This is an online space for members of HONR 398 (Sp. 12) to extend our intellectual community...
Tuesday, January 17, 2012
January 19…The Purposes Public Schooling
Have you thought about the role of schools in the U.S.?What do you make of Counts’ challenge to use public schools to remake society, given what you know of contemporary politics?
Wanting to be an educator myself, I've often thought about the role of schools in the US. I know that the standard curriculum, at least in Virginia public schools, are quite lacking in that they do not challenge or stimulate critical thinking in students. What then is the point of an education if students are not taught how to apply their knowledge? However, it is not easy to use public schools to remake society because public schools are controlled by government, which can be considered a part of the capitalist system that Count speaks of. Despite government being a public affair, it is also sometimes funded by private businesses that can manipulate what is taught in school for their own interests. So in order to remake society through the school system, there either need to be a change in the views in government itself or this indoctrination of certain ideas has to come from somewhere else.
I agree with Tom in that the standard curriculum offered by Virginia schools leaves much to be desired. Often what happens is that educators teach to the SOL, and this allows for no growth, no discussion, just the reiteration of static information. And oftentimes, because the school is funded by the government, it seems everything must be politically correct within education; I feel this is unrealistic. Life is not politically correct, and shielding children from these debates serves no purpose other than to deflect blame from the school systems. I think to achieve the sort of change Count talks about, the school system needs to be further separated from the government. Otherwise, the unchallenging curriculum will never go away, because it makes the school system, county, school board, representative, etc., look better when able to measure success against an oversimplified standard of learning.
I think Sam is correct in saying the government and schools need to be separated more in order for Count’s ideas to work. Children today need to be challenged more in school. They need to learn about what is actually going on in the world and why. They need to be able to understand that we do have problems in our society and that things do need to change, however with the way that the government is so involved with what the schools teach, this will never occur. Many of today’s teachers only teach what is required of them and they don’t challenge their students to learn anything else, however there is more going on in the world around them then what is written down in a textbook. I believe that Count has good ideas in what he wants to happen within the schools and remaking society, however I do not think that with our government being the way it is today that his ideas would all be possible.
When people consider the role of public schools, perhaps the most common focus is the goal of “education”. I think that the idea that all U.S. students have the opportunity to be “educated” depends on your definition of the term. Does education mean merely coasting through the grade levels, retaining just enough the get through the year? Or does it perhaps imply a greater involvement and dedication? I wonder to what extent public schooling in the U.S. can be considered an education. To me, the most interesting argument that Count made was that schools should work to actively engage students in molding an ideal future- that students should leave school ready for action. Presently, that idea seems a bit lofty. Students and teachers are bound by standardized tests, which leaves little room for flexibility or- I think- excitement and motivation.
I, too, agree that there is a level of unattainability provided from Count's pamphlet. I do believe Count makes a very persuasive argument on remaking society by providing a true education that should be obtained from the school as well as the teachers who should not deliberately distort or suppress facts to support any view point. On page 6 he states that progressive education leaves us incapable of dealing with crisis such as war, prosperity, or depression. I agree with Count’s view and the above comments about SOLs. The above comments on how Virginia teachers, and I’m assuming every other state that has a standardized test, have a homocentric curriculum which leaves no room for expansion of thoughts beyond their lab tables. Count also mentions how some teachers abuse their power. An example of this could be playing favorites with students which would give some an unfair advantage and possibly personal prejudice that the teacher may have. Thinking about the roles the schools play in the U.S., I feel like there is almost too much accountability being put on the schools. I feel like he leaves no room for blaming what happens beyond the schools walls. Parents are just as influential as teachers, if not more. In regards to what the government’s role is with public schools, I believe Count’s ideas are unattainable for a different reason than the ones listed above, though I do agree with them. Since each state has its own standardized testing, aside from the SATs and ACTs which are optional, I feel like if the United States can’t really agree on what academic level their students should be at on a national scale. But even if they did come to a consensus this still would promote intelligence over passion like Count claims education does to the youth.
I agree on Sam's point about the SOL, that these tests do not allow students to learn beyond a standard curriculum set out by the government . However, it does put forth a minimum standard that all kids in this state must pass the SOL's to go to the next level. But like my fellow classmates pointed out these tests are not challenging enough and does not stimulate anything on a higher level. On the other hand, if you take a look at the SAT's and AP exams ,which are not associated with the government whatsoever ,builds on a higher achieving test which allows students to actually analysis, think critically and apply what they know. The government limits the education curriculum and in a way teaches what is in a box. So, the government itself should separate from the school system and let the schools teach what interests the children that is beyond the minimum and is applicable to the future.
The schools in the U.S.A. play a role so that every student have an opportunity to get an education which will somehow benefit not only the student in the future, but also the country. Politicians look at school as a target to fix for the future generation and even the country to attain prosperity and secured position in the world. Recently, the target has been not been set on the students of the school but the teachers. Count points out that teachers are the ones that should use their "power" to strive to make the most out of it through the school system; to inspire and accelerate the children's mind that will ultimately impact society. They should have the power to "fashion the curriculum" and not the government. Even though in theory this sounds good- how many teachers actually will go such lengths to instill that passion in students in the current school system? I do believe with Count that teachers are the source to "bridge the gap between school and society", but changes are needed to be made, but gradually and properly executed.
There have been many topics discussed in the past comments including the weakness of standardized test, the role education should play in exposing students to society, and the government in education. It all boils down to one question, what is the definition of education? Some people argue that education is what our government provides every citizen with to better “educate” them. Again pops the question, what is education? Others argue that education is the accumulation of knowledge that someone receives. The question is presented again, but this time in a new form, what is knowledge. Booth argues that the education system should be teaching more than just the textbook. We should be teaching social issues. To an extant, I agree. Teaching these things promotes better, educated students. However, the problem with this is that there will be a bias. People disagree on what issues should be discussed and what how it should be taught. For example, if a conservative teacher is left to decide, then the student will receive bias opinion on issue taught. The same goes for a liberal teacher. If the government is to decide, then there creates confusion. Each politician will have a different opinion. Also, our government is constantly changing authority so there will be discrepancies as time goes on. Due to the way our country is currently set up, the government as says over what is taught. Sara’s comment basically sums up the problem with Booths point. With the way our current society is set up, Booth plan will not work. However, if we as a society can come up with a neutral, unbiased way to teach social issues and social change, then Booth argument could be set into effect.
I have definitely thought about the roles of schools in the US considering that my mother has been a preschool teacher for approximately 14 years. Many excellent points were brought up by my fellow classmates regarding the Standards of Learning tests (SOL). The main course curriculum in grade school consists of preparing students for the SOL tests. The SOLs test the bare minimum of knowledge for the required courses, and inevitably make classes simple. Although I have experienced courses in which teachers do the bare minimum to achieve accurate and precise test scores, I've had many teachers that have gone above and beyond the appallingly average standards of teaching. As for Count's challenge: I definitely agree with Sara on the point she made on how Count has good ideas for the school system, yet the way our government is run today, they all are not possible.
Honestly, in my opinion, public schools in the U.S. aren’t adequate enough in providing a solid education to its students. Recently graduating from a public high school, I know from personal account that students aren’t preforming to their intellectual potential because of the simple fact that their minds are not being challenged. As Sam stated, school systems are designed to get students to the point where they can pass the “standardized tests”, which is, the bare minimal amount of knowledge needed float to the next grade. I agree with Count’s challenge to use public schools to change society. This country needs to make educating the students in public schools a priority and take it much more seriously. The education these generations receive will in fact, determine our society’s future. As count stated, “Any individual or group that would aspire to lead society must be ready to pay the costs of leadership.” Though I’m sure they will receive a lot of criticism; our government, school systems, and instructors need to step up and enforce that students receive a genuine education. Instead of setting the standards low so they can easily pass, how about taking time and effort to create a curriculum that is designed to challenge students to preform to their potential, broaden their minds, make them think, and simply give them a quality education?
The role of schools in the US is not very clearly defined, which I find to be a serious part of the problem with the education system today. Many people view school merely as a way to babysit children while parents go to work. They expect schools to teach basic ideas, but they do not have a specific idea of how much children should be educated, just that they should be. Other people, nowadays, seem to place too much of the parenting responsibility onto schools. Count, for example, seems to want schools to teach things beyond science, English, history, mathematics, etc. He seems to want teachers to become the leaders of society and teach children about things such as morality and how to behave in a society. Much of that, it may seem, should belong to parents. Of course, many people also see school as the institution that is supposed to prepare children to help this country be competitive against the world in science/math/technology. While I understand preparing children for the more difficult task of college and to become innovators, it seems wrong to use children as pawns to make our own society dominate to the others. But then, I do not care for this "race" notion that many people have, that our nation has to be the best at everything. I would prefer a harmonious global society, one that takes the strengths and weaknesses of each to further the welfare for all. But then, I understand that is idealistic, not realistic.
I'm not sure that it is school's place alone to remake society. School is certainly a part of it. School is something most every child in America attends; it is the easiest way of spreading a way of thinking to children at large. However, parents should aid in teaching their children to be innovative, to want to help change society in a specific manner. Also, I'm not entirely sure that forcing change will work. Change is more organic than Count gives it credit for being. He seems to claim that change comes solely from individuals who become leaders. Leaders, most often, are aided by many things that they had no control over. Hitler, for example, did cause a revolution. An awful one, of course, but a revolution. He could not have set any of his plans in motion if WWI had not happened. If German coin had not become useless, if the people were not starving in the streets and dirt poor, they would not have supported the radical change Hitler brought with him. I'm simplifying it a bit, but the point remains. One institution alone cannot bring forth change unless the society has reached a place where it is ready for change; the society only reaches this place through many other events.
Also, schools would have to know how exactly they wanted to remake society. If this plan is not concrete enough, it will fail. For example, today's schools have been directed to make children equal with each other. They no longer are interested in making those who shine be the very best they can. Instead, they try to bring the students who are struggling to a standard level, not caring if the students who could have risen higher do so or not. Some of this is attributed to No Child Left Behind. While it may help the struggling students be a bit better, in the long term, it fails to make us competitive with the rest of the world, which is one of the primary goals of current education. It fails since those who could help us compete are not being encouraged to do their best.
After reading my peers responses the consensus seems to be that the Standards of Learning present the greatest impediment to the learning process. This is true, though the true issue behind these standards has not been touched on. The No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) passed by George W. Bush Jr. is the driving force behind these standards, the outdated curriculum and teaching processes used in the U.S. today. The act goes against what Counts presents as the ideal functioning and purpose of the school system. We see the effects of this act when we observe how teachers’ today work towards these standards as opposed to focusing on the individual children and their individual learning preferences. Counts presents what he feels is one of the best ways to educate, which he states is very similar to the ideals of the Progressive Education Movement. He offers criticism not only of this movement but also of the existing education system stating that both lack direction. In my opinion Counts makes a large mistake very early on in reading. He states that teachers must be leaders and must give the system direction. This is where contemporary politics presents the greatest impairment. Due to policies like NCLB and continued cuts to public school funding teachers are discouraged and limited in ways that keep them from doing their Job. The Job of being an educator has turned into meeting standards instead of promoting personal growth in today’s youth, which in effect makes reshaping society in a positive way more difficult if not impossible.
“The” purpose of public school suggests that there is one united or cohesive purpose of educating our youth. The purpose of public schools has changed over time ranging from securing one’s salvation to gaining social equality to critical thinking, as well as much in between. The government and society, in general, see the schools as a vehicle to remake humanity. But as Counts suggests, they are fearful of molding the youth to any one particular pattern of being, of thinking. The purpose of schooling is dependent upon the lens through which one looks (i.e. business and industry, civics, etc.). At this juncture, schools and teachers are not in a position to reach for the type of power and authority that Counts suggests. Schools and teachers are to be in compliance of the legislation that is passed down, typically and conveniently attached to funding. Thus, I agree with Sara in that Counts’ challenge, though ideal, does not seem feasible with the way our government and leaders operate and view schools and the role of educators. A teacher’s efficacy and her ability to inspire her students cannot be measured through standardized testing, yet that is the order of the day in synthesizing not only her effectiveness in meeting society’s idea of the purpose of public schools, but also the progressing potential of her students to make contributions to society.
Public schools should educate all students equally. I agree with Tom where he said most students are not actively knowledgeable and they are lacking of understanding critically. Despite the fact that, High School system is divided into two processes, the Advanced Placement which means college-level and Regular classes where the teachers don’t teach more than it’s required. As a result, Students who take AP classes are more likely to encounter critical thinking and they are well prepared for collage where most regular students don’t meet these skills. One thing common between AP class and regular class is Instructors are abandoned from expressing freely and educate truth about political issues because Governments requires public schools to limit on political concerns. In order to remake society through school system, I think governments should not get involved in what needs to be taught to the students.
I’ve always considered the role of schools in the United States as guaranteeing that every willing person be provided a decent education as well as to create an educated public that understands their society and government so that the United States can function. The government standardizes the public school system to create supposedly equal opportunities for student, however this often backfires. I think standardize testing has made schools evolve into think machine to produce cookie cutter students, which does not work for students or society. I don’t know much about contemporary politics but I’ve done some research into changes in schools. Unfortunately schools are very resistant to change.
I would contest that the primary importance of the public education system should be to mold liberally rounded, informed citizens, not to, necessarily, educate the populace with strict vocational abilities. Moreover, school should introduce concepts and allow students to discover, for themselves, the answers- providing foundation for unique, original ideas. Though Counts’ radicalism is difficult to wholly concur with, I agree that the strict establishment which entraps and confines the content that educators can, and cannot, teach is crippling to societal idiosyncrasy and individuality. Contrarily, while Counts asserts that all such structures should be removed, I would suggest a balance, as such idealistic beliefs as Counts hopes for would require a colossal amount of drive and enthusiasm from teachers, more than one should expect from another human being. Counts’ asserts that the education should be used to “remake society.” While Counts may have been genuinely benevolent in his suggestion, had this proposal taken shape, namely, in order to recreate a society some model must first be fabricated- in who’s image would this model be made? What party? What religion...? No matter the case, some ethnocentric view would have distorted this “new society.” Individuals should decide what to make of a society, not a governmental system. We are more than conformable dolls; we are hearts, and minds.
I agree completely with the previous statements by Courtney. I believe that the system in which the American government and schools decide to teach the children is not as efficient when comparing ourselves to other foreign countries. In those countries, the governments are strict, demands are high, and sacrifices are made to educate their young to fully excel in the future. You can see through China's curriculum that Chinese children are light years ahead of American children when it comes to the subjects of Math, Science, and the arts. When the American is learning Algebra I, the other hand is already at a Precalculus or Calculus level. All in all, I believe that there should be a sort of action by the US government to further emphasize, sacrifice, and pay attention to the schools. The children should not be taught to be as the same level as every other child through standardized tests, but should be pushed academically. Next, kids should not solely be educated in the subjects (such as Math and History), but also educated in the worldly events. As Counts had challenged, I believe that with a rapid and ever-changing society all around us, the teachers should assert themselves and teach both sides of education so that the little-knowing children can open their eyes and see the world around them.
I found Demerath’s accounting of the “Wilton Way” to be an interestingly distressing depiction of achievement-oriented students. My high school experience was nothing like this, although I surely wanted to do well. I did not attend a school that had much in the way of AP/Honors courses, so I guess one could say that I haven’t been “conditioned” like these Burnham students, perhaps not even like my fellow classmates. I worry about the students’ health in becoming premature cogs in the machine that churns out “sombodies.” Something is wrong when a kid feels guilty about spending quality time with his brother, time he could have used more productively. Dewey says that “there is no obvious social motive for the acquirement of mere learning…the only measure of success is a competitive one.” The leading measure of defining one’s success is comparing how far one can get ahead of his/her peers. I don’t see anything wrong with these students forming early and specific school and career goals, being confident, taking on a business mindset, etc. These are all good characteristics that will serve these students well in whatever occupations they find themselves. I think that it becomes problematic when these qualities take over and all students think about is exploiting schooling for social mobility. Also problematic is the marginalization of students that do not fit the “Wilton” mold.
zdrglknmhaSCEafmsclasrlgmuasclms,l;rgl;uk
ReplyDeleteWanting to be an educator myself, I've often thought about the role of schools in the US. I know that the standard curriculum, at least in Virginia public schools, are quite lacking in that they do not challenge or stimulate critical thinking in students. What then is the point of an education if students are not taught how to apply their knowledge? However, it is not easy to use public schools to remake society because public schools are controlled by government, which can be considered a part of the capitalist system that Count speaks of. Despite government being a public affair, it is also sometimes funded by private businesses that can manipulate what is taught in school for their own interests. So in order to remake society through the school system, there either need to be a change in the views in government itself or this indoctrination of certain ideas has to come from somewhere else.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Tom in that the standard curriculum offered by Virginia schools leaves much to be desired. Often what happens is that educators teach to the SOL, and this allows for no growth, no discussion, just the reiteration of static information. And oftentimes, because the school is funded by the government, it seems everything must be politically correct within education; I feel this is unrealistic. Life is not politically correct, and shielding children from these debates serves no purpose other than to deflect blame from the school systems. I think to achieve the sort of change Count talks about, the school system needs to be further separated from the government. Otherwise, the unchallenging curriculum will never go away, because it makes the school system, county, school board, representative, etc., look better when able to measure success against an oversimplified standard of learning.
ReplyDeleteI think Sam is correct in saying the government and schools need to be separated more in order for Count’s ideas to work. Children today need to be challenged more in school. They need to learn about what is actually going on in the world and why. They need to be able to understand that we do have problems in our society and that things do need to change, however with the way that the government is so involved with what the schools teach, this will never occur. Many of today’s teachers only teach what is required of them and they don’t challenge their students to learn anything else, however there is more going on in the world around them then what is written down in a textbook. I believe that Count has good ideas in what he wants to happen within the schools and remaking society, however I do not think that with our government being the way it is today that his ideas would all be possible.
ReplyDeleteWhen people consider the role of public schools, perhaps the most common focus is the goal of “education”. I think that the idea that all U.S. students have the opportunity to be “educated” depends on your definition of the term. Does education mean merely coasting through the grade levels, retaining just enough the get through the year? Or does it perhaps imply a greater involvement and dedication? I wonder to what extent public schooling in the U.S. can be considered an education. To me, the most interesting argument that Count made was that schools should work to actively engage students in molding an ideal future- that students should leave school ready for action. Presently, that idea seems a bit lofty. Students and teachers are bound by standardized tests, which leaves little room for flexibility or- I think- excitement and motivation.
ReplyDeleteI, too, agree that there is a level of unattainability provided from Count's pamphlet. I do believe Count makes a very persuasive argument on remaking society by providing a true education that should be obtained from the school as well as the teachers who should not deliberately distort or suppress facts to support any view point. On page 6 he states that progressive education leaves us incapable of dealing with crisis such as war, prosperity, or depression. I agree with Count’s view and the above comments about SOLs. The above comments on how Virginia teachers, and I’m assuming every other state that has a standardized test, have a homocentric curriculum which leaves no room for expansion of thoughts beyond their lab tables. Count also mentions how some teachers abuse their power. An example of this could be playing favorites with students which would give some an unfair advantage and possibly personal prejudice that the teacher may have. Thinking about the roles the schools play in the U.S., I feel like there is almost too much accountability being put on the schools. I feel like he leaves no room for blaming what happens beyond the schools walls. Parents are just as influential as teachers, if not more. In regards to what the government’s role is with public schools, I believe Count’s ideas are unattainable for a different reason than the ones listed above, though I do agree with them. Since each state has its own standardized testing, aside from the SATs and ACTs which are optional, I feel like if the United States can’t really agree on what academic level their students should be at on a national scale. But even if they did come to a consensus this still would promote intelligence over passion like Count claims education does to the youth.
ReplyDeleteI agree on Sam's point about the SOL, that these tests do not allow students to learn beyond a standard curriculum set out by the government . However, it does put forth a minimum standard that all kids in this state must pass the SOL's to go to the next level. But like my fellow classmates pointed out these tests are not challenging enough and does not stimulate anything on a higher level. On the other hand, if you take a look at the SAT's and AP exams ,which are not associated with the government whatsoever ,builds on a higher achieving test which allows students to actually analysis, think critically and apply what they know. The government limits the education curriculum and in a way teaches what is in a box. So, the government itself should separate from the school system and let the schools teach what interests the children that is beyond the minimum and is applicable to the future.
ReplyDeleteThe schools in the U.S.A. play a role so that every student have an opportunity to get an education which will somehow benefit not only the student in the future, but also the country. Politicians look at school as a target to fix for the future generation and even the country to attain prosperity and secured position in the world. Recently, the target has been not been set on the students of the school but the teachers. Count points out that teachers are the ones that should use their "power" to strive to make the most out of it through the school system; to inspire and accelerate the children's mind that will ultimately impact society. They should have the power to "fashion the curriculum" and not the government. Even though in theory this sounds good- how many teachers actually will go such lengths to instill that passion in students in the current school system? I do believe with Count that teachers are the source to "bridge the gap between school and society", but changes are needed to be made, but gradually and properly executed.
There have been many topics discussed in the past comments including the weakness of standardized test, the role education should play in exposing students to society, and the government in education. It all boils down to one question, what is the definition of education? Some people argue that education is what our government provides every citizen with to better “educate” them. Again pops the question, what is education? Others argue that education is the accumulation of knowledge that someone receives. The question is presented again, but this time in a new form, what is knowledge. Booth argues that the education system should be teaching more than just the textbook. We should be teaching social issues. To an extant, I agree. Teaching these things promotes better, educated students. However, the problem with this is that there will be a bias. People disagree on what issues should be discussed and what how it should be taught. For example, if a conservative teacher is left to decide, then the student will receive bias opinion on issue taught. The same goes for a liberal teacher. If the government is to decide, then there creates confusion. Each politician will have a different opinion. Also, our government is constantly changing authority so there will be discrepancies as time goes on. Due to the way our country is currently set up, the government as says over what is taught. Sara’s comment basically sums up the problem with Booths point. With the way our current society is set up, Booth plan will not work. However, if we as a society can come up with a neutral, unbiased way to teach social issues and social change, then Booth argument could be set into effect.
ReplyDeleteI have definitely thought about the roles of schools in the US considering that my mother has been a preschool teacher for approximately 14 years. Many excellent points were brought up by my fellow classmates regarding the Standards of Learning tests (SOL). The main course curriculum in grade school consists of preparing students for the SOL tests. The SOLs test the bare minimum of knowledge for the required courses, and inevitably make classes simple. Although I have experienced courses in which teachers do the bare minimum to achieve accurate and precise test scores, I've had many teachers that have gone above and beyond the appallingly average standards of teaching. As for Count's challenge: I definitely agree with Sara on the point she made on how Count has good ideas for the school system, yet the way our government is run today, they all are not possible.
ReplyDeleteHonestly, in my opinion, public schools in the U.S. aren’t adequate enough in providing a solid education to its students. Recently graduating from a public high school, I know from personal account that students aren’t preforming to their intellectual potential because of the simple fact that their minds are not being challenged. As Sam stated, school systems are designed to get students to the point where they can pass the “standardized tests”, which is, the bare minimal amount of knowledge needed float to the next grade. I agree with Count’s challenge to use public schools to change society. This country needs to make educating the students in public schools a priority and take it much more seriously. The education these generations receive will in fact, determine our society’s future. As count stated, “Any individual or group that would aspire to lead society must be ready to pay the costs of leadership.” Though I’m sure they will receive a lot of criticism; our government, school systems, and instructors need to step up and enforce that students receive a genuine education. Instead of setting the standards low so they can easily pass, how about taking time and effort to create a curriculum that is designed to challenge students to preform to their potential, broaden their minds, make them think, and simply give them a quality education?
ReplyDeleteThe role of schools in the US is not very clearly defined, which I find to be a serious part of the problem with the education system today. Many people view school merely as a way to babysit children while parents go to work. They expect schools to teach basic ideas, but they do not have a specific idea of how much children should be educated, just that they should be. Other people, nowadays, seem to place too much of the parenting responsibility onto schools. Count, for example, seems to want schools to teach things beyond science, English, history, mathematics, etc. He seems to want teachers to become the leaders of society and teach children about things such as morality and how to behave in a society. Much of that, it may seem, should belong to parents. Of course, many people also see school as the institution that is supposed to prepare children to help this country be competitive against the world in science/math/technology. While I understand preparing children for the more difficult task of college and to become innovators, it seems wrong to use children as pawns to make our own society dominate to the others. But then, I do not care for this "race" notion that many people have, that our nation has to be the best at everything. I would prefer a harmonious global society, one that takes the strengths and weaknesses of each to further the welfare for all. But then, I understand that is idealistic, not realistic.
ReplyDeleteI'm not sure that it is school's place alone to remake society. School is certainly a part of it. School is something most every child in America attends; it is the easiest way of spreading a way of thinking to children at large. However, parents should aid in teaching their children to be innovative, to want to help change society in a specific manner. Also, I'm not entirely sure that forcing change will work. Change is more organic than Count gives it credit for being. He seems to claim that change comes solely from individuals who become leaders. Leaders, most often, are aided by many things that they had no control over. Hitler, for example, did cause a revolution. An awful one, of course, but a revolution. He could not have set any of his plans in motion if WWI had not happened. If German coin had not become useless, if the people were not starving in the streets and dirt poor, they would not have supported the radical change Hitler brought with him. I'm simplifying it a bit, but the point remains. One institution alone cannot bring forth change unless the society has reached a place where it is ready for change; the society only reaches this place through many other events.
Also, schools would have to know how exactly they wanted to remake society. If this plan is not concrete enough, it will fail. For example, today's schools have been directed to make children equal with each other. They no longer are interested in making those who shine be the very best they can. Instead, they try to bring the students who are struggling to a standard level, not caring if the students who could have risen higher do so or not. Some of this is attributed to No Child Left Behind. While it may help the struggling students be a bit better, in the long term, it fails to make us competitive with the rest of the world, which is one of the primary goals of current education. It fails since those who could help us compete are not being encouraged to do their best.
After reading my peers responses the consensus seems to be that the Standards of Learning present the greatest impediment to the learning process. This is true, though the true issue behind these standards has not been touched on. The No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) passed by George W. Bush Jr. is the driving force behind these standards, the outdated curriculum and teaching processes used in the U.S. today.
ReplyDeleteThe act goes against what Counts presents as the ideal functioning and purpose of the school system. We see the effects of this act when we observe how teachers’ today work towards these standards as opposed to focusing on the individual children and their individual learning preferences. Counts presents what he feels is one of the best ways to educate, which he states is very similar to the ideals of the Progressive Education Movement. He offers criticism not only of this movement but also of the existing education system stating that both lack direction.
In my opinion Counts makes a large mistake very early on in reading. He states that teachers must be leaders and must give the system direction. This is where contemporary politics presents the greatest impairment. Due to policies like NCLB and continued cuts to public school funding teachers are discouraged and limited in ways that keep them from doing their Job. The Job of being an educator has turned into meeting standards instead of promoting personal growth in today’s youth, which in effect makes reshaping society in a positive way more difficult if not impossible.
“The” purpose of public school suggests that there is one united or cohesive purpose of educating our youth. The purpose of public schools has changed over time ranging from securing one’s salvation to gaining social equality to critical thinking, as well as much in between. The government and society, in general, see the schools as a vehicle to remake humanity. But as Counts suggests, they are fearful of molding the youth to any one particular pattern of being, of thinking. The purpose of schooling is dependent upon the lens through which one looks (i.e. business and industry, civics, etc.). At this juncture, schools and teachers are not in a position to reach for the type of power and authority that Counts suggests. Schools and teachers are to be in compliance of the legislation that is passed down, typically and conveniently attached to funding. Thus, I agree with Sara in that Counts’ challenge, though ideal, does not seem feasible with the way our government and leaders operate and view schools and the role of educators. A teacher’s efficacy and her ability to inspire her students cannot be measured through standardized testing, yet that is the order of the day in synthesizing not only her effectiveness in meeting society’s idea of the purpose of public schools, but also the progressing potential of her students to make contributions to society.
ReplyDelete~ Karrie Longnecker
Public schools should educate all students equally. I agree with Tom where he said most students are not actively knowledgeable and they are lacking of understanding critically. Despite the fact that, High School system is divided into two processes, the Advanced Placement which means college-level and Regular classes where the teachers don’t teach more than it’s required. As a result, Students who take AP classes are more likely to encounter critical thinking and they are well prepared for collage where most regular students don’t meet these skills. One thing common between AP class and regular class is Instructors are abandoned from expressing freely and educate truth about political issues because Governments requires public schools to limit on political concerns. In order to remake society through school system, I think governments should not get involved in what needs to be taught to the students.
ReplyDeleteI’ve always considered the role of schools in the United States as guaranteeing that every willing person be provided a decent education as well as to create an educated public that understands their society and government so that the United States can function. The government standardizes the public school system to create supposedly equal opportunities for student, however this often backfires. I think standardize testing has made schools evolve into think machine to produce cookie cutter students, which does not work for students or society. I don’t know much about contemporary politics but I’ve done some research into changes in schools. Unfortunately schools are very resistant to change.
ReplyDeleteI would contest that the primary importance of the public education system should be to mold liberally rounded, informed citizens, not to, necessarily, educate the populace with strict vocational abilities. Moreover, school should introduce concepts and allow students to discover, for themselves, the answers- providing foundation for unique, original ideas. Though Counts’ radicalism is difficult to wholly concur with, I agree that the strict establishment which entraps and confines the content that educators can, and cannot, teach is crippling to societal idiosyncrasy and individuality. Contrarily, while Counts asserts that all such structures should be removed, I would suggest a balance, as such idealistic beliefs as Counts hopes for would require a colossal amount of drive and enthusiasm from teachers, more than one should expect from another human being. Counts’ asserts that the education should be used to “remake society.” While Counts may have been genuinely benevolent in his suggestion, had this proposal taken shape, namely, in order to recreate a society some model must first be fabricated- in who’s image would this model be made? What party? What religion...? No matter the case, some ethnocentric view would have distorted this “new society.” Individuals should decide what to make of a society, not a governmental system. We are more than conformable dolls; we are hearts, and minds.
ReplyDeleteTypos...I'll use word next time ;)
DeleteI agree completely with the previous statements by Courtney. I believe that the system in which the American government and schools decide to teach the children is not as efficient when comparing ourselves to other foreign countries. In those countries, the governments are strict, demands are high, and sacrifices are made to educate their young to fully excel in the future. You can see through China's curriculum that Chinese children are light years ahead of American children when it comes to the subjects of Math, Science, and the arts. When the American is learning Algebra I, the other hand is already at a Precalculus or Calculus level. All in all, I believe that there should be a sort of action by the US government to further emphasize, sacrifice, and pay attention to the schools. The children should not be taught to be as the same level as every other child through standardized tests, but should be pushed academically. Next, kids should not solely be educated in the subjects (such as Math and History), but also educated in the worldly events. As Counts had challenged, I believe that with a rapid and ever-changing society all around us, the teachers should assert themselves and teach both sides of education so that the little-knowing children can open their eyes and see the world around them.
ReplyDeleteI found Demerath’s accounting of the “Wilton Way” to be an interestingly distressing depiction of achievement-oriented students. My high school experience was nothing like this, although I surely wanted to do well. I did not attend a school that had much in the way of AP/Honors courses, so I guess one could say that I haven’t been “conditioned” like these Burnham students, perhaps not even like my fellow classmates. I worry about the students’ health in becoming premature cogs in the machine that churns out “sombodies.” Something is wrong when a kid feels guilty about spending quality time with his brother, time he could have used more productively. Dewey says that “there is no obvious social motive for the acquirement of mere learning…the only measure of success is a competitive one.” The leading measure of defining one’s success is comparing how far one can get ahead of his/her peers. I don’t see anything wrong with these students forming early and specific school and career goals, being confident, taking on a business mindset, etc. These are all good characteristics that will serve these students well in whatever occupations they find themselves. I think that it becomes problematic when these qualities take over and all students think about is exploiting schooling for social mobility. Also problematic is the marginalization of students that do not fit the “Wilton” mold.
ReplyDelete