As public school practitioners and policymakers continue their good work toward isolating the measurable aspects of school and student performance nationwide, little or no attention is being given to perhaps one of the more devastating realities facing our youth in the classroom everyday. The sad truth is that young people’s hopes and dreams are being destroyed daily in classrooms everywhere by teachers who harbor beliefs and prejudices about groups of students that destroy their confidence, elevate their fears, and mask their true academic progress. This “soft bigotry” is at once stunning and shameful, especially during a time in history where Americans are convinced that they’ve moved beyond their long held stereotypes and biases. While we have certainly progressed from the era of segregated schools and separate and unequal public schooling in this country, we have not done enough to address the deeply ingrained, perhaps indelible, opinions of those who are stewards of our children in schools. The expectation is that the proper training and development will help teaching professionals overcome any preconceived biases and tendencies that may prevent them from teaching in an equitable and fair manner in the classroom. However, the most well-intentioned professional development has not been able to rid the profession of bad actors who continue to poison the water for too many American schoolchildren.

Any casual observer of teacher classroom attitudes and behavior would acknowledge that certain teacher actions are not only unfortunate but remind us all that the problems plaguing school age children are not wholly within the control of the children. The last thing students need is to be poorly served by the teacher corps, especially considering the increased levels of accountability, standards, and scrutiny currently being imposed. Some teachers fail to realize that when they challenge some students to strive for the “A” grade while accepting the “B” for other students as their best, they are essentially lowering their expectations of those in the “B” group. Certain teachers don’t even understand that when they provide students with the answers to homework assignments and standardized tests, they are sending the wrong signals to our youth. This kind of cheating and bigotry is rooted in selfishness on behalf of the teacher who is either primarily concerned about keeping her job or not at all concerned about the noose she is placing around students’ necks. These lowered expectations will shackle some groups of students for the rest of their lives. Further, the social promotion schemes that plague some of our most challenging school communities dig a deeper and more impenetrable hole for youth whose circumstances are already dire.

How do we rid our schoolhouses of this “soft bigotry” and how do we ensure that our schoolchildren know beyond a shadow of doubt that we are fully committed to providing them with a world class K-12 education? We start by hiring and training teaching professionals who are mature and competent enough to teach and evaluate each student based on objective and fair measurements. We implement academic programs and curriculums that give students the space and time to discover and engage their gifts and abilities in creative and unfettered learning environments. We require parents and other community stakeholders to become actively engaged in the review and oversight of their local schools. If the culprits are not willing to change their bad attitudes and habits, then hopefully those of us who care about the future prospects for our children can apply enough pressure to force the necessary change. With the teaching and learning processes of our school systems already tainted by the perennial inequities across districts and states, the impact of intangible realities such as bigotry do nothing but exacerbate the severity of the public education quagmire. The breadth of these challenges is a reminder that America’s public schools need resources and expertise from every sector, profession, and industry, if we are to increase the success probability for schoolchildren in rural, suburban, and urban areas.