Real Reform: What we DO want (?)

9 thoughts on “Real Reform: What we DO want (?)”

1. 

   I consider myself to be a,progressive with respect to education. But I have to say that most of these were on the progressives’ listed five, ten, and likely more than ten years ago. AND I hope you will agree that much has changed in ten, even just five years – some due to the influence of the corporations, venture philanthropists, and their lackeys, the politicians. BUT there also is much in the way of research on education as well as new technology; AND there have been huge shifts in the manner in which the world operates – the job opportunities.

   With the exception of #15 and maybe some of #3 and #10, there is no acknowledgements. Two thoughts: EVERYTHING has to change to reflect the changes and opportunities that happen regularly; AND there are specific problems that have continually raised their ugly heads without resolution (e.g., the presence of totally incompetent teachers with no attempt to help or eliminate – just waiting for retirement; they existed in the 1950’s when I was in school, the 1980’s when our kids were in school, and in the 2000’s and 2010’s while our grandkids are in school).

   If the progressives are going to gain any traction with the public and get some sanity into education, may I strongly suggest each progressive honestly work with motivated people of ALL persuasions to honestly find the BETTER ALTERNATIVES that do exist and can help all students become effectivee Learners. I’m sorry but the premise that progressives generally are AGAINST items for the most part is NOT addressed by restating the progressive position of 10+ years ago!

   Posted by John Bennett | June 10, 2012, 1:58 pm
   Reply to this comment
   • 

     I’m not sure I followed your full train if thought…so let me offer just a couple responses…I would say that the ideas on teacher prep and teacher eval I had would solve some of the issues of incompetent admins allowing “bad teachers” to continue woeking, but your point is taken that some specific language on that might help…but remember that’s also a framing issue – “let’s fire bad teachers” frames the debate in a specific way that overemphasizes the problem of bad teachers and makes ussues seem falsely narrow and too classroom-based; no one’s going to lose an argument saying bad teachets need to go – who’s gonna disagree….but if I frame it as “all kids deserve a well-compensated, well-trained educator who sees them as a whole human being,” it’s an entirely different (and better) conversation….also, if my positions are indeed those of a few years ago, it’s because we haven’t won yet and are fighting a generation of global neoliberalism — but that’s no reason to abandon them….the question asked what is our agenda and i posed one, not what an agenda might be if i had to be overly pragmatic with the negarious forces in the NJ state legislature — the provlem is that the institutional power tasked w/advocating for the agenda, our state abd national unions, don’t even start from this point — they start meeting opponents half-way and finish having met them 2/3 or 3/4 of the way….

     Sent from my iPhone

     Posted by iteach4change | June 10, 2012, 4:16 pm
     Reply to this comment
2. 

   Here’s what I would add:

   1.) End forced schooling. It’s amazing how many of the “problems” are made possible by–in fact, caused by–the fact that young people are required to participate in a system with rules over which they have no control. Yes, of course I realize that schooling is, first and foremost, a $500 billion dollar business that would be sent into total upheaval if it didn’t have a captive (sic) audience. Yes, I realize that the test makers, curriculum writers, administrators, building contractors, desk-and-blackboard-and other overpriced school crap-makers, and ineffective teachers would all have to find other work to do. So what? Look how long we propped up tobacco growers in the name of job/income security? Would we worry about putting the mob out of business by legalizing certain drugs? We didn’t when we introduced state lotteries (not that they are such a good thing to promote). Young people are natural learners, yet we treat them as guilty of being incapable of becoming productive (forget happy!) members of society without being forced to endure 12 or more years of incarceration. “Twenty years of schooling and they put you on the day shift; look out, kid, they keep it all hid…”, as Dylan said. This is not to say that some people don’t get some value out of being in school some of the time, but as William Blake wrote, “If a blighted tree bears fruit, let it not be said that it was the blight that produced the fruit.”

   2.) Use taxpayer money–both locally-raised and that raised by the feds and re-distributed to communities that really need it due to poverty, etc.–to provide resources and options for families. Use libraries and community centers as examples, where there is a public service that benefits individuals without compelling their use. Create “institutions” (if they must be called such) that provide many of the same services as schools–instruction, for example–but on a voluntary participation basis, where the providers (“teachers”) and recipients (youth as well as adults) form an equal partnership in determining what they do. (“Okay, you want to learn about how to write a play, calculate the area under a curve, understand how our laws were made, etc. etc.? This is what I, your teacher, want in return–meaning both compensation for my services and type/degree of participation from you. If it’s not worth it to you to pay me a living wage, or to do the kind of work that I think is nec’y to master what you say you want to know, then perhaps you and I should find other partners to help us reach our goals. (This is the way commerce works, isn’t it? If I don’t like the quality of your goods or the price you are asking for them, I shop somewhere else.) Other models include adult education centers (what a treat to be able to learn Russian history without having to worry about grades or even going to class if you have something better to do that night!); homeschoolers’/unschoolers’ resource centers such as North Star for Teens in western Massachusetts, Open Connections in eastern Pennsylvania; and truly democratic schools such as Sudbury Valley in eastern Mass, (I know there are many more options around the country and the world.) Why not create public places that replicate these obviously successful options?

   In short, let’s finally follow John Holt’s plea and start trusting young people to learn, and let’s stop corrupting their natural process in the name of job creation for an enormous number of people whose work is ineffective, irrelevant or, worst of all, punishing to the very people they are supposed to be serving. Even having the best of intentions does not make up for generations of compulsory mis-education.

   Posted by Peter A. Bergson | June 10, 2012, 4:50 pm
   Reply to this comment
   • 

     I can get hip to some of that – especially since the hegemonic models of schools are factory models, but i think choice/free market can be a dangerous step if not handled well…and i’m very critical of total hone schooling/unschooling in most cases (another topic for another day)…and let’s remember that a lot of sudbury type schools are in white, affluent areas….and if you characterize public ed as sticking with something in the name of jobs for teachers and others, many of who are bad, then you and mr. holt are delusional — there is no need to toss public ed aside – we simply need to change/update it….not to mention, i’m responding to a question about public ed reforn – if you want to advocate for your models, write a post – this post is w/the assumption we keep much of the structure, just reform/revutionize/chane/transform/fix/update it…. the almost libertarian vision you suggest is beyond the parameters of this conversation

     Sent from my iPhone

     Posted by iteach4change | June 10, 2012, 5:11 pm
     Reply to this comment
3. 

   I’d just add that unequal communities need extra resources. Most affluent kids don’t need nearly as much support as poor kids. We ought to be looking at ways to spend 2-3x per pupil for disadvantaged kids.

   Posted by Eli | June 10, 2012, 5:11 pm
   Reply to this comment
   • 

     agreed – i thought my ideas on funding implied/covered that…. schools funded by property taxes ensures continued inequity….

     Posted by iteach4change | June 10, 2012, 5:14 pm
     Reply to this comment
4. 

   Great list, and I’m with Eli above. Income inequality is a very significant piece and needs to be part of the discourse.

   Appreciatively,

   Kirsten

   Posted by Kirsten Olson | June 11, 2012, 7:29 am
   Reply to this comment
   • 

     Totally agree – i tried to address that in my catch-all about public policy and in the increased collectivist culture bit…just to tell you my thinking…

     Posted by iteach4change | June 11, 2012, 9:15 am
     Reply to this comment
5. 

   Student-directed learning; democratic education 🙂

   Best regards,
   C

   Posted by Chad Sansing | June 14, 2012, 12:17 pm
   Reply to this comment