Common core education has been a major topic of discussion in recent years. This is something that many people have very widespread viewpoints on. The idea of a common school system and common core stems from Horace Mann and his advocating for a common school reform. Acoording to "Fraser" the common core standards have brought new rules and ideas to the way people think that students should be taught. An interesting fact can be seen in "Urban" when it is said that 41 of the 50 staes adopted these common school standards.
There are however people that do not agree with these stndards. One of these people is Arthur Levine. He believs that sutends are advancing in their studies with the evolution of technology but the common core standards are holding them back because they are not advancing also. Technology is having a major impact on education in America and needs to be better adopted into the common core and educational system. These are some of the things that Levine would most likely respond with. Kids are no longer paper learners, the times are changing.
0 Comments
During this time period in America education was a major concern for many people. Society wanted to make sure that American education was up to date and progressing. There were many people that critiqued they syestem but others that praised it. "A Nation at Risk" is an example of a document that stated America's educational system was falling behind. It suggested that countries like Japan were ahead of America. The document "Choosing Equality" suggests otherwise bringing up some myths in the educational system.
The first myth the document brings up is that"today's school failures represent a recent development, in contrast with a golden age of public schooling which one served well both the elite and mass of students"(342 Fraser). The document offers to other myths that are believed by society as it related to the educational system. "Choosing Equality" brings up the mission of schooling describing what our goal is and where failure stems from. Overall this document takes a much more positive approach to talking about the educational system. Often the problem was "financial upheaval and related cutbacks" but the "Choosing Equality" document discusses the governmant and the need for funding(Urban 252). All this being said the educational system was being looked at it many different angles and these two documents suggest that. The Navajo Nation Educational System
This document explains and describes the making of a native American school in Arizona around the year 1970. For the Navajo they had a lot they hoped to fix with the educational system. When they first created the school it was made with a dual staff and ended up being a complete failure. After a second try with the Navajo's being in complete control they were able to make changes and the school is still a success to this day. Something firm that they believed is "the navajo people will not abandon their traditional cultural ways and devote themselves to living by non-Indian standards"(Fraser 328). What this meant is that they did not want to lose sight of their culture and they wanted to implement this into the school system. There were many "concerns for the children of immigrants and Indians", this being the reason why this Navajo school was such an important aspect to the Indian people (Urban 194). Another thing these schools were able to help with was preparing students for college. The two things that were a big emphasis in the school was that instruction be in the navajo language and there shall be "emphasis placed on the relevancy of education to the children's Navajo milieu"(326). These are some of the reasons why the school is still a a major success today. In conclusion perhaps the most major change was departing from a dual staff. This lead to a better Navajo educational system in all.
Education changed dramatically during these times as the United States was working to compete with their rival country Russia. The United States was focusing on an education driven by science and engineering. The reason for this being Russia was providing an education where students were being trained as scientists and they were excelling far beyond students in the U.S. These changes in education were a success as it related to catching up to Russia but students were now taught like robots and quality of life for both teachers and students decreased. These three authors would for the most part agree with each other while there would still be some sense of disagreement. In Fraser it says you can teach yourself through both "personal experience and by studying the experience of others"(253). The authors would agree that the students need to learn by these two ways and focus on teaching themselves to an extent. When students had passion about what they were learning and really bought in they were seen to succeed. They would also agree on where the motivation to change education in the United States came from. Russia was forcing the United States to take desperate measures in order to catch up. The entire U.S. was living in fear and authors like these gave a good idea of what education needed to begin leaning towards.
Select any one of the perspectives offered in the documents from this chapter. If you were a teacher, what would you need to do to help that student succeed in your class?
Being a teacher during this time period would be an overwhelming task. Teachers had a lot on their plate with schools during this time period. As difficult as it could be these people had an opportunity to make an impact on the lives of many children. If I was a teacher beginning to teach Mexican American children specifically there would be a few things I would teach the kids in order for them to succeed. "Children of eastern European Jews performed on a par with, or better than, other groups" but this was not the case for the Mexican Americans(Urban 190). One thing that came to be very difficult for Mexican American children to learn was the American language or also known as english. It was thought to believe that the American culture would "make their dreams, and often lose them" if they were not able to learn it(Fraser 194). The kids scored lower on their IQ tests because they were not able to understand the english language. By teaching them the language they would be able to common irate better and learn the American culture where they could be wealthier and better off. The second thing I would teach the children are some trades. This way the kids will not have to work in the fields their whole life but maybe they could receive better jobs. Overall these kids were very smart people and with the correct teaching they progressed through the educational system. Conant's report discussed many things related to High School education. One main thing is focuses on is whether or not High School was preparing students for life after school. The answer to this question and the debates that took place during this time can be seen taking place on Conant's review. During this time period David Snedden was seen arguing that High Schools needed to be more focused on a vocational education. He believed that this was the most important thing that kids could be learning. This way when kids were graduating High School they were ready to enter the workforce and had the proper knowledge to do so. Someone arguing against Sweden was a man known by the name of John Dewey. "Just at the moment when advocates of vocational education saw federal support as a real possibility, here was Dewey acting as a critic"(Fraser 148). Fraser argued for a broader education where students would learn more about subjects and get a good base knowledge. While the two had very different opinions many people saw value in both of their ideas. Many people were seen "blasting the public school system" while others praised it and saw no need for change (Urban 131). Conan himself believed that High Schools needed to meet the needs of all youths. Based on my experience of High School I believe that schools today offer more broad schooling rather than a vocational education that was discussed in the report. Schools teach kids many subjects that expand there knowledge over broad spectrums rather than preparing them for one job. Students do have the choice to take some vocational like courses so I believe the debates were somewhat of a tie and High Schools adopted a bit of both worlds.
Describe the reasons why Frederick Douglas came to value literacy. Do such reasons make sense in the twenty-first century?
Douglas was a slave who lived on a plantation. While living there the wife of the plantation owner slowly began to teach Douglas the basics of education in America. She taught him things like the ABC's. Learning how to read and write was illegal for slaves during this time in America. Eventually the husband gained knowledge that his wife was teaching Douglas how to read. Finding this out he became very angry strictly instructing the both of them that those actions will no longer take place on his plantation. Mr Auld stated that "if you give a nigger an inch, he will take an ell"(Fraser 97). He stated that there will be no keeping Douglas if he learns how to read and write. Through this experience Douglas began to understand the relationship between an education and freedom. He began to understand that if he could learn to read and write it could lead to him no longer being a slave. Douglas said things like at whatever cost of trouble he would set out to become educated. For the reason of freedom he began to value literacy. He would trick kids into teaching him to read and write and at any moment he could get he would try and read his book. An education meant no more slavery for Douglas. In a sense I do believe that these reasons make sense in the twenty-first century. Today we must go to school and receive an education to attain a job and make a living. While there are alternatives people are constantly stressing the importance of schooling and higher education in todays society. Overall Douglas became a very intelligent human being due to his perseverance. The McGuffey’s Reader has been described as the ideal textbook for the schools of nineteenth-century America. Why would someone say that? Do you agree?
Indeed the McGuffey reader has been described as the ideal textbook for schools in the nineteenth-century America. There are many reasons why people would argue this statement to be true. The McGuffey reader taught children everything from spelling, pronunciation, grammar and morality. As described on page 76 the McGuffey readers "were there at the right time, they were there to be read by millions of children from all parts of the country".(Fraser) The textbook served a very large purpose of teaching children education in this time. During this period of time there were many names like Horace Mann who were pushing for a new kind of education in America. "Just as the schools were growing a text-book came along that fit the culture, the morality and the patriotism of the institution and the times".(Fraser) Because of these reasons someone would argue that the McGuffey reader was an ideal textbook for the schools. I would most definitely agree with people saying that the McGuffey reader was such a big deal. The readers taught millions of children. Reading and writing just scratched the surface of what kids were beginning to learn. The fact that each edition of the book gets more challenging pushes the kids to learn more and hone there skills in order to move to the next level. Overall thee books had a huge positive impact on American education in the nineteenth century. |
AuthorI am a junior at Bradley University working towards my Business Management and Leadership Degree. Archives
December 2016
Categories |