To begin with, here is an interesting article for you to consider. The background it provides on the author is as follows:

quote:

---

John Taylor Gatto is a former New York State and New York City Teacher of the
Year and the author, most recently, of The Underground History of American
Education. He was a participant in the Harper's Magazine forum "School on a Hill,"
which appeared in the September 2001 issue. [according to his homepage, this specific article ran in Harper's in September 2003 - Kenny]

---

The article: http://www.spinninglobe.net/againstschool.htm

There are further links available from that page if you are interested.

So I'll let that float around first, and we can build more discussion from there.

[Disclaimer: As with anything, I ask you to be skeptical of the information contained in the article just the same as I would ask you to be skeptical of your current view of the subjects discussed. You/we can evaluate this further through thinking and discussion, and you can figure out how it applies to the little human-critters in your life. Open mind is key here, just as it is anywhere.]

[ February 13, 2004: Message edited by: Just Kenny ]

Ken, that's an interesting judgment on the author, which I can understand, but I think it's not entirely well-founded without having read the whole article. But the fact that you even started reading it makes me happy enough. Though, the issue isn't public school vs. private school, necessarily, this particular article is more of a blow towards the system upon which both public and private schools are based on. I believe he offers some constructive ideas and suggestions for improvement on his homepage, but I'm not sure.

Jody, I half-agree with you. Your personal experience in the field clearly demonstrates what appear to be indisputable benefits for the children, which is excellent. I went through the public school system, too, and I feel the same way: that I came out a rather well-rounded individual. I agree with you completely that school does not equate life, nor does the 9-to-5, and that's why I started this thread. Mark Twain said something to the effect of "Don't let school get in the way of your education," a reminder that the two are not synonymous.

Though your personal experience doesn't account for his own experience. He was a teacher in a large metropolitan area, and that may make a huge difference. Where do you live/work?
I hear horror stories from teachers/subs here in the Los Angeles area where the kids are totally negative, apathetic, and feel hopeless about their own abilities - with a large part of the fault due to the teachers calling the students stupid and worthless. When bred that way as a child (which also has much to do with the parents), many people may not even consider the option of challenging themselves to break out of the cage - their way of life may be all that they know, leaving it at that.

Naturally, unless you were entirely home-schooled with a flexible curriculum and intuitive direction, then it's hard to really recognize any of the "normal" or "standard" practices of school-life as anything other than "the right way." Even the simple conditioning aspect of it, getting used to the authority-worker paradigm, eating when the bell rings, etc., can be hard to dispute unless you can clearly see an alternative, and alternatives are scarce.

Personally, I again agree with you in my own feeling of how to raise children. Encouraging creativity, curiosity, exploration, humor, and actually wanting to learn (the definition of learning would have to be adjusted, as well). In fact, I am very much interested in being a home-school teacher, if not only for my own potential children, but for others as an occupation. I'm not totally sure how I would go about it and "make a living", but certainly the process of it would be mostly intuitive to the child's interests while still teaching them the fundamental knowledge-areas at their own pace in a way that works best for them.

The common concept is that school sucks. And thus, since education is viewed as one as the same as schooling ("get an education," means "go to school"), many (not all) people's views are that education sucks.

As far as the more conspiracy-theory-ish feel of the article, it doesn't sound unfounded and I don't really doubt it at all, but I still suggest you don't fully believe it, without fully writing it off. An interesting exercise would be to think about it if the author were telling the entire truth, partial truth, or was mostly mistaken (or even deliberately misleading, if you want) and come to a flexible decision that's constructive for you.

Thank you, Jody, for your great response. It inspired way more thoughts in me that I wanted to put out, but I can't recall them as they came in a flood. More later, I guess.

Secondly, let me say that I had a fairly positive school experience…aside from the social aspects that is but that may very well be a story for another time…I’ll try to focus my statements on the academic side of things…

Gatto, in his article states that boredom is the root of failure in the public school system…while I can see where he’s coming from, I tend to think of apathy as the major problem…not just from the students, but from educators and parents/guardians alike…people in today’s modern society just don’t seem to care a whole lot about school/learning…they fail to see the value in either learning or teaching and are too wrapped up in other pursuits to really stop to realize the negative effects of a lack of education…

Those involved in the public school system tend to suffer from this apathy more than others…I’ve found that at the elementary level, public schooling is fairly good (especially where I live)…teachers are excited to teach and the students are eager participants in learning activities for the most part…teaching is not seen as solely a way to pay the bills, but also as a way to help fledgling minds discover new and exciting things…and kids see school as something fun, not a burden and not some place where you go for five hours a day just to be dominated by someone who’s not even your mom or dad…but as one continues on into the middle-school and high-school levels of the system, something changes…apathy kicks in for whatever reason…students seem far less interested in learning and far more burdened with the structure and rigidity of both their school schedule and curriculum…educators seem far less willing to “go that extra mile” in order to instill a lust for knowledge in their students…but why?

I don’t know that I’m qualified to answer that…maybe it has something to do with the fact that in our society, adolescents take on a “know it all” attitude and see the educational system as an authority figure to rebel against…maybe it’s due to educators not willing to teach a young adult who seems disinterested in learning anyway…it’s really difficult to pinpoint…

What I can say though is that people (not just children either) have a naturally curious disposition…we (as individuals) are willing to learn, but only when the subject matter is interesting to us…we want to learn on our own terms…this is where I think that the public school system, with it’s rigid 8:00 to 3:00 schedule and canned curriculum, go wrong…when an individual is forced to perform a task repetitively, no matter how beneficial to them, that individual will eventually begin to see the task as a burden…this holds true for both teachers and students…I don’t think that the public school curriculum (especially at the higher levels) fuels one’s desire to learn or teach…everything is so repetitive…it fails to engender much creativity and effectively dampens curiosity and will to learn…

I feel that a teacher’s curriculum needs to be dynamic…it needs to speak to the wants and need of the individuals in a class…no two people are exactly alike…so why do they have to have the same information shoved down their throats in the same exact manner for 8:00 to 3:00 every day of the week?…how will that breed a willingness to learn?…I’d like to see smaller, more intimate classes staring at the elementary level and continuing through the end of one’s primary education…this would allow educators to better handle the needs on individual students…I’d like to see the encouragement of free thought even though it may mean a deviation from standard curriculum…I’d like to see more emphasis put on the arts, if a school can spend hundreds of thousands of dollars on new uniforms for their athletic teams then why not spend that much on their music department?…a fit body is great and all but what about a fit mind?…it’s been proven that learning music can improve critical thinking and reasoning skills which I believe is far more important that running a 4 minute mile or being able to shove a ball through a little hoops (and I say this as both a lover of music and a sports fan)…

In any case…I think I may have over-rambled for one post…let me just close by saying that, as a parent, I feel that I hold the biggest responsibility for my child’s educational success…I may eventually entrust my child’s education to the public school system, but her future success really depends on the importance I put on things like creativity, curiosity, and discovery…I think that it’s a parent’s job to instill in their child a willingness to learn…as long as parent’s are not apathetic to their child’s educational achievements and/or failures then their child will also overcome that apathy toward education that seems to be permeating the public school system…parents should care and teach their children to care…because even though the curriculum may be canned and the schedule may be tedious, you can only expect to get out what you put in…despite the shortcomings of public schooling, one may still get a decent enough education as long as they’re willing…

I was thinking about this perpetual childhood thing (but didn't have a name for it) the other day after reading a book of interviews with and essays by young adult immigrants to the United States. In one interview with an 18 yr old Russian girl who had moved to California, the author talks about how she looks older and more sophisticated than her classmates, and how she acts more like an adult etc., because (supposedly) once you are 18 and graduate high school in Russia, you are on your own and have to get a job/get married/whatever, and can't depend on your parents and have one of those perpetual American childhoods that last until your 30s or what have you. I had a bit of a problem with that blanket statement. But I won't go into that here because my reasons were entirely based on assumptions and...stuff.

I didn't quite get a good sense of what the "Prussian style" of education is/was that was continually referred to and I was too lazy to look it up. However, it made me think of my limited knowledge of the Bulgarian school system. They learn sooo much more than we do. They take classes in specific subjects, and they are rotated...so instead of having just an "integrated sciences" class (WORST IDEA EVER) for a certain amount of time every day, they'll have level-appropriate biology, chemistry, physics, geography etc. on a rotating schedule or something. Same with other subjects. And maybe it's just the individuals I've come in contact with, but the harsh demands of the education system don't seem to have stifled free thought or anything. My friend Rossy is wicked proud of herself (and rightfully so) because this Valentine's Day she put on a production with a comedy and tragedy (which she wrote herself working on it continually for like 3 days) with only herself and two other girls running things, and staged it for her school. Also, required languages. A very, very good thing. Rossy goes to a language school, where students specialize in learning languages. There are other specialized schools, like in her town there is a tech school (not in the American tech school kind of way, but like computers and stuff). There are regular high schools, but they are kind of looked down on as being for kids with less ambition, who aren't planning on going to college or whatever. But anyways, Rossy studies English, French, German, and Russian. They choose which language they emphasize, English is Rossy's primary language. Her friend Daniel's primary language was German (I think) and he was so apologetic about his English since it was only his second or third language...but he spoke so well. I felt so stupid talking to most of her friends, and I do pretty well in school and take "advanced" level classes. It's just how things are set up here versus there.

One thing I thought the author could have explored further was textbooks and their failings and role in the curriculum. "Lies My Teacher Told Me," by James Loewen...very good book (he's my history teacher's father, spoke at our school 2 years ago, and I missed it. ) I like having a textbook as a reference, and all of my teachers are very good about not using them to excess and taking them with a grain of salt. My history teacher (who has enough liberal guilt to smother a village and takes it all out on us, whole 'nother thread) is constantly supplementing our reading with fun stuff by Howard Zinn and others.

I agree with RJ and Jody about the curriculum in schools. I came from a public school where academics took the back seat to athletics and to performing arts, but the important thing is having the access to additional resources that provide a well-rounded background. My high school was very active with the performing arts, and allowed singing groups to travel the nation to sing at events, and once a year, the school put on a real musical production that costs an arm and a leg. But the thing was that almost every student was involved and gained some sort of out-of-textbook education from it, and that was the neat part.

All of this kinda makes me think about what I've been discussing in many of my classes at school, which is the government's role in our poor state of education today. Although most of us have been talking about personal and individual things that can help improve education, we have ignored the damages caused by politicians and the means and access to improve education in this country.

quote:

---

The No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (No Child Left Behind) is a landmark in education reform designed to improve student achievement and change the culture of America's schools. President George W. Bush describes this law as the "cornerstone of my administration." Clearly, our children are our future, and, as President Bush has expressed, "Too many of our neediest children are being left behind."

Source: http://www.ed.gov/nclb/overview/intro/index.ht ml

---

What troubles me most about the American educational system is the fact that it's so contradictory in the federal level. Here we have this "No Child Left Behind Act" (which Gatto brought up), but it's being currently being underfunded and schools probably will not get the help they were promised by this act. Bush's budget proposal for this upcoming year underfunds this act by about $9 Billion (I think that's what it was.. but I'm not sure.) Even though Bush asked for a 1.8% increase to the No Child Left Behind Act, it does very little, and most schools will suffer the impact of maintaining programs that are vital to give children a good education and the opportunity to go to college.

Basically in our country, education is equated with power. The more education you have, the more money you will earn and the more control over technology and information that you will have. Therefore I believe politicians limits the public's access to education to maintain their own power and to keep people at bay.

I know here in the state of California, education is going through absolute hell because of the budget crisis and Arnie's ineffectiveness to fix it (or anything else). I'm more distrubed by Arnie's elimination of the increased car tax in which everyone would help out with the burden of the state, and instead imposing cuts to education and increases to public university tuition. The poor state of our education stems not from the individual level, but at the state level. The state shifts the blame onto those who can't afford education, thus creating a cycle of public education not being obtainable.

Our country would rather spend money on looking for Weapons of Mass Destruction rather than to help education in our society. It's rather distressing. But that's a whole other irritation with the current state of affairs. I suppose I've gone off topic too much.. So I'll stop here.

--Christy

[ February 20, 2004: Message edited by: Christy K. ]