In my mind, the purpose of schooling is to help students develop the ability to;
1) Understand the cultural heritage that drives our way of life.
2) Make appropriate decisions based on, clear thinking and, an understanding of the natural world.
3) Communicate with others effectively in multiple ways.
4) Live by a set of common moral values.
If any one of these four cornerstones of education is missing, the school has failed to meet its obligation to the students it graduated. In order to accomplish the goals listed above, students must acquire a set of skills which include, but are not limited to; reading, writing, speaking, observing, and calculating.
Understanding The Cultural Heritage That Drives Our Way of Life
I do not believe that students should be taught a particular culture, but rather, they should be exposed to any and all cultures that have a significant impact on their lives. Certainly the European, African, Hispanic, Native American, and Asian cultures have had a significant impact on the way all of us live. But I would not limit exposure to only those. To achieve this goal, students would have to be exposed to music, dance, story telling, food, laws, geography, and the literature common to each. The big idea here is that our present laws and culture have been influenced by many others.
Make Appropriate Decisions Based on, Clear Thinking and, an Understanding of the Natural World.
Should I invest money for my retirement? If so, where should I put it? Should the government fund and control health care or should we be responsible for those ourselves? Is abortion wrong and immoral, or is it a right of women? What environmental damage is acceptable in order to maintain a certain standard of living? What powers should the police have over us? Which treatment should I choose for my cancer or heart condition? What information do people need in order to answer these questions? Only a population versed in History, Science, Mathematics, and Social Science can make such important decisions. Or are we all too happy to let political parties make this type of decision for us?
History gives us a perspective in which to frame each decision. Science and Math help us evaluate information used to persuade (or brain-wash) us into leaning one way or the other. Social science helps us understand our motivation and predict the effect our decisions will have on others.
Communicate With Others Effectively in Multiple Ways.
The educated person should be able to write effectively and read with understanding. I would not limit communication skills to just those. The educated person should speak clearly, listen with an open mind, and understand the powerful messages transmitted through the arts. They should know how to use a computer to research information as well as communicate with others. Language, speech, theater, and art would all be necessary to build these skills.
Live By a Set of Common Moral Values
Except for fostering the idea that one’s health is to be valued, this is the one area where many public schools drop the ball most often. Modern educators are often uncomfortable teaching “morals”, they should not be. Not teaching morals is in fact teaching morals. When we don’t help students develop an understanding of right and wrong, we are in fact teaching that right and wrong are relative—a moral value. I’m not talking here about Religion, I would not favor teaching Religion in public schools, but I would favor teaching what is right and what is wrong. Our framework for making those decisions should be the constitution and laws of this country. Would you not teach that murder and theft are wrong just because there is a “commandment” against them? I am a Roman Catholic, but I would not favor a law making it illegal to eat meat on Friday in lent, or get a divorce. Schools must teach about government and laws, as well as the religious framework upon which these were generated—this does not mean they would teach religion. A clear distinction between what is moral and what is legal must be the driving question that is explored here.
Assuming that students went to high school for four years and there were 7 classes each day, for a total of 28 credits, and I would require students to take 4- 1 credit summer classes for a total upon graduation of 32 credits, I would require the following for graduation. Some particular courses might be ½ or even 1/4 credit.
4 credits in Science (including biology, chemistry, and physics)
4 credits in math (including Algebra (basic and advanced), Geometry, Trigonometry, and Statistics)
4 credits in Social Studies (including both US and world history, government, Geography, Psychology and Sociology)
4 credits in English Language Arts (including Writing, Literature, Drama, and Speech)
4 credits in Life Skills (including physical education, health, nutrition, personal finance, investing, and basic computer skills.
4 credits in Foreign Language and Culture (including foreign languages, world cultures and religions)
4 credits in Moral Development (including religious studies, and our legal and moral responsibilities as citizens.
2 credits in Fine Arts (including art, music, dance, theater, and film)
2 credits in electives
I would consider this schedule a minimum, general educational program. I would allow, even encourage students to pass out of required courses in order to take more electives, personalizing their curriculum. Highly capable students could fulfill some of these requirements in Junior High School and pass out of requirements easily. Others might do independent study to fulfill the requirements.
I would not force curriculum to conform to the 5-day per week schedule. Physical Education would be taken every year. In my school the gym would be more like a health club. Students would “work-out” three days a week all year for ½ credit. On the two off days they could take a 1/4 credit class if it meet for a semester. For example, health, nutrition, personal finance, basic computer skills could be taught 2 days a week for a semester and count for1/4 credit,. Some classes, chemistry for example, might meet three days a week for a double period in order to accommodate extended lab periods, while the other two days might be two ½ credit classes or one full credit class that meet twice a week.
Sunday, October 21, 2007
Sunday, October 14, 2007
The Purpose of an Education
When you go to the golf driving range, you order a bucket of golf balls and practice hitting them. You probably concentrate on the clubs you don’t hit particularly well. If asked the purpose of this activity most people would probably say that it was to improve their golf game, or learn how to better use a particular club.
When you go to the health club you probably work out on the weight machines, or walk/run on the treadmill. You might ride a stationary bike or attend an aerobics class. If asked why you were there, you probably wouldn’t say it was to learn how to use the weight machines. You do not go to the health club to learn to walk or run more efficiently. You go to the health club to condition your body, build up stamina, or possibly lose weight.
Which of these analogies is most similar to school? Why do student go to school?
Some would argue that you attend school to learn to perform particular tasks or acquire a specific skill. Balance a chemical reaction, solve a 2nd degree algebraic equation, identify the parts of speech in a sentence, or outline the branches of government. People of this camp have “state goals and objectives” that schools are required to test on at specified times, to demonstrate that the students have learned the prescribed skills. These are the golf range people.
On the other hand, some people would argue that the purpose of school is to teach you how to learn. These people would argue that it is not so important what specific things you are taught, but, rather, that you practice learning many things. This is to help you develop the ability to learn again under new conditions and circumstances. This camp does not like standardized tests of “state objectives”, but rather evaluate the product of an education after graduation. Their real test is life after school. They are the health club people.
Which one am I you ask? I guess I lean more toward the “health club” people. Except for some basic skills, I don’t think it matters what subjects a student takes as long as schooling teaches him or her to learn in new situations. You can’t learn how to learn until you have acquired these basic skills. The acquisition of these skills is not, of itself, evidence of an education.
I do feel strongly that students should be required to take courses in every subject area, but the content of those courses is not important for most. Those few who will be studying particular fields in university will need special treatment. Someone who aspires to become a physician needs more than a general course in Chemistry and Biology when in high school. A future engineer will need extensive training in Mathematics and Physics before attending university. The idea that everyone should be trained as if they were going to be a scientist or an engineer is wasteful of school resources and generally impossible, even if there would be unlimited funding. Some would label my proposal as elitist, but it is just practical. I would not limit inclusion in special programs to an elite class, but rather to students in any class who show a special interest or aptitude for that subject.
To illustrate how silly the alternate argument is, let me offer this example. Why is it that all students should be trained as scientists? We don’t train all students to be opera singers. Are opera singers and other performers less valuable to society than scientists? Go ahead, I would love to hear your non-elitist argument for that position! Everyone should receive training in both science and music, but everyone does not need to be trained as a scientist and/or opera singer. Every student should be allowed the opportunity to study whatever field interests them, and their success in that field should be dependent on their individual abilities and talents. I might want desperately to be an Olympic sprinter, but no expenditure of money or effort will ever make me one.
A former teacher–more than 40 years ago in fact–had a poster in her classroom. To this day it had, in my opinion, the most eloquent and honest advice for students: “Bloom Where You’re Planted”
When you go to the health club you probably work out on the weight machines, or walk/run on the treadmill. You might ride a stationary bike or attend an aerobics class. If asked why you were there, you probably wouldn’t say it was to learn how to use the weight machines. You do not go to the health club to learn to walk or run more efficiently. You go to the health club to condition your body, build up stamina, or possibly lose weight.
Which of these analogies is most similar to school? Why do student go to school?
Some would argue that you attend school to learn to perform particular tasks or acquire a specific skill. Balance a chemical reaction, solve a 2nd degree algebraic equation, identify the parts of speech in a sentence, or outline the branches of government. People of this camp have “state goals and objectives” that schools are required to test on at specified times, to demonstrate that the students have learned the prescribed skills. These are the golf range people.
On the other hand, some people would argue that the purpose of school is to teach you how to learn. These people would argue that it is not so important what specific things you are taught, but, rather, that you practice learning many things. This is to help you develop the ability to learn again under new conditions and circumstances. This camp does not like standardized tests of “state objectives”, but rather evaluate the product of an education after graduation. Their real test is life after school. They are the health club people.
Which one am I you ask? I guess I lean more toward the “health club” people. Except for some basic skills, I don’t think it matters what subjects a student takes as long as schooling teaches him or her to learn in new situations. You can’t learn how to learn until you have acquired these basic skills. The acquisition of these skills is not, of itself, evidence of an education.
I do feel strongly that students should be required to take courses in every subject area, but the content of those courses is not important for most. Those few who will be studying particular fields in university will need special treatment. Someone who aspires to become a physician needs more than a general course in Chemistry and Biology when in high school. A future engineer will need extensive training in Mathematics and Physics before attending university. The idea that everyone should be trained as if they were going to be a scientist or an engineer is wasteful of school resources and generally impossible, even if there would be unlimited funding. Some would label my proposal as elitist, but it is just practical. I would not limit inclusion in special programs to an elite class, but rather to students in any class who show a special interest or aptitude for that subject.
To illustrate how silly the alternate argument is, let me offer this example. Why is it that all students should be trained as scientists? We don’t train all students to be opera singers. Are opera singers and other performers less valuable to society than scientists? Go ahead, I would love to hear your non-elitist argument for that position! Everyone should receive training in both science and music, but everyone does not need to be trained as a scientist and/or opera singer. Every student should be allowed the opportunity to study whatever field interests them, and their success in that field should be dependent on their individual abilities and talents. I might want desperately to be an Olympic sprinter, but no expenditure of money or effort will ever make me one.
A former teacher–more than 40 years ago in fact–had a poster in her classroom. To this day it had, in my opinion, the most eloquent and honest advice for students: “Bloom Where You’re Planted”
Friday, October 5, 2007
People Don't Respect Teachers
No matter what most people say to your face, if you are a teacher, they have little respect for what you do. Don’t try to tell me otherwise. Most look at you and wonder why you couldn’t get a real job. A colleague, who used to work in the public schools, explained to me one day why the teachers unions want all school board members to be professional people. He said that a teacher’s salary is not that much compared to a doctor or lawyer, but postal workers and clerks think we get paid too much. I have news for him; doctors and lawyers don’t respect us either.
I do outside tutoring, and I often get calls from people who want to hire me to help their sons or daughters improve their grades. Invariably they want to know how much I charge for a tutoring session, and many react with shock when I tell them that I charge $60/hour to come to their home and work with their child. Many say they want to think about it, but never call back. Others can’t contain their utter surprise. I have heard, on several occasions from the opposite side of the phone something like, “You’re just a teacher! How can you charge so much?” I love the “You’re just a teacher” comment; it really tells you who they are. There are many people who value the help enough to pay my asking price, and I generally have a full load of students within the first few weeks of any school year. I try to limit myself to no more than six outside tutoring students at any time, but have had as many as 10 per week. I regularly turn people down when I don’t get the feeling they have the respect for me that I feel I’ve earned—I never have any open appointments for their kids. One especially obnoxious woman rejected my price initially, but called back a few days later and said she would pay, but she wasn’t going to like it—her voice dripping with disrespect. Apparently it’s not easy finding a calculus tutor. I told her that I had an appointment open when she called the first time, but that had been taken since, so I could not help her son.
I was very fortunate when I first began tutoring outside of school; I was introduced to a woman who needed to hire a tutor for her son. She was a member of the school board for a local high school district. My work with her two sons was so successful that she recommended me to several friends who inquired about my work. Through her help and recommendations I was able to build a significant private tutoring practice among the members of a rather wealthy community. I still advertise my services with the guidance departments of local high schools, but most of the students I tutor now have been recommended by some other family or are the brother or sister of a former student.
Tutoring has done more for me than the extra money it provides my family; it has helped me become a better classroom teacher. I have become better able to sense problems my students are having and devise alternate explanations and examples that will help them understand. Working one-on-one with struggling students has given me new insights into the way students learn, and the reasons they don’t. It is, in itself, a methods class with practical applications.
I do outside tutoring, and I often get calls from people who want to hire me to help their sons or daughters improve their grades. Invariably they want to know how much I charge for a tutoring session, and many react with shock when I tell them that I charge $60/hour to come to their home and work with their child. Many say they want to think about it, but never call back. Others can’t contain their utter surprise. I have heard, on several occasions from the opposite side of the phone something like, “You’re just a teacher! How can you charge so much?” I love the “You’re just a teacher” comment; it really tells you who they are. There are many people who value the help enough to pay my asking price, and I generally have a full load of students within the first few weeks of any school year. I try to limit myself to no more than six outside tutoring students at any time, but have had as many as 10 per week. I regularly turn people down when I don’t get the feeling they have the respect for me that I feel I’ve earned—I never have any open appointments for their kids. One especially obnoxious woman rejected my price initially, but called back a few days later and said she would pay, but she wasn’t going to like it—her voice dripping with disrespect. Apparently it’s not easy finding a calculus tutor. I told her that I had an appointment open when she called the first time, but that had been taken since, so I could not help her son.
I was very fortunate when I first began tutoring outside of school; I was introduced to a woman who needed to hire a tutor for her son. She was a member of the school board for a local high school district. My work with her two sons was so successful that she recommended me to several friends who inquired about my work. Through her help and recommendations I was able to build a significant private tutoring practice among the members of a rather wealthy community. I still advertise my services with the guidance departments of local high schools, but most of the students I tutor now have been recommended by some other family or are the brother or sister of a former student.
Tutoring has done more for me than the extra money it provides my family; it has helped me become a better classroom teacher. I have become better able to sense problems my students are having and devise alternate explanations and examples that will help them understand. Working one-on-one with struggling students has given me new insights into the way students learn, and the reasons they don’t. It is, in itself, a methods class with practical applications.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
