Page 206
“The compromises required in teaching not only shatter ideals but also cheat students of opportunities to learn.”
Horace makes his compromises in shortcuts; for example, assigning two paragraph essays instead of one to two page essays because he simply doesn’t have the time to grade them all. He also has 120 students, whereas if he were working in an urban area he’d have over 170 students. This is a scary comparison because if Horace is making all of these shortcuts with his students making his students not being able to learn as much as they could, what’s going on in the urban schools? I wonder if the same shortcuts are happening in elementary schools. Usually, a teacher would have roughly 30 students there verses over 100 as a secondary school teacher. Maybe there needs to be larger school building with more classrooms and teachers so that class sizes can be smaller. Maybe having a smaller class will lessen the load of work a teacher has to do. A teacher will most likely be more willing to teach more to their students in a case like that. What else can be done to perhaps lessen a teacher’s workload besides cutting corners?
Page 209
“One striking statistic is that teachers teaching in high-poverty schools are most likely to leave teaching.”
This is such a sad statistic because this is where the best teachers are needed. High-poverty schools already don’t have as much as low-poverty schools and schools in high-class suburban areas, the teachers are what practically makes or breaks the school at this point. I wonder what kind of teachers the high-poverty schools are hiring; well-educated teachers, first-year teachers? When I say well-educated, I mean is as they’ve been in the teaching profession for many, many years. I feel as though these schools are hiring first-year teachers or whatever they can get. Which would be fine in any of school, yet there’s more pressure in a high-poverty school for a teacher. There’s already an immense amount of pressure on a teacher in their first-year teaching let alone. Could that be one of the reasons why teachers are leaving the profession?
Page 220
“The profession of teaching has changed greatly since the nineteenth century model of teachers as paragons or morality.”
While looking at a timeline of what school used to be and what it is today, it’s slightly horrifying. Teachers used to be teaching morals way in the beginning and now today, it’s all business run. We’re basically teaching our students to become fabulous in the corporate world. In a sense, it fits with the times right? It makes sense to teach children these things because when they get older, that’s what they’re going to have access to. That’s only setting our nation up to continue to be the same: business, business, business. These children need to learn morals, need to be individuals, they need to be creative and they need to be learning so much more in school than they actually have access to nowadays. Unfortunately, it doesn’t sound like any of this is going to change any time soon. Is there anything that can even be done about it at this point in time?
Page 205
“Teachers’ salaries might compare favorably to occupations that do not require a college diploma. However, they do not compare favorably with other occupations requiring a college education.”
My dad is actually the head manager of two Mobil On The Run gas stations and he’s making more money than I could ever imagine ever making, let alone making after becoming a teacher. My dad didn’t go to college either, yet he’s a very successful man. Times have changed and what you used to be able to get without a college degree back in the day, you need to have a college degree now for them to even look at you. It’s silly to think that one of the most difficult professions in the nation gets the least amount of money. No one goes into teaching for the money, in fact, money should be last on one’s mind if they are doing to be a teacher. Being a teacher is so much more than money, but at the same time, it really wouldn’t hurt if teachers were paid more. Don’t teachers usually put half of their paycheck into supplies for the classroom anyways?
Page 162
“In 2006, supporters of charter schools in the U.S. Department of Education were surprised by a report issued by the National Center for Education Statistics that found that the achievement in reading and math of students in public charter schools was lower than that of students in public noncharter schools.”
If charter schools are scientifically being researched as no better than noncharter public schools, than why do parents constantly think that these schools are so much better? Yes, there are charter schools out there that are significantly proven far superior to public schools, but I’m sure it’s the same vice versa. Is it because charter schools are under less government control that people just assume these schools are better? Charter schools are getting schools LOWER than that of noncharter public schools, not even the same, but usually lower scores. These schools are able to explore different methods of almost anything, so could it be that these schools just need to be established for more time to show any decent results? If you think about it, a school can’t be built one day and then a year later, have sky rocketing results from the students.
Page 170
“Home schooling is one answer for parents who want to take charge of their children’s education.”
49% of children that are being home schooled are due to religious convictions. There are a lot of parents out there that really want their children to get the religious experience they grew up on and they hate the way public schools are ran, so what better way than to home school? There are a lot of other reasons why children are home schooled, but religious reasons was ranked number one followed by a positive social environment at 15%. Home schooling sounds great as long as the parents really are able to put forth a great education to their children. If parents don’t have the time or energy to do so, then what’s the difference then putting them back into public school? At least in a public school they will be surrounded by peers and other children their age to make friends. Home schooled students, I used to think, would grow up a bit socially awkward unless they had a lot of neighbors to play with. It’s good to know they usually children that are home schooled tend to do things like community service and other such field trips with other home schooling groups.
Katrina,
ReplyDeleteIn response to your quote about morals, I don't think that things will be changing in the education system (in terms of that) any time soon because now when people think about morals and morality, they automatically think about religion. Too many people are afraid to bring in morals into a school system because they are afraid of getting blamed for teaching a specific religion in a school. I do agree that a specific religion should be taught to students in a public school (with the intent to persuade them), but I o think that different morals need to be taught than the ones that are being taught our students today. Our morals, I think, should focus more on creativity, family, honesty, hard work, etc and less on money, business, success (geared only towards the job market), etc. However, I am not sure if it can or will ever change because that is where our society is right now, in the mindset of business and money. It makes me worried to think about how our children and our children's children are going to grow up. Where will their hearts and minds lie as they grow into adults an parents themselves. Do you think that different morals could be taught without mixing religion and state, or is there a need for that mix in order to save our educational system? Are the two even related when talking about morals, or do people connect them because they are afraid of the unknown, afraid of what could happen if it were different than the way it is today?
I think people connect them because they are afraid of the unknown because morals can and are so much more than religion. What you said before "Our morals, I think, should focus more on creativity, family, honesty, hard work, etc and less on money, business, success (geared only towards the job market), etc." is exactly what I was thinking and should most definitely should be brought into schools today. I feel like the school systems are just leaving it up to the parents/guardians to teach these morals to their children. Parents, of course, do have a huge role in that, but it shouldn't stop once the children step foot outside their house. It should be something they carry with them, no matter where they go. If only taught in the house, children will most likely only express it around family and close friends because they are scared what others might think. If they are taught at home and in school, I feel like we'd have a greater result for our future.
ReplyDeleteKatrina,
ReplyDeleteA child spends most of the first 18 years of their life in a school setting. If they are learning two different ways to live in two different places, wouldn't these things confuse the student? If a child is taught to be one way at home, but told they have to think something different at school, wouldn't that create an inner conflict within the child? I feel like it would make them wonder who they are supposed to be at different points in their lives. Teaching itself has changed to mirror that of our job markets. If this is what they are learning in schools, who will they be when they go home to their families?
Exactly my point! If a child spends 18 years of their life in a school setting, why wouldn't the schools be teaching a child more than just reading and math? This is just telling students that all they need in life is to know how to read and to know how to do math, which is most definitely not true. Both subjects are very important and should continue being taught in schools, but there are other very important things, like morals, that should be expressed in schools systems as well. But wait, morals isn't on the test, so why teach it?
ReplyDelete