As I've noted before, it is difficult to justify comparing the education systems of different countries because there are countless variables and intangibles that cannot be contrasted to any truly evaluative conclusion. For example, in the beginning of Wagner's Global Achievement Gap, he notes various statistics designed to show how poorly America is doing. For example, he points out that the US high school graduation of rate of 70% trails many countries, such as Denmark which graduates 96%. However, countries such as Denmark only have compulsory education until the age of sixteen. The US allows dropouts at sixteen but graduation is generally two years later. Thus, if the US switched graduation to sixteen, the rate may be as high as others. He argues "only 1/3 of US high school students graduate ready for college," yet the percentage of the population holding bachelors degrees is about 30%, so perhaps that is all that is necessary, or all that the market will bare. Clearly, Wagner is using statistics in absence of any truly meaningful context.
Later, he attempts to provide context by citing a conversation with Christy Pedra, the CEO of Siemens Hearing Instruments. Pedra argues that "questioning techniques" are a major component of her success in her job. She criticizes the public education of her kids - at a top school in Massachusetts - because "They're spending too much time getting kids ready to take [state tests]. And they're measuring the wrong things." Pedra believes that training students to become scientists is about the ability to explore and asking the right questions. She believes it's not about "how much they can retain." However, that's only half the issue. It's about both retention of core knowledge, and using that knowledge to ask even more, or even better, questions. This has been well documented, and blogged about, by Dan Willingham whose book Why Don't Students Like School offers insight into the importance of knowledge prior to and as a component of learning . Willingham's research in cognitive science explains how important "how much they can retain" is in the brain accessing new information.
Clearly, Pedra and Wagner have an understanding that ignores much we know about learning and education. Pedra criticizes the education of her kids, yet I assume a similar education allowed her to rise to the level of CEO. Somewhere, despite standardized testing, she learned to apply those questioning techniques integral to her job. Additionally, I would assume she wants her children to be well prepared for the ACT/SAT which are the gateways to college whether she likes the focus on skills and knowledge or not. Pedra and Wagner make good points, though their primary focus is too narrow and removed from the larger school of cognitive science and learning.
Monday, April 27, 2009
Sunday, April 26, 2009
Global Achievement Gap
As I continue to read blogs and encounter discussion, comparing public education in the U.S. and the rest of the world, I recently picked up Tony Wagner's book on the issue, The Global Achievement Gap. While I am only a chapter in, and I concur with Wagner on some assertions, I am still frustrated by the blanket comparisons of separate school systems, especially when they are focused on issues such as international standardized test rankings and graduation rates. Both of these issues are arbitrary in many ways, as well as myopic at best in terms of true evaluation.
One of Wagner's early references that gave me pause was to Thomas Friedman's work in The World is Flat. Friedman has regularly noted in books and columns how America is "falling behind," and he warns that U.S. students will face increasing competition in the "global community." The problem is Friedman, and by reference Wagner, often asserts that the math skills of foreign students give them an advantage as American companies offshore accounting and engineering jobs to countries such as India and China. This is a deceptive claim, as both authors ignore the fact that companies offshore this work, not because the foreign workers are better, but because they are cheaper. Thus, the "crisis" that is discussed in many blogs about students' use of calculators implies that the lack of skills will cost American workers their jobs. The reality might be much simpler - a matter of cost, not talent.
This sort of assertion, which is bought by many commentators and politicians outside of the classroom, does a huge disservice to discussions about education reform.
One of Wagner's early references that gave me pause was to Thomas Friedman's work in The World is Flat. Friedman has regularly noted in books and columns how America is "falling behind," and he warns that U.S. students will face increasing competition in the "global community." The problem is Friedman, and by reference Wagner, often asserts that the math skills of foreign students give them an advantage as American companies offshore accounting and engineering jobs to countries such as India and China. This is a deceptive claim, as both authors ignore the fact that companies offshore this work, not because the foreign workers are better, but because they are cheaper. Thus, the "crisis" that is discussed in many blogs about students' use of calculators implies that the lack of skills will cost American workers their jobs. The reality might be much simpler - a matter of cost, not talent.
This sort of assertion, which is bought by many commentators and politicians outside of the classroom, does a huge disservice to discussions about education reform.
Thursday, April 16, 2009
Tea Party Silliness
As thousands of people across the country hit the streets (apparently with no jobs to distract them) to protest taxes, columnist Debra Saunders offered insight into the odd appropriation of the "Boston Tea Party" allusion. As she clearly noted:
There is a world of difference between 1773 and 2009. Two hundred-plus years ago, Americans risked life and limb protesting a distant and oligarchic system of government that did not represent the good people of Massachusetts.
No doubt many who show up at the Tea Day rallies will argue that they didn't vote for Obama and should not have to pay for his programs. I have news for you folks: Conservatives lost. American voters elected a big spender and, one way or another, Americans will have to pay for his agenda. The Obama tax hikes on Americans earning more than $250,000 have yet to materialize — but when they do, they'll be taxation with representation, a campaign pledge made good.
Even though both Saunders and I disagree with much of Obama's policies, there is something unseemly, even absurd, about current objectors aligning themselves with patriots who risked their lives to achieve representation and the right to protest.
We currently have representative government - thus there is no connection to the Boston Tea Party.
There is a world of difference between 1773 and 2009. Two hundred-plus years ago, Americans risked life and limb protesting a distant and oligarchic system of government that did not represent the good people of Massachusetts.
No doubt many who show up at the Tea Day rallies will argue that they didn't vote for Obama and should not have to pay for his programs. I have news for you folks: Conservatives lost. American voters elected a big spender and, one way or another, Americans will have to pay for his agenda. The Obama tax hikes on Americans earning more than $250,000 have yet to materialize — but when they do, they'll be taxation with representation, a campaign pledge made good.
Even though both Saunders and I disagree with much of Obama's policies, there is something unseemly, even absurd, about current objectors aligning themselves with patriots who risked their lives to achieve representation and the right to protest.
We currently have representative government - thus there is no connection to the Boston Tea Party.
Wednesday, April 15, 2009
Carnival of Education
The Carnival of Education is hosted this week by Joanne Jacobs. It contains my post about the comparisons between the US education system and those of Europe and Asia.
Saturday, April 4, 2009
We're Not Europe/Asia - Should We Be?
Nearly every in-depth discussion of the American education system inevitably turns to the school systems of other countries and the way their students regularly outperform American students on international tests. The question is whether America should look to those schools in terms of improving its system. For example, Joanne Jacobs recently linked to a story about how countries with high scoring students - like Finland and Singapore - have "high quality" teachers. The definition of the term "high quality" is vague, by the way, and there are many other variables involved. The question is whether we should adapt their teacher education programs.
While this is interesting and certainly tempting as a reform idea, the rational side of me keeps in mind the significant cultural differences between European/Asian countries and America. Having taught in Taiwan for five years, I know there are fundamental components of their system that, while very effective there, would simply not transfer here with the same results. For one, they have rather strict controls on their "college-prep" track, as noted in the comments on this story. Hopeful college students simply don't have an option of slacking off, as they do here. American students can "graduate" with a D-average, or not even graduate at all, and still get into college. That exists no where else in the industrialized world, especially Taiwan. And, we certainly don't intend to restrict access the way other countries do, as we have a more egalitarian approach to education.
A telling comment on the differences in the Taiwan system and the US came from Dr. David Ho, the researcher credited with coming up the "AIDS cocktail" which was the first and most effective treatment for lowering HIV to undetectable levels in infected people. Dr. Ho was born and raised in Taiwan where he went to school for his formative years - elementary and middle. He then moved to the US where he did high school and college. He has noted that if he'd stayed in Taiwan his whole life, he never would have made the discovery. Likewise, he explains if he had been born in the US and always educated here, he never would have made the discovery. It was the rigid style of the early years in a Confucian system that gave him the discipline he needed, as well as the more "open" and diverse style in the US that encouraged questioning and creativity (yes, through electives) that allowed him the solid foundation and insight necessary to make one of the 20th century's most significant medical breakthroughs.
Clearly, it's not one or the other, but a combination of both. For that reason, I would like to see some reforms in the USA which would align more with other countries standards for university. They are clearly more efficient in that they don't waste the time of students or teachers by trying to force non-academically-inclined students to pursue higher education. Yet, while our system may be too lenient, theirs are often far too exclusive. Thus, I would like to see a serious expansion of Career and Technical Education (CET), as well as a much greater emphasis on associate's degrees. American society is far too elitist in its attitude toward skilled labor. Granted, America must also alleviate historical concerns that poor and minority students are funneled into vocational education with little choice. That is why I am still intrigued by the reform plans in New Hampshire.
We are not Europe, and we are not Asia. They have different attitudes toward education and different cultural norms that will not transfer to American society. Yet, there is much we could adapt from the most successful schools system, at the same time we keep all that is successful about the American system, and there is much we do right.
While this is interesting and certainly tempting as a reform idea, the rational side of me keeps in mind the significant cultural differences between European/Asian countries and America. Having taught in Taiwan for five years, I know there are fundamental components of their system that, while very effective there, would simply not transfer here with the same results. For one, they have rather strict controls on their "college-prep" track, as noted in the comments on this story. Hopeful college students simply don't have an option of slacking off, as they do here. American students can "graduate" with a D-average, or not even graduate at all, and still get into college. That exists no where else in the industrialized world, especially Taiwan. And, we certainly don't intend to restrict access the way other countries do, as we have a more egalitarian approach to education.
A telling comment on the differences in the Taiwan system and the US came from Dr. David Ho, the researcher credited with coming up the "AIDS cocktail" which was the first and most effective treatment for lowering HIV to undetectable levels in infected people. Dr. Ho was born and raised in Taiwan where he went to school for his formative years - elementary and middle. He then moved to the US where he did high school and college. He has noted that if he'd stayed in Taiwan his whole life, he never would have made the discovery. Likewise, he explains if he had been born in the US and always educated here, he never would have made the discovery. It was the rigid style of the early years in a Confucian system that gave him the discipline he needed, as well as the more "open" and diverse style in the US that encouraged questioning and creativity (yes, through electives) that allowed him the solid foundation and insight necessary to make one of the 20th century's most significant medical breakthroughs.
Clearly, it's not one or the other, but a combination of both. For that reason, I would like to see some reforms in the USA which would align more with other countries standards for university. They are clearly more efficient in that they don't waste the time of students or teachers by trying to force non-academically-inclined students to pursue higher education. Yet, while our system may be too lenient, theirs are often far too exclusive. Thus, I would like to see a serious expansion of Career and Technical Education (CET), as well as a much greater emphasis on associate's degrees. American society is far too elitist in its attitude toward skilled labor. Granted, America must also alleviate historical concerns that poor and minority students are funneled into vocational education with little choice. That is why I am still intrigued by the reform plans in New Hampshire.
We are not Europe, and we are not Asia. They have different attitudes toward education and different cultural norms that will not transfer to American society. Yet, there is much we could adapt from the most successful schools system, at the same time we keep all that is successful about the American system, and there is much we do right.
Thursday, April 2, 2009
Why I'm Not a Republican
Uuuuuggghhhhhhhhhhh!!!!!!!
For once and for all can we agree that there is a difference between tax rates and taxes paid? The intentional blurring of this line is a fundamental reason while I am not a member of the GOP, though I am fiscally conservative and support many of their policies.
In today's press conference for the GOP's alternative budget, Congressman Matt Ryan was making some very valid points about spending, entitlement reform, and taxes, and then he drove the bus right of the cliff with the standard "Sean Hannity-like" rant about corporate tax rates. Sticking to the standard mantra, Ryan and the GOP proposed lowering the corporate tax rate from 35%, "which is the highest rate in the industrialized world," to a lower 25% which is the average. This sort of statement on taxes is disingenuous, if not outright deceitful and dishonest, and it is designed to to manipulate fiscally conservative people who are less than informed about tax policy.
There is a fundamental difference between tax rates and taxes paid, and it is disingenuous to argue that America’s tax rates are responsible for downturns in the economy or the movement of business abroad. No one pays the top rates in the American tax code, as it allows for generous deduction. While I may be in the 20% tax bracket, I pay no more than 11%. Incidentally, the GAO report found that between 1998 and 2005, two-thirds of American companies paid no income tax. This finding complements a similar study of the boom years of 1996 to 2000 which also found that 90% of the companies that paid any taxes paid less than 5%. Corporations in other countries may be paying a lower rate, though they often pay more taxes because their tax codes do not allow the generous deductions and massive loopholes that America allows.
A reasonable student of finance - which Ryan is clearly not because he's too busy being a politician - would understand that accounting practices allow companies to show no actual profits because of expenses such as salaries, interest, and investment. In fact, the model by which a company shows no profit and no loss is the most efficient business model and an optimum goal in terms of tax responsibilities. Certainly, the government should address the loopholes that allow companies to hide money overseas. However, to argue that Corporate America is overtaxed simply isn’t true.
For once and for all can we agree that there is a difference between tax rates and taxes paid? The intentional blurring of this line is a fundamental reason while I am not a member of the GOP, though I am fiscally conservative and support many of their policies.
In today's press conference for the GOP's alternative budget, Congressman Matt Ryan was making some very valid points about spending, entitlement reform, and taxes, and then he drove the bus right of the cliff with the standard "Sean Hannity-like" rant about corporate tax rates. Sticking to the standard mantra, Ryan and the GOP proposed lowering the corporate tax rate from 35%, "which is the highest rate in the industrialized world," to a lower 25% which is the average. This sort of statement on taxes is disingenuous, if not outright deceitful and dishonest, and it is designed to to manipulate fiscally conservative people who are less than informed about tax policy.
There is a fundamental difference between tax rates and taxes paid, and it is disingenuous to argue that America’s tax rates are responsible for downturns in the economy or the movement of business abroad. No one pays the top rates in the American tax code, as it allows for generous deduction. While I may be in the 20% tax bracket, I pay no more than 11%. Incidentally, the GAO report found that between 1998 and 2005, two-thirds of American companies paid no income tax. This finding complements a similar study of the boom years of 1996 to 2000 which also found that 90% of the companies that paid any taxes paid less than 5%. Corporations in other countries may be paying a lower rate, though they often pay more taxes because their tax codes do not allow the generous deductions and massive loopholes that America allows.
A reasonable student of finance - which Ryan is clearly not because he's too busy being a politician - would understand that accounting practices allow companies to show no actual profits because of expenses such as salaries, interest, and investment. In fact, the model by which a company shows no profit and no loss is the most efficient business model and an optimum goal in terms of tax responsibilities. Certainly, the government should address the loopholes that allow companies to hide money overseas. However, to argue that Corporate America is overtaxed simply isn’t true.
Wednesday, April 1, 2009
Work, Work, Work
As education critics continue to argue about who should go to college, with some decrying the loss of trade schools and the negative attitude toward associate’s degree programs, and others like Bill Gates preaching four-year colleges for everyone, Mike Rowe of Discovery Channel’s “World’s Dirtiest Jobs” presents an insightful commentary on the nature of “work” and how we might just be getting it all wrong. I ran across this on the blog RightWingNation, though it is featured at the website Ted, which features some of the most compelling speeches happening in the world today.
The speech Mike Rowe gives centers around a pretty graphic description of the act of “lamb castration” in the life of a sheepherder in Craig, Colorado. It is rather eye-opening, not to mention eye-brow raising. Yet, the truly interesting part is as Right Wing Prof says, “the best argument against the “everybody needs to go to college” line I have seen.” Rowe describes his epiphany – with a great side-bar on a couple of terms from Greek tragedy – about the nature of “work,” or more importantly, the idea that in America we have declared war on work. We seek to avoid it, work less, retire earlier, etc., etc., etc. There seems to be an entitlement to work less and less, and we have no respect for much of the necessary work. Hence, the derision of trade schools and community colleges, even as white-collar work is outsourced, quality electricians make a mint, and our infrastructure screams for skilled labor.
Rowe concludes he was mis-led and we might be wrong about the advice to “follow your passion.” He’s somewhat right. I followed my passion, rather than my pocketbook, and became a teacher, not a computer administrator. Despite three times the salary, life as a UNIX guru would make me miserable. That said, following passion is one route, but not the only one. Ultimately, people should figure out who they are and be that person. Some people should follow their passions. Some should follow their strengths. And, some should just follow the market and go where their job takes them.
The speech Mike Rowe gives centers around a pretty graphic description of the act of “lamb castration” in the life of a sheepherder in Craig, Colorado. It is rather eye-opening, not to mention eye-brow raising. Yet, the truly interesting part is as Right Wing Prof says, “the best argument against the “everybody needs to go to college” line I have seen.” Rowe describes his epiphany – with a great side-bar on a couple of terms from Greek tragedy – about the nature of “work,” or more importantly, the idea that in America we have declared war on work. We seek to avoid it, work less, retire earlier, etc., etc., etc. There seems to be an entitlement to work less and less, and we have no respect for much of the necessary work. Hence, the derision of trade schools and community colleges, even as white-collar work is outsourced, quality electricians make a mint, and our infrastructure screams for skilled labor.
Rowe concludes he was mis-led and we might be wrong about the advice to “follow your passion.” He’s somewhat right. I followed my passion, rather than my pocketbook, and became a teacher, not a computer administrator. Despite three times the salary, life as a UNIX guru would make me miserable. That said, following passion is one route, but not the only one. Ultimately, people should figure out who they are and be that person. Some people should follow their passions. Some should follow their strengths. And, some should just follow the market and go where their job takes them.
Saturday, March 28, 2009
Rational Health Care Reform
The health care debate continued to rage last week in Colorado when a sub-committee in the state house voted on a bill to move to a state-wide single-payer system. This is surprising in a traditionally libertarian place like Colorado, though it is understandable as the state turns more Democratic and voters continue to lose faith with the current system and the lack of a viable alternative. Vincent Carroll of the Denver Post's Editorial Board responded with a typical ideologically conservative commentary that was long of criticism and scare tactics, yet predictably short on alternative proposals. Though I was disappointed to see him immediately resort to the "red flag, talking-point" of rationing, I was pleased to see his concession that the current system already rations care based on ability to pay into the private system. Reform critics claim that single-payer would lead to rationing and prevent people from seeing their own doctors, as well as turn medical decisions over to a bureaucrat. However, that is already true. My employer-based coverage cost me my personal physician, and specialist care is limited. Decision are not simply left up to me and my physician; they are vetted through the administration of the insurance company. Conservative critics who cite those as effects of single-payer are fools. That situation is the essence of the private system as it exists. For, far worse than a cost-cutting bureaucrat (whose bosses are still responsible to voters) focused on budgets, is a cost-cutting executive focused on profits. Insurance companies are in the business of collecting premiums and denying claims.
As Colorado attempts a move to single-payer, I am hoping they will take a more pragmatic approach and blend the public-private system as many countries do, and as we currently do for nine million federal employees. Thus, I hope Mr. Carroll will consider researching and writing about options that would do this, and alleviate the need for states to push for a single-payer system. A good place to start is the Healthy Americans Act, also known as the Wyden-Bennett plan. It is an adaptation and extension of the logical move of extending FEHBP (Federal Employees Plan) to all Americans. In FEHBP, there are more than 250 providers that competitively bid to cover federal employees. Employees are given the choice to purchase as much or as little coverage as they need, but all are guaranteed some basic coverage. Obviously, large pools lower cost, and if a pool of nine million employees works, then a pool of 300 million would work even better. An extension of FEHBP to all Americans is the best and most logical reform, the the HAA is a good second-best.
As Mr. Carroll notes, reform is necessary, and it will come. As the private sector eliminates more people from coverage, the masses will eventually take what they can get. And having lived under it for five years, I can say with all honesty that national health care is far better than being un-insured in this county. Thus, I urge the Denver Post to research and write extensively about plans, such as the HAA or the FEHBP, that blend public and private. I have contacted my congressional candidates and representatives about this, and I hope more people will as they become aware of it. Otherwise, we will be stuck with a system that the masses begrudgingly accept.
As Colorado attempts a move to single-payer, I am hoping they will take a more pragmatic approach and blend the public-private system as many countries do, and as we currently do for nine million federal employees. Thus, I hope Mr. Carroll will consider researching and writing about options that would do this, and alleviate the need for states to push for a single-payer system. A good place to start is the Healthy Americans Act, also known as the Wyden-Bennett plan. It is an adaptation and extension of the logical move of extending FEHBP (Federal Employees Plan) to all Americans. In FEHBP, there are more than 250 providers that competitively bid to cover federal employees. Employees are given the choice to purchase as much or as little coverage as they need, but all are guaranteed some basic coverage. Obviously, large pools lower cost, and if a pool of nine million employees works, then a pool of 300 million would work even better. An extension of FEHBP to all Americans is the best and most logical reform, the the HAA is a good second-best.
As Mr. Carroll notes, reform is necessary, and it will come. As the private sector eliminates more people from coverage, the masses will eventually take what they can get. And having lived under it for five years, I can say with all honesty that national health care is far better than being un-insured in this county. Thus, I urge the Denver Post to research and write extensively about plans, such as the HAA or the FEHBP, that blend public and private. I have contacted my congressional candidates and representatives about this, and I hope more people will as they become aware of it. Otherwise, we will be stuck with a system that the masses begrudgingly accept.
Thursday, March 26, 2009
Knowledge is the Key
People may logically assume that learning leads to the acquisition of knowledge. However, the converse may, in fact, be true. It appears that knowledge is the key to learning. I've have been intrigued in the past week by all the talk of "knowledge" as the fundamental component of learning. From op-eds in the New York Times to the education blogs, there has been an exciting degree of discussion about the importance of knowing information. This is intriguing, as I've often noted the importance of background knowledge as the key to accessing new material. It first impacted me after reading I Read It, But I Don't Get It by a Denver-area teacher and researcher Cris Tovani. The insights I gained from Tovani's book were revolutionary in my teaching career, as the epiphany about knowledge impacted the way I taught reading, writing, and critical thinking.
That discussion of background knowledge in reading was accented by E.D. Hirsch this week in his New York Times piece "Reading Test Dummies." Hirsch argues very effectively about the importance of background knowledge in students interpreting passages on standardized reading tests. The disconnect between the focus of knowledge in the classroom and the obscure passages in reading tests negatively impacts the validity of the tests. Hirsch notes some impressive research from 1988 about the performance of weak and strong readers based on previous knowledge, where weaker readers performed better on tests than skilled readers if the weaker ones had an interest in and knowledge about the subject. I've often noted to people the significant differences in academic performance between kids of lower and higher socioeconomic status, simply based on background cultural knowledge, especially vocabulary. Poorer kids who arrive in kindergarten with roughly one-third the vocabulary of middle-class kids face a disadvantage in learning from which most will never recover. Until this gap is acknowledged and closed, there will be no fundamental change in reading scores, literacy rates, or achievement gaps.
Hirsch's arguments are even more intriguing as I ran across Joanne Jacob's entries on both Hirsch and Dan Willingham of the Core Knowledge Blog. Willingham, a psyche professor at Virginia, added to the knowledge discussion by explaining how important "knowing facts" is, and how integral it is to learning and understanding. The "very processes that teachers care about most-critical thinking processes such as reasoning and problem solving-are intimately intertwined with factual knowledge that is stored in long-term memory (not just found in the environment)". Learning "new ideas" is fundamentally linked to having the correct understanding of the relevant "old ideas." There is no more clear explanation of the problems in literacy rates, reading scores, college readiness, and the achievement gap. It's all about a knowledge gap. According to Willingham, "understanding is remembering in disguise."
Willingham's book Why Don't Students Like School is my next purchase, and I expect it will have a similar effect on my teaching that Tovani's book did. His discussion of "cognitive science" is integral to understanding how we can more effectively educate. The discussion reminds me of my questions about why students lose the ability to "wonder." However, it's clear they actually don't. Kids do like learning; they love acquiring new information; they become quite engaged in many activities, including some very philosophical discussions. They don't have an inability to focus - they have an inability to focus on much of what they encounter in the classroom. It reminds me of the "flow experience" described by authors Michael Smith and Jeff Wilhelm in their book Going With the Flow which was a follow-up to Reading Don't Fix No Chevies. I encountered this book and concept in a great staff development class on adolescent male literacy, and it inspired me to seek more ways to engage all my students with knowledge and learning.
Clearly, the concept of factual knowledge as a key to learning is an important component of the education game, and any serious discussion of reform must take into account the ideas put forth by all these authors and researchers.
That discussion of background knowledge in reading was accented by E.D. Hirsch this week in his New York Times piece "Reading Test Dummies." Hirsch argues very effectively about the importance of background knowledge in students interpreting passages on standardized reading tests. The disconnect between the focus of knowledge in the classroom and the obscure passages in reading tests negatively impacts the validity of the tests. Hirsch notes some impressive research from 1988 about the performance of weak and strong readers based on previous knowledge, where weaker readers performed better on tests than skilled readers if the weaker ones had an interest in and knowledge about the subject. I've often noted to people the significant differences in academic performance between kids of lower and higher socioeconomic status, simply based on background cultural knowledge, especially vocabulary. Poorer kids who arrive in kindergarten with roughly one-third the vocabulary of middle-class kids face a disadvantage in learning from which most will never recover. Until this gap is acknowledged and closed, there will be no fundamental change in reading scores, literacy rates, or achievement gaps.
Hirsch's arguments are even more intriguing as I ran across Joanne Jacob's entries on both Hirsch and Dan Willingham of the Core Knowledge Blog. Willingham, a psyche professor at Virginia, added to the knowledge discussion by explaining how important "knowing facts" is, and how integral it is to learning and understanding. The "very processes that teachers care about most-critical thinking processes such as reasoning and problem solving-are intimately intertwined with factual knowledge that is stored in long-term memory (not just found in the environment)". Learning "new ideas" is fundamentally linked to having the correct understanding of the relevant "old ideas." There is no more clear explanation of the problems in literacy rates, reading scores, college readiness, and the achievement gap. It's all about a knowledge gap. According to Willingham, "understanding is remembering in disguise."
Willingham's book Why Don't Students Like School is my next purchase, and I expect it will have a similar effect on my teaching that Tovani's book did. His discussion of "cognitive science" is integral to understanding how we can more effectively educate. The discussion reminds me of my questions about why students lose the ability to "wonder." However, it's clear they actually don't. Kids do like learning; they love acquiring new information; they become quite engaged in many activities, including some very philosophical discussions. They don't have an inability to focus - they have an inability to focus on much of what they encounter in the classroom. It reminds me of the "flow experience" described by authors Michael Smith and Jeff Wilhelm in their book Going With the Flow which was a follow-up to Reading Don't Fix No Chevies. I encountered this book and concept in a great staff development class on adolescent male literacy, and it inspired me to seek more ways to engage all my students with knowledge and learning.
Clearly, the concept of factual knowledge as a key to learning is an important component of the education game, and any serious discussion of reform must take into account the ideas put forth by all these authors and researchers.
Friday, March 20, 2009
Need a Job - Go Abroad
Young, college-educated, and unemployed? Get out of this country. And take with you a most precious and desired commodity you acquired for free - the English language. The opportunity to travel, live, and work abroad has always been a great option for the newly-graduated and unencumbered, and in the current economy, it is becoming an attractive option for those young people facing a tough job market. This issue was featured on Right-on-the-Left-Coast, and it reminded me of my own experience, graduating with an English teaching degree in the recession, and tough job market, of 1992. I haven't written about this before, but I have often meant to, as I regularly speak about it to my students. With few high school English teaching positions available - and actually little interest in or motivation to start teaching high school at the age of twenty-one - I up and moved to Taiwan with my future wife to teach English. It was one of the best decisions I ever made.
Because one of my wife's roommates in college was Taiwanese, she had been there before, and she was well aware of all the opportunities to teach English in Taiwan. At the EPO (Educational Placement Office) of the University of Illinois, we ran across a flier for an organization known as Hess Language School. It was based in New York, and it was the largest cram school, or bushiban, on the island of Taiwan. After filling out an application and undergoing a brief phone interview, we moved six-thousand miles from home, and began teaching Taiwanese children the finer points of ABC and "How are you?" The school was founded by an American woman and her Taiwanese husband, and they had basically cornered the market for cram schools, where parents send their children after school for a few hours a week to give them a jump start on the rigors of English instruction in junior high school. Hess provided us with a work visa and a yearlong contract teaching roughly twenty hours a week for about twenty dollars an hour. It was great gig.
We went to Taiwan at the same time my wife's roommate moved there to live at home. She lasted nine months; we stayed five years. During that time, we lived the dream and traveled the world, not to mention saved a lot of money. We knew numerous Americans there who paid off their student loans and credit card debt in a year or two. There are so many options for work abroad, and there is no better time for a little adventure.
Because one of my wife's roommates in college was Taiwanese, she had been there before, and she was well aware of all the opportunities to teach English in Taiwan. At the EPO (Educational Placement Office) of the University of Illinois, we ran across a flier for an organization known as Hess Language School. It was based in New York, and it was the largest cram school, or bushiban, on the island of Taiwan. After filling out an application and undergoing a brief phone interview, we moved six-thousand miles from home, and began teaching Taiwanese children the finer points of ABC and "How are you?" The school was founded by an American woman and her Taiwanese husband, and they had basically cornered the market for cram schools, where parents send their children after school for a few hours a week to give them a jump start on the rigors of English instruction in junior high school. Hess provided us with a work visa and a yearlong contract teaching roughly twenty hours a week for about twenty dollars an hour. It was great gig.
We went to Taiwan at the same time my wife's roommate moved there to live at home. She lasted nine months; we stayed five years. During that time, we lived the dream and traveled the world, not to mention saved a lot of money. We knew numerous Americans there who paid off their student loans and credit card debt in a year or two. There are so many options for work abroad, and there is no better time for a little adventure.
Sunday, March 8, 2009
Home Ec Returns
"We should learn how to balance our checkbooks, and things like that."
Comments such as this occasionally arise in my class, as students debate (and complain about) much of the core curriculum in high school. I don't know if there is any really "useless information" in the standard high school curriculum, but there is much to be said about addressing more practical issues as we invest in the education of young people. While I point out to my students that learning to balance a checkbook should take about fifteen minutes, I can imagine many basic competencies that I'd incorporate into a "life skills" curriculum, not the least of which is home finance and basic repair.
With that in mind, the Denver Post recently spotlighted a resurgence in home economics in local high schools, with the added emphasis of an increase in both male teachers and students. The classes are now referred to as Family and Consumer Science, and they are focused on being far more practical than the home ec classes of yore. As the economy changes, and more people are adjusting to lifestyle changes, the acquisition of basic skills that not only save money, but might open up a new career, seem like a good investment in education. I'd like to see an expansion of this sort of investment in education, as it strikes me as the sort of basic competencies we should expect of young adults after thirteen years of education. The ability to cook, budget, organize, create, and repair are never useless skills. This also might be a great way to adapt a workforce more quickly, especially for those jobs that don't need a four year degree. So, on with home ec and shop classes.
In the immortal words of Breakfast Club, regarding shop class:
Brian: "Bender, do you realize without calculus, there'd be no engineering."
Bender: "Without lamps, there'd be no light."
Comments such as this occasionally arise in my class, as students debate (and complain about) much of the core curriculum in high school. I don't know if there is any really "useless information" in the standard high school curriculum, but there is much to be said about addressing more practical issues as we invest in the education of young people. While I point out to my students that learning to balance a checkbook should take about fifteen minutes, I can imagine many basic competencies that I'd incorporate into a "life skills" curriculum, not the least of which is home finance and basic repair.
With that in mind, the Denver Post recently spotlighted a resurgence in home economics in local high schools, with the added emphasis of an increase in both male teachers and students. The classes are now referred to as Family and Consumer Science, and they are focused on being far more practical than the home ec classes of yore. As the economy changes, and more people are adjusting to lifestyle changes, the acquisition of basic skills that not only save money, but might open up a new career, seem like a good investment in education. I'd like to see an expansion of this sort of investment in education, as it strikes me as the sort of basic competencies we should expect of young adults after thirteen years of education. The ability to cook, budget, organize, create, and repair are never useless skills. This also might be a great way to adapt a workforce more quickly, especially for those jobs that don't need a four year degree. So, on with home ec and shop classes.
In the immortal words of Breakfast Club, regarding shop class:
Brian: "Bender, do you realize without calculus, there'd be no engineering."
Bender: "Without lamps, there'd be no light."
Thursday, March 5, 2009
Colorado's Lawmaker Poses Questions
In quoting the Bible as a model for what the state government of Colorado should and should not do, Senator Scott Renfroe, a Republican from Greely, has generated a serious discussion for which more information is needed. I am hoping he will address the following issues during his next speech on the floor of the legislature:
1. Exodus 35:2 says people who work on the Sabbath should be put to death. I'm wondering how many doctors, nurses, police officers, firefighters, grocers, and other merchants Senator Renfroe thinks the State of Colorado should kill?
2. Leviticus 10:10 says eating shellfish is an "abomination." Interestingly, that's the same word used to describe homosexuality. Is Senator Renfro as aggressive in pushing legislation that denies the rights of shrimp eaters? If not, why not?
3. Exodus 21:7 sanctions selling children into slavery, and I am wondering if the senator has done this. Should Colorado laws be re-written to address this? Or is that a constitutional issue?
3. Leviticus 25:44 allows the purchase of slaves from other countries. Was the Civil War wrong, as well as the government's current efforts to combat the slave trade? Should Colorado secede from the union?
4. How does Senator Renfroe propose to kill his male friends and neighbors who cut their hair, especially around the temples, as forbidden by Leviticus 19:27? Should the state complete that task?
7. If Senator Renfroe learns of people who plant two different crops in the same field, or who wears garments made of two different kinds of thread (say a cotton/poyester blend) does he get the whole town together to stone them to death, as required in Leviticus 19:19? Does he stone everyone who curses as required by Leviticus 24:10? How many public burnings has he attended for people who sleep with their in-laws, as required in Leviticus 20:14? Should the state organize these activities, or does the senator want to leave it up to individual communities?
Obviously, there is much in the Old Testament that doesn't necessarily work in practice in America in the 21st century. Christ focused clearly on a personal relationship with God and with the plight of the poor and downtrodden. That, of course, brings up an entirely different issue.
What should the state of Colorado do, in a legislative capacity, to erase the problem of excessive wealth and ease the suffering of the poor? Christ said, “It is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle, than it is for a rich man to get into heaven.” Is Colorado’s tax policy making it difficult for people to live Christian lives? Christ told a rich man to give half of everything he owns to the poor. Should the state increase taxes to fifty percent, so that each citizen can live according to the word of Christ?
Senator Renfroe has said the government must not make laws “that go against what biblically we are supposed to stand for.” If that is true, then the legislature has a lot of work to do. Of course, if Senator Renfroe seeks to initiate a theocratic government, he might want to put that to the voters first.
(NOTE: many of these citations originated from the oft-published "letter to Dr. Laura" featured in a West Wing episode)
1. Exodus 35:2 says people who work on the Sabbath should be put to death. I'm wondering how many doctors, nurses, police officers, firefighters, grocers, and other merchants Senator Renfroe thinks the State of Colorado should kill?
2. Leviticus 10:10 says eating shellfish is an "abomination." Interestingly, that's the same word used to describe homosexuality. Is Senator Renfro as aggressive in pushing legislation that denies the rights of shrimp eaters? If not, why not?
3. Exodus 21:7 sanctions selling children into slavery, and I am wondering if the senator has done this. Should Colorado laws be re-written to address this? Or is that a constitutional issue?
3. Leviticus 25:44 allows the purchase of slaves from other countries. Was the Civil War wrong, as well as the government's current efforts to combat the slave trade? Should Colorado secede from the union?
4. How does Senator Renfroe propose to kill his male friends and neighbors who cut their hair, especially around the temples, as forbidden by Leviticus 19:27? Should the state complete that task?
7. If Senator Renfroe learns of people who plant two different crops in the same field, or who wears garments made of two different kinds of thread (say a cotton/poyester blend) does he get the whole town together to stone them to death, as required in Leviticus 19:19? Does he stone everyone who curses as required by Leviticus 24:10? How many public burnings has he attended for people who sleep with their in-laws, as required in Leviticus 20:14? Should the state organize these activities, or does the senator want to leave it up to individual communities?
Obviously, there is much in the Old Testament that doesn't necessarily work in practice in America in the 21st century. Christ focused clearly on a personal relationship with God and with the plight of the poor and downtrodden. That, of course, brings up an entirely different issue.
What should the state of Colorado do, in a legislative capacity, to erase the problem of excessive wealth and ease the suffering of the poor? Christ said, “It is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle, than it is for a rich man to get into heaven.” Is Colorado’s tax policy making it difficult for people to live Christian lives? Christ told a rich man to give half of everything he owns to the poor. Should the state increase taxes to fifty percent, so that each citizen can live according to the word of Christ?
Senator Renfroe has said the government must not make laws “that go against what biblically we are supposed to stand for.” If that is true, then the legislature has a lot of work to do. Of course, if Senator Renfroe seeks to initiate a theocratic government, he might want to put that to the voters first.
(NOTE: many of these citations originated from the oft-published "letter to Dr. Laura" featured in a West Wing episode)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)