: It is clear that there are problems in education; what isn't clear, however, is how the nation is going to deal with them.
: First, what are the problems? Well, in 1983 a report, "A Nation at Risk" was publicized. SDF: So? People have been complaining about the public schools, in empty rhetoric wrapped in terms of Mom and apple pie and motherhood, ever since these schools were originally created in the late 19th century. This is precisely what "A Nation At Risk" does. Read Gerald Bracey's book FINAL EXAM for a more complete analysis of "A Nation At Risk".
: In this report it was stated that this country's students had academic skills which fell below other industrialized nations. Morton Kondracke, a newspaper columnist, said that the Third International Math and Science Study (TIMSS) "showed that U.S. 12th-graders outscored students from only two of the 21 counties participating."
SDF: There's a wide variety of opinion about such tests and their ability to measure anything.. I'd recommend a gander at the debate about the TIMSS in the pages of the PHI DELTA KAPPAN magazine.
: That did not include any Asian countries. The same report said that there was an alarming trend with the academic success (or is that failure) of the children; 4th graders did rise above the international average, 8th graders fell below average, and the 12th graders took an even scarier dip.
SDF: You're talking about a comparative analysis, not a trend. Please get an education about social science yourself, before you continue to complain about the education of others.
: Ok, so now we see the problems...well, why do we care about education, anyway? Education itself is of high importance; without it we wouldn't be the strong country that we are. Without it, some of us wouldn't be the "strong" individuals that we are. How do you get through life without knowing? Well...you're controlled. Lack of a sufficient education in any area will result in many downfalls - trading, business, economy...
SDF: Whereas, with education, we can all earn the income of Bill Gates, right? Gimme a break. If everybody's educated, somebody still has to take out the trash.
The point is that education for leadership (in "trading, business, economy") requires stupefaction for the followers, the folks who pour the concrete and sweep the floors so that the "educated" can take all the credit and earn all of the good money. If you want people to enjoy education as being itself a source of wealth, you have to change the system. More particularly, you have to change the way in which the pie is sliced.
: How can anyone function properly if they simply do not know?
SDF: DDN's question is the one you beg here: know WHAT?
: Over the years, many presidents have proposed numerous plans to improve
: America's public education systems. Recently, a spending bill by Clinton was just passed (that is threatened to be veteoed because of cuts in his program to hire 100,000 new teachers in a span of 7 years); is that truly the answer? So far, I've not found specifics on hiring these new teachers; is anyone just going to be hired? What about their qualifications in the subjects they are to teach? Did you know that only approxiametely 30% of the teachers hired to teach mathematics minored or majored in that subject? Is hiring new teachers the best answer that is thrown at us? The bill was also said to somehow help low-income students to enroll in college; that I do agree with. Everyone should have the right to further their education if they wanted to; it could only help, not hurt.
SDF: You missed the CBS special report on this matter of out-of-field teaching. It was on Sunday night (10/11/99). The CBS people concluded that the good teachers, the ones who know something in their fields, aren't getting the support they need from colleges or administrators. They missed another category, however: parents and students. Good teachers need parents and students on their side. To sum up: a different kind of support system might create a different kind of teacher, and since in places like Oakland Unified School District (the subject of some of the most atrocious rumors I've ever heard or read) there's a 20% yearly turnover, we have numerous opportunities to test out such a support system if we only were to have the power to create it.
: So what are more answers? Well, reform is needed, but how do you go about reform? Good question. We don't want the federal government totally controlling us, but how do we make sure that local and state governments "meet the grade?"
SDF: Since the main disparity in "meeting the grade," as revealed by statistical studies of "meeting the grade," is inequity in school funding, what you do if you really want to allow schools to "meet the grade," if that's your goal, is you make school funding more equal.
: And also, how do they make they grade if each community is different from another? What one set of standards is flexible enough for all? Elizabeth Dole and Andrew J. Coulson, author of Market Education: The Unknown History, both had similar suggestions on schools competing with each other for students. The idea is to allow parents to choose where their children should go, whether they live in that area or not, based on the "quality" of that school; this could be done by posting school results on the internet so that the parents can see for themselves.
SDF: "Choice" systems all determine school attendance through laws of supply and demand. I recommend that you consider empirical evidence, furthermore, before rushing to become a voucher-supporter.
: Dole commented that teachers shouldn't necessarily have to go by mandated procedures; make the class come alive, and you've more interested students.
SDF: This is the best proposal you've made -- without of course much of a practical plan of implementation. But of course, as a high school senior, you're expected to be idealistic and serious about principles, at least according to the manuals on adolescent psychology sold to teacher education programs. (Please try to note the extent to which these people "have your number"...)
: She also had suggestions on school safety, such as searching lockers and backpacks more often as well as keeping records that follow each student so that principals and teachers know whom they're dealing with; that does not mean unnecessary harassment.
: I, as a senior student at a small public high school, also have my own suggestions. Smaller class sizes equals more attention per student. Tracking, the idea of placing students in classes based on their achievment (those who need more help to basic to advanced), would decrease feelings of inferiority of students who aren't so quick and would also eliminate those quicker students from being "slowed down" and vice versa.
SDF: I've taught in tracked classrooms before. I really have to wonder about how you formed your current opinion of such classrooms, since my experience of them puts me in 100% agreement with Deep Dad's opinion of them. BTW, some of the best public schools have adopted multi-graded classrooms, so that the students can teach each other in addition to receiving teacher help.
The rest of it seems pretty harmless, status-quo stuff. Won't hurt, probably won't help either. Computer technology soaks up funds where dozens of books at the same price would in many cases be more helpful.
None.
