1. Do you think Cuban's criteria for judging schools might ever conflict?
2. Can you add to Cuban's 'list' of "democratic values"?
3. Consider the current social milieu, that being a national presidential election. Is it possible that both these schools can substantively advocate for democratic values? Might there be an intractable difference regarding the interpretation of democratic values?
10 comments:
I was intrigued by the idea that schools were created primarily for democratic reasons. Besides developing literate adults, Cuban tells us they were created to teach respect of authority, to develop reason, to appreciate differences of opinion, and to fulfill civic duties. What other democratic values do schools develop? Cuban exemplifies one of the key pieces of democracy by describing his two "good" schools and that is...CHOICE. The idea that some people have a choice as to where they go to school is democracy in action. Perhaps one family finds a progressive school a fit for them while another family is more comfortable with a traditional school. In Vermont, we shy away from school choice. The VNEA does not support it; however, in many urban areas, charter schools are a positive force in education. Personally, I am oposed to school choice if it creates elitist groups. Also, I would not want schools to compete for funds. However, I am aware of some urban areas, New Orleans, for example where school choice works. It is free, public education that includes a diverse ethnic and socio-economic population and meets a specific need. One such school is a Audobon School that takes students K-8 and immerses them in French language and culture. I wonder how the families feel about their school. If, as Cuban states, one indication of a "good" school is parent and student satisfaction, then by giving a family school choice, they should be involved and content with the education.
Here is the link to the Tale of Two Schools article
http://www.edweek.org/ew/articles/1998/01/28/20cuban.h17.html
Happy Constitution Day! A great day to think about what role schools play in a democracy.
I don’t know about anyone else, but my husband and I received “citizenship” grades when we went to school. Being a responsible citizen in the school community was important, especially if you wanted to be a lunch leader or crossing guard when you got to the 8th grade. Good citizens participated in class, did their work, helped others, acted responsibly and were respectful. I remember my high school Civics teacher telling us that one of the functions of a free and public education was to create an informed electorate. She also believed that meant we had to be actively involved in the process. Good citizens not only fulfilled their civic duties, but they worked hard and paid their taxes, were good neighbors, read a newspaper and kept up with current events, and they were also fiscally responsible.
Schools were not originally designed to be governed by federal authorities, and I am not so sure that the creation of a US Dept. of Education or federal funding has been beneficial (too many strings, mandates and paper work to be cost effective!). Local control is fiercely protected here in Vermont as evidenced recently when former Education Commissioner Cate wanted to alter the current school governance structure.
That being said, as educators we have to be aware not only of our parents and community values, but keep our eye on Washington and be discerning about what the political pundits are saying.
I believe that both schools can advocate for democratic values like those listed in the article. I agree that we need to “to talk through problems, reason, deliberate, and struggle toward openly-arrived-at compromises.” But as students and teachers, we also know that sometimes the principal (or school board) has to make a final decision. Another of those values then might include being able to live with and support the decisions made, whether by compromise or edict. While we may not like all NCLB enacted, we do our best to comply. That does not mean we can’t work to change it.
The Watson Case Study might be an example of a difference in interpretation. Michael and Alan both thought an understanding of vocabulary was important. Michael believed when students interacted and applied meaning to their experience that they understood the concepts. Alan on the other hand, believed that he needed to know that each of the students had done the reading and could communicate their understanding through the writing.
This article was interesting. I like how Cuban kept repeating that we dont have to decide which approach is better. Instead, he writes that they can both be good. I would be very curious to visit a progressive school. I cant imagine how the day would go. My only experience related to this topic is from my junior year of high school. My pre-calculus teacher came from a progressive school to our traditional school. She is a very intelligent woman who definately knows her math! The problem was, she didnt "make us" learn! We didnt have to do homework. We didnt have to pay attention....and, that seemed like a no brainer to a bunch of 16 and 17 year olds who were used to being told exactly what to do....we obviously chose not to work! Well, that didnt work out too well my senior year when it was time for Calculus. I think the problem was that as "traditional" students, we werent used to the freedom that she was giving us so we thought she was just a push-over who we didnt have to work hard for.
That relates to what Cuban said when he wrote that everyone (teachers, students, parents) all need to be on the same page to make a "good" school. My peers and I were on a different page than our teacher for sure!
This article reminds me of the great debate amongst parents at the annual Kindergarten Screening at our school. What type of classroom should I request for my kindergartener they ask? In addition to the traditional kindergarten classroom, we also offer a multi-age option and a looping option. Many parents agonize over the choices. However, I feel that all the choices are good options for incoming students just as Cuban described the traditional and progressive school options.
There are teachers who are more traditional and teachers who are more progressive working side by side in schools. Students in both types of classrooms are learning. So I agree that there isn’t a need for debate. Yes, there are some students who may learn better one way or another. But isn’t it important to expose children to many different styles in their lives? They will experience it in the work place and in college and they need to be prepared for this type of diversity. As long as they are learning!
I liked Cubans suggestions for determining a good school at the end of the article. It’s important that parents, staff, and students feel satisfaction. It is also important that schools achieve their goals which should be educating the students and teaching the global concepts of democracy and values.
Cuban makes a point that has been put aside in education for quite some time – the idea that public schools were not created to replace anything else, and that as long as teachers, parents, and students all have common goals within a school system, does it really matter how that is achieved?
I understand Kelly when she says that traditional students being in a progressive type class was not productive. I once team taught with a teacher who taught based upon progressive beliefs whereas I would consider myself to have more of a traditional approach. It was really difficult. Our goals were not that inconsistent (as Cuban points out), but it was hard for us to work together when our approaches were so different. Regardless of whether you’re a teacher or a student I think it is hard to wrap your mind around and practice the other “strategy” when that is not what you’re used to, or what you believe. I thought it was interesting that Ceil mentioned the case study, and how Michael might be a good example of this- I hadn’t thought of it that way as I read it.
Both types of schools can be successful as long as the goals of the school stay in focus. Losing site of democratic values is not the direction that we want our public schools to go in.
Oh - and thanks for the site, Linda!
Any school or program where students learn and participate as community members is a “good” school. Since everyone learns differently, to have educational options would make the most sense. But as Larry Cuban describes, there are two predominant ways of thinking, with both sides believing they are right. Over the past fourteen years, I’ve known many teachers from both sides. It sort of reminds me of the whole language vs. phonics debate; one side always thinking their side is the one and only. Has anyone ever considered that a little of both is also an alternative?
Really, though, what’s making “good” schools is the population of students and how they learn best. If the students are showing through assessments and involvement that they are learning and growing, then teachers are satisfied, parents are happy because their kids aren’t complaining, administrators are happy because their schools’ goals are being achieved; everyone’s happy.
But…it all depends on the kids teachers have. Teacher A could have one class where the students need black and white direction from a book, absolutely need structure in content and behavior, or they will not succeed. That same Teacher A’s next class could be much more independent so that they learn best by designing their own learning, voting on a set of classroom rules that they made up themselves, and going at their own pace. That’s not politics talking, that’s the students’ learning styles and the teacher’s recognition and support of them. THAT, I believe, makes a good school. Both classes could be doing the exact same unit, but they NEED it delivered in different styles-nothing the matter with that at all.
I think Cuban’s criteria of everyone being satisfied depends on various factors. There are many households that have both parents working (or single parent homes), arriving home late, still having to deal with the everyday chores and tasks that must be done; many students don’t get the nurturing that is needed at home; parents just want to make sure their children are happy, no complaining. If there is any complaining, the parent(s) will call the school and let the teachers or the principal have it without knowing the other side of the story. Many students are not going to be happy unless they don’t have homework to do. Staff aren’t happy unless the students are being productive..tax-payers aren’t happy unless their taxes go down. it just goes on and on. But, on the other hand, you have those families who still believe in supporting their children’s education and work habits, helping them with homework or project times, extracurricular activities, etc..I don’t believe that these situations can be controlled by the schools themselves or the tax-payers. That’s family dynamics.
Part of what my school believes in is “We believe that middle level education should provide an environment where students can develop into healthy, productive, happy, contributing members of our society.” It sounds pretty democratic to me but with the extra boost of being healthy and happy. I believe we do support this statement through what we do in the school, appreciating students as individuals who have different learning styles. For the most part, I believe we are what Cuban sees as a “good” school.
Cuban maintains that the following are the criteria that the “goodness” of a school should be judged by: the satisfaction of parents, staff, and students; whether or not a school is meeting its self-imposed goals; and if it is able to instill democratic values. This article has caused me to reflect on the divisiveness of the current presidential campaigns, and conclude that it would be difficult, if not impossible, to reconcile the vast differences in opinion around what values would be defined as “democratic.” These values, which differ in tremendous ways, especially at the local level, would undoubtedly shape a school’s unique goals. Regardless of the nature of these goals, I have never had the good fortune of being able to work in a district where the faculty, administration, parents, and students were all united in supporting each of a school’s initiatives. In fact, I find that schools and parents are increasingly at odds with each other over the philosophical purpose of public education. These disagreements would only be compounded on a national scale, where the current push for accountability and performance has made it difficult for schools to freely experiment with their organizational structures and philosophies without fears of seeing a decline in highly politicized standardized testing scores.
How about this for an addition to Cuban’s list of democratic values- eliminating the effects of local, state, and federal bureaucracies that prevent kids from receiving the best public education that our tax dollars can buy.
I think that Cuban’s criteria for judging schools may conflict today in our society. Coming from a special educator’s point of view, I see students with very different learning modalities. My students need different teaching styles to reach all the various learning styles. It is not as easy as traditional verses progressive ways of teaching, but combining the two, to reach each student. For example, a few years ago I worked with a student that had been diagnosed with Aspergers and had been in a self-contained classroom for most of his educational career. He couldn’t read or write. In addition he could not communicate with the other students or adults. He needed to read and write, but he also needed some communication skills to survive in the community. It was important to really get to know the student in order to get him to communicate. He had a low self-esteem and felt that he would never learn to read and write. The communication skills were also important in order for him to want to read or write. By eighth grade he was able to be included in the regular classroom. He was able to talk to students at lunch. He even felt good enough about himself to attend the eighth grade dance. He needed to be able to communicate before taking an interest in reading. Today he has a job in a store interacting with the public.
I think that “good” schools incorporate both styles of teaching. I agree with Cuban’s democratic values. I think that the two different schools do derive from a deeply embedded common framework. A crucial piece is that students, parents and teachers take ownership in the learning process as a team.
Post a Comment