Payne’s A Framework For Understanding Poverty
Trying to teach children that come from impoverished cities is not a new concern for educators. For many years teachers and researchers have tried to research and come up with many strategies that will help these children. Curriculum committees have even tried adopting different curriculum’s that were believed to help impoverished students. When President Bush designed NCLB, teachers, administrators, and districts were all concerned about how they were going to keep the lower socioeconomic class of students succeeding at the same rate as other students. Strategies used in the past were no longer going to be enough.
Ruby Payne has written a book called A Framework for understanding Poverty. Her book is part of a presentation series that she gives to districts across the world. Her presentations are designed for her and her staff to teach the messages of her book. Payne’s message is mainly based on “case studies” she has done over the years. When I started reading an article by Anita Bohn, she claims that Payne’s “case studies,” were “nothing more substantive than a few random anecdotes about children and families she claims to have encountered over the years.”
Payne’s message to teachers and districts is that students in poverty need to be taught based on what is essential and necessary for them. She believes that most teachers are from a middle socioeconomic status, and that does not allow them to understand the true needs of students that are from a lower socioeconomic status. Payne also believes that poverty is more than just a monetary condition. Based on Anita Bohn, Payne believes that being poor is cultural. In this culture there are certain values and rules that people live by. Payne states that the values of being poor are passed down from generation to generation. Each generation teaching the next what Payne calls the “hidden rules of poverty.”
In Bohn’s article she list the questions Payne gives on a quiz called “Could you Survive?” Some of the questions for could you survive the lower class are:
I know how to get someone out of jail.
I know how to physically fight and defend myself physically
I know how to get a gun, even if I have a police record.
Some of the questions asked for if you can survive middle class are:
I know how to hire a private attorney to handle a criminal or civil matter.
I know how to reserve a table at a restaurant.
I know how to set and decorate a table with flowers, place mats, and napkins.
At first read of these questions I was completely shocked at the questions about the lower class, and even shocked to hear what she had to say about the middle class. It felt very stereotypical to judge all people based on a few assumptions. Coming from the field of Special Education I am taught that all children are individuals and should be taught based on their individual needs, not on an assumption or stereotype.
My issue with the quiz aside, originally I had no problem believing in the message that Payne preached. I loved the idea that she focused her attention on children that can so easily be overlooked. She has a very strong message, and approaches poverty from an angle different than any I have heard before. Her words have a way of entrancing you and making you want to get up and change your ways. From what I have read, she is a very powerful speaker and makes the audience feel involved with her personal stories about child. I believe that Ruby believes in what she is preaching. I can tell from all my research that she truly has a passion for children and wants to help teachers enrich their lives.
Believing Payne has a passion for child is not enough for me. It wasn’t until I took a second to look into the actual research that I found some flaws in her message. Her message is not backed up by research. The research she has claimed to do has not been checked or authorized as valid. She is not published in popular journals as a true expert on poverty because her work has not been evaluated.
I believe that we as educators should hear her message, that Ruby Payne is an intelligent individual that truly believes in the message she is preaching. I do not think that teachers should get swept up in the hype she preaches and start changing all of their teaching approaches. The works of Ruby Payne should be heard, thought about completely, and parts of them should be put into practice. Teachers need to be well rounded and able to look at information with a critical eye.
Thursday, March 25, 2010
Fixing and Preventing the Dropout Rate
Across the United States a lingering problem that seems far from becoming resolved is the rising dropout rate in our state’s schools. Some researchers refer to the problem as a silent epidemic. Research shows that one third of all high school students, and half of all African Americans, Hispanics, and Native Americans, fail to graduate with their class. Students who dropout are more likely to be unemployed, in poor health, living in poverty, on public assistance, and become single parents. Leanne Hoagland-Smith states that with baby boomers retiring during the next decade, the US economy will be facing critical shortages in finding qualified and educated workers. Unless public education addresses this problem and makes significant changes in how they educate young people the U.S. could possibly lose its number one place in the world economy. Not only will dropout rates negatively affect the growing economy of each community, state, and our nation, all uneducated young people will add costs to each state’s bottom line. The Friedman Foundation based in Indianapolis estimated that the dropouts for 2006 will cost the state of Indiana over $55 million each year until they die. These costs are calculated from lost tax revenue, social health care such as Medicaid and incarceration. Dropouts are more than eight times as likely to wind up in jail.
In an article online, Addressing the Real Problems Instead of Traditional Symptoms, the author found that most students make the decision to drop out in middle school or junior high. A survey released from the Civic Enterprises suggested that 90% of the drop outs had passing grades, but left because classes were too boring. We need to start examining the real problem and start implementing ways to prevent students from dropping out instead of just fixing the problem after it occurs.
Knowing where schools are located and who attends them is critical for policymakers, reformers, and others concerned with directing resources toward measuring the dropout problem and towards fixing it. When finding one schools dropout rate you need to compare the number of students who dropped out in one year to the number of students enrolled. You also need to take into consideration those who transfer and graduate, take longer than four years to graduate or leave school and return to graduate or receive their GED.
Most of the research points towards reorganizing the public education system and curriculum that is offered to the students. Students need to be engaged in what they are learning. We also need to offer other paths for those students that are not successful on a college track. We need to show students that there are other options. We also need to address the realities that face many students, lack of adequate housing and shelter, lack of positive role models and social and emotional baggage. We need to give students more options within choosing courses. Offer more relevant curriculum to students some examples given online were conflict resolution classes, finance and budgeting. The truth is our country failed to restructure education when the industrial revolution happened and still employs a patch approach to fixing the problem. True education reform has never existed in this country since the 1970s. We need a curriculum based upon a 21st century knowledge and technology economy. Being realistic and not pouring tons of money into a thoughtless curriculum guided by politics and letting educators do their jobs would be a move in a positive direction toward preventing the dropout rate.
Other options sited in research are giving teachers more training on how to teach strategies. Teachers coming out of college and even teachers that have been in the field for many years need more course and instruction in the area of instruction. Teachers also need to know their students. They need to be able to make connections and allow their students to feel the connection and feel that they are in a safe and caring learning environment. We can provide the opportunity for this through keeping class sizes under control and the smaller the class the deeper the connection a teacher can make with her students. A strong and consistent connection with home can also help in developing stronger connections. If students and parents hear from teachers when students are making positive progress instead of just negative issues or calling home when there are problems. This would help parents to also stay on top of how their child is doing and taking the positive encouraging approach from the classroom and continuing that at home.
Focus on where there is a problem. Contact those students that have dropped out. Find out why and what may have made them stay. Pay attention to early warning signs. Students do not just wake up one morning and decide to drop out. Watch for patterns in attendance or missed credits and intervene. We can not afford to wait until it is too late. By putting in place proactive approaches and reviewing and analyzing the current curriculums we may be able to come up with a way to lower the number of dropouts.
Andrea Concordia
In an article online, Addressing the Real Problems Instead of Traditional Symptoms, the author found that most students make the decision to drop out in middle school or junior high. A survey released from the Civic Enterprises suggested that 90% of the drop outs had passing grades, but left because classes were too boring. We need to start examining the real problem and start implementing ways to prevent students from dropping out instead of just fixing the problem after it occurs.
Knowing where schools are located and who attends them is critical for policymakers, reformers, and others concerned with directing resources toward measuring the dropout problem and towards fixing it. When finding one schools dropout rate you need to compare the number of students who dropped out in one year to the number of students enrolled. You also need to take into consideration those who transfer and graduate, take longer than four years to graduate or leave school and return to graduate or receive their GED.
Most of the research points towards reorganizing the public education system and curriculum that is offered to the students. Students need to be engaged in what they are learning. We also need to offer other paths for those students that are not successful on a college track. We need to show students that there are other options. We also need to address the realities that face many students, lack of adequate housing and shelter, lack of positive role models and social and emotional baggage. We need to give students more options within choosing courses. Offer more relevant curriculum to students some examples given online were conflict resolution classes, finance and budgeting. The truth is our country failed to restructure education when the industrial revolution happened and still employs a patch approach to fixing the problem. True education reform has never existed in this country since the 1970s. We need a curriculum based upon a 21st century knowledge and technology economy. Being realistic and not pouring tons of money into a thoughtless curriculum guided by politics and letting educators do their jobs would be a move in a positive direction toward preventing the dropout rate.
Other options sited in research are giving teachers more training on how to teach strategies. Teachers coming out of college and even teachers that have been in the field for many years need more course and instruction in the area of instruction. Teachers also need to know their students. They need to be able to make connections and allow their students to feel the connection and feel that they are in a safe and caring learning environment. We can provide the opportunity for this through keeping class sizes under control and the smaller the class the deeper the connection a teacher can make with her students. A strong and consistent connection with home can also help in developing stronger connections. If students and parents hear from teachers when students are making positive progress instead of just negative issues or calling home when there are problems. This would help parents to also stay on top of how their child is doing and taking the positive encouraging approach from the classroom and continuing that at home.
Focus on where there is a problem. Contact those students that have dropped out. Find out why and what may have made them stay. Pay attention to early warning signs. Students do not just wake up one morning and decide to drop out. Watch for patterns in attendance or missed credits and intervene. We can not afford to wait until it is too late. By putting in place proactive approaches and reviewing and analyzing the current curriculums we may be able to come up with a way to lower the number of dropouts.
Andrea Concordia
New Find for the Mini Curriculum Project:
Essential questions and enduring understanding are located at the bottom of this webpage under "Standards Clarification Project:"
http://www.state.nj.us/education/cccs/2004/njscp
http://www.state.nj.us/education/cccs/2004/njscp
Separation of Church and State
“Separation of church and state” is a phrase that has become synonymous with controversy and conflict since the concept was first introduced during the post Revolutionary War era in the newly formed United States of America. Although these exact words were never put in writing by the framers of the Constitution, the conflict between government, established churches, and freedom of religion was certainly created. It is improbable that the authors of the Constitution ever imagined the extent to which the First Amendment would be debated and will continue to be debated for years to come.
The First Amendment states, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.” At the times of its writing, the Colonies were attempting to establish a unified country without the discriminative practices and oppression suffered by those who came to these shores for a new life. When first establishing the Colonies, church and government were not entirely separate entities. There were established churches in most colonies and very little, if any, religious tolerance existed. As the Colonies grew and a greater number of established religious groups immigrated to this country, it became evident that the church and the government could no longer function as conjoined entities and that the government would be representative of the entire nation’s peoples regardless of their religious beliefs.
Colonial churches petitioned the President for decisions and clarification. In his letter to the Danbury Baptist Association in Connecticut, President Thomas Jefferson created the metaphor of a “wall between the church and state”. Many believe that Jefferson’s words inadvertently created the controversy which exists today. Yet it was not until 1947 that the actual phrase, “separation of church and state”, was put in writing. Since the signing of the Constitution, it became the responsibility of the United States Supreme Court to interpret and rule on issues related to the First Amendment. The first such ruling of significance related to church and state took place in 1947. In the case, Everson vs. Board of Education, the court ruled in favor of the Board of Education in Ewing, New Jersey, stating that it was not unconstitutional to use a percentage of property taxes to pay for student transportation to Parochial schools. Justice Hugo Black referenced the wall between church and state and stated, “That wall must be kept high and impregnable.” Since this landmark ruling, there have been innumerable challenges to the first amendment regarding the separation of church and state, most of which have ended up with the Supreme Court.
As agents of the government, public schools must uphold the aspect of the first amendment which states that no government may establish a preferred church or religion. Extremists would have everyone believe that this means that any mention of God, religion, holidays, or spirituality is strictly forbidden. These extremist groups have gone so far as to petition textbook publishers to eradicate any words or material related to religion from all public school textbooks. If these groups have their way, the Pledge of Allegiance would be sanitized by removing the words “under God”. The Pledge of Allegiance has previously come under scrutiny, and the courts ruled that although one must stand during the Pledge of Allegiance, no one can be compelled to recite the words. This ruling provides balance so as no one person need violate their personal religious beliefs. Each individual’s religious freedom is protected.
Absolute separation of church and state cannot be achieved except at the expense of knowledge. Our world’s history, literature, music, art, theater, and dance have all emerged from a basis in religion. To eliminate the study of these subjects would be tantamount to programmed ignorance and would cripple our youth in terms of their ability to compete in a global society. Additionally, our understanding of the many peoples who make up the citizens of this country would be severely reduced. Even though the area of the humanities would be most affected by a complete separation from religion, mathematics and the science would be adversely affected as well, since the evolution of these subjects were heavily influenced by both the church and the government. Our entire educational system would be irreparably damaged if the extremists were ever successful in fully separating church and state in public schools.
Everyone in this country is entitled to certain rights and equality, however we are not, in fact, exactly the same. We are not a nation of clones, and to think that we should be is the antithesis of the very foundation of this nation. The delicate balance between church and state that has developed over time is evidence of these foundations successfully at work. We have choices in this country, and where many citizens of other countries around the world do not, we can choose the type of education we want our children to receive. If we believe and support a more secular education, then our children attend public schools. If we desire a stronger religious orientation to education, we have the option to send our children to private religious schools. The public school makes every effort to accommodate the wide variety of religions and ethnicities of the communities which it serves.
Schools, neighborhoods, families, all of society have seen a dramatic rise in violence, offensive language, and overtly vulgar behaviors. Much of this can be attributed to media bombardment and informational technology which has created a culture of acceptance of what used to be considered unheard of or strictly taboo. Those who vehemently oppose the separation of church and state would argue that lack of religion, or at the very least spirituality, in schools is partially to blame for the current state of society. This group would argue that religion as a part of a student’s daily school experience would foster a more highly moral climate and that these expectations would spill over into life outside the school. These groups would argue for established time for prayer in school as well as more teaching based directly on religious tenets. This style of education is readily available to those who attend religious schools, but how could a public school establish religious practices when it must be representative of all the people, some of whom are non-religious? The answer is, it cannot. Even if one agrees that children need a stronger moral education, it must be done in such a way as to remain neutral in terms of established religious practices. Today, many public schools have adopted “Character Education” to combat the overall moral decline of our society.
The separation of church and state we have in 2010 is likely not exactly what our fore fathers envisioned when they established the foundations of a new nation, but the system of balance that was also created still works even today. The Supreme Court serves its function by interpreting each individual case and thereby establishes the status quo until a newer situation arises. This was the case, is the case, and will be the case. Perhaps the phrase “separation of church and state” should be re-coined. Perhaps the “balance between church and state” would be more accurate.
The Emphasis for STEM in Education
According to both the National Research Council and the National Science Foundation, the science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) fields are considered the core technological underpinnings of an advanced society. The American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics believes that “STEM education in our nation’s classrooms provides the critical foundation needed for our future national security and economic competitiveness.” As evidenced by President Obama’s recently announced “Educate to Innovate” campaign and the $250 million public-private initiative to recruit and train more STEM teachers (this is on top of the more than $3 billion the federal government already provides for STEM education each year across a range of agencies), it is obvious that our current government also strongly believes education in the STEM fields is essential to remain globally competitive and secure. Information Technology Association of America (ITAA) President Harris N. Miller emphasized that “increasing global competition from countries like India and China is fueling major concerns about how well the United States is developing the pipeline of skilled STEM workers.” Unfortunately, the National Science Teachers Association reported in 2008, that nearly half of all students studying engineering and science at the post-secondary level leave the major for other pursuits because they are not adequately prepared in the K-12 classroom to meet the demands of the college classrooms. The National Academy of Science states that we will eventually lose quality jobs to other nations, resulting in a lower standard of living, reduction in tax revenues, and weaker domestic market for goods and services. Eric A. Hanushek of Stanford University suggested that reforming STEM education efforts would not only strengthen our country’s place in the technological world by encouraging more students to seek STEM professions, but that such reform would also lead to great economic improvement. He projected that the United States gross domestic product (GDP) would be 4% higher in 2025, and 10% higher in 2040, than it would be without such reform. This increase would be enough to cover the annual cost of K-12 public education.
I recall Dr. Dugan mentioning during our first class, “For the first time in the history of America, you cannot have low skills and get a high paying job.” Apparently the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics also agrees, predicting nine of the top ten fastest growing occupations through 2016 requiring a bachelor’s degree will be STEM related. With so many of tomorrow’s jobs having a background in the STEM fields, and increasing levels of globalization, it is hardly a surprise that there is such an emphasis for STEM in education.
Although I personally feel as though innovation is paramount in a 21st Century global economy and that the STEM fields are the backbone of concepts that drive job creation, economic growth and prosperity in a global economy, one could argue that there are drawbacks to an increased focus on such fields. All of the emphasis on STEM fields may come at the expense of other areas in education. Unfortunately, as every educator knows, it is nearly impossible to add material to a curriculum without subtracting something else. In future years we may find this country’s language and reading skills suffering, and/or weakness in the related arts subjects due to a reallocation of time and money towards STEM classes. Already financially suffering art and music education programs would surely deteriorate further with additional funding being directed towards STEM programs. One could also argue that just as everyone cannot be a professional athlete, not everyone is capable or has the aptitude to find success in the STEM fields.
Just as President Dwight D. Eisenhower established the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) in 1958 and rallied a nation around its space program, it is time for a renewed push towards the STEM fields, as they are becoming the universal language of the global marketplace. Only the future will tell if we have put enough of an emphasis on STEM education today.
I recall Dr. Dugan mentioning during our first class, “For the first time in the history of America, you cannot have low skills and get a high paying job.” Apparently the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics also agrees, predicting nine of the top ten fastest growing occupations through 2016 requiring a bachelor’s degree will be STEM related. With so many of tomorrow’s jobs having a background in the STEM fields, and increasing levels of globalization, it is hardly a surprise that there is such an emphasis for STEM in education.
Although I personally feel as though innovation is paramount in a 21st Century global economy and that the STEM fields are the backbone of concepts that drive job creation, economic growth and prosperity in a global economy, one could argue that there are drawbacks to an increased focus on such fields. All of the emphasis on STEM fields may come at the expense of other areas in education. Unfortunately, as every educator knows, it is nearly impossible to add material to a curriculum without subtracting something else. In future years we may find this country’s language and reading skills suffering, and/or weakness in the related arts subjects due to a reallocation of time and money towards STEM classes. Already financially suffering art and music education programs would surely deteriorate further with additional funding being directed towards STEM programs. One could also argue that just as everyone cannot be a professional athlete, not everyone is capable or has the aptitude to find success in the STEM fields.
Just as President Dwight D. Eisenhower established the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) in 1958 and rallied a nation around its space program, it is time for a renewed push towards the STEM fields, as they are becoming the universal language of the global marketplace. Only the future will tell if we have put enough of an emphasis on STEM education today.
Defining and Understanding the Drawbacks and Challenges of Global Competition with Regard to Public Education
Edward Callinan
Fundamentals of Curriculum Development
Dr. Jay Dugan
23 March, 2010
A Definition of Education and Global Competition
Fundamentals of Curriculum Development has taught us about the four existing educational philosophies - essentialism, perennialism, progressivism, and reconstructivism. But perennialism, in particular, might best help define the relationship between global competition and public education. In the text Curriculum: Foundations, Principles, and Issues (2009), Ornstein and Hunkins note that this philosophy might "be behind some educators' and members of the public's demand that American students must be number one in the world." But the two authors concede that "the West is in decline, a decline that must be addressed." (p. 41)
To place the relationship of the aspects into a historical perspective, Ornstein and Hunkins cite A Nation at Risk (which appeared in the mid-1980s), National Goals for Education (initially published in 1990 and revised in 1994 and 1998), and NCLB (published in 2001). All of the aforementioned called for "improved U.S. education and emphasized international "competition" and "survival." ... The emphasis is on academic and economic productivity. The vitality of the U.S. economy and U.S. political hegemony are linked to strengthening the nation's educational institutions." (p. 45)
Thus a basic definition for the educational issue of the relationship between public education and global competition has been provided. But to fully understand the complexity of this issue, one must analyze potential benefits and potential pitfalls of directing the entire U.S. educational system on one that has a global competition focus.
The initial reaction for a majority of the public would be that there could be no drawbacks to having an educational philosophy that keeps the focus of global competition ever-present. This a challenging notion to propose. Therefore, we will attempt give fair balance to both sides of this issue by at least studying the potential drawbacks first.
Drawbacks of Global Competition As A Determinant of Public Education Policy
First, the idea of treating public education as an arm of economic policy is in direct juxtaposition to the theoretical concept of educational policy. In theory, U.S. educational policy would be written with the exclusive intention of educating the domestic population so that it might be knowledgeable, survive, and even thrive. The money that is spent on public education and the manner in which that education is conducted would have solely those goals in mind. Such goals are not necessarily inextricably linked with an eye towards the way in which other countries are educating, surviving, and thriving. But incorporating global competition as a determinant of public education does exactly that.
Second, basing American educational curriculum on differentials in standardized test results of other countries is questionable, as standardized tests are susceptible to the critique that they do not illustrate creativity, initiative, etc. In his article "The New Untouchables (Published on 20 October 2009) New York Times columnist Thomas L. Friedman cited Harvard University labor expert Lawrence Katz's observation that "those at the high end of the bottom half — high school grads in construction or manufacturing — have been clobbered by global competition and immigration." But Friedman countered, stating that "those who have some interpersonal skills — the salesperson who can deal with customers face to face or the home contractor who can help you redesign your kitchen without going to an architect — have done well.” Even if creativity and initiative are removed from the questioning of American public education's impact on its students, there is still the concern that standardized tests cannot even accurately measure practical skill levels and potential, as standardized tests constitute such a limited amount of the American student's school year schedule.
Third, there are people who are skeptical that the lack of skills is responsible for the nation's employment problems. Jared Bernstein of the Economic Policy Institute testifies to the Committee on Education and the Workforce of the U.S. House of Representatives in 2004. In this testimony, Bernstein posed the question: Is there any evidence that the lack of skill is responsible for our current employment problems? "Can the unusually weak jobs recovery be explained by the lack of skill or education of the American workforce?"(testimony given on 11 March 2004). Bernstein's response: "The answer to the first question is an unequivocal “no”—the weak jobs’ performance of the last few years is wholly a demand-side phenomenon. The problem is not the lack of skilled workers; it’s the lack of jobs." Bernstein elaborates on this response, stating that the problem is not one of lack of skills and knowledge thanks to public education, but an unwillingness to pay the high wages demanded by those American workers. Bernstein elucidates in his testimony, clarifying that:
what differentiates foreign workers from their domestic
counterparts is thus less a skills’ gap than a gaping wage
differential. By offshoring skilled and semi-skilled white collar
jobs, U.S. firms are sending a clear market signal that these
offshore workers are worth the investment made by American firms.
Note that throughout this recent period when offshoring concerns
have surfaced, firms in affected industries, such as information
technology and financial services, have been able to maintain
historically high rates of productivity and profitability even
while domestic hiring has stalled or fallen. Thus, while the extent
of the phenomenon is unknown, it is highly likely to increase further,
as will the attendant anxiety it generates among domestic workers in
affected sectors.
4. Finally, the manifested fear that the United States is falling farther behind the world in terms of global competition has impacted public education by proposing that all citizens should be in college preparatory classes in high school and should definitely attend college beyond. But the reality is that not all people are academic. This results in an enormous drain of tax dollars, as students leaving high school are made to believe that they must attend college, as opposed to developing a skill or trade. This has resulted in millions of American students needing to take remedial classes at four year and two year colleges alike. Moreover, the same students that take remedial classes at the beginning of their college tenure statistically do not complete their degree program anyway.
Public Education Challenges Presented By Global Competition
Despite the arguable drawbacks of global competition listed above, it would be difficult to deny that the challenge of global competition is still not one of great concern to the United States and a challenge that needs to be met in some form.
Now that employers have a global workforce to draw from, competition for U.S. jobs comes from around the world. Such a reality was elicited by New Jersey Deputy Commissioner Willa Spicer in 2008, when she asserted that “For the first time in the history of America, you cannot have low skills and get a high paying job.” New York Times columnist resounded the same concern, citing an interview conducted with Todd Martin, a former global executive with PepsiCo and Kraft Europe and now an international investor. Martin suggested that:
Our education failure is the largest contributing factor to the
decline of the American worker’s global competitiveness,
particularly at the middle and bottom ranges... This loss of
competitiveness has weakened the American worker’s production of
wealth, precisely when technology brought global competition much
closer to home. So over a decade, American workers have maintained
their standard of living by borrowing and overconsuming vis-à-vis
their real income. When the Great Recession wiped out all the credit
and asset bubbles that made that overconsumption possible, it left
too many American workers not only deeper in debt than ever, but out
of a job and lacking the skills to compete globally.
Milton Friedman, a senior research fellow at the Hoover Institution and winner of the Nobel Prize for Economics in 1976, cautioned of the challenges now faced by the United States as long ago as 1995. On 19 February, 1995, Friedman wrote an article for the Washington Post, indicating that the public education system in American needed to undergo and drastic overhaul to face the challenges of global competition. Friedman wrote that "A radical reconstruction of the educational system has the potential of staving off social conflict while at the same time strengthening the growth in living standards made possible by the new technology and the increasingly global market. In my view, such a radical reconstruction can be achieved only by privatizing a major segment of the educational system--i.e., by enabling a private, for-profit industry to develop that will provide a wide variety of learning opportunities and offer effective competition to public schools." And though Friedman suggests that public education itself is part of the problem, he concedes that it is also part of the solution. Again, Friedman:
Our educational system has been adding to the tendency to
stratification. Yet it is the only major force in sight capable
of offsetting that tendency. Innate intelligence undoubtedly
plays a major role in determining the opportunities open to
individuals. Yet it is by no means the only human quality that
is important, as numerous examples demonstrate. Unfortunately,
our current educational system does little to enable either
low-IQ or high-IQ individuals to make the most of other
qualities. Yet that is the way to offset the tendencies to
stratification. A greatly improved educational system can do
more than anything else to limit the harm to our social
stability from a permanent and large underclass.
Conclusion
Regardless of the exact number of drawbacks of using global competition as a determinant of public education policy or the number of challenges that global competition poses for public education policy, it is certain that the world economy has been permanently altered in the last half century. The urgency of this crisis for the United States specifically can be debated, and the potential difficulties posed by facing the challenges of global competition can certainly be daunting. But the United States must recognize, just as every other nation - developed and under-developed - must recognize that whosoever does not address global competition does so at his peril.
Fundamentals of Curriculum Development
Dr. Jay Dugan
23 March, 2010
A Definition of Education and Global Competition
Fundamentals of Curriculum Development has taught us about the four existing educational philosophies - essentialism, perennialism, progressivism, and reconstructivism. But perennialism, in particular, might best help define the relationship between global competition and public education. In the text Curriculum: Foundations, Principles, and Issues (2009), Ornstein and Hunkins note that this philosophy might "be behind some educators' and members of the public's demand that American students must be number one in the world." But the two authors concede that "the West is in decline, a decline that must be addressed." (p. 41)
To place the relationship of the aspects into a historical perspective, Ornstein and Hunkins cite A Nation at Risk (which appeared in the mid-1980s), National Goals for Education (initially published in 1990 and revised in 1994 and 1998), and NCLB (published in 2001). All of the aforementioned called for "improved U.S. education and emphasized international "competition" and "survival." ... The emphasis is on academic and economic productivity. The vitality of the U.S. economy and U.S. political hegemony are linked to strengthening the nation's educational institutions." (p. 45)
Thus a basic definition for the educational issue of the relationship between public education and global competition has been provided. But to fully understand the complexity of this issue, one must analyze potential benefits and potential pitfalls of directing the entire U.S. educational system on one that has a global competition focus.
The initial reaction for a majority of the public would be that there could be no drawbacks to having an educational philosophy that keeps the focus of global competition ever-present. This a challenging notion to propose. Therefore, we will attempt give fair balance to both sides of this issue by at least studying the potential drawbacks first.
Drawbacks of Global Competition As A Determinant of Public Education Policy
First, the idea of treating public education as an arm of economic policy is in direct juxtaposition to the theoretical concept of educational policy. In theory, U.S. educational policy would be written with the exclusive intention of educating the domestic population so that it might be knowledgeable, survive, and even thrive. The money that is spent on public education and the manner in which that education is conducted would have solely those goals in mind. Such goals are not necessarily inextricably linked with an eye towards the way in which other countries are educating, surviving, and thriving. But incorporating global competition as a determinant of public education does exactly that.
Second, basing American educational curriculum on differentials in standardized test results of other countries is questionable, as standardized tests are susceptible to the critique that they do not illustrate creativity, initiative, etc. In his article "The New Untouchables (Published on 20 October 2009) New York Times columnist Thomas L. Friedman cited Harvard University labor expert Lawrence Katz's observation that "those at the high end of the bottom half — high school grads in construction or manufacturing — have been clobbered by global competition and immigration." But Friedman countered, stating that "those who have some interpersonal skills — the salesperson who can deal with customers face to face or the home contractor who can help you redesign your kitchen without going to an architect — have done well.” Even if creativity and initiative are removed from the questioning of American public education's impact on its students, there is still the concern that standardized tests cannot even accurately measure practical skill levels and potential, as standardized tests constitute such a limited amount of the American student's school year schedule.
Third, there are people who are skeptical that the lack of skills is responsible for the nation's employment problems. Jared Bernstein of the Economic Policy Institute testifies to the Committee on Education and the Workforce of the U.S. House of Representatives in 2004. In this testimony, Bernstein posed the question: Is there any evidence that the lack of skill is responsible for our current employment problems? "Can the unusually weak jobs recovery be explained by the lack of skill or education of the American workforce?"(testimony given on 11 March 2004). Bernstein's response: "The answer to the first question is an unequivocal “no”—the weak jobs’ performance of the last few years is wholly a demand-side phenomenon. The problem is not the lack of skilled workers; it’s the lack of jobs." Bernstein elaborates on this response, stating that the problem is not one of lack of skills and knowledge thanks to public education, but an unwillingness to pay the high wages demanded by those American workers. Bernstein elucidates in his testimony, clarifying that:
what differentiates foreign workers from their domestic
counterparts is thus less a skills’ gap than a gaping wage
differential. By offshoring skilled and semi-skilled white collar
jobs, U.S. firms are sending a clear market signal that these
offshore workers are worth the investment made by American firms.
Note that throughout this recent period when offshoring concerns
have surfaced, firms in affected industries, such as information
technology and financial services, have been able to maintain
historically high rates of productivity and profitability even
while domestic hiring has stalled or fallen. Thus, while the extent
of the phenomenon is unknown, it is highly likely to increase further,
as will the attendant anxiety it generates among domestic workers in
affected sectors.
4. Finally, the manifested fear that the United States is falling farther behind the world in terms of global competition has impacted public education by proposing that all citizens should be in college preparatory classes in high school and should definitely attend college beyond. But the reality is that not all people are academic. This results in an enormous drain of tax dollars, as students leaving high school are made to believe that they must attend college, as opposed to developing a skill or trade. This has resulted in millions of American students needing to take remedial classes at four year and two year colleges alike. Moreover, the same students that take remedial classes at the beginning of their college tenure statistically do not complete their degree program anyway.
Public Education Challenges Presented By Global Competition
Despite the arguable drawbacks of global competition listed above, it would be difficult to deny that the challenge of global competition is still not one of great concern to the United States and a challenge that needs to be met in some form.
Now that employers have a global workforce to draw from, competition for U.S. jobs comes from around the world. Such a reality was elicited by New Jersey Deputy Commissioner Willa Spicer in 2008, when she asserted that “For the first time in the history of America, you cannot have low skills and get a high paying job.” New York Times columnist resounded the same concern, citing an interview conducted with Todd Martin, a former global executive with PepsiCo and Kraft Europe and now an international investor. Martin suggested that:
Our education failure is the largest contributing factor to the
decline of the American worker’s global competitiveness,
particularly at the middle and bottom ranges... This loss of
competitiveness has weakened the American worker’s production of
wealth, precisely when technology brought global competition much
closer to home. So over a decade, American workers have maintained
their standard of living by borrowing and overconsuming vis-à-vis
their real income. When the Great Recession wiped out all the credit
and asset bubbles that made that overconsumption possible, it left
too many American workers not only deeper in debt than ever, but out
of a job and lacking the skills to compete globally.
Milton Friedman, a senior research fellow at the Hoover Institution and winner of the Nobel Prize for Economics in 1976, cautioned of the challenges now faced by the United States as long ago as 1995. On 19 February, 1995, Friedman wrote an article for the Washington Post, indicating that the public education system in American needed to undergo and drastic overhaul to face the challenges of global competition. Friedman wrote that "A radical reconstruction of the educational system has the potential of staving off social conflict while at the same time strengthening the growth in living standards made possible by the new technology and the increasingly global market. In my view, such a radical reconstruction can be achieved only by privatizing a major segment of the educational system--i.e., by enabling a private, for-profit industry to develop that will provide a wide variety of learning opportunities and offer effective competition to public schools." And though Friedman suggests that public education itself is part of the problem, he concedes that it is also part of the solution. Again, Friedman:
Our educational system has been adding to the tendency to
stratification. Yet it is the only major force in sight capable
of offsetting that tendency. Innate intelligence undoubtedly
plays a major role in determining the opportunities open to
individuals. Yet it is by no means the only human quality that
is important, as numerous examples demonstrate. Unfortunately,
our current educational system does little to enable either
low-IQ or high-IQ individuals to make the most of other
qualities. Yet that is the way to offset the tendencies to
stratification. A greatly improved educational system can do
more than anything else to limit the harm to our social
stability from a permanent and large underclass.
Conclusion
Regardless of the exact number of drawbacks of using global competition as a determinant of public education policy or the number of challenges that global competition poses for public education policy, it is certain that the world economy has been permanently altered in the last half century. The urgency of this crisis for the United States specifically can be debated, and the potential difficulties posed by facing the challenges of global competition can certainly be daunting. But the United States must recognize, just as every other nation - developed and under-developed - must recognize that whosoever does not address global competition does so at his peril.
Survival of the Fittest in Education and Technology: How fit is the U.S.?
Noelle Bisinger Spring 2010
Fundamentals of Curriculum Development
Survival of the Fittest in Education and Technology: How fit is the
As adults we have become accustomed to being quickly outdated by rapidly changing technology. It is not uncommon to be bypassed in the technological world by I-phone-using, Wii-playing, instant-messaging youth. It’s almost impossible to believe though, that despite the way our nation’s young people have mastered cellphones, computers, video games, and other technologies, we are falling further and further beyond our international competitors in the areas of technological awareness, knowledge-base, and skills required for future job markets. “The
A transition from an industrial-based economy to a service-providing economy has made factory-based careers in the
Some researchers insist that if we continue be ignorant of international progress and our current status in the world market, we will easily be left behind. “In fact, some countries are already way ahead of the
Foreign competitors have already begun to narrow the gap between the
Many states have added technology skills into the curriculum since the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) set the goal of having all students technology-literate by 8th grade. NCLB, however, required states to figure out how to achieve the goal themselves. About half the states set their own requirements, which are largely based on recommendations provided by national organizations. The bottom line is that American students are not getting consistent and applicable instruction that can prepare them for the future. Schools are failing to engage kids in technology systems as creative or productive tools.
Fierce international competition will continue to change the world market and impact the standing of the
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)