Entry #6 -- Is it really worth all the stress?

Scene: Wake County Schools (North Carolina), one of the 20 largest districts in the U. S.

On the 3rd and final day of NCLB testing, one child starting crying during the test, and so I gently invited her to move to the rear of the classroom where she could sit by herself and have more space with fewer possible distractions. She progressively became more distraught, and refused to read or complete any further test items even though she was less than halfway finished.

Minutes later, the young student lay on the floor in a fetal position, sucking her thumb, crying while asking for her mom to come get her because "it (the test) was too hard."

What in the name of NCLB's inane standards are we doing to our children!! Where will this end!!!

I once heard a lecturer say that FEAR really is an acronym standing for False Education Appearing Real. Well, AMEN to that, my friends.

I sit here tonight weeping and paralyzed by grief. I never thought I would see this day. I really didn't.

I included this short story because I'm hoping you guys will reply with your reactions and thoughts....

The site I am using to analyze aspects of NCLB for improvement suggestions is listed here: No Child Left Behind. The site lists the main goals of NCLB as defined by the Bush Administration and is used to supplement to the England readings and the classroom discussion. Although, the site details all aspects of NCLB, I will focus primarily on the accountability and testing aspects that were mentioned in our readings and discussions.

The four main goals of the blueprint -- Increase Accountability for Student Performance, Focus on What Works, Reduce Bureaucracy and Increase Flexibility, and Empower Students -- are broken into 7 subsections: 1.) Improving the academic performance of disadvantaged students, 2.) Boosting teacher quality, 3.) Moving limited English proficient students to English fluency, 4.) Promoting informed parental choice and innovative programs, 5.) Encouraging safe schools for the 21st Century, 6.) Increasing funding for Impact Aid, 7.) Encouraging freedom and accountability

Although definitions and explanations for these are listed on the site, one only needs to read these focal points and subsections to realize that many of these have not been met and have not been implemented favorably. Looking at Subcategory #3, for example,ESL and bilingual education programs are oftentimes the first programs cut or reduced from the curricula while sports programs are constantly improved. (Obviously, capitalism plays into this b/c sports bring in money for the schools, etc., but it still shows that NCLB was not implemented fully or correctly.) Flaws and shortcomings of each subcategory can be listed, but I'm sure those reading this have already had a few come to mind so we'll move on from listing anymore of them but will mention that the Bush Administration has posted on its Educational Reform site a fair amount of praise for NCLB by listing information about successes. (Some of the articles will no doubt make a few of you laugh or scoff.)

Let's look at the fourth main goal of NCLB -- Empower Students: How do the current standardized testing and accountability aspects of NCLB reflect this goal? Primarily, in my opinion, they don't. England uses the MCAS exams as an example of this -- with the 6000 students who were not allowed to graduate even though they had completed all other requirements and showed application of the materials needed to pass the exam. As we discussed in class, some who could otherwise pass the exams or could demonstrate learned knowledge of the materials, may not do so because of the high amount of stress involved with resting a student's prospective educational and occupational careers primarily on a few major exams. (Hence, the discussion about some students experiencing PTSD afterwards. Some, as mentioned in the article "Study reveals stressed out 7-11 year-olds" are having pervasive anxiety issues as well.)

I know it is pretty long already, but now I have to list my suggestions/recommendations as we should be focusing on what to do now...

Surely, we can analyze both psychological and educational evidence and histories to find a combination of, or alternatives to, testing methods that might actually empower and encourage students and their learning instead of making them fear their education. As we've discussed in class, helping students create portfolios (and keeping copies of the materials at the schools which can transfer if a student changes schools) consisting of project summaries, non-"major" test scores, essays, etc. can be another way to assess whether (or what) a student is learning (as well as the progress and aptitude) which can be used instead of, or in addition to, standardized exams such as regents and SATs. Schools should be able to evaluate these throughout the year and use common (consistent among all states) rubrics to standardize progress assessments. Also, if the federal government continues to want to be so "highly" involved in the educational process, they can set up another agency/department that consists of education professionals from all states to evaluate and review the assessments the schools make -- and audit the actual portfolios themselves, if needed.

I also think we should evaluate whether progressing students by grades is still helpful for today's students. For example, perhaps they could progress levels by subject instead of by overall grades. Schools can still be divided by age so that 15 yr old students who might be behind in math aren't placed in the same class as 7 year students. Progressing levels by each subject might help with the grade inflation and with lowering standards to pass students just to keep them with their class mates since each class could potentially consist of a various members of different students within a range of ages. Level progression may also help teachers to better tailor lessons towards the students' different learning styles and abilities. Obviously a suggestion like this still requires more research and debate, but it is a suggestion that might be possible with better planning for design and implementation. Standardized testing for each student, should then be done by individual subject level based on the standards set for each. Level progression can still be based on a full year or semester but should also be flexible to assist those who may learn materials more quickly.

Yes, this will mean that some students may progress levels in the middle of a semester, but it is possible to design a curricula according to this flexibility. (Some subjects may be taught on an independent study basis while still having a teacher in the room that can be there for guidance and to answer questions. Students should also be encouraged to work with peers to help learn from each other before asking a teacher, though.) The education/learning is then tailored towards an a student's strengths and learning style and helps to remove students' perceived limitations about how far they can advance in a year which might encourage them to be more proactive in doing their homework, etc.

I also wanted to give you guys a link to an article I found detailing how much money is going into the testing industry and which companies are the primary beneficiaries: Are children really the people who benefit from standardized testing?

Story location: http://susanohanian.org/outrage_fetch.php?id=465

Entry #5 -- Are you wooed by WOO?

This week's blog is a bit difficult for me. I'm swimming in a sea of thoughts and emotions, but my head is a bit more under-water than over this time as I try to find my way back to the shore.

"There is real emotion in their voices as they vie for the privilege of being singled out... each of them is on a relentless quest to be special. There is a deep-seated importance in recognition." (England, p.68)

I think about the expansiveness of this quote. In our readings, this refers to the seventh-grade children being observed and their eagerness to be selected to do various classroom jobs. In our discussions, I expand this to each of us, eager to find our own accomplishments while also wanting to be noticed (somehow) in the process, whether by our parents, our teachers, our coworkers, or our peers. We want to speak out, but we don't want to get stoned for doing so. We want to express our opinions, but we don't want to offend anyone. We know we have a "physical" voice, but we are rarely encouraged to use it -- in fact, some of us were even discouraged by being told to shut up or by being ignored.

And what about those who finally find their courage to speak up, especially in class? How do we respond to that person? Do we try to encourage further participation by acknowledging the courage it took for them to say what they think (even if some disagree with what was said) and responding with a comment of our own, or do we discourage them by staring at them blankly and in silence or by rolling our eyes? Perhaps we should all just sit in silence... class time will really fly by then. How awkward is it for presenters to ask questions and only get silence in return? I admire those who speak their opinions -- at least I know they're capable of thinking for themselves, at least enough to voice them as their opinions even though they may have been formed externally. Thank you to those who contribute; you truly make the class more enjoyable for me.

I sometimes feel bad for not having time to comment on everyone's blogs. Cheryl's comment in class about no one responding to her blog last week made me think about that even more -- people are taking the time to reach out to us with their entries... to finally share with us how they think. I try to check as many as I can, but I am limited with my time because of my classes and my work -- which is why you get a lot of late-night ramblings in my blogs; it's really the only time I have to dedicate to my school work. Not only do I appreciate the blogs from those with whom I agree, but also I value those who present another perception -- it provides me an opportunity to think of things in a different way or to see things from another perspective that maybe I haven't considered.

As has been a recurring comment in class... don't stifle yourself and don't feel like you have to apologize for telling us your background -- either in class or in your blogs. Maybe you feel a bit like people don't really care, and some may not, but there are those of us who look forward to hearing and reading what you have to say -- even if we don't always have time to comment.

-------

Back to our readings, I was interested in learning more about the World of Opportunity (WOO) School located in Birmingham, Alabama so I wanted to find some more information about it and thought I'd share a few links with you guys about it also. "The WOO is a social justice and civil rights experiment which works at teaching the whole person. This means addressing hunger, homelessness, and domestic violence as well as academic needs." (England, p.85) The first link is from susanohanian.org and provides an overview of the school but also has other interesting information relating to politics and education such as a "$71.40 plan to Stop NCLB." The second link is the World of Opportunity organization website which gives more detailed information about the school organization including news about students and projects. As I (and a few other classmates) have said in class, a good way to address issues in education is to address issues in the home and in the society; this organization attempts to address some of those issues. Do you think this organization provides a stepping stone in leveling the playing field for "pushed out students" and non-traditional students who have already been affected by the inequality and unfairness in the educational system?

So I was going to try to keep this entry shorter, but it doesn't seem like I did a good job with that. Guess I tried to address too many of my thoughts/issues again. Next week I'll try harder to choose just one...

Entry #4 -- "Everybody Knows"

In my blog last week, I used the debate to supplement the Kozol readings since the answers of the candidates pertained to available resources. This week, I will supplement the Anyon readings focusing on the "hidden curriculum" of education in relation to social classes.

"Store facts in your head like cold storage -- until you need it later for a test..."
(Anyon, 79)

Obviously when reading the passages, I, like many others, thought back to our elementary and secondary education to try to figure out where we "fit in." I had a teacher who said that the job of the teachers at that school was to prepare us to take the standardized tests: "You will learn how to think in college." This statement is why, at the time, I thought all public schools operated under the same principles. The aim of public education (or so I thought at the time) was to give you a basic ("boring") education of reading, writing, grammar, mathematics, and social studies while also having you write and memorize facts that the teacher put up on the board or read in class which you would later regurgitate for tests and college assessment exams like the SATs and ACTs. The "advanced education" ("interesting" learning) would be done in college -- where you would learn how to think, how to analyze, how to critically discuss topics; and you would do this with active participation with others who were equally as active and interested in wanting to learn more. College is where we would be more proactive in what we able to learn. (At least for those of us who might be able to make it to college. Other students were encouraged to take the vocational technology route where they attended school for half a day and then the vo-tech for half a day. Still, others were encouraged to get their GED because they would end up "barefoot and pregnant by 16.") I remember in high school (not the 5th grade), though, being asked a few "critical analysis" questions in the A.P. English course, but they were not based on what we thought, rather they were what we thought the author was thinking or what the author's purpose was, and to best answer these types of questions, we were instructed to quote a few lines from the readings and supplement them basically with paraphrases from the explanations in the text following the reading. Our research papers also consisted of paraphrasing and presenting information -- we were not to include our analysis because "first-person opinions should not be presented in research papers." The mechanical note-taking process existed throughout a majority of my educational process -- even in high school.

Given that a majority of students come from similar middle- and working-class school structures (in Anyon's 1980 article, these two classes accounted for 77.5% of the population), I find it interesting, then, that a lot of colleges jump immediately to expanding on ideas and habits taught more at the affluent professional and executive elite schools with seemingly no recognition that for most of us, we're not accustomed to that type of education. Some instructors have berated students for not participating more actively in discussions usually contributing it to a lack of being prepared for the material presented (which is, of course, true in some cases) instead of hesitating, at least for a moment, to consider that maybe we're not used to being able to speak up in class -- unlike in our current class, where it's been brought to our attention on more than one occasion that we're allowed to talk, etc. (and that we don't have to raise our hands and be given permission to do so). Over 13 years of being told to keep quiet and to not ask questions because the completed process will have answered any relevant questions develops quite a hard habit to break, especially in the beginning of the semester. Oftentimes, we're expected to draw qualitative connections to other things we have learned which can be difficult when a majority of what we learned was how to write down facts from given lectures. While in general theory, these are excellent approaches to developing an expansion of knowledge and perceptions, some accommodations recognizing the limitations of the public school system should be made -- even if just early in the semester -- to encourage more active exploration of the studies. Even a majority of community colleges teach at a middle-class type level so transfer students into their third and fourth years may no doubt experience some apprehension in adjusting to the new "rules" of being allowed to voice their own opinion without fear of being told their opinion is incorrect -- provided they can sufficiently defend their opinion, of course.


While reading the rest of the passage, I was reminded of a (really) old song my dad used to sing occasionally called "Everybody Knows" by Leonard Cohen. The lyrics I thought about are listed below, but I'm also including a video of the song for those who may want to hear it.


Everybody knows that the dice are loaded
Everybody rolls with their fingers crossed
Everybody knows the war is over
Everybody knows the good guy's lost
Everybody knows the fight is fixed
The poor stay poor, the rich get rich
That’s how it goes
Everybody knows
Everybody knows that the boat is leaking
Everybody knows that the captain lied
Everybody got this broken feeling
Like their father or their dog just died

(I didn't say I thought it was a good song; it's a bit haunting, but it's one, of many songs, that I remember my dad singing along to when he heard it and came to mind when I was thinking about the article.)

Also, while reading the descriptions of the working and middle class curricula, I thought back to another passage I read called "The Banking Model of Education" by Paulo Freire in which he states the formal education system is too much like a "banking model" in which the teacher deposits information into the minds of the students and should instead take a more active approach which engages the individual in the learning process, similar to the curricula at the affluent and elite schools. (For those not familiar with the Freire's "Banking Model," you can read about it here: Freire's Banking Model Explained. Even John Dewey held a strong belief that individuals need to be engaged in their learning in order for education to be successful. (Although, I agree with aspects of these philosophies, I think for today's society, a combination of philosophies might be a better approach than adapting or following one particular school of reform.) To summarize though, the banking model values a more authoritarian approach to education (similar to the regime explained in Kozol and in Anyon's description of the working and middle class curricula) whereas an active, humanitarian model emphasizes the partnership of the teacher and students and values communication -- more found in the affluent and elite schools.

I've often said that "I'm not that creative of a person." After reading about the affluent school curriculum, I wonder if perhaps I do have a creative side that maybe wasn't tapped into or developed... And, in general, I think a strong focus on learning the English language in its entirety (not just punctuation or basic grammar) is of paramount importance, especially in written and oral communications and wish I would have had more opportunity with practicing my grammar in preparation for written and oral communications. The elite schools obviously understand how important this is to the perception of how intelligent a person seems and how others relate to that person as a result. It is not necessarily a measure of a person's intelligence but it is a contributor in how others perceive one's status in society (and in how educated you are) which can be very important in a number of situations and especially when interviewing for jobs.

[It was interesting (but not surprising) that the parents' contribution to the students' education weren't mentioned at all until the descriptions of the affluent and elite structures -- reminded me of our previous classroom discussion about the inequality of parents as educational resources as well.]

For those who came from schools with curricula similar to the affluent and elite schools, did you read anything about the other types that perhaps you might have appreciated but didn't get? What are some of the things lacking in your education that you didn't realize until after you came to college -- or maybe until after taking this course? Do you think sometimes you take college (or took your elementary/secondary education) for granted?

For those from schools similar to the middle and working class curricula, did you find it difficult to transition to college? What strengths did you develop throughout your education that you might not have obtained at a school structured to a different social class? I wonder if we were better prepared to overcome certain obstacles or if maybe we have a different level of determination and motivation for completing college. I think for some in the other two classes, perhaps college is more expected; whereas for me and maybe some of you, it's more of a privilege?

Entry #3 -- Debate on Education Solutions

Click here for Democratic Education Debate video

Some of this may not make sense if you haven't seen the videos, so if you get lost, just click the link, select the candidate, and then click education to watch that portion of the debate. :-D (This blog focuses on the Democratic candidates b/c that's the only education debate I found so far; I haven't found a Republican education debate to comment on yet -- maybe I'll find one for the next blog.)

First of all, though... wow... a lot of the candidates seemed to just be regurgitating ideas from our Kozol text. Did anyone else notice that? Or maybe those ideas are popular complaints and a few candidates are actually listening... hahaha yeah maybe

I look forward to your feedback/opinions on these b/c these debates are always a matter of interpretation so I may need some different perspectives. Anyway a few of my thoughts on particular points of each candidate:


1.) Biden -- Major focus was on a College Access Program

The program will implement a $3000 Tax Credit -- If I understand this correctly, it's a yet another tax CREDIT, so who is this really going to help? It's not going to benefit those who are in poverty because they don't make enough money to put themselves over the taxable limit which would allow them to claim this credit -- It sounds similar to the hope and lifetime learning credits being offered now, if you don't make over a certain amount, it won't matter if you claim it because it's not adjusting your income since you're below the taxable level already. It may help some middle-class people but primarily it's giving the upper-class yet another tax credit. (Yes, he did mention increasing the pell grant amount, but $4500/year still doesn't make that much of a dent if colleges average $15,000/semester [$30K/yr] for tuition, board, books, etc. The current pell grant amount is $4,050, meaning an increase of only $450, but the people who earn enough to claim the credit can get $3000 off their adjustable gross income -- and he didn't state whether this was in addition to the other learning credits.) Thinking about this program irritates me... College Access for whom? Those who could already afford it? Sounds like he thought this through REALLY well, doesn't it?

He believes in early education programs such as Pre-Head Start and Head-Start as well as competent pre-school programs and starting kids at age 3 instead of age 6 but doesn't mention a universal pre-K program and doesn't talk about how these programs should be funded or if he even thinks funding should be changed.

No Child Left Behind (NCLB) -- He thought it would have been good if funded and implemented correctly, but says it now needs overall improvement. Agrees with having standards but says not to "teach to the test" and says to measure progress against a standard to consider progress made but doesn't mention how he thinks this should be done other than by saying start earlier, smaller classes, "better" teachers, and college.

My thoughts: I got the impression that education wasn't a priority to him and his campaign. Hard to pick out a few pro points in this one other than the smaller classes, etc. but no description was given on how to provide for those features. :o\ After viewing the clip, do you guys agree or disagree? Maybe I missed something...


2.) Clinton -- "Education is an Afterthought"

Education Agenda: Universal PreK, Changing NCLB, Affordable college and training/apprenticeship for non-college bound kids, looking at role of family and society

Is education working in the 21st century? "Other than computers, everything looks the same..." She thinks children need to be better prepared for education in the 21st century. When talking about how to do this, she said each person has opinions but didn't really provide one of her own. "Everyone's an expert because we went to school." Her only comment on it: "The public school system worked so well for us for so long." (WHAT?!?!?!) Sounds like she needs to do a bit more research...

She was asked a question by Kozol about testing created by NCLB producing robotic test-prep factories to which her response was that she believes in accountability and a place for testing but then says children are not walking tests and called for assessments but under a broad, rich curricula. Again, no real answer was provided. I guess they should have called this presidential questions instead of presidential debate... Kind of seems like specifics on improving education are a bit of an afterthought to her as well.

My thoughts: At least she acknowledged funding for apprenticeship and other training programs besides college. (but again didn't provide details on how to make them "affordable")


3.) Dodd -- Perspective regarding parent/teacher dynamic

He said education improves individual opportunities but that our government also depends on well-educated society. 'Education starts with parents.' He said children are not ready to learn in our country today. Sure he agrees with having Pre-K and Head Start programs, but the first educators are parents. I did agree with his point that not enough is being done to assist and support the parents. More needs to be done to allow people to try to be more active in the education of their children. (I know this was a debated topic in class which is why I thought it was interesting that Dodd mentioned it as well.)

Free college program -- He proposed a free community college education in which the federal and state governments would each pay 50% of the tuition for the students. He also proposed an expansion of pell grant and work study programs, incentives for americorps/peacecorps, indexing college tuition to keep tuition from increasing so much, and proposed a sliding scale for payback of loans for careers that don't pay as much. The sliding scale is an interesting concept -- but of course it depends on the implementation.

My thoughts: I liked some of what he said about providing more support to families but again lack of details about how -- it's one thing to say it, it's another to actually plan it. Some of the education incentives seemed like he gave them some thought -- but since his college program is based on community college, I think he should add vo-tech/BOCES, apprenticeship, etc. type programs to this as well.


4.) Edwards -- Another one who didn't answer the question posed to him

A mother's perspective -- A college-educated mother who has been laid off and not able to find employment asked how these situations encourage children to attend college?

His response: College-for-Everyone Program -- For those who are qualified to go to college and agree to work 10 hrs/wk -- covers undergraduate tuition and books at a public university (which cuts down on debt for college students)

He states people need to rethink education -- think of it as a "Birth to Death Experience" by starting children much earlier (than 3-4 yrs) and much more intensely. Provide better health care and nutrition support for those who need it. Raise teacher pay (and bonus pay for those working with at-risk), change NCLB. Supports a national infrastructure (instead of the current non-standardized one) for continuous education in the workforce.

My thoughts: Seemed more optimistic about education reform/improvement in terms of feasibility. I like the "Birth to Death" experience in theory, but I don't necessarily agree with forcing a formal education on infants and toddlers -- they need time to develop their creative thinking and to explore their new worlds. It bothered me that he didn't even acknowledge the question that was asked of him though. Good thoughts on health care and raising teacher pay as
well as continuous education -- but, again, how to implement and find funding for this?


5.) Gravel -- Are we failing our children?

Answer: How could we not, when our focus is on military development. Education needs to be first priority. A lot of focus on "Compete and Succeed"-- to include a year-round school system, competition in education, "super" teachers, and not just throwing money at it "since money goes primarily to administrators not children." He proposes a property tax to fund schools and says poor communities have poor education because they don't have property tax? (Ranting in my head about this one) -- Isn't property tax based on the value of the property? How is that really going to help the "poor communities" in getting a "rich" education? This proposal REALLY irritates me for some reason -- it just seems asinine to the primary funding of the education based on a property tax. It just seems detrimental to inner-city and rural areas on a number of levels. Increasing the tax on farmers who are already just barely getting by, causing them to sell what land they have left and discouraging those in inner-cities from buying properties because they will have to pay a higher tax on it. Surely we can come up with better ideas to fund education than by increasing a tax that will hinder those already being hurt by the system?!? Another point he made: Other countries educate children at no cost but US can't match that? (Is he wanting to use these property taxes to fund a free college program for everyone as well?)

My thoughts: Empowering American people to make laws (but how?); education is not top priority (and it shows) and needs to be. Maybe I misunderstand this property tax thing -- perhaps someone can explain to me how it will benefit the communities who need the most help?

6.) Kucinich -- Universal Pre-K and Improving Early Education

Basically, he calls for the end of NCLB saying testing isn't the end all and be all of education. He recognizes that many students have started out behind and proposes a stronger early education program to include universal PreK. Also believes the country needs to focus more on education -- to make it the top domestic priority and stresses the importance of developing a love of knowledge. Proposed funding to include a 15% cut in pentagon budget to fund universal pre-k and increase funding to elementary and secondary education. He also mentioned a universal college plan but didn't really provide details on it.

My thoughts: Believes in making education a primary focus by attempting to improve it at all levels, from universal pre-k to universal college. Would like more details on implementation and funding since more funding will be needed than just the 15% from pentagon budget. How to address the resources issue that we discussed in class? Sounds like a good general idea but needs more development and specifics.

7.) Obama -- A lot of ideas, a little bit of substance

He was asked to assess the American education system? How well is it doing from K-high school?

He said it is doing very well for some, but not very well for all. States NCLB is false advertising,. Believes a sense of urgency about improving education system needs to be restored to remain competitive in new global economy. Says there are challenges and opportunities in having to recruit a new generation of teachers (since baby boomer generation will be retiring) but doesn't mention what they are. Believes the most important ingredient in the education system is the quality of the teacher in front of classroom -- so they should have more pay, more professional development, and to work with them (instead of against them) to improve standards. Believes in providing bonuses for math and science teachers and bonuses for teachers in "tough" settings (inner city and rural schools) and wants to improve early childhood education (said over half the work force is going to be black and brown -- so need to step up education for these children).

How to make competitive on world scene? Invest more in early childhood education, for those at-risk, start as soon as they're born and support parents. Improve math and science instruction -- find innovative ways to make it interesting.

My thoughts: Seems to recognize some of the issues in education but provides no real feasible solutions on how to begin to tackle them -- unfortunately, a lot of ideas without much substance. He's like the advice columnist who tells you what needs to be done w/out suggesting how to go about doing it or whether it's actually possible considering the current situation.


8.) Richardson -- 15 yr Competition Goal

Feels the high school curricula is not competitive. Wants to emphasize arts, etc. and not just science and math (in contrast to Obama's view). Scrap NCLB. Proposes a minimum wage ($40,000) for teachers, revise high school curricula, start children earlier with pre-school (early childhood for children under 4), full-day Kindergarten, no one-size-fits-all-testing, and to help schools not performing well instead of hurting them by removing funding. 15 yr goal to make America #1 in science and math to increase global competition. Focused on legal immigration to help people remove red-tape to permit skilled workers (such as engineers) into our work force.

My thoughts: If the goal is to produce quality math and science engineers to be competitive, how will they find jobs in the States if visa and immigration laws become more lax? He seems to contradict himself with that thought -- students will not get the training they need if the jobs are not available, and why would they be encouraged to enter those fields if there isn't as high of a demand for jobs in those industries? Most will look at jobs outside of the States so the investment in funding their college won't be returned since they won't be working in our country. Also, a lot of engineering and science jobs are also being moved to other countries like Mexico and India, causing a shortage of those jobs here.

Overall thoughts -- For those proposing free college or loan assistance (sliding-scale) plans, I'd be interested to see how that would affect those already paying for college and those already repaying student loans. I also think they should give more thought to non-traditional students and how to make college/training programs more accessible to them to encourage our current generation to improve their situations with training/education of some sort. Also, what will replace NCLB since most proposed to end it? Should we try to develop national standards and assessments, and, if so, how do we determine what they should be? Some candidates stressed a need for more math and science, others for arts and broader curricula. I wasn't really completely satisfied with the funding proposals either -- I still think more research is needed, and trial programs should be implemented on smaller levels before adopting another national program like NCLB.

Another problem I have is this focus on ONE problem. Some did briefly acknowledge a few other things, but the education system is a problem with education alone. There are other social factors to consider -- health care, poverty, unemployment, etc. We can't just look at education as the end-all solution for all of the social problems. Also, again, I question the responsibility of the various levels of our society -- government, communities, and individuals and their roles and responsibilities that they have to work with each other as well. I also don't agree with a major focus on just science and mathematics. I think we are doing an injustice to our society by not also focusing on moral development to include empathy and cultural competency. Also, we our doing an injustice to our children by not allowing them the opportunity to partake in art, theatre, music, and sports programs. We need to shift our attitudes on having to be the dominant world power in everything. There is danger in power free from moral and ethical standards. Some candidates make it sound like a competition that must be successful at any cost.

As briefly mentioned in class, I think cultural competency should be emphasized more in the public school systems. Make it a requirement for students to learn about different cultures. We allow them to choose which foreign language they study; we could do something similar by providing some courses on different cultures for them to choose. For communities with more limited funding, then provide courses relevant to the diversity in that community or at least on a few of the more prevalent cultures such as African and Hispanic cultures and maybe Native American culture. For communities that can afford it, add to it to allow Asian, Russian, and other cultures. And for schools that still can't afford something like that -- maybe they can at least offer one class that focuses on a different culture each week. Yes, it's still a matter of resources, but at least it's one step that can be taken to help others become more aware of different cultures before (if) they go to college. When it comes to trying to change the attitudes as a society, we have to start somewhere -- no matter how small. I know there are other ways to do this, and I hope you all will provide some of your own suggestions.

I think we can also research other countries and their integration programs. As I mentioned before, I have a friend from the West Indies who said he didn't even know color was a factor in resources (employment, etc.) until he moved here after college. Looking into the programs of other countries may offer insight on how to change policies on a federal level to try to redistribute things a bit more. (Although, the big problem exists in shifting the view point of those in power... or shifting the power to those with a broader view point. Maybe schools should focus more on our political system as well -- to fully educate citizens in policy formation and how to change policies and lobby, etc. I think this might actually be a good classroom discussion for our one of our class sessions -- maybe it will help us to brainstorm or be more familiar with more possible resolutions or ways to make changes?)

ok....I think I'm feeling a bit critical today or something. Which candidates do you think made some valid points? Which ones do you think were blowing smoke out their butts?

Entry #2 -- Virtual Integration: "Any Time, Any Place, Any Path, Any Pace"

Article Link: Virtual Schooling K-12: Is this a Way to Integrate Students?

Opening Abstract from the Article: "As a seventh-grader, Kelsey-Anne Hizer was getting mostly D's and F's and felt the teachers at her Ocala middle school were not giving her the help she needed. But after switching to a virtual school for eighth grade, Kelsey-Anne is receiving more individual attention and making A's and B's. She's also enthusiastic about learning, even though she has never been in the same room as her teachers."

As the popularity of virtual, or online, college education increases, some believe an online K-12 education is feasible as well. Online schools boast an increase in educational opportunities and an enhanced learning experience for K-12 grades, emphasizing collegial expertise. Obviously, we can spend quite a bit of time discussing the pros and cons of such educational experiences, but I am choosing to question a few of the pros and cons regarding one aspect in particular as it pertains to a class discussion regarding segregated schools. With the prevalence of violence in public schools, the increasing lack of proper resources and accommodations, and the overall sense of dismay about public education (to name a few of the current issues), will a virtual school provide opportunity for a more truly "integrated" classroom experience that will better prepare students to contribute to the society in which they live?

On one hand, we can argue that online schools may be a better way to integrate students because a greater sense on anonymity exists online than in the classroom which may provide some students with more confidence to take part in online class discussions. Even in our class, some students said they favored the use of blogs because it provided such an opportunity. Some programs are designed with a "work at your own pace" type of curriculum, allowing students with disabilities or learning difficulties to take more time to work on and understand the subject matter with increased "personal" attention while also allowing others to complete the material at a faster speed, avoiding the boredom that occurs in a traditional classroom. Additionally, supporters of online education state that curriculum for those in schools with limited resources is increased because students now have access to virtual classrooms of many subjects not available at their schools. The online courses also serve the technological interests of the current society, and will, therefore, give students a better understanding of computers than may have been gained otherwise. Some may also go so far as to say that socio-political or socio-economical traits such as class, race, religion, and such do not exist online.

On the other hand, however, we must look at whether the implementation of these ideals are successful in eliminating some of these issues. The article and some of the supporting information does not address how underserved populations get access to these schools -- and even the computers and online access which are no doubt a necessity for the school work. Some virtual schools, like the Florida Virtual School listed in the article, do provide "grants for online learning opportunities, with an emphasis on underserved populations," but the challenge regarding available resources is still unanswered until more information is provided about the amount and length of the grants. How are other resources such as text books provided? Are they available online free of charge? Can they be mailed to the students for use during the class and then later returned? Again, in terms of computers and online access, yes, some have access to these through public libraries and such, but then what about the related transportation issues this causes? Also, albeit a lot of social communications are taking place online, students can still greatly benefit from in-person social functions. How else are they going to learn how to interact and network with others in a more formal setting. Virtual schools, then, may become a dependent source of communications, in turn isolating some from society instead of teaching them to be an integral part of it. Yes, as stated above, some students may be more likely to interact with others online, but we do have a responsibility to help them interact with others in an offline world as well. Resource allocation in every regard still continues to pose a challenge to education -- even in the online realm.

Perhaps instead of looking at virtual school as an either/or situation, we can find a way to better incorporate distance and virtual learning opportunities into our communities. Maybe the courses can be taught and completed online (maybe via computer centers at schools and libraries), but schools can still exist to provide the social responsibility to our students in terms of arts, music, sports, and other extra-curricular activities. Also, perhaps this could be a way to offset certain budget limitations which might allow for greater access to vocational programs and other programs to enhance "life skills" such as finance/budgeting, home economics, and such. Obviously more research is needed to find a way to better incorporate this idea of a combination approach because I have only begun thinking about some of the different possibilities and obstacles and politics involved and know there are several more issues which need to be addressed in areas such as staffing, curriculum development, and funding.

I am curious about what others think about this topic -- especially when considering your own personal experiences. Do you think online courses could be a better way to integrate children in their schools and societies? What experiences have you had in this area -- were they only while in college or did some of your high schools provide experiences for additional communications in the form of online blogs, etc.? Finally, do you think that race, class, and other similar issues would be as big of a problem in virtual settings as they are in public schools?

Entry #1 -- Hardscrabble Childhood

This blog entry focuses on some thoughts I had as a reaction to the Hardscrabble Childhood movie/video.

I think people have become so accustomed to focusing solely on the negative aspects of our society that as we get older, this focus overflows into our everyday thinking -- almost as though we have lost any hope we held for the good of humanity in general. The question was posed "Which kid, if any, might have a chance of making it?" I understood the use of "might" in the question to emphasize the possibility of hope while acknowledging the limitations/challenges that would be presented. When I voiced my opinion about hope for one of the children, I was met with a conflicting view originally focusing only on the obstacles (without acknowledging that they could be overcome) which seemed to present a sort of pessimistic/hopeless tone to the view that we, as adults, can usually view with objectivity, but it made me wonder how children (who have not yet developed a comfortable sense of self or self-esteem) maintain any sense of resiliency or hope when constantly faced with so many negative attitudes in their daily lives. In general, people have become quick to tell people why some thing can't be done instead of helping them to find ways to make doing it possible. I think some people forget the differences in optimism, pessimism, and realism -- with, in my experiences, a majority mistaking pessimism for realism. I understand the importance of acknowledging limitations, but I do not think that all limitations should be automatically accepted either. What hope do we have in changing our social problems, if we focus entirely on the negative components, including the "improbabilities" of overcoming the obstacles involved? In an age where most are determined to make as much money as possible, why is it that so few are determined to make as much of a difference to social injustice as possible? Many of us avoid political issues, I think, because then it is easier for us to claim ignorance of those issues than to claim responsibility for being a part of changing or not changing them.

So what/who is responsible for attempting resolutions? When we look at social issues such as poverty or a struggling education system, who bears the responsibility of promoting progress and resolution? Should we place our faith in our federal government to resolve these issues, or the state or local governments? Or, should we, as a community, find ways to work through our differences to enhance the lives of our families/children as a whole instead of what impacts a family individually? I think the shift to the idea of an exclusively nuclear family has contributed to some of the current problems with poverty and education issues in the United States. We have been programmed to be independent, to rely solely on ourselves to solve our own problems and to look down on or isolate those who are unable to do the same. Many make fun of the poor, judging them and making assumptions as to why they are poor -- when several of those are perhaps one job-loss away from finding themselves in a similar situation. Some make excuses as to why the poor are undeserving of help. Perhaps if we focused less on independence and focused more on balancing interdependence with independence, we will be more open-minded to finding better resolutions for some of the existing social injustices. And why have we, as a society, become so content with being reactive instead of proactive? We want change yet expect others to be responsible for making changes. Why have we not learned to work together in a more proactive manner to promote changes instead of reacting to the changes that we allow a group of people (who are oftentimes biased and not representative of those affected by the changes) to make for us?

I think we need to work on all levels -- individually, within our communities, and within our governments -- to find better resolutions, instead of temporary reliefs, to our problems, so that maybe we're not in a perpetual cycle of battling the same social issues throughout our generations. (Please don't think I am being foolish enough to think that we can solve every problem this way -- or that this shift is free of problems in and of itself, but consideration of the problems being caused and escalated by this focus of total independence with no sufficient progress towards resolution should allow for research and analysis of alternative methods which may be able to provide better resolutions to some of the more prevailing issues within our economic and education systems.) When we stop expending so much energy on blaming and making excuses and start shifting that energy on working together to alleviate our complaints, then we will feel more empowered as individuals and as a nation to add more optimism (and less pessimism) to our realism and to promote the changes we feel would make a positive impact on the world we are creating for our future generations so that hopefully we can avoid passing down our learned helplessness and perpetual cycles of making the same mistakes over and over again. Maybe we'll once again start adding thoughts about why we can do something to the thoughts about why we can't... hopefully producing more well-rounded thoughts capable of viewing the different sides of the situations and creating more well-rounded solutions based on the research of both the "strengths" and "weaknesses" or "positives" and "negatives" of the problems.