Thanks for the discussion under the Education challenge below. I want to add a new dimension. Scot says, in his comment something that some of you might like to comment on:
However, the poor quality of public education in some states is arguably a violation of kids' civil rights.
17 comments:
OK, I'll bite. How do we determine the quality of education in a state?
I think a low standard of quality would be a start: young people who finish high school should be able to read, write and do basic maths. I agree with Scot: people should be educated to a level where they can participate in society. I would consider education a basic human right, but some people tend to resist extending the definition of human rights beyond the civil and political, so maybe classifying education as a civil right is the way to go.
How do we determine the "standard of quality" in a state's educational system?
Set some pretty simple, quantifiable tests:
What %age of children can read by age 8?
What %age of each age cohort graduates from high school by age 20?
Add a few others to this mix.
These are legitimate tests, though the graduation rate is tricky - with the frequency of family movement from school to school, district to district, particularly amoung low income communities, it's difficult to tie a student to a particular school's graduation/drop out rate. Also, if you're going to tie some carrot or stick to a school's graduation rate, then I can guarantee you that many schools are going to find a way to graduate everybody.
I'm interested in what other standards can be used to determine quality.
Could it be that we have moved into an age when "schools" as we know them should be radically rethought? With computers and lightening fast mathematical answers, we probably don't need people to learn the same skills they sued to. Maybe every individual should be educated at whatever stage she is at the moment in her life.
Maybe we don't need graduation anymore.
But you've wandered from the topic. But while we're here, how would you improve Michelle Bachman's understanding of the role of slavery in the founding of this nation? "Whatever stage of life" is she in(and so many others like her who post on the internet)? But then, civic literacy in a democracy isn't important - as long as students can read and do their maths who cares about all those frills.
Who decides what civic literacy is and what to teach? I can imagine what would be taught in Texas and Kansas. Maybe people need to be taught how to read and reason and argue a point coherently. You don't need to teach people facts, but how to think critically. Do students learn this anymore? Is this possible to teach?
"Do students learn this anymore?" We're so busy teaching those "skills" that are easy to quantify (reading, math)that there is little attention devoted to civics, history, art, music, etc. Education has taken a back seat to training, and this is even more true at the post-secondary school level.
Irene, I hope you realize that many of my comments are laced with sarcasm.
Back to the topic: I think the current Dept. of Education in Washington is not helping anything.
Sparty - Sarcasm has a home at Birches! As for the topic, I really don't know much about the role of the federal Dept of Education. It would be good to see a more consistent and comprehensive approach to curriculum throughout the country. It could help guarantee some basic levels of literacy and numeracy. They have been attempting to do that in Australia for a few years now - there's not much dispute in the maths and spelling areas, but it's been a bunfight for other subjects. Conservatives and liberals can't agree on what history and literature to teach. I can't see a country like the US, which is so much more focussed on states' rights, having a chance to implement any nationwide reforms.
On another note, teachers need to be paid more. Who else goes to university for 4-5 years, finishes with a professional degree, then gets paid so poorly and has little or no job security? Are teachers paid poorly because education isn't valued? I can't believe how much lawyers are paid in comparison, but I suppose the work they do is valued by those in society with the power and money, and education is not.
I've enjoyed this discussion but I'm just as confused about the kinds of questions that Irene and Scot raise as I've ever been. I really don't think the structure of instructional delivery is the fundamental problem - seems to work in China, Korea, Sweden, etc. And, do the students in inner city Chicago or Buena Vista perform poorly on assessment tests because the teachers aren't trying or aren't competent? If that's the case let's transfer the teachers from New Trier High School to the poorest performing school in the city of Chicago and let's transfer the teachers from Frankenmuth High School to Buena Vista High. And even if we could do it does anybody honestly think that would reverse the trend over the long run? And if education is a civil right how do we determine those students who had their right to an education denied them - do we consider all students in a poorly performing state or school district to be in an entitled class much as we've done with race and gender, or only those in a poorly performing school, or only those individuals who fail to meet a standard - in reading? math? writing? science? history? logic? And once we've identified them, what do we do that the schools aren't trying to do right now? Sorry to be so wordy but this is just the tip of the iceberg.
sorry to be a gloomy Gus, but teachers have been minimally hit by the general trend of lower wages for doing the same work they used to at higher wages. The unions are largely powerless now so wage reductions are soon to follow. All part of the Republican scheme to eliminate the middle class ----- Will we follow Egypts lead a few years from now ????
It should be noted that thousands of teachers in the US have been laid off or outright pink slipped because of the recession.
Regarding the question from Irene: Do we teach to reason, read and argue a point coherently. At the charter school where I taught for 8 1/2 years the curriculum director frequently swept through the classes and I got soooooo tired of hearing: "that's not in the curriculum". We had time for inane 9:00 a.m. assemblies with rock singers, coloring contests sponsored by the local lawyers association and walmart and who ever else wanted to get their name before the parents. We had time for nurses to come into the class and anyone else the "bosses" thought they wanted in there. We COULD make valentines and Christmas cards etc. but Kwanzaa(in a school with 98% African-American students) with its 7 priciples and values "wasn't in the curriculum". Real art wasn't in the curriculum but music taught be a very nice man who couldn't read music and was a chorister at a local church was in. He taught religious hymns and a Muslim family left as a result. When a teacher was absent the class was combined with another class to save money. One teacher was out for 6 weeks as a result of having a hysterectomy. Her class was combined with another class for the total time, making a class of some where between 45 & 55 students in a room designed for one class. Shorter term combinations were routine. The teacher getting the additional class didn't know it until arriving at school. To tell it all would make a book but you get the idea I hope.
In golf terms, Flint, Saginaw and Detroit city teachers are definitely playing a par 5 hole, when you compare them to suburban private school teachers who are playing a par 3 to get the same results.
If you are trying to educate children who have grown up in a peaceful evironment with educated , professional parents, rather than kids who have seldom seen a book, have one parent by the same last name if they are lucky, and wake up to gunshots frequently during the night, you have a big advantage.
Post a Comment