Friday, April 28, 2006

Encouragement: More Evidence

This is a great time of year: the end of the semester. Don’t get me wrong, I love my students and find it difficult to see a class end. We have developed such a great classroom community together.

This time of year is great source of encouragement to me as I begin the next set of new classes. I wish it could be like this from the first week through the semester.

I need to remember how great each class becomes as the semester progresses. Many (not all!) of my students are resistant or scared or intimidated or overwhelmed (or many other negative emotions) by having a daily Wall Street Journal discussion in class. The requirement that they read the Journal on a regular basis is simple not appealing to many students. (Hmmm, I wonder why.) But this time of the semester is when I get to hear how much many of them have come to value and even enjoy reading the Journal and discussing current events in class. And that is after the grades are in!

Some of my most resistant students have told me that the WSJ current events discussion is the most interesting part of the class. For example, several traditional-aged students stopped me in the hallway after class to say they really enjoyed the Journal and plan to continue reading it even if it is not required in future semesters.

I was floored! I had no idea that they were so interested and stimulated.

Some of the initial resistant has diminished since so many of my colleagues are now using the Journal. It seems that students expect current events discussion and business applications from WSJ articles to be a part of the class. That is one of the many benefits you have when your school joins the Journal in an Academic Partnership.

Need more encouragement and inspiration? The thrill is not just from student comments. All kinds of excitement comes from using the Journal. Colleagues from my school and from around the country frequently share success stories with me.

One of my colleagues drafted a question for his business statistics exam using the use of statistics in the NBA. He asked the students to develop a model to predict the number of expected victories based on readily available basketball statistics (like the kind found on the back of trading cards). The idea was to show a real-life use of statistics with a fun topic for the students. Less than one week later, the Journal carried an article about how sports teams are using statisticians to aid in drafting, starting line-ups and play-calling. My friend excitedly shared the article with his classes. His students will definitely remember that concept application now.

In many of our classes, students fail to see the value of the material covered. Articles from the Wall Street Journal supply that crucial link for our students too see that it really is applicable to the world.

So remember, no matter how resistant students may be initially, things always get better as the semester progresses. They are different students now at the end of the semester.

Encouragement: More Evidence

This is a great time of year: the end of the semester. Don’t get me wrong, I love my students and find it difficult to see a class end. We have developed such a great classroom community together.

This time of year is great source of encouragement to me as I begin the next set of new classes. I wish it could be like this from the first week through the semester.

I need to remember how great each class becomes as the semester progresses. Many (not all!) of my students are resistant or scared or intimidated or overwhelmed (or many other negative emotions) by having a daily Wall Street Journal discussion in class. The requirement that they read the Journal on a regular basis is simple not appealing to many students. (Hmmm, I wonder why.) But this time of the semester is when I get to hear how much many of them have come to value and even enjoy reading the Journal and discussing current events in class. And that is after the grades are in!

Some of my most resistant students have told me that the WSJ current events discussion is the most interesting part of the class. For example, several traditional-aged students stopped me in the hallway after class to say they really enjoyed the Journal and plan to continue reading it even if it is not required in future semesters.

I was floored! I had no idea that they were so interested and stimulated.

Some of the initial resistant has diminished since so many of my colleagues are now using the Journal. It seems that students expect current events discussion and business applications from WSJ articles to be a part of the class. That is one of the many benefits you have when your school joins the Journal in an Academic Partnership.

Need more encouragement and inspiration? The thrill is not just from student comments. All kinds of excitement comes from using the Journal. Colleagues from my school and from around the country frequently share success stories with me.

One of my colleagues drafted a question for his business statistics exam using the use of statistics in the NBA. He asked the students to develop a model to predict the number of expected victories based on readily available basketball statistics (like the kind found on the back of trading cards). The idea was to show a real-life use of statistics with a fun topic for the students. Less than one week later, the Journal carried an article about how sports teams are using statisticians to aid in drafting, starting line-ups and play-calling. My friend excitedly shared the article with his classes. His students will definitely remember that concept application now.

In many of our classes, students fail to see the value of the material covered. Articles from the Wall Street Journal supply that crucial link for our students too see that it really is applicable to the world.

So remember, no matter how resistant students may be initially, things always get better as the semester progresses. They are different students now at the end of the semester.

Encouragement: More Evidence

This is a great time of year: the end of the semester. Don’t get me wrong, I love my students and find it difficult to see a class end. We have developed such a great classroom community together.

This time of year is great source of encouragement to me as I begin the next set of new classes. I wish it could be like this from the first week through the semester.

I need to remember how great each class becomes as the semester progresses. Many (not all!) of my students are resistant or scared or intimidated or overwhelmed (or many other negative emotions) by having a daily Wall Street Journal discussion in class. The requirement that they read the Journal on a regular basis is simple not appealing to many students. (Hmmm, I wonder why.) But this time of the semester is when I get to hear how much many of them have come to value and even enjoy reading the Journal and discussing current events in class. And that is after the grades are in!

Some of my most resistant students have told me that the WSJ current events discussion is the most interesting part of the class. For example, several traditional-aged students stopped me in the hallway after class to say they really enjoyed the Journal and plan to continue reading it even if it is not required in future semesters.

I was floored! I had no idea that they were so interested and stimulated.

Some of the initial resistant has diminished since so many of my colleagues are now using the Journal. It seems that students expect current events discussion and business applications from WSJ articles to be a part of the class. That is one of the many benefits you have when your school joins the Journal in an Academic Partnership.

Need more encouragement and inspiration? The thrill is not just from student comments. All kinds of excitement comes from using the Journal. Colleagues from my school and from around the country frequently share success stories with me.

One of my colleagues drafted a question for his business statistics exam using the use of statistics in the NBA. He asked the students to develop a model to predict the number of expected victories based on readily available basketball statistics (like the kind found on the back of trading cards). The idea was to show a real-life use of statistics with a fun topic for the students. Less than one week later, the Journal carried an article about how sports teams are using statisticians to aid in drafting, starting line-ups and play-calling. My friend excitedly shared the article with his classes. His students will definitely remember that concept application now.

In many of our classes, students fail to see the value of the material covered. Articles from the Wall Street Journal supply that crucial link for our students too see that it really is applicable to the world.

So remember, no matter how resistant students may be initially, things always get better as the semester progresses. They are different students now at the end of the semester.

Thursday, April 27, 2006

The Death or Rebirth of Foundations? Looking Beyond Teacher Education Service Courses

The elimination of foundations as a requirement has really already happened in my state of Wisconsin, although in a more subtle way. Instead of actively eliminating the requirement for foundations, the state has instead eliminated requirements and created a set of standards for certification of teacher ed programs. And these standards do not really address “foundations” issues.

Even if foundations is not eliminated, it often seems to be increasingly absorbed, generally by C&I departments. Non-foundations people often believe that lots of faculty can teach "that stuff," and, anyway, when we teach it, I sometimes hear, we generally don't relate it well enough to practice.

This absorption of foundations by C&I (and others) is partly driven by the increasingly precarious budgets of our public universities. We are in a new world than we were even a decade ago. Departments must increasingly fight for their piece of an ever-shrinking pie. The old days, when other departments would be generous to others are long gone--at least at my university this often seems to be the case. The point, here, is not that non-foundations people completely disregard our usefulness. Instead, given a wide range of competing demands, it is, pragmatically, difficult--even for me, at times--to see why we deserve a faculty line more than, for example, early childhood or exceptional education. This is especially true with more “esoteric” fields like philosophy of education. Foundations faculty will not be completely eliminated—especially in major research universities--but we will certainly continue to be marginalized.

We can’t survive without service classes—but I am increasingly convinced that a focus only on service classes is a losing strategy. The fact is that, in the current climate, nothing succeeds like success. If you want a faculty line, you'd better be able to show that you can bring in either the research $ or the enrollment to support it. Fighting for the shrinking scraps of service classes from other departments in this environment is a losing proposition, since the only enrollment we can promise is enrollment that we "take" from "them."

We need to act more proactively. In fact, I think we generally play down our strengths. At my university, our Cultural Foundations of Education Masters program is _the only graduate program in the school that has seen a significant increase in enrollment_ over the last year. Let me say that again: Foundations in my school is a growth industry!

This was not always the case. A few years ago, our classes were almost empty. We realized that if we did not quickly turn our enrollment numbers around, we would quickly be put on the chopping block. And so we began a focused PR campaign. We created flyers that emphasized our strengths, and focused on areas where we had a competitive advantage. In part because we also have an undergraduate program in Community Education, only about 1/3 of our Masters students are actually certified teachers. The rest come from government, community organizations, and a diverse range of other places. So we sent flyers to churches and to government offices and community organizations.

At the same time, we developed a specialization in Social Foundations of Education, which has proved popular. And we developed a specialization in Community Education in our Masters program (adding only a couple of classes and reaching out to other departments on campus) to be more attractive to youth workers and other non-profit staff who “educate” outside of schools.

The fact is that graduate work in foundations is extremely attractive to a wide range of potential students. At our best, we provide a kind of interim space where practice and theory come together in unique ways. Students will rarely find this in the Literature, Science, or Arts departments, which often downplay the importance of practice. Many non-teachers are very interested in education, but not necessarily in the more pragmatic methods-based approach of C&I. At the same time, many teachers are tired of what may seem like the same old classes they took as undergrads. They want something that will stretch their minds in different ways. Others just need/want a Masters degree, and because it doesn't really matter what it is, they find their way to us as the most interesting and feasible option. In fact, people in social service positions not infrequently end up in our program instead of social work because ours is so much easier to complete and, again, because it stresses analysis over practical training. Foundations also often attracts students from oppressed groups who would like to examine issues of inequality, race, ethnicity, class, etc., in more detail than C&I can do given their wider array of concerns. Frankly, the non-teachers in my courses are often the most challenging and refreshing.

In my department, we argue that we provide not answers but new ways of asking questions. We provide an understanding of the social context in which education takes place, and give people the understanding they need to develop their own strategies in response to the challenges they encounter. And, clearly, this argument has proved convincing to a wide range of students.

I also believe, and I think students have found, that a Masters in foundations is one of the best preparations for doctoral work.

Another reason our program is attractive is because, since we don't have to meet any licensure or other requirements, we are able to keep the number of credits to a minimum as well as the requirements. Aside from our 4 core courses (philosophy, sociology, history, and research (yes-philosophy is a required class in our department), students can basically take what they want. And all our classes are offered in the evening, making them accessible to working adults. Students interested in social work, for example, frequently end up taking our Masters program instead because it is much easier to complete.

My department will at least survive--and hopefully continue to flourish--because we have developed an independent enrollment base that the rest of the school increasingly depends on. And we are constantly trying to figure out how to attract an even broader base of students. In my state, the contribution of our foundations graduate programs to the bottom line $ of the school is especially evident because of changing requirements that no longer require teachers to collect graduate credits to maintain their certification, contributing to enrollment drops across the school.

Our tendency to despair, at times, may actually play into a general sense that our time has come and gone. Right now, at most universities, "they" don't need "us." From a budgetary and enrollment standpoint, this often seems an inescapable truth to harried
administrators and threatened faculty in other departments that no amount of thoughtful analysis will, I think, be able to overcome. I hope that foundations will be able to reclaim its place in education, but we need to survive until that happens. Until we can show, in concrete, $ based ways that "they" do need "us," we will continue to be in danger.


(One way to do this, by the way (although my department doesn't), is to require that a course or two in our degree programs come from other SOE departments, so that increases in foundations enrollment translate directly into increased enrollment for other departments. In this way, they end up providing "service" courses to us, and become dependent on us in the same way that we are usually dependent upon them. The day a C&I department gets a faculty line specifically to support a degree in foundations will be the day that we become indispensable, again.)

The Death or Rebirth of Foundations? Looking Beyond Teacher Education Service Courses

The elimination of foundations as a requirement has really already happened in my state of Wisconsin, although in a more subtle way. Instead of actively eliminating the requirement for foundations, the state has instead eliminated requirements and created a set of standards for certification of teacher ed programs. And these standards do not really address “foundations” issues.

Even if foundations is not eliminated, it often seems to be increasingly absorbed, generally by C&I departments. Non-foundations people often believe that lots of faculty can teach "that stuff," and, anyway, when we teach it, I sometimes hear, we generally don't relate it well enough to practice.

This absorption of foundations by C&I (and others) is partly driven by the increasingly precarious budgets of our public universities. We are in a new world than we were even a decade ago. Departments must increasingly fight for their piece of an ever-shrinking pie. The old days, when other departments would be generous to others are long gone--at least at my university this often seems to be the case. The point, here, is not that non-foundations people completely disregard our usefulness. Instead, given a wide range of competing demands, it is, pragmatically, difficult--even for me, at times--to see why we deserve a faculty line more than, for example, early childhood or exceptional education. This is especially true with more “esoteric” fields like philosophy of education. Foundations faculty will not be completely eliminated—especially in major research universities--but we will certainly continue to be marginalized.

We can’t survive without service classes—but I am increasingly convinced that a focus only on service classes is a losing strategy. The fact is that, in the current climate, nothing succeeds like success. If you want a faculty line, you'd better be able to show that you can bring in either the research $ or the enrollment to support it. Fighting for the shrinking scraps of service classes from other departments in this environment is a losing proposition, since the only enrollment we can promise is enrollment that we "take" from "them."

We need to act more proactively. In fact, I think we generally play down our strengths. At my university, our Cultural Foundations of Education Masters program is _the only graduate program in the school that has seen a significant increase in enrollment_ over the last year. Let me say that again: Foundations in my school is a growth industry!

This was not always the case. A few years ago, our classes were almost empty. We realized that if we did not quickly turn our enrollment numbers around, we would quickly be put on the chopping block. And so we began a focused PR campaign. We created flyers that emphasized our strengths, and focused on areas where we had a competitive advantage. In part because we also have an undergraduate program in Community Education, only about 1/3 of our Masters students are actually certified teachers. The rest come from government, community organizations, and a diverse range of other places. So we sent flyers to churches and to government offices and community organizations.

At the same time, we developed a specialization in Social Foundations of Education, which has proved popular. And we developed a specialization in Community Education in our Masters program (adding only a couple of classes and reaching out to other departments on campus) to be more attractive to youth workers and other non-profit staff who “educate” outside of schools.

The fact is that graduate work in foundations is extremely attractive to a wide range of potential students. At our best, we provide a kind of interim space where practice and theory come together in unique ways. Students will rarely find this in the Literature, Science, or Arts departments, which often downplay the importance of practice. Many non-teachers are very interested in education, but not necessarily in the more pragmatic methods-based approach of C&I. At the same time, many teachers are tired of what may seem like the same old classes they took as undergrads. They want something that will stretch their minds in different ways. Others just need/want a Masters degree, and because it doesn't really matter what it is, they find their way to us as the most interesting and feasible option. In fact, people in social service positions not infrequently end up in our program instead of social work because ours is so much easier to complete and, again, because it stresses analysis over practical training. Foundations also often attracts students from oppressed groups who would like to examine issues of inequality, race, ethnicity, class, etc., in more detail than C&I can do given their wider array of concerns. Frankly, the non-teachers in my courses are often the most challenging and refreshing.

In my department, we argue that we provide not answers but new ways of asking questions. We provide an understanding of the social context in which education takes place, and give people the understanding they need to develop their own strategies in response to the challenges they encounter. And, clearly, this argument has proved convincing to a wide range of students.

I also believe, and I think students have found, that a Masters in foundations is one of the best preparations for doctoral work.

Another reason our program is attractive is because, since we don't have to meet any licensure or other requirements, we are able to keep the number of credits to a minimum as well as the requirements. Aside from our 4 core courses (philosophy, sociology, history, and research (yes-philosophy is a required class in our department), students can basically take what they want. And all our classes are offered in the evening, making them accessible to working adults. Students interested in social work, for example, frequently end up taking our Masters program instead because it is much easier to complete.

My department will at least survive--and hopefully continue to flourish--because we have developed an independent enrollment base that the rest of the school increasingly depends on. And we are constantly trying to figure out how to attract an even broader base of students. In my state, the contribution of our foundations graduate programs to the bottom line $ of the school is especially evident because of changing requirements that no longer require teachers to collect graduate credits to maintain their certification, contributing to enrollment drops across the school.

Our tendency to despair, at times, may actually play into a general sense that our time has come and gone. Right now, at most universities, "they" don't need "us." From a budgetary and enrollment standpoint, this often seems an inescapable truth to harried
administrators and threatened faculty in other departments that no amount of thoughtful analysis will, I think, be able to overcome. I hope that foundations will be able to reclaim its place in education, but we need to survive until that happens. Until we can show, in concrete, $ based ways that "they" do need "us," we will continue to be in danger.


(One way to do this, by the way (although my department doesn't), is to require that a course or two in our degree programs come from other SOE departments, so that increases in foundations enrollment translate directly into increased enrollment for other departments. In this way, they end up providing "service" courses to us, and become dependent on us in the same way that we are usually dependent upon them. The day a C&I department gets a faculty line specifically to support a degree in foundations will be the day that we become indispensable, again.)

Robot Dreams

This article in the NY Times today about an undocumented immigrant student in an East Harlem high school makes a pretty compelling case for passing the DREAM Act, which would allow many undocumented students that graduate high school in the US to attend college and get on a path to citizenship. The article focuses on Amadou Ly, an undocumented immigrant from Senegal and a member of a robotics team that made the national finals against all odds. Amadou can't fly down to Atlanta for the competition because he doesn't have an ID to get on the plane, and he is worried about not getting into the building where the competition is being held for the same reason. And while the fact that this kid might be prevented from taking part in a robotics competition because of his immigration status is ridiculous, the really crazy part of the story is that he won't be able to attend college because he does not qualify for financial aid. He also might be deported, simply because he came here "illegally" with his mother. It seems like Amadou is exactly the kind of student that we should be encouraging to go to college (read the article for glowing reports from teachers and friends).

Amadou's story also shows how ridiculous the immigration legislation passed by the House, which would make the presence of undocumented immigrants a felony. I don't think we should be punishing immigrants for wanting to work and for doing jobs that most Americans won't do, and it is certainly wrong to punish kids that came here with their parents, especially ones that are completing high school and want to go to college.

Wednesday, April 26, 2006

Foundations of Education Endangered Species?

This came across the FairTest ARN listserv today. For anyone still of the mind that the attack on history, thought, reflection, and questioning is some kind of overblown conspiracy theory, smell this coffee:

Deletion of foundations requirement by the State:
My name is Kurt Stemhagen and I'm as assistant professor at UMW. I've been involved with the group involved in working to keep Foundations of Education a required course in the teacher licensure sequence Virginia.
We met with the DOE just prior to the semester break and we have learned that the proposal to eliminate Foundations of Education will be up for public comment probably as early as the end of this month!

We are working to put together a strong case for our position. One facet of this effort is a petition I've written on behalf of the Virginia Educational Studies Association and placed it online. Basically, the petition makes a case for the value of foundations courses to teacher preparation. It can be accessed at http://new.PetitionOnline.com/VESA001/petition.html. We plan to present the petition to the DOE when they hold public hearings on this proposal. Please read and sign the petition as soon as possible, as I am sure that K-12 teachers will be more likely to sign on if there are already a decent number of signatures. There is a place for comments, so please feel free to make your own points as to why prospective teachers need foundations. Also, if this is going to have any impact it will be the result of a grassroots effort to get the petition into the hands of as many sympathetic individuals as is possible, so please take a few minutes to forward this to anyone who you think is likely to sign it!
If you have any questions or comments, please contact me at kstemhag@umw.edu. Regardless of whether you sign the petition, I hope that you will forward this message to as many potentially interested parties as possible.

CONTACTS for petition:
Kurt Stemhagen, Ph.D.
Assistant Professor of Education
University of Mary Washington
121 University Ave.
Fredericksburg, VA 22406
540.286.8093--kstemhag@umw.edu


Maike Philipsen, Ph.D.
Associate Professor, Social Foundations
Virginia Commonwealth University
1015 W. Main St.
Richmond, VA 23284-2020
(804) 827-2630
Letters and calls to decision makers

Thomas M. Jackson, Jr.
President
Virginia Board of Education
227 North Main Street
Hillsville, VA
24343

Dr. Ella P. Ward
Vice President
1517 Pine Grove Lane
Chesapeake, VA 23321

Foundations of Education Endangered Species?

This came across the FairTest ARN listserv today. For anyone still of the mind that the attack on history, thought, reflection, and questioning is some kind of overblown conspiracy theory, smell this coffee:

Deletion of foundations requirement by the State:
My name is Kurt Stemhagen and I'm as assistant professor at UMW. I've been involved with the group involved in working to keep Foundations of Education a required course in the teacher licensure sequence Virginia.
We met with the DOE just prior to the semester break and we have learned that the proposal to eliminate Foundations of Education will be up for public comment probably as early as the end of this month!

We are working to put together a strong case for our position. One facet of this effort is a petition I've written on behalf of the Virginia Educational Studies Association and placed it online. Basically, the petition makes a case for the value of foundations courses to teacher preparation. It can be accessed at http://new.PetitionOnline.com/VESA001/petition.html. We plan to present the petition to the DOE when they hold public hearings on this proposal. Please read and sign the petition as soon as possible, as I am sure that K-12 teachers will be more likely to sign on if there are already a decent number of signatures. There is a place for comments, so please feel free to make your own points as to why prospective teachers need foundations. Also, if this is going to have any impact it will be the result of a grassroots effort to get the petition into the hands of as many sympathetic individuals as is possible, so please take a few minutes to forward this to anyone who you think is likely to sign it!
If you have any questions or comments, please contact me at kstemhag@umw.edu. Regardless of whether you sign the petition, I hope that you will forward this message to as many potentially interested parties as possible.

CONTACTS for petition:
Kurt Stemhagen, Ph.D.
Assistant Professor of Education
University of Mary Washington
121 University Ave.
Fredericksburg, VA 22406
540.286.8093--kstemhag@umw.edu


Maike Philipsen, Ph.D.
Associate Professor, Social Foundations
Virginia Commonwealth University
1015 W. Main St.
Richmond, VA 23284-2020
(804) 827-2630
Letters and calls to decision makers

Thomas M. Jackson, Jr.
President
Virginia Board of Education
227 North Main Street
Hillsville, VA
24343

Dr. Ella P. Ward
Vice President
1517 Pine Grove Lane
Chesapeake, VA 23321

"History May Not Cut It"

From Schools Matter:

Yale history major, George Bush, was sent down to Tuskegee on Wednesday to make the formal annoucement of the American Competitiveness Initiative (ACI). For those who have watched over the years as Spellings and Bush have plied their cynical lies regarding an egalitarian rationale for NCLB, it is not surprising to see them take the stage at Tuskegee to suggest that the ACI is aimed to help the brown and the poor to find a way out of the second-class status that Bush's and Spellings' conservative cronyism and social-engineering-through-testing-policies have both exacerbated.

Although Bush would wait until his California trip on Friday to actually make it explicit that the different "skills sets" that students will need in the brave new future do not include history, and that 'history may not cut it," he did take the opportunity at Tuskegee to downplay history's importance by pointing out, in good ole' boy self-deprecating fashion, that his own undergraduate degree in history had left him unprepared to understand what he was seeing in the labs at Tuskegee, while expressing amazement that Tuskegee could actually have real scientific labs:

And here are some things we need to do to make sure we shape the future. First is to make sure we're always on the leading edge of research and technology. I saw some amazing things happening today. I was a history major so maybe they were really amazing because I didn't know what I was looking at. (Laughter.) Seemed amazing. (Laughter.) I was at the Center for Biomedical Research -- I was really at the Center for Advanced Materials called T-CAM, a sister organization to the Center for Biomedical Research and for the Center for Aerospace Science Engineering. Isn't that interesting, those three centers exist right here in Tuskegee.

What is ironic in Bush's pro-technology and anti-history campaign that was launched at Tuskegee this week (and is sure to picked as part of the Spellings Commission plans for state universities) is that Bush probably has no historical knowledge that his kind of philanthropy resembles the policies of McKinley and Taft, who came to Tuskegee after its founding in 1881 to hail its industrial education model as the solution to the "Negro problem." Rather than support the liberal arts curriculums of higher ed institutions such as Harvard of Yale or Vanderbilt, the solution then was to inculcate the value of labor, any labor, for African-Americans, rather than the value of a well-rounded education that included the classics, the arts, and yes, history.

Booker T. Washington, Tuskegee's first principal and implementer of the racist social policies he had learned at Hampton Institute under the tutelage of Samuel Chapman Armstrong, became the sweetheart of white Protestant elites because of his brainwashed complicity in the acceptance of segregation and second-class citizenship as the price to be paid for a chance to work. (See James Anderson for more on the industrial education model).

But an anti-history history major would never know these facts, much less understand them. I am wondering, then, if Bush, who has a such a low regard for historians, realizes what low regard that historians have for him. Even before Katrina, domestic spying, or lies about war intelligence, historians, both conservative and liberal, gave Bush a 19% favorable, 81% unfavorable rating. The ratings today must be in the minus territory, much like I imagine the ratings are among the African-Americans who dutifully listened to his subterfuge this past Wednesday at Tuskegee, a great university today despite the oppression of the white philanthropy that would have kept it a training center for labor.

"History May Not Cut It"

From Schools Matter:

Yale history major, George Bush, was sent down to Tuskegee on Wednesday to make the formal annoucement of the American Competitiveness Initiative (ACI). For those who have watched over the years as Spellings and Bush have plied their cynical lies regarding an egalitarian rationale for NCLB, it is not surprising to see them take the stage at Tuskegee to suggest that the ACI is aimed to help the brown and the poor to find a way out of the second-class status that Bush's and Spellings' conservative cronyism and social-engineering-through-testing-policies have both exacerbated.

Although Bush would wait until his California trip on Friday to actually make it explicit that the different "skills sets" that students will need in the brave new future do not include history, and that 'history may not cut it," he did take the opportunity at Tuskegee to downplay history's importance by pointing out, in good ole' boy self-deprecating fashion, that his own undergraduate degree in history had left him unprepared to understand what he was seeing in the labs at Tuskegee, while expressing amazement that Tuskegee could actually have real scientific labs:

And here are some things we need to do to make sure we shape the future. First is to make sure we're always on the leading edge of research and technology. I saw some amazing things happening today. I was a history major so maybe they were really amazing because I didn't know what I was looking at. (Laughter.) Seemed amazing. (Laughter.) I was at the Center for Biomedical Research -- I was really at the Center for Advanced Materials called T-CAM, a sister organization to the Center for Biomedical Research and for the Center for Aerospace Science Engineering. Isn't that interesting, those three centers exist right here in Tuskegee.

What is ironic in Bush's pro-technology and anti-history campaign that was launched at Tuskegee this week (and is sure to picked as part of the Spellings Commission plans for state universities) is that Bush probably has no historical knowledge that his kind of philanthropy resembles the policies of McKinley and Taft, who came to Tuskegee after its founding in 1881 to hail its industrial education model as the solution to the "Negro problem." Rather than support the liberal arts curriculums of higher ed institutions such as Harvard of Yale or Vanderbilt, the solution then was to inculcate the value of labor, any labor, for African-Americans, rather than the value of a well-rounded education that included the classics, the arts, and yes, history.

Booker T. Washington, Tuskegee's first principal and implementer of the racist social policies he had learned at Hampton Institute under the tutelage of Samuel Chapman Armstrong, became the sweetheart of white Protestant elites because of his brainwashed complicity in the acceptance of segregation and second-class citizenship as the price to be paid for a chance to work. (See James Anderson for more on the industrial education model).

But an anti-history history major would never know these facts, much less understand them. I am wondering, then, if Bush, who has a such a low regard for historians, realizes what low regard that historians have for him. Even before Katrina, domestic spying, or lies about war intelligence, historians, both conservative and liberal, gave Bush a 19% favorable, 81% unfavorable rating. The ratings today must be in the minus territory, much like I imagine the ratings are among the African-Americans who dutifully listened to his subterfuge this past Wednesday at Tuskegee, a great university today despite the oppression of the white philanthropy that would have kept it a training center for labor.

Tuesday, April 25, 2006

A quiet 37.5 minutes

Another update on how the 37.5 minutes of extra tutoring is working at my school: I walked around yesterday looking for a few of my kids, and noticed that most of the classrooms were either empty or had only one or two students. It was the same today, and it was a little eerie to have the halls be so quiet (next to the windows was another matter, since most of the kids were outside fighting or cursing at each other). Since I complained about how crazy the 37.5 minutes has been, I suppose I shouldn't be upset about the calm that has come with the warm weather. Except for the fact that almost no kids are taking advantage of the extra time to get help from their teachers, which is not a good sign for a school where so many kids are failing. The more motivated kids (that actually need help with their schoolwork) in my after school program don't even seem to be getting anything out of these sessions, since I am spending several hours a day with them on projects, and they leave all their materials in my office. There is still a lot that needs to be ironed out with the extra tutoring.

Thursday, April 20, 2006

Complaining Students: "Why Do We Have to Know That? It's Not Related to this Class."

Wow, I just had an amazing accounting class. This is a terrific way to end a semester. And it began with an unlikely article.

One of my students selected an article about the growth in sales for expensive jeans for toddlers from Weekend Journal section in the Friday paper. I must admit that I was a bit skeptical about the value of this particular article, but I always give my students freedom to fail or succeed. She discussed the basics of the article and how it would impact the financial statements as these sales grew. She also brought in the economics concept of the profit maximizing price point. We were all amused by the topic, as well as informed.

Now it becomes more interesting. One after another, other students chimed in with other, unrelated articles and connected them with the article about high-priced jeans for kids. None of these articles were directly related to denim, toddler clothing, or high-priced clothing. Instead they covered a variety of other topics, but the student still were able to connect the ideas.

One student discussed an article regarding the huge increase in consumer debt over the last 10 years, and she related how that could impact sales in the future, how companies should be careful about expanding (operations management!) and incurring additional fixed costs, and wondered whether debt could continue to fuel consumer purchases of these high-priced items.

Someone else jumped in with an article about the housing market cooling and suggested that home equity debt was not going to be available to fund extravagant purchases forever. He added that the resulting drop in demand would cause a decrease in price (more economics!), and therefore a decrease in revenues.

Another student brought up an article about Wal-Mart relegating its smiley face to second string advertising behind lifestyle ads. The connection he offered was the attempt by the discounter to polish up its image to seem more high-end and the anticipated higher profitability (marketing!).

Another article discussed related to the production scheduling of cyclical pattern in seasonal or faddish-type products (operations management again!).

The discussion continued on for several more articles.

I was thrilled and impressed! My students were able to take unrelated business articles and see connections. Major themes emerged. Concepts from other disciplines were related. They are remembering and applying concepts, so their comprehension and retention is greatly increased. Mission accomplished!

Contrast this with this statement made to one of my colleagues by a student. 'Why do we have to know return-on-investment for this class? This is a management information systems class, not a finance class.' This frustrates me to hear a student more interested in limiting his learning than seeing the connections. I salute this excellent professor for showing his students the importance cost-benefit analysis and payback periods for hardware and software purchases. Unfortunately, despite his valiant efforts, this student missed the point completely.

Using the Journal is a great way to show the connections between business disciplines and helping students to see the big picture. Education is not just memorization of facts and formulas, but more importantly, it should result in the development of thinking processes that utilize that information and see connections.

And my class 'got it!'

Complaining Students: "Why Do We Have to Know That? It's Not Related to this Class."

Wow, I just had an amazing accounting class. This is a terrific way to end a semester. And it began with an unlikely article.

One of my students selected an article about the growth in sales for expensive jeans for toddlers from Weekend Journal section in the Friday paper. I must admit that I was a bit skeptical about the value of this particular article, but I always give my students freedom to fail or succeed. She discussed the basics of the article and how it would impact the financial statements as these sales grew. She also brought in the economics concept of the profit maximizing price point. We were all amused by the topic, as well as informed.

Now it becomes more interesting. One after another, other students chimed in with other, unrelated articles and connected them with the article about high-priced jeans for kids. None of these articles were directly related to denim, toddler clothing, or high-priced clothing. Instead they covered a variety of other topics, but the student still were able to connect the ideas.

One student discussed an article regarding the huge increase in consumer debt over the last 10 years, and she related how that could impact sales in the future, how companies should be careful about expanding (operations management!) and incurring additional fixed costs, and wondered whether debt could continue to fuel consumer purchases of these high-priced items.

Someone else jumped in with an article about the housing market cooling and suggested that home equity debt was not going to be available to fund extravagant purchases forever. He added that the resulting drop in demand would cause a decrease in price (more economics!), and therefore a decrease in revenues.

Another student brought up an article about Wal-Mart relegating its smiley face to second string advertising behind lifestyle ads. The connection he offered was the attempt by the discounter to polish up its image to seem more high-end and the anticipated higher profitability (marketing!).

Another article discussed related to the production scheduling of cyclical pattern in seasonal or faddish-type products (operations management again!).

The discussion continued on for several more articles.

I was thrilled and impressed! My students were able to take unrelated business articles and see connections. Major themes emerged. Concepts from other disciplines were related. They are remembering and applying concepts, so their comprehension and retention is greatly increased. Mission accomplished!

Contrast this with this statement made to one of my colleagues by a student. 'Why do we have to know return-on-investment for this class? This is a management information systems class, not a finance class.' This frustrates me to hear a student more interested in limiting his learning than seeing the connections. I salute this excellent professor for showing his students the importance cost-benefit analysis and payback periods for hardware and software purchases. Unfortunately, despite his valiant efforts, this student missed the point completely.

Using the Journal is a great way to show the connections between business disciplines and helping students to see the big picture. Education is not just memorization of facts and formulas, but more importantly, it should result in the development of thinking processes that utilize that information and see connections.

And my class 'got it!'

Complaining Students: "Why Do We Have to Know That? It's Not Related to this Class."

Wow, I just had an amazing accounting class. This is a terrific way to end a semester. And it began with an unlikely article.

One of my students selected an article about the growth in sales for expensive jeans for toddlers from Weekend Journal section in the Friday paper. I must admit that I was a bit skeptical about the value of this particular article, but I always give my students freedom to fail or succeed. She discussed the basics of the article and how it would impact the financial statements as these sales grew. She also brought in the economics concept of the profit maximizing price point. We were all amused by the topic, as well as informed.

Now it becomes more interesting. One after another, other students chimed in with other, unrelated articles and connected them with the article about high-priced jeans for kids. None of these articles were directly related to denim, toddler clothing, or high-priced clothing. Instead they covered a variety of other topics, but the student still were able to connect the ideas.

One student discussed an article regarding the huge increase in consumer debt over the last 10 years, and she related how that could impact sales in the future, how companies should be careful about expanding (operations management!) and incurring additional fixed costs, and wondered whether debt could continue to fuel consumer purchases of these high-priced items.

Someone else jumped in with an article about the housing market cooling and suggested that home equity debt was not going to be available to fund extravagant purchases forever. He added that the resulting drop in demand would cause a decrease in price (more economics!), and therefore a decrease in revenues.

Another student brought up an article about Wal-Mart relegating its smiley face to second string advertising behind lifestyle ads. The connection he offered was the attempt by the discounter to polish up its image to seem more high-end and the anticipated higher profitability (marketing!).

Another article discussed related to the production scheduling of cyclical pattern in seasonal or faddish-type products (operations management again!).

The discussion continued on for several more articles.

I was thrilled and impressed! My students were able to take unrelated business articles and see connections. Major themes emerged. Concepts from other disciplines were related. They are remembering and applying concepts, so their comprehension and retention is greatly increased. Mission accomplished!

Contrast this with this statement made to one of my colleagues by a student. 'Why do we have to know return-on-investment for this class? This is a management information systems class, not a finance class.' This frustrates me to hear a student more interested in limiting his learning than seeing the connections. I salute this excellent professor for showing his students the importance cost-benefit analysis and payback periods for hardware and software purchases. Unfortunately, despite his valiant efforts, this student missed the point completely.

Using the Journal is a great way to show the connections between business disciplines and helping students to see the big picture. Education is not just memorization of facts and formulas, but more importantly, it should result in the development of thinking processes that utilize that information and see connections.

And my class 'got it!'

Domestic v. Mental Critical Theory

The theoretical power of critical social theory, and in particular critical theory in education, seems to have lost its punch. Indeed its long standing emphasis on the critiques of the past and present, without a keen sense of the future of education, broadly defined, has apparently contributed both to a demise in the appeal of critical pedagogy and a sense of loss, if not nostalgia, of the roots of critical theory as a political intellectual movement. (For a notion of an educational future, see Michael Peters, www.wwwords.co.uk/pfie/index.html.)

The apparent good news, however, is that there is a revival of sorts within strands of critical theory, namely feminists and critical scholars of color. For example Wendy Kohli has spoken about the need to make “domestic” certain macro discourses of critical theory so as to make relevant and accessible this intellectual project, especially to classroom teachers and to teacher educators. From what I understand of this work, the engagement with pedagogy strikes at the heart of domestic labor concerning social theory, despite the fact that this work is not as grand compared to its more “masculine” forms, such as ideological rails against capitalism and white supremacy. Now it is the relevance and accessibility of theory-philosophy, and who is academically entitled to perform this work, is what I want to argue may be limiting the utility of the Blog to recruit a broader profile of contributors.

Bluntly stated, scholars who embrace Kohi’s “domestic” (feminine labor) position not only may feel that they have less time to indulge (or self indulge, if you prefer), in more “mental” (my term following Willis) or masculine intellectual tasks. This mental work may in part consist of performing abstractions, though such theorizing has clear conceptual import. Although I do not personally subscribe to this perspective, I can understand it, because as a scholar “of color,” I am often asked to assist the university in efforts to “diversify.” It’s like the only scholars qualified—available to perform such labor—are minority scholars. That’s a problem.

It’s also a problem for users of blogs, in our case of the Wall. The ontological divide—who does the labor of diversity in the Academy and so on, and who is privileged to theorize in behalf of the Other-- is an issue. These dynamics are problematic and nuanced. I do not wish to take sides here, but merely to suggest that unless we find a way to inspire the domestically inclined workers in the Academy, I feel that the same old self-fulfilling prophecy will linger. We’re talking to ourselves.

Domestic v. Mental Critical Theory

The theoretical power of critical social theory, and in particular critical theory in education, seems to have lost its punch. Indeed its long standing emphasis on the critiques of the past and present, without a keen sense of the future of education, broadly defined, has apparently contributed both to a demise in the appeal of critical pedagogy and a sense of loss, if not nostalgia, of the roots of critical theory as a political intellectual movement. (For a notion of an educational future, see Michael Peters, www.wwwords.co.uk/pfie/index.html.)

The apparent good news, however, is that there is a revival of sorts within strands of critical theory, namely feminists and critical scholars of color. For example Wendy Kohli has spoken about the need to make “domestic” certain macro discourses of critical theory so as to make relevant and accessible this intellectual project, especially to classroom teachers and to teacher educators. From what I understand of this work, the engagement with pedagogy strikes at the heart of domestic labor concerning social theory, despite the fact that this work is not as grand compared to its more “masculine” forms, such as ideological rails against capitalism and white supremacy. Now it is the relevance and accessibility of theory-philosophy, and who is academically entitled to perform this work, is what I want to argue may be limiting the utility of the Blog to recruit a broader profile of contributors.

Bluntly stated, scholars who embrace Kohi’s “domestic” (feminine labor) position not only may feel that they have less time to indulge (or self indulge, if you prefer), in more “mental” (my term following Willis) or masculine intellectual tasks. This mental work may in part consist of performing abstractions, though such theorizing has clear conceptual import. Although I do not personally subscribe to this perspective, I can understand it, because as a scholar “of color,” I am often asked to assist the university in efforts to “diversify.” It’s like the only scholars qualified—available to perform such labor—are minority scholars. That’s a problem.

It’s also a problem for users of blogs, in our case of the Wall. The ontological divide—who does the labor of diversity in the Academy and so on, and who is privileged to theorize in behalf of the Other-- is an issue. These dynamics are problematic and nuanced. I do not wish to take sides here, but merely to suggest that unless we find a way to inspire the domestically inclined workers in the Academy, I feel that the same old self-fulfilling prophecy will linger. We’re talking to ourselves.

Tuesday, April 18, 2006

Visiting Columbia

I took my 8th graders to visit Columbia University last week. I thought it would be a good idea to get them thinking about the importance of college and to let them know that I expect them to go to college. So many people at school (teachers, administrators and even the staff at my after school program) expect nothing from most of the kids, so it sometimes suprises me that more kids don't give up when they are constantly told they won't amount to anything. Now I don't think college trips are going to change very much - although the way the kids reacted to a visit by a Dominican friend of mine from the South Bronx was really great to watch. He was originally going to talk mostly about college, but the kids really connected with him and seemed to understand a little more about what it takes to succeed in high school and beyond. Even after the success of that visit, I wasn't sure what the kids were going to get out of seeing Columbia.

I was pretty sure that the kids wouldn't understand how good of a school Columbia is. But I think they figured out pretty quickly that they wouldn't feel comfortable there. What they really focused on was the fact that the students there were not like them (most of the kids were Latino or black). Several of the kids asked the tour guide if everyone looked like me, white and blond, even though I thought that the student body seemed fairly diverse. The kids also zeroed in on the buildings and how different they were from Queens. One asked why there weren't any fire escapes, and wanted to know how people got out in case of a fire. They also wanted to know right away about how much it costs to attend the university, and didn't believe me or the tour guide about the possibility of financial aid.

Maybe a little exposure to a world completely different from their own will help these kids be able to think about going to college, something most of their parents never did. But it was pretty obvious that they felt like there was no way that they could ever get to a place like Columbia. It's sad that kids who are just starting to make their way in life (they'll be in high schools all over the city next year) feel like so many avenues in the future are already closed off. I couldn't tell if it was the Ivy League atmosphere that made the kids uncomfortable since we visited Queens College during spring break and the kids couldn't get a good feel of the college, but I don't like it that the 8th graders are already deciding that some colleges are too good for them.

Thursday, April 13, 2006

Spring Break!

Happy Spring Break!
The Wall Street Journal has scheduled spring break this week for the WSJ Weekly Reviews and WSJ Professor Blog.
See you next week.

Spring Break!

Happy Spring Break!
The Wall Street Journal has scheduled spring break this week for the WSJ Weekly Reviews and WSJ Professor Blog.
See you next week.

Spring Break!

Happy Spring Break!
The Wall Street Journal has scheduled spring break this week for the WSJ Weekly Reviews and WSJ Professor Blog.
See you next week.

Wednesday, April 12, 2006

Boys, Boys, Boys

Boys, Boys, Boys

In the early reading school books from the 1950s Dick and Jane era (re-released recently, by the way), we can see clearly the gender stereotyping that taught children very early the differences between girls and boys: Boys were active, girls were passive. Boys did things, girls watched. Boys were strong and rambunctious, girls were helpful and quiet. Boys built things, girls helped their moms. These stereotypes were not unique, of course, to the 1950s. They were taken for granted even earlier than the 18th Century when Rousseau argued that Nature, itself, determined sex differences in that “it is the part of one to active and strong, and of the other to be passive and weak.”

It is very interesting, then, to note that some data emerging during our current orgy of tabulation in schools indicate that girls are scoring better during this, our new 21st Century testocracy. Now, to anyone willing to question the legitimacy of the current school model based on the creation of a fact-based, test-based, teacher-centered factory for the production of test scores, these data trends might say something about which gender may be counted on to be more malleable than the other, more trained by social convention to the passive role that has been the gift bestowed by the “protectors” of women. After all, a school model built on the transmission of knowledge to empty receptacles fit for its storage, coincides quite nicely with the historical notions of what it means to be female, yes?

But this possibility remains lost on those who turn now to pop psychology for answers, where there are plenty of fresh explanations in search of book buyers who want to know about the brain variations of boys’ and girls’ language and math centers, whatever those are. And then there are the folks of South Carolina, who see good reason to use this new data as an opportunity to declare the present-day traditional “convergent” curriculum as suited to girls, whereas boys will require a more “divergent” curriculum—one that we may expect to allow and encourage thinking, perhaps? Imagine that--boys might need to think and do.

And thus we have the beginning of a phenomenon that we haven’t seen on a large scale since the middle of the 19th Century—the segregation of education by gender. When neocons talk about turning back the social clock by a hundred years, apparently they weren’t just talking about race relations. From the Florence Morning News:
Taylor said it is important to educate divergent learners in a way they will want to learn. Whereas traditional learners value learning, sequencing, following the rules, rehearsing skills and memorizing information, and having predictable responses to questions, the divergent learner strives toward “meaningful interpersonal relationships as a prerequisite to learning. He resists rehearsal and predictability of thought and behavior.

“It is best to think of it as a messy closet,” Taylor said, a brain with “lots of storage boxes, neatly placed on one another, along with the junk drawer.”

Traditional learners and traditional teachers find importance in details; value facts; store data in order without context; find data quickly; separate information from a personality; like planning and preparation; learn in a quiet context; are competitive in the classroom; and conform to standards and appear (at least to divergent learners) to be uptight, stiff, overly serious, Taylor said.

Divergent learners and divergent teachers find importance in wholes or chunks of in-context information, value people’s affect, process holistically, store data in big piles with memories wrapped around chunks, search through data until they see what they want, reviewing events and finding the facts (a longer process), respond to personality first, cannot learn from people they dislike or from whom they feel alienated, are indulgent and expedient, like spontaneity and surprise, dislike rehearsal and repetition, like creative answers, like humor, believe play is work, need some accompaniment when studying, such as background music, and are repelled by competition in learning, he said.

“They appear to traditional learners as too happy to be accomplishing anything important, lacking urgency, messy, disorganized and somewhat out of control,” Taylor said.

If traditional learners are more often girls, and divergent learners are more often boys, can they learn in the same classroom? Can a traditional learner be happy in a nontraditional learning environment?

When a divergent learner is stifled, anxious, and does not proceed at an appropriate rate, he is dismissed by authorities, Taylor said.

“Divergent learners have a high need for mobility, a high need for informal settings for learning, a high need for cooperative learning activities with their peers, and an inclination towards gestalt-oriented, creative, divergent, holistic, right-brained thinking which involves needs for relating emotionally to issues and for concretely acting out events and ideas about which they are learning,” Taylor says. . . .

As an antidote to this half-baked nonsense, have a look at this thoughtful piece from the W. Post, The Myth of the 'The Boy Crisis', by Caryl Rivers.

Boys, Boys, Boys

Boys, Boys, Boys

In the early reading school books from the 1950s Dick and Jane era (re-released recently, by the way), we can see clearly the gender stereotyping that taught children very early the differences between girls and boys: Boys were active, girls were passive. Boys did things, girls watched. Boys were strong and rambunctious, girls were helpful and quiet. Boys built things, girls helped their moms. These stereotypes were not unique, of course, to the 1950s. They were taken for granted even earlier than the 18th Century when Rousseau argued that Nature, itself, determined sex differences in that “it is the part of one to active and strong, and of the other to be passive and weak.”

It is very interesting, then, to note that some data emerging during our current orgy of tabulation in schools indicate that girls are scoring better during this, our new 21st Century testocracy. Now, to anyone willing to question the legitimacy of the current school model based on the creation of a fact-based, test-based, teacher-centered factory for the production of test scores, these data trends might say something about which gender may be counted on to be more malleable than the other, more trained by social convention to the passive role that has been the gift bestowed by the “protectors” of women. After all, a school model built on the transmission of knowledge to empty receptacles fit for its storage, coincides quite nicely with the historical notions of what it means to be female, yes?

But this possibility remains lost on those who turn now to pop psychology for answers, where there are plenty of fresh explanations in search of book buyers who want to know about the brain variations of boys’ and girls’ language and math centers, whatever those are. And then there are the folks of South Carolina, who see good reason to use this new data as an opportunity to declare the present-day traditional “convergent” curriculum as suited to girls, whereas boys will require a more “divergent” curriculum—one that we may expect to allow and encourage thinking, perhaps? Imagine that--boys might need to think and do.

And thus we have the beginning of a phenomenon that we haven’t seen on a large scale since the middle of the 19th Century—the segregation of education by gender. When neocons talk about turning back the social clock by a hundred years, apparently they weren’t just talking about race relations. From the Florence Morning News:
Taylor said it is important to educate divergent learners in a way they will want to learn. Whereas traditional learners value learning, sequencing, following the rules, rehearsing skills and memorizing information, and having predictable responses to questions, the divergent learner strives toward “meaningful interpersonal relationships as a prerequisite to learning. He resists rehearsal and predictability of thought and behavior.

“It is best to think of it as a messy closet,” Taylor said, a brain with “lots of storage boxes, neatly placed on one another, along with the junk drawer.”

Traditional learners and traditional teachers find importance in details; value facts; store data in order without context; find data quickly; separate information from a personality; like planning and preparation; learn in a quiet context; are competitive in the classroom; and conform to standards and appear (at least to divergent learners) to be uptight, stiff, overly serious, Taylor said.

Divergent learners and divergent teachers find importance in wholes or chunks of in-context information, value people’s affect, process holistically, store data in big piles with memories wrapped around chunks, search through data until they see what they want, reviewing events and finding the facts (a longer process), respond to personality first, cannot learn from people they dislike or from whom they feel alienated, are indulgent and expedient, like spontaneity and surprise, dislike rehearsal and repetition, like creative answers, like humor, believe play is work, need some accompaniment when studying, such as background music, and are repelled by competition in learning, he said.

“They appear to traditional learners as too happy to be accomplishing anything important, lacking urgency, messy, disorganized and somewhat out of control,” Taylor said.

If traditional learners are more often girls, and divergent learners are more often boys, can they learn in the same classroom? Can a traditional learner be happy in a nontraditional learning environment?

When a divergent learner is stifled, anxious, and does not proceed at an appropriate rate, he is dismissed by authorities, Taylor said.

“Divergent learners have a high need for mobility, a high need for informal settings for learning, a high need for cooperative learning activities with their peers, and an inclination towards gestalt-oriented, creative, divergent, holistic, right-brained thinking which involves needs for relating emotionally to issues and for concretely acting out events and ideas about which they are learning,” Taylor says. . . .

As an antidote to this half-baked nonsense, have a look at this thoughtful piece from the W. Post, The Myth of the 'The Boy Crisis', by Caryl Rivers.

The Immigration Debate and Parent Involvement

An article from Education Week (subscription required) discussed the potential impact of proposed immigration legislation on schools. One particularly interesting point was how legislation that would give undocumented immigrants the chance to become citizens could help increase parent involvement in schools. I personally think the language barrier and the lack of translation services is a more important factor in the lack of parent involvement among immigrant parents, but there is no doubt that immigrants would feel more welcome in many parts of American society (and more likely to participate) if they had documents.

Representatives from the National Council of La Raza and the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund, or MALDEF, said this week they support the Senate Judiciary Committee bill because it provides comprehensive immigration reform, rather than the House bill and a separate bill that has been introduced by Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, R-Tenn., both of which focus on enforcement.
They applauded the inclusion in the Senate Judiciary Committee bill of a provision that would provide a path to citizenship for undocumented youths who graduate from U.S. high schools and attend college or participate in military service for at least two years.
They also endorsed the part of the Senate Judiciary Committee bill that offers a way for undocumented workers to become legal.
Ms. Underwood noted that K-12 public schools are obligated under a 1982 U.S. Supreme Court decision, in Plyler v. Doe, to provide an education to children regardless of their immigration status. “From the school’s perspective of the primary mission of educating the kids, the immigration status of the parent is secondary,” she said.
Peter Zamora, a legislative lawyer for MALDEF, added that legalization for children’s parents could improve parent involvement in schools. “There’s a relationship between government and individuals in this community that is not based on trust,” he said. “Bring this population out of the shadows; have them participate in all facets of American society, including school.”

Tuesday, April 11, 2006

We are America

I'm back from a brief hiatus (spent visiting graduate schools and agonizing over the decision) and I'm excited about the huge pro-immigrant rallies taking place around the country. This Washington Post article seems to be pretty typical of the positive coverage that the rallies are getting in the national media. The bit about the shift on the part of organizers to include more American flags and less Mexican flags was particularly interesting to me. Even though many Americans seem to sympathize with immigrants families and reject harsh measures (the article says that three-fifths of the population wants to provide immigrants that have lived here for some time with a path to citizenship), there is still a lot of xenophobia, and the imagery of an "immigrant invasion" is all over in places like Fox News (during a 30 minute show that I saw last week, Sean Hannity showed a tape of Mexicans streaming across the border 15 or 20 times).

So although I think it is great that immigrants are standing up to the digusting and hateful bill passed in the house, I also think that a lot of commentators are going a little too far with their predictions that these rallies are the start of an immigrant/Latino political movement. Most of the immigrant parents in the night ESL classes at the school went to the rally in downtown New York yesterday (article here), but from what I can tell most of the immigrants around here are just plain scared of what is going to happen. And while the rallies are big enough that they can go without worrying about being deported, I just don't see the accompanying political consciousness that would turn these rallies into a powerful movement, at least in my little part of New York (it could be very different in a city with a more homogeneous immigrant population). I want to hear what my kids are thinking about all this (the youth movement is the most exciting part of this), and hopefully I'll report back with some interesting findings.

Thursday, April 6, 2006

Lesson of Global Competition: The World is Flat

Using the Wall Street Journal in your classes can introduce the topic of global competition for your students. This is very important because the world has become flat - another important reason to integrate the Journal into your classes.

With daily current-events discussions, international themes constantly emerge in our class discussions. I tell my students that they are not just competing with the student sitting next to them, or worse yet, the student that has already dropped the course! Competition for jobs is cropping up all round the world. Fortunately I don't have to lecture my students about the career challenges facing them - they read about foreign impact on domestic industries and jobs in the Journal everyday.

Reading "The World is Flat" by Thomas L. Friedman confirmed my views and efforts on this topic. He is actually pretty rough on parents in their upbringing of our college students. Friedman criticizes the sense of entitlement parents have encouraged, which hampers our young people in adapting to a flat world.

On page 305, he states "Our children will increasingly be competing head-to-head with Chinese, Indian, and Asian kids, whose parents have a lot more... character-building approach than their own American parents. I am not suggesting that we militarize education, but I am suggesting that we do more to push our young people to go beyond their comfort zones, to do things right, and to be ready to suffer some short-run pain for longer gain."

But we cannot control the parents of our students - we take them as we get them! So what can we share with them? Friedman writes on page 264, "One cannot stress enough: Young Chinese, Indians, and Poles are not racing us to the bottom. They are racing us to the top. They do not want to work for us; they don't even want to be us. They want to dominate us - in the sense that they want to be creating the companies of the future that people all over the world will admire and clamor to work for."

I try to help them see the importance of lifetime learning and career flexibility, the value of critical thinking, and adding value to an organization. Our students, more than any generation before them, must be ready to change jobs or career paths as the need arises. Only then will they be the Americans who benefits from globalization, rather than suffer from it.

The Journal has been an important tool for these discussions, with articles serving as real-life verification of the challenges they will. It's our job to educate them, but also to prepare them for the future - instructing them in both knowledge of business information, as well as the realities of this new world economy.

Lesson of Global Competition: The World is Flat

Using the Wall Street Journal in your classes can introduce the topic of global competition for your students. This is very important because the world has become flat - another important reason to integrate the Journal into your classes.

With daily current-events discussions, international themes constantly emerge in our class discussions. I tell my students that they are not just competing with the student sitting next to them, or worse yet, the student that has already dropped the course! Competition for jobs is cropping up all round the world. Fortunately I don't have to lecture my students about the career challenges facing them - they read about foreign impact on domestic industries and jobs in the Journal everyday.

Reading "The World is Flat" by Thomas L. Friedman confirmed my views and efforts on this topic. He is actually pretty rough on parents in their upbringing of our college students. Friedman criticizes the sense of entitlement parents have encouraged, which hampers our young people in adapting to a flat world.

On page 305, he states "Our children will increasingly be competing head-to-head with Chinese, Indian, and Asian kids, whose parents have a lot more... character-building approach than their own American parents. I am not suggesting that we militarize education, but I am suggesting that we do more to push our young people to go beyond their comfort zones, to do things right, and to be ready to suffer some short-run pain for longer gain."

But we cannot control the parents of our students - we take them as we get them! So what can we share with them? Friedman writes on page 264, "One cannot stress enough: Young Chinese, Indians, and Poles are not racing us to the bottom. They are racing us to the top. They do not want to work for us; they don't even want to be us. They want to dominate us - in the sense that they want to be creating the companies of the future that people all over the world will admire and clamor to work for."

I try to help them see the importance of lifetime learning and career flexibility, the value of critical thinking, and adding value to an organization. Our students, more than any generation before them, must be ready to change jobs or career paths as the need arises. Only then will they be the Americans who benefits from globalization, rather than suffer from it.

The Journal has been an important tool for these discussions, with articles serving as real-life verification of the challenges they will. It's our job to educate them, but also to prepare them for the future - instructing them in both knowledge of business information, as well as the realities of this new world economy.

Lesson of Global Competition: The World is Flat

Using the Wall Street Journal in your classes can introduce the topic of global competition for your students. This is very important because the world has become flat - another important reason to integrate the Journal into your classes.

With daily current-events discussions, international themes constantly emerge in our class discussions. I tell my students that they are not just competing with the student sitting next to them, or worse yet, the student that has already dropped the course! Competition for jobs is cropping up all round the world. Fortunately I don't have to lecture my students about the career challenges facing them - they read about foreign impact on domestic industries and jobs in the Journal everyday.

Reading "The World is Flat" by Thomas L. Friedman confirmed my views and efforts on this topic. He is actually pretty rough on parents in their upbringing of our college students. Friedman criticizes the sense of entitlement parents have encouraged, which hampers our young people in adapting to a flat world.

On page 305, he states "Our children will increasingly be competing head-to-head with Chinese, Indian, and Asian kids, whose parents have a lot more... character-building approach than their own American parents. I am not suggesting that we militarize education, but I am suggesting that we do more to push our young people to go beyond their comfort zones, to do things right, and to be ready to suffer some short-run pain for longer gain."

But we cannot control the parents of our students - we take them as we get them! So what can we share with them? Friedman writes on page 264, "One cannot stress enough: Young Chinese, Indians, and Poles are not racing us to the bottom. They are racing us to the top. They do not want to work for us; they don't even want to be us. They want to dominate us - in the sense that they want to be creating the companies of the future that people all over the world will admire and clamor to work for."

I try to help them see the importance of lifetime learning and career flexibility, the value of critical thinking, and adding value to an organization. Our students, more than any generation before them, must be ready to change jobs or career paths as the need arises. Only then will they be the Americans who benefits from globalization, rather than suffer from it.

The Journal has been an important tool for these discussions, with articles serving as real-life verification of the challenges they will. It's our job to educate them, but also to prepare them for the future - instructing them in both knowledge of business information, as well as the realities of this new world economy.

Wednesday, April 5, 2006

20 Reasons, 1 Cause

I applaud Aaron's call for action, rather than just talking about action. But unless the call is translated into doing, the call itself remains just talk, too. Talk about talk about doing.

In terms of the perceived reification of Dewey, Dewey readers know that he would be aghast at the notion that anyone would look to Dewey for a formula that could solve problems into a future that Dewey could not have anticipated. Dewey was too much of an evolutionary democrat for that, and someone, too, who knew that continuity is represented by past, present, and future. He was neither an antiquarian nor a futurologist.

And yes, I agree, too, that social action, as Myles Horton pointedly pointed out, happens most often despite school, not because of it. Highlander was, indeed, about education, but hardly about school.

At this point in history, however, it seems to me that we educators of educators are faced with a much more pressing choice than a preferred venue for social action. That choice is whether or not we believe that public education in schools should continue and be improved or whether it should die and be replaced.

If we are unwilling or unable to make that choice, there is clear guarantee that the choice will be made for us. So while I embrace the notion of strategies to fight oppression inside and outside the schools, I would argue that the possibility of carrying on the good fight (above ground, at least) hinges on the civic commitment symbolized by and made tangible in the public school system.

In short, if we don't support schooling, public schooling, our opportunities to educate for democracy will be replaced for something that will be quite different, I am sure.

In keeping with that spirit, then, of doing as knowing, I have 20 Reasons to Eliminate NCLB (yes, I am obsessed, and I don't mind that my obsession may appear entirely pedestrian to my collleagues who serve the important function as the "elites of non-elitism" (Marquard, 1988):

A number of organizations have adopted a strategy of hoping to fine-tune NCLB when it comes up for re-authorization next year. Personally and professionally, I see no possiblity of using the word "fine" (even hyphenated) in conjuction with this cynically-devised policy that is having such devastating effects on children, schools, parents, and teachers. And unless eliminated next year, you ain't seen nothing yet.

Thanks to Monty Neill for inspiring me to come up with these 20 Reasons to Eliminate NCLB:

20 Reasons to Eliminate NCLB

  1. An education policy built on impossible performance demands that assure the failure of the majority of American public schools should be eliminated, not reformed.
  2. An education policy that has the same impossible demands for most English-language learners and special education students should be eliminated, not reformed.
  3. An education policy that traumatizes children, destroys the desire to learn, and corrupts the purposes for learning should be eliminated, not reformed.
  4. An education policy that uses fear, intimidation, and retribution as motivation should be eliminated, not reformed.
  5. An education policy that uses a single assessment once a year to make life-altering decisions should be eliminated, not reformed.
  6. An education policy that ignores poverty as a chief determinant in academic performance should be eliminated, not reformed.
  7. An education policy that creates two different school curriculums, one for the children of the poor and one for well-funded successes, should be eliminated, not reformed.
  8. An education policy that uses skewed and manipulated research from the National Reading Panel to devise a national reading strategy should be eliminated, not reformed.
  9. An education policy that uses the strain of test score competition to undercut public cohesion and civic commitment to democratic goals should be eliminated, not reformed.
  10. An education policy that shrinks the American school curriculum to two or three subjects that are tested should be eliminated, not reformed.
  11. An education policy that discourages diversity and encourages homogeneity in schools should be eliminated, not reformed.
  12. An education policy that supports the use of tax dollars to fund private schools rather than public school improvement should be eliminated, not reformed.
  13. An education policy that advocates the use of public money to pay private contractors to run public schools should be eliminated, not reformed.
  14. An education policy that is built on unfunded and under-funded mandates should be eliminated, not reformed.
  15. An education policy that reduces or eliminates local and state decision making by citizens should be eliminated, not reformed.
  16. An education policy that mandates that military recruiters have access to student information should be eliminated, not reformed.
  17. An education policy that inflames a teacher shortage in order to replace professional teachers with individuals who have passed a teaching test should be eliminated, not reformed.
  18. An education policy that is used to reward tax dollars to insiders and cronies for their political support should be eliminated, not reformed.
  19. An education policy that uses paid propaganda to advance its agenda should be eliminated, not reformed.
  20. An education policy that puts test scores in the place of the intellectual, social, and emotional growth of America’s children should eliminated, not reformed.
10 Action Strategies for Eliminating NCLB
  1. Hold a public forum in your community to explore and explain these points.
  2. Organize community and neighborhood potluck dinners with teachers and parents to talk together about how NCLB is affecting children and school.
  3. Persuade your organizations to pass resolutions calling for the repeal of NCLB based on these points.
  4. Collect signatures on a Petition to Eliminate NCLB based on these 20 points. Publicize your results in the local media and send copies of resolutions and petitions to your local and federal elected officials.
  5. Write letters-to-the-editor and op-ed pieces for your local and regional newspapers, making these points.
  6. Get your local school board to pass a resolution or hold a community forum about eliminating NCLB.
  7. Contact your U.S. senators and representatives about eliminating NCLB: Call them, write or email them (send these points and other information), and set up meetings with them in your district (bring a group of children).
  8. Contact your state legislators to enlist them in the effort to eliminate NCLB; get state legislatures to pass resolutions.
  9. Parents: Join the NCLB-mandated Parents Advisory Board at your child’s school. Bring the 20 Reasons to Eliminate NCLB to begin a dialogue.
  10. Organize a public protest or march on test days or days given over to test preparation.
If you do not have the documentation you need to explain the 20 Reasons, or if you can't find it on this or other websites, contact me via email.

20 Reasons, 1 Cause

I applaud Aaron's call for action, rather than just talking about action. But unless the call is translated into doing, the call itself remains just talk, too. Talk about talk about doing.

In terms of the perceived reification of Dewey, Dewey readers know that he would be aghast at the notion that anyone would look to Dewey for a formula that could solve problems into a future that Dewey could not have anticipated. Dewey was too much of an evolutionary democrat for that, and someone, too, who knew that continuity is represented by past, present, and future. He was neither an antiquarian nor a futurologist.

And yes, I agree, too, that social action, as Myles Horton pointedly pointed out, happens most often despite school, not because of it. Highlander was, indeed, about education, but hardly about school.

At this point in history, however, it seems to me that we educators of educators are faced with a much more pressing choice than a preferred venue for social action. That choice is whether or not we believe that public education in schools should continue and be improved or whether it should die and be replaced.

If we are unwilling or unable to make that choice, there is clear guarantee that the choice will be made for us. So while I embrace the notion of strategies to fight oppression inside and outside the schools, I would argue that the possibility of carrying on the good fight (above ground, at least) hinges on the civic commitment symbolized by and made tangible in the public school system.

In short, if we don't support schooling, public schooling, our opportunities to educate for democracy will be replaced for something that will be quite different, I am sure.

In keeping with that spirit, then, of doing as knowing, I have 20 Reasons to Eliminate NCLB (yes, I am obsessed, and I don't mind that my obsession may appear entirely pedestrian to my collleagues who serve the important function as the "elites of non-elitism" (Marquard, 1988):

A number of organizations have adopted a strategy of hoping to fine-tune NCLB when it comes up for re-authorization next year. Personally and professionally, I see no possiblity of using the word "fine" (even hyphenated) in conjuction with this cynically-devised policy that is having such devastating effects on children, schools, parents, and teachers. And unless eliminated next year, you ain't seen nothing yet.

Thanks to Monty Neill for inspiring me to come up with these 20 Reasons to Eliminate NCLB:

20 Reasons to Eliminate NCLB

  1. An education policy built on impossible performance demands that assure the failure of the majority of American public schools should be eliminated, not reformed.
  2. An education policy that has the same impossible demands for most English-language learners and special education students should be eliminated, not reformed.
  3. An education policy that traumatizes children, destroys the desire to learn, and corrupts the purposes for learning should be eliminated, not reformed.
  4. An education policy that uses fear, intimidation, and retribution as motivation should be eliminated, not reformed.
  5. An education policy that uses a single assessment once a year to make life-altering decisions should be eliminated, not reformed.
  6. An education policy that ignores poverty as a chief determinant in academic performance should be eliminated, not reformed.
  7. An education policy that creates two different school curriculums, one for the children of the poor and one for well-funded successes, should be eliminated, not reformed.
  8. An education policy that uses skewed and manipulated research from the National Reading Panel to devise a national reading strategy should be eliminated, not reformed.
  9. An education policy that uses the strain of test score competition to undercut public cohesion and civic commitment to democratic goals should be eliminated, not reformed.
  10. An education policy that shrinks the American school curriculum to two or three subjects that are tested should be eliminated, not reformed.
  11. An education policy that discourages diversity and encourages homogeneity in schools should be eliminated, not reformed.
  12. An education policy that supports the use of tax dollars to fund private schools rather than public school improvement should be eliminated, not reformed.
  13. An education policy that advocates the use of public money to pay private contractors to run public schools should be eliminated, not reformed.
  14. An education policy that is built on unfunded and under-funded mandates should be eliminated, not reformed.
  15. An education policy that reduces or eliminates local and state decision making by citizens should be eliminated, not reformed.
  16. An education policy that mandates that military recruiters have access to student information should be eliminated, not reformed.
  17. An education policy that inflames a teacher shortage in order to replace professional teachers with individuals who have passed a teaching test should be eliminated, not reformed.
  18. An education policy that is used to reward tax dollars to insiders and cronies for their political support should be eliminated, not reformed.
  19. An education policy that uses paid propaganda to advance its agenda should be eliminated, not reformed.
  20. An education policy that puts test scores in the place of the intellectual, social, and emotional growth of America’s children should eliminated, not reformed.
10 Action Strategies for Eliminating NCLB
  1. Hold a public forum in your community to explore and explain these points.
  2. Organize community and neighborhood potluck dinners with teachers and parents to talk together about how NCLB is affecting children and school.
  3. Persuade your organizations to pass resolutions calling for the repeal of NCLB based on these points.
  4. Collect signatures on a Petition to Eliminate NCLB based on these 20 points. Publicize your results in the local media and send copies of resolutions and petitions to your local and federal elected officials.
  5. Write letters-to-the-editor and op-ed pieces for your local and regional newspapers, making these points.
  6. Get your local school board to pass a resolution or hold a community forum about eliminating NCLB.
  7. Contact your U.S. senators and representatives about eliminating NCLB: Call them, write or email them (send these points and other information), and set up meetings with them in your district (bring a group of children).
  8. Contact your state legislators to enlist them in the effort to eliminate NCLB; get state legislatures to pass resolutions.
  9. Parents: Join the NCLB-mandated Parents Advisory Board at your child’s school. Bring the 20 Reasons to Eliminate NCLB to begin a dialogue.
  10. Organize a public protest or march on test days or days given over to test preparation.
If you do not have the documentation you need to explain the 20 Reasons, or if you can't find it on this or other websites, contact me via email.