Putting the Public Back in Public Education

Yes, it is time for a positive approach to educational reform. First on the agenda, however, is for everyone involved to acknowledge their own role in the current educational state of affairs.

I am a teacher in a Title I school. Our population is primarily poor, African American and Hispanic children. All of the teachers at our school know that most of our students are struggling academically, economically, and often emotionally. Nevertheless, you don't know how many times I have passed by classrooms where teachers are talking on the cell phones, or just having students cleaning the classroom.
Have they forgotten that these children rely on them (whether they know it now or not) to provide them with an education that will allow them to get out of some of the situations--ranging from mediocre to bad--many of our children are in? So why are they short changing their students?

I hear teachers complaining regularly about 'all the paperwork', too much assessment, and about sticking to the union contract. I can't help but wonder: Whatever happened to having integrity and being part of something, something bigger than ourselves? How can a teacher sit and talk on a cell phone during a child's instructional time? If these were adults that could speak up for themselves, a teacher would be called out for that behavior and would probably change it because he/she would know that they'd get called out by students again if they pulled the same stunt. So, is it okay to take advantage of little kids because they are little kids who often times don't have parents that advocate for their educational well-being?

Do administrators play a part in making teachers feel overworked and often demoralized, leading to some of the behavior exhibited by teachers working in poor schools? Yes. However, teachers need to start seeing that they are not victims, they have power, even with a small "p", within their own classrooms to get their children t

Yes, it is time for a positive approach to educational reform. First on the agenda, however, is for everyone involved to acknowledge their own role in the current educational state of affairs.

I am a teacher in a Title I school. Our population is primarily poor, African American and Hispanic children. All of the teachers at our school know that most of our students are struggling academically, economically, and often emotionally. Nevertheless, you don't know how many times I have passed by classrooms where teachers are talking on the cell phones, or just having students cleaning the classroom.
Have they forgotten that these children rely on them (whether they know it now or not) to provide them with an education that will allow them to get out of some of the situations--ranging from mediocre to bad--many of our children are in? So why are they short changing their students?

I hear teachers complaining regularly about 'all the paperwork', too much assessment, and about sticking to the union contract. I can't help but wonder: Whatever happened to having integrity and being part of something, something bigger than ourselves? How can a teacher sit and talk on a cell phone during a child's instructional time? If these were adults that could speak up for themselves, a teacher would be called out for that behavior and would probably change it because he/she would know that they'd get called out by students again if they pulled the same stunt. So, is it okay to take advantage of little kids because they are little kids who often times don't have parents that advocate for their educational well-being?

Do administrators play a part in making teachers feel overworked and often demoralized, leading to some of the behavior exhibited by teachers working in poor schools? Yes. However, teachers need to start seeing that they are not victims, they have power, even with a small "p", within their own classrooms to get their children t

I have sent this letter to all my senators and representatives, and to president-elect Obama; no response! Here's my opinion of where we need to take education:

I am writing to inform you about a situation of dire straits here on the rural Oregon coast. We are in a crisis stage in the Nestucca district, which endangers our very existence. I teach in a high-poverty area; schools operate on a bare-bones budget unstably funded, in run-down, mold-infested buildings that should have long ago been abandoned. We are continuously attempting to mend our broken economic troubles by cutting staff back to numbers that make it impossible to serve our students; we are asked to do the unattainable to meet test standards set by folks who have obviously never set foot in a classroom. Yet, I have an idea that I believe can serve as a success story in the transformation of education and help alleviate rural poverty while promoting renewable energy. Despite our predicament, we do have some incredibly promising resources that could very well help to solve the myriad problems facing us; our district owns 20 acres of prime farm land, which receives plenty of rain, wind, and, just three miles inland off the coast in Cloverdale, we catch an abundance of sunshine too!. Here it is, my intention: to find a way, through grants and investors, and a few savvy politicians, to establish a true “Green School,” a “No Waste,” school, as an expansion of my 30 raised bed organic garden that I see as merely the beginning. I need you to help me pursue this vision into reality.

Imagine a school operating on 100 % renewable green energy generated on school property using wind turbines, solar panels and rain catchers; a well organized charter school that teaches the kids, with hands-on learning, the green technology needed for the future success of our continued existence. We would maintain a large agricultural production on site, coupled with small animals to provide eggs, meat, and dairy produc

[Sorry, the latter part of my previous comment got cut off]

Yes, symbol manipulation is important, but being an accomplished member of a cohesive group is a fundamental prerequsite to being able to skillfully apply symbol manipulation behaviors to good effect within a particular social context. What is elmentary in elementary education is the social structure in which the children are embedded. What kind of social skills are we developing in children when they are embedded in a behavioral dictatorship?

The existing alternative education culture that is marginalized in what passes for debate on educational issues is the democratic education movement. Democratic schools embed children in behavioral democracies. Children learn what it means to be a member of a community in which everyone has the right to have their grievences heard and to have the grief they cause others to be addressed directly by the judgment of their community. And it turns out that this kind of democratic system implicitly turns literacy into a practical social advantage that all the children eventually learn. There are hundereds of democratic schools around the world that put attitude before academics and consistently facilitate their graduates transition to becoming good, contributing citizens beyond their school.
--
Enjoy,

Don Berg

Site: www.Teach-Kids-Attitude-1st.com
Blog: blog.Attitutor.com

Here's an independent idea that points to an existing but currently marginalized alternative educational culture.

I propose that the primary element in elementary education should not be academics. Current practice in almost all schools and certainly in the minds of those who conceive of education as a quantifiable commodity that is effectively accounted for on tests is that mastery of symbol manipulation behaviors (a.k.a. academics or the 3R's) is the paramount concern of elementary schools.

Howard Gardner in his 1995 book The Unschooled Mind describes how symbol manipulation behavior came into prominence, "Once the importance of symbols had been recognized within the academy, researchers concerned with human development reached a consensus that this period of development [the early childhood/elementary school years] is best termed a time of 'symbolic mastery.' Such otherwise disparate scholars as Jean Piaget, Heinz Werner, Alexander Luria, and Jerome Bruner would all concur with this characterization. Indeed, so great is the consensus that one wonders whether possibly everyone may inexplicably have overlooked some competing issue-- one as manifest as the prose that was missed by Monsieur Jourdain [a character in Moliere's play Le bourgeois gentilhomme who was shocked to discover that he had all his life been unknowingly speaking in prose.]"

Gardner is, in fact, correct in his speculation that everyone (including himself) has inexplicably overlooked a fundamental issue. That issue is commonly known as attitude, or more technically known by the rubrics of social/emotional/interpersonal/intrapersonal intelligences.

The premature consensus on the primacy of symbol manipulation behaviors overlooks the evolutionary and developmental primacy of our species hundreds of thousands of years of social group development over the the past fifteen thousand years in which symbol manipulation behaviors have developed. Yes, symbol manip

Chris-

As I understand it the increased spending tactic does not have a good record, there are state systems spending a lot with little to show for it and state systems spending little with a lot to show for it. Can you point to some evidence that spending has actually made a difference?

It may be true that more money is called for, but in order for the argument to be valid you have to specify exactly where the spending needs to happen. I have no reason to believe that inflating the ranks of administrators is a good investment. Are you going to pay all teachers more, and if not, what criteria are you going to use to increase the pay of some and not the others? Are you going to use the No Child Left Behind tactic of high stakes testing results?
--
Enjoy,

Don Berg

Site: www.Teach-Kids-Attitude-1st.com
Blog: blog.Attitutor.com

The ‘About Us’ page says that the Utne Reader is all about “independent ideas and alternative culture” and “forward thinking”, yet somehow Lobel argues that we should do exactly what we’ve always done, only more so. She even harkens back to a mythical age, and makes her appeal to tradition: “Citizens need to rededicate themselves to the promise of public education, a tradition founded on the ideals of educating every child, unifying a country that’s been diverse since its inception, and instilling the civic-mindedness required of citizens in a healthy democracy“ – this sounds inspiring, unless one is at all familiar with the history of compulsory education is this country and elsewhere. In any case, ‘forward-looking’ this is not.

One bit of subtly faulty logic calls for particular note, since it is so often repeated in discussions of education: “A 2007 study by the Center on Education Policy found that, after controlling for background factors like student achievement before high school, a family’s socioeconomic status, and parental involvement, public school students performed just as well on achievement tests as private school students did, and made it into college at similar rates.” Adjust for all those variables, and what is revealed is that school doesn’t matter at all! Public, private, home, un-: if the kid comes from a strong, stable, high-achieving family, chances are very good that she’ll do well no matter how she spends her K-12 years! Conversely, chances are very good that a kid from a broken, poor, chaotic ‘family’ is doomed to end up in pretty much the same socio-economic place she came from. The truth is something the people who pay for these studies don’t want you to conclude: School is neither the source nor the answer to ancient, persistent social problems. Those problems merely provide a convenient pretext for grabbing power.

Fundamentally, Lobel misses a key point: It is not the failures of public education that motivate millions across

The author's underlying premise seems to be that public schools can and should do traditional education better, without questioning the value of traditional education or its alternatives. The truth is that many kids leave public schools because they are not good places for them and school districts have no incentive to branch out into other ways of looking at how kids learn. I tried being a good citizen, while my son became depressed and sick and I made no progress with his teacher or principal, so I chose being a good mother and had to leave the other citizens to improve things without me. I don't feel guilty about it.

What do I know about improving pubic education? I've only been a public school teacher for 34 years.

I do know this, though. Those who say that you can't improve things by throwing money at it are dead wrong.

As I see it, making the funding of public education would, off the top of my head, accomplish two things.

It would enable governmental entities to pay teachers a top salary. This would attract the brightest people to the profession and rejuvenate the ranks of teachers, many of whom are nearing retirement age, with young people who will instill the love of learning in our children.

More importantly, on so many levels it would provide tangible proof, to society as a whole and to children specifically, that education is valued and is the means to a productive, fulfilled, and rewarded life.

That's the way it seemed to me when I attended public grammar schools in the 50's and 60's, when we were full of hope for the future.