Traditional vs. Choice

I thought that the international student panel was very interesting and enlightening in class. We talked about topics such as a typical school day, homework, expectations, and assimulating. To me, the experience both of these students are having is amazing.

One student from Ghana is able to see two ways of schooling, choice and traditional structure. I enjoy the freedom of choice I have in the United States even though some people think our schools are failing, maybe because of this reason. When I heard about the structure the student had at the boarding school, I felt two emotions. I was so happy I did not have to go to school like that to get to Luther College. On the other hand, I was a little jealous. This student seemed very bright and intelligent. He seems to have a great work ethic and values (this coming from only a half hour of talking to him). Then I wondered if I would have been through that type of schooling, would I be as knowing as him?

After pondering about the idea, I decided I probably would know what "real work" is and probably be even more thankful for my air-conditioned job in the summer. However, whether being in a traditional boarding school or an U.S. "choice" school, I think it comes down to work ethic. People in the United States have great work ethics when they make the choice to. People in the United States are very intelligent if they want to. In the U.S, it seems we put emphasis on you will get out of it what you put in it and that is your choice. In Ghana it seems you have no choice, you will do the work! I think teachers, administrators, parents, etc. should try and help students choose to have a good work ethic because they know and want the benefits.

Although, other countries seem to be "beating us" through education, they seem to have very strict ways to do this. I don't think the United States should change to these ways, however I do believe in general a different attitude/expectation should be utilized in society.

ECE

About a week ago my discussion group got on a topic about early childhood education. Many different viewpoints were brought into the converstation which made for a great discussion. We hit issues on different areas of Early Childhood Education but the hot topic was if preschool should be mandated for all children. Most recently in my education at Luther I've learned a great deal about the benefits to Early Childhood education. The intellectual development before the age of 5 is extrodinary. The group seemed to agree, or at least somewhat, on how the development during this time is crucial. The children should be educated during this time period. Should this be left up the parents? Should preschools be offered but not mandated? Should all children be required to attend preschool?

In a perfect world, it would be great to have all parents able to stay home with their children and teach them values, social concepts (like sharing, interacting with others), etc. However, now and especially with the economy, both parents are needing to work to provide for the family. This indicates that children are kept with other caregivers during many of their waking hours. Are these caregivers giving the necessary help and guidance to the children? How should we ensure that this is possible?

Also, how are preschools to be funded? An interesting comment was made that the funding for early childhood should go to grades K-12 to better that education through resources or other areas. During the discussion I thought this was a response that many people in the United States could argue and it appears valid when many schools are "failing" at those levels.

So....I decided to turn to my early childhood education professor for a quick answer. She stated, "The K-12 schools aren't funded by the government; they are funded by the state property taxes. If the federal government were to divert this money to the states, how would it be done equitably--poor states get more, everybody gets the same?" She also mentioned the thought that we need to compare the budgets of early childhood programs that are government funded (only one is Head Start) and compare it to other government funds. Where is the money (the attention) going to? Where does education come on this scale?

NCLB and children with disabilities

NCLB, what a popular topic! If I started talking about NCLB, the entire blog would be filled so I decided to focus on one aspect that I knew a little about which is special education students. I was placed in a 3rd and 4th grade special ed. classroom for my freshmen observation. I was there a month and was able to observe a lot about the students in my class.

Reading about NCLB "Distracting Schools from Productive Reforms" in the article Evaluating "No Child Left Behind" by Linda Darling-Hammond I completely agree with some of the statements. One statement was the thought, "It is impossible for the subgroups (English language-learners and special-needs students) ever to be 100 percent proficient. Schools serving a significant share of these learners will inevitably be labeled failing, even if all their students consistently make strong learning gains." This statement was true in the school district I was placed in. The school had a good special education program so parents from other school districts were open-enrolling their students and sending them to this specific school district. My cooperating teacher notified me her school district is close to being labeled "failing" and it could be due to the large population of special need students in the school.

Reading another article on NCLB entitled Ten Big Effects of the No Child Left Behind Act on Public Schools by Jack Jennings and Diane Stark Rentner made the point about the frustration of actually giving the test to the special needs students. They state the tests are "inappropriate and serve no instructional purpose." I witnessed this first hand. My cooperating teacher was required to test her students. Like all teachers, she read the directions to the student who was a fourth grader functioning at a 1st/2nd grade level. After the directions, she couldn't say much more. The student looked scared and confused, like the teacher had just talked in a foreign language. He did not even know how to begin. Finally, the student began clicking answers like it was a game because it was a computerized test. Comprehension or learning were not present. The student could not read the question or answers. He could simply pick a letter, since he did know his alphabet.

I felt it was a waste of money (for the test itself) and time for the instructor and student. If the government expects to assess special needs students, the tests need to be appropriate for the student. I know NCLB has flaws and good ideas, some much more complicated than others. I feel like test appropriateness is such a basic concept, it amazes me this has to be an issue.