Public Schools
I contribute to an on-line chat board fairly regularly, and I find that I am often the only voice of moderate liberalism. Most of the contributors are right and far right of center. Recently, the topic of Affirmative Action was raised. That discussion evolved into a discussion on education in America, and how a well-designed and executed public school system would eventually erase the need for Affirmative Action.
The question then came up: what’s wrong with American schools, and how can we fix them? I found myself trying to explain that poor school systems have a number of hurdles to face, and money is one resource that would help. The response was a fairly predictable stock phrase about people just “throwing money at the problem,” thereby completely ignoring the point I had made about what to do with that money. The argument was made that the answer to the problem is to re-introduce God into the school system, to provide a moral fabric for today’s young people. I countered that this was not a good option – the place of faith-based morality is in the home. The public schools should be providing academic and life-skills support and value systems that apply to all, not just to Judeo-Christians. Not to mention school buildings which aren’t falling apart, science textbooks that aren’t from 1972, and healthy lunches as opposed to industrial spaghetti from a can, Cheetos and Orange Crush. There’s more, but I think you get the idea.
I have never taught in a public school system, nor did I attend one, and I don’t have a child enrolled in one. I’d like to throw out the question to this community: what do you think is the worst problem facing our public schools, and what do you think is the best course of action to improve the poorer public school districts in this country, with the hope of giving all young people a fighting chance to fulfill their potential? Okay, that was actually two questions. Facts and figures are welcome as well as creative ideas on what we can do.
May 7th, 2007 10:05
Elena,
I am a product of both private and public schools. My mother taught in public school, so I have some exposure to the system. The problems are many, but one of the most significant is that our school system is fractionalized and controlled by local school boards, which control the funding for each individual school. So those districts that are wealthy do well and those that are not have the text books from the 1970’s. Our educational system needs to be nationalized in some form. We cannot leave this up to the locals.
Also, we must increase compensation for teachers which would increase our recruiting base and thus improve the overall quality of our teachers. That’s just for starters.
May 7th, 2007 12:54
I have liberal friends who have decided to vote down every school levy that comes their way. They communicate regularly with an elementary school teacher who earns $75,000 per year, and gets bonuses when her class size is greater than twenty-one students. That teacher is not suffering for funds; if she is, it’s a personal spending and prioritization problem. Note: not every finance problem is a lack of funds problem; this is especially true on the personal level. But, I digress.
I think the biggest problem facing public schools is the lack of willingness to break the current structure in order to improve it. (This, btw, is my biggest problem with unions, too.) Sometimes you have to break things to fix them; the public school system fits into that category.
The second biggest problem is introduction of subject matter that requires critical thinking skills way before the children have the aptitude for it. This gets into indoctrination, not education. “Heather Has Two Mommies” is no more appropriate at elementary school than is explicit religious teaching. Keep it all at home. Digression #2: To force Christianity or Islam down anyone’s throats as “education” is wrong; however, excluding the personal practice of faith on school grounds because it is not separation of church and state is absolute folly.
I was educated in Catholic and public schools, and we home school our own children. State and national programs have agendas that are political and reward the status quo, instead of focusing on “education”, which I define as the three Rs (which never go out of style) and the liberal arts. We purposefully look for older books because politics are not thrown in. And, if there are biases thrown in - racism, extreme nationalism, et al - it gives us another opportunity to explain where culture and society have changed. We don’t throw away our history; we explain it.
When business has problem, they don’t start by cutting the line workers en masse; they start by whittling out middle management (i.e. administration) and the poor performing line workers. I don’t hear this being done in my region. All I hear is that the districts need more money. When throwing money is always the first and only solution, Elena, then it is a problem. We’ve become lazy and indifferent to change.
Oh, by the way, these same local districts are spending millions of dollars on new football “stadiums” with the latest and greatest astroturf. Time for another levy to make up the difference….
Rick
May 7th, 2007 13:44
Rick,
A $75,000 salary is very atypical. Nationwide the starting salary for a teacher is about $35,000. Even with 20 years of experience, the median is around $55,000.
Independent data can be found here.
This latter salary would typically be someone with a masters degree in education. Compare this to the median salaries of all masters degree holders (except MBA) with 20 years of experience, which comes out to about $84,000.
The median for a teacher with a master’s degree and 20 years experience is only $4000 a year more than someone with only a high school diploma. Hardly a lucrative profession.
May 7th, 2007 14:21
Hi Elena-
Now you got me started. This is a personal issue with me, and I purposely didn’t write a post about this because every time I tried to write one, I couldn’t stop. So thank you for being focused.
I’ve mentioned this before, but I want to preface my answer with this anyway, to set a context. I taught public school for 15 years. My mother was a public school teacher all her life. My brother is a public school teacher and administrator. He and I went to public school. I have taught in a univeristy master’s education program. I am currently working on my dissertation (almost done!) in curriculum and instruction…and I send my daughter to private school.
I agree with Magnus Animus about the structure of the school system…I undestand the issue with states’ rights, but that sets up HUGE disparities among states (as well as within individual states).
I think it comes down to Rick’s point about breaking the current school structure. Though there is plenty of research on what’s best for schools
(e. g., class size; length of school year; starting times), overall the public school system does not change significantly.
One last thing, and this sounds harsh I know; remember, I taught in public schools in a state considered to have some of the highest standards in the country. There are some excellent teachers, and there is some deadwood (just like in any profession). I think that most public school teachers are OK…but I want more than that for students. I want highly intelligent, creative, exciting, innovative people…and while there are certainly teachers out there like that, that’s not the majority. There’s too much complacency. The system doesn’t change because (for one reason) it has people working in it who don’t facilitate change….(e.g.) they feel powerless, or they don’t see the need, or it’s too overwhelming, or they don’t know how to start…I think it’s time to invest in a new type of teacher. More money might help atttract some talented people who head elsewhere, but it’s not just about money.
The teachers at my daughter’s school are paid OK, but, comparatively, it’s not a really expensive private school. Salary is not an issue here. These are talented people, passionate about their work, and they are given the opportunity to excel…(e.g.), released time to do anecdotal reports and portfolios instead of report cards, very flexible scheduling, opportunity to work with other teachers and other grade levels, a school-wide commitment to the arts, and classes so small that everyone knows everyone else…
See, Elena, I told you I go on and on. I’m stopping now.
Susan
May 7th, 2007 14:23
Brian,
Sorry for not pointing out that I recognized this as an exception. My point is that teaching is not primarily merit based, but union grade based. Until we break the entire system (fill in your comments about it being broken here), including compensation and merit guidelines, I don’t believe the problem will change.
Understand that I don’t think this is primarily a problem with the teachers. In principle, I agree that the teaching profession is underpaid. Those that deserve to be rewarded are not supported as they should be, and those that should be out of a job are not.
Case in point: when I lived in Michigan, a church acquaintence told my wife and me that after he received his bachelor’s in education, he was moving to Ohio to become a teacher there. Why? Because the certification requirements were looser and the recertification requirements were lower. He was actively looking for states with a lower entry point and maintenance point. That didn’t sit well with me.
Rick
May 7th, 2007 16:49
Elena,
I’m based in Detroit, so you can imagine what we’re dealing with out here. The greatest problem facing public schools is that the urban public schools have essentially been abandoned. In other words, public schools are not a bad word if you live in Grosse Pointe, but if you live in the city? It’s another story.
And I’d be lying if I didn’t say that fiscal and administrative mismanagement - and incompetence - didn’t figure strongly into the equation. In many inner city public schools the neglect is a combination of the willful neglect condoned by those who don’t care because they feel they don’t have to and those who just look the other way because they are tired of looking at a problem they don’t believe can ever be solved. In Detroit I know for a fact that lack of voter participation in electing school board members has played a huge role in what we’re dealing with today. And that lack of participation comes from apathy, which comes from depression, and so many other related inner city ills that it’s hard to know where to begin.
In short, the decrepit condition of inner city schools is just the symptom of a much, much bigger problem that has infected entire communities.
How to fix these problems? Well, we can begin by acknowledging that there really is a problem, and that like it or not, we will ALL be affected if this problem is not solved. We all live in America, and poor education in our cities is an American problem. It’s not ‘them’ who will pay the price it’s all of ‘us’. Once we acknowledge that, which may take awhile, then maybe we can actually come together and work towards equality in education because we finally realize it is in all of our best interest to do so. But until we realize that we’re all in this together, and that there’s no place to hide?
Forget it.
May 7th, 2007 16:54
I see 3 big problems with public schools:
1) Teachers’ Unions - They have changed over the years to care only about the teachers / unions and, in practice, couldn’t care less about the students.
For instance, if an initiative would hurt tenure for teachers, but improve education for students (such as merit-based pay / advancement), the unions fight tooth and nail against it.
2) Schools are State-Run Monopolies - Like all massive, government-run offices, it is nearly impossible to fire incompetent teachers or reward good ones.
Also like most government-run monopolies, they’d rather sweep evil under the rug instead of doing the right thing and risking publicity.
3) Schools are Run By Lawyers - Decisions are made either from fear of a lawsuit or as the result of a questionably applicable lawsuit. Hence, the lawyers now run the schools.
I feel bad for most teachers. They have a tough job and very little support. And now it’s getting more dangerous for them.
Can we just go back to one-room schoolhouses?
Dan
May 7th, 2007 17:18
Keith,
Your last paragraph raises an interesting point. You are correct, we are all affected. Where I see the support for your argument falling short actually has nothing to do with what you’ve said.
I live in a suburb of Cleveland, and attend an inner-city church. What happens to Cleveland itself is of interest to me because of the thoughts you convey. My concerns are that the political gains made in two areas often trump any good that can be done by making change. They are:
1. Maintaining the status quo, and all the ills that provide fodder during the next election cycle. As a candidate, you don’t actually have to solve the problem, you just need to let your constituents know you’re on their side.
2. The inner-city indifference to assisting established institutions. Yes, the problems of public education affect everyone; however, in my neck of the woods, the politicians would rather defend the inner-city culture than actually fix the problem. I am white; therefore, I can’t understand the problems or the culture of the inner city, and I can’t lord over the inner city with my proposed solutions.
So, if you’ll allow me to re-frame your question…how do we de-politicize the public education issue? I don’t think the schools can be fixed until the politics are removed, or until a majority of the population ignores the politics and advocates for a different type of solution.
Rick
May 7th, 2007 17:58
I am agreeing with Magnus regarding the source of funds and who runs the school system. The current situation in the US means that poor districts get under-resourced schools. The US needs a mechanism for getting more funding to the poorest schools.
Here in Australia, public schools are run by State govts. In NSW all public schools get the same amount on a per student basis, then the poorest 30% of schools (based on income levels in the local area) get extra funds. It’s not a perfect system but it does ensure that poorer districts get more resources not less.
I read somewhere this week that the main purpose of public education was to reduce inequality. I strongly support that.
While the school systems are run by State Govts, the funding comes from the National Govt and this has given the National Govt some leverage on curriculum and other matters. About 10 years ago they led a ‘values’ project that has resulted in a set of 9 widely accepted values being taught in all public schools in Australia. The values are things like ‘care and compassion’, ‘doing your best’, ‘integrity’, ‘understanding, tolerance and inclusion’, and so on. I just found a really informative website that provides resources for schools to implement this program. The National Govt has tied funding to the implementation of the Values Program - so it is widely supported in Australian public schools. In the 7 or so years that it has been running, I have not heard any debate or reservations about whether or not these values should be taught in schools. So, I’d say the program has been a success.
I think it is really important that the core values that underpin a healthy society are taught in all schools, not only in religious schools. A secular society is not lacking in values, and a secular education can, and should, include values.
http://www.valueseducation.edu.au/values/default.asp?id=8655
May 7th, 2007 18:45
Gillian,
I see a bit of irony in your comments. If I stated that the ten commandments should be posted and taught in each school because they frame the basic tenets of appropriate behavior, respect, and fairness, I would be laughed out of the conversation. (I would not advocate that, though; see my previous comments to this post.) However, the values you indicate are similar to many religious creeds.
Why not have the schools focus on what they should teach well - reading, writing, math, history, art and science facts? Add critical thinking, reasoning, logic, problem solving - whatever you want to call it - as the kids approach the teenage years. Then re-visit topics as appropriate after cognitive thinking starts to take hold; let the kids formulate the questions, let them have people who have different perspectives answer the questions, not just an instructor who may be overtly or covertly pushing an agenda.
In my opinion, everything that doesn’t fit specifically into the subjects listed above is subject to the desires of the family or the community.
I don’t want the schools to work toward equality, because the definition of “equality” is a political issue. Do you mean equality of opportunity or result? Do you mean kids cannot be failed from a grade, and therefore must be advanced even though their aptitude is not at the level as their friends in the same grade? Do you mean that “gifted” programs are inappropriate because some kids are smarter than others? I believe this is a porous foundation.
To echo Susan’s comments, the goal of excellence seems to be missing from the public schools.
Let’s debate another question: who is the customer of an education, the child or the family? In private schools, you could say it’s the family - maybe even that it’s the parents, because they are paying for the education. So, why should it be different in public schools?
Rick
May 7th, 2007 20:30
Hi Rick,
We’re on the same track. I didn’t intend any irony at all in my comments about values.
I understand that values entered into Australian education in response to parent concerns that people were choosing private schools over public schools because public schools were deficient in teaching values. The wish for schools to not leave a value-vacuum aligns with the view that ‘it takes a whole village to raise a child’. Really important stuff, really-really important stuff, like values, have to be communicated by the whole community - not fenced off within individual households.
In Australia there would be the same division of opinion about using the Ten Commandments as you would have. These 9 values have avoided that problem because they have almost universal support.
I believe that Australian schools that receive public funding and are required to actively teach the 9 values, are doing a good job of it. They have as good a chance to do it well as they have at doing literacy and numeracy.
I hear your concerns about inculcating formulas into young children and support your view about teaching appropriately for age group. However, these values can be taught appropriately from the earliest age. In the home, we start teaching our kids to share from the age of 3-4, don’t we? In schools, bullying is an ongoing issue even in the early grades, and bullying can be addressed within a value framework that encourages respect for others which is one of the 9 values. Teaching the values doesn’t just happen in the classroom, it occurs through all the ways that the school interacts with students and parents, including policies for playground supervision, etc.
Like you, I think that schools would do well to look at what their ‘customers’ want (no debate for me there). In my view the customer is the person who is paying the bills. In public education, that is the taxpayer. I guess that we are fortunate that we have managed to come up with 9 values that get virtually universal support from all members of the community. When parents/the community began complaining that public schools were falling short on teaching values, the service provider (government) responded by putting this program in place.
The big difference between the US and Australia is that because we are so much smaller and we have a stronger Federation system, these things can happen on a national scale, whereas in the US these initiatives are likely to happen on a local scale.
Rick, I wonder what values you think would gather almost universal support in US communities? Would there be divided opinions about things like ‘doing your best’ and ‘integrity’?
Regarding equality, I agree with you that it doesn’t imply any of the things you’ve noted. I think that social justice should lead towards better opportunities for people who start out with disadvantages relative to others. Head start programs have shown good outcomes when kids from disadvantaged homes are given extra support. You can’t leave it all to market forces. Left to themselves market forces fail the poor and disadvantaged again and again.
Equality may be a porous foundation, but social justice can’t be left out of consideration because societies with more even distribution of wealth do better on most social measures, including overall income. So, I am interested to hear where you place ‘equality’ or ’social justice’ as I suspect that you don’t want to throw it out altogether.
……………..
HEY EVERYONE… you may know that I bought a second-hand Toyota Prius last week. Well, I’m having just the BEST TIME driving it - it’s a whole other experience!
May 7th, 2007 21:06
Gillian,
Hmmm, interesting points. I’ll do my best…
- “schools to not leave a value-vacuum” - agreed. The concepts of respecting others and their property, and abiding by boundaries seem to be lost in our current culture. If parents won’t teach these values at home, then I think an organized group setting, like a classroom, is an appropriate place for it.
- “In the home, we start teaching our kids to share from the age of 3-4, don’t we?” Generally, yes, along with the teaching of other principles or values. It’s not done as much as I would like to see. Many parents in the U.S. outsource the raising of their children. Some do it consciously, some unconsciously, moving them from day care, to pre-kindergarten, to school, to after-school programs, etc. Some parents are less mature than their children; I see it every Sunday. There should be a higher qualification for being allowed to have children than simply having working sexual organs. (Just kidding…I would never mandate that.)
- Regarding teaching of the nine values - are there classes specifically taught for these values, or are they incorporated into other subject matter areas? In the U.S., political biases and advocacy tend to show up in math and literacy programs. We’ve even seen math programs where a homework assignment was for the student to discuss recycling with their parents, which obviously has nothing to do with math. I’d be curious to know how your educational system handles it.
- “I wonder what values you think would gather almost universal support in US communities?” That’s a terrific question. If you took all the politicians out of the discussion, and let the parents and religious and business leaders debate and decide, I think you would find some common terms: honesty, integrity, respect, responsibility, accountability, citizen, excellence, and pride, just to name a few. I am for equality of opportuity, but not equality of outcome. Based on previous comments, political sway would eliminate terms such as responsibility, accountability, citizen, excellence and respect. (Unfortunately in the U.S., respect is a one-way street; you have to respect me, but I don’t have to respect you.)
- “You can’t leave it all to market forces.” Agreed, which is why I am not against the concept of public schools, but fiercely against the way the institution executes its responsibilities today.
- I don’t think I’m ready to address social justice in this post or comment, because in some communities and with many politicians, victim mentality is a way of life. Events may happen to me that make me a victim, but that doesn’t mean I am a victim 24×7. If I had those magic glasses that could help me differentiate between laziness (at all levels - individual up to corporate and community) and incapability, it would be a big help; the line is blurred to the extent that I am genuinely cynical about what is true need, and what is manufactured victimhood.
Can we just take the politicians out of the picture???
Hope this helps.
Rick
May 7th, 2007 23:59
Hi Rick,
You seem to be advocating an ‘either-or’ position, whereas I am arguing an ‘and’ position. Yes, teaching values in schools helps kids whose families are not doing this, but it also helps families that are doing their best to teach their kids to do their best, be responsible, care for others, be tolerant, etc., because it supports and extends the work they are doing.
“are there classes specifically taught for these values, or are they incorporated into other subject matter areas?” –
Here’s something I found on the website that supports the program - it comes from a report that evaluated the way 119 schools implemented the program when they had a free hand to implement it however they liked.
The Values Education Good Practice Schools Project – Stage 1 demonstrated that good practice values education can:
1. lead to changes in teacher professional practice in classrooms and, in particular, in the way teachers relate to and communicate with their students;
2. produce calmer and more focused classroom activity;
3. enable students to become better self‐managers;
4. help students develop greater capacities for reflection;
5. increase teachers’ levels of confidence in their approaches to their work and their sense of professional fulfilment;
6. produce strong positive relationships between students and between students and teachers.
It sounds like the process of articulating the values and bringing them to the forefront had an impact on the teachers as much as on the students! How refreshing - a learning environment where everyone is learning.
As you can imagine, the full report is extensive and detailed, this is just a handy exerpt. I don’t think that the schools implemented a series of lessons on the values - I think it was much more diverse and creative. There seems to be some professional support for extending ‘best practice’ in this area, rather than just dumping a new set of demands on schools.
Now that I’ve given it some thought, I suspect that the best thing about the program may have been the extensive consultation that went on across the community and teaching profession to arrive at a set of values that is widely supported and also teachable in a school setting. As you suggest, I don’t think that politicians had much to do with the nitty-gritty work of shaping the values, other than final sign-off. Though I do notice that the image on the front of the report is a very familiar one of two Aussie soldiers helping each other. I have no doubt that it was used as a sop to our PM who is big on soldier mateship as a defining aspect of Australian character.
May 8th, 2007 08:50
Well, you have to admit, throwing god at the problem is cheaper than throwing money at the problem.
May 8th, 2007 09:39
To All: great comments. I’m happy to see that there is so much interest in the education of our children. Thanks to Elena for writing the original post.
I agree that teaching values is important. The argument is “how” to teach it. Culturally, many of our moral lessons are rooted in religious contexts, which makes it difficult to completely secularize our schools. I happen to think that our children should be exposed to spirituality at some point in their education. What many “pro-religion” in schools advocates really want is their own narrow version of Judeo-Christianity, which complicates the argument.
As for teacher’s unions, I think given the way that legislatures (and citizens) treat educators, unions are necessary.
It is very American to think of our children as “consumers” or “customers” of education, which is one of the reasons the thing is so screwed up in the first place. Education is not a “product” like soap or cable television. It’s not something that should be bought or sold. It is a fundamental part of our society. One of the most important parts.
Lastly, I happen to believe that the greatest skill we can impart to any student is the skill of critical thinking. We have to teach our students not to accept anything at face value, but to question, research, compare, and come to their own logical and intelligent decisions. I’m not sure we’re very good at doing that.
May 8th, 2007 12:32
Gillian,
My apologies, I didn’t mean to imply an ‘either/or’ position. I am for the instilling of values into our children, some which our core to the nation and community, some which are core to the family or faith.
I want disciplined, attentive, respectful, and learned students. I don’t want politically correct students, and I don’t want courteous students that can’t figure out how to answer the spam protection math on this site.
I want educated students. If we can identify best practices for fulfilling core education requirements, and instill a least common denominator of basic values, and understand the difference between each, then I would welcome the teaching of both.
Magnus,
I think “religious survey” is acceptable in the school, as long as it remains agnostic to the tenets of each. This means that Islam is explained factully according to the Koran, not to CAIR’s interpretation. I would expect the same of Christianity re: the bible and the differences in belief of the major denominations. However, I would not expect the public schools to expound upon the veracity of claims from each religion.
Rick
May 8th, 2007 12:32
Hi Daniel-
I want to respond to your comment about teachers’ unions. Upfront let me say that I was a union officer, as was my mother…so you can see where I’m coming from.
Teacher’s unions are intended to be advocates for teachers; to bargain collectively ensure that teachers receive due process. Certainly there are unions and officials that abuse this, but I don’t think it’s fair to generalize. Being against merit pay doesn’t mean unions work against students. I am all for improving the public schools, but I think merit pay is just a little band-aid on a big problem, and merit pay brings with it more difficulties.
There are many times when I was involved in contract negotiations that we settled on something that was good both professionally for teachers and academically for students (like scheduled time to meet and plan with other teachers).
As far as tenure is concerned, I can only speak for my state, which does have a tenure system. It is not impossible to get rid of incompetent tenured teachers; there is a specific procedure in place. However, it requires that administrators be directly involved and collect documentation of improper actions. In my experience, I’ve seen at least one administrator shirk responsibilites in this regard. The problem in my state is not the tenure system, it’s getting someone to follow through on it.
Susan
May 8th, 2007 12:55
Thanks to everyone who is contributing to this thread. This is very informative, and just what I’d hoped for. Please, continue…
May 8th, 2007 21:49
Elena,
It seems I came late to this party, but after reading (or skimming) the comments it seems that one point is missing from this discussion. That is that the entire public school system is sadly antiquated and very out of date. The whole basis of September to June schedule is based upon a 19th century agrarian economy, not the 21st century information economy.
The semi-modern cirruculum, somewhat based upon the No Child Left Behind program, is based on teaching to a test in order to get the students scores where they need to be in order to continue to receive federal funding. This method fails to teach critical thinking and problem solving which is paramount in todays day and age. The American public school system is no longer producing the world’s best scientist, engineers or doctors. Other countries are taking the lead in these fields and leaving us far behind. The idea that just 40 years ago that we were able to put a man on the moon and today we have trouble getting a space shuttle up and back successfully speaks volumes.
The solution is to review and overhaul the entire education system. This would be a complete redesign and would include a review of how it is funded, what we should be teaching, what children need to know in order to leave or graduate and become productive members of society, providing them with skills and knowledge that will be essential in the 21st century.
I am not an educator, but am a concerned parent. I want to make sure that my children are more prepared for adult life and responsibility when they graduate public high school then when I did 20+ years ago.
As an aside, part of the problem is the teachers union and the difficulty of removing a sub-par teacher because of the contract. However, I do believe that a teacher should be one of the highest paid professionals in our society, equal to doctors, laywers, CEOS and anyone else. At the core, they control the future and many great and brilliant minds (including myself) have chosen different career paths because teaching is not economically viable. If my taxes go to paying teachers salary and the teachers can show my children how to fish, rather than being given a fish then the taxes are worth it. A good teacher can make all the difference to a child. Likewise a bad teacher could do multiple harm to a childs learning and self confidence.
Finally, G-d has absolutely no place in public schools. There is a little something called seperation of church and state, and whether we like it or not, public school is a state function. If you want religion in your classroom, then send your children to a Catholic school, Bible School, Yeshiva, or whatever is appropriate for your beliefs. I have to admit I am a bit offended (appalled) that CT public schools offer a moment of silence after the pledge (don’t get me started on this) to allow children to pray. But hey that is just me.
May 9th, 2007 09:08
This has been a delightful exchange of ideas and perspectives. Thanks to all.
To recap some of the main problem areas that we’ve been discussing;
– teacher recruiting needs to improve with regards to standards and also salaries. A national teacher training basic structure, with perhaps state-level additions is one idea, so that there is some consistency in the requirements for obtaining and maintaining a teaching license.
– critical thinking skills are sorely lacking, while teaching to the test has become almost necessary to satisfy the No Child Left Behind standardizations. Not to mention the plight of the arts. In addition to this, I’d add that real-world skills are sorely lacking. A required internship or work-study in the highschools might go a long way in this area.
– with regards to inner-city settings, a lack of resources over decades has produced hopelessness and helplessness. It’s a tangled skein to unwind and figure out, and de-politicizing the issue is the best way to do that. Hmmm….so how do we do that?
– there is a lot of debate on teaching “values” it would seem. I like the idea that values need to be supported by the community, not just boxed into a particular environment. I don’t think values have to be directly connected to a particular religion. Most religions support the basic ideas of treating others with respect, as well as yourself, and ideals such as try your best and don’t give up go hand-in-hand with critical thinking and problem solving. These values can be woven into the day-to-day fabric of students’ lives, rather than having a lecture series on the evils of bullying.
– the agrarian-based schedule may not be modern, but can you imagine having to go to school all year as a kid? Good god, I can’t imagine teaching all year!
I think it’s important to recognize that concerned parents need to use their voice - maybe some do, but perhaps many don’t. PTA meetings, board meetings, etc. are opportunities for that, as well as school board elections. I’d hate to think what will happen if we ever abandon our public school children to the politicians.
May 9th, 2007 09:34
Hi Elena-
Nice recap, thanks.
Not that I think it will happen in the near future, but I just want to set your mind at ease for the “year-round school.” Most of the models I’ve seen have some extended breaks throughout the year, 2-3 weeks at a time. So it wouldn’t necessarily be like adding the summer on to the traditional school calendar.
As a former primary school teacher, I can see the value in not losing more than 2 months…for a lot of (especially young) kids the beginning of the school year must be used to review what’s been done before, rather than building off what’s already been learned.
However, there are tremendous social and economic issues (such as summer employment) that would be impacted by year-round school. Since things change so slowly in education, I don’t see this being universally adopted anytime soon…
Susan
May 15th, 2007 21:50
Just to pick up quickly on the values discussion, there is no such thing as a values-free education.
Allow me to explain a little.
Regardless of the subject, do you teach children to sit calmly in their chairs, not talk randomly, and pay attention when the teacher is speaking?
Then you are teaching respect for elders / authority.
Do you break up fights on campus rather than allowing them to settle a Darwinist hierarchy of power?
Then, depending on how it is done, you are teaching one or all of non-violence / reasoned dialog / displacement of anger / equality / respect for the individual / human life.
The problem becomes that, in the absence of a “greater than us” reason why you’re teaching these specific values, you’re also teaching that those with power (the teachers / principal in this case) make the rules. And they can make any rules they wish.
Enron, anyone?
Dan
May 16th, 2007 18:09
Good point about rules, Dan.
One thing I’m trying to teach my daughter is to question anyone, no matter the position, if she doesn’t understand, doesn’t agree, is uncomfortable with a situation, etc. The only rule I’ve set up is that it has to be done respectfully.
So far she’s been able to discuss her frustration with her ballet teacher concerning the “lack of focus” of the other students in her class. (The show is on Tuesday. It’s probably going to be awful; I watched rehearsal today.) It didn’t change anything, but she voiced her concerns and the teacher listened. That’s a start.
Coincidentally, earlier today I told her a story about a rule in my high school that stated that girls’ had to wear these horrible (mostly polyester) one-piece gymsuits in phys. ed. class. In junior high we’d been wearing shorts and t-shirts. Why the switch? No one could tell me, not the principal, the PE teacher, the school board president…it’s just the way it’d been done. The PE teacher did try to say the suits were safer…but does that mean that we had been unsafe in junior high? What about the poor boys? With my mother’s support, I refused to wear the gymsuit and wore the shirt and shorts from junior high. Shortly afterward, most of the girls in the school were doing so. No one died from unsafe clothing.
A minor example, I know, but it was a start…
Susan
May 17th, 2007 15:15
I generally agree with questioning the stupidity that regularly accosts us in life. Like with your cute polyester suit, it frequently came from someone else, but is maintained for the sake of “always done it”.
On the other hand, I try to be a little careful about how I teach this to my daughters. If they, individually, are the final arbiters of what is right and wrong, good and bad, what is the bigger lesson that I’m teaching?
Dan
May 17th, 2007 17:08
Daniel,
I think that kids get so deeply trained in early primary school to respect authority that we have to go some way towards undoing that. I was specific with my two girls in doing this with respect to being the final arbiters on what level of intimacy they felt comfortable with. I taught them that “It’s OK to say no” especially to authority figures with regard to personal behaviours like being touched or verbal suggestions that made them uncomfortable.
As you say, we have to put some boundaries around how far they should push this, but in this one area, it is entirely up to them to say what they are comfortable with - they are the final arbiters. Beyond that, there are some lessons in appropriate ways of voicing one’s concerns about uniforms etc.
Susan, you seem to have done a great job of helping your daughter criticise the teacher’s skills by diplomatically pointing at the consequences (class focus) instead of pointing at the teacher. Skills within skills within skills.
May 18th, 2007 10:01
I agree with your general point, Gillian. The children are the final arbiter of people touching their bodies. Unfortunately, that’s something to worry about at schools.
But you have to remember that schools are different than when we went.
In fact, the students are for the most part not learning “respect for authority” any more. Witness a teacher who was almost beaten to death here in Houston for sending a student to the principal’s office.
And I’m sure the ever-publicized stories and statistics about inappropriate teacher/student contact haven’t done much to bolster a warm and fuzzy feeling towards authority.
In several school districts in Houston, they teach a “Values Clarification” course in either elementary or jr. high school. The beginning of this course says that children should throw away the values that their parents hold and “figure out” their own. This is for 10-year-olds.
Dan
May 19th, 2007 16:33
Hi Dan,
Yes, I see the context you’re coming from — it’s very worrying.
Here in Australia, the situation is very different, even in disadvantaged schools, for both violence and values in schools.
Here at BH, I tend to provide a view into how things are done in other parts of the world. It’s interesting for me to hear insiders’ views on US society and politics.
Gillian
May 19th, 2007 19:34
Hi Dan-
I wanted to let folks who are unfamiliar with values clarification know that it’s nothing new. I remember in the ’70’s when my mom was teaching third grade, her district “adopted” it. I don’t believe it lasted long. Just another example of how education cycles within itself.
Hi Gillian-
I for one am very glad to have an international persective…both for what’s happening in your country and for how you perceive the U. S. That’s part of the diversity we were hoping for…
Susan