This rather idealistic article informs us that in addition to all the well-documented disadvantages that commonly plague urban schools, the most harmful factor overall may be society's pessimistic attitude towards them.
Contrary to public opinion, its authors point out that urban schools have a lot to offer and can even become ideal models or paragons of education that can benefit the rest of the population. To support this claim, the article cites how cities are influential forces that bring together "vital aspects of social, cultural, aesthetic, political and economic activity". Furthermore they make the claim that the diversity of race, ethnicity, langugages anc cultures found in urban settings provides learning opportunities that may not be present in suburban or rural schools. To this end, the authors (ie: Senior Fellows) believe that the purpose of schools in a democratic society should be to prepare students to play an active role in public life.
The article then goes on to examine urban schools and their relationship with society through the concepts of agency, equity, instruction, and outcome with an emphasis on urban conditions and context.
It seems to me that the bottom line of this study is the question of how these schools (and their students) can succeed when society itself sets up an expectation of failure. On a personal one-on-one level we have all seen the difference a little postitive encouragment can have on an individual and how people themselves only tend to live up to high or low expectations that others have of them. While inbalances of income, resources and skilled teachers are very real, it is perhaps this self-fulfilling prophecy of failure held by many educators, society at large, and even the students themselves that is the hardest to cure.
The authors rightfully suggest that parents and teachers alike must become "agents of change" by acting as advocates for children in urban schools helping to dispel some of these damaging myths.
Changing a long-held opinion throughout society cannot happen overnight. However until there is genuine public belief and support of these schools, it will be difficult for these students to have belief in themselves and what they can accomplish in a (perhaps not so) democratic society.
Sunday, October 21, 2007
Sunday, October 14, 2007
Putting Our Mouth Where Our Money Is: A Response To Parker
In reading, Walter C. Parker’s essay, "Teaching Against Idiocy", I was forced to think more deeply about both the meaning of the word “citizen” and the role our schools play in fostering the development of one.
In explaining the arresting title of his piece, we learn that “idiocy” in this context, doesn’t define a “moron”, but rather one who is ignorant about the public world outside of themselves -- a phenomenon that exists perhaps more today than ever before, in spite of the plethora of resources that make up the Information Age. Perhaps it may even be a side effect of the Information Age, that allows us to be so informed and yet so insular, as if everything we see and hear in the media is a virtual game whose outcome doesn’t really have all that much to do with us.
Nevertheless, as Parker suggests, I agree that school seems a natural place to teach young people about their role as citizens in a democratic society, because it is essentially a mini-society, the first one to which children belong and learn to cooperate with others of diverse cultural backgrounds.
But treating each other fairly, and celebrating diversity are only part of the picture. Of equal importance, is the message that it is not enough to learn a trade, make a living, and pay our taxes. Each one of us has a moral and civic obligation to play an active role in our legislative and judicial processes, both on a local and national level. This sometimes includes the need to become politically/socially active by standing up for the things we feel need addressing.
This point of view is best reflected by the words of Daniel Kemmis, former mayor of Missoula, Montana in The Good City and the Good Life;
"People who customarily refer to themselves as taxpayers, are not even remotely related to democratic citizens. Yet, this is precisely the word that now regularly holds the place, which in a true democracy would be occupied by “citizens”…"
Mr. Kemmis goes on to comment that while people continue to pay taxes and expect services in return, what they fail to do is govern, or even make an attempt to feign an interest in the workings of government.
This statement resonated with me on a personal level as my only working experience with government took place as a resident in a large, self-governed condominium complex. Here I saw first-hand, that while people paid a considerable monthly dues to live there, for the most part they failed to attend any open Board meetings or volunteer their services to the Board. Yet when a meeting concerned the raising of the monthly dues, you can be assured that all the individuals previously missing in action, could be found complaining about the Board’s decisions. Point here – if you want to have any effect on the outcome, you have to be part of the process.
I relate the above to illustrate that just because people are “anteing up”, it doesn’t mean they are necessarily fulfilling their role as citizens. The strange dichotomy is that while on one hand taxpayers feel the have certain ‘inalienable” rights, on the other hand they are loathe to get involved or put in their political “two-cents” -- at least until an issue affects their wallets. Perhaps the majority of us need to learn to “put our mouths where our money is”, so to speak.
So what can schools do about all this?
I think Parker, while fairly idealistic gives us many practical suggestions for encouraging discussion and dialogue of democratic ideals both socially and across the curricula, but I suggest taking it a step further by turning ideals into action. Action projects could involve having students write their political representatives about an issue that’s important to them, or participate in a field trip to town hall to learn about how local politics work. Students can also hold mock trials and political debates based on either current events or issues at school. Learning about the electoral process and stressing the importance of voting, and not just every four years, is also key for encouraging citizen participation.
The bottom line is, that the possibilities for applying democratic ideals to real-life situations are endless, and for the creative teacher who is willing to go beyond mere dialogue, the opportunity to help mold an engaged citizenry of the future is both exciting and challenging and well worth the effort.
In explaining the arresting title of his piece, we learn that “idiocy” in this context, doesn’t define a “moron”, but rather one who is ignorant about the public world outside of themselves -- a phenomenon that exists perhaps more today than ever before, in spite of the plethora of resources that make up the Information Age. Perhaps it may even be a side effect of the Information Age, that allows us to be so informed and yet so insular, as if everything we see and hear in the media is a virtual game whose outcome doesn’t really have all that much to do with us.
Nevertheless, as Parker suggests, I agree that school seems a natural place to teach young people about their role as citizens in a democratic society, because it is essentially a mini-society, the first one to which children belong and learn to cooperate with others of diverse cultural backgrounds.
But treating each other fairly, and celebrating diversity are only part of the picture. Of equal importance, is the message that it is not enough to learn a trade, make a living, and pay our taxes. Each one of us has a moral and civic obligation to play an active role in our legislative and judicial processes, both on a local and national level. This sometimes includes the need to become politically/socially active by standing up for the things we feel need addressing.
This point of view is best reflected by the words of Daniel Kemmis, former mayor of Missoula, Montana in The Good City and the Good Life;
"People who customarily refer to themselves as taxpayers, are not even remotely related to democratic citizens. Yet, this is precisely the word that now regularly holds the place, which in a true democracy would be occupied by “citizens”…"
Mr. Kemmis goes on to comment that while people continue to pay taxes and expect services in return, what they fail to do is govern, or even make an attempt to feign an interest in the workings of government.
This statement resonated with me on a personal level as my only working experience with government took place as a resident in a large, self-governed condominium complex. Here I saw first-hand, that while people paid a considerable monthly dues to live there, for the most part they failed to attend any open Board meetings or volunteer their services to the Board. Yet when a meeting concerned the raising of the monthly dues, you can be assured that all the individuals previously missing in action, could be found complaining about the Board’s decisions. Point here – if you want to have any effect on the outcome, you have to be part of the process.
I relate the above to illustrate that just because people are “anteing up”, it doesn’t mean they are necessarily fulfilling their role as citizens. The strange dichotomy is that while on one hand taxpayers feel the have certain ‘inalienable” rights, on the other hand they are loathe to get involved or put in their political “two-cents” -- at least until an issue affects their wallets. Perhaps the majority of us need to learn to “put our mouths where our money is”, so to speak.
So what can schools do about all this?
I think Parker, while fairly idealistic gives us many practical suggestions for encouraging discussion and dialogue of democratic ideals both socially and across the curricula, but I suggest taking it a step further by turning ideals into action. Action projects could involve having students write their political representatives about an issue that’s important to them, or participate in a field trip to town hall to learn about how local politics work. Students can also hold mock trials and political debates based on either current events or issues at school. Learning about the electoral process and stressing the importance of voting, and not just every four years, is also key for encouraging citizen participation.
The bottom line is, that the possibilities for applying democratic ideals to real-life situations are endless, and for the creative teacher who is willing to go beyond mere dialogue, the opportunity to help mold an engaged citizenry of the future is both exciting and challenging and well worth the effort.
Friday, October 5, 2007
What's Faith Got To Do With It?
Here is a Haiku I composed inspired by our class discussion last week about religion and morality --
What does it matter --
Call It Allah...Buddha...Christ
We're all flesh and bone.
This Haiku reflects my belief that no matter what we each believe about the great "cosmic custodian", that we are all united in our common humanity and that we share the same wants, suffering, needs and yes, morality.
In addition, anyone who has studied the great world religions will come to the conclusion, that despite different names, customs and practices, that they are all more similar in their basic teachings than they are different. This makes it hard for me to understand why so many wars and killings occur in the name of religion, or why one group seems to feel that everyone should belong to the same group that they do.
Regarding religion and education, I wholeheartedly agree with the principle of "separation of church and state and school", not because I am anti-religious, but because I feel that references to God, Christmas, etc. leave out certain individuals who do not belong to those groups, especially in light of all the different immigrant groups that make up our public schools today. For example, if we don't celebrate Ramadan in public schools, why should we make Christmas or Hanukah decorations? (My daughter, the only Jewish child in her Kindergarten class many years ago, was told by a well-meaning teacher that she didn't have to make the Santa or the Christmas stocking, which of course, she-- like the other kids--wanted to make. My questions is, why do we have to go there at all?)
Certainly we can advocate moral values such as kindness, courtesy, respect etc., without invoking the name of the Almighty in our schools. I don't quite understand why there is so much controversy about this and I am open to respectfully hearing others opinions on this subject.
By the way, if you would like to know more about Ethical Culture, also known as "secular Humanism", you can check out www.ethicalfocus.org which is the site of the Bergen County Chapter. There is also a chapter in Essex County as well. Anyone can join or participate regardless of race, religion or beliefs about God. All you have to care about is being an ethical human being.
Thanks for listening!
What does it matter --
Call It Allah...Buddha...Christ
We're all flesh and bone.
This Haiku reflects my belief that no matter what we each believe about the great "cosmic custodian", that we are all united in our common humanity and that we share the same wants, suffering, needs and yes, morality.
In addition, anyone who has studied the great world religions will come to the conclusion, that despite different names, customs and practices, that they are all more similar in their basic teachings than they are different. This makes it hard for me to understand why so many wars and killings occur in the name of religion, or why one group seems to feel that everyone should belong to the same group that they do.
Regarding religion and education, I wholeheartedly agree with the principle of "separation of church and state and school", not because I am anti-religious, but because I feel that references to God, Christmas, etc. leave out certain individuals who do not belong to those groups, especially in light of all the different immigrant groups that make up our public schools today. For example, if we don't celebrate Ramadan in public schools, why should we make Christmas or Hanukah decorations? (My daughter, the only Jewish child in her Kindergarten class many years ago, was told by a well-meaning teacher that she didn't have to make the Santa or the Christmas stocking, which of course, she-- like the other kids--wanted to make. My questions is, why do we have to go there at all?)
Certainly we can advocate moral values such as kindness, courtesy, respect etc., without invoking the name of the Almighty in our schools. I don't quite understand why there is so much controversy about this and I am open to respectfully hearing others opinions on this subject.
By the way, if you would like to know more about Ethical Culture, also known as "secular Humanism", you can check out www.ethicalfocus.org which is the site of the Bergen County Chapter. There is also a chapter in Essex County as well. Anyone can join or participate regardless of race, religion or beliefs about God. All you have to care about is being an ethical human being.
Thanks for listening!
Martian Posting (Group Assignment)
What are schools like and how did they get that way?
Schools are divided into districts and each district has their own standards and rules for how the school is run. Students must attend school a certain number of years and days per year. They are required to fill certain criteria of what they need to study and the number of years they are required to study each subject. This criteria is set by the federal government and state districts. There are different types of schools including public, private and charter schools. The majority or 88% of the students attend public schools which are free of charge to attend as opposed to the 12% of students who attend private schools that require tuition. The majority of the funding for the public schools is provided by local and state taxes. The schools offer a variety of supplemental services such as lunch programs, health programs, and social services. These services provided are to help children function in the community and society.
Who are the students?
The students are made up of all demographics throughout the country from the highest to the lowest income ratios. The students are made up of all different races and backgrounds. They consist of not only American children whose first language is English but also 19% are immigrants and 10% are English language learners.
Who are the teachers?
The majority are experienced and have advanced degrees in there subject areas. This is to ensure a great understanding in their specific area so the student has the greatest possible understanding of the information provided. This is not the case in all demographic areas in high poverty areas teachers are not always highly qualified in their subject area. Most teachers seem to be young white females. Reasons for this might be that the mind set of American citizens is to make more money, considering the low pay of most teachers may be the reason for this statistic. The high rate of teachers changing and leaving the profession is a question of how the education system is run.
Schools are divided into districts and each district has their own standards and rules for how the school is run. Students must attend school a certain number of years and days per year. They are required to fill certain criteria of what they need to study and the number of years they are required to study each subject. This criteria is set by the federal government and state districts. There are different types of schools including public, private and charter schools. The majority or 88% of the students attend public schools which are free of charge to attend as opposed to the 12% of students who attend private schools that require tuition. The majority of the funding for the public schools is provided by local and state taxes. The schools offer a variety of supplemental services such as lunch programs, health programs, and social services. These services provided are to help children function in the community and society.
Who are the students?
The students are made up of all demographics throughout the country from the highest to the lowest income ratios. The students are made up of all different races and backgrounds. They consist of not only American children whose first language is English but also 19% are immigrants and 10% are English language learners.
Who are the teachers?
The majority are experienced and have advanced degrees in there subject areas. This is to ensure a great understanding in their specific area so the student has the greatest possible understanding of the information provided. This is not the case in all demographic areas in high poverty areas teachers are not always highly qualified in their subject area. Most teachers seem to be young white females. Reasons for this might be that the mind set of American citizens is to make more money, considering the low pay of most teachers may be the reason for this statistic. The high rate of teachers changing and leaving the profession is a question of how the education system is run.
Monday, October 1, 2007
Schools vs. Fools For Citizens: Tyak Article
The Tyak reading was interesting because it raises some important questions that are just as relevent now as they were to our founding Fathers.
On the very first page of this reading we are told that American society was "socially diverse, scattered across a continent, politically contentious, religiously splintered, and averse to government." No big difference there.
We also learn that all forms of education have a hidden (or not so hidden) agenda that may have political, moral or religious teachings at its core, and that public education's early founders were "apt to assume that people like themselves were exemplars of worthy citizenship (page 11)."
Although our forefathers may have been blindsighted in their views, considering the historial context, it made sense for a new nation to be concerned about the civic education of its citizens, and the establishment of public education, with all its flaws was a great legacy that cannot be denied.
So in our class, "Public Purposes of Education", it can be said that the first purpose of American public education was to teach civic duty and responsibility. According to Tyak, sub-purposes of a republican education were to stabalize society (ie: law and order) and to preserve freedom.
On page 12, Tyak makes what I think is a critical point, and that is that education today may have shifted in purpose to one of "economic survivalism". In plain speak this means that schools today must prepare students to make a living and survive in what has become an increasingly competitive "dog-eat-dog" global world -- hence another item to put on the list of "public purposes of education".
In spite of their zeal in perpetuating their agenda, these forefathers being the intelligent men that they were, realized the many shortcomings in a single approach to educating people from so many diverse cultures, and therefore took measures to prevent controversy and to ensure that students became as ethnically cleansed as possible.
By contrast, today's educators place much emphasis on teaching "cultural diversity". So the question is, is there a standard for teaching curriculum that every American citizen should know, that is free of cultural bias while preserving the individual's identity at the same time?
I think the answer is yes and no.
On another classmate's posting, there was a reference to those African-Americans who feel that the public school system is just trying to make them "white" and look with distain to others of their race who are trying to "fit in" by achieving. (And yes, I agree with this classmate, that this attitude is not held by every member of this group). Yet, I do not see what is "white" about achieving good grades, and learning what you need to know to be an informed and contributing citizen.
While hip-hop music, for example, may be cool and may even be considered to be an art form by some, it does not (in my opinion), espouse anything that will help its listeners to get ahead and succeed in the world. Therefore, to some degree, I think we have to stop worrying about being politically correct all the time, (you can't please all of the people all of the time) and agree on the basic values that are common to all humanity-- those that as John Swett astutely identified in 1855 - self-knowledge, self-restraint, honesty, impartiality, patience, courtesy, etc. - have not really changed.
What needs to adapt itself to changing times however, is content knowledge making sure that what is being taught academically is preparing students for the challenging times ahead. Global-warming, its causes and solution, for example is something that previously was not found in textbooks.
So is there room for cultural diversity in the classroom? Yes, I think our cultures can be expressed in our artwork, the foods we eat, the music we listen to, the clothes we wear and in a thousand other myriad ways. But in the end, we are ALL global citizens with much to learn together and from each other both in and out of the classroom.
On the very first page of this reading we are told that American society was "socially diverse, scattered across a continent, politically contentious, religiously splintered, and averse to government." No big difference there.
We also learn that all forms of education have a hidden (or not so hidden) agenda that may have political, moral or religious teachings at its core, and that public education's early founders were "apt to assume that people like themselves were exemplars of worthy citizenship (page 11)."
Although our forefathers may have been blindsighted in their views, considering the historial context, it made sense for a new nation to be concerned about the civic education of its citizens, and the establishment of public education, with all its flaws was a great legacy that cannot be denied.
So in our class, "Public Purposes of Education", it can be said that the first purpose of American public education was to teach civic duty and responsibility. According to Tyak, sub-purposes of a republican education were to stabalize society (ie: law and order) and to preserve freedom.
On page 12, Tyak makes what I think is a critical point, and that is that education today may have shifted in purpose to one of "economic survivalism". In plain speak this means that schools today must prepare students to make a living and survive in what has become an increasingly competitive "dog-eat-dog" global world -- hence another item to put on the list of "public purposes of education".
In spite of their zeal in perpetuating their agenda, these forefathers being the intelligent men that they were, realized the many shortcomings in a single approach to educating people from so many diverse cultures, and therefore took measures to prevent controversy and to ensure that students became as ethnically cleansed as possible.
By contrast, today's educators place much emphasis on teaching "cultural diversity". So the question is, is there a standard for teaching curriculum that every American citizen should know, that is free of cultural bias while preserving the individual's identity at the same time?
I think the answer is yes and no.
On another classmate's posting, there was a reference to those African-Americans who feel that the public school system is just trying to make them "white" and look with distain to others of their race who are trying to "fit in" by achieving. (And yes, I agree with this classmate, that this attitude is not held by every member of this group). Yet, I do not see what is "white" about achieving good grades, and learning what you need to know to be an informed and contributing citizen.
While hip-hop music, for example, may be cool and may even be considered to be an art form by some, it does not (in my opinion), espouse anything that will help its listeners to get ahead and succeed in the world. Therefore, to some degree, I think we have to stop worrying about being politically correct all the time, (you can't please all of the people all of the time) and agree on the basic values that are common to all humanity-- those that as John Swett astutely identified in 1855 - self-knowledge, self-restraint, honesty, impartiality, patience, courtesy, etc. - have not really changed.
What needs to adapt itself to changing times however, is content knowledge making sure that what is being taught academically is preparing students for the challenging times ahead. Global-warming, its causes and solution, for example is something that previously was not found in textbooks.
So is there room for cultural diversity in the classroom? Yes, I think our cultures can be expressed in our artwork, the foods we eat, the music we listen to, the clothes we wear and in a thousand other myriad ways. But in the end, we are ALL global citizens with much to learn together and from each other both in and out of the classroom.
Saturday, September 22, 2007
Hodgkinson On Demographics
How fascinating! Harold Hodgkinson's article on shifting demographics (Educational Demographics: What Teachers Should Know) and the challenges they pose for today's educators was truly illuminating to me, (although I'm sure that for many who are currently immersed in the public education system, it serves to confirm what they already finding out).
This article was infinetly more intersting than our reading from last week because it goes beyond mere statistics to provide a meaningful look at America's changing student population and their needs, and offers what I feel are some valuable suggestions for teachers as well. To some extent this article even goes beyond the subject of education, giving us an extended view of how America itself is an ever-changing global entity, and therefore, one that is increasingly difficult to define.
It was particularly interesting to find "transiency" mentioned as a major obstacle to educators today. This is something I never thought about, but makes total sense. Just anecdotelly, my daughter briefly had a friend in elementary school whose family was always relocating. (This seemed to be not for job reasons, but more about an unstable family situation, but that is a totally separate issue). At any rate, this was one obviously very bright girl, who also happened to be very precocious and popular, but she seemed to be getting in trouble a lot and failing in school (6th grade) because she refused to study or do homework. My daughter and other kids, spent a lot of time urging this girl to do her work because they didn't want to see her get left back again (she was a bit older than them), but she just didn't care, claiming that "what was the point of bothering, her family was just going to move again", and you guessed it -- within a year, her mother had gotten divorced again, and they were history.
The point here, is that regardless of race, socio-economic status or any other factor, no child can succeed in school if they are constantly being moved around for whatever reasons, and according to this article there is a real lot of this. Therefore it is a revealing , though reasonable correlation that "states with the lowest rates of high school graduation and college admisssions are the five most transient states in the U.S."
Equally interesting was the study's discussion of race and how it is becoming less and less important in providing clues to what is going on in our schools. The other makes an argument that this is due in part to the "blurring" of racial lines -- more mixed marriages, people falling into more than one category, yada...yada. (I was shocked by my own ignorance to realize that the term "Hispanic" does not define a race -- I even looked it up in Websters! After a lifetime of seeing it as a race box to check off on forms, I suspect that many others share this ignorance as well. Yet think about it -- it is no more of a race than "Jewish" -- a religion or cultural background, is.) But the key point here is that what affects performance globally in school is not race but POVERTY. This is one thing that unfortunately affects kids of all races and from all countries.
So where does race fit in? Well according to the author, it is not so much race, but culture and cultural-climate that teachers need to be sensitive to and Hodgkinson provides several interesting examples of cultural differences to be aware of and possible ways to respond to them. all of which make great sense to me.
Lastly, the article addresses our aging population and raises questions about the baby boomer generation (over 70 million!) and whether or not they will maintain their interest in supporting public education once their own children have left the school system. With rising costs of health care, medications and the like, along with shrinking Social Security benefits, it is not surprising, nor hard to understand that many seniors who value education, would elect to opt out of paying school taxes if allowed. However the "side effect" of this demographic is critical and could be life-threatening to the future of schools. Therefore in the same way, that public consciousness is being raised about global warming to ensure the health of the planet for future generations, the public needs to be educated about the debt owed to future generations by ensuring the health of our public school system.
In conclusion, this article is not only essential reading for future teachers, but helps to illustrate that demographic studies can be interpreted in many ways and that statistics are more than a collection of numbers--they are indicators of an intricately linked series of cause and effect phenomenon that have implications way beyond the obvious. For those willing to navigate them, they can provide valuable clues that can help make the journey a smoother one.
This article was infinetly more intersting than our reading from last week because it goes beyond mere statistics to provide a meaningful look at America's changing student population and their needs, and offers what I feel are some valuable suggestions for teachers as well. To some extent this article even goes beyond the subject of education, giving us an extended view of how America itself is an ever-changing global entity, and therefore, one that is increasingly difficult to define.
It was particularly interesting to find "transiency" mentioned as a major obstacle to educators today. This is something I never thought about, but makes total sense. Just anecdotelly, my daughter briefly had a friend in elementary school whose family was always relocating. (This seemed to be not for job reasons, but more about an unstable family situation, but that is a totally separate issue). At any rate, this was one obviously very bright girl, who also happened to be very precocious and popular, but she seemed to be getting in trouble a lot and failing in school (6th grade) because she refused to study or do homework. My daughter and other kids, spent a lot of time urging this girl to do her work because they didn't want to see her get left back again (she was a bit older than them), but she just didn't care, claiming that "what was the point of bothering, her family was just going to move again", and you guessed it -- within a year, her mother had gotten divorced again, and they were history.
The point here, is that regardless of race, socio-economic status or any other factor, no child can succeed in school if they are constantly being moved around for whatever reasons, and according to this article there is a real lot of this. Therefore it is a revealing , though reasonable correlation that "states with the lowest rates of high school graduation and college admisssions are the five most transient states in the U.S."
Equally interesting was the study's discussion of race and how it is becoming less and less important in providing clues to what is going on in our schools. The other makes an argument that this is due in part to the "blurring" of racial lines -- more mixed marriages, people falling into more than one category, yada...yada. (I was shocked by my own ignorance to realize that the term "Hispanic" does not define a race -- I even looked it up in Websters! After a lifetime of seeing it as a race box to check off on forms, I suspect that many others share this ignorance as well. Yet think about it -- it is no more of a race than "Jewish" -- a religion or cultural background, is.) But the key point here is that what affects performance globally in school is not race but POVERTY. This is one thing that unfortunately affects kids of all races and from all countries.
So where does race fit in? Well according to the author, it is not so much race, but culture and cultural-climate that teachers need to be sensitive to and Hodgkinson provides several interesting examples of cultural differences to be aware of and possible ways to respond to them. all of which make great sense to me.
Lastly, the article addresses our aging population and raises questions about the baby boomer generation (over 70 million!) and whether or not they will maintain their interest in supporting public education once their own children have left the school system. With rising costs of health care, medications and the like, along with shrinking Social Security benefits, it is not surprising, nor hard to understand that many seniors who value education, would elect to opt out of paying school taxes if allowed. However the "side effect" of this demographic is critical and could be life-threatening to the future of schools. Therefore in the same way, that public consciousness is being raised about global warming to ensure the health of the planet for future generations, the public needs to be educated about the debt owed to future generations by ensuring the health of our public school system.
In conclusion, this article is not only essential reading for future teachers, but helps to illustrate that demographic studies can be interpreted in many ways and that statistics are more than a collection of numbers--they are indicators of an intricately linked series of cause and effect phenomenon that have implications way beyond the obvious. For those willing to navigate them, they can provide valuable clues that can help make the journey a smoother one.
Friday, September 14, 2007
A Public Education Primer
Although these statistics held few surprises, they were very useful in presenting an overall picture of the state of public education, who controls the purse-strings and where the biases lie.
A few things that I didn't know ---
* over 90% of funding for public education comes from state and local sources
(We don't have to strain our brains to guess where all that federal money IS going....)
*Less than 5% of our Gross Domestic Product is devoted to public education
(Definitely not something to brag about if you ask me!)
*That over 46% of teachers drop out, burn out or switch careers in the first five years! (Low pay? Tough students? Weak teachers? The study doesn't give the reasons for this phenomenon, but I would be interested to see any more detailed studies on "teacher burnout"). Although definitely not a good thing, this does mean that there will be additional employment opportunities for those entering the profession to fill the gap.
The most mind-boggling tidbit --
* Did you know that Camden, New Jersey spends more money per student than any other district in the state? Unless this is an error, the explanation may lie in the footnote that claims that the this may be due to the greatest number of low-income students enrolled resulting in the most federal assistance being given out.( I haven't visited any public schools in Camden, but I wonder if it would be apparent where all this extra money is going). The district with the lowest expenditure per student is Brick Township, NJ.
Of the most personal interest --
Were the statistics about immigration and the direction it is taking.
(Did you know that 1 in 10 public school students is an English language learner, and that there has been a 65% increase in English language learners between 1993 and 2004?)
This is personally significant to be since when I decided to pursue a degree/certification in art education, others already in the teaching field, intimated to me that perhaps it is not the easiest area in which to find employment. Therefore, following a vague hunch, I decided early on that I would pursue an additional certification in TESL (teaching english as a second language) and these statistics seem to confirm the notion that that this is a hot (aka "in demand") area for future teachers. It is my hope that this additional certification will make me a "value added" prospect and provide more opportunity and flexibility for future employment.
Conclusions:
While opinions may vary about the reasons for deficits in our public education system, where the faults lie and on what course of future action should be taken, statistics paint a somewhat clearer picture of the current situation that new teachers are facing, and being forewarned can help one to be forearmed and prepared. Going into a new situation with "eyes wide open" ie: realistic expectations, may help to lessen the new teacher burnout rate that is apparently a huge problem in our schools today.
A few things that I didn't know ---
* over 90% of funding for public education comes from state and local sources
(We don't have to strain our brains to guess where all that federal money IS going....)
*Less than 5% of our Gross Domestic Product is devoted to public education
(Definitely not something to brag about if you ask me!)
*That over 46% of teachers drop out, burn out or switch careers in the first five years! (Low pay? Tough students? Weak teachers? The study doesn't give the reasons for this phenomenon, but I would be interested to see any more detailed studies on "teacher burnout"). Although definitely not a good thing, this does mean that there will be additional employment opportunities for those entering the profession to fill the gap.
The most mind-boggling tidbit --
* Did you know that Camden, New Jersey spends more money per student than any other district in the state? Unless this is an error, the explanation may lie in the footnote that claims that the this may be due to the greatest number of low-income students enrolled resulting in the most federal assistance being given out.( I haven't visited any public schools in Camden, but I wonder if it would be apparent where all this extra money is going). The district with the lowest expenditure per student is Brick Township, NJ.
Of the most personal interest --
Were the statistics about immigration and the direction it is taking.
(Did you know that 1 in 10 public school students is an English language learner, and that there has been a 65% increase in English language learners between 1993 and 2004?)
This is personally significant to be since when I decided to pursue a degree/certification in art education, others already in the teaching field, intimated to me that perhaps it is not the easiest area in which to find employment. Therefore, following a vague hunch, I decided early on that I would pursue an additional certification in TESL (teaching english as a second language) and these statistics seem to confirm the notion that that this is a hot (aka "in demand") area for future teachers. It is my hope that this additional certification will make me a "value added" prospect and provide more opportunity and flexibility for future employment.
Conclusions:
While opinions may vary about the reasons for deficits in our public education system, where the faults lie and on what course of future action should be taken, statistics paint a somewhat clearer picture of the current situation that new teachers are facing, and being forewarned can help one to be forearmed and prepared. Going into a new situation with "eyes wide open" ie: realistic expectations, may help to lessen the new teacher burnout rate that is apparently a huge problem in our schools today.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)