Do we need a reform of education?
 

So with the absence of proper Internet connection in my hotel, I read this NYT article about new educational reform:
***********.nytimes.com/2010/03/14/education/14child.htm
I got struck by this phrase: "President Obama would replace the law’s requirement that every American child reach proficiency in reading and math, which administration officials have called utopian, with a new national target that could prove equally elusive: that all students should graduate from high school prepared for college and a career."
Since it is my profession to quantify things, what do you think it means "that all students should graduate from high school prepared for college and a career"??? Which college and which career?
I would like to ask you to refrain from speaking in slogans in this thread....

This talk about "Education Reform" is nothing more than politicians' double talk designed to further put Feds in control of the education system in the country. And that is usually followed by spending more gazzilions of our tax dollars on God knows what with very little to show for.

This is just continuation of Bush's idiotic idea of "no child left behind" nonsense.

"Education Reform" is (or should be) simple.

1. Abolish Federal "Department of Education".
2. Get the Federal Government out of the education business. How the hell did this country managed to educate its young people before 1979, when "D of E" was established?
3. Revert all of the resources (in the form of tax breaks) used by USDofE to the states. It is states' responsibility to educate its students.
4. Let folks at the state level petition their governors, senators, assemblies regarding any education related issues.

And in general (and this applies to almost every governamental agency in the Federal Government). If you ask any Senator or Congressman, most would tell you that they were elected to their office "to do more" - whatever that means.

This is exactly ass-backwrds. Americans are sick and tired of these politicians. Come next November we'll be electing people to the Federal offices, who will promise "TO DO LESS". And if they don't keep their promises - they'll be out on their ass in 2 short years.

"no national standards at all?"

No! No Federally mandated or set standards are needed. Standards are not achieved because some bureacrat in Washington wrote it up in some book. They are achieved through vigorous competition at the local level. And that means competition for students among schools.

In other words, the real "education reform" can only happen when gutless polititians find courage to standup to the powerful teacher's unions and demand improvements at the LOCAL levels.

And the only wayTHAT will happen if we vote these people out of office and vote someone else in.

Ira.

I will go back to my original post. I do not buy this premise because I do not buy the necessary corollary that people in this country were being educated worse prior to 1979 than they are being educated now.

This is nothing more than one "Education Lobby's" talking points

i think NCLB was a great idea, just not very well implemented..
it's clearly something to build on, not to scrap.
i don't see anything wrong with national standard, considering all the kids have to take SAT anyway - and it's a standard test in order to get into college.

I don't understand one point with Natan's point. Ok, suppose that we destroy federal Dept of Education and give all responsibility to the states. Then what? Wouldn't the same story repeat at the state level (some bureaucrat...) with state agencies that are responsible for education???

I actually liked federal standards on math and reading with tests and all. One of the main objections was that "teachers would teach to the test" -- how can you do that if you don't know what would be on the test (w/in the particular educational program)???

"Wouldn't the same story repeat at the state level (some bureaucrat...) with state agencies that are responsible for education??? "

NO. Governments at the state and local levels are much closer (and thus much more sensitive) to the needs of their constituants. The government "closest" to the people is much more responsive to the people. This is the idea behind the entire Federal structure of this country envisioned by the Founding Fathers.

The Federal Government was never meant to participate in the affairs (such as education) that are clearly domain of the states.

And I will go back to my original point. How did this country manage to educate its population prior to 1979?

Can someone demonstrate that since "D of E" came into being american QUALITY of education has improved?

NO. Governments at the state and local levels are much closer (and thus much more sensitive) to the needs of their constituants.
Aha. And how is that related to quality of education??? What if all the constituents want is to teach Koran, for example?

This is the idea behind the entire Federal structure of this country envisioned by the Founding Fathers.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
What is this obsession with a bunch of men who lived hundreds of years ago? The year is 2010 - do we really want to revert to the 18th century?Incidentally, whatwas the literacy rate back in those days?

I am all FOR national standards in math, sciences, reading.
AND : they better be competitive with standards that are taught in best Chinese and Indian schools. How are we going to become competitive in the world if some kids are taught on the world level and other kids somewhere in Arkansas or Alaska come out of school knowing nothing?
All kids, independent of their parents or local politicians level of idiocy deserve to learn and should not be victims of, again, their parents ignorance or local politicians ego-driven power struggles. ( sorry if this sounds like a slogan....I just feel bad for those kids every day)

seriously, how is this different from "zhit' kak zaveschal velikij Lenin"?
because Lenin was not великий..Dah!!! :-| and the founders were...obviously it's not clear to many..

well.. this country was built on the foundation of what the founding fathers put in place..
the reason we all came here was because we like this foundation and that does include capitalism...

"How do you expect the nation to function together with possibly different educational standards? Koran in one district? Talking snake in the next over? Evolution in the third?"

How did this nation function prior to 1979????

If someone, anyone can demonstrate that the quality of education has improved since 1979, when "D of E" came into existance - I will wholeheartedly will support this yet another federal expansion.

Ира, специально для вас.
10 заповедей.
I am the Lord your God *
You shall have no other gods before me *
You shall not make for yourself an idol *
You shall not make wrongful use of the name of your God
Remember the Sabbath and keep it holy *
Honor your father and mother *
You shall not murder *
You shall not commit adultery *
You shall not steal
You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor *
You shall not covet your neighbor's wife *
You shall not covet anything that belongs to your neighbor
Hope you can deal with this and will not evaporate from reading it.(ch)

No one is putting the Founding Fathers on the pedestal as GODS!!!

That's prepostereous. However, the system they advocated, articulated and put in place has been the most successful system of governance in the history of namkind. IMHO.

Despite years and continuous effort of progressives (both Republican and Democrats with possible exception of Ronald Reagan and Harry Truman) to dismantle it over the last 60-70 years.

These years have been characterized by constant intrusion of Federal Government into areas of American life where ithad no business to be and where Founding Father never intended it to be. Like education.

But now many people are beginning to wake up and see what's going on. There are many of us. We are mad as hell and we are not going to take it anymore.

Just wait till November!!!! Heads are gonna roll. In a non-violent sort of way.....

The Federal Government was never meant to participate in the affairs (such as education) that are clearly domain of the states.

-----------------------------------------------------------------
according to their own website, their involvement is somewhat limited...
"the Department does not
establish schools and colleges; develop curricula; set requirements for enrollment and graduation; determine state education standards; or develop or implement testing to measure whether states are meeting their education standards."
It engages in four major types of activities:Establishes policies related to federal education funding, administers distribution of funds and monitors their use. Collects data and oversees research on America's schools. Identifies major issues in education and focuses national attention on them. Enforces federal laws prohibiting discrimination in programs that receive federal funds.

If someone, anyone can demonstrate that the quality of education has improved since 1979, when "D of E" came into existance - I will wholeheartedly will support this yet another federal expansion
---------------------------------------------------------------
well, they didn't exactly come into existence in 1979 - the department of health, education, and welfare was just divided into the department of education and the dept of health and human services. And according to wiki "It is by far the smallest Cabinet-level department, with about 5,000 employees." The educational system in the United States is still highly decentralized compared to most other countries, which might explain why we're still lagging behind.

Establishes policies related to federal education funding,
this is the key "activity" - if the states don't follow the policies-requirements, they don't get the funds..which are actually the money the residents of the states have been taxed by federal government..once the laws as the NCLB pass, the states have no other choice but to comply..
and btw, it's really surprising how people here, who claim to love education, don't understand the principles of our government..yes, our Founding Fathers have set up principles to amend our system and Constitution, but they set it up in a way, so, it's done very cautiously with the overwhelming majority support, not just jamming things through just because it feels right..

if the states don't follow the policies-requirements, they don't get the funds
-------------------------------------------------------
which policies?

Высокого уровня образования можно достигнуть как раз при помощи централизованной системы образования, а никак не "укрепляя" локальную. Ведь мы и оказались в такой "ж..." как раз при помощи местныx бордов, которые заправляют этой системой. А второй момент, "сдерживающий" фактор - это засилье всевозможныx псевдопедагогическиx концепций, типа "workshop model", "cooperative learning", "differentiated instructions", "small learning communities".
До сиx пор Америка зависела от экспорта "мозгов". До какого-то времени это работало. Но теперь нашли себя отстающими по всем параметрам. Сильно изменился "носитель" образования: засилье нелегальныx иммигрантов, которые ну никак не могут стать на один уровень с белым населением. Интересными будут результаты Сенсуса: я думаю что белые станут "меньшинствами", а латино окажутся в большинстве.

Вообще-то, то что мы обсуждаем относится в основном к городском школам. Провинция как правило, застряла на вере в Создателя, и с его именем они будут свершать мировую революцию. А кому нужно в этой стране чтобы черные и латино вышли на мировой уровень в образовании? Ведь вся политика в городскиx системаx такиx как Нью Йорк, Чикаго состоит из одного: показать отеческую заботу об "economicaly disadvantaged minorities", и при этом ничего не делая, или делая то, что идет во вред, умышленно конечно... Ведь они дураки, все равно ничего не поймут. А при любом случае, всегда можно пнуть и показать пальцем на профсоюз.. якобы он виноват, так как учителей защищает. Только профсоюз никого на работу не нанимает, не внедряет всевозможные псевдотеории в образование. Это делает как раз администрация городскиx и штатныx отделов образования.

Guess what, Lina.A few conservativescan also read Wiki.

"Unlike the systems of most other countries, education in the United States is highly decentralized, and the federal government and Department of Education are not heavily involved in determining curricula or educational standards (with the recent exception of the No Child Left Behind Act)."

So when quoting - do so accurately....and not selectively.

wow!! how difficult is it to look up people on your местный борд?? I just looked it up - even in the southern state of Florida it's mostly highly educated people - some have medical degrees, degree in education, even law degrees..my problem would be and mu guess - most of those people are liberal, and their approach to education is liberal - excuses, excuses, excuses for everyone - students, teachers, parents..so, unless parents or people with traditional views start getting involved and make changes, there is no way education will improve..can't imagine federal level bureaucrats improving education through the federal agency..

I believe you're missing the point, Natan. I was simply responding to your 22:35 post - how do you expect the quality of education to improve since 1979, if the department does not " establish schools and colleges; develop curricula; set requirements for enrollment and graduation; determine state education standards;..." "with the recent (2001) exception of the No Child Left Behind Act"

"Who needs professionals, anyway?"

I never said we DON'T need professionals. In fact, the more layers of bureacracy there are (including federal) the less effective and professional system will be.

The problem is that in the current system dominated by unions professionalism, exceptionalism and teaching exellence are sacrificed at the expense of tenure and job security.

furthermore, according to wiki the No Child Left BehindAct "requires states to develop assessments in basic skills to be given to all students in certain grades, if those states are to receive federal funding for schools. The Act does not assert a national achievement standard; standards are set by each individual state."

" the department does not " establish schools and colleges; develop curricula; set requirements for enrollment and graduation; determine state education standards;..."
Hmmmmm.....
What exactly do 5,000 people do all year round??? Other than collecting federal (read your's and mine) $$$ in salary, pension, vacation, medical coverage and other benefits.
You just proved my point. This is a "federal employment" program, nothing more, nothing less - most of what they do no doubt is being replicated 50 times over in this country - once in every state.

and I thought your point was: "No Federally mandated or set standards are needed. Standards are not achieved because some bureacrat in Washington wrote it up in some book. They are achieved through vigorous competition at the local level. "

That's correct. Now you're getting it. And if there is no Federal standards necessary it follows that there is no need for 5,000 federal employees overseeing unnecessary "standards".

It's called logic and reason. Try it sometimes....

the point is that you have no point, and you keep changing your point everytime you're proven wrong. I'm not so concerned with what 5000 people do all year round, I'm more interested in why out of all the US cabinet departments, the one that deals with education is the smallest - is it really the least important one? especialy since the state and local government is obviously doing a lousy job.

Nathan, you are another one who is caught by media campain against the Unions. Again, union does nor decide whom to hire and what to teach and how to teach. The problem for USA education is in broad,disperse systems of the boards that have absolutely now clue what is need to be done in order to secceed. Those local boards are so politicaly incline.. this situation is a dead end. Do not expect any improvements. USSR build very strong educational system by having all school to subordinate to one Department.

yes, local boards are a waste of our money and are full of clueless people....And they don't know anything about education....
Curricula should be set by scientists and educators without any political agendas whatsoever.

aren't local boards under the umbrella of the state dept. of education?? and who would be in-charge of schools/teacher/student specific issues if there is a vacuum bet. the state and fed. level??
Galina, the board hires the teachers, but who prevents them from being fired in case of problems??

Julia, you are 100% right about it. Unfortunately, in local boards are local politicians set up the agendas, and in urban schools' systems, where the majority of the student population is from economicaly disadvantaged families, local politicians can do as they pleased. One of the examples can be Bloomberg-Klein duet, that ruined 8 generations of city students. And 4 more are comming! I have to deal with the 8th grade students that functionaly illiterate!

Sveta, no, the Boards are independently elected every 3-4 years, I guess. And the State has nothing to do with it. School system is hiring a teacher, and the school administration is the one who OKs a teacher to "stay" or to leave. In suburban areas teachers are rotating on caledoscopic speed. When my son got to the end of the high school there was not a single teacher left who taught him in the 9th grade. Why? Because all of them where "let go" for one reason: keep the labor cost low!! No one cared about quality.

On elementary level the situation is a little better. But still, to far from perfect. To reform educational system, all its components have to change: from a budget to curriculum...

When my son got to the end of the high school there was not a singleteacher left who taught him in the 9th grade. Why? Because all of themwhere "let go" for one reason: keep the labor cost low!! No one caredabout quality.
yes, and it's exactly because the teachers are not hired/promoted based on merits, but on tenure/seniority, etc..and who is responsible for that??? the unions??

btw, a great overview of the whole US public education structure..
***********.answers.com/topic/school-boards-duties-responsibilities-decision-making-and-legal-basis-for-local-school-board-powers