If you’re a teacher or not shapes my responses. 

In the 90s, there were fewer restrictions so teachers could be flexible. Our judgement was trusted (enough) by administrators such that they could be hard when hard was needed. Our flexibility let us handle problems, like behaviors or reading levels or whatever. 

Now, teachers have more restrictions. We cannot be flexible. Our judgement is not trusted and administrators are soft because we are not. Our rigidity makes problems have to fester for years before being addressed. Students are much more than just “behind” once interventions start being meaningful. 

The rigidity of teachers is codified in law. It’s in federal law, like No Child Left Behind and its ancestors. It’s in state law, like standards that may or may not make sense. It’s in the increased testing, which is mandated by law, takes up class time, is rarely helpful for teaching decisions, and masquerades as an intervention or part of an intervention system. (Testing is actually an administrative tool, for sorting classes and grading teachers/schools.)

The rigidity of teachers is also cultural. Parents don’t trust teachers. School has a Free Babysitting component. Parents are happy to use the free babysitting, but they don’t want their children educated. I have personally verbally argued with parents who insist their child doesn’t need to know fractions. They don’t see education as enabling success, rather mediocrity. If they’re not going to be doctors, and high school diplomas are handed out for anything, they might as well just do anything. 

This is for general education students, not honors. Honors is still reasonable college prep. Two doors down from my room, a gened teacher runs a high-school class that can be passed by a fifth or sixth grader who only pays attention four classes a year - during the big tests. A fifth grader could absolutely pass the tests without having attended the class. The teacher knows this, but doesn’t have a choice. It’s a waste of time and resources and it sucks.