Wednesday, August 13, 2008
The Problem With Schools: Corruption
My wife worked at a poor school in Dallas ISD, and what she observed there makes me come to the conclusion that the problem with poorer schools is the presence of rampant corruption. More money is spent per student in poor, underperforming schools than is spent in districts that do much better. Why is that? It's because of what nobody wants to talk about: corruption. The AC and the heat were often out in my wife's school, and people would come and look at things and do nothing. No doubt they were getting paid just as much to look and do nothing as others were paid in better-performing schools to actually fix those things. Who can teach under those conditions? Also, teacher authority is completely undermined by everyone. The student and parents have more authority than the teacher. Nobody believes anything the teacher says -- it is assumed that the teacher is lying, not the student, if it comes down to a confrontation between the two. Administration treats teachers terribly. This is further exacerbated by the fact that there's no discipline, and without discipline, learning will not occur. (It is no mistake that "discipline" and "disciple" -- pupil -- are derived from the same word.) Schools need to tell parents to shut up and let the teachers teach, that they either need to help their child learn, or get out of the way. Any parent who utters the words, "My child would never . . ." should be banished from the school grounds for the rest of the year.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
10 comments:
'Schools need to tell parents to shut up and let the teachers teach, that they either need to help their child learn, or get out of the way. Any parent who utters the words, "My child would never . . ." should be banished from the school grounds for the rest of the year.'
I disagree with the first sentence quoted. I don't have any children, but if my hypothetical child was taught badly or even mistreated in school, I certainly wouldn't shut up. There are bad teachers, you know.
More generally, you can hardly blame parents for feeling strongly about their children.
My sister used to teach in a third-tier school in a poor neighbourhood in Germany, and she reported the opposite problem. The parents didn't give a f*** about their childrens' educational careers. As in any German school, they had those days on which the parent could meet the teacher and talk about it - but nobody ever came; she got a lot of reading done on those days. They thus introduced a very unusual policy that the biannual school reports would not be given out to the pupils, only the parents - so that at least they'd have a chance to talk to them twice a year.
She used to say that if you look at the parents, it's remarkable how relatively well the kids are doing.
As for the second sentence quoted, parents will usually think they know their children extremely well and are hence entitled to "My child would never..."-type statements. That seems reasonable, but I think it's wrong: Children and adolescents will often behave very differently when not with their parents.
Oh, I forgot: If you have a problem with "it is assumed that the teacher is lying, not the student, if it comes down to a confrontation between the two", I suggest you move to Germany, where, in my experience, things are exactly the other way around. Which isn't ideal either.
Of course it all depends on what the parents are doing when they come to the schools. Here in the U.S., admin does nothing if parents complain about the teachers being bad teachers, but they are all over the teacher if the parents complain that the work is too much or too hard. Certainly if your child is mistreated, speak up. But being corrected is not being mistreated -- the real problem is that people don't seem to understand the difference between discipline and abuse and, as a result, have all but gotten rid of discipline. In the poorer districts here, most parents could care less too (part of the problem in those schools) -- but when they do show up, it's to make matters worse.
When I was growing up, it was always assumed that the children did what the adults accused them of having done, and the parents disciplined the children accordingly. And it wasn't all that long ago. I'm only 37. There was rarely any of this, "My child would never . . ." nonsense.
"being corrected is not being mistreated"
No disagreement there. It's weird; the conservative blogger Steve Sailer often complains about US education being to feelie-goodie. That's strange because in Germany and, I think, most of Western Europe, the US is usually being perceived as being more competitive.
I even contemplated whether maybe corporal punishment should be brought back. This is a very unfashionable thought. It was outlawed in Germany in the 1979s, and I understand why: There is wide room for abuse of that priviledge, if you want to call it that. On the other hand, I've heard lots of stories about children who just won't react to being shouted at. I really don't know what the best answer here is.
More generally, it anecdotally seems that young children (pre-adolescents), and maybe young boys in particular, look for someone to lead the pack. The "teacher" whom I remember most dearly is a soccer coach I had when I was a young boy. He had no problem singling players out for criticizm - even in front of the whole team - and he did quite a bit of shouting at us. We loved him.
Boys in particular do need guidance. They need to have an authority figure being tough on them to keep them in line and achieving what they can. The way our education has become in the U.S., it has greatly benefitted girls, but too often as the expense of boys. We see this especially in growing differences in graduation rates, earning college and advanced degrees, etc.
The fact is that at the societal level, America is very often quite competitive. That being the case, our education system is not preparing our students for such a society. "Competition" is a dirty word among educators. Nobody wants winners. Everyone gets an award for participation. You cannot correct anyone for anything for fear of hurting their feelings (you can't correct a Hispanic or African-American student's English, either, as that's not PC, though, as Carlos Mencia pointed out, nobody's going to give you a job when you pronounce it "yob"). What's worse is it seems the worst ideas are being used most frequently in the poorest schools, meaning we are making those who need education the most less educated.
I'm with you. I always loved the strictest teachers the most -- if I thought they were fair about it. I hated lenient teachers, and held them in contempt. Unfortunately, nobody coming to college nowadays has had a strict teacher, so they are all spineless mush-heads who crumple if you tell them there's a comma out of place. America won't be a competitive place for long with the way our education professors teach our teachers, and the way our teachers teach our students. We're all about self-esteem in this country -- which is why we score lowest on all academic fields, but score highest on how we feel about how much and what we know. We have students who know nothing, but think they know a lot. That is not a recipe for learning -- or knowing -- anything. It is a recipe for annoying arrogance with no substance to back it up, though.
If "competition" is a dirty word among American educators, that's unfortunate, because kids are all about competition: Who's the best soccer player? Who looks best? Who's got the coolest mobile phone? And so on and so forth. You can use that (shall we call it) instinct in education, and some teachers sometimes do.
It's good that you mention fairness in the context of strictness - the teacher I hated the most was also very strict, but he was basically an arsehole.
You'd have a hard time finding a school class around the globe who give a teacher a lot of respect for being spineless. Kids sense it very quickly, and they're going to exploit it. I remember it very well. As a consequence, I know next to nothing about chemistry (not that I mind very much).
I'm not against self-esteem - I certainly don't recommend low self-esteem as the road to happiness - but with respect to learning I've found the only proper attitude is humility. That's because you're never going to be perfect at maths or soccer or English.
But humility is unfashionable. It's not going to get you laid. It's almost a dirty word.
Oh, and sorry for the typos above. I blame my lenient teachers. ;-)
Here's the solution to corporal punishment: make it public. Have it done in front of all the other students. You won't have to use it much, then (shame works wonders), and it couldn't become abuse, since it would be done in front of so many people.
That's how it used to be done. I don't see how this solves the abuse problem.
If there are witnesses, there won't be abuse. YOu don't overdo it. More, you won't have t use it all that much because nobody wats the embarrassment of being spanked in front of everyone.
Not sure on both counts. But let's just let it rest.
Post a Comment