I recently read an article from a parent who was so upset with public education that she is choosing to remove her child from the public system and into the private school system. I was then guided toward a Ted Talk from a local teacher who spent 20 minutes describing to an audience of his current career. Although these are just two examples, there are many more like these that are available for the public to see. Sadly it has taken 15 years for people to speak out. Whether the people speaking out are teachers, parents and even some media outlets, they are all now just realizing that the reason for their anger is because of a well-orchestrated model for profit and competition to destroy the public acceptance of the public education system.
The Definition of Competition states “the person or people with whom one is competing, especially in a commercial or sporting arena; the opposition”.
When considering the ideology of education, in 2014 the idea of competition has become prevalent. The American society is developed around the concept of winning. Often winning at all costs without consideration of the consequences or ultimately the devastation that may be left in the wake.
Within the American culture, this mindset has found success in most every environment yet is winning at all costs the best model for the future of success as the culture matures. In 2014, society is developing a new renaissance. The political landscape over the past 15 years has seen a see saw swing of ideologies, with several ideological changes occurring. Some of these changes are inevitable, others are being changed by force.
Considering competition and the idea of forcing a societal change, I have noted the field of education has come under attack. Several Education specialists arrived and shared with politicians that they could develop a model of change which can bring the United States toward the number educational country in the world. To do this, these people needed to develop a business model to show that their model was working. The problem with a business model in education is the product that is being developed. The product is not deficient, it just not fit into every box that the specialists and politicians desire of it. The product is alive, ever moving and at times, does not have the aptitude necessary for a standardized model.
In the modern environment, the corporate sector has convinced people that the public schools are all a failure. Articles flow with every teacher error yet they ignore that the alternatives to public education do not add up. The private school system is not equal to the public system. The charter system is far more private, yet is funded with public money. With this charter mentality, the school is not designed to care for all students, rather they focus on their desired population. In order to sell this model to the people, the specialists and politicians attacked the public school system. Teachers were blamed, new school grading systems were created and when all else failed, funds were withheld. Rather than grow a product to compete with the American competition, specialists and politician’s focused on developing an internal destruction of a public model, to recreate their desired tax paid private system.
So why destroy one model on the hopes of creating a new one. The reason is that other nations are providing better results than the USA and as a country the USA does not like to ever lose. As for the results of the public school destruction, it has not yet been a successful fight.
The reason is that the politicians wanted to setup a system in which every child is monitored through standardized tests. These tests would be administered and then students could be held accountable, along with their teacher. The issue that arrived – each State administered its own test an explained its own results.
The reality at the beginning was that Students were failures. Approximately 50% of students failed the tests. Remedial classes were needed since the United States does not lose. Each child would succeed, would graduate high school and be ready for the success of life.
This ideology was elitist, yet, when dealing with politicians and specialists, elite is often the expectation. In the past 15 years the American society has developed tests in each State, systems to teach remedial classes so students can pass these tests, systems to find a way for each student to graduate and in some States classes such as AP have become open to ever student as they are part of school grades.
On the surface each of these aspects is a positive direction within education, yet the goal of these additions is to survive the political change. In the 1960’s the same percentage of students were not reading at grade level as we have today in 2014.
Although the problem is systemic and I agree society needs to find a system capable of changing the reading on grade level ability, along with the math on grade level – the American model needs help from home and community. With the mindset of community, are politicians willing to invest in after school programs and community programs – rather than add funds to for-profit charter schools?
As the process of competition evolves, along comes Common Core. I agree with the primary concept of Common Core. The idea is that the foundation (standards) of education will be the same in every state. The content Standards will still be State focused, yet will also include some national standards. At the end of each year students will take a test which covers, English, Math, Science and Social Science and then the Data will be utilized to compare how each State is doing. So why the push back. The reality is that people do not want to think of themselves as failures. They also don’t want to see the reality of where their State ranks or if their students are less successful than other States. Rather than admit there is a problem, politicians and specialists operate with other groups to attack the program they created. They are now against Common Core as they realize that creating the competition won’t work in their favor. It may also backfire as foreign countries may be seen as creating a superior product.
Today, in 2014, the environment of education is doing more to harm students with their (USA) need to be the best than they are actually teaching them for the future. The ability to teach critical thinking, development understanding and or simply just the enjoyment of learning is gone. The model today is to test a student for pre-knowledge to know how much more testing is needed until the actual test which arrives 8-10 months after the process begins. Sometimes prior knowledge helps, most often it does now. Business models test products, keeping the ones that work and removing the ones that don’t. The field of education is trying to do the same now. Yet, in business the person who creates a product gets to redo their errors, whereas in teaching, politicians are asking to remove teachers who fail students, regardless of why they fail. The American system needs a proper professional direction for education.
Go ahead and allow common core to evolve and let the States Compete. Rather than use the data to force remedial classes and teachers into punitive punishment, use the information for professional development, student development and perhaps community enhancement. Allow for remedial classes to be there for students, yet guide those students to also have extra attention in school and after school.
The politicians need to let the leaders of education develop a proper model for future growth. The leaders of education need to allow professional teachers create a proper, working system. The system needs to be allowed to develop. This is the same country that developed intelligent enough people to fly to the moon, create the car, personal computer, internet and quite frankly everything amazing. Where is that education and passion for learning coming from today.
Competition is one of the greatest gifts given to the human being. It is also a system of greed, abuse and neglect if it is allowed to be that way.
Modern leaders need to deconstruct the model, decide how they want to compete, and then reconstruct the model in that way. Then they need to let it breathe for a period of time rather than continuing to attack. The system needs to find a way to exist in the system of competition that will be created.
Thank you for reading my thoughts.
“It is easy to see leadership as something urgent and immediate.
Decisions needs to be made. Performance needs to be evaluated. Goals needs to be set. Action needs to be taken. Something must be done right away; it takes a leader to get it done.
We forget that leadership is not completed when we take action. Leadership is not only immediate” (Leadership Never Dies)
– The Message to be shared within this article and through my comments today is that Leadership is a living, breathing entity which guides the future. In our current leadership system of 2014 there is more of a “Do as I say mentality along with a save me or else mindset”. These situations are not what good leaders are, rather they are models of leadership left over from 5o years ago.
As time evolves, leadership is meant to as well. I do not mean that we need to change the style of leadership, rather how that style is handled with an ever changing social dynamic.
The modern leader of 2014 needs to understand that the people working for them wants to feel important too. People do not always desire to lead, yet they want to know that they have a voice, are able to use this voice and or utilize their skills to their best ability. A true leader of today focuses on developing the people around them for their future, not the future of the leader.
Goals for the modern leader need to be set and then put in the hands of the people that are working for him/her. When the right personnel are in place, then the goals will find success and the leader will achieve their due accolades. When a leader is forceful upon their people and just looking to achieve their goals alone, then the personnel tend to feel disgruntled and may be less productive. Without an ability to see where they belong within the organization, personnel have a tendency to withdraw. Great leaders are great because they understand the climate of the people working for them, know how to motivate them and in the modern environment know how to step back and let the people develop.
When making decision, leaders need to know how to evaluate strengths, weaknesses and possible flaws within a future outcome. This does not mean stay away from any of these situations, rather place personnel within reach when necessary to allow for goals to continue to develop. This is a model based within transformational leadership with a small amount of servant leadership adaptation. The modern environment needs this type of system.
The modern leader needs to be involved, know the future and guide the people toward it…if that is able to occur, then success for the leader will arrive.
I hear all of the time that teaching has changed and that reaching today’s students is far harder than it was 5, 10, 15 or even 20 years ago. I do not disagree with this statement, yet at the same time, I don’t agree with it either. The students of today are not different, they are still people and they still develop in their brain in much the same way. What has changed is society and the expectation society places on the modern student.
Yesterday I worked with approximately 50 students who joined me for my annual Advanced Placement Review at Panera Bread. Typically, the event focuses on me going over the material and students asking questions. We began this year’s session the same way, yet with modern research abilities, my students preferred to use their knowledge to ask questions to expand on prior knowledge rather than simply just be given a guided answer.
As an educator I do my best to focus on a system where learning is guided by student questions. I read consistently that my model of teaching has become more difficult due to learning styles, learning abilities and general student apathy. The people making these statements are out there to sell me a product. The parents who have a child that does not receive an A on every test buy into this problematic system and proceed to blame the teacher not their child. Keep in mind parents, if your child only ever achieves an A on everything, then why would students need a teacher. An A means a student is perfect and can restate what they have learned perfectly.
Students today are not different than the students that arrived before them. Rather, the system is different. Parents and the community should understand that the role of education has changed on purpose. The shift from teacher centric and teacher guided has been shifted to political minded. There is money to be made in education and the corporate elites have figured a way. Do your best to realize that a professional in the classroom is far more prepared than any person no longer in the classroom.
The role of society today is guided by cell phones, apps, computer technology and every other method of reaching a student other than the original way. Since the brain develops the same as it did in the past, why not try some of the old teaching methodology. Consider how you learn at work today. Someone sits with you and asks you to do something. You sit and do it, then ask a superior to review your work. You either did it well enough to move on or you have to redo it. They send you back to redo it, you ask questions, you redo the work and when it is approved you move on. This is what you learned from a teacher. Learning does not end, it changes into a job later on. The preparation your teachers do guides students toward their future abilities. Watching movies does the same thing, yet you cannot ask a movie questions. Using a computer is a great tool, yet you cannot ask Google if the answer is right or wrong..all you can do is ask google.
What I learn from my students each year is extensive. This year I learned that students are able to ask questions and if given the chance in a setting they are comfortable they will do just that. The review with my students lasted 3 hours and it was student run. In reflecting on the event I do believe that the students that participated are ready for their AP exam. They may pass, they may fail, yet all in all, they knew enough to communicate an understanding of Psychology. I know this because their questions told me they learned. They learned from a teacher who does not show movies, does not have them do dittos and does not force them to just write vocab words. Rather I make them read, ask questions, read more and write outlines, papers and do projects. The same model from the past still works…if we just modernize it a little.
Commentary from the article by Valerie Strauss
People who make legislation often are guided to do so because of fundamentals in belief and attitude rather than analysis from within the position of knowledge.
One of the problems that political leaders deal with when considering educational policy is the belief system of the party in power. There is a fundamental difference in understanding the true value of education.
The article that is written is from the view of a woman who joined the ranks of teaching, left and became an attorney. She takes on the systemic mindset of knowledge for a position rather than assume the knowledge of an environment. When a politician makes policy, they most often rely on special interest groups, lobbyists and donors to guide their decisions. Within the field of education, the system is extremely different. There is no current system to measure success and therefore, the special interest groups and lobbyists have nothing to sell other than fear.
The article is spot on, and I am not commenting on the validity of the article. Rather I am commenting on why the situation is dire enough that the conversation is occurring at all.
During the political transformation in which we see such a difference of perspective between Republicans and Democrats, the system of education began to come under attack. The value of a teacher, the teaching landscape and the success of a person was not able to be measured through statistical data.
Historically, education was a rich person’s gift, whereas working (blue collar) for a living was given to those with fewer means. As society moved toward a cognitive society (education necessary) there has been a shift in responsibility. With this responsibility and the cost of education being what it is, the people in power desire results. To each of these people, the belief is that the responsibility to educate is specific to the school and the teacher. The theoretical problem with this belief system is that each person spends 1350 Hours in school per year and 7410 Hours outside of the classroom. The real education for a person is only partially able to be assisted in the classroom. When a person passes their formative years (elementary education) then the average teacher has a total of 5 hours per week for each student. Adding in all the students each teacher has there is less than 30 minutes per student for the teacher to reach per week. To say that any person truly knows what a teacher does to reach each student is beyond the scope of intelligence for anyone not a teacher, yet politicians in their wisdom are most often guided by the party. The party is guided by the money that they receive and the money being received is to develop a for-profit education system.
The blame the teachers system that is currently moving through society is an excuse to develop a for-profit model, which is a political favorite.
As the system blames the teacher, the more the society wants a different option. Teachers are considered to be a necessary aspect of the American population, yet it is not a profession deserving of respect. The author (Valerie Strauss) left teaching for a more desired profession. If the American society was to be honest with itself, it has no idea what teachers do or how they do it, rather they want teachers to be society’s saviors.
If you want to know what a teacher does, then allow teachers to do what they do, go back to school and become a teacher yourself. Take the time to learn the art of teaching, join the profession and begin to write your own viewpoints. I believe that you will find everything you knew before entering the profession will quickly fall away when your everyday will begin at 5am and end around midnight (If you do it right).
If you want to make policy that affects teachers, then work toward becoming a politician, work with teachers (not administrators) and develop policy that benefits education not pad the pockets of the wealthy.
The more education remains intertwined with politics the more articles like this will be necessary. A system will remain balanced until an operation arrives that is capable of altering it. The Charter school system is a problem for the system of education in that it does not bring balance. There is already an environment for private school and public school. Parents already have choice. So why develop the argument against teachers. Why are teachers the worst thing for your child? There is a very simple answer.
The people making policy are not educators and have no idea what it takes to be part of the classroom.
Thank you for listening and consider calling your Legislators, Senators and President and have them remove education from politics.
Developing an understanding of who I am and why I matter has been an interesting journey. For those that know me, they know that my work on my dissertation has been exhausting yet extremely rewarding. The reason that I have found it to be so rewarding is that quite frankly, it is relevant, specific and worthy of being shared. Throughout my dissertation I focused on learning more about the economic system within the United States, the culture of wealth and the differentiation of mental behavior for the people in poverty. What I learned was extremely interesting, which is why I began to see how entrenched our system actually is.
Each social position within the United States has a role to play. My focus was guided by the mental set of people who have wealth guiding the mental set of people on poverty. What is most interesting is that through my research I learned that the people at the top have no idea what it means to live in poverty. Therefore, all of the guidelines that are created are done so from the mental set of wealth. Comments such as “If they only worked harder” or “They just need an education” are comments which are elitist.
As I continued to develop my research, a theory continued to come to me. Social Cognitive Reality. Simply put, people living in any given socio-economic location have their own developed social system, which is enveloped into a person cognitive map, which is that person’s reality. There are definitely people who managed to find their way out of poverty, yet, for the most part, people in poverty remain in poverty. The same is said for people of middle class and of wealth. It is not that people at each stage intend to remain this way, rather the people don’t know any better, and to learn a new reality is extremely difficult.
Consider where you are in life right now. Consider making a complete life change. Would you be able to adjust to a complete alteration of who you are, what you are and why you are.
Just saying to be successful requires hard work is an almost impossibility. The factors associated with changing locations, positions and cultures are far more ingrained than people understand. Therefore, the mental model of removing poverty from our system is not the way to go. Nor is it simply increasing minimum wage or even giving out funds to the needy. The American society needs people from all walks of life to sit down, collaborate and discuss options for redeveloping our society. The people in poverty survive in poverty, the people in wealthy live in wealth. Giving to one and or taking from the other may seem to politicians as the correct sentiment, yet, the most important lesson I learned from my research is that in order to change a society we need to change the culture..which cannot be done with money.
The following is copied from Teaching High School Psychology – Posted – Tuesday October 29th 2013
Web Blog: http://teachinghighschoolpsychology.blogspot.com/2013/10/learning-styles-myth.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+blogspot%2FFcTgv+%28Teaching+High+School+Psychology%29
Learning Styles: Myth? I’m interested in hearing how teachers and administrators in your district talk and think about “learning styles.” I remember learning – learning style “theory” during staff development workshops as a young teacher, and the main impact was that I felt guilty for not diligently including visual, auditory, and kinesthetic experiences in my lessons.
So I was glad to read Daniel Willingham’s work on “debunking” what he calls the “learning styles myth.” It turns out there really isn’t much empirical evidence that learning styles exist or impact learning (they might be learning “preferences”). Willingham has been dedicated to adding some science to the discussion of “learning styles” for quite a while and created many resources that are usable by many audience. The FAQ document linked to below is a good overall summary of his thinking:
Learning Style FAQ http://www.danielwillingham.com/learning-styles-faq.html
More recently, Howard Gardner chimed in to try to clarify how his multiple intelligences theory is different form “learning styles,” and how people misinterpret his theory too. Howard Gardner: ‘Multiple Intelligences’ are not ‘learning styles’ http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/answer-sheet/wp/2013/10/16/howard-gardner-multiple-intelligences-are-not-learning-styles/
Thoughts from Cade Resnick – The original idea of learning styles gave a reason to explain behavior. The more Neuroscience arrives into the world of Psychology and understands human interaction, the more we understand of learning styles. I believe it is in the best interest of educator’s worldwide to realize that every student is not a learning style the same way no 1 person is just one of 5 senses. We know more now and now we need to utilize this new knowledge to educate as such. Thanks for listening.
When considering what we are all able to offer the world, I believe that my future lies in developing a world view understanding of my research, analysis and perspective. I am not writing to inform the world of my own arrogance, rather I am writing to develop an understanding of a theory I am choosing to develop and then enhance. The name of my theory is social cognitive reality. The reason for developing my theory relates to my own experience of trying to explain to people how their situation, environment, perspective etc are theirs alone.
While working on my dissertation I poured over years of research in the fields of psychology, sociology, philosophy and politics. There is an understanding within each of these fields as to the value of a single person and their value in relation to society and culture. The research is there within each field as a separate entity, yet it does not seem to be combined to explain how society and social influence effect the system of YOU. As a systems theorist I find life to be fascinating in that we all operate in harmony to work together. Even when we all think we are different, psychology steps in to remind us that we are all very similar. We all play a role in the development of others, and they in turn play a role in our development.
Questions we should ask on a continual basis – How do the people around me, affect me. How does my environment affect me? Who am I? Why am I? What am I? These may seem like philosophical questions, yet they also have answers within social cognitive reality.
As my blog develops, I am going to write weekly for everyone to read about different aspects of social cognitive reality are part of who YOU are.
As I get myself back into blogging, I am going to leave all of you with the following two thoughts
1) How do you know, what you know?
2) Is what you know Universal, or only to you and a small spectrum of people?
My goal with my Blog is to open up people’s thoughts of people, culture, community and society. I hope you enjoy reading as much as I enjoy writing.