The task of effecting education in the U.S. is not an assignment well delegated to Government. This is demonstrated by the present, post-industrial condition of public education in the U.S. Rather, the proper role of Government may be limited to assuring that every citizen, not mere resident, has equal access and opportunity to education to the limit of one’s intellectual ability. This assurance may best be effected with productive funding, stated performance standards (not curricula), or, most preferably, open competition among schools.
"Back in the day," a teacher was expected to present competent instruction and a student was expected to assimilate the instruction presented. When a student did not understand the instruction, questioning and further or alternative instruction were had. Students who did assimilate the instruction may be called upon to assist students who did not. Substantially, the teacher’s initial presentation may have been considered about eighty to ninety percent effective with the slack being taken up with the questioning and the fellow student assistance.
Inherent in the process was an understanding and accommodation of individual learning preferences. Those considered good teachers held a class in which all students were addressed, while those considered bad teachers substantially presented instruction in their own way, take it or leave it. A good teacher would also take note of response to instruction presented and account for that response in future presentation.
Public education was founded at a local or grass roots level. Community involvement was inherent. Industrialization was applied to public education with consideration of the efficiencies of mass production. The rigid, assembly line public school system was birthed generations ago and continues to fester. While the autonomous, community public school of days gone by may rightfully be compared to a craftsman’s shop, today’s public school is just so compared with impassive mass production, including, its accouterments.
The prior day community school was an integral part of the character of the community, affecting the growth, the attitude, and the reputation of the community. The present day public school bureaucracy has smeared the distinctions among communities to one common and low threshold. Public education is no longer a prominent factor in defining a good character of a community. Worse, however, is the diminishing value of public education, though budgets continually increase.
It is, or should be, common knowledge that a principle task of post secondary educators (college) regarding entering Freshmen, is to bring the entering students up to a twelfth grade functional level. An entire industry of tutoring services has grown in the past thirty years or so, and is established on the failure of public education. It is common knowledge in business that when one presents to a general adult audience and one wants eighty percent of the audience to understand the message presented, then the presentation is best targeted to a fifth grade level. Only a few years ago the target was seventh grade.
Public education should return to local control and autonomy. Whether the definition of local is city / township, metropolitan area, or county is not clear. Be that as it may, funding may be provided at a larger geographic level; perhaps regionally in an intrastate context, with state and federal supplemental funding as may be equitable; perhaps statewide with federal supplemental funding as may be equitable. The sole purpose of state supplemental funding would be to assure equal access and opportunity to education throughout the state, while the sole purpose of federal supplemental funding would be to assure equal access and opportunity to education throughout the nation. Supplemental funding may be structured to account for economic factors that vary geographically. However structured, the objective would be to assure that the same level of educational resource is available to each student.
- - - - -
An open forum discussion was held the other week regarding public schools and their propensity to kill creativity. The gathering opened with recorded comment by Sir Ken Robinson, which should be found at TED.com. Sir Robinson’s comment was directed to a notion that schools kill creativity.
Various participants shared their personal experiences relative to a child or sibling and regarding failure of the public education system to edify. Rather, the anecdotes demonstrated public education as damaging. “Public education” seems to be generally presented in its "public relations" as focusing its efforts to uplift students. One likely typically considers that public education is neutral at worst and typically does not consider it actually damaging, though it may damage.
I presumed the forum would identify constructive steps forward to improve public education and proposed an analogy of public education having come to be a mass production bureaucracy or institution that is based on an “one size fits all” premise and that treats students as fungible raw materials, and further proposed that public education should start with a premise that each student is unique and is uniquely inherently a valuable resource. One forum participant arose in argument against the proposition, stating that public education is rigid and does not recognize the differences of each student.
Sad, is it not, when one chooses to not listen such that they may not hear. Sad, is it not, when one’s educational experience manifests its failure.
Undaunted, I continued to propose that to the extent that a “one size fits all” mandate to efficiencies may be imposed, then perhaps consideration may be had to focusing or limiting that mandate on the traditional three R’s, namely, reading, ‘ritin’, and ‘rithmatic. That is to say, focus on students being competent to survive in society with communication and transaction skills such that one not be relegated to being a ward of the state. This limitation may, then, allow accommodation of individuality. One forum participant arose in argument against, making claim that communication and transaction skills are unimportant; himself not being able to balance his checkbook and it works for him.
Dumbfounding, that anyone may propose that an ability to read a menu, for example, and that an ability to purchase goods or services are not essential skills. Have you yet noticed how clerks have predominately lost the ability to simply make change?
Another forum participant interjected that the discussion had been judgmental and punitive. This participant continued that broader understanding of alternative cultures, beliefs, or lifestyles should be undertaken, including an immersion experience of Islam in a public school.
Judgmental involves judgment, which is a process of forming an opinion or evaluation by discerning and comparing. Again, I presume. The conceptual purpose of a forum is to discern a present condition, to form opinion thereof, to judge desirability thereby, to identify deficiencies therein, and to make recommendation. As to punitive, on the other hand, this is inflicting, involving, or aiming at punishment. No participant was punished, however. As to public education of Islam, this ignores the court rule of "separation of church and state." That the participant intended to overturn the court rule of "separation of church and state" is doubtful. That the participant has read the Koran is also doubtful.
Quite frankly, the experience was, in itself, educational. I came away impressed. If the body of this forum fairly represents the community at large, then I am impressed by the myopia that was given voice.
Ponder then, the cause-effect relationship; generations of degrading public education and a myopic community. Ponder also, who elects who.
And, so goes the plutocracy - - -
