EDUCATION QUESTION: If public schools in the US are in such bad shape...

[battleknight24]

... and schools in Asia and Europe are so much better, why is the US such an economically and politically powerful country?

I know many of you guys are saying "India and China are catching up to us..." Yes, they both have the potential to become serious economic powers in competition with the US. But people have actually been saying this for a very long time now, and ever since I can remember people have talked about how public education (K-12, approx...) in other countries is superior.

What is it that America does right? And what changes should, if any, be made to the public education system? Is it as bad as some politicians make it out to be?


Peace,

[DRoseDARs]

1. There's no "c" in "shape"...

...unless you're intentionally using some Middle English. ;)

Edit: I see you've corrected that. :P

[BeTheChange]

2. It was good of you..

to edit the title.. considering the question :)

[battleknight24]

7. Sorry about the grammatical error... by the way...

I did in fact go to a very shitty high school, so I am not entirely at fault all by myself...


Peace,

[BeTheChange]

12. No no no..

I was just joking. It just struck my insomnia induced brain as giggly.

[applegrove]

3. For 100 years, the best and the brightest from all over the world

have gone and studied the the US. I mean - the best and the brightest have been attracted to your best Universities. And many of them stayed and had kids. Or at least they had contacts.

The problem is that those days may end. Nobody is ever going to catch up with Harvard or MIT. But there was government funding at those places to make them so excellent. But the best and the brightest may start going elsewhere. And 20 years after that starts to happen, it may have already, the US will notice a difference.

Also - they have the drive to work hard in China because work and study gets rewarded with middle income lifestyle (or a privileged one). In the US today - often dumbass alcoholic sons of rich dynasties get ahead. The elites and their vast wealth will start to skew things - like they haven't already. And then the dark ages begin where you have to be not hard working - but kissy assed and good at being kissy assed to get ahead. That is why the middle class splitting into have and have nots is bad. Many, many of the amazing American leaders in scholastic, sciences and humanities and governance didn't come from the 'top half'. And in my opinion, far too many of them went into law school or MBA school. Not enough into the sciences. Not enough into other fields.

The 20th Century for America was an amazing time. With incomes changing and reward for hard work. You need to renew that - not skew it. Cause the prize if you are a hard working poor Chinese person is much greater. They are hungry. Parts of America will be very hungry. Parts will not if the tax cuts continue in the path the neocons are taking them.

And if values are changed so that a buck is the only measure of a man/woman - will the people with integrity like many scientists and humanities people - will they get frustrated and leave? If I had been a little smarter I would have gone into the sciences. But if you had showed me then how corporate medicine, science etc. was going to become - I would not have been so attracted.

[jeff30997]

8. "dumbass alcoholic sons of rich dynasties get ahead"

Sounds familiar.

[battleknight24]

10. I can't put my finger on it...

... he is in the news a lot, isn't he?


Peace,

[jeff30997]

13. Hehehe.

[LSdemocrat]

4. A couple reasons:

The US has, for all modern times (since about WWII), always had top rate services available for people who could afford it and those who were so utterly outstandingly intelligent as to get scholarships to the bastions of the rich (merit scholarships to Ivies that developed in the 1950's and 1960's). This focus on high end education and services led to many technological breakthrougs that fueled the economy and attracted top scientists and businesspeople, further fueling the US economy.

Of course the downside to this focus is a failure to help those outside the top 5% or so in wealth and/or intelligence. This failure will be exploited over the next decades as the "third world" catches up in terms of education and due to US backwardness (read: increased control by fundie nut jobs) hindering the technological breakthroughs described above.

[carpetbagger]

5. What America used to do right...

Our previous success was based on several factors.

One is that our workers took responsibility in their positions. American workers, for the past two centuries, have been more generalized in skills than their European counterparts, and more adaptable. Add plentiful land, a new continent, and an egalitarian structure, and you get the industrial ingenuity that put us at the forefront.

Another is that over the last 100 years, we've imported huge amounts of brain power. Who built the bomb? Who took us to the moon? Who does much, if not most, of the bench research in this country? Skilled immigrants.

We also benefitted from the sense of national urgency and purpose in math and science in the 50s and 60s. No, the Sputnik generation didn't take us to the moon, that was done by their parents, but they did end up giving us the edge in computer technology.

Now, we mostly benefit from natural resources, capital (dollars, patents, infrastructure), and the fact that our workers work harder than even the Japanese.

The school system is quite good in the places where it works. I had a terrific high school education outside of Washington DC. But it's horrendous in much of America.

The most important change in education policy for the United States is to re-open higher education to foreign students. If we want nice, shiny weapons in 2070, it's a matter of national security, if nothing else.

Other changes would be much harder to make. We simply don't have a society that values learning. So if you're talking about global competition, we need to invest more energy in corralling the top 20% of high school students into industries that will help us in that, and the way to do that is through maintaining support for advanced studies in JHS and HS levels.

[KaliTracy]

6. It's not as bad as the politicians and CORPORATIONS make it out to

be, but, it's not as good as it could be, either.

See this mini-click through! from the Odysseus Group http://www.johntaylorgatto.com/historytour/history1.htm

See the Odysseus Group http://www.johntaylorgatto.com/


See Susan Ohanian's Site -- http://www.susanohanian.org

she has a book called: Why Is Corporate America Bashing Our Public Schools?

Also See: Alfie Kohn http://www.alfiekohn.org/ he has some great articles.

He edited a book with Patrick Shannon called Education, Inc.: Turning Learning into a Business (Series of essays)



When a learner is vested in learning -- then there usually aren't any problems -- it's when the system/information/environment (all or just one) conflict with the learner in some way that problems happen. It could be a child 'shutting' down -- it could be disenfranchisement of such a degree that they lash out. And this carries over home/school and can become intertwined. No simple answers. LOTS of committed teachers out there trying to make a difference, sometimes swimming upstream with no support. Government control over standards that are arbitrary to a learner certainly don't help.

I used to teach, but Ohio started High Stakes Tests years before "no child left behind" (a high stake test is any test that punishes a learner for a one-shot deal -- no promotion to the next grade if one or more sections aren't passed, no graduation (even if all you've missed is ONE math question...). Over 50 psychological, educational and child-centered organizations are against high-stakes tests.

see http://www.stophighstakestests.org for lots of resources about this practice

[battleknight24]

9. So what is being done right, and what needs to be changed...

... in the American Public Education system?

Peace,

[GettysbergII]

11. Responding to the Attack on Public Education and Teacher Unions

Here's a well researched study by the Commonweal Institute on how various rightwing foundations have lead the charge to undermine public education for the last 25 years.

http://commonwealinstitute.org/reports/ed/EdRespondReport.html

Introduction
Until about 25 years ago, public education was widely regarded as one of the great
institutions of this country. Open to all children, public schools have long embodied
our national ideals of equality and opportunity, and they have served as a vital resource
for American communities, as the center of children’s social as well as academic life.
Public school facilities provide auditoriums for performances, community sports
facilities, and after-school rooms for adult education and other activities. And many of
those people who have graduated from public school have gone to become leading
figures in American society – in business, politics, the arts, and other fields.

Public schools have a proud history of enriching American community life. Public
education has long involved much more than reading, writing, and arithmetic. For
generations of immigrants, public education facilitated the learning of English and eased
the transition into American society. Students learned about civics and government and
developed respect for our democracy and an understanding of the responsibilities of
citizenship. In more recent years, public schools have provided food, counseling, health
care, and social assistance for kids from all backgrounds. Public schools have also
sought to innovate, to improve, to represent the best interests of their communities, and to
enable talent, creativity, and ambition to be recognized and rewarded. Not all public
schools were equally successful, and none was perfect, but that is true of every major
institution. The fact is that, until the late1970s, our public school system enjoyed the
admiration and respect of the American public. It was considered one of the essential
institutions of our society. Although still well regarded by much of the public, this
previous high level of public esteem has gradually eroded. There is now significant
concern about, as well as opposition to, public education. So what happened?

Opposition to public education has occurred as a result of a broader ideologically
and politically motivated assault, by what we will term here as the “Right” on “liberal”
institutions and policies. This assault is not generally recognized by the public or even
many educators. Its major targets include the national media, college professors,
organized labor, the regulation of business, progressive taxation - and public education...
These attacks have greatly influenced how the American public thinks about institutions
and policies that had long been considered as the bedrock of our country. In particular,
the Right has systematically worked, for more than two decades, to undermine the
public’s confidence and respect for public education.

Initially promoted as providing “choice,” the Right is becoming less covert about their
real goal – privatizing schools and eliminating as much of the public education system as
possible. This should not be very surprising, given that the “school choice” campaign is
actually part of a broader ideological movement intent on shifting a whole array of
government functions – from the military to Social Security – to the private sphere.

The alternatives to public education being proposed by the Right, by any reasonable
and objective standards, are not in the broad public interest. Vouchers can lead
directly to a breakdown of the separation of church and state, and could result in an
education system consisting of religious and private corporate based schools only. The history of corporations in this country, both past and present, show that a corporate run,
for-profit school system cannot be expected to serve the public interest.

[murielm99]

14. This is an incredible study.

It deserves its' own thread.


:thumbsup:

[oscar111]

15. Gettysburg, you say RW wants to end public schools, but why?

why do they want to privatize schools?

my guess is to lower taxes on the rich.

or to insert more biased courses that lead to liking the RW.

what is their motive?

[applegrove]

16. They all came out of MBA school with the theory that anything could

be run better privately than publicly. Health Care, Schools, - you name it.

Parents will send their kids to the best school and the bad ones will fail. Well I don't know if they are planning to give free bus passed to 5 year olds and send them on their way or what? How could a school bus every drop kids off going to different schools? That would be ridiculous. Of course private school buses would take care of that problem ...right?

[awoke_in_2003]

17. why do they want to privatize schools?

So only the wealthy can afford it. That way they can destroy what FDR and post-WWII policies helped create- a strong middle class. An uneducated work force is alot cheaper for big business, who would much rather outsource skill jobs. While they will lose some market share here, they can become more competitive (price-wise) in European Union market. The combined GDP of EU exceeds that of the US, plus with sales in other parts of the world, they can keep up their profits, or probably increase them. Third world manufacturing means cheaper wages, less regulation, more profit. Screw the proles. :sarcasm:

[applegrove]

18. Oh no - they have plans for vouchers so that the poor can send their

5 year olds across town. Ridiculous.

I really don't think that kids need to be covered in advertising as they walk down the halls.

Actually it was the scots who started with public schools. As a reaction to their treatment by the British - they went all out in the 1700s and taught their kids to read and do math. And then those kids farmed out around the world and did well for themselves..because they had an education that many around the world did not.

And good public education is still the big equalizer.

I don't know why they think the way they do. I guess the corporations want kids who are happy to be in a corporate environment and see it as the giver of all light.

What foolish experiments they play with the lives of the half of America that is not wealthy.

[GettysbergII]

20. I think there's several reasons

1) Depending whose figures you're using, the ruling elite/megacorporations see public education as a $360-600 billion market that they are excluded from exploiting. Given the fact world oil production appears to be peaking in the next few years (2004-2010) its going to get increasing difficult to drive a growth economy without the seemingly endless supply of cheap energy (oil) that we had for the last 150 years. Thus after oil costs starting spiraling here in the early 70s after American Oil production peaked, the ruling class shortly after (Reaganomics) started cannabalizing our economy at the expense of the working class by first farming out the means production, and then outsourcing tech and white collar jobs and all the while removing restrictions on monopolistic business practices, funneling public funds into corporate welfare programs and whenever possible castrating and coopting organized labor. After gouging the American working people for all that the market will bear on health, medicine and insurance costs all that's left to exploit now is government controlled programs like public education, social security, the penal system and public pension funds. Hence the euphorism 'privatize' instead of the more apt description 'piratize'. (Then after only the corporations are allowed to abrogate there legal debts after the impending economic collapse I would expect a return to indentured servitude will be used to bridge the energy gap.)

One of the major forces in privatizing the public schools is the Wal-Mart heirs via the Walton Foundation whereby they pump hundreds of millions into funding the voucher/charter school movement. (http://blackcommentator.com/85/85_cover_walmart.html) Once the backbone of public education is broken expect to start seeing Wal-Mart cookie cutter charter schools undermining the smaller legitimate players. And less you still think the goal is to improve education for the impoverished, keep in mind that every 'failed' dropout that moves from highschool to prison costs the goverment 30,000 a year that goes into the prison-industrial complex coffers. The fact is there's lots and lots of money to be made off poverty.

2)The teacher unions are some the last effective labor unions in the USA. Obviously, the right wing would love to polish them off to make the third-worldization of the the American worker even easier.

3)The megacorporations control the mainstream media and use it as an organ for social control and shaping the publics perceptions. Getting control of the education system to better acclimate our children to their lot in life in a return to old testament law, would be just icing on the cake.

By the way, keep in mind that both Repugs and Democrats passed the NCLB Act. The rightwing of the ruling class may be spearheading the charge to 'privatization' but the socalled 'progressive' wing of the ruling class is going along with it.

There's an interesting paper and discussion on this issue here at DU:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=103&topic_id=128286&mesg_id=128286&page=

[pretzel4gore]

19. 3 hoaxes pushed by the rightwing

as recounted in michael lind's 'up from conservativism'...the 3 hoaxes, or big lies, are
1) taxes are too high
2)public schools fail to educate, are not cost effective
3)the rates of illegitimacy among the poor, meaning black, are higher then social norms

Lind uses government and agency numbers to prove that
1)taxes in fact are actually lower then in comparable industrial countries - low taxes are indeed one attraction the US has for well educated rightwingers from 3rd world countries!
2) US public schools produce graduates at rates as good as anywhere; this even after reagan tried to wreck the public school system
3) poor women have illegitimate children at the same rates as upper or middle class women; racism is the main factor in public belief that high rates of illegitimacy exist among the poor...

the main factor to remember is that the men running the country, the business community, the media etc know that these are lies based upon a political agenda, yet go along with them....like dope pushers, they sell straw as thai weed or jamaican, or horsepills as lsd....they push bad dope year in/year out, relentlessly lying until the lie becomes faith...unforunately, they were shitting in their own nests: today, the people don't believe the government, the pigmedia or anyone else therefore WE CHOOSE WHAT WE BELIEVE....and thus the US is a faith based society, without any goddam faith

[oscar111]

21. efficiency of charter schools demolished

one re made the point that "they come out of MBA school thinking private can do anything better than public"

this is the Efficiency argument.

Counter this please?

my off the top of the head counters, against Efficiency Argument in general, all spheres of society, not just education;

===============================
1. Wasteful competition - duplication of equipment: trade secrets keep others less efficient

2. great wealth from privatized concerns, is used to bribe officials {campaign contributions} - destroying democracy

3. loss of control: privatized concerns are run by dictators, not the citizens.

4. cut corners -- shabby products. Profit motive drops quality, increases tricks to ripoff. Pharmacist recently diluted cancer drugs to up his profit. Heart pacemakers were "recycled" by the OEM altering expiration date. OEM orig equip maker. Privatized garbage collection -- trash left for weeks, "hopper" workers treated badly { all fired daily, re-hired or not, next morning. Insecurity results. Imagine how a banker will react to a mortgage application from a daily-fired worker.} , wildcat strikes, hoppers began demanding money from houseowners. {hoppers hop on and off truck, pitch the trash in}. Hoppers i saw looked to be 15 {unreported child labor?}, and very very tired. It was painful to watch people so fatigued trying to work.

5. monopoly private equals price hikes --- not seen when monopoly public, because a public director has no profit gouging ideas.

6. competition inferior to co-operation.

Co-operation === Strength flows together, building strength.
competition ==== Strengths destroy each other.

Mentally, co-operating citizens have a friendly approach to other citizens -- ending neighbor-strife over minor matters.
competing citizens are aggressive, upping strife and inner turmoil.

co-operation = love,
competition = hate. Take your pick for the healthier basis of a society.

7. In Nature, recently biologists have found that co-operating symbiosis is MORE common than predatory lion-eat-deer situations. In the past, MBA schools have touted Nature as the big argument for "competition is God-ordained".

Our own bodies have bacteria in our gut to aid in digestion and produce B-vitamins. Symbiosis {human and bacteria}. The tiny bacteria cells are so numerous, they outnumber human body cells ten to one! They are tiny in comparison, so they all fit in your gut. Bulk is needed for properly moving feces down the gut -- two thirds of the bulk is produced by bacteria.

[applegrove]

23. Markets are efficient. As to fair, as to meeting the goals set by

people, as to dropping externalities everywhere (costs): they are not efficient or equitable.

Sorry if this is long Oscar - you keep emailing me and asking me to expand on my posts.

That is why in health care and in schooling, regulations and perhaps monopoly power is necessary (monopoly power in the hands of the people allows you to cut costs too). Because in this case, the market cannot deliver on goals (who do you want in medical school? people heading towards California with hopes of a degree in plastic surgery or doctors who will stay in your state and work for the populations there - you hope to spend $150,000 dollars on the education of someone who will stay and help out). Who do you want educated? Someone whose income will rise to a point where they can buy a house and save for that education or someone who doesn't need that.

Yes I agree part of the 'branding' of schools & all things government is to undo the ties between people and government ...and thus tax reduction. Political & a power grab.


The markets belong to us. If you live off of more than you could grow off your front lawn and eat & turn into clothes..you are living off the market and have some wealth in your hands in the form of dollars (perhaps only an optional $100 a month if you are lucky). We get to use them as they suit us a human beings. Markets do not belong to corporations. Corporations are tools for us to use too. They are efficient tools. But guess what? So is the internet now..and who says that the internet will not be the end of the corporation. They used to have a monopoly on transnational trade. Now they don't.

So you need a mix. Which is why all the West are mixed market economies. Neocons know better than anyone else that giving government monopoly power on important parts of the economy is necessary - why look at the monopoly power the government has in the arms industry. Neocons think that is important - so that is why they try and undo international cooperation and corporate mergers in the arms industry. That is why MIT has been so funded by the USA government over the years. They simply prioritize it that way.

It is just a choice of values and where you think all the power to control outcomes should be. If you want to control an outcome/results - you give monopoly power to the government. Where you don't give a shit - and want to not be involved or have to tax for - you make it into a market which will then run itself and spread wealth to some people(not like the markets themselves are not regulated). Where you don't like the spreading of wealth that a good public school system does - let's say you are resentful and racist - you move to burbs and pay your taxes there and refuse to amalgamate as cities and develop other sicknesses like a dependence on oil to make your life 'just so'.

Where you think the elites have too much power and will skew the government and go oblique and hide their needs and actions from people in cabals or by stealing elections with so much smoke & mirrors with their excess wealth or by dumping costs (externalities) on anyone but themselves - you regulate against elites. So that they don't skew things - like the markets they are in or the governance they run up against. And that is where we are.

Choices. Priorities. Oh the neocons talk good talk about efficiency - but they have the talk all planned out. It is not about efficiency..it is about choices and meeting their own needs or assuaging their own fears. And dumping what they don't care about (or what gets in their way)as issues. So they teach people to be less empathetic about their neighbors. So that the military will back corporations all over the world - and people in outside countries will have to play by American rules - just as world markets might be saying: USA fuck off we have our own markets and other competitors than you and we have priorities amongst our people and we can monopolize what we want if that will meet our goals (like say poverty reduction by health care or schooling). So neocons are not about efficiency outside the USA. Only when it suits their goals.

Hypocrites - as the day is long - nothing but one set of rules for you and one set of rules for themselves.

[oscar111]

22. Poverty drags on students, regardless of any school quality

a big factor in the life of any student is where most of his time is spent: home.

Poverty means chaos attacking from all sides without the money needed to solve the problems.

result, is parents of students,.. too frazzled to be parents.
result, is troublesome chaotic neighbors.
result, is bad housing == too cold or hot to study. Rat-borne disease. Asthma from roach parts.
result, is neighbors with no income {see Job Shortage in my sig below} and so, into crime.. which means burgling the student's room.
result, is stores in student's area that rip off customers, knowing they cannot afford a lawyer.
on and on.

Poverty is a drag on education. Europe has less poverty, and it is less severe due to social safety nets.

Result: Europe and any area with social benefits {less poverty} will have better learning by kids. RR's planned Job Shortage {to cut wages down} upped poverty by fifty percent and forced three million to live on a piece of sidewalk --- including kids.

end poverty, and ANY school will do a better job.

poverty is mainly a result of the Job Shortage.. 14 million shortage of jobs... see sig.

end poverty with WPA. It would harness the output of those now unharnessed -- so zero cost --- in fact, it would pay, not cost. Also helpful, Share the Work plan of France, and new co-ops.

End poverty, and you accidently end street crime. Ever hear of muggers in well to do neighborhoods? Jobs end crime.

[applegrove]

24. Oh yes - full employment is something else the neocons feel goes

against their needs. Why if you have full employment and the price of Oil goes up - you have a recession. Perpetual markets can only happen if you have a good kitty of the unemployed. Because we know that oil is only going to go up and up and up. And those rich little elites in the US - don't want to see a recession.

Selfish, selfish, selfish!