Spin-off of Quiver's Post on Education...

[Kate CA]

Let me preface what I am saying by sharing that I am 100% pro-homeschooling. It is what we will do until all the children graduate. We don't evaluate every year - it is part of our life. And we love it. :)

 

With that said, and believing as I do in what Tracy in KY said in Quiver's original post:

 

 

 

"Hmmm...based on what I have read about the history and purpose of public education, it isn't failing. It is, in fact, doing exactly what it was intended to do--namely, provide a population of labor for the industrial machine that is our society. The ideal labor force is one which is not highly educated, not independent thinkers, but in fact is trained to think as a mass in conformity, and think what the powers-that-be want them to think."

 

 

What would make the perfect school (if homeschool was not in the equation for some reason). We know that the schools were created for the great machine, but what if they weren't? What would they look like?

 

Curious in CA,

Kate

:)

[Mrs. H.]

If the parents money, time, etc. was tied up in a school their child attended, you could bet that it would either be a good school giving children an excellent education, or their kids would be going somewhere else.

 

Parental involvement is a big factor in the success/failure of schools, and the more parents are involved, the better the education, the better the behavior of both students and faculty, and the schools turn out much better children, who are closer to their families and feel a connection to the world at large, instead of feeling like outsiders.

[chiguirre]

I admire our local Montessori school. They do such a great job providing an individualized education to 20 kids in a room. It's not as good as hsing IMHO, but it's very good.

[mcconnellboys]

I think schools would be privitized and would specialize in various areas of education, in order to attract those students who need a hands-on approach to education; those who are math and/or science oriented (they don't always go hand in hand); those who want a classical or liberal arts sort of education; those who want an education that focuses heavily on the arts, or other special approaches to education. Parents could then select the school that's the best fit for their children. Class sizes would be small and class assistants would be prevelant. Parent/teacher interaction would be weekly. Parents would be intimately involved in the schools their children attended.

 

That's a start,

 

Regena

[Volty]

I think Tracy is too cynical. All people involved of every belief and at all levels want public schools to succeed to be world class. There's no conspiracy to keep the masses dumb and under control. Granted, priorities are different and things aren't working out so well, but it's not for a lack of good intentions.

[Audrey]

I think Tracy is too cynical. All people involved of every belief and at all levels want public schools to succeed to be world class. There's no conspiracy to keep the masses dumb and under control. Granted, priorities are different and things aren't working out so well, but it's not for a lack of good intentions.

 

Honestly, IMO, I don't think Tracy is cynical enough.

[Robin in Tx]

I missed the other thread, so perhaps I'm speaking out of turn by looking at that quote out of context from the rest of the conversation... but... where does Tracy get that idea to begin with?

 

I'm sorry, but I just don't believe that premise at all. A highly educated work force is very desirable, as the entire nation benefits most from our innovators and our entrepeneurs. Yes, our public schools educate the wager laborers but they also educate our future doctors and scientists and leaders in technology, as well as journalists and artists and architects. If public school education shouldn't be laying the groundwork for *all* these people to pursue their future work, then what should it be doing?

 

Not trying to start an argument, of course... I just don't understand why anyone would think our public schools have such dark, manipulative motives.

 

 

Robin

[Robin in Tx]

I should have read this one first and just said ditto. :)

 

 

Robin

[Kate CA]

I missed the other thread, so perhaps I'm speaking out of turn by looking at that quote out of context from the rest of the conversation... but... where does Tracy get that idea to begin with?

 

I'm sorry, but I just don't believe that premise at all. A highly educated work force is very desirable, as the entire nation benefits most from our innovators and our entrepeneurs. Yes, our public schools educate the wager laborers but they also educate our future doctors and scientists and leaders in technology, as well as journalists and artists and architects. If public school education shouldn't be laying the groundwork for *all* these people to pursue their future work, then what should it be doing?

 

Not trying to start an argument, of course... I just don't understand why anyone would think our public schools have such dark, manipulative motives.

 

 

Robin

 

I was not saying that the folks inside the schools, i.e. the teachers or principals do. I do think though, that in the beginning, if you look into the research of the founding goals for public schools you will find what Tracy is referring to. There is much information out there on the "whys" of it all, but that was not really what the post was about (though of course it is a part of it). Perhaps it would be good to read the original thread by Quiver to understand why she wrote that.

 

I was asking what would make a good school since it is already accepted by most in this country that our schools are not even remotely up to par. That is part of what Quiver's post was about.

 

HTH!

Kate

[Robin in Tx]

And the context is what I suspected... that she was saying that public schools today are not failing, they are succeeding because they are doing exactly what she claims they intend.

 

I still find myself in disagreement. I know that public eduation was instituted to produce a better work force (the state wouldn't get involved in an endeavor this huge unless it was in its best interest), but here's where I disagree:

 

..."The ideal labor force is one which is not highly educated, not independent thinkers, but in fact is trained to think as a mass in conformity, and think what the powers-that-be want them to think."

 

That is simply not true! The ideal labor force *is* well educated... *is* a "think outside the box" kind of innovator... at least in the USA it is.

 

This sounds like something Gotto would say, to be honest.

 

Robin

 

EDITED to add: I really am trying to think of an answer to your question, but the problem is in order to imagine what it would be like to NOT have those goals as the underpinnings of public education, one must first agree that those goals *are* the underpinnings. I think there are things that our schools can do better, but those things are about methodology, choice of content, etc.... I don't think the actual purpose of public education is the issue, because I don't agree that it is what was described in that quote. It's late... sorry I'm not being very clear :).

[WTMindy]

would be where *all* the students are engaged in and excited about learning. As a teacher I would never have to co-erce, bribe, force or make my students learn. They would learn just for the sake of learning and they would try even on the things they weren't particularly interested in because they could see the value of learning them. :D

 

Sorry, I fell asleep and started dreaming again! (Actually, my dd is pretty close to this, but God gave me my ds to keep me humble!)

[Volty]

Seems to me that the recipe for success in public schools is elusive. Everybody here has pretty much turned their back on it, sometimes to great hardship, rather than have their children go through it.

 

I would think a safe, clean, compfortable school environment. Teachers and faculty who are good at their job, knowledgable about their field and who care. A well rounded curriculum of challenging material. Focusing on knowledge and thinking skills, less on memorization. Good discipline, homework that is constructive.

 

I think it's easy to know the ends we want to reach, the means to get there can be a challenge. I know it eludes my local school district in the US and I'm certain that I can do better.

[Kate CA]

I think it's easy to know the ends we want to reach, the means to get there can be a challenge. I know it eludes my local school district in the US and I'm certain that I can do better.

 

And that is why many of us do what we do. I completely agree that it is sometimes easy to know the ends, but not know how to accomplish it.

 

I don't think the current government controlled course is the answer though - that is why I asked - what would be the alternative?

 

Warmly,

Kate

[CLHCO]

I missed the other thread, so perhaps I'm speaking out of turn by looking at that quote out of context from the rest of the conversation... but... where does Tracy get that idea to begin with?

 

I'm sorry, but I just don't believe that premise at all. A highly educated work force is very desirable, as the entire nation benefits most from our innovators and our entrepeneurs. Yes, our public schools educate the wager laborers but they also educate our future doctors and scientists and leaders in technology, as well as journalists and artists and architects. If public school education shouldn't be laying the groundwork for *all* these people to pursue their future work, then what should it be doing?

 

Not trying to start an argument, of course... I just don't understand why anyone would think our public schools have such dark, manipulative motives.

 

 

Robin

 

Please take this with a grain of salt as one who is just pondering the whole mess as well.

 

I think Tracy has read John Taylor Gatto and others of a similar mind. There is ample evidence of a deliberate design in the compulsory public schools to get kids off the farms and into the new economy started in the industrial revolution. The current system is a hodgepodge of various manipulations, not one specific "conspiracy" but it's a mess either way.

 

The thing we have to understand is that for every skilled lab technician there are a dozen or more people who simply say, "Thank you for shopping at Walmart". The schools do manage to squeak out a doctor or two, some districts far more than others in a way that hardly seems like a fair and equal chance for all, and usually it's enough to supply us with the doctors we'll need for the number of janitors, waitresses, paper files of all types and customer service representatives. In truth, someone has to clean the toilets and pick up the trash. It would not be good to have a society of smarty pants who are fully skilled and stuck flipping burgers. It's mindless work for most, not glamor. They are slaves to the companies and the toys they hope to buy with the job that company gives them. The schools had, indeed, been previously doing just what they needed for this society.

 

Something like that cannot be sustained though. It has gotten too big and doesn't have an agenda at all anymore other than to stay alive and provide lots of jobs itself. Education has declined when even that above vision was lost in the shuffle so we now are falling behind in our competitiveness in the world in some fields. I do think there are some that recognize this and hope the next bandage will fix that area we're falling behind on. But even if we solve that and get a middle of the road group a bit more trained than the average, we still need our candy bars stuffed into those little packages neatly to go off to 7-11. I don't like it but that's the consumer society we've created. There is no utopia and I suppose all types of societies have their issues with equality. Even on Star Trek they never explained how society managed to make everyone satisfied in their perfect job, including the person who puts together the Enterprise's toilets and plugs wires in. Life calling?;)

[Kate CA]

The ideal labor force *is* well educated... *is* a "think outside the box" kind of innovator... at least in the USA it is.

 

This sounds like something Gotto would say, to be honest.

 

Gatto or not - I have not read his books so your statement is irrelevant to me. But where I have to disagree is in your statement that we are an educated people. Perhaps our definitions of education differ, I don't really know. The education of today is not what it was even 100 years ago. The testing (if you consider that a valid avenue for evaluation) reveals that. A Google search will show you that the US has fallen below other countries (and in some areas quite a bit below). Are we an educated people? What does our culture reveal? That we care about Paris Hilton and Brittany Spears' lives? Why are they headline news in our "educated" culture? Why are the shows available to watch what they are? What does our music culture say about our true selves? I am aghast at our "culture" most of the time and the true honest lack of education - even of the most basic of things.

 

Again, though, this is not really a post about that (though we are certainly doing a good job of discussing it!) I think most of us are so used to the traditional public school that we even have a hard time breaking that mold in our own homeschools. So what would a truly good school look like--regardless of your thoughts on Tracy's quote. That is what I am trying to get at.

 

Warmly,

Kate

[Kate CA]

Even on Star Trek they never explained how society managed to make everyone satisfied in their perfect job, including the person who puts together the Enterprise's toilets and plugs wires in. Life calling?;)

 

I think they became one with the collective. :p But seriously, I appreciated this post. I think you said some very important things. It is distressing, isn't it--to see the way our educational systems have deteriorated. It is, as you so aptly put it, "a mess."

 

I appreciate your post.

 

Warmly,

Kate

[Alana in Canada]

If you are interested in pursuing the question of "what are the schools really trying to do" and "how did they get into this mess, anyway" I highly recommend reading Diane Ravitch's Left Back.

 

Schools--or rather the "establishment" tried over the years to completely re-define what it means to be educated. A late proponent of the "child-centered" type of schooling actually defended an education policy by saying, in effect, that it was unrealistic to expect all children to learn to read--and that parents were just upsetting themselves.

 

Yes, at one point schools thought they needed to turn out people who would be "useful" in the industrial age--too much education made people dissatisfied. As Ravitch pointed out though, they had no idea that society would change--that its requirements would change.

 

Sorry, I have to run...

[Kate CA]

I highly recommend reading Diane Ravitch's Left Back.

 

Thank you!

 

I appreciate it. :)

 

Warmly,

Kate

[Alana in Canada]

You're welcome!

[Colleen]

I've been chewing on this post, and the replies thus far, but I have a stumbling block in that I disagree with Tracy's premise. I understand that you, Kate, used her quote merely as a jumping-off point to discuss what truly good schools would look like. I'm just having a hard time getting past this faulty (imo) notion that "the great machine" wants nothing more than to produce a mindless, under-educated populace.

 

Okay. Having said that...;) Here are some things I envision about truly good schools:

 

 

• They will introduce students to foreign languages during the grammar stage.
  
• They will not be connected in any way, shape, or fashion with sports teams.
  
• They will conduct a morning session, send children home for a break during the midday meal, and then conduct an afternoon session.
  
• They will not be privatized. I am not in agreement with those who think the source of our educational ills lies in government control.
  
• They will encourage creativity and allow for exposure to music, art, and handcrafts.
  
• They will be attractive buildings with windows. There will be rows of bicycle racks outside. Yes, children will ride bikes there! And take public busses, because there will be no busses that exist solely to service school students. And there will be no parking lots for cars because students won't be driving there but instead be riding bikes or taking a bus or walking (what a concept!) or okay, mabye riding a moped.
  
• They will focus on specialization as early as the logic stage. Herein lies one of the greatest errors in our educational system, imo; the false hope of a general education. Specialization and "tracking" wrongly became taboo words in this country.
  
• In keeping with the above, they will encourage apprenticeships for students who are not planning on university.
  
• They will not be called upon by society to serve as social welfare agencies.
  

 

 

In other words, they'd be in Europe.;)

[chiguirre]

Colleen really hit it on the head. The reason so many countries cream us on achievement tests is because they value achievement so highly. In the US the kid who excels academically will probably try to hide that fact to fit in socially, in most other countries they would be admired by other students. My Venezuelan dh's experience of highschool was so different from mine. He was astonished by the idea that it was a social handicap to get good grades. Until we change that social dynamic in our schools, we'll never provide an excellent education in public schools.

[LNC]

What do you mean by "they will not be called upon by society to serve as social welfare agencies"?

[Renee in NC]

What do you mean by "they will not be called upon by society to serve as social welfare agencies"?

 

 

Schools today have so much more to worry about than education. They are expected to make sure the children have good nutrition, get "character" education, and screen for all basic health needs. Schools in some places have health clinics for birth control and STDs. Other schools have daycares for teen parents. Still others are dealing with the ills of poverty, drug use (by the children and the families), and child abuse and neglect.

 

My oldest ds goes to a public charter school. It is a school of choice, which means they have to accept whoever applies. However, they don't have to keep the troublemakers! They don't deal with this stuff because it isn't their job. The school does fairly well at education, especially compared to the local regular public schools, mostly because their only function is to *educate* these children!

[Harriet Vane]

I disagree with her opinion on privatization though. I think a combination of private and public is fine.

 

My ideal school would additionally have a student-teacher ratio of 10-1 at most.

[Karen sn]

Volty - actually, she is right. I can't tell you who said it years ago - can't remember - but a highschool teacher shared with me a quote on "How to gain control of a group of people" - it was said/written a very long time ago. And guess what - it describes public mass schooling to a T!

[Jackie in AR]

I think schools would be privitized and would specialize in various areas of education, in order to attract those students who need a hands-on approach to education; those who are math and/or science oriented (they don't always go hand in hand); those who want a classical or liberal arts sort of education; those who want an education that focuses heavily on the arts, or other special approaches to education. Parents could then select the school that's the best fit for their children. Class sizes would be small and class assistants would be prevelant. Parent/teacher interaction would be weekly. Parents would be intimately involved in the schools their children attended.

 

Ohhh, I like the idea of specialization. And parents/children deciding what they would like to concentrate on in their studies. Not the one-size-fits-all education that is mandated today.

 

And in a perfect world, schools would be privitized and all the parents would be intimately involved.

 

Great ideas, Regena.

[Plaid Dad]

 

• They will focus on specialization as early as the logic stage. Herein lies one of the greatest errors in our educational system, imo; the false hope of a general education. Specialization and "tracking" wrongly became taboo words in this country.

• In keeping with the above, they will encourage apprenticeships for students who are not planning on university.

 

I'm glad to hear someone say this.

 

One of the reasons our schools fail is that not everyone can or should attend university. As a society, we are suffering from the Lake Wobegon effect - it's part of our cultural mythology that "you can do anything you set your mind on if you just work hard enough." Our schools reflect this myth. The reality is more like the Incredibles:

 

"Everybody's special, Dash."

"Which is another way of saying nobody is."

 

I don't think the schools, public or not, will succeed without a more realistic model:

 

 

1. Basic, knowledge-based education for all through 6th grade. The best mainstream version of this I've seen is Core Knowledge.

2. From 7th-10th grades, a general liberal arts program for most students, to include English, mathematics, history, science, and foreign language as the core subjects. Tracking at this level would separate the small pool who are likely to go to university and give them a more rigorous curriculum, preferably a traditional classical one; arts and natural science tracks for qualified students (cf. Bronx Science, LaGuardia Arts). The school days would be short enough (ca. 5 1/2 hrs.) to allow older students to have after-school jobs or internships. Most students would end their school time at age 16. Apprenticeships and one- or two-year vocational certificate programs would be the normal way of qualifying for employment in both the blue- and white-collar worlds - and this would include most school teachers.

3. Optional 11th-12th grade college preparatory work for university-bound students. Teachers would be subject specialists with at least a master's degree in their field. Rigorous, essay-based school leaving exams for this level.

4. University education for the professions, for prospective research scholars and professors, and for advanced (research-focused) work in certain technical fields - this last at technical universities. Most institutions currently carrying the name "college" or "university" should either close their doors or become vocational training schools. The first to do so should be the Education schools.

5. There should be a way to jump from one track to the other in 7th-10th and provision made for able boot-strappers, including homeschoolers, who didn't complete the optional 11th-12th grades to test their way into university.

 

 

So, yeah: Europe. ;) And no, I don't see this happening in the US any time soon. The best we can hope for, if the trend toward national standards continues, is something like Core Knowledge becoming normative for public elementary schools.

 

Given our cultural allergy to "elitism," it probably also needs saying that, in acknowledging that most people don't need a university education, I am saying nothing at all about their worth as human beings relative to those who should go to uni.

 

Here endeth the sermon. :o

[debbiec]

This is the school district I want to belong to!

[Robin in Tx]

Cheryl, thanks for your post.

 

You said:

 

I think Tracy has read John Taylor Gatto and others of a similar mind.

 

Yes, I thought I recognized the viewpoint. And it's important to point this out, because he is a huge force behind the proliferation of this rhetoric among homeschoolers. And as long as he's got people believing this is what is wrong with our schools, then the other problems/issues (some of which are addressed in this thread) won't get the attention they need. There is no hope for a successful solution if you have not properly identified the problem. I simply disagree that the charge expressed in the original post is the real problem.

 

Something to consider when we look at the performance of education 100 years ago... education and standardized testing back then was catered more towards an elite white class. Anytime you diversify the sample pool to include the less advantaged, the averages are going to go down - that is a statstical reality. I think we overlook that when we compare our performances today to 100 years ago, which was long before civil rights and the push to provide equal education opportunities to all regardless of race or class. It is also overlooked when we compare our performance to racially and culturally homogenous countries.

 

I'm not sure what the solution is, because I'm not sure what the problem is. It is elusive, that is for sure. For every failure there is a notable success. And, as you stated, there will always be a need and a supply for working class labor... what we want is for anyone in that class to have the opportunity to crawl out of it... and I think that has just as much to do with the individual student as it has to do with the system (as Mindy cleverly pointed out).

 

Much of what Kate said about culture revealing our level of education are actually moral issues in my mind... not academic ones. So I think we're talking about two different things (as she said, one must define education). I am only discussing academics that lead to innovativeness and national security and global competitiveness, not any sort of moral training. European countries that have educational systems that many here obviously admire have an even more insatiable appetite for papparazzi frenzy than we have; and, when you get right down to it, all the moral training in the world will not help keep a country strong and advancing... if it did, then the Amish would be leading our country into the 21st century :).

 

I agree with much of what Colleen suggested, especially that it not be privatized. I wouldn't want the kids to have to go home for lunch, because the distance is far and too many kids' parent(s) work outside the home thus a vacant house mid day. I wouldn't want to turn transportation over to the city... that would be a disaster where I live. I would allow specialization to a certain degree, but not at the expense of any basics (we would have to agree on a definition of the basic, minimum standards), and I wouldn't have children pressured into specialization at a young age. Most people don't figure out what they want to do until they are older and a general education is best for holding doors open until a decision is made. Our local schools already have vocational training tracks for students that are not college bound, and I think that is very good... but note the irony - that is nothing other than reducing the high school education down to working class job training at the expense of a liberal education... when couched in the rhetoric of the original quote, it sounds alarming. When explained as a reasonable alternative, it sounds quite acceptable.

 

I do wonder about something you said, Cheryl... (sorry I don't know how to multi quote)

 

..."Education has declined when even that above vision was lost in the shuffle so we now are falling behind in our competitiveness in the world in some fields."...

 

What fields would that be? Sincere question.

 

Thanks for the discussion, everyone!

Robin

[Robin in Tx]

Well, at least you're familiar enough with Gatto to recognize my misspelling of his name :).

 

I've addressed some of your comments elsewhere in this thread... but as far as answering your question...

 

I originally thought your question was "what would a school look like that *didn't* endeavor to keep the masses ignorant and compliant" to which I had trouble responding because I don't think our education system endeavors to do that in the first place. But as you are wording it now (what does a good school look like, plain and simple), I actually think that a good school doesn't look drastically different from the public schools in my area. They already are good schools for the most part, and the only thing I wish I could change about them would be teacher/student ratio, involvement of parents, ambition of students, competitive salaries and less red tape for the teachers, less teaching to the test, more discipline, more fine arts, more emphasis on language skills, stricter dress codes, more flexibility/options for an individually tailored education, and an absence of drugs and violence. As long as we're talking about waving a magic wand, that's what I'd do :).

 

Robin

[Tammyla]

I've been chewing on this post, and the replies thus far, but I have a stumbling block in that I disagree with Tracy's premise. I understand that you, Kate, used her quote merely as a jumping-off point to discuss what truly good schools would look like. I'm just having a hard time getting past this faulty (imo) notion that "the great machine" wants nothing more than to produce a mindless, under-educated populace.

 

Okay. Having said that...;) Here are some things I envision about truly good schools:

 

 

• They will introduce students to foreign languages during the grammar stage.

• They will not be connected in any way, shape, or fashion with sports teams.

• They will conduct a morning session, send children home for a break during the midday meal, and then conduct an afternoon session.

• They will not be privatized. I am not in agreement with those who think the source of our educational ills lies in government control.

• They will encourage creativity and allow for exposure to music, art, and handcrafts.

• They will be attractive buildings with windows. There will be rows of bicycle racks outside. Yes, children will ride bikes there! And take public busses, because there will be no busses that exist solely to service school students. And there will be no parking lots for cars because students won't be driving there but instead be riding bikes or taking a bus or walking (what a concept!) or okay, mabye riding a moped.

• They will focus on specialization as early as the logic stage. Herein lies one of the greatest errors in our educational system, imo; the false hope of a general education. Specialization and "tracking" wrongly became taboo words in this country.

• In keeping with the above, they will encourage apprenticeships for students who are not planning on university.

• They will not be called upon by society to serve as social welfare agencies.

 

 

In other words, they'd be in Europe.;)

 

 

Colleen, I was thinking this sounds like Germany (Europe) while reading through your post. I think they have a good model system.

[mcconnellboys]

Well, that'll be a long bike ride, LOL, but I like most of these ideas, too.....

 

Regena