Schools should be changing but are they? Check out this article http://www.time.com/time/printout/0,8816,1568480,00.html. Enter your reaction to this article in the comments section. You are encouraged to react to your fellow scholars' comments.
I think this is an interesting article insofar as it begs the question of how much should corporate America be incorporated into schools. As the vast majority of the TAP class can testify; the vast majority of what one needs for jobs is learned on the job NOT in the classroom. Does it make sense to design curriculum around real world needs and real world concerns? Having stepped back into high school after 15 years things seem pretty much the same. I do think it is time for school reform. I am not convinced that the current public school model is providing the leaders of tomorrow with the tools they need today.
It is an inescapable fact that the world of technology has become the reality for the US. But, I wonder if we're not becoming much like the poor humans on Star Trek who were assimilated by the borg. Technology has made life wonderful for so many people and done things that no human could do hundreds of years ago, but I wonder if we have not run away with the idea in the last decade. To do as the article says and to add technology in the classroom as it has been accepted in the general society would require a HUGE shift in how everything is run. Schools would have to be redesigned and the curriculum thrown out. Some altruist company would have to donate a lot of their wares to all schools across the country to truly make technology possible in all schools. I think that this is entirely possible, but it needs a society that can band together for the common good to make this happen. Not just the US, but with other countries to make global education a reality. The US needs to make arrangements with other nations to bring those cultures into the classroom in order to really help kids understand. I believe this can happen, so long as someone ignites the fires of change in all people because only with great effort comes great change.
I agree, George, the schools need a change. I'm am not so sure we are preparing students for life after high school in the most effective ways possible.
I agree with the article in that interdisciplinary teaching is very important for students. In teaching English, that is something that is quite possible. In addition, teaching effective communication should be a goal in any class, but should be a definite focus of an English class.
I do not think students should stop learning things, simply because they are easy to obtain from the Internet. Maybe, reduce the need for rote memorization, but not total elimination. Students need the basics before they can achieve the higher levels. I think we should encourage referencing the internet, but not total reliance.
In addition, I totally agree that we need to teach students to discern true and false information in this time when anything can be found on the Internet and passed off as real research.
I agree that our schools need to see change. I know when I was in high school in 2003 I did not come out prepared to deal with the real world or even the demands of my college courses. I did not have study skills, my tech skills were lacking and, although I had gotten good grades in high school, the material had not prepared me the way it should have.
I also agree that it seems ridiculous to have students memorize facts for a test that has no real world implication. Instead of having to memorize dates and battles, we should have our students using higher-order thinking and understanding the why, not the what. Instead of having students memorize the periodic table, have them understand why it is setup the way it is and how the chemicals react with each other.
I do think we need to teach our students the basics. I mean, how could we expect students to analyze the civil war without knowing the basic history of our country. Or how can we expect students to analyze cancer and its causes without knowing the basic chemistry of the human body.
Lastly, we must make it a priority to get students immersed in technology and know how to use it to be more efficient in the world. If a student comes out of high school only knowing how to word process and make a basic presentation we have set them back in our fast moving world.
I thought this article was really interesting and brought up a lot of things to be pondered and weighed. I liked the idea of looking at broad important concepts and showing how those concept apply in the students's real lives. I do believe if we cannot tell a child a good reason for why they are learning what we are teaching we need to reevaluate what we are teaching and why. I do think that the world is becoming more global and an awareness of this and an appreciation of other cultures could be emphasized more and would enrich student learning. I think technology needs to be used in the classroom more. It will be and already is an important part of our lives. I also think when used in the right way it can be a valuable teaching tool.
I agree with you Dominque, getting rid or decreasing the amount of rote memorization. It is true that te kids today can get a lot of information off of the internet, but we still as teachers need to be able to fill in the gaps and holes in the information they may get offline.
Our Country and world is more tech savvy then ever. We need to be able to integrate the technology into our methods of teaching.However, as educators we need to take a broader look at the material we are teaching.
I can say I completey aggree with George, I didn't learn how to work in the real world from my highschool. It was something I learned from my own personal experiences and the values that were instilled upon me by my familyl.
The Time article was dated December of 2006. Here's another good link: http://www.opportunityequation.org/ done by the Carnegie Corporation of New York saying essentially the same things, released in June 2009. Also, in July 2009, President Obama announced "Race to the Top," to get schools to compete for funds ($4.35B) by opening more charter schools, tie teacher pay to student achievement and move toward common academic standards. So Diana, the "altruist company" closest to the ATM deposit slot and holding the wrecking ball is the federal government. http://www.ed.gov/programs/racetothetop/index.html Who opposes most of the above actions? The NEA.
The NEA has cause to be nervous. We've just seen automobile unions broken through GM and Chrysler's bankruptcies. Previously, I'm betting those unions assumed they "were too big to fail."
I agree with Dominique in theory: students have to have more rigorous and demanding common standards at the earliest levels (where they learn their core competencies) so they can actively and constructively participate in these "outside the lines" interdisciplinary discussions, and be furnished the means to properly vet references. This would actually narrow the range of topics in the early years, so they can expand later. I know one thing for sure: when I learn something wrong it is harder than hell to unlearn it and go back and learn it right.
Advanced critical area teachers should be paid more, if only to acknowledge they have more school loans to pay back. Isn't it ludicrous that a first year kindergarten teacher earns as much as a first year AP Physics teacher? That AP Physics teacher went and got his/her master's degree, separately from a teacher's certificate! Personally I could not have considered this career without perks from my military background (too many requirements, too little ultimate compensation, slow salary progression).
This is an explosive situation and it's coming to a head. Hopefully by the time these changes roll through I will be poised to roll them forward instead of becoming too comfortable.
So this article was published in 2006. I understand that public institutions move much slower than private, but what concerns me is that we are constantly "talking" about moving our education system into the 21st century, yet little has been offered on a BROAD scale about how to go about it. I find it unnerving that reform is not offered on a broad scale. This leads to schools, more than likely inner-city schools with little $ available, falling behind those which have the cash to apply innovations/reforms. The article mentions that Singapore, Sweden and Belgium have great school systems - It would be interesting to take a look at how these systems are funded. In the end, cash will allow for reform, as there is only so much a teacher can do when they have just a chalkboard and an overhead projector.
School reform is obviously needed in many areas. It is not uncommon that most changes in school are lagging behind the rest of the changes in the world. However, part of the reason for this is a system needs to be proven (or at least have some positive results) to be used on students. We can't risk students' educations on failed tests.
I do think that teaching students to work in teams, find abstact ways to find problems and use technology effectively are essential. I have seen students rely on websites or articles that are not factual. As well I think knowledge of a global world can only benefit students. I do, however, think the balance is the most important issue. We can't stop the basic foundation of learning and jump to complex problem solving. These skills can only be layered on an understanding of basic knowledge.
This article takes a pretty hard stance in saying that the American school system as a whole is basically broken, falling behind in international competition, and outdated, yet the author manages to list several examples of schools which she deems as acceptable. I do agree that schools should continue to improve themselves, especially in the areas of technology and global outlook.
What I found most intriguing about this article was the “Google Era” section which MrsRoss also commented on. Why are we forcing kids to memorize information (i.e. Periodic table of elements, civil war dates) when those facts are so easily accessible to us? By cutting out dry material have “no real world implication”, teachers can use that time to engage students in higher levels of thinking such as critical analysis and simulations of an event. I also agree with Kim when she said we as teachers need give our students good reasons for learning course material. Rationales keep a teacher accountable and also serve as motivation for the student.
I agree
ReplyDeleteFinally, I am in!
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI think this is an interesting article insofar as it begs the question of how much should corporate America be incorporated into schools. As the vast majority of the TAP class can testify; the vast majority of what one needs for jobs is learned on the job NOT in the classroom. Does it make sense to design curriculum around real world needs and real world concerns? Having stepped back into high school after 15 years things seem pretty much the same. I do think it is time for school reform. I am not convinced that the current public school model is providing the leaders of tomorrow with the tools they need today.
ReplyDeleteIt is an inescapable fact that the world of technology has become the reality for the US. But, I wonder if we're not becoming much like the poor humans on Star Trek who were assimilated by the borg. Technology has made life wonderful for so many people and done things that no human could do hundreds of years ago, but I wonder if we have not run away with the idea in the last decade. To do as the article says and to add technology in the classroom as it has been accepted in the general society would require a HUGE shift in how everything is run. Schools would have to be redesigned and the curriculum thrown out. Some altruist company would have to donate a lot of their wares to all schools across the country to truly make technology possible in all schools. I think that this is entirely possible, but it needs a society that can band together for the common good to make this happen. Not just the US, but with other countries to make global education a reality. The US needs to make arrangements with other nations to bring those cultures into the classroom in order to really help kids understand. I believe this can happen, so long as someone ignites the fires of change in all people because only with great effort comes great change.
ReplyDeleteI agree, George, the schools need a change. I'm am not so sure we are preparing students for life after high school in the most effective ways possible.
ReplyDeleteI agree with the article in that interdisciplinary teaching is very important for students. In teaching English, that is something that is quite possible. In addition, teaching effective communication should be a goal in any class, but should be a definite focus of an English class.
I do not think students should stop learning things, simply because they are easy to obtain from the Internet. Maybe, reduce the need for rote memorization, but not total elimination. Students need the basics before they can achieve the higher levels. I think we should encourage referencing the internet, but not total reliance.
In addition, I totally agree that we need to teach students to discern true and false information in this time when anything can be found on the Internet and passed off as real research.
I agree that our schools need to see change. I know when I was in high school in 2003 I did not come out prepared to deal with the real world or even the demands of my college courses. I did not have study skills, my tech skills were lacking and, although I had gotten good grades in high school, the material had not prepared me the way it should have.
ReplyDeleteI also agree that it seems ridiculous to have students memorize facts for a test that has no real world implication. Instead of having to memorize dates and battles, we should have our students using higher-order thinking and understanding the why, not the what. Instead of having students memorize the periodic table, have them understand why it is setup the way it is and how the chemicals react with each other.
I do think we need to teach our students the basics. I mean, how could we expect students to analyze the civil war without knowing the basic history of our country. Or how can we expect students to analyze cancer and its causes without knowing the basic chemistry of the human body.
Lastly, we must make it a priority to get students immersed in technology and know how to use it to be more efficient in the world. If a student comes out of high school only knowing how to word process and make a basic presentation we have set them back in our fast moving world.
I thought this article was really interesting and brought up a lot of things to be pondered and weighed. I liked the idea of looking at broad important concepts and showing how those concept apply in the students's real lives. I do believe if we cannot tell a child a good reason for why they are learning what we are teaching we need to reevaluate what we are teaching and why.
ReplyDeleteI do think that the world is becoming more global and an awareness of this and an appreciation of other cultures could be emphasized more and would enrich student learning.
I think technology needs to be used in the classroom more. It will be and already is an important part of our lives. I also think when used in the right way it can be a valuable teaching tool.
I agree with you Dominque, getting rid or decreasing the amount of rote memorization. It is true that te kids today can get a lot of information off of the internet, but we still as teachers need to be able to fill in the gaps and holes in the information they may get offline.
ReplyDeleteOur Country and world is more tech savvy then ever. We need to be able to integrate the technology into our methods of teaching.However, as educators we need to take a broader look at the material we are teaching.
I can say I completey aggree with George, I didn't learn how to work in the real world from my highschool. It was something I learned from my own personal experiences and the values that were instilled upon me by my familyl.
The Time article was dated December of 2006. Here's another good link: http://www.opportunityequation.org/ done by the Carnegie Corporation of New York saying essentially the same things, released in June 2009. Also, in July 2009, President Obama announced "Race to the Top," to get schools to compete for funds ($4.35B) by opening more charter schools, tie teacher pay to student achievement and move toward common academic standards. So Diana, the "altruist company" closest to the ATM deposit slot and holding the wrecking ball is the federal government. http://www.ed.gov/programs/racetothetop/index.html
ReplyDeleteWho opposes most of the above actions? The NEA.
The NEA has cause to be nervous. We've just seen automobile unions broken through GM and Chrysler's bankruptcies. Previously, I'm betting those unions assumed they "were too big to fail."
I agree with Dominique in theory: students have to have more rigorous and demanding common standards at the earliest levels (where they learn their core competencies) so they can actively and constructively participate in these "outside the lines" interdisciplinary discussions, and be furnished the means to properly vet references. This would actually narrow the range of topics in the early years, so they can expand later. I know one thing for sure: when I learn something wrong it is harder than hell to unlearn it and go back and learn it right.
Advanced critical area teachers should be paid more, if only to acknowledge they have more school loans to pay back. Isn't it ludicrous that a first year kindergarten teacher earns as much as a first year AP Physics teacher? That AP Physics teacher went and got his/her master's degree, separately from a teacher's certificate! Personally I could not have considered this career without perks from my military background (too many requirements, too little ultimate compensation, slow salary progression).
This is an explosive situation and it's coming to a head. Hopefully by the time these changes roll through I will be poised to roll them forward instead of becoming too comfortable.
So this article was published in 2006. I understand that public institutions move much slower than private, but what concerns me is that we are constantly "talking" about moving our education system into the 21st century, yet little has been offered on a BROAD scale about how to go about it. I find it unnerving that reform is not offered on a broad scale. This leads to schools, more than likely inner-city schools with little $ available, falling behind those which have the cash to apply innovations/reforms. The article mentions that Singapore, Sweden and Belgium have great school systems - It would be interesting to take a look at how these systems are funded. In the end, cash will allow for reform, as there is only so much a teacher can do when they have just a chalkboard and an overhead projector.
ReplyDeleteSchool reform is obviously needed in many areas. It is not uncommon that most changes in school are lagging behind the rest of the changes in the world. However, part of the reason for this is a system needs to be proven (or at least have some positive results) to be used on students. We can't risk students' educations on failed tests.
ReplyDeleteI do think that teaching students to work in teams, find abstact ways to find problems and use technology effectively are essential. I have seen students rely on websites or articles that are not factual. As well I think knowledge of a global world can only benefit students. I do, however, think the balance is the most important issue. We can't stop the basic foundation of learning and jump to complex problem solving. These skills can only be layered on an understanding of basic knowledge.
This article takes a pretty hard stance in saying that the American school system as a whole is basically broken, falling behind in international competition, and outdated, yet the author manages to list several examples of schools which she deems as acceptable. I do agree that schools should continue to improve themselves, especially in the areas of technology and global outlook.
ReplyDeleteWhat I found most intriguing about this article was the “Google Era” section which MrsRoss also commented on. Why are we forcing kids to memorize information (i.e. Periodic table of elements, civil war dates) when those facts are so easily accessible to us? By cutting out dry material have “no real world implication”, teachers can use that time to engage students in higher levels of thinking such as critical analysis and simulations of an event. I also agree with Kim when she said we as teachers need give our students good reasons for learning course material. Rationales keep a teacher accountable and also serve as motivation for the student.