- Ability Varies
- Half of the Children Are Below Average
- Too Many People Are Going to College
- America's Future Depends on How We Educate the Academically Gifted
The lie is that every child can be anything he or she wants to be. No one really believes it, but we approach education’s problems as if we did.
It isn't a secret that things like Head Start can create a bump in achievement, but that it lasts less than a handful of years, at which point there's little to no difference in academic skills compared to the control sample. He suggests there can be in some interpersonal abilities.
I wasn't aware of how things like the NAEP math tests worked, and found his numbers on how many students couldn't solve the "8'th grade" problems horrifying.
He proposes cerfifications to undermine the BA fetish, hoping that a need for certifications would create a supply for them. Let employers who don't know what a school's BA is worth (or whether the fellow without a BA is good) have a way of measuring skill.
For those who go to college for STEM, he has little to say: The demands of STEM weed out those not apt; there aren't "too many" after a while. But many are encouraged to go to college who don't benefit.
For those who don't "live in Lake Woebegon," he points to existing and underutilized and underadmired career and technical education. He wants tracking--though I'm not sure he understands how big a staff increase this might require.
For the gifted he hopes to teach wisdom:
A wonderful maxim is attributed to George Christian, one of Lyndon Johnson’s press secretaries: “No one should be allowed to work in the West Wing of the White House who has not suffered a major disappointment in life.” The responsibility of working there was too great, Christian thought, to be entrusted to people who weren’t painfully aware how badly things can go wrong. The same principle applies to those who will become members of America’s elite. No one among the gifted should be allowed to rise to a position of influence without knowing what it feels like to fail. The experience of internalized humiliation is a prerequisite for humility.
At all levels, he wants to teach basic Western culture and the principles of virtue. Those aren't exactly popular, at least in public.
As a sympathetic onlooker, I offer one piece of advice to advocates on the front lines: Stop focusing on math and reading test scores to make your case. They are the measures of educational achievement most closely tied to the child’s underlying academic ability. The limits that public schools face in raising those scores also bedevil private schools, charter schools, and home-schoolers. The reason private schools, charter schools, and home-schooling are desirable is their ability to create a better education in ways that do not show up in reading and math scores.
What can push change? School choice (including homeschool) and certification can help address the first few problems. For the liberal education he hopes in four things: "The stuff of a liberal education is truly wonderful," professors trying to look smart with "impenetrable vocabulary" can't get away with that forever (may not be a safe prediction, it's an old problem), students already ask themselves the questions a liberal education addresses, and using your capacities to the utmost is fun.
Don't look for top-down solutions:
If there is to be a return to reality, it will not come from government. Of all the people hooked on wishful thinking, politicians have the most untreatable habit.
It's about 168 pages, with the rest being notes. Some of his ideas parallel things I've been thinking about education. Give it a read.
3 comments:
Thanks for posting this! I'm very interested, though it'll be this summer before I can take a look at it. From your summary, his proposals seem good.
I liked the George Christian quote about major disappointments. They teach.
Older people keep plugging technical educations, but young people still shy away. This is likely because of the status game of dating and mating, especially for males. The reality of the certificate credential, which might be more accurate and valuable than the degree, cannot (yet) overcome the prestige factor.
As an example close to home, I worked as a social worker. The MSW is crap and actually harms the ability of people to provide any assistance beyond helping with applications, but those who have it defend fiercely that it should be required for most jobs. Such people also control certification for reimbursement.
I've read it. I liked the first three chapters but was disappointed by the last.
This is because "wisdom" is partly a matter of opinion. Sure, we all want our rulers to be educated into virtue, but we don't all agree on what virtue is, or how to achieve it, or what limits should be placed on rulers.
I'd have been be happier if he'd just recommended a survey course on philosophy and a good grounding in history.
Re tracking: It works well for those in the top track, but can be discouraging to those who are in one of the lower tracks. There's also a one-way value issue: if you are dropped from an upper track to a lower one, you may feel bad but you can easily keep up with the new track. But even if you are smart enough to move up, if you do so you will be months behind the others already there.
My junior and senior high schools were tracked, mostly with three levels, but there were five levels of math instruction. I saw both the good and bad sides of the practice.
One side-effect of tracking I've never seen mentioned elsewhere is that the "smartness' distribution in the upper levels isn't 'normal', with most in the middle. Instead it's a triangle, with most of the students near the bottom of the range and few very smart kids at the top. That's a different dynamic that one where most are in the middle.
Post a Comment