators. Nonetheless, here are some actions mature, 
serious, intelligent, concerned high school students could do:
Go 
to your principal and complain about the poor quality teaching you're 
experiencing. Nothing will happen the first time, so go a second and 
third time. Bring other concerned students with you.
Be polite but
 assertive, telling your principal that you have a right to quality 
instruction but aren't receiving it. Clearly state your areas of 
complaint: too much classroom noise, inadequate instruction, lack of 
teacher interest, and so on. 
Make an appointment with the superintendent to voice your concerns. 
Present a plan of how your grievances can be redressed. Bring other 
concerned students with you. Request permission to speak at a board 
meeting and present your complaints to these elected officials