A Sense of Urgency
Here's a recent exchange I had with an area school administrator
and a teacher. I was surprised none of the business people on
the list responded, but encouraged how quickly the responses arrived.
First, my original posting
I've recently been reading a disturbing book called, The World
is Flat. Disturbing because it paints a picture of how China, India, and
Japan are aiming for our high-paying jobs with everything they can muster.
Most disturbing to me is how their K-12 systems reportedly focus on a lot
of Math and Science. The book makes multiple references to a publication
called Education Weekly, which all educators supposedly subscribe to,
that has published disturbing statistics showing 4th graders are pretty
much on-par with other countries, but as our children progress through
middle and high school they fall further behind.
There's also some upsetting information about perceived levels of ambition
between Asian and American students.
Coincidentally, everyone in Michigan has been reading about the loss
of labor and other low-skilled jobs. This past week has also seen
discussions about why young men aren't going to college at the same
rates they used to.
A few weeks ago Michigan's Superintendent of Schools proposed 16 required
courses for graduation, featuring math and science. What is Royal Oak's
position on the new proposal?
Lastly, I'm coming to the opinion that one course can't serve
college-bound and vocational-bound students at the same time. We need
to identify those students with greater aptitude and make sure we get
busy filling their heads before they reach college. Competition starts
earlier than it used to and I want to know our children are prepared
not just for 2006, bug 2010, 2020, and beyond.
The first response I got back was from a district administrator
I wasn't aware was on the list. I thought it was just the teacher
and other business people.
Hi Tom-
I too have read the book and found it very interesting. Royal Oak
does not have an official position on the new mandates that have been
proposed. My guess is that they will be approved, with a few possible
variations. I think everyone is in agreement that most students in high
school can handle more rigor. I think that, for some kids, greater focus
on math and science is appropriate and necessary. My personal opinion
however, is that not all kids are successful in those areas. The mandates
call for 4 years of math and three of science. I think that's a great
idea, but am not sure why those classes need to be specifically mandated.
For a student who struggles in math, Algebra II is one of the hardest
courses in high school, but students will have to pass it in order
to graduate. If that student wants a career in an area that is based
more in languages or human services, why that course? Why not a more
appropriate math course for him/her? I've seen all A students whose
grade points have been dramatically impacted by one or two courses,
preventing them from getting into a college of their choice.
Remember that schools in Asia are not necessarily mandated to accept and
educate all children the way we are in the U.S. In general, it has been
shown time and again though, that education is much more valued in Asia.
I think that question is a cultural issue that I could go on and on about
(don't worry, I won't).
So, I guess what I am saying is that I agree with the new standards as
long as we don't forget those kids who won't fit the mold. Our job is
to educate all kids.
Several of the administrator's comments got under my skin.
Think back to college and how many times your major may have changed.
What did you really know in high school about what you wanted to
be when you grew up, or what you could be, or what you needed to be?
I thought I'd be a ballroom dance instructor for a while cause the hours
were good, the work was fun, and the girls were pretty. I suspect
entrusting minors to make decisions that will affect the rest of
their lives is an abdication of responsibility on both their parents
and boards of education going back to the 60s and protests against
"the establishment", "don't trust anyone older than 30" and any of a
number of flower-child emblems that resonated with the common themes
anti-establishment rhetoric.
Why is college enrollment down for freshmen-aged men? Why is it their
choice? Community college remains affordable and the cost is no less
for women than for men. Why aren't our children being encouraged, nay,
required to continue their education after receiving their diploma?
Why are parents giving them that option? Are 17 and 18-year olds
mature enough to make that decision? Over twenty years ago we decided
they weren't old enough to drink responsibly and yet they're electing
themselves whether or not post-secondary education has value?
Remember that schools in Asia are not necessarily mandated to accept
and educate all children >the way we are in the U.S. In general,
it has been shown time and again though, that education >is much more
valued in Asia. I think that question is a cultural issue that I could
go on and on >about (don't worry, I won't).
I should follow your self restraint!
So, I guess what I am saying is that I agree with the new standards
as long as we don't forget those kids who won't fit the mold. Our
job is to educate all kids.
It is, but must we give all kids the
same education? I'm not familiar with all education policies, but to
what level do we teach to; lower, middle, or upper? Capitalism, and
success in general, cares little for mediocrity. Failure is part of
life and a great learning experience. Education affords an egalitarian
result only by ignoring the inevitable consequences awaiting students
after they graduate. It will matter little to our unemployed students
that foreigners and immigrants awarded their jobs came from education
systems that discriminated. They won't care. All they know is they're
unemployed or under-employed. How will their self esteem from high
school make up for what they don't know about math and science and
their inability to afford housing?
GM will lay off tens of thousands. Ford will lay of thousands.
Delphi will layoff and cut the pay of thousands. Has everybody read
the desperate cries of these people preparing to lose 50% of their
income at once with nothing to fall back on? The automotive industry,
and all manufacturing, is fast approaching a reckoning when it and the
nation discover low-skill jobs will receive much lower pay than we're
accustomed to. Even our service economy, which has absorbed much of
what manufacturing abandoned, is being sent over seas.
Are we preparing our students to be life-long students, constantly
retraining themselves and preparing for the multiple job changes most
will experience through their lifetimes? It takes at least 15 years
of schooling to prepare an engineer for their first job. Must it
all happen in the last four? Where will tomorrow's science and math
teachers come from? Students don't need (and shouldn't have) to make
these decisions now. Students' best options are available after they
graduate, not before. We need to stop pretending (I hope that's all
it is) they have as many options as they think they do. They don't.
Options increase with education. 18 year-olds aren't mature or wise
enough to weigh the value of options today v. options four years
from now. That's a decision they shouldn't be responsible for simply
because parents and curricula prepared them to feel better about fewer
options when they should be hungry for many more.
This is all a verbose version of Nolan Finley's 11/20 column
.
I don't know what to do, but I feel like yelling. Let me know if there's
something either of you think may be a worthwhile tree to bark up.
That must be it. I feel like barking!
After reading my response, Tiffani threatened to take
the book away. Since it was a gift from her folks I blamed it
on them.
At this point the list's teacher responded:
I agree with all of these points. I am convinced it is much more
societal than it is systemic in the educational system. One of my
biggest frustrations are the "Decided Non-Learners" that walk our halls
and interrupt our classrooms. There is becoming a large population of
students, mainly guys but includes some girls, that are not interested -
don't care - or will not do anything for us teachers in the classroom.
I bust my butt, short of putting on the useless dog and pony show with
costumes and props, to interest those students in any subject matter that
I am teaching. If they do not have immediate feedback/satisfaction and/or
a physical reward, or if their parents do not threaten some of them to
within an inch of their life, they will not do anything in the classroom.
This is societal. If the household environment does not put a high value
on education, the kids do not value it at all. In short - the parents who
care and are involved - the students, for the most part, succeed in high
school and are successful. Let me ask this. Two students side by side.
Doing the same classes in high school and getting fairly good grades.
One student is going to college and has to pay for it themselves.
The other does not want to go to college. What are the differences?
I can feel their pain. Really. I heard similar sentiments
from one of my son's teachers shortly after the Ferndale
School District reorganized his elementary school to house all
the district's K-2 students.
I started out quoting from the teacher's comment:
Let me ask this. Two students side by side. Doing the same classes in
high school and getting fairly good grades. One student is going to
college and has to pay for it themselves. The other does not want to
go to college. What are the differences?
It shouldn't be their choice? It matters little whether they want
to go or not. The parents of both should consider long and hard the
consequences of their decisions.
Nolan Finley's article reported only 25% of Michigan's graduating seniors
are adequately prepared for college, and only 20% of our freshmen will
graduate from college.
One of my employees grew up in Russia. This morning he told me his
schools had only only one track -- college bound. Kids that couldn't keep
up simply got poor grades and ended up in trades (consider, however, that
after an alternative track they would have still ended-up in the trades).
He also went to a Russian university and said his K-12 was more difficult
than his degree was. No wonder America still has more universities and
more highly regarded universities than any other country (as reported in
"The World is Flat"). Everyone wants to come here for post-secondary
education. Too bad we can interest so few of our own children in it!