Prompt: Select one of the four responses to No Child Left Behind and write a review of at least one other response from that perspective. Response: Alfie Kohn, an American author and lecturer in the areas of education, was one of those people who did not believe in the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB). Kohn stated, "It punishes those who most need help and sets back efforts to close the gap between rich and poor and between black and white (Frasier, 375)." NCLB and The Effort To Privative Public Education wanted the goals to be accomplished, but they saw the lack of funding and rigidity in defining students success exclusively through the results of standardized test. The NCLB aimed to help all in society, but "the link between education and socioeconomic mobility has been indirect at best (Urban, 338)." Linda Darling Hammond believed that the NCLB was a step in the right direction, but it also reverted the schools back to discrimination (Fraser, 374). She talked about how schools use to be separated by race and gender, now the NCLB separates children based on their brain and how they learn. Since the NCLB was giving so much attention to the disadvantaged children, it separated children without even meaning to. Hammond claimed that the NLCB has flaws that are detrimental to children's education and the educational system (Fraser, 374). Hammond stated that with the new testing "most of the nation's public schools will be deemed failing within the next few years." And, "The attack on the identification of test scores by school, by class, and by individual students threatens negative consequences (Urban, 331)."
0 Comments
Prompt:
Select either the A Nation at Risk perspective or that of the authors of Choosing Equality. What is your critique of the opposing document? Response: After reviewing the A Nation at Risk document, I chose to look at it through the Choosing Equality perspective. In April 1983, after two years of data gathering, public hearings, and deliberation on the causes and consequences of educational decline, the National Commission on Excellence in Education published a report of its activities and conclusions. That report, titled A Nation at Risk, sought to persuade the American public that there was a real crisis in American education, and that the solution to that educational crisis should become the major educational objective of the era (Urban, 321). The A Nation at Risk document focused on the low achievement records and comparisons with other countries to scare the public into caring about reform. The document “invoked the image of a nation threatened economically by its political allies who were also economic rivals (Urban, 319)." The document stated, “When we look beyond the universal call for excellence, we find new standards for achievement, but not new strategies for ensuring that all children will have the appropriate means to meet them (Fraser, 340)." A Nation at Risk dwelled on the "perfect" student and citizen, rather than considering all children's needs. The Nation At Risk made the citizens of the United States believe that the United States is falling behind other countries in education by indicating test scores (Urban, 297). However, Choosing Equality outlines the issues that the nation is facing. It explains that education is becoming too federal and should be more local (Urban, 297). Choosing Equality stated that there are three myths in this document; there is a difference between the elite and the mass of students, equity reforms attempted in the 60's and 70's were proven diverted or damaging, and the national economic growth are contingent on establishing more rigorous standards of education (Fraser, 341). Prompt:
Describe the reasons President Lyndon Johnson saw school reform as essential to improving the nation. Do you agree or disagree? Response: President Lyndon Johnson believed that education was the key to improve economic opportunities. Johnson expressed that improving schooling was essential for the Great Society effort (Fraser, 281). The most compelling statement that President Johnson made was; "By passing this bill, we bridge the gap between helplessness and hope for more than 5 million educationally deprived children. We put into the hands of our youth more than 30 million new books, and into many of our schools their first libraries. As a son of a tenant farmer, I know that education is the only valid passport from poverty (Fraser, 285)." However, the passage of the ESEA in 1965 under President Johnson raised the expectations of the National Education Association (NEA) that its long-sought goal of a federal partnership role in educational finance would be fulfilled (Urban, 299). In my own opinion, I completely agree with President Lyndon Johnson's stance on school reform. The first step to demolish poverty is education, and the most powerful tool someone can have is knowledge. It is also crucial for students to have a resourceful classroom to learn in. For example, a clean learning environment, up to date textbooks, materials needed to succeed (like pencils). In order to help children succeed, the children need the resources to achieve success. By educating children at a young age, they can begin to form their own goals in life, which will lead them out of poverty. It has been an extremely progressive movement in the United States, and it is important to continue the progression. Prompt:
Why did the United States Supreme Court rule as it did in the Brown v. Board of Education case? Cite specific examples for your reasons. Response: The 1954 Brown v. The Board of Education decision helped motivate African Americans to launch a series of civil rights campaigns on their own behalf. The impact of the civil rights movement in educational affairs came mainly through a series of legislative acts. These acts were passed because of the pressure from blacks and other minority groups. The court decisions rendered in response to suits filed by various minorities (Urban, 287). The United States Supreme Court's decision for the Brown v. Board of Education case was unanimous. The Supreme Court ruled this way for two reasons. The first reason is; segregated schools made African Americans feel inferior. The second reason is; segregation of schools violated the 14th amendment (Fraser, 250). First, the courts ruled that when a child has a sense of inferiority, their motivation to learn decreases. The Supreme Court declared that the phrase, "separate but equal," had no place in education (Fraser, 252). Second, the 14th amendment states, "No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States" (Fraser, 251). Therefore, by segregating schools, African American children could not receive the privilege of enrolling in a "white only" school. The "white only" schools had much better resources, along with a better education. Because of this, the courts ruled that African Americans were abridged the privilege of an education. Prompt: Select either Herb Kohl or John Holt and then defend or critique the statement that they represent the next generation of progressive educators. Response: The most famous romantic critic was Jonathan Kozol. Kozol’s indictment of the treatment given inner-city black children was scathing. He argued convincingly that these children were the victims of prejudiced, unfeeling teachers and an ignorant, rigid school bureaucracy (Urban 302). For Kozol, the result of this perilous situation was that the children in these schools were not being taught. Rather, they were being warehoused by their teachers and the school authorities (Urban 302). John Holt strongly agreed with Kozol's philosophy. Holt wrote a series of books named, How Children Fail, which entailed his belief that that schools, public or private, could not be reformed (Fraser 235). He believed that that homeschooling was a much better option to produce real success in the lives of children. I do not agree with all of Holt's statements about education. For example, I do not believe that homeschooling a child is the best option. However, I do agree with Holt's statement as to why children fail and why schools fail children. Holt said, "We cannot have real learning in school if we think it is our duty and our right to tell children what they must learn" (Fraser 238.) I completely agree with his statement and logic in that quote. It is so important to encourage free thinking at a young age. Rather than encouraging students to learn the "right" answer all the time, teachers should focus more on teaching students how to discover new ways to solve a problem and how to learn without ever finding a "definite" answer. Prompt:
Imagine a conversation between Margaret Haley, Ella Flagg Young, Grace Strachan, and Cora Bigelow. What would each say in response to the others? Where would they agree and disagree? Response: A conversation between Margaret Haley, Ella Flagg Young, Grace Strachan, and Cora Bigelow would revolve around the progressive movement of female teachers and education. In 1904, Margaret Haley asserted to the National Education Association (NEA), which was dominated by the male elite of education, that teachers needed; increased salaried, job security and pensions, an end to overwork in overcrowded schoolrooms, and recognition of teachers as educators instead of "factorized education" (Fraser 181). Haley knew change had to occur quickly, so that teachers could be professionals who felt proud of themselves and of their shrive to the nation's children. She believed an organized body of teachers, known as a "union," was the key to change (Fraser 182). While Margaret Haley was the nation's best known organizer of militant teachers, her close ally, Ella Flagg Young, was the most significant theoretical voice of the teacher movement of the progressive era in 1901 (Fraser 185). Young spoke for the belief that a democratic society required a democratic system of education in which the teacher was a respected citizen and not a passive cog in a machine run from above (Fraser 185). In 1862, she began her career in the Chicago schools by teaching in an elementary school. She rose quickly through the ranks and eventually became principal of the “practice school” portion of one of the city’s high schools that had been set aside for normal school students. She continued to win promotions, moving to the principalship of a full elementary school and then to the principalship of a larger school. In 1887, she was made an assistant (or district) superintendent with responsibilities for the curriculum of the elementary schools and the quality of the teachers in her district (Urban 193). Young’s doctoral dissertation, “Isolation in the Schools,” gave her the chance to refine her educational views. In it she decried the lack of relationship between the various subjects that comprised the curriculum in the schools and also between the various elements (teachers, principals, superintendents) that composed the school bureaucracy. Her views of the dignity and importance of teachers made her the friend of classroom teachers and, potentially, the enemy of administrative progressives, who sought to mechanize the teachers’ role in the new top-down form of school management (Urban 193). Although Margaret Haley and the Chicago teachers focused on a wide range of issues affecting teachers, Grace Strachan and the other leaders of New York City's Interborough Association of Women Teachers had a single focus: the unequal salaries paid to women teachers in 1910 (Fraser 187). Most cities and towns had two different salary scales, one for women and one for men. From early in the nineteenth century onward, women had been recruited to the teaching profession because they were seen as more maternal than men, but also because school boards could hire them more cheaply (Fraser 187). Cora Bigelow was the leader of the elementary school teachers' organization in Boston, a group she was able to turn briefly into one of the first teacher unions in the nation of 1919 (Fraser 189). For Bigelow, progressive education meant teacher power: adequate compensation for teachers and a central role for teachers in the development of the school's curriculum and goals. Overall, these four women would all agree on the progressive movement of teaching and education. These women wanted equal pay to men, respect from the community and to establish a union of teachers. However, some of the women would disagree on how to proceed with the movement. For example, Cora Bigelow was kind and peaceful when speaking to administration, whereas Margaret Haley was more assertive and dominate. Prompt:
Compare the narrative of Mary Antin with that of the Mexican American students described in America Me. What is similar and what is different in their experience of American schooling? Speculate on some of the reasons for these differences. Response: Mary Antin was a young, Russian, Jewish girl who immigrated to Boston, Massachusetts in 1912 from Russia (Fraser 145). She attended a public school ("common school") once she immigrated to the United States. However, immigrant children were mostly known as "green children," while attending school (Fraser 147). When Antin was in school, she was treated very well by her teachers and classmates. There was a class made up of other Jewish immigrants, whose first language was not English either (Fraser 148). Antin was able to learn the English language, within her first year of school, with the help of her teacher. The teacher was very attentive to Antin and gave her extra help when she needed it. In 1948, Beatrice Griffith, went to Los Angeles, California to interview young Latino students. While conducting her research, she discovered a letter that a few students had written to President Roosevelt, stating what they believe would make their school better. The students said that they wanted to learn about "important" things in life, like how to sew, put money in the bank, stars and the moon, etc., rather than the "basic" topics (Fraser 164). The problem that the students were having in school was that they were just learning about the United States history, instead of world wide history, including Mexico's history. However, the problems that students encountered outside of school included; poverty, bad housing, undernourishment, ill health, bilingualism, and segregation (Fraser 164). The schools were segregated between by "Mexican Schools" and "American Schools," and the Mexican students seen the American students get picked up by the bus before school, whereas the Mexican students had to walk to school. There was an abundant difference between the Mexican and American schools, for example; the Mexican schools did not have play facilities, cafeteria, auditorium, and the teachers that were sent there were usually there because they were being "punished" (Fraser 165). Overall, the Mexican American students were treated very poorly compared to the American students. The main difference between Mary Antin's school and the Mexican American student schooling is the location. Mary Antin went to school in Boston, where segregation was not a prominent and the area was more progressive. However, the Mexican American students were in California, which was not a very progressive state at the time. The second largest factor causing the difference between the Mary Antin's school experience and the Mexican American student school experience was the times period. Antin went to school during the pre war area, whereas the Mexican American students went to school during the post war area. Although efforts to bring about curriculum reform and improved working conditions for teachers have been stressed, along with the growing demand for equal educational opportunity, in some ways American education emerged almost unchanged from the war years (Urban 251). The basic school curriculum remained largely unaltered by the war, as did the structure of school governance, the training of teachers, classroom teaching practices, and most other educational policies and practices. School budgets recovered somewhat from the negative times of the depression era as the postwar economic prosperity trickled down to the public sector (Urban 251). Prompt:
Compare the different visions of the American high school described in these documents. What vision of a larger democratic society is represented in each one? Using both Conant’s 1959 report and your own experience in high school, who “won” the debates? Be sure to use specific evidence from other documents to illustrate your points. Response: The high school education system has changed immensely throughout time. High schools in the late 1800s, early 1900s, offered a curriculum that was significantly more advanced than the common school, which is now known as "elementary schools" (Fraser 106). The education provided was to strengthen skills in reasoning and do more advanced study in English and mathematics. Although, high schools also offered college-preparatory courses, courses that led directly into the world of work in business, and "normal courses" that lead into a career as a teacher, even though only a tiny portion of the nation's population attended high school (Fraser 106). However, many people were concerned with what was being taught in the schools and in parts of the country, which made education was a widely debated topic. For example, the topic of "evolution" was being taught in some schools, causing some states to ban that topic from being taught. A different form of education was The National Society for the Promotion of Industrial Education (NSPIE). NSPIE was founded in 1906, and was an influential group in the movement for practical studies. The NSPIE was supported from the beginning by business and industrial leaders who sought to link schooling to employment (Urban 178). The NSPIE advocated for industrial and trade schools, where students could learn the skills needed for industrial and manufacturing jobs (Urban 178). The enrollment in these schools were slim, so advocates argued that students who lacked academic aptitude should be encouraged into industrial programs Urban 178). In Conant's 1959 report, he stated, "... the three main objectives of a comprehensive high school are: first, to provide a general education for all the future citizens; second, to provide good elective program for those who wish to use their acquired skills immediately on graduation; third, to provide satisfactory programs for those whose vocations will depend on their subsequent education in a college or university..." (Fraser 138). Conant "won" this debate, considering his beliefs and ideas are still being used in the United States high schools today, including my own high school experience. At the high school I attended (Galesburg High School), we have all three of the objectives Conant stated in his report. First, we were provided a general education; second, we had electives, such as foreign language, computer science, theater, child development and so on; third, we had a vocational program, which included nursing, early childhood education, woodwork, automotive, etcetera. Prompt:
From your reading, why did Charlotte Forten go south in 1862? Response: Charlotte Forten was an African-American, free black woman. She was born in Philadelphia in 183, but later moved to Salem, Massachusetts, and taught in the Epes Grammar School in the late 1850s (Fraser 88). She taught school in Massachusetts prior to the Civil War. Although, she volunteered early on in the Civil War to go south and teach some of the first slaves that were freed by the Union Army (Fraser 77). She, along with other northern women, where anxious to teach in the schools of the South. Forten kept a journal of her experience of teaching in the South. She started off the journal with describing her voyage on the ship from Massachusetts to the Port Royal, South Carolina (Fraser 88). Throughout her journal, she explained the dangers of teaching in the South. She was literally teaching on the edge of the Civil War Battle lines (Fraser 88). As she was writing, she began to talk more about the flowers, climate, and her daily life. However, even with the development of the “dual” system of “separate but equal” schools, African American citizens hoped that their children and their children’s children might gain some knowledge (Urban 134). But, the system of separate schooling perpetuated inequality. Northern philanthropists and southern reformers created educational policies that allowed black children to make only marginal advances. The Southern legislatures supported public schools, but only for white children (Urban 134). At the start of the twentieth century, many sections of the South remained intellectually and economically impoverished (Urban 134). A southern “educational revival” started in the new century, but the there were many issues before the reformers of that generation. The per-pupil expenditure, length of school terms, teacher preparation and salaries, conditions of schools, attendance, and graduation rates, showed a large gap separating the opportunities and performance of black and white children of the South (Urban 143). The gaps separating southern schools from those in many other parts of the nation were pronounced as well. Prompt:
It is clear that young women went west to teach for many different reasons. Describe what you think was the most important reason and defend your view. Response: The Board of National Popular Education, founded by Catharine Beecher, was based off of religious and charitable organizations, in which raised money to recruit young women to teach in the west (Fraser 61). The Board of National Popular Education (Teacher Corps) offered young women adventure in a new place, a sense of purpose and meaningful effort in their teaching career, and a fresh start in life (Fraser 61). After hearing all those promising opportunities, young women were drawn to the teaching life in the west. The profession of women teaching was fairly new, but also highly respected, since it was a consistent with the widespread view that women were innately nurturing (Urban 93). By having women teachers, common schools could save money on salaries, as women teachers were not paid as much as men teachers. Common school were also able to further the image of the school as a nursing, home-like institution (Urban 93). Even though female teachers were not equal to male teachers, this was the start of the women's revolutions. The most important reason for women to teach out west was the ability to further their education beyond the home, along with finding new adventures and experiencing more from life. A women's life was not already decided for her, instead she could choose to be more than a homemaker. Women were no longer expected to stay with their families until marriage, they were rather encouraged to leave and teach. The dependability on a man for a women was not as dominate as what it was in the past. Women could make their own life for themselves. Above all, women being able to decided their own life path is the most important reason for women to teach out west. The freedom that was given and the respect that was earned, changed how women were perceived in society. |
Alexsia HarlanI am a sophomore elementary education major at Bradley University. |