I was not that surprised to come across an editorial that tried to convince its readers that the problem (the beast) facing education today was the competitive global economy. The trouble with this theory is that it presupposes the innocence and super-ability of the students that are being tamed. This article effectively stated that the problem that kept students illiterate was the global economy — get that straight and all will be educated. It’s that same old line about throw more money at it and make it better. This is why I decided to write the following:
I found it interesting that your education article started out with the terms “good news” and moved quickly to using the image of a “beast.” Coincidentally, these terms not only reflect the times in which we live, but also, the real problems we face with today’s so-called educational program. If I may switch metaphors, the beast to be tamed is not the competitive global economy, but the “lost kids” you mentioned. That teachers should be paid larger salaries is unmistakably true, however, throwing money at the trainer will not tame the savage beast. Now, if you were to give the beast $6000 a year, then it might be persuaded to perform. Conversely, if you told the beast that it would not eat unless it performed, you might be surprised at the results also. It is more than apparent that this government education social experiment, of over a century, has not been successful. Dewey’s socialist experiment was somewhat stable until around 1963. At that time, statistics show at dramatic change for the worse in the experiment. The condition of the “beast,” as we see it today, is a direct, progressive, and lingering result of the fatal decisions made then. It would behoove our candidates to take a hard, fast look at what happened to the education system in 1963. What honestly caused the marked rise in teen pregnancy and teen crime together with the gradual decline in SAT scores during that period of history? Since to describe what happened would demand far greater text than I am afforded here, let me just hint that the answer was not a drop in teachers’ salaries, and had nothing to do with the amount of special programs developed. One thing is for certain, we better find out what happened before the “de beast” gets wind of “de-bate.”
Michael Aprile
Music "in balance" with the heart beat
December 31st, 2009 at 4:38 pm
What honestly caused the marked rise in teen pregnancy and teen crime together with the gradual decline in SAT scores during that period of history?… let me just hint that the answer was not a drop in teachers’ salaries, and had nothing to do with the amount of special programs developed.
I almost want to apologize before saying this on this site, but I do think it needs to be said. The problem may lie with the growth in this country of religious fundamentalism over the past four or five decades. Having taught in a fundamentalist Christian school, as well as teaching in secular public schools, I believe there is a significant difference in the way students from the two streams approach knowledge. And the students from the fundamentalist stream do not come off well prepared for a technological society.
Editor’s comment: I am not a proponent of so-called “Christian” schools, so I will not say more about them than this. Many of these schools are replicas of the secular schools with the label slapped on them — in the same way that there are thousands of people who call themselves Christian who are sadly nothing of the sort. I do not believe, on the other hand, that there is any evidence that a “growth in this country of religious fundamentalism over the past four or five decades” has caused the marked rise in teen pregnancy and teen crime together with the gradual decline in SAT scores during that period of history between 1963 and now. It can be proven statistically that this effect was the direct result of removing the Bible and prayer and eventually any bastion of God from the public schools. When you remove the absolutes from a society, you reap chaos and a society with little or no morals.