Madame:
Your paragraph
“There isn't any perfect curriculum. The next
program with the catchy name isn't going to fix anything. The problem is one of
freedom and time. No one has enough of either. Teachers don't for all the reasons
you've listed in your post. Parents don't because they are struggling to make
ends meet and families are stressed to the breaking point. And children don't.
They are herded from class to class and then after school their schedules keep
them from processing the day's events and careful reflection. Imagine someone
in charge trying to suggest that we actually do less, or have more
recess and time outdoors. Imagine parents having time to engage their children
in conversation instead of just being the nightly homework police.”
is one of the best
encapsulations of the American elementary/secondary education situation I’ve
ever seen. Of course, the American
penchant for filling whatever time there is with diversions and entertainment,
along with spectacle-fixation and busybody concern over peripheral matters,
rather than true reflection and meaningful work for meaningful change, means we
also have to address that flaw before the quite necessary other adjustments you
so astutely outline can have good effect.
The question you ask
about how education “jumped off the track” is in some respects a direct one,
and in others, a complex one. For
true understanding, it requires “deep history,” going back far into the 20th
and even 19th centuries, but in many respects, American education has
been caught up in anti-progressive strategies of the upper-upper class for many
decades now. In their transformation of
society, they have sometimes transformed education directly, often because of
finances, but even more so done it indirectly, again, because of finances. It has often been disguised as “reform,” and as
they are accomplished masters of long-term strategy, deception, deflection, mis/disinformation,
and emotional manipulation, they enlisted many witting and unwitting assistants
along the way.
It is not to say the
ground was infertile for their methods. A
Nation At Risk, a document I’ve
always had ambivalent feelings about, came out of a time when a fair amount of what
I term unmoored, fuzzy liberal foolishness, along with initial bureaucratic
growth and the results of the beginning of student catering, helped to focus a
backlash. In typical fashion, pieces of
the report were concentrated on and the rest ignored. The conservative rising tide found ready ears
in calls for increasing the number of school days in a year, longer school
days, etc. All in the name of more “rigorous
academic standards,” a mantra that would culminate of course in No Child Left Behind, with its
standardized tests to quantify and measure “achievement”—and punish school
systems (and teachers) who did not meet those “standards.”
The sagging fortunes of
the middle class coincided with slashing of state budgets for education,
leaving the property tax emphasized even more as the discriminator between
abled and disabled school districts. Federal aid became more and more needed,
but came with more and more “strings,” leading to increase in directly and
indirectly associated bureaucracy. As
schools struggled to respond to the unceasing chorus of criticism from a
society unable to truly look at itself, they got more administration, more “counselors,”
more special assistants, etc. to try to meet the impossible demands and “standards.”
More and more requirements
were made on students’ time outside of the teacher-directed classroom. Less and less latitude was permitted the
teacher on the how, what, and how much of that what the teacher taught. As society became The Nation of Strangers that Vance Packard tried to warn us so
eloquently about, schools became less and less a student body and more and more
a collection of individuals (and their parents who emphasized that individual
separatism). Sometimes they were coddled
individuals; at other times they were excessively structured (stifled)
ones. The increasing stress factor on nearly
all helped to make school less a shared experience of community (and perhaps wonder),
and more a required feat of endurance.
Visionless legislators
teamed up with visionless administrators to find visionless education “reformers”
that inflicted continual rounds of “reform” and “initiatives” to address the
symptoms of the above, but of course, they only made most everything worse (a
few things got a bit better, at least statistically, but the exceptions only
proved the pattern).
Today’s result: More
well-off school districts fare better, of course, but, with only a few
exceptions, to find great performing schools and great performing students of
the kind your memory remembers, you’ll have to look to those that are generally
private—and not all private schools, but primarily only those of the
upper-upper class.
No comments:
Post a Comment