You hit one of my really hot buttons. One of the most expensive schools in
the nation, when breaking out the cost per pupil, has the lowest scores on
any standardized test given.
Standardized testing is not always a meaningful measurement of
student capability, but it is often dragged out as the post upon which
we can beat public education into submission.
That should clarify that fact that money is
not the problem, but it gets ignored as most would prefer to simply accept
the easy way out. I have several relatives who teach at college level and
they espouse the same unwashed garbage without using their fine minds to
analyze what the problem really is.
But what IS the problem? I'm certain Bob Allen would concur that
many students working through college lack the ability to fully
comprehend what they read, cannot write persuasively, lack logic and
critical thinking skills, and further, cannot effectively use
mathematics as a problem solving tool. What do you expect college
professors to do when students come to them with poorly developed
skills? Why is this happening?
On the other hand, and I'm certain Bob Allen would agree, a
percentage of students moving through colleges are very skilled,
highly motivated and capable of academic success. Why the contrast?
The situation in education is very complex. The argument put forth
that American society places greater value on its military might than
it does on education has merit. I've read somewhere that "where your
treasure is, there your heart is also."
What most folks ignore is the simple fact that throwing more money at the
school system is NOT going to begin to address the problem as long as
PARENTS use the schools as parking places with baby sitters for their
offspring. That is one of the reasons that most schools are unwilling or
not permitted to provide any punishment to miscreants. Hence we see
pre-teens in handcuffs for temper tantrums or worse.
I remember school being a place where only the "smart" boys had a
chance to succeed. The kids who didn't do well were systematically
shunted off to the "dumb" class, given the least experienced teachers
with the worst textbooks, and suspended from school for any infraction
that hinted they might not become ideal citizens. Many of them simply
dropped out. I remember girls having three career choices: teacher,
nurse or secretary. I remember racial discrimination, and I know what
it's like to be treated unfairly simply for being poor and coming from
an ESL family. This was happening on a wide scale as recently as the
1960's, when I was in school.
Much has changed. There are greater opportunities in education for a
far wider spectrum of our society than was the case when I was growing
up. Pointing the finger at test scores and complaining that society
is dumbing down and that schools consist of nothing more than a
baby-sitting service ignores a lot of positive change.
The teachers unions are not going to say money is not the answer because it
removes the reason for their fight to get more pay and reduces their
political leverage. The taxing folks are not going to say that because then
the people will want to lower taxes and politicians are against you having
your own money and choices because then government won't be providing
everything. Clearly the students are not going to say that because they
don't know.
Let's examine teacher pay for a moment. Here's a web site you can
visit that lays out salaries for various professions:
http://swz.salary.com/salarywizard/layouthtmls/swzl_salaryrangenarrow_20.html
The median elementary teacher salary in the United States is $45,617.
A high school teacher will bring home $47,565, whereas an assistant
history professor at the college level makes an average of $44,387. A
full tenured chemistry professor might expect $81,139, after having
education "piled high and deep", with the ongoing demand for peer
reviewed publication. Compare this with an advertising
manager--someone with a bachelor's degree who manages, develops, and
implements product marketing activities to maximize sales of an
assigned product line--and you will find their median salary at $83,096.
So then, the people who are responsible for developing independent
thinking skills are paid considerably less than is the case for people
who are responsible for developing dissatisfaction among consumers.
The average mortgage credit manager makes $95,477 for managing the
mortgage credit underwriting function for a bank, and I dare say that
such a profession is LESS demanding than planning an effective
education program for children.
Yet you argue that money doesn't enter the equation. I don't
understand how you can write this.
Unfortunately for many, the intelligentsia has sold the idea of more money
to the schools rather than parental involvement and interest.
I'm not confident that this idea has been "sold" to anyone, rather,
it's the outgrowth of societal priorities. Having been in the
classroom and witnessed firsthand the apathy that many parents bring
into the education of their children, it's easy for me to understand
how classroom teachers can become jaded.
Further, parental interest is not always a good thing. I worked for
several years in a Christian school, where parental involvement was
far more of an impediment than it was positive. For example, on many
occasions I was severely chastised for teaching evolution. What I
find highly ironic about this, and most people in this forum
understand by now, is that I believe that God created the universe and
always presented a very critical view of evolutionary theory, yet the
fundamentalists didn't even want the CONCEPT of evolution presented to
their children at all! It didn't matter to these folk that evolution
is as much a part of the curriculum as social studies or mathematics. . .
Yet, one of my students went on to score 100% on the criterion
referenced British Columbia Provincial Exam for biology--the only
student in the history of this province to do so. He was in my
classroom for two years (I taught all subjects in 5 grades
concurrently at that time) and moved on to a Christian high school
that served him very well, as his test scores illustrate.
Education is supposed to develop thinking skills. It's important to
partner with parents in this realm, but the sad reality is that many
parents had bad experiences in school themselves, they're busy making
money to support a comfortable lifestyle, and it's far easier to
"leave teaching to the professionals".
When was the
last time YOU went to your kid's school to visit with a teacher?
Yesterday afternoon, actually! (But I admit that the dynamic for me
is easier, as my colleagues know they're talking to another educator.)
We were "discussing" sentence subjects, because of a controversial
test item:
"The natives of the village were discussing plans to build a resort."
My son identified "the natives" as the subject of that sentence, but
his teacher marked the response as incorrect because she wanted him to
include the preposition "of the village". We talked about "the
village" as the object of the preposition "of", but SHE is the teacher
in that classroom, it was HER test, and she prevailed.
Nobody cares about a single item on a 5th grade grammar test anyway. . .
Even a bad teacher can be lead to the path of educating kids rather than
babysitting,
but someone who cares has to do the work. When was the last time you
reviewed your kid's test results good AND bad with an eye to teaching the
corrective information? When did you look at your kids homework to make
sure they are getting the message? A little outside help goes a very long
way towards making an education effective, and that is the parents JOB.
This is an excellent synopsis of what is required to successfully
partner with professional educators, most of whom didn't get into the
field because it offered great financial rewards. Remember, however,
that the smart kids are easy to teach. The ones who struggle require
far more effort for a whole lot less success, and the public schools
are filled to overflowing with students like these. Many excellent
teachers burn out before their 5th year in the classroom.
Let's put it on a more direct basis. How many of you discuss biofuels with
your kids? That is educational, if someone explains some of the technical
and financial issues that are hidden from view. I do. We cannot move
towards biofuel usage without educating people with more than the
intelligentsia allows in schools.
Jim, some of us actually taught about biofuels and conservation in
school. One year I had my students build a woodstove powered steam
turbine. We calculated its efficiency (which was terrible!) then
extrapolated the impact of such a device on the forest ecosystem as a
model for how human energy use can quickly strain a watershed.
But those of us with an interest in conservation are swimming
upstream against a powerful social current. For most Americans,
change is only motivated by crisis. A crisis over energy use is
inexorable, and for those of us who desire to preserve the earth, now
is the time to educate ourselves and gain experience so we can help
our neighbors understand how to adapt when the time comes.
We planted our garden last Sunday. There are few activities in
Western society more subversive than tending a garden!
robert luis rabello
"The Edge of Justice"
Adventure for Your Mind
http://www.authorhouse.com/BookStore/ItemDetail.aspx?bookid=9782>
Ranger Supercharger Project Page
http://www.members.shaw.ca/rabello/
_______________________________________________
Biofuel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel
Biofuel at Journey to Forever:
http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html
Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable):
http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
