May 9, 2007
What is it that schools are for, anyway?
Jarrett left a question on my last post that I’ve been thinking a lot about: “Do you think that schools should continue to push the idea that everyone needs to go to college?”
To give you some background, Jarrett is a teacher (his actual title is ‘Diversified Occupations Coordinator’) who runs a work study program and teaches employability skills to students who are dismissed after three periods at school to go to work. He really likes the program and feels it has significant potential for kids who aren’t planning to go to college, but also feels the program is more an afterthought than a concerted effort to reach a certain cohort of students who don’t fit neatly into the ‘college-bound’ category.
I feel pretty strongly about this subject because, bottom line, I think our ultimate educational objective is to help students discover what they care about and find ways to pursue it, through college, or otherwise.
Unfortunately, Jarrett's question points to one of those areas in which schools have over-reacted (that famous ‘education pendulum’ seems to only work in extremes!) Many “comprehensive” high schools seem to have decided it is impossible to succeed in life without a college degree, so they’ve dropped the vast majority of non-academic electives. Talk about a lot of kids being left behind! Isn’t it ironic that another of the major trends right now is to increased personalization of the high school experience through smaller learning communities!
Anyway, I think Jarrett’s question is an important one for three reasons:
1 – First and foremost, because I believe that when kids can pursue things that interest them they are more willing to learn, and are almost guaranteed to begin thinking tangentially ... which is what makes learning a rich, complex experience that stimulates the brain to make connections :)
2 – because I firmly believe that not all kids should be college-bound, especially immediately following high school,
3 – and last but not least, because I think a lot of colleges need to radically re-examine what post-secondary education should be in the 21st C. anyway. Too often, what is offered in conventionally-organized, discipline-based institutions actually discourages the kind of networked, inter-disciplinary thinking that is the hallmark of this digital age.
This is where Toby’s comment on my previous post intersected Jarrett’s question. Quoting an unidentified source, he said,
“For technology to play a full and meaningful role there needs to be reduction in emphasis on targets, prescriptive practice, standards and ‘content delivery’.
The challenge to teachers is about the way they engage with learners and the role they play in stimulating communities of learning, and in co-creating with them, rather than just imparting information.
“New forms of online collaboration can support a wide range of behaviors that are needed to survive and thrive in the modern world, and therefore in theory at least, help develop the kinds of skills that education should aim to provide.”
Doesn’t that sound a lot like Jarrett’s job of ‘Diversified Occupations Coordinator’? Jarrett, I’m curious about how much of a role technology plays in your ‘employability skills’ curriculum and whether you or your school have thought about it from the perspective of using technology to actively promote the ‘communities of learning’ concept? I’d also love to know about schools out there modeling this concept. Finally, thanks to both Jarrett and Toby for contributing. This is just the kind of conversation I've been looking for!
join the conversation
#1 Jarrett
said . . .
May 9, 2007
Unfortunately technology does not play as big a role in my curriculum as I would like. I have a few problems with the curriculum but that is a completely different story. This is my first year teaching this subject and I would love to implement the use of technology throughout the curriculum. It is just not as accessible as I would wish. The sad truth is that our district can't afford it. We have 1 small computer lab with 27 computers. I have to point out that it isn't even referred to as the computer lab but rather the "writing lab." This year we added about 45 wireless laptops. The laptop carts are usually booked weeks in advance. I would do anything to have access to 20 computers daily.
I'm not sure what the school's thought is on communities of learning. I know the big push this year is to have common finals and eventually have common assessments for every unit in every subject.
#2 Dan Leiphart
said . . .
May 9, 2007
Hello, I work with Jarrett and I am the Alternative Educatiion teacher. I agree and feel Jarrett's programs is very useful and necessary for some students. It is the same situation for my students as well. My students have behavior, academic, and attendance issues and I am constantly working to find material they enjoy to help them learn.
It is my understanding that not everyone is going to go to college and college isn't for everyone. So why are some schools constantly pushing a college when they should be looking at the big picture and maybe pushing an program such as an apprenticeship. It worked for several children whom I know including my younger brother. He loves what he is doing and knew that college was not for him.
I just wanted to add that this is a very nice site and appreciate being told about it.
#3 Bonnie in Albuquerque
said . . .
May 10, 2007
I can understand where jarrett is coming from as I taught in East New york, in Brooklyn and we were lucky if 1 computer worked. Jarrett what would "common finals" be? I don't think I have heard that term when I was teaching in NYC or here with my student teachers in new mexico. The idea about college, well, maybe I am in so deep with my research and after 4 1/2 years of critical race theory classes, i agree that not everyone needs to go to college. I don't know if I agree with it in the sense of the talented 10th as in W.E.B Dubois..but I dont think that college is for everyone. I graduated from New Trier, in Winnetka Illinois, which was one of the schools in Savage Inequalities by Jonathon Kozol and everyone was meant to and did go to college. There was no way around it...From my teaching experience in Brooklyn and Harlem and working with student teachers here in New MExico in very low SES schools and communities, I am finding that they are purposely guiding people away from college knowingly or in some cases unknowingly. Through racially and culturally biased standardized testing and the valuing of cultural capital that many students from these types of schools are not exposed to, students are sorted into ability levels and many are not even getting the chance. I agree that students should be allowed to explore their potential and that they should be encouraged to explore their interests and most likely (in my experience) that leads them to learn more. Unfortunately Barbara, I don't think the public school can fulfill the "communities of learning" concept. It seems as the public schools in this country still operate under a functionalist framework, as written about in Moral Education by Durkheim. If a student does not do well, it is the students' fault not the stystem. Well at least under this administration since functionalism since to rise up in times of fear....The only schools that I have seen making a difference are some charter schools here in new mexico which do not have to follow NCLB testing. There are some amazing schools in the native communities that are doing some great things. If anyone is interested I can post some links to information.
#4 Jarrett
said . . .
May 10, 2007
The idea behind common finals is that every teacher who teaches the same subject gives an identical final exam. So every student who takes U.S. History would take the same exam regardless who their teacher is.