The Demise of Public Education (Cathryn Crawford)

Washington Dispatch ^ | September 26, 2003 | Cathryn Crawford

[Scenic Sounds]

There are two issues commonly focused on by the American people at this time in our history – the war on terror and the economy. While both have to do with our everyday and contemporary survival, there is another issue that is of deep and long-lasting importance that seldom gets the attention that it deserves – the demise of the public school system in America. Public education is fading away, and while it is doing so, it is taking a whole generation of children with it. The problem lies within the very foundation of public education – the notion that education itself entails parenting and raising children instead of educating them. Instead of simply being accents of parents and families, public schools have become the families themselves, and the results have been devastating.

We are losing our unchallenged standing and superiority in commerce, industry, science, and technology to a rising tide of mediocrity. Teachers are no longer concerned with whether or not their students have a firm grasp of the core curriculum – they are more concerned about whether or not they offend someone with their curriculum. Instructors must embrace every child’s opinion – no matter how wrong it may be - in order to teach them in a politically correct manner. Teachers are taught in college to teach from every point of view, so instead of a nationalistic viewpoint, the content is more general, and students suffer from the lack of depth and detail.

Public schools are facing declining test scores, poor performance, high functional illiteracy rates, watered-down curriculum, and declining standards, and yet no one sees any correlation between these statistics and the expanded role of public schools as socialization centers. Public education has become all things to all people, and academics are suffering. It has become so focused on providing nutritional, medical, psychological, religious, and social care that it has lost sight of its original purpose – to educate. Public schools are no longer places of learning – they are set up instead to be social service centers that, according to Sharon Robinson of the American Educational Research Association, “accelerate progression toward the day when reform is guided by the joint efforts of researchers, practitioners, parents, social workers, health professionals, law enforcement officials, members of the business community, and other civic-minded citizens.”

Beyond the very important argument that the government makes a horrible parent, there is the added issue of “busyness” that has overtaken schools. By focusing on too many programs, their standards are lowered and their focus on the details of academics – science, history, and language – is lost. Instead of making sure that students have a firm foundation of knowledge, public schools are focusing on solving the social problems of the community around them. Instead of education, it has become socialization.

Is there a solution? Not under the existing structure. In a socialistic system – our current public educational structure - there is no competition; therefore there is no incentive for improvement or innovation. Public schools have a monopoly on the education market. Private and charter schools are only allowed to compete on a limited level because of high costs.

The only viable solutions that can be seen are either complete privatization of the public school system, or, barring that, school vouchers. Competition improves quality, and until we see public schools having to fight for their funding, we will see no improvement whatsoever in the educational system. When schools are privatized – when the government is no longer a factor in education – then we will see a difference; with vouchers, parents no longer are chained to a horrible district – they can take their money and children elsewhere.

Cathryn Crawford is a student at the University of Texas. She can be reached with comments at feedback@washingtondispatch.com.

[mathluv]

But who will develop the exams, and decide on the level for getting that?

Ross Perot helped develop merit teacher pay/standards 20 years ago in Texas. I was involved at the Education Service Center level. (There are 20 of those in Texas, to help small districts with curriculum needs.) The administration hired people to 'grade' their teachers, as well as training local administraters to do this. I had 3 principals tell me - guess who will get on the career ladder - my wife works for him, his wife works for me - it is money in my pocket for my wife to do well. The system has changed, costs more money, more non-teachers hired to 'evaluate' teachers. Teachers are not doing that much, if any, better.

[mathluv]

see #81.

[Amelia]

I'm going to comment on this before I read the rest of the replies, so forgive me if I'm redundant.

We are losing our unchallenged standing and superiority in commerce, industry, science, and technology to a rising tide of mediocrity. Teachers are no longer concerned with whether or not their students have a firm grasp of the core curriculum – they are more concerned about whether or not they offend someone with their curriculum.

I'm sure this article will play well with many FReepers, most of whom don't have a clue about what really goes on in most public school classrooms, but I'm not at all worried about offending anyone with my curriculum. Political correctness isn't what's killing the school system.

The problem with the school system is very much related to our problems with society.

In the middle part of the 20th century, we had a tremendous upheaval in society: women's liberation, Dr. Spock's new methods of child-rearing, welfare programs, the peace movement and other forms of rebellion against authority, and the civil rights act and school desegregation. All of these (and probably a few other factors I haven't remembered) have resulted in huge changes in society and in the public educational system.

I could elaborate on each issue, and its effect on the educatonal system, but I'd have a longer essay than your original.

The only viable solutions that can be seen are either complete privatization of the public school system, or, barring that, school vouchers.

Again, a line that some FReepers agree with totally, except that it leaves out homeschooling. The problem is, it won't be a realistic solution for some years, if ever.

Privatization has been tried in some areas, and hasn't always resulted in improvement. Even if vouchers were available, not all areas have private schools, and in some areas, the private schools are not as competitive academically as the public schools, but exist for religious or other reasons instead. Finally, not everyone is willing or able to homeschool.

Public schools will be a necessary option for the foreseeable future. The problem remains, how to improve them?

[Cathryn Crawford]

Ping to this post.

[cpforlife.org]

"when the government is no longer a factor in education – then we will see a difference"

Bullseye. Thank you, Catherine. Keep up the good work.

“If you expect a nation
to be ignorant and free,
you expect what never was
and can never be.”
Thomas Jefferson

[Amelia]

Instead of basing pay on say how many years a teacher has taught, base it on how well the students and parents are satisfied with the teacher.

Do you think that's fair? I despised my high school English teacher, until I got to college and discovered she'd really done quite a good job -- I found the college English classes much easier than many of my classmates did.

[Amelia]

I'd agree there are many students in secondary schools who could benefit from social programs at school, but I don't have time to provide them - I have enough to do just trying to teach as much of my curriculum as possible to students who can't read or do math because they've been socially promoted by a teacher who didn't want to harm their self-esteem, or an administrator who was afraid of overcrowded classrooms if too many students were retained.

I have enough to do trying to teach the kids who'd like to learn, in between distractions provided by some of the other students.

There are the children who have behavior disorders, and who need to be in my classroom because it's the "least restrictive environment", but they can't be punished like the other children because of their disability (and I can't explain to the other students WHY those children get treated differently, because that would be a violation of privacy).

I have the students who don't want to come to school, but they do, because if they don't attend, the state says they can't have a drivers license until they're 18, and if they don't have a drivers license, they can't get to work. However, the state law just says they have to BE THERE to get a drivers license, it doesn't say they have to PASS, or even attempt to.

There are also those who have to be there so their parents won't get put in jail for neglect - allowing the child to be truant - and those who are required to attend so that they, their mothers (or both) will continue to receive the Aid to Families with Dependent Children checks. Again, the law says they have to be there, but it doesn't say they have to do anything.

Almost forgot, I also have the teenaged parents, and the pregnant teenagers. The pregnant teenagers often don't want to be there, because they don't feel well. (They tend to ask for lots of restroom passes, too.) The parents sometimes can't make it to school because they don't have child care, so many of them don't do real well in school even if they're trying.

And then, there are the students who really are abused and neglected. We could use some social programs in the schools, I suppose. Please don't ask me to provide them. I've got enough to do trying to teach the curriculum.

[KC_for_Freedom]

Teachers are not doing that much, if any, better.

This is the old "there is no way to set standards for teachers" arguement. It was that way when I was in school, but more and more schools are using mandated standardized tests. This scares the H*ll out of some teachers. When I was in my first year the dept head told us that all teachers in the same subject (I taught Math, maybe your favorite subject) would give the same exam. The other teachers had years of experience over me. I did alright.

Even though there are no set standards (and possibly many criteria, I know that everyone in a school can tell you which teachers they would want their kids to have.

My suggestions:

test scores, over a period of three years

who does well the following year in a cumulative subject

which teachers the kids like, and the parents like

which teachers the other teachers go to for help

The principal and deans, which teachers have recurring discipline problems

how many students a teacher teachers

which teachers are asked to write recommendations for college

how well the teachers do on subject matter tests that they teach. (harsh, but we are looking for professionals)

what outside experience the teacher has

reviews by direct observation in class

It can be done, schools just don't want to do it and teachers in the union who like senority pay and layoff plans won't like it. So lets do it.

[KC_for_Freedom]

Yes, see post 88, not every teacher needs to be liked to be effective, and some are liked for the wrong reasons or because they are loose with grades. I would not use a single criterion any more than my boss at Lockheed (after I was laid off by the senority system) would use only one criteria in my evaluations. But to pay every teacher the same pay, regardless of how many students they teach or how well, or what other skills they bring, only relying on the number of years they have taught is more than strange, its fatal.

[4thGradeTeacherBronx]

I thank you for your comments.

It is very unsettling to share one's experience and perspective in an open forum. I don't think enough actual teachers participate in our democracy and join this national dialogue about education. Perhaps we should try harder. (As if we have the time...)

I teach in the Bronx. I often wonder if my life would be more enjoyable and rewarding if I got myself hired in a religious, private, or voucher funded school. Sure I'd make less money, but maybe the kids would be more like me, use more of the same social conventions (syntax, etiquette, values) that I was raised with. I mean, why should I have any compassion for children of immigrants and welfare parents? Why would I keep trying to inspire, motivate, and equip these other American citizens to succeed in their education?

All my flag waving, bible touting relatives tell me to get out of there. They say the public school system is doomed and they don't want a penny of their taxes going into it.

Well, that's why I'm there. I'm a dedicated teacher. Everyone who says these kids and their schools are a lost cause are the problem. Public schools are made up of a kid named (***) whose father is so determined to have him succeed that he practically beats him if he gets anything wrong on a test or hesitates for a second in solving a math problem. Inner city schools are also made up of a tiny girl named (*******) with learning disabilities whose father is in jail and whose mother speaks no English and maybe never will. What is that like? Move your family to China, see how much Chinese you're speaking in a year.

Everyone has an opinion about how to change education. Every politician has a slogan. Every school administrator has ten slogans. Every Houghton Mifflin or Harcourt Brace has a billion dollar solution. Every DOE has "a new push." Even the teacher's unions have millions of pages of forms and contracts. What has that got to do with the lives of these kids? What has it got to do with mine? None of that affects what I succeed at day after day.

I entered the education field because I believe in the power of education to improve an individual's life. The more young Americans we prepare for a productive life of service, innovation, and worthy contributions to society, the better our country will be for our own children--and for the children of disadvantaged, uneducated children.

I realize that an ignorant conservative is going to post in response to this. I'll be called a communist. According to the usual uneducated conservative rhetoric, I don't exist. The 30 struggling children I teach should give up their 28¢ and their caring teacher to an upstate school where the kids already speak the English of their white parents.

Since, according to these know-it-all conservatives who have never taught a single 4th grader, putting more money into education lowers test scores, so why not support legislation that forces me to spend even more of my own money in the classroom? My wife and kids would proudly make the sacrifice, we're white Christian Americans.

Why do you other professionals get to deduct thousands off of your taxes for unreimbursed job expenses (2106) and teachers get only a few hundred?

[optimistically_conservative]

I realize that an ignorant conservative is going to post in response to this....Since, according to these know-it-all conservatives who have never taught a single 4th grader

Fascinating, which is it? Are we all ignorant or know-it-alls?

And why should anyone bother to post since you only signed up today to rant and insult - only to disengage and hide tomorrow?

Perhaps, being a worldly and wise Bronx 4th grade teacher, you can educate us how children with disabilties are being taught in Canada, Finland or Korea and why we are failing? Perhaps you can explain why school systems in the US and around the world perform better than your with less spent per pupil? Perhaps you can explain why others succeed where YOU fail, with much less money spent per child? Even better, perhaps you can explain why conservatives are ignorant know-it-alls when they attended the same public schools their smart open minded liberal peers attended?

You're not succeeding day after day, and it is long past time you took responsibility for that.

[optimistically_conservative]

Unfortunately, vouchers are a means of medicating the symptoms - not the disease.

I think a quick comparison of the education system today back to a time when it was considered more successful (pre-social counter-culture revolution Amelia describes), between failing systems and successful ones in the US today (urban, suburban and rural) and between our system and other systems worldwide would lead you to the conclusion that vouchers are not a cure, only a method of pain management.

Discipline, cultural emphasis and parental involvement remain the ingredients for success - at home, private or public school. Divorce, welfare, open borders, two income self focused parents, etc. undercut the quality of schools.

School boards in small systems can be influenced for good or bad by a small core of parents, teachers and administrators. Larger systems are victims of bureaucracy and waste.

[mathluv]

I agree with much of what you have listed. There are two sides to every suggestion. There were plans to test teachers in their subject area(s), but that got canned real quick, and a nothing test was substituted.

I don't want to give up on public schools. I want to take them back. For every teacher who does not want to see a parent near the school, there is a teacher who wants to help any way possible. For every parent who wants an easy out with easy grades, there is a parent who wants their child to learn.

The best teachers are not always popular with kids, parents, or other teachers. The worst teachers are not always popular with kids, parents, or other teachers.

Yes, math is what I love, what I taught, and wish I could teach again.

[June Cleaver]

I disagree with your statement about "broad brushing" the American public education system. Until we can admit as a nation that the system is failing we will never address the problem and fix it! It's the old "well, yes, SOME schools are bad, but of course the schools MY children attend are the EXCEPTION."

I will go further with that brush and add that our culture has given up its right to raise children . . . we abdicate to the education system.

Your line of "Most schools are doing a good job educating THEIR children" says it all. Whose children are they?

I have opted out of the system. We are in our 13th year of homeschooling . . . there is no diversity in our school, there is no PC history, or new Math! But my children can THINK logically, argue on any given topic of current events, and know where the Middle East is located.

And they have never had to put a condom on a banana!

[June Cleaver]

Ok, Cathryn, define good.

Does that mean bringing up test scores?

All well and good, but there is another problem and I think you addressed it in your article.

What should the schools be teaching?

[Amelia]

But to pay every teacher the same pay, regardless of how many students they teach or how well, or what other skills they bring, only relying on the number of years they have taught is more than strange, its fatal.

I can agree with that. Another thing that's always been strange to me is that teachers want to be thought of as professionals, yet paid on a union scale.

IMO, paying for (and promoting by) only seniority, whether in schools, factories, whereever, leads to mediocrity and less productivity.

[June Cleaver]

You have hit on the core problem of our educational system. No one (especially if they have children IN the system) wants to admit that there IS a problem, or well, if there is it's just a matter of a few PC textbooks! Geesh!

Wake up and get a whiff of eraser dust! The CORE CURRICULUM IS THE PROBLEM. Even if you have wonderful teachers, they still must ladle out this pablum . . .

I do not have this problem in my home curriculum . . . we don't use of lot of textbooks. We use REAL books mostly.

[PGalt]

Great article. Thanks for posting it.

"Is there a solution? Not under the existing structure. In a socialistic system – our current public educational structure - there is no competition; therefore there is no incentive for improvement or innovation."

More evidence-http://www.freep.com/news/education/chart25_20030925.htm

[June Cleaver]

Incredible isn't it? And we won't be able to back up the bus.

On a personal note, my daughter is enrolled at a Texas university (your rival!) after 12 years of homeschool. She is finding much the same with a lot of her profs . . . thankfully she is a clear-headed logical thinker . . . good thing too as she will have to do a lot of sifting!

[not-an-ostrich]

Not many families capable of homeschooling since majority have both parents working. Homeschooling has to be a rare occurence.