Why I’m quitting teaching part 11/11: Five ways in which mainstream education doesn't 'fit' society
View this post on Hive: Why I’m quitting teaching part 11/11: Five ways in which mainstream education doesn't 'fit' society
I've moved to Hive, along with most other people, following Justin Sun's takeover of Steem in the Spring of 2020. I believe hive is a lot more decentralised than Steem!
I agree with your points however it is difficult to imagine an alternative at scale. Small scale homeschooling may work but most do not have the ability to teach multiple subjects at multiple levels to their kids (and most don’t have the time). Additionally, society expects you to have been through the mainstream education system, so when applying for jobs etc you are expected to have standard qualifications. Experience is more important later in careers but initially you are expected to have a certain standard level of education!
I'll concede that kids are better off with some kind of education rather than no education! I just think we need much more flexibility around the school week, and maybe lots more people involved in the educational process!
I will begin by stating this is a solid post, with a lot of thought and insight. I agree with everything you say here (I teach at the college level, I recognize many of the same problems since I inherit students from the public school system, but I also have two of my own kids and I’m involved in their school, AND coach high school athletics. While I’m giving his long self intro :), my wife is a high school guidance counselor, so you could say we are fairly immersed). Stamdardized testing is so problematic, but I’ve heard first hand testimony from people in the rural US that say it was a god send. Their take is that their schools didn’t get the attention they needed until the testing showed how far behind they were. So that one purpose of them kind of softened by anti-testing attitude. They do serve a role, but there are so many other problems associated with testing that it’s still hard to rationalize the widespread use and overemphasis.
Large class size is less of an issue to me. I grew up going to an overcrowded school, but we had great teachers and a lot of supportive families so it was fine. But I’m places with higher levels of at-risk kids, class size is more important. I just think there are other issues that are much more pressing.
The daily schedule is perhaps the most damning thing I see and that I experienced as a kid. We could be way more creative about how to use the school day!
Age cohorts is an interesting point. I never really thought about that before. Along with a national curriculum, I wonder if those are both things that are just practical in an publicly provided system.
And I guess that’s my main point to make in this comment. How do we change these things in a public system? I know in the UK (from a couple of friends only, so not really sure) that people are less adverse to taxes, so perhaps there is more flexibility to fund more creative (and expensive) programs, but in the US it is a constant struggle to get people to support public education. My attitude is that we are more or less stuck with the current sustem(s) but we need to keep fighting to improve them, in most cases from within. If you quit teaching, will you be able to have an influence on positive change? I know that’s a very loaded question, as I go crazy with the slow change in higher ed! But at the same time, I see that at my kids’ elementary school the teachers are way more creative, and curriculum is much improved, compared to my experience 40 years ago.
As someone who is very involved in my town, schools, and local politics, I always wonder how we can best move forward toward ideals like what you’re hinting at. I know your purpose here is to articulate the problems, but how do overhaul the system?
I like your point about the testing being helpful for showing how behind some schools are - it's not a point I'd thought about before. However, it also leads to certain schools "teaching the test" and skewing the results badly.
It would be wise for economically-disadvantaged schools to acknowledge this fact and then tackle it from a different point of view, i.e. the point of view of helping students achieve what they can rather than trying to conform the whole school to the same standards of more advantaged areas.
I graduated from a poor, rural high school in Oregon. We had enough students to get most of the activities we wanted to do. Because it was a small school, students had more flexibility to do what they wanted to do. You didn't have to be a perfect cheerleader or and NBA-quality basketball player in order to get onto the Varsity squad. The "talented and gifted" had programs too though most frequently, those students simply participated in more things and flourished in their own ways.
However, no school can do everything, and that's even more true for the poor, rural school. I was not pushed enough in high school - not in the right way, anyway, and despite being a gifted student myself, I wasn't prepared to have to work for my grades and struggled immensely in college - it was a shock to the system.
What hurt my school the most?
There was a tax reform measure that was passed about the time I graduated which diverted our property taxes to the central government who then decided where the money would go. Guess what? It wasn't to the rural schools. Although my school's sports program has done exceedingly well in the past decade or so (the community places huge value in it, after all) - I went to school with the guy who is currently one of the winningest baseball coaches in Oregon history - the arts programs have pretty much died. It's very sad.
I don't know if it's as bad in other states, but that's what happened in Oregon - it's hard to recover from that kind of blow.
I live near Philadelphia, and teach at Community College of Philadelphia, where I work with a lot of students from the city's school district. They have lost most athletic and arts programs. It's a terrible situation right now, and by the look of the mass walkouts happening around the country, I would guess it has happened everywhere.
So sad, and so short-sighted. :-(
Yes, the one-size-fits-all formula doesn't work for many.
My husband and I often talk about the fact that "the system" tends to fail both ends of the spectrum at the same time. We were both at the bright end of the spectrum. While I was better at not rocking the boat, he was bored stiff and branded a trouble-maker. It was years down the road before someone decided to give him an IQ test. (Actually, there's a charming scene in the Icelandic film "Noi Albinoi" which focuses on that problem.)
My opinion is that a Montesorri-ish system is the only way that one can deal with all levels at the same time - but even that has its serious drawbacks. (Not to mention the fact that it requires a lower student-to-teacher ratio.)
My ex-husband attended a school of that style in Minneapolis. He had very high opinions of the school, but my observations was that the school simply magnified the parental attitudes. Hence, the children of parents who cared about their education did extremely well in that school. The ones whose parents did not care failed miserably.
This seems to support homeschooling again - it's the parents that matter most!
Still, for many, the system is their only option and it's so sad to see the system failing those who need it most.
That sounds scandalous, and I had no idea there was a rural-urban divide in Oregon. Is that all those 'socialists' in Portland?
Yes, the rural-urban divide is actually quite strong - though the coast is being gradually taken over by city-slickers wishing to retire nearer the beaches - locals are having trouble trying to afford to live there. I grew up on the north Oregon coast, and I have to realize now that barring some financial miracle, we will not be able to afford to retire there ourselves - despite the fact that I have deeper roots there than any other place.
I won't place labels on the people who make the decision (I hate politics) - but the main urban (and very liberal) area is down the Willamette (will-AM-ette) Valley - Portland down to Salem and on to Eugene, primarily (Corvallis, is more conservative as the ag and tech college.)
East of the Cascades, with the notable exception of Bend and Prineville (Facebook HQ now), is all very agricultural wherever it's possible to farm, anyway, it's also one of the most severe rain shadows in the world. A lot of ranching country over there - and therefore quite conservative as well. They even have a different accent than those west of the Cascades!
Thanks for the very detailed comment, excellent questions, I'll reply fully later today, just wanted to briefly say thanks for now, I do appreciate dialogue!
I will quickly say this, the secondary enrollment stats suggest the US has 'third world' levels of school enrollment, I assume that's due to some states allowing parents the freedom to 'home educate' their kids - I know states vs Fed is a big issue with many millions of Americans, so it sounds like quite a lot of US citizens are already voting with their feet. In the UK practically every child (99%) attends a state school (or at least 99% of the 93% who aren't privately educated).
Great comment, will reply in more depth later,
Karl.
Sounds like the numbers are now up around 27,000 students being home-educated in England. (I didn't see what numbers might be in Scotland, Wales or Northern Ireland.) I don't know what percentage that makes without further research. It also sounded like the numbers have doubled in recent years.
I home educated off and on while I lived in the UK.
My eldest wasn't ready at the age of (barely) 4 - August birthday.
Second wasn't ready at 4 1/2...
And thus it continued.
After my divorce, I did put them into school, but pulled them out again after our local catchment school failed an OFSTED and then a couple weeks later got flying colors from the C of E version - so, that was okay then, they didn't need to fix anything...
I dislike the GCSE system, as a huge pressure to get one test perfect - as the be-all-and-end-all about whether they did okay in school or not.
I'm glad that home education has picked up steam so much. (I started home educating in about 2000 for my eldest and was doing it off and on until I left the UK in 2013.) But I'm concerned about the constant attempts by the government to rein in all the rebels. I think they need to concentrate on fixing the state schools first.
Right now, I'm still home educating my youngest children, one of whom is not academically gifted. Her gifts are elsewhere - arts, computing, things like that. Not to mention that her personal schedule is incompatible with the "system."
Thanks for the stats. Oddly enough I remember being on an updating A level sociology course about 12 years ago and I met someone who was just starting her PhD on home education, I remember at the time thinking that was clever as there was a research gap in a growth market, checking up on her research is something I must get around to doing.
I know exactly what you mean about 'their schedule'... we're doing revision ATM, and I can totally understand it if a student wants to revise in their own way and totally ignore me. In fact, I let many of them do just that. Problem is, if I got caught doing that... why I've gtg!
I do wonder how the government get their teeth into the home educators....
I wish I could afford to do an online degree - problem is, I have too many interests and I can't stick to any one focus for long enough to get there! Had I gone that route, I'd probably have 3 or 4 totally unrelated degrees right now and still not know what I really want to do when I grow up!
Heck, I've even had research projects in mind that I would have loved to do! The thing that would have made the biggest difference to me as a student... had someone sat down with me, not give me a stupid aptitude test - I have too many aptitudes! - but help me work out a career path that would encompass 2/3 of my strong interests - and help me find that one career that I've still never heard of, but would have suited me better than anything else... like finding the passion, but better.
I once sat with a solicitor in Wiltshire who told me that he'd hire a home-educated person any day! His reasoning was that he wouldn't have to worry about what the person would be doing. Home schoolers are self-starters! I've taken that one to heart and carry it with me whenever I feel that I'm not "doing enough" - which is a common problem.
One of my sons is another that can't do the regular schedule. He would work best if I let him stay up past midnight and wake up near noon... As long as I worked with his schedule, he was a positive person and a real asset around the house. If you forced him to the normal accepted school schedule, he would be grumpy and confrontational... my most difficult child in some ways!
He's also the one who did the autonomous learning thing best...
When I first took him out of school, it took some time, but then he started reading... and reading... and reading... read through everything we had, pretty much. All of Harry Potter, Lord of the Rings... and kept going! Then he started writing - and wrote about 100 pages! Another time, he decided to learn Algebra. He literally picked up a GCSE-level textbook and just plowed through it!
This child has recently been accepted at Bristol, to study law!
Yeah, the government in home education is a hot potato in England, especially - since that one seems to be done separately in Wales and Scotland, at least.
See, the LEAs like to do these annual home visits for home educated students. Part of the excuse seems to be child welfare related, especially in the aftermath of the whole Baby P thing. Yet, it's become just that - an excuse - and the people are now fed up with it and saying "no"- they're not legally entitled. Of course, the response is - "well, we'll just make it legal" (to poorly quote Darth Sidious.)
In the US, even the most difficult states to home school do not require a home visit!
Anyway, must go and get my students back on task. :-)
I know what you mean about the degrees - personally these days I prefer to look at specific topics in depth and just apply knowledge to them.
Interesting what you say about employers..... for a similar reason I'd be reluctant to employ privately educated kids - you don't know if they're intelligent or just hot-housed!
Yes - child safety as an excuse, it's all bullshit of course, we've no idea how much abuse there is or has been, so you can't tell whether it's increasing or decreasing.
Glad your kid got into Bristol, good university that, good alternative town for him as well.
Will come back and upvote the comment once my VP's recharged!
That sounds scandalous, and I had no idea there was a rural-urban divide in Oregon. Is that all those 'socialists' in Portland?
TBH I have no idea how we change things at a systemic level - education is one of those institutions where so many people have 'stakes' in it that it's difficult to see how it's going to change!
In the short term I'd certainly say abandoning testing for primary schoolers, everyone up to at least 11 (I'm trying to be a realist here); introducing more vocational streams earlier on, say for 14 year olds; getting more people involved in education would be an idea - maybe once a week having voluntary groups, industry, pensioners, anyone really just taking over education for a day - that would allow teachers a day off to prep and reduce class sizes (if you think about the math). The last strategy would also need to be co-ordinated with a 4 day work week.
A lot of other solutions are already being done in many schools - there's lots of creativity, time for students to do individual work, we just need more of it and less pressure from the examination system.
I think being aware of its function is the first step though for sure... Danny Dorling's 'injustice' chapter on education is very interesting in this regard... basically he argues it's set up to distinguish the middle classes.
Oh, and there are those teachers who just 'shut the door and teach', but it's no country for old men for sure!
I can agree with most of what you have said here but without a greater knowledge of the differences between the UK and here (Australia), I can't be certain if I agree about the bit about the early years framework. We have a framework that by the looks of those statements sounds very similar (it covers all early learning / childcare though, not just 3+ but obviously the way these skills present in a baby is different to a 3 year old) and we mostly look at it in a positive way by seeing how the children are developing in line with these important developmental areas and also as a whole group working on helping the children to develop important skills, but to really help a child, sometimes we not only have to look at strengths and the leaps and bounds they are making with development, but also at the areas where they appear to be struggling, so we can implement activities to help them develop in those areas and likely be more happy and handle social situations etc easier both now and in the future. It is great to encourage kids to use their strengths, but we would be doing them a disservice if they were struggling in an area and we ignored it rather than helping them. It's not really about "labelling" children though, as it is to help them develop. Also when it does come to labelling (like when you go beyond this to talking about disabilities etc), that can be positive or negative depending on how it affects the person and in the case of the child, the parent. Some people finally understand and can get help and getting "labelled" is the best thing that ever happened to them and some people take labels and go down a downwards spiral because of it instead. Labels on the level you are talking like "needs help communicating with others" shouldn't be presented as a label and if they are doing that, they are doing it wrong as it should just be an area to work on, not a label, but the intention is likely good, like how I stated how we help children with both further enhancing their strengths AND improving upon the areas they are struggling with. I've worked in inclusive support before, and in that area, you really need to focus on both and you do need to identify the areas that need help so there's no way around that really. The Early Years Learning Framework doesn't require us to go academic in childcare, even preschools in childcare, which is good as academics shouldn't be forced on children early (but play based activities that happen to teach language and early maths skills are great and often get used), though some do focus on "school readiness" and push academics a bit, but it isn't required and we shouldn't be pushing it, because the Early Years of actual school should be more hands on or play based, rather than overly academic too, but unfortunately that often (not always but often) isn't the case and our curriculum from the year before year one onwards makes it hard to do so unfortunately. I love the Early Years Curriculum here and I've worked with it quite a bit (and the curriculum for OSHC too which is similar but more age appropriate for school aged children), but our actual schooling system isn't the worst but is far from the best too. We should be looking towards places like Finland.
There are alternatives though. I wouldn't touch Steiner / Waldorf with a ten foot pole, but when done properly (as the name isn't trademarked so anyone can claim they are Montessori but not really be following it correctly) Montessori aligns well with what we know about child development and is based on scientific observation of children, rather than nonsense, and some of the time even aligns better with child development than traditional schooling systems and is way more individualised, so I think Montessori, when done correctly, is a suitable alternative if people can afford it, and I'd consider sending my future children to one that is nearby us. It actually kind of sucks that both Steiner and Montessori are alternative as it means they get lumped in together, but Montessori aligns with child development and came about through observation of children and is a legitimate option but Steiner is just nonsense about stuff like spirits and it is full of racism.
Montessori works on 3 years in one classroom, rather than everyone in the classroom being the same age, and is more individualised and tends to have bigger classes than what you are describing but has a teacher and an assistant so the ratio is actually lower and having two people allows for a different teaching style. Montessori schools typically don't have homework either. The kids are expected to get stuff done though, just through an individualised plan (it's not like some say "the kids do whatever they want" - I studied part of a "Learning Management" degree at one point and they tried to crap on Montessori by saying that but not really understanding or explaining how it really worked and at that point I didn't know much about it either - the children have a lot more choice and the education is more individualised but they still meet the curriculum but in a different more flexible way and they must meet their end of the plan they and the teacher make together).
That said, people must also check these things out first. I worked a day in a Montessori childcare centre (which only really makes sense above 3 anyway as the Montessori system starts at 3 years old but centres apply it to babies anyway) and it was terrible and I didn't even agree morally with how they did some things, but that isn't a reflection on Montessori but just a reflection on that centre. As I said, it isn't regulated or trademarked. No matter what school or childcare people are sending their kids to they really need to do their research. Don't assume because a system is good, it means individual schools and childcare centres are good.
Thanks for the comment - I basically agree with what you say about soft labels and hard labels... but what makes me cynical is that, well, my parents generation generally grew up into capable adults, my generation generally grew up to be capable adults, which suggests we just don't need these frameworks!
I do accept what you say about there being very general guidelines and possibly useful though, and I guess they can be applied sensitively and have a use.
Good distinction between S and M, I was aware that the latter was 'sounder' but TBH I don't know much about the difference between the two.
You should make a whole post of this!
Not everyone in those generations turned out capable, happy and healthy. People just don't hear much about the people who didn't. You're right though, that we don't need these frameworks. They do help though (or at least the one I have dealt with does, when used well). I don't think it just comes down to if we need something. If we can improve something and that makes life better in some way, even if maybe it isn't at the point of being needed, we should do it. Sometimes we might stuff up and make stuff worse, but the worst thing we can do is not try to move forward. If a child is struggling socially for example, if intervening helps them with that issue earlier than they would solve it themselves and saves them years of struggling to make friends and maybe even being bullied, I think it is worth trying to help and prevent that harm even if they would have solved it themselves by one point, but later than if we helped. If we could successfully help them with those skills earlier (or alternatively find out there's a deeper reason for the struggle they are having), the journey would be a lot nicer for them and the journey wouldn't have hurt them along the way as much. They might still reach the same endpoint themselves where they work the social stuff out (they might not too) so you could say it isn't needed, but maybe they took a longer time to get there and they suffered socially and emotionally during the time it took to develop those skills. In that case, helping would still be the right thing to do, even with the same end result (for those skills - the end result mentally will still be different if they copped a lot of bullying etc along the way).
Also worth noting is that a lot of adults have struggled with things and then their kid get diagnosed with an actual disability or disorder and they discover they have it too, and for some finding out about themselves is the best thing that ever happened to them as they understand where their struggles come from now and they know it's not just a personality trait flaw etc and a lot of help and support (therapy, medications, psychology etc) can come to child and parent in this situation, so that shows that labels definitely can help at the disability level and also that not all adults are finding life easy and feeling capable, happy and healthy. It also doesn't help when people think certain disabilities don't even exist or only affect certain groups of people too.
I think we definitely need labels as a label can be what turns a life around for the better. As for the frameworks, we don't need them but they are a useful tool. We should be aiming to improve on things, either way, regardless of what tools we use.
I think things worked okay in the generations that are now adults, but I also think there is a lot of room for improvement. Things can work, but they can also work really well.
Maybe if labels are used sensitively they have a place!
A one sentence reply with an exclamation mark. That's concerning. I hope this hasn't turned out like Facebook conversations sometimes do, where people mistake discussion for argument. Normally people are happy to discuss on Steemit and Reddit, unlike Facebook. Either way, the response seems to be one to shut down the conversation rather than discuss.
I hope you know that I wasn't arguing with you and I'm sorry if it came across that way. I was addressing what you said in your earlier reply and discussing what I thought was an interesting topic with you. You said about whether we need or it or not, so I was agreeing with you that it wasn't needed, but simply pointing out that it can help, and also pointing out that "we all turned out alright" isn't actually true - that's actually survivor bias and some people have struggled within the groups that turned out alright. I have had absolutely awesome discussions about topics of interest, even when disagreeing to a degree with a person, on places like this and reddit where no-one is arguing or unhappy but there is a back and forth that goes like "Fair enough, I agree about .... but I think x" or "yeah but what about these factors" but unfortunately sometimes those conversations don't eventuate or people think you are arguing and either a) try and shut the conversation down or b) think you are arguing with them and attack you instead (as evidence by instead of disagreement and discussion, insults and nastiness etc). B rarely happens anywhere but facebook, but it still can happen on other platforms. Speaking of schooling, I don't know why they teach you in school how to discuss and debate (not argue) in school if not many people in the real world are interested in real discussion and even take discussion to be arguing.
I'm sorry if it came across as arguing and you felt the need to shut the conversation down. On my end we were having a discussion, so I addressed the points you said and basically said "I agree about the need thing, but we can do better and we should do better with each generation". I just wanted to discuss a point of interest and I thought that's what we doing.
Sorry if it seemed like an argument, that really wasn't the aim. It's sad to see this conversation cut off either way. Sorry if it came across wrong.
If you weren't thinking I was arguing with you, or trying to shut down the conversation, and simply didn't have much to say, then yes, I agree that used sensitively labels may have their place and I'm sorry to have misunderstood your reply.
To be honest I was just feeling a bit brain dead after a week at work and on my phone at the time as I still am which is a barrier to typ8ng. I WILL reply with a more deserving reply later this afternoon!
Have faith!
And I do tend to overuse exlamation marks!
Glad to hear it wasn't my conversation coming across the wrong way. That was what concerned me the most. I completely understand feeling brain dead and not being able to type much, I was just hoping it wasn't due to some misunderstanding of my previous comment. Glad to hear you didn't see my discussion as argument.
No no, not at all, just a bad time of the week/ term.
Bad time of the term set to continue and probably worsen for the rest of May!
Thankfully today's looking good.
I think this may be why may parents are moving to homeschooling options or alternative education sources.
If I had kids, that's certainly what I'd do! School is kind of like the Nation State: where the later is too big to deal effectively with local issues (as in out of touch) yet too small to deal with global problems, the former is too big to deal with individual level problems and too small to tackle social level problems!
If parents are in a position to 'opt-out' I commend them, of course the problem is that most parents aren't in such a position.
Thanks for the comment!
Karl.
It would be hard to homeschool if you weren't well set up as its a fulltime job to be a parent let alone add in teacher as well. Plus most households require a double income to stay above water. its a catch 22 thats for sure. We will be picking up our son in the coming months, we are adopting, we have bought a house in a good area for schools but now I do wonder if we needed to or if we just need to teach him from home.
I've seriously considered homeschooling, and even with fairly flexible schedules I am not sure my wife and I could pull it off. For now I rationalize things by thinking that school is where my kids learn to be in a room with others for several hours (although not exactly inspiring, clearly a life skill in our society), and I "homeschool" by teaching them to garden, camp, hike, fish, canoe, make home/bike/car repairs, build things, organize the house, etc, etc. :). An essential element of this approach is that we spend very, very little time looking at screens of any kind.
I think this approach is a good one. Kids should learn all those skills and we teach what we can when we can. So long as we put as much effort into that as we can then we are doing rhe best we can for our children.
THANK YOU @revisesociology for your very important post!! I live in Norway, and you have nailed my concerns with my kids' school/ shooling system bang on the head. We tend to think of the schooling systems as varying between different nations, but it seems we face many of the same difficulties/ challenges.
That's interesting to here: the standard line here is that the Scandanavian systems are little utopias (although I've mainly heard that in relation to Finland).
In general I just think our education systems are something of a throwback to the industrial era, they really need to post-modernise!
Thanks for the follow/ comment,
Karl.
We as Norwegians look to Finland as well when it comes to educational systems, but I don't think many find the Norwegian one is a utopia, and especially not the Swedish. The Swedes, who normally excel in so many areas, have really run their educational system into the ground. At least there was a lot of talk about it a couple of years ago. One can hope the situation has improved. My mother in law worked in a Swedish school, so I had quite a lot of input from her before she retired. :)
Congratulations @revisesociology, your post has been selected by the @asapers for a resteem and a feature in our brand new curation post. Issue 44
What does this mean for you? Well first an upvote from some members of the team, we are no @curie or @ocd but who is going to be unhappy with some extra upvotes. Also each post featured in the article will receive a 10% share of the SBD generated from the curation post.
Keep up the great work and please consider supporting the @asapers with an upvote and/or a resteem on the post you feature in. Please wait seven days for payout.
Your friendly @asapers
Giving back A.S.A.P
Great initiative this, I just followed yer curation trail. Sorry about the stingy upvote here, I'm running a bit low on VP!
Cheers!
All good, thanks for writing things I can curate :)
Good one! I am in the midst of the thick of this. My kids are 13 & 15. The system, despite amazing (and the odd not so amazing) teachers is broke. I agree. I've tried their home school it's wrecked too. Just trying to navagate the best I can through this. With the goal being 'happy & healthy' for everyone involved!! Fun fun fun 💙💙💙
Congratulations! Your post has been selected as a daily Steemit truffle! It is listed on rank 15 of all contributions awarded today. You can find the TOP DAILY TRUFFLE PICKS HERE.
I upvoted your contribution because to my mind your post is at least 21 SBD worth and should receive 81 votes. It's now up to the lovely Steemit community to make this come true.
I am
TrufflePig, an Artificial Intelligence Bot that helps minnows and content curators using Machine Learning. If you are curious how I select content, you can find an explanation here!Have a nice day and sincerely yours,
TrufflePig