|
Musicmystery -> RE: Public Schools (3/13/2010 10:56:30 AM)
|
julia,
First, you're going to have to let go of preconceptions and educational buzzword/soundbite/knee-jerk reactions. You have been taking statements and pinning them to concepts and programs other than what I've been discussing. That's not going to further any discussion.
Second, a disclaimer--I'm no expert on K-12 education. My very fine colleagues address those areas--my expertise is in the professional world. It's why I was recruited.
I CAN tell you what I'm seeing come out of high schools, including students with straight A grades, including students with AP credit--they can't write. Not paragraphs, not sentences, not even grammar. Research means typing something into Google. They can't evaluate the information they find. Although a B indicates good work, they consider it a grave insult, "a slap in the face." They aren't at all interested in improving--they find their work perfect already. They can't concentrate for five minutes. They can't visualize and construct a project over time. They have no background knowledge--they literally don't know that Civil Rights and the Civil War are separate matters a century apart. Some have never heard of either. Many of them can barely read--no, I'm not exaggerating. Some are even proud they've been able to skate through without reading. Their entire life is their cell phone. And before you go there again, no, that's neither a dismissal nor a condemnation---it's where things are on day one when they walk into class. Much of the college level work has to wait for or be incorporated in basic lessons on how to go to school and how to take responsibility as a young adult.
I don't think the schools are liberal. I think they face a great many challenges, from funding to the people making the decisions (my local school board is, all but one, high school graduates) with too little information and understanding, overcrowding, slow adaptation to a rapidly changing world, insufficiently prepared teachers (half of whom quit the profession within the first three years), poorly paid good teachers, political interference, and much more. The solutions aren't comfortable, especially when they usually involve money. That's the only sense they are "liberal" -- to some people, if it costs money, it's ipso facto "liberal." And then solutions aren't easy to pinpoint, especially with any real consensus.
Without a question students have changed from a few decades ago, as have parents. The term "Helicopter Parent" didn't exist a few years back; now it's a common phrase. Laws restricting what teachers can tell parents of college students didn't exist either. Students expect all learning to be fun. They expect A grades for showing up more or less. They expect deadlines to be extended readily. They expect to turn in the same quality work they've always done, no improvement. They expect homework to be brief and to be easy to complete immediately. When they have difficulties, they complain to authority, not uncommonly making up things that never happened. They often lie and play victim to avoid responsibilities, even to their own detriment, as it's their first impulse. These are maturity issues.
What I DID target specifically in the other thread is the self-esteem movement starting in the 70s, and now dogma. It's a recipe for victim creation. Sounds great---who isn't for building a child's self-esteem, or for that matter, a college student's--but it's a mirage. Real self-esteem comes from accomplishment, not from letting anything at all be acceptable. Instead of "Don't worry, that's fine, let's move on," they need, "Don't worry--you'll get it; let's go over it again together." When the student finally meets the mark--THEN the "Well done" means something, something real, something that will stick with the student, something that will truly promote self-esteem and the desire to meet the next challenge.
Instead, we create victims. Too tough? You're persecuting the poor child. Too lenient? You're a great rescuer--but later come the lawsuits (yes, people literally sue institutions) for not rescuing good enough. They were owed, and the institution didn't deliver. They are not at fault. Trouble is, it's no way to get anywhere in the world. It's just an excuse for failure to do so.
I do think education deserves part of the blame. In particular, quite few popular beliefs are in fact myths flying in the face of research. Discussion works better than lectures, right? Research says no--discussion is more popular, but students learn more from lecture. Students learn best according to their learning styles, right? Again, research says no--all students learn better from a variety of styles, and best of all when the styles are well-matched to the particular subject, not the student. And of course, hybrid methods are poorly researched or not at all--such as intensively guided discussion. The journals are also full of "studies" that are really "here's what I and a colleague did with two classes last term"--hardly a study, as classes vary widely, and a host of factors could easily alter outcomes with such a shallow data basis. But, these are frequently adopted as "fact" because they sound good. That's who's doing the teaching of critical thinking--people so readily convinced on such scanty evidence. No, not all, of course--but many.
Incidentally, the ineffective interaction among Victim/Persecutor/Rescuer has been well-studied by psychologists. I'm sure you can find journal articles if you're curious.
Put all this together, and you have an environment counterproductive to effective learning.
Yes, many students learn despite this. I'm not sure the schools count. I skipped high school frequently--mainly to read and study more challenging material on my own, earning my scholarship. Motivated people will always achieve their goals.
Then we have Christian politics geared toward changing education from learning to indoctrination. A whole other challenge.
|
|
|
|
