Skip to main content

that were part of this diary, posted in late 2006, intended to start a discussion on rethinking American education.

As I reread them this evening, it saddens me to think how relevant still the questions and challenges I raised remain, now more than 6 years later.

I thought about taking the words and reworking them, but decided to offer them exactly as I did then, typos and all.

As I continue the process of looking for a situation that will put me back into the classroom - having taught a sample lesson at one school this afternoon and meeting with the administration of another to discuss a possibly very exciting opportunity - I find it relevant to look back at how I have been concerned about educational policy, especially in light of the continued wrongheadedness of what has been being imposed upon American schools for far too many years.

Make of this what you will.

I will read any comments that are offered.

I always do.


I believe that we must totally redesign our entire approach to education in this nation.  If we do not do so, we will not survive as a democratic republic.  We will continue to move in the direction of stratification by class, by wealth, by social mobility or the lack thereof.

Some of the questions we must address include the following:

What does it mean to be educated?

How do we measure learning?

What are the purposes of schools?

How do we balance the real conflict between efficiency and meeting the needs of unique individuals?

How should schools and colleges be structured?

How should we fund education at all level?

What if any minimal common knowledge should we expect as an outcome of our educational processes?

How can we have some assurance of common knowledge and still ensure that there is sufficient diversity of educational choices to meet the needs and the preferences of Americans that we provide the greatest opportunity to learn for ALL of our residents?

How much of education should be a discrete and separate process and how much should be more broadly integrated with life outside of formal educational structures?

Should some level of education be a Constitutionally guaranteed right a the national level?

What should be the role of the different levels of government with respect to education, and to one another?

How will we determine whether our efforts are working, or need to be modified?

The foregoing list is not intended to be exhaustive.  As we begin to attempt to answer these questions, many more will arise, and will also need to be addressed.

Let me offer a few, not particularly well organized, thoughts that underlie this process.   They are the product of several years of intense reflection on my part, and my own participation in a number of efforts to examine education with an eye to making it something more meaningful.

American education is in large part broken, although I don’t think for usual reasons offered.  This may be because of conflicting visions about what education should do / accomplish.

Education is a  major economic issue.  There are huge amounts of money spent directly on educational process: salaries & benefits, books, transportation, physical plant, supplies.  In order to proceed we will need to have some sense of the scope, which I can outline somewhat as follows:
- K-12 public
- K-12 private
- Post secondary degree granting
- post secondary other
- early childhood

There are also many indirect costs of education, such as
 - high level of functional illiteracy among many
 - lack of basic economic understanding
 - lack of understanding of our history and system of government
 - lack of understanding of mathematics beyond basics
 - total lack of scientific understanding (problem not limited to biology
         or cosmology)
 - lack of historic awareness or of other cultures, even among many
       in the leadership.

 All of this leads to mistakes both by individual citizen and by leaders of public and private organizations.  One can argue that our current imbroglio in Iraq is an example of this.  Then Number 2 in the Department of Defense Paul Wolfowitz opined that one advantage of fighting in Iraq was that unlike Saudi Arabia there were no  Muslim holy places ab out which needed to be concerned, thus demonstrating total ignorance of the history of Shi’a Islam, which is the dominant orientation of the Iraqi population.  

I have said that the task before us is impossible.  Let me outline some of the difficulties we face in addressing it.

- most people think they know something about education having undergone some themselves.  There is a tendency to extrapolate from one’s own experience and observation

- there are large capital investments in physical plants that might actually be part of the problem: the capital plant of our schools is worth billions and there is a natural tendency to want to continue to utilize something in which so much treasure has been invested

- many jobs are tied to how we currently do the system.  Thus many constituencies have vested interests in not totally reshaping the structure of education, because such reshaping potentially  threatens their jobs and other economic interests.  Here I note that we have millions of teachers who have in recent years been buffeted about by one proposal for educational renewal after another, who are often blamed for perceived failure of students when they have relatively little control over content, decreasing control over pedagogy, and no control over the many hours that shape learning or inhibit it that take place outside of their classroom.  If each teacher is individually evaluated at the secondary level, in our current structure  it leads to cross conflicted students, as each teacher emphasizes his/her curriculum without regard to how it fits with those of others.  We cannot succeed in meaningful educational reform if we attempt to impose it top down on those upon whom we must rely to accomplish it.  Unfortunately too much of our approach has been one that is effectively that the beatings will continue until the moral improves.

- education is a convenient political football - everyone has some experience of it, and many parents are rightly concerned that their children get the best education possible.  This unfortunately  can lead to some silly and destructive things, such as
   ..... playing a zero sum game, that resources going elsewhere
         are viewed as taking resources from my child / community
         this makes it difficult to change how we finance education

    ....seeking advantage for my child.  Often done by decision
        of where to live / purchase a residence.  Also seen in parents
        registering newborns for the prestigious preschool / nursery to
        get on the escalator of preschool, primary, prep, college, etc.  
        This is compounded by how many colleges / universities
        in part  market themselves, which feeds this kind of thinking

- we do not agree on the purpose of education.  For some, they view
the purpose of school as socializing people to something common.  Certainly such was part of the basis for the expansion of public schooling beginning in 1890’s with the Committee of Ten. There was a need to “americanize” the large number of people coming from differing backgrounds, a point with currency today in light of the high number of non native born children and children of immigrants.

Others have argued for the need to provide marketable skills so that people can be employed (a valid concern), and employers want people who have the skills to do the jobs they have, but often do not wish to incur the expenses of the specific training.  There are other approaches as well, of course.  The conflicts between advocates of different purposes underlie many of the battles over educational policy:  if you cannot agree on the purpose of what you are doing, it is unlikely you will agree on the steps to be taken.

Let me stop for a moment.  We will need to understand how we arrived at the place in which we now find ourselves.  I have tentative agreement from a prominent historian of education to help with this process.  We cannot propose radical changes without being able to explain the history that has gone before now.

There are some basic conflicts in understanding about education and school.  Some argue that the best way to help people become Americans as they conceive of that role is by training them to emulate examples of what they consider good Americans.  This attitude leads to the idea that we study what is best about our national past, and looks askance at the idea of critically examining the weaknesses of our forebears and the missteps of our history, at least while students are still in K-12.  This tends to foster an attitude that is far more accepting of authority and less likely to be critical.  Examples of this kind of approach can be seen in things like former Secretary of Education William Bennett’s Book of Virtues  Others, perhaps driven by the idea of Santayana that those who do not know history are doomed to repeat it, believe it important to fully examine all of history, including the flaws of our Founders and the weaknesses of the system they established and led.  They believe that this should start at the earliest possible age, in order that our student develop the capability of thinking critically and not being bound by what has gone before.

It is important to note that this fundamental difference can very much drive the structure of how schooling is accomplished.  One mode is that the idea that knowledge is best obtained by what Paolo Freire pejoratively called the banking model: an authority presents the information, depositing it into the consciousness of the students. On the other end of the spectrum  is the belief that learning is more meaningful, retained better, and better able to be applied if one helps students construct their own understanding.  This constructivist approach, derived at least in part from the work of Lev Vygotsky, is very much in conflict with a traditionalist approach of recitation.  And of course these are not the only possible approaches.

It is impossible in one piece, even were it of book length, to fully explore even the issues already described.  And yet there are even more that we must consider:

- Is the current structure of our educational system even relevant nowadays from an educational perspective?  After all, despite all our attempts to use education to remove children from the workforce, an increasing number of our secondary students work, either because the income is needed by them or their families, or because they want independent money whose use is up to them.  Should our educational framework be redesigned to consider this?

- Is the model of going to college for 4 straight years now obsolete?  

I- Is taking children and confining them to a building for 6+ hours a day beginning when they are 4 or 5 years old the best way to help them learn?

- Is our division of material into discrete subject areas in fact counterproductive to real learning?  

- Given that the evidence is overwhelming of the diversity of learning styles among students, do we not have an obligation to provide learning opportunities that maximizes the chances for success for those of differing styles?  

- How do we determine that someone is educated, competent to move to the next level?

Even attempting to discuss thoroughly the future of education is complicated by ongoing conflicts in education.  I would like to see us step back and totally rethink how we do education.  My current occupation as a social studies teacher, who instructs in a self-contained classroom the subject of government in discrete 45 minutes periods, one of 8 during the course of the day (or 9 for those students who take a zero period), is not something I think conducive to real learning.  What role would there be for someone like me in a different system?  How do we involve the experience of teachers in rethinking what we are doing with schools and education and teaching and learning?

And yet while we attempt to step back to examine this topic, education inevitably is changing, with even more resources being committed to a structure that may have no chance of succeeding in its espoused goal of educating, whatever meaning we may ascribed to that term.  In the forthcoming session of Congress the issue of reauthorization of No Child Left Behind is a major topic.  Already battle plans are being formed, from those who want the basic structure maintained, but more money applied, to those who want no Federal role whatsoever in education,  andperhaps no local government role, who want to use the sanctions of NCLB as a means of delegitimizing public education, to those who are dedicated to opposing reauthorization in anything like the current format in the hopes of forcing some serious reexamination of how we do education.  This last group are in some manner natural allies of the process I am attempting to stimulate in our preparation for Yearlykos 2007, and I am a participant in some of these efforts.  But many of these natural allies believe that unless reauthorization is stopped the chance of rethinking what we are doing will disappear.  I have heard it described as a Vietnam or Iraq syndrome - we have put so much money and so many lives into what we have been doing that to walk away without achieving “success” would be to betray those who have given so much to the effort.  Here I am reminded of the most powerful words John Kerry ever spoke, to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, when he inquired how you asked someone to be the last man to die for a mistake.  Each day we allow our current system of miseducation to continue another child ‘dies” - the natural interest in learning gets suppressed by the mandates of tests and more “rigor.”  We have at least 23 years since A Nation at Risk, and probably many more, going back to “Why Johnny Can’t Read” in the 1950’s, that our solution has been to throw more and more at children, to demand that our schools and teachers do more and more, that the bar for ‘success’ be raised ever higher, even as we complain that we are not reaching the goals we have already established.  I fail to see how if someone cannot vault over a bar set at 10 feet we accomplish anything by raising that standard to 12 feet.  All it will mean is that even more will be marked by ‘failure’ whether these be schools or students.  

Originally posted to teacherken on Mon May 13, 2013 at 07:06 PM PDT.

Also republished by Education Alternatives and Teachers Lounge.

Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags


More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Tip Jar (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Linda Wood, BeninSC, Ree Zen, Mostel26

    "We didn't set out to save the world; we set out to wonder how other people are doing and to reflect on how our actions affect other people's hearts." - Pema Chodron

    by teacherken on Mon May 13, 2013 at 07:06:00 PM PDT

  •  Thank you (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    teacherken, Mostel26

    These are serious questions that we need to address, and the for-profit reformers are not interested in anything but the profit.


    Zen is "infinite respect for all things past; infinite service to all things present; infinite responsibility for all things future."--Huston Smith's Zen Master

    by Ree Zen on Mon May 13, 2013 at 07:56:39 PM PDT

  •  It is interesting to read that your 2006 diary (0+ / 0-)

    is so current, I mean that those of us who are very interested in education can continue to discuss any one of your points and still find lots to disagree about and lots to learn about from each other.

    But I think some things have changed. I think the argument over how to teach reading is less contentious now, though you don't mention that per se. And I think your anecdote about Wolfowitz not knowing anything about religion in Iraq is consistent with the concerns of parents and university faculty that our kids need to know more about history, the planet, and cultural tradition.

    For me, your key point is the question,

    What if any minimal common knowledge should we expect as an outcome of our educational processes?
    I think the trend is toward the belief that a minimum of common knowledge is in the best interests of our kids and our country. So now we're discussing what it should be and how it should be "implemented," or taught. Things like whether all third graders should be taught the same essential content, again, at a minimum, so that they can go to a fourth grade "minimal" content, is still somewhat in contention, but less so than it would have been in 2006.

    What you and I might have difficulty discussing is the social justice teaching method controversy, if such exists. I may misunderstand you, but I gather you advocate constructivist teaching methods while you are also in favor of providing students with a strong foundation of knowledge of history. I favor the strong foundation of knowledge, but I believe in direct instruction. Both terms, constructivist and direct instruction, are oversimplifications, but the controversy about them is significant. I think teaching methods are still the most current and important points of contention. I think the more students know about the world the more they will be activists for social justice.

  •  Measuring Learning (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    Thank you.  I really enjoyed reading your diary.

    Regarding this question, "How do we measure learning?"

    I had a few more questions....

    "Who are we trying to benefit by education -- the overall society or the child, himself?   Do we put the needs of the child over the needs of society or vice versa?  (training a kid for a job society needs, but the child does not want?  Holding back a gifted kid, or pushing a struggling kid too hard?).   We have decide on this before we measure learning, and use those results to make changes.

    “What are the purposes for measuring learning?”  

    “Who benefits most from the measurement of learning?”   (don't forget corporations that produce tests or conduct testing)

    “Is the measurement of learning in the CHILD’S best interests?”

    “Should we use different methods for measuring learning, depending on what is the purpose of the measurement?”

    "Who has a right to access information about the measurements of a child's learning?"

    "Are there uses of information about the measurements of learning that should be directly proscribed?"  (such as proscribing the use of genetic information in hiring practices).

    "How will the measurements of learning be used?"

    "How does the use of different measuring methods skew the results, and who benefits from skewed results?"

    "Do specific measurements of learning actually produce any tangible benefits TO THE CHILD, and should the measurements be allowed, if they do not?"

    "Is it ethical to subject a child to measurements of learning, where the primary benefit is not to the child?"  (such as testing to adjust teacher salaries, rather than testing to measure progress and adjust a student's study plan"

    I could go on and on.  A great subject.  

    You could start  think tank.  There's enough here for a large staff to ponder, for decades.

    •  human subjects testing - (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      there is supposed to be a pre-clearance proceeding to make sure it is ethica.

      and yet we are requiring students to sit for tests for which they have not been given instruction

      we are imposing upon them new ways of teaching that have not been piloted

      there are now people arguing that this is therefore a violation of federal law

      "We didn't set out to save the world; we set out to wonder how other people are doing and to reflect on how our actions affect other people's hearts." - Pema Chodron

      by teacherken on Tue May 14, 2013 at 09:46:36 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site