In the book In Schools We Trust: Creating Communities of Learning in an Era of Testing and Standardization, Deborah Meier shares her experiences in designing and operating Mission Hill School in Boston, serving as principal, and her experiences teaching and leading in various New York City schools. She became the founder and director of the alternative Central Park East School, which embraced the ideals of John Dewey and she served as founding principal for Central Park East II and River East, both in East Harlem. Meier also helped to establish a network of small schools in New York City. She started out teaching kindergarten in a temporary position in Chicago with the intentions of following a different path in life after this position, but found her passion in teaching, specifically with the minority population. Her love for and connection with inner city school minority students comes from her experience as a young Jewish girl feeling like a minority growing up in a predominantly Anglo-Saxon population.
Her philosophy in public school education is a belief that small, personalized schools with close, strong school-family ties, like the schools of the “privileged white” students would benefit the disadvantaged inner city students as well (Meier, 2002, p.56). This was a highly controversial philosophy because most educators on both sides of the racial lines did not agree with her philosophy at the time. It was on this foundational principle that she began her successful experiments in teaching more than thirty years ago. Deborah Meier is now referred to as the founder of the modern small schools movement.
With regards to trust and the culture of schools, Meier believes that schools should be smaller, self-go...
... middle of paper ...
...arents in any given public school district would be in full agreement on all aspects of the philosophy of education, the choice of curriculum, and the vision and mission of the school. This is evidenced by parents who currently choose to send their children to private schools. Meier’s experiment with a self-governed school model worked for her, not without some difficulties and snags along the way, but a level of accountability is missing and on a large scale this model has great potential for misuse and failure.
“It is in the public schools that we learn the art of living together as citizens, and it is in public schools that we are obliged to defend the idea of a public, not only a private, interest.” (Page 176.)
Reference
Meier, D. (2002). In Schools We Trust: Creating Communities of Learning in an Era of Testing and Standardization. Boston: Beacon Press.
Goldstein argues a problem with education policy is, “American policy makers require every public school to use the same strategy…” (261) When facing the problem of inequality in education a teacher needs to be fluid with his or her curriculum. In fact, one of the best ways to allow for fluidity is through peer-to-peer help. Goldstein states, “(teaching hospital model) allows best practices tailored to a specific school to be passed from professional to professional.” (255) Peer-to-peer help not only does this allow for constructive feedback, but also it allows teachers to learn from one another. While policy makers might not know a schools demographics and unique situation teachers in the school will. Thus, teachers can help one another on their unique problem through a collaborative process. Peer to peer help allows for the design of, “creative curriculum materials and to lead school turnaround efforts.” (232) The problems associated with inequality can be thought out and explored through teachers working
All of this leads to obsessing over disciplining and having high test scores to compete with other school around the area. In Finland, they have no standardized tests that students need to take. When people are in trouble in Finland, an approach is taken to help them and support them. This is different in America. This supports the example of Harold as none of the teachers at the school took the approach to help Harold or even to support him. Many accusations were said that Harold is the problem and not the teachers. However, as Rose took a stand for Harold and helped him as he started to give up. With the standardized testing, it puts students with similar scores in the same classes. From this, Millie was put in a remedial class which was stated as an average class. As the schools soon start to care about the results of the standardized tests, the school start to focus on math, science,and reading which leads kids to being the same. This makes school not fun and the students end up dreading on going to school. In Finland, not only do the school focus on math, science, and reading they also focus on other important studies such as the arts, humanity, and physical education. Focusing on it all gives the students the ability to become creative and be their own individual person. Ken Robinson also proves that giving students the individual attention that they need helps them thrive to meet the goals that they have in education. Ken Robinson claimed, “Education does not go on in the committee rooms of out Legislative Buildings, it happens in the classrooms and schools. And the people who do it are the teachers and the students. And if you remove that discretion it stops working” (TEDtalks 13:15). When a teacher teaches a student will learn. Taking the actions to actually
She realized that choice and accountability were not the answer, but that curriculum and instruction were more viable solutions to America’s educational dilemma. Ravitch suggests that to abandon public schools is to abandon the institution that supports our concepts of democracy and citizenship and to the promise of American life (Ravitch, 2011, p. 12-14). The idea of school choice is rooted in Milton Friedman’s essay concerning the government’s role in education. Friedman asserted that society should support and contribute to the maximum freedom of the individual or the family. He maintained that the government should provide vouchers to help support parents financially on their children’s education, which parents could use at the school of their choosing; so long as the school met set standards. Therefore, this creation of choice would stimulate competition, which Friedman believed would increase the development and improvement of nonpublic schools, as well as, create a variety of school options (Ravitch, 2011, p. 115). As a result of the choice movement, the public received three versions of school choice: voucher schools, private schools, and charter schools. Each of these schools receives public funding, but do not operate as traditional public schools, and are not managed by a government agency (Ravitch, 2011, p. 121). Charter schools became the most popular choice of this new
Labaree discusses how the United State’s education is in a school syndrome, as people in America want schools to teach society’s ideals as well as let people express their individuality. These two demands are polar opposites that cannot be achieved. As the focus goes towards balancing these in hopes of improving society as a whole, the bettering of actual student learning is put on pause. Labaree talks about the beginning of education reform, in the 19th century, being the most successful in developing society; however, as education reform continued throughout time, its effectiveness wore off. He then addresses how the desire for education reform is more about improving society than it is about learning. He finishes his argument by providing possible solutions to fixing this problem, but states that fixing this problem will never happen because no one is willing to give up both demands. Overall, Labaree goes in wonderful detail explaining the problems of education reform. What made me choose this article was that he addressed the desire that people have on school systems in promoting both society normality and individuality. This correlates well with my topic in whether public school systems promote conformist ideals or individuality.
Kaufman, Daniel. "Notes from Hell: The Public Schools Need Discipline and Respect for Learning. That's All." National Review 30 Sept. 1996: 46. Opposing Viewpoints in Context. Web. 3 Mar. 2014.
“Of course class size is important. You have to find the child before you can teach the child (Archived… 2000).” Though this opinion may seem radical to most people, you can see the underlying theme in the argument. Smaller classes allow students to have more personalized, individual attention from teachers. Many teachers and smaller class size advocates believe that such classes will allow for more constructive group activities, strengthen students’ problem solving and critical thinking skills, and accommodate for a wide range of learning paces. These advocates also believe that a reduced student to teacher ratio will give teachers more time to be innovative and develop new ideas, lead class discussions to further understanding, and give more practice exercises. For parents who want the best education for their children, these proposed effects of small class size make you wonder where the hard evidence is to back them.
Sacks, Peter. Standardized Minds: The High Price of America's Testing Culture and What We Can Do to Change It. Cambridge, MA: Perseus, 2000. Print.
Education is fundamental in today’s society. It has become a sought after medium for attaining success. Many careers have set specific educational requirements for a person to even be considered for employment. The education that one receives can be achieved through different types of institutes. Many parents face the conundrum of sending their children to the right institution that will aid in their child’s future success. The choices seem to be in abundance but many people find themselves limited to a short list of obtainable institutions. The parents have a great deal of things that need to be thought through. This may require factors that have to be considered. Some of the factors include the following: curriculum, class sizes, cost and school’s quality but these are some questions that stand out. Does the type of school really help performance? Are there factors that hinder one type of institution from thriving? These decisions are crucial and, for the most part, will determine the type of institution the child will receive his or hers knowledge from.
Even when low-income schools manage to find adequate funding, the money doesn’t solve all the school’s problems. Most importantly, money cannot influence student, parent, teacher, and administrator perceptions of class and race. Nor can money improve test scores and make education relevant and practical in the lives of minority students. School funding is systemically unequal, partially because the majority of school funding comes from the school district’s local property taxes, positioning the poorest communities at the bottom rung of the education playing field. A student’s socioeconomic status often defines her success in a classroom for a number of reasons.
Throughout my experience in the public school system, I have heard the line, “What do I need to know this for anyway?” about 1,057 times. It is not uncommon to hear students complain about the worth of their education. Regardless, there seems to be a unanimous agreement that the youth needs education to succeed in life. What is education anyway and what does schooling accomplish? In his book, “A Time to Learn” George Wood provides a definition of education as “making wise citizens and good neighbors who can think deeply and intelligently about issues of self and society, take care for and respect others, take care of their family needs, and contribute to the welfare of others” (Glickman 48). Is school necessary for developing this type of educated citizen? If not, how is it we measure success and how is school important in attaining that?
Standardized tests have been a controversial issue regarding whether they are helping or hurting students and their academics. People that are for standardized testing argue that the tests are fair because all students nationwide are learning and being tested on the same thing. Bruno, Kemmerling, and others agree that these tests are beneficial to schools, students, and teachers. Others who are against standardized testing disagree because teachers are only teaching to the test. Littky, Caines, and Hanford see the negative aspects of standardized testing and want to change how people perceive it. Both sides of the issue have a credible argument.
Class sizes in America have been on a constant rise for years now, with little help from a budget, and almost no recovery from a slumping economy, which brings to light the age-old discussion; does class size really matter? With class sizes rising at a constant rate there is also no relief for students. There are many students who tend to struggle in certain subjects, and a smaller class could mean more individual time with a teacher and that could help improve their knowledge and comprehension of the subject. Our students are in classes day in and day out that are simply too big for even the finest teachers to handle, which impairs each individual’s learning. Therefore if teachers had fewer students this would enable them to give more individual teaching time to each student. Class size is important, and it has a large impact on our student’s education and that is why class size should be cut, specifically in Pre-K to third grade classes or classes which serve the most “at-risk” students.
It is about that time for families to start sending their children to school. The first thing that crosses their mind is “I hope my child gets the best education I can give them.” These parents want their children to excel in their math classes, pass that test in science class, and they want them to be the best they can be. These families want the teacher to give their child the best education that they can offer. So what if the best way that teachers could give the best education to that child was to have a class size reduction? What if the smaller the class, the more that child could achieve? That teacher would be able to focus on any
Kohn, Alfie. The Case Against Standardized Testing: Raising the Scores, Ruining the Schools. Portsmouth NH: Heinemann 2000.
Many people in today’s society believe it’s wise to send their children to private schools. In making the decision on whether to put children in public or private schools, they look to four main factors: curriculum, class size, the graduation rate, and cost. When people have to pay for something, their first thought is, “Will I be getting what I’m paying for?” With a private school education, the amount you have to pay is usually well worth it. Public schools offer diversity. Here students can find people who are just like them and can associate better. Wherever you live, you have to send your child to the closest school. There’s no choice on what public school you can send your child to, whereas for private schools you can pick to send your child there. It’s not an easy choice for parents to decide, but many factors point toward a guarantee that a good education would be achieved, which is most important.