In a message dated 8/30/2002 9:20:32 AM Central Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> I can understand > why someone would support Joe Erickson given how difficult it is to > understand how liberal educational philosophy perpetuates school failure. I don't agree with Michael Atherton that liberal educational philosophy perpetuates school failure. We don't agree about what makes good schools good. And I doubt that we could agree on what a good school looks like. I think that a majority of students in Minnesota's public school system are enrolled in schools that are doing a great job of educating nearly all of their students. Although I engage in what some call 'public school bashing,' I also do a little public school cheerleading from time to time. How do public schools where 95-99% of the students pass the Minnesota Basic standards on the first try differ from the public schools in Minneapolis, leaving aside student background characteristics? One difference is that they don't have a nonacademic work-readiness curriculum. Instruction in good public schools is done the same way it is done in good private schools. Instruction is based on individualized educational planning, not ability-grouping. That's why a majority of public schools in Minnesota get about the same results as the better private college preparatory schools. Lets consider 3 policy changes proposed by Michael Atherton which go against the grain of so-called liberal educational philosophy: (See message posted by [EMAIL PROTECTED], dated 8/31/2002 2:46:29 PM Central Daylight Time): 1. Test teachers on their knowledge of their subjects. Rationale: teacher training programs overemphasize general teaching methodology, the emphasis should be on curriculum content. 2. Promote structure and discipline. Institutional constraints: "a) Contemporary educational philosophy holds that discipline and structure inhibit student learning..." "b) Liberal public school administrators are unwilling to tarnish their careers by supporting individual teachers in disciplinary actions." 3. Need a better system for weeding out bad teachers. "Bad teachers don't quit, they just stay on till retirement. The unions, weak-kneed administrators, and an unconcerned public are responsible for this problem." If the public schools in Minneapolis are failing because of contemporary educational philosophy, teacher training programs that overemphasize general teaching methodology, weak-kneed liberal school administrators, and teachers unions, then all of the public schools in Minnesota must be failing because just about all the public schools in Minnesota have those things in common. I think that the Minneapolis Public Schools will be better off without the kind of 'conservative' reforms which Michael Atherton advocates. -Doug Mann Mann for School Board web site http://educationright.tripod.com _______________________________________ Minneapolis Issues Forum - A Civil City Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest option, and more: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
