Monday, August 29, 2005

Why does education in America suck?

Ever since my childhood (I'll admit it wasn't that long ago), I've occassionally seen statistics about how the children of this country are falling behind other countries in terms of academic metrics like math literacy, reading literacy, and have always wondered how this figure could be real in a country as prosperous as the United States. As I was reading Bob Herbert, I had this thought: what is it about being a prosperous nation makes me think our education should be any better?

We're prosperous now, but that just means the adults that run this world today were well-educated when they were growing up. I have no statistics from the 50s, 60s, and 70s (and I doubt that objective ones are available for comparison between the USSR and the US), but I'd venture to say that the Cold-War bred a pervasive national pressure to be better educated. In this day and age, the pressure to succeed just isn't strong enough to motivate children to gain the skills we (as adults) see as necessary to be a successful contributor to society. Could it be that our country has gone complacent? And if so, will programs like No Child Left Behind effectively address this attitude of children?

Personally, I think that No Child Left Behind is at least a bit mis-guided. While it may have been true in the past that US kids were falling behind because standard education was not available to all, I think the tide may have turned (I try not to use the phrase "tipping point" because man, everyone and their mom uses that term). Nowadays the education deficit shows up more in the attitudes of the children that we are trying to teach. They understand that the government says they need to learn how to read, but they don't know why it's so important.

How can we express to children these days the importance of education without fabricating a comeptitor or "enemy"?

I think the core concept here is competition. Has the competition that makes capitalism so great been missing from education? I can't decide. The topic has been broached before when the Soviets fell and the US was the only remaining superpower, but I wonder if the education system is showing us the effects of the lone-superpower-syndrome.

If we need more competition, I suggest we further segment the school system, and I suggest it be done in middle and high schools. I have personally learned most in the transitions to a new school, into middle school, into high school, and into college.

Might it be beneficial to throw our kids into new systems with clean slates in which they can experiment and re-invent themselves? Kids these days are all about reinvention, why not give them a convenient vehicle to do it with? 10th graders should graduate from Frosh-Soph high school and move to a different, more mature high school for 11th and 12th graders.

How about making each school stage competitive? Of course this might suggest the "bad kids" go to one school and the "good kids" go to another, very likely causing the "bad kids" to feel alienated. So instead of measuring academic performance, I suggest each school should develop its own culture, and to have a different environment. Like a simplified college system, or like Gryffindor and Slytherin, for example. No school would be "better" than another, they would just be different.

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

<< Home