Subscribe to Common Dreams News Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
The Death of Public Education
The news says we are watching the death of public education before our eyes. Detroit is closing more than 40 schools, Kansas City wants to close more than 40 percent of its school buildings. Other cities have been closing schools over the last decade. Boston avoided closings in its most recent budget deliberations, but still must slash custodial staff and postpone building repairs.
It is no secret that American education is at a great divide, unrivaled in most of the developed world. The United States spends $9,800 per public primary and secondary education student, which is technically high by global standards.
But meanwhile, children of the wealthy are being trained at private schools at more than triple the expenditures. In the Boston area, day school tuition rates are closing in on $35,000.
Our investment in public school teachers is paltry for the wealthiest country in the world. According to the National Center for Education Statistics, the United States ranks in some measures behind England, Italy, Japan, Scotland and way behind Germany in starting teacher pay. The average expenditure on college students in the United States amounts to $24,400 per college student, two and a half times more than the $9,800 per-pupil spending in the public schools.
Beneath the numbers is the resegregation of children on the basis of class, race and immigration status. Prison spending soared so much, that by 2007, five states spent as much or more on corrections than on higher education, according to the Pew Center on the States.
In monetary terms, we have given up on millions of children. "I don't think necessarily that public education is dead, but certain parts of it are dying,'' said Linda Darling-Hammond, a Stanford University professor who headed President Barack Obama's education transition team. "The programs of the 1960s and 1970s that helped make education more equitable were mostly eliminated in the 1980s and never put back.
"We're disinvesting in a significant way. With the huge decline in America of manual labor jobs that are being off-shored or digitalized, the vast majority of jobs are knowledge based. If we do not invest that way, we really can't survive as a nation. To deeply underfund public education as we are doing does not make any sense.''
Author of the 2009 book, "The Flat World and Education,'' Darling-Hammond says neither poverty, nor the diverse nature of the American population are excuses not to educate everyone. Several countries were behind the United States decades ago in education and now have passed us.
She cites the example of Korea, which "in the space of one generation . . . moved from a nation that educated less than a quarter of its citizens through high school to one that now ranks third in college-educated adults.''
She noted how Singapore, where 80 percent of families live in public housing, was tops in the world in fourth-grade and eighth-grade math assessments in 2003. "When children leave the tiny, spare apartments they occupy in high-rises throughout the city,'' she wrote of Singapore, "they arrive at colorful, airy school buildings where student artwork, papers, projects, and awards are displayed throughout, libraries and classrooms are well-stocked, instructional technology is plentiful, and teachers are well trained.''
It is enough to make one consider whether America needs to start from scratch. Whatever we are doing, it is not working. For instance, Darling-Hammond said Obama has an education platform that could rival the last serious education president, whom she considers to be Lyndon Johnson, but "to date has not squarely embraced the idea of equity. He did a great job coming out of the box on higher education, but inequity in elementary and secondary education is continuing to widen.''
Johnson once said you cannot "take a person who for years has been hobbled by chains and liberate him, bring him up to the starting line of a race and then say, ‘You are free to compete with all the others.' '' Today millions of American children once again need our help to get to the starting line.
- Posted in
84 Comments so far
Show AllThe last 10 years predatory corporations have attempted to make profits off of public schools through No Child Left Behind. charter schools, and Race to the Top. They have made money through making unneeded standardized tests children are supposed to take endlessly. They make money through using charter schools to gentrify black and Latino working class neighborhoods in Chicago. They make money through running charter schools. They use socalled "reform" assaults teachers and teachers' unions making the job much harder with less pay.
The results have been a disaster for children, for teachers, for communities, for cities, and for democracy. The schools are becoming segregated again and quality of learning is declining. What we can do is get rid of Race to the Top which pits states against each other in a race to the bottom to compete on who can dismantle their public schools the quickest.
The 30 year deconstruction of the US middle class is nearly complete...just as planned.
Yes, indeed it was planned, particularly with regard to education, employment, class subjugation, and restricitons of voting rights. Details of the plan as developed by the Trilateral Commission can be read at:
http://www.trilateral.org/library/crisis_of_democracy.pdf
The implementation of the plan, however, required the input of many hands.
A lot of progressives are against charter schools because of the for profit and union busting impacts. I am only personally familiar with one non-profit charter school. It is consistently rated among the better schools in the state. The school gets about 80% of the funding per student than the non-charter public schools yet consistently out-performs them. The school has a dedicated board, a great principal and mostly young, talented, dedicated teachers. Those teachers are not paid what they are worth and get less than teachers in the non-charter public schools. They're happy to be there though because A) They are respected and appreciated B) Being a teacher at the school will be an asset on their resumes C) The Principal is an ex-teacher who is passionate about her work and D) there is a job shortage. There are also a lot of involved parents who volunteer at/for the school.
I think the biggest problem in schools isn't the teachers or the curriculum. The biggest problem is they are under funded. Less money equals fewer teachers, greater class sizes and cuts to the number of school days and the number of non-core classes like music and art. You can't cut funding year after year and expect the quality of education to remain the same. A lot of states have played a shell game with state lotteries that were supposed to increase school funding. Once the voters okay the lottery the money often does go to the schools BUT the state then reduces that amount or more from the amount of educational funding from other sources. The result is the schools are in the same position or worse after they start getting the lottery monies.
Charter schools like the one I am familiar with exacerbate the situation because the parents who care enough about their children's educations to seek out a highly rated school (and not just enroll them in the closest school) are the same ones who would be trying to improve under-performing local schools if their children were there (although, if they have the resources they'd probably just enroll them in a private school).
The simple fact of the matter is the schools need more funding, which means higher taxes. Everything else is just smoke and mirrors.
Visiting Professor
But who is really responsible for this (if you were correct)? And who is it that rally benefits from their control? Who gets their votes?
Strange, there is no mention of the culprit behind all this, Bush's No Child Left Behind Act. Another thing I would like to ask this author and others in this forum is why we measure other countries' education by teacher salary pay instead of by the fact that even in countries where teachers' salaries are less than the US, the teaching quality beats the USA by milestones. Never mind. On education and health care, this nation is an ass. We're supposed to be very very ignorant and look the other way paying no attention to the man behind the curtain. When even "progressives" like Kucinich could vote yes on NCLB like most politicians, it proves that like health care government is ready to wash its hands off except for one thing. No child will be left behind in America. They'll just thrown into a foreign war if they don't settle for crumbs like "obedient kids" !
Mr Jackson: Now is that even fair, comparing the investment in education by the U.S.A. and that of Singapore? After all Singapore does not have to maintain heavy investment to support a generously staffed and equipped military establishment around the world, nor does it have to spend untold billions in glitzy-sounding "Operations" to try to (as Bill Blum puts it), free the world to death. It doesn't have to bribe two countries, Iraq and Afghanistan, into ending their insurgencies. What's really important here, Jackson, to educate a kid or to preserve him or her from all them terrorists that lurk around every lamp post ready to kill the kid? You want a educated kid or a dead kid?
phoenix20, you nailed it!
As a former public schoolteacher who left the profession largely out of disgust for (among too long a litany of other things) the nearly content-free history textbooks I was charged with helping to choose for our district, I must reiterate some of what's already been said here: the standardized test business, the strangulation of the arts & relevant content to actual human lives, the privatization of schools with the charter-schools & voucher craze, the dumbing-down of curriculum, the vapid 'content' that does nothing but make of students (and teachers, administrators and parents!) a vapid 'market' of unthinking, addicted, consuming sheep (if not wolves disguised as sheep---my apologies to actual wolves and sheep for the metaphor)... all these things have contributed to the decay of the factory-model school system which has long outlived its usefulness to society. Any teens (and most adults!) out there reading this would do well to find and read a copy of "The Teenage Liberation Handbook" and opt OUT of the schooling charade as soon as possible, in my opinion. The system has been breaking down horribly since well before I first started teaching in the late 80s and perpetuates itself through costly and disingenuous PR. Personally I haven't much hope things will improve except for in communities where THE PEOPLE INSIST ON LOCALIZING their lives... take RESPONSIBILITY in breaking free as possible from corporatized jobs, agriculture, housing, health-care, media and education.... not to mention the utterly horrific nonsense of the military! We have got to stop wasting our human intelligence on the detritus of a decaying empire and start living responsibly within our ecological means. We need to get beyond the clever techno-smart of the head and infuse it with the smarts of the HEART and develop nonviolent communication skills to learn how to live cooperatively (and not like rapacious competitive pirates!) with other human beings in our households, communities and the planet itself, if we want to leave a legacy of hope--and not horror-- for our kids and grandkids.
Matangicita, I am sorry to hear that this godforsaken system forced out of doing what you actually wanted to do as a profession. I would like to add one more idea on localizing, localizing the food that is served. If more households would team up and garden and donate a small share of their produce to public schools to make better foods which will produce better thinkers, the differences to education and society would be enormous.
the situation is easily understandable, and well documented...
the solution seems to be the problem...
I would suggest that is because we have yet to settle on life's purpose, which leaves one very confused when deciding what to teach...
does one teach chemistry to children who will then, very naturally, wonder why we're killing each other, and the rest of the living world, with chemicals for money?
does one teach electromagnetics to children who will then, very naturally, ask why we're killing each other for oil and gas and coal and nuclear, devastating the planet in the process of getting them and burning them and manufacturing them into toxic electroplastic crapola, rather than simply discard the outdated products to an unknown third world dump, and line up to buy the newest programs, devices and interfaces at the mall store?
does one teach the history of human evolution to children who will then, very naturally, request we stop debasing and killing our genetic cousins both here at home and in other locations around the globe?
if we want intelligent, kind and capable individuals, we must first learn to share this planet in all myriad variety, and embrace our fellow men and creatures...
reading and writing and arithmetic are admirable, but:
the realities of the world, the physical nature of things, the complexities of the human psyche and social relationships, and the presence of deception, coercion and violence, amog other things, may be more important, in the long run...
logic is good, so is self-awareness and self-preservation: thinking for oneself, collaborating with one's neighbors, and standing up to enemies...we don't teach them...we teach deference to a 'responsible other', not reliance upon 'responsible self'...this is a big problem...
private property is in there, you know...the banks and the law...
are we still raising little lifelong consumers, or do we need a new vision?
hunter\gatherers? farmers? gardeners? fisherpeople (hmmm)?
physicists? assassins? drone builders and programmers?
Sometimes it is claimed that the United States pays more per child than many other countries that perform well on international assessments--Japan, for example. What is missing in this argument is the understanding that all children in the United States are not backed up by the same amount of money. In my state (Michigan) the range is from 12000 per student to 7100 depending on the district. If you look at the mean expenditure for the whole country, we compare fairly well. If you look at the lower extreme, we do not look good at all. Most countries I know--Japan in particular--support each student with the same amount of money; there is not the disparity we have here.
Also, in spending money on education it is necessary to look at diversity and poverty. In Japan, all students (pretty much) are Japanese. No problems with immigrants there. And poverty rates in many countries that perform well on international tests (Scandinavia) are below that of the United States. It takes more money to educate children whose parents were poor themselves and do not know how to support their child in school.
Aside from money differences, the real reason US students do not perform well on international tests is that there is a societal value that good students are born, not made. So many young people (and their parents) believe you either "have it" or you don't--with regard to academic ability. Contrast that view to what the Japanese believe: that hard work can make up for initial deficiencies. Many American students--those from impoverished backgrounds especially--do not believe they have a chance at academic success. By high school they react in such a way as to scorn those that are successful in school, thus making it shameful to appear smart. No wonder we do not succeed in education--we do not provide the necessary resources and too many kids believe they are incapable of learning.
drosera
Excellent posting.
While there is certainly some merit to your point about the general ethnicity in Japan and in some aspects the disparity of per student expenditure, plus your points about our immigrants, how do you explain the same circumstances in our country up to the fifties say, but the results were much different?
Under these same general circumstances we produced a far higher level of education. Higher than theirs in fact.
"too many kids believe they are incapable of learning"
I was really struck by your sentence here because I believe that is a centerpiece of whats wrong.
My impression of early schooling in the United States is, first, only an elite completed high school so that cherrypicking of the best students had something to do with ostensibly good performance on tests, and second, that, looking at the kinds of tasks students were asked to do, tests were easier back then. I do have data about graduation rates in the United States and I know that in the twenties only 26 percent of students graduated from high school while nowadays, using a similar (but not identical measure of high school graduation rates) more than 71 percent graduate. Through the fifties blue-collar kids could drop out and get decent jobs at auto plants and the like. School wasn't necessary to make a decent living.
As far as the difficulty of tests is concerned, you only have to look at the textbooks from the early twentieth century in biology (my field) or chemistry to see that more is asked of students now. Chemistry was descriptive: Name the inert elements. Biology textbooks did not ask students to understand and apply Mendel's laws. Now, on international tests of science all kinds of fairly searching questions are asked--much less rote memorization as compared to formerly. Mathematics education was in a sorry state throughout the fifties and sixties (and before). Computation was valued over understanding. Sputnik helped change things a bit in this country for the better, but obviously those reforms did not go far enough.
The comment below about Kozol: I am a great fan of Kozol. I know these poor and mainly black kids are smart. Racism can cut two ways: one way is how it affects those that judge and discriminate by race and ethnic background and the other way is it how affects those being discriminated against. Soon I will have my fiftieth high school anniversary. My school was perhaps ten percent black. At that time, I had NOT ONE black in all my college-prep classes, something that embarrasses me deeply since I know there were lots of bright black kids I never got to know. They were all routed by their counselors into voc ed--and they accepted that! How much of our troubles relate to racial and class-based stereotyping? More than you can count.
drosera
In the twenties and thirties of course, there were reasons kids were out working and had to ditch school. All my family did. My Grand Dad was gone before the ninth grade.
Though the HS education wasn't as needed thru the 40's to 60's the education was far superior to present in most urban HS's and in most rural areas.
I'd say to you the graduation rate is at your number, but the skill level is way down.
Chemistry, Biology and upper level math has to be more complicated as we know so much more. Its the Liberal Arts area that concerns me so much, its been degraded terribly.
As to rote memorization and learning you cannot get a basic grounding in areas without it. If you don't memorize multiplication tables etc, how can anyone expect kids to be able to handle math? Same for English, dates in History are a framework, etc.
I obviously will read Kozol ASAP, but any generalities you can throw that you picked up from him, gratefully appreciated.
"How much of our troubles relate to racial and class-based stereotyping?"
A bunch. And by blacks, Latinos and whites. Its no longer racism like the fifties, its racism endemic in cultures. As someone said about a student that was studying..."you trying to be white?"
Consider it outside the gratuitous race argument as I do. They see this poor black kid (or Latino or Asian or white) and he can't speak decent English, can't write well, can't read much, and they define him or her immediately as stupid, not bright or he comes from a poor/violent/ethnic neighborhood....obviously they can't cut it. The response has been mostly, lets lower the bar, lets cut them a lot of slack because they are ...or from...., etc. Lets pass them because they are "disadvantaged", etc.
Thats the stuff that really pisses me off. Sure there are some kids that are not smart, not as smart, but most kids given the chance, given the expectation they can succeed, told they can, CAN learn most anything. Color my ass. They just have different obstacles to overcome. And we are cheating them. Really honks my horn.
I think I'm trying to say, we have to stop catering to their weakness's.
Comparing my education in high school (graduated in 62) to that provided in the school district I taught in up to seven years ago, I would have to say students get a much better education now. I live in a rather ordinary town in Michigan, smaller than the town I grew up in. There are far more choices available to kids now: advanced placement courses, taking courses at the college level on the public's dime, math/science specialization tracks, fairly sophisticated training in electronics, computers, and well as the traditional trades beginning in the 11th grade. That is the thing: so much is available now, but so few students go for it--extend themselves. Too many are content with that general diploma, a reward that is not worth the paper it is written on. A kid can come out of high school with an excellent education--not as good as Singapore, perhaps--but still good. Or--he/she can emerge barely knowing how to read, write, and do elementary math. There is a trade-off always, though. You raise standards for everyone (without providing the extra help that is required to enable them to achieve at a higher level) and you lose a whole lot of kids. Education will cost more in the US simply because we are starting from so low a position.
About rote learning: Certainly it is necessary to learn the basic facts, but after that you really need to challenge students to think, create, critique, and express themselves. Old-fashioned education did not aim to make thinkers and questioners and neither does education nowadays.
I agree with you that lowering standards is not the answer. At the same time, we must be prepared to offer help to students who come from impoverished backgrounds no matter what their race. If that is "affirmative action," then I am entirely in favor of it.
drosera
You raise a really good point that not every kid wants, needs or should go to college.
"Certainly it is necessary to learn the basic facts, but after that you really need to challenge students to think, create, critique, and express themselves. Old-fashioned education did not aim to make thinkers and questioners and neither does education nowadays"
63' myself and I can tell you thev greneral HS graduate isn't even close. You guys just have better schools.
Oye hit it above when he mentioned the Socratic method. Thats what was used here when I was in school. Lecturing yes, but always Q&A.
"At the same time, we must be prepared to offer help to students who come from impoverished backgrounds no matter what their race. If that is "affirmative action," then I am entirely in favor of it."
Thats called education. Its not "affirmative action." "affirmative action" is putting somone before someone else simply because of their race. A practice we needed for 10-15 years to level the playing field, but a practice that is now nothing but racism in action. NO ONE should get preference because of their race. Ever again. We have had enough racism in our country.
How much cheaper would it be I wonder to offer tutoring to help the students you are speaking of than to put them in prison later or to support them because they can't get or hold a job? Where is the real cost?
Veritas and drosera, a very interesting back and forth!
jlocke123
No kidding! I'm sure picking some things up. From Ardent! and Oye too. And another. Most grateful to them for sharing.
I have no problem spending more money for kids in Detroit than elsewhere in Michigan because the problems are so great there. Some people might claim that spending more money on those kids--mainly black--is unfair--but to my way of thinking, it is fine. Send the resources to where it is most needed. If that is to Detroit, so be it. If it is to a poor community in the UP of Michigan, fine. Need, not race, should determine resources. Of course my working class town of 15000 gets 7100 per student and that is not enough to run a good program.
Students going for a general hs diploma are not getting a decent education. That diploma should be abolished. Instead, kids should aim for a diploma recognizing excellence in career-based education. Of course, I cannot go with vocational education only--no arts, no basic knowledge of science and history, no literature. Life is more than work after all.
drosera
"Need, not race, should determine resources"
Absolutely. I don't care what their race is, but we must start to utilize everything we can. We are losing generations here. The Gen Yer's don't even know how to get a job, let alone hold it...generally speaking.
We have a revenue sharing plan here whereby the richer districts have to kick in to the poorer dists. Not perfect, but it helps. Our biggest problem seems to be getting decent mamagement in the poorer districts.
Man, $7100 isn't much in Michigan. Do you know how much your Teachers get?
Thanks
7100 is lowest Michigan pays. Ann Arbor (a community hardly in need of extra money) gets 12000 per student. The state average is--9500?--or so. Teachers start in my district at 30000. With thirty hours beyond a Masters and twenty years of experience a teacher might make about 62 or so. The governor and legislators claim they want to help poorer districts, but it's just words. Cuts are proposed in school funding and, from what I gather, my school district--the one getting 7100--will probably be cut the same amount as Ann Arbor. Damn! Sure could use some socialism around here!
drosera
My God! Your Teachers ARE underpaid. Ours start at $38,000 right out of school. School and education is an appropriate place for socialism in funding in my opinion. And I am no socialist.
Your post is excellent. I would add one thing that was a revelation for me in regards to your comment:
"Many American students--those from impoverished backgrounds especially--do not believe they have a chance at academic success."
I am still mad and fuming after reading Jonathan Kozol's books regarding education in impoverished neighborhoods. It is so sad because children in these scenarios are not stupid, and they know that the pathways to academic success are closed to all but a few. We write them off, but they are smart enough to realize those who run education doing it - in fact it is not that hard to figure out when you compare schools, materials, and educational opportunities between the rich and the poor.
It is no wonder they react with scorn by the time they are high school aged.
Public education doesn't earn Wall Street profits. Locking up Americans and blowing up foreign countries do. The U.S. education system is unfair, underfinanced and regularly demonized by corporate media. Education is quickly becoming a privledge that only the rich can afford as the general public buys into the corporate propaganda about charter schools, the necessity of getting into Ivy league schools and the success of NCLB policies. Like universal healthcare, ending the illegal occupations abroad, reducing military spending or slowing down the incarceration of the citizenry, public education is also going the way of the Dodo bird.
SORRY CHARLIE!
"Schools don't earn Wall Street profits."
THINK AGAIN!
No Child Left Without a Kick in t Behind was a 100% sales of the entire public education system to corporations.
As the law operated, by 2014, a school must get 97% of their kids to pass the test.
When the school fails, the board gets to "choose" between 1 of 3 corporate programs to run the school.
In my state, only 3 schools are left operating outside of corporate control.
And guess what, the corporations never have to get the kids to pass.
They just own the system forever.
When NCLF started, the percentage of kids needing to pass the test was much lower.
So, if a "bad" school was taken over, looked like a good piece of helpful legislation.
But the intent, I believe, with the testing was to phase in the takeover of the entire system.
Do you think 97% is a challenge.... or a set up?
All the issues talked about are not relevant.
All the issues are just smokescreens for this reality.
Corporations DO own public education.
They're going to model after McDonads - mark my words.
Every job as easy as putting on the mustard.
With scripted lessons that anyone can "administer."
AND THEY WEILL MAKE MONEY.
They sell the curriculum.
And they pay - only tutors - with no benefits.
Tutors that have to get licensed in order to get the job.
so still these tutors will have to pay the bucks to go to community college.
grim
www.sudval.org
a real educational model
FULL OF DEMOCRACY AND ACHIEVEMENT
REAL LIFE
FOR
REAL PEOPLE
I share your concern for public schooling - but what's wrong with IB? IB is offered in many poor schools also - including the Kansas City, MO district referenced in this article. If anything, these programs make it easier for lower income kids to make it to college - since they can earn a year's worth of credit in HS on the cheap. We should encourage the IB program- with it's higher standards and college credit, not attack it.
I think the easy and quick answer to fix school problem and funding is to end the ridiculous system whereby schools are funded by property taxes - a practice that inevitably dooms poor neighborhoods to poor schooling. Sharing these taxes between counties and cities would force equality.
The word "public" is fast becoming an expletive.
Its about time we broke the model of complaint that our teachers aren't paid enough, enough money is not spent on schools, there is too much rigid instruction and children aren't "free" enough to explore their education.
Horsefeathers.
A. Too much reliance on testing....you bet.
B. Too much money spent on administration....you bet
C. Too much interference from the Federal government....you bet, NCLB be gone.
Now, a groundwork to restore real education.
A. Absolutely the first requirement is the returtn of discipline to the classroom and the school. And parents held responsible. Not lip service responsible, but real responsibility.
B. Teachers must be disabused of the notion prevelent in our teaching colleges that their duty is to teach the kids what to think rather than how to think.
C. Tenure must be abolished.
D. Real instruction must be returned to the classroom. I.E. Children must be taught how to read and write correctly, basics of math and science, before their real education starts. You cannot build a house without tools.
E. Excuses must be removed. Expectations must be raised. Standards upheld. No more social promotion.
F. Real text books with real facts must be returned to the school room. Homework returned to the students.
Remember when you hear complaints about the regimented, industrial model schools, or the old methods of teaching, thats what the rest of the world is using to kick our ass.
Its time to make some real changes.
Veritas,
"Its about time we broke . . . to explore their education." Why must we "break" these complaints? Many teachers do not get paid all that well--I know I am one--with 15 years experience and a Masters plus hours and make about $48,000 per year. No, it is not a lot but I didn't get into teaching (at the age of 38) for the money. There is too much "rigid instruction" if it is of the drill and kill for the standardized test variety.
"A. Too much reliance on testing....you bet." Agree with you 100%.
"B. Too much money spent on administration....you bet" Totally disagree with you on this point. When you look at "span of control" in relation to how much is spent on administration/management the public school sector should be considered much more efficient than the business sector. The business sector has one supervisor for each 5 employees versus one supervisor for every 20 employees in the public school sector. Add to that the fact that for comparable levels of span of control and fiscal responsibility a public school administrator makes anywhere from three to ten times less per year than the business manager/administrator. We really do get more for the administrative buck in public education than in the business world.
"C. Too much interference from the Federal government....you bet, NCLB be gone." I agree 100% on the NCLB be gone (along with the Race to Top BS) But there is a need for the feds to enforce equal opportunity for all--see American education before Brown vs Board to understand why.
"Now, a groundwork to restore real education.
A. Absolutely the first requirement is the returtn of discipline to the classroom and the school. And parents held responsible. Not lip service responsible, but real responsibility." Not sure what you mean by this statement as for the most part parents are responsible and do want to do what they consider best for their child.
"B. Teachers must be disabused of the notion prevelent in our teaching colleges that their duty is to teach the kids what to think rather than how to think." I agree that I consider my main job is to teach the kids how to learn and not just learn and/or get a grade (which is the main problem now in that parents and students want to get a grade and not necessarily learn the subject matter).
"C. Tenure must be abolished." Absolutely not!! Tenure protects the students from having all teachers teach the party line (whatever that line may be). I've seen administrators get rid of great teachers because they would not kiss the administrator's ass--and they were tenured teachers
"D. Real instruction must be returned to the classroom. I.E. Children must be taught how to read and write correctly, basics of math and science, before their real education starts. You cannot build a house without tools." Can't disagree with you here. I have been lucky to be able to pick the new textbook series for our Spanish classes (I'm the only Spanish teacher in the district--a 3,000 student rural poverty one). The new series, which is not from one of the three huge conglomerate textbook publishing houses, will cover almost twice as much as the prior set, is more grammatically oriented and generally covers everything much better--the book is less "visually cluttered".
"E. Excuses must be removed. Expectations must be raised. Standards upheld. No more social promotion." Many times there are "excuses" (you can call them reasons, that usually are out of the student's control) as to why a particular student is struggling. Expectations should be raised but standards are the big lie upon which all the standardized testing bullshit is based--See N. Wilson's "Education Standards and the Problem of Error to be found at EPAA. And "social promotion" can actually be a good thing if the student is receiving the proper resources (teachers and programs) to help them succeed.
"F. Real text books with real facts must be returned to the school room. Homework returned to the students." Doing all that now. My students are amazed when they don't get a written assignment each day.
"Remember when you hear complaints about the regimented, industrial model schools, or the old methods of teaching, thats what the rest of the world is using to kick our ass." They aren't "kicking our ass"--all those comparisons of different countries "performance" are pure hogwash--like comparing apples to potatoes. But I agree that some of the "old method" still do work--can anyone say "Socratic method"?--but some don't and some new things do work. That's the teacher's job to sort out what works and doesn't work for his/her particular classroom.
OYE
# 2
"C. Tenure must be abolished." Absolutely not!! Tenure protects the students from having all teachers teach the party line (whatever that line may be). I've seen administrators get rid of great teachers because they would not kiss the administrator's ass--and they were tenured teachers
I think Absolutely. Bad teachers hide behind it. The higher up you go the worse it gets. And thats one of the problems I was speaking of in administration. They are the worst abusers of all. Lets not leave out the local board either. But I wouldn't say I might have this wrong and you might be right. How about Unions?
"E. Excuses must be removed. Expectations must be raised. Standards upheld. No more social promotion." Many times there are "excuses" (you can call them reasons, that usually are out of the student's control) as to why a particular student is struggling. Expectations should be raised but standards are the big lie upon which all the standardized testing bullshit is based--See N. Wilson's "Education Standards and the Problem of Error to be found at EPAA. And "social promotion" can actually be a good thing if the student is receiving the proper resources (teachers and programs) to help them succeed.
I'm sorry, but attaining something you haven't earned...i.e. social promotion is worthless. I wouldn't be surprised at all if in some cases it would be a good idea as you say, but as a policy, I find the results to be detrimental. By standards I simply mean a High School student should be able to read and write literate English, so fourth and KNOW what the 4th of July is. Not some big standardized hob goblin like our TAK's test in Texas. What BS indeed!
"F. Real text books with real facts must be returned to the school room. Homework returned to the students." Doing all that now. My students are amazed when they don't get a written assignment each day.
You are, good teachers do, but most teachers don't or at best assign fluff.
"Remember when you hear complaints about the regimented, industrial model schools, or the old methods of teaching, thats what the rest of the world is using to kick our ass." They aren't "kicking our ass"--
all those comparisons of different countries "performance" are pure hogwash--like comparing apples to potatoes. But I agree that some of the "old method" still do work--can anyone say "Socratic method"?--but some don't and some new things do work. That's the teacher's job to sort out what works and doesn't work for his/her particular classroom.
SOCRATIC METHOD! PLEASE!!!! All classes are different and teachers should be allowed to modify things for the differences encountered. But enough of A HS teacher assigning his class a political assignment that reflects his view or their social views.
The Socratic method has produced superb educational results for eons, who decided some of the crap they tried over the last 50 years was superior?
Thank you for your comments. I don't think for a minute I've got all the answers, but there are some things I have identified as a certainty. If I have to get on the School Board to get some of these done, I will. The kids in my town are through being cheated. But I do need to learn more and you guys are helping me.
oye el pensador
Hola
Note. I'm not speaking of our good schools or our good students that will have good results no matter what and there are those.
A. $48,000 is good pay in some states but not others. The pay is also for less time spent at work, even considering the extra time spent in required days outside the school year, so we need to equalize pay at least. But I'd give you a $20,000 raise tomorrow with better results.
"B. Perhaps I should have said FAR to many administrators rather than money spent. I don't mind spending whatever we need to, but lets spend it in the classroom, not in the administration building.
I would also say if Teachers need a lot of supervision, they are in the wrong profession. I'll bet you do not need as much as you get.
"C. Too much interference from the Federal government....you bet, NCLB be gone." I agree 100% on the NCLB be gone (along with the Race to Top BS) But there is a need for the feds to enforce equal opportunity for all--see American education before Brown vs Board to understand why.
Absolutely. But the need for the Feds is past as far as equality goes. They have become a hindrance at this point. We are at class rather than racism.
"Now, a groundwork to restore real education.
A. Absolutely the first requirement is the return of discipline to the classroom and the school. And parents held responsible. Not lip service responsible, but real responsibility." Not sure what you mean by this statement as for the most part parents are responsible and do want to do what they consider best for their child.
Very simply, I disagree, most parents in the schools that need the most help won't even attend a Parent/Teacher conference. If their child is abusive/disruptive they want the school to deal with it and they must be held responsible for their children doing their work. The parents you speak of aren't the problem.
"B. Teachers must be disabused of the notion prevalent in our teaching colleges that their duty is to teach the kids what to think rather than how to think." I agree that I consider my main job is to teach the kids how to learn and not just learn and/or get a grade (which is the main problem now in that parents and students want to get a grade and not necessarily learn the subject matter).
You are a good teacher. But the teachers being trained now are being told its their job to teach kids what to think. They are not coming out neutral.
Veritas,
Based upon your criteria for reform, it's obvious you know nothing about education. You are simply an embittered old curmudgeon who no longer has the press of necessity to ply your soul. You remind me of a Dickens character in "Hard Times," Mr. Gradgrind, with your list of principles: "Excuses must be removed, Standards upheld, Real textbooks with real facts must be returned." Are you embittered because you tried teaching at some point in your sad little life and were ousted by senior teachers who saw how rigid and unaccomodating you were? Is that why you want to see tenure removed? Tenure protects education from an unceasing storm of inadequate, inexperienced, obstinate bullies who are unable to connect to students because of their rigid structure and antiquated maxims.
Though your dim observations are not wholly misled regarding NCLB, you need to curb your teacher hate. It's obvious to everyone you're angry because you couldn't cut it as a teacher.
Union bashing is something you do regularly on this site. So, I'm going to make a guess about why you do this as well. Maybe your union couldn't help you because you did something even they couldn't protect you against. Did you misabuse a child? Did you lose control of your senses? Unions can only help those teachers that are abused by the system. They cannot help unbalanced people retain their positions.
Yes, public education is going downhill at a fast pace. This is one reason people are home schooling their children. This isn't for everyone. My cousin successfully home schooled her son. He is now a senior at Mason University. He entered college at age 16. He will be 20 when he graduates.
There is a lot of work for the parent who decides to home school. If you are up to the challenge, go for it.
You want quality public education?
You want quality public health-care?
You want quality public transportation?
You want quality public infrastructure?
I am afraid in most cases, you will have to leave the USA in order to get that.
If you are rich, there is no problem you can get expensive private services that are some of the best in the world. For the rest, too f-in bad. At the same time, working people are taxed heavily to subsidize the corpoarations, the banksters and the rich. Welcome to Neo-Feudalism.
many things well said...
abandoning television and the MSM is critical...
Get the federal gov't out of education. Someone mentioned equal protection clause. That's the only federal input as I see it. NCLB is just the most dramatic example of what has been going on for years. Local control has to be reasserted.
Like everything else in this country, our education system is in a race to the bottom. Then, to be sure, when we do arrive at the bottom, most people will look around in their amazed stupor and wonder how we got 'here'.
I don't know if you've ever heard of a long-deceased superb writer and educator named James Herndon.
Even though I was neither an education major nor a teacher, during my teens I stumbled into two books that I can't recommend highly enough: "The Way It Spozed to Be" and "How to Survive in Your Native Land".
I don't know if they're still in print, but they ought to be-- especially the latter.
Anyway, Herndon was a career elementary-school teacher in California's public-school system; he notes at one point that the true purpose of School in America is exactly what you say it is: to separate the sheep from the goats.
But Ms Darling Hammond, many of the knowledge jobs are being given to immigrants so they can be paid less.
Further, most jobs, the vast majority, require little job training, and most of the new jobs are going to be low paying.
Only one in four jobs in this country pays 16 dollars per hour and guarantees health insurance and guarantees a pension.
It doesn't have to be this way and we are not going to educate our way out of this unfair economy.
Joe Hill told us the solution long ago: Organize!
Privatization on steroids. Welcome to ObamaLand.
It is all being done on purpose. I would say that it has been gestating for quite some time. I would also add that there is an orchestrated component with it's origins in such PR foofaw as put forth by the Chamber of Commerce, Foundations, NAM, and so forth.
Now of course things have gone not only to another level but out towards some bizarre tangents and it almost seems that the Supreme Council of Lies is now 'built-in' to the entire program though with constant promotion and copious amounts of money cast into the cesspool of various outfits. All for the benefit of big business.
It's as if the genie is out of the bottle, a genie that was concocted from a thousand different "human resource", "public relations", "academic think tank" laboratories and now the thing itself is confused as it runs pell-mell towards the latest real or manufactured crisis and making sure that absolutely no one speaks clearly about anything.
I don't get your "welcome to ObamaLand" like the whole mess has been his doing.
I saw beginnings of this kind of stuff when my kids were in school - and my youngest graduated thirty years ago. I saw a lot more of it going on when I worked in a school district through the eighties and early nineties. And during all that time it was the teachers being blaming for what was happening, and they still are.
True, Obama didn't build the coffin of privatization.
But he's proved handy with a nail gun, and his corporate-shill Secretary of Education is busy designing an impressive sepulchre in which to seal it.
Obedient Servant
Great analogy! Great truth.
I quite clearly said, "It has been gestating for quite some time."
How did you miss that?
I believe that ObamaLand is now accurate. Over these next three years -- or seven he and his cronies should be able to put the final nail in the coffin of anything public, i.e. paid for by taxes for the benefit of all -- rather than improving the system totally dismantling it to please his corporate donors. Yes, this corporate agenda started was fueled vigorously starting with Reagan but I believe it could reach to never-before-seen heights under Obama. And as long as people keep apologizing for Obama, or assigning attributes to him that don't exist (i.e. Obama cares about ordinary people, etc.), he will be able to get his agenda pushed through, with great help from the Repubs, whose habit of saying no to everything gives Obama the excuse to keep bending right and corporate.
Obamacare is only the beginning, and I read another comment somewhere that said "and Obama doesn't care if we the people don't like it." Had Obamacare not passed these so-called "education reforms" would have been difficult to pass. This guy is feeling very empowered right now, and the sheep are giving him a pass.
American Public Schools are led by Coaches. Principals and Superintendents are selected mostly from the coaching staff. That is a big reason why America has wonderful football teams and lousy education scores. Put academics in charge of public education.
I'm about to finish my first year of teaching in the public schools- and already set to lose my job, after giving up another (which is no longer available) in order to take the teaching job. I had many years of real life experience and went to college late in life to take on the challenge of a new career. Maybe I'm too new and inexperienced, but I already dislike what I've seen, such as the following: over emphasis and total reliance on testing. I would have a more experienced colleague suggest that what I was covering (which was in the standards and benchmarks) sounded interesting, but it wasn't going to be on the test; High school students who have passed competency exams but still lack real writing skills; allowing kids who fail classes- mainly because they don't do any work or often don't show up-to play sports; allowing students who are failing because they ditch classes or don't do any work in class to "make up" the class by taking a replacement class on a computer-- and the replacement class is insultingly easy. Most of the students don't show an interest in learning or figuring things out for themselves; few of them read and most will complain if they have to do any reading in class or if expected to complete work at home. I keep telling friends who are sympathetic to my job loss that perhaps it's for a reason; I need to get out before things get even worse.
NMLib
"allowing kids who fail classes- mainly because they don't do any work or often don't show up-to play sports; allowing students who are failing because they ditch classes or don't do any work in class to "make up" the class by taking a replacement class on a computer-- and the replacement class is insultingly easy."
You raise some important points that we haven't covered. Especially the point about sports when failing. And easy "make up" for passing.
"Most of the students don't show an interest in learning or figuring things out for themselves; few of them read and most will complain if they have to do any reading in class or if expected to complete work at home."
This is a clone of what the Teachers in my family complain about (among a few other things) and what I hear from our Teachers here.
Perhaps you are in the wrong school district? Don't give up! Come to Texas, we are hiring.
I have friends and family members who teach in other states, and I'm hearing similar stories- so I know mine is not unique. I also hear constant blaming: many college professors blame the high school teachers. Well, I want to tell them that by the time a student is a Senior- if that student has passed his or her competency exam, that student is considered proficient in those subjects, so imagine their surprise when they get to college and find out they have to take developmental courses before they can get into their required composition or math class. (The figure, nationwide I believe, is now 40% of Freshmen college students must take developmental courses to make up for deficiencies-- and it's increasing every year.) The high school teachers blame the middle schools, and I'm sure the middle schools blame the elementary. I think students have a negative view of school much earlier than they did during my generation, and I think most of it is because they're fried on test prep and testing. And why are we happy with these test results? Students are considered "proficient" in reading when they read at 7th grade level in high school. Yes, many of these students read at higher levels- but why are we satisfied with such low achievement?