We're all part Cave-Man (Neanderthal) except for the Africans

[Dave Stratman]

Re: We're all part Cave-Man (Neanderthal) except for the Africans

Very interesting stuff, thanks. How was it received at the time? How do you think education has faired since then?

Where do you think the line is between conspirators and dupes? When bills like that go out, do you think the Senators are actively worried about over-educated masses with high expectations? Or are they greedy dupes of slick lobbyists?

Good questions.

The speech was received extremely well, though in the Q&A period a couple of superintendents said they couldn't believe that all this could be planned; it sounded like a "conspiracy theory." News of decades of tobacco industry insider memos revealing conscious suppression of medical evidence had just come to light in the media. When I pointed out this long history from the podium, the two withdrew their objections. A number of superintendents rose to say that they thought that what I had described was happening but had never heard it said out loud before. That evening, at the cocktail reception, six different superintendents came up to me and said, "Dave, do you think we need a revolution?" Pretty amazing, coming from officials at the top of the local education establishment.

MASS then offered to hire me to put together an alliance of organizations to oppose business-led reform. Someone higher up in the government--I assume it was John Silber, then Commissioner of Education--quickly put the kibosh on that. The superintendents' organization then fell into line and supported reforms that its members knew were destructive but felt no power to resist.

Snce 1997 the situation in public education has gotten much worse. At the time of my speech, high-stakes testing had not yet begun in Massachusetts (it began in spring, 1998); it was only in Florida and Texas. In the ensuing years it was spread by state Business Roundtables to all 50 states. In 2001 a bill called "No Child Left Behind" was passed. This federal law was the collaborative product of the Business Roundtable, the AFT and NEA, Ted Kennedy and other liberal and conservative senators, George Miller and other liberal and conservative representatives, and George Bush. It is the most intrusive and destructive piece of education legislation ever passed. Its full effects will not be felt till 2014, but it has already had devastating impact. NCLB massively increases student testing. (the US already does much more testing than any other nation.) It sets schools up to fail by raising test targets yearly to unreachable levels even while education resources are dramatically cut. It allows for the mass firing of teachers at schools which fail to reach meet their "AYP"--annual yearly progress in raising test scores; these schools are typically schools in the poorest areas, where teachers and students face the greatest odds. It promotes privatization of public education.

Do I think Senators are actively worried about over-educated masses with high expectations, or are they just dupes? Another interesting question. Experienced leaders like the late Kennedy and George Miller understood the game and their role in it completely. But in our political system, it is not necessary for all the players to understand the game plan. They just have to know who is leading the team. When Business Roundtable lobbyists and officials tell Senators to jump, the only question is "How high?"

You'll note that the teacher unions, the AFT and NEA, were in on writing this bill. The national leadership of these organizations has long played a double game: expressing ineffective or tangential criticism of anti-education bills on the one hand, while undercutting teacher resistance on the other. For example, when the disastrous No Child Left Behind law was passed, what was NEA's strategy? Did it mobilize teachers to fight the bill or resist implementation? Not on your life. No, the NEA went to Court to demand that the bill be fully funded.

One last note. As I've mentioned elsewhere, the Business Roundtable was founded in September, 1972 in Washington, DC when the CEOs of the 200 largest corporations in the US came together to plan how to go on the counterattack against the popular movements of the 1960s that were challenging their power and their profits. The BR has played a leading role ever since then in planning and organizing education reform as part of its overall strategy of social control.

[shiny!]

Re: We're all part Cave-Man (Neanderthal) except for the Africans

Dave, your speech reminds me of John Gatto's take on public education. Are you familiar him? He says that the problem with education isn't that it is teaching the wrong conclusions to children, but that it is teaching students to be incapable of forming any conclusions at all. Public education was deliberately designed to produce passive factory workers who, by the time they graduated school, would be completely programmed to turn off their minds when the bell rang and do what they were told without question.

My husband had the opportunity to hear Gatto speak in Santa Fe around 1994. He then read Gatto's book, Dumbing Us Down: The Hidden Curriculum of Compulsory Schooling http://www.amazon.com/Dumbing-Down-C...1344508&sr=8-1 over the weekend. He was so excited by Gatto's ideas that he went back to work the following Monday and told the other teachers and principal about what he had learned. The workplace harrassment began almost immediately. By the end of the next school year he was blackballed by the school district. He couldn't get a teaching job anywhere in the state for the next four years. It was only when he stopped listing his two years teaching for that district on his resume that he got hired (immediately) and received stellar reviews for his work for the rest of his life.

He wanted to see a Jeffersonian system of public education. Thomas Jefferson wanted an educational meritocracy. Under his plan, all children would be provided three years of public education to learn how to read, write and do basic math. After that, the best student from each primary school would be given 2-3 more years public education. After that, the best student from each grammar school would be given 6 more years of high school at public expense. Those that didn't progress to grammar or high school would become laborers or go into the trades as apprentices. The top 50% of high school students would be given a free college education to study anything they wanted.

http://www.educationnews.org/article...al-wisdom.html

There was no NCLB and "Every child deserves to go to college" cr*p because it was well understood that not every child was college material. It was considered a great opportunity to become an apprentice and learn a trade. Nowdays, it seems that nobody wants their child to grow up to be a plumber, electrician, HVAC repairman or auto mechanic, even though those jobs are needed and can pay very well.

High schools no longer offer vocational education; smart children that are not academically inclined are being forced into college-prep curriculums. They are bored out of their minds, often labeled ADD and drugged, and become school dropouts.

The founder of Summerhill, A.S. Neill, believed that if children are not required to attend classes but are instead given a rich environment to explore and learn from on their own, they can learn all the requirements for high school graduation in only a few years when they are ready and motivated. "Summerhill: A Radical Approach to Child Rearing" is a fascinating book:

http://www.amazon.com/Summerhill-Rad...1348967&sr=1-1

Warehousing children in 12 years of compulsory education keeps them in a prolonged state of immaturity and separates them from society. When children are prevented from having involvement in their community they see no value in it. If, for example, a child is involved in building a house as an apprentice under adult supervision, they learn so much that cannot be taught in a classroom. I believe a child is not as likely to vandalize a house if they know how much hard work goes into building that house. Likewise they are not going to join a gang if they have positive involvement with adult mentors on a daily basis.

[lektrode]

Re: We're all part Cave-Man (Neanderthal) except for the Africans

....Fathers can be forced by the court to pay child support. It ain't a bad deal to have that baby for a young woman.

It needs to be a bad deal.

not so much a 'bad deal', per se - but theres got to be something that FORCES RESPONSIBILITY on the part of _both_ parties to the 'transaction'

altho abortion is certainly a crude option, the idea that the self-selected welfare class can just krank out babies - on the public's dime - without being held responsible for _their_ actions, what? because they too phreakin stoopud to wear a rubber or take the pill? (and yeah, they self-select this 'lifestyle' as there are _ALWAYS_ other options than going on welfare and letting the state (the rest of us) pay the freight - there ought to be workfarms for those who, thru no fault of their own, cant find any other job - they can produce food, at the very least, to pay back the state, until they can pull themselves up out of whatevah hole they got dumped into - and i'm not refering to the unemployed, here, either = a different issue entirely)

BS!!! and i'm phreakin sick and phreakin tired of listening to all the GD (liberal's) excuses on how they cant help themselves, while they lay around on their fat asses, smokin cigs (at upwards of 10bux/pack out here) or out cloggin up the streets on their way to the 'free' clinics with their brood of brats every time they get the sniffles (and my SO is a nurse, so i hear _all_ about it) and WE (the workin class and/or The Productive class) ARE JUST SUPPOSED TO ACCEPT THE FACT THEY THINK THEY ENTITLED TO KRANK OUT MORE BABIES, which jacks up their 'benefits' to the tune of THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS A MONTH?

i say, NO WAY - you get preggers by 'accident' ONE time - the _next_ time, its either give the kid up for adoption upon birth, or termination of pregnancy upon the 1st missed period, aka ru486'd - then, you get the depo-provera, and must appear monthly to get yer checks and/or EBT card recharged

either that or YOU _CAN_ WORK AT A WORKFARM IN EXCHANGE FOR YOUR 'benefits' but the very idea that these people can simply krank out babies rather than go to WORK = a GD outrage

oh and one other thing here (cuz i'm not going to get any further dragged into this goin-nowhere thread)
its really quite simple: what is the 'tipping point' where about the time the working class starts to notice that the welfare class is doing more than getting by, when its an option to simply give up and say 'if ya cant beat em, mights well join em'
that my friends will be The End of 'america' as we know it

[jneal3]

Re: We're all part Cave-Man (Neanderthal) except for the Africans

Anyone else nervous about posting to this thread for fear of being misunderstood...?

I am interested in the cultural explanation for characteristics of a given race some would mis-attribute to genetics - and I ran across this article that made me wonder whether what some people like to point to as evidence of the innate inability of poor blacks to help themselves is partly (obviously coming out of slavery with no wealth had a little to do with things) a cultural legacy of slavery, namely that after 250 years of zero control over one's fate a culture would evolve where it would be nonsense to believe in free will:

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/22/sc...ef=johntierney

“Doubting one’s free will may undermine the sense of self as agent,” Dr. Vohs and Dr. Schooler concluded. “Or, perhaps, denying free will simply provides the ultimate excuse to behave as one likes.”

Those who survived slavery may have been those who accepted and perpetuated the logical conclusion that there is no free will - to accept otherwise under slavery would drive you insane. Without a strong 'sense of self as agent', all things tend to seem beyond your own control. Having your own government tell you that you need to be taken care of (the message implied in welfare today) would be a powerful pull given a predilection to believe it. Why study hard in school, save for the future, and delay gratification in general when in your cultural bones you think it probably won't pay off?

Just gives me that much more admiration for blacks who make it in this country.

[aaron]

Re: We're all part Cave-Man (Neanderthal) except for the Africans

We want the schools to raise our kids. They do a poor job of it. We are expecting a lot more than they can deliver with current funding.

Has school ever done more than prepare people for the factories and cubicles ? That is their point of existence, no?. They do not hide this --> study hard, get into college, get a good job. That is the formula that we have all accepted.

Do high schools really no longer offer training? Or, do they spend those resources on computers instead of shop class? Which one would be more beneficial for a kid to learn?

The only thing I have read that seemed good for the kids for sure was year round schooling. I think I saw that in Freakonomics.

In Taiwan, kids all go to elementary school. If they test high, they can go to middle school and then test again for high school. If they do not test well, but are still teachable, they can go to one of the trade schools. The trade schools are like a combination between high school and junior college. You get a degree and skill when you graduate.

[c1ue]

Re: We're all part Cave-Man (Neanderthal) except for the Africans

I just got back from China & Taiwan where they actually do have a meritocracy for students. If you score highest on the national entrance exams, then you get to go to the best schools.

That is still somewhat true, although the reality is that the highest level jobs are increasingly going to those who attend foreign top schools.

After all, what you describe was more or less true in the United States even just 30 years ago, and look what has happened since.

China/ethnic Chinese also have the legacy of the Hanlin examinations - a semi-fabled past where government positions were filled by national examinations.

Of course even in this paradigm, those who had the luxury and money to study and get tutored are far, far more likely than the poor peasant laborer's kid to do well.

[lektrode]

Re: We're all part Cave-Man (Neanderthal) except for the Africans

.....Having your own government tell you that you need to be taken care of (the message implied in welfare today) would be a powerful pull given a predilection to believe it. Why study hard in school, save for the future, and delay gratification in general when in your cultural bones you think it probably won't pay off?

Just gives me that much more admiration for blacks who make it in this country.

+1

[lektrode]

Re: We're all part Cave-Man (Neanderthal) except for the Africans

writing as one who went thru a HS voc-tech program, and got rather bored with it after the 1st year (and maybe 1/2 the 2nd) - probably would've been a better bet to go thru a more rigorous academic track - the results of this, somewhat ironically and fortuitously, is what allowed me to walk away from the manufacturing 'career' track i that thot was my future

today, all things considered, the meltdown of the economy etc - it all worked out and i bill 75bux/hour to do things that my highschool training prepared me for (not that i get to bill all that many hours, but its a living) but what made it workout, was the willingness to work my ass off to achieve the result - nobody handed me anything.

learning something other than the ABC's is a good bet for just about everybody

[Dave Stratman]

Re: We're all part Cave-Man (Neanderthal) except for the Africans

Dave, your speech reminds me of John Gatto's take on public education. Are you familiar him? He says that the problem with education isn't that it is teaching the wrong conclusions to children, but that it is teaching students to be incapable of forming any conclusions at all. Public education was deliberately designed to produce passive factory workers who, by the time they graduated school, would be completely programmed to turn off their minds when the bell rang and do what they were told without question.

My husband had the opportunity to hear Gatto speak in Santa Fe around 1994. He then read Gatto's book, Dumbing Us Down: The Hidden Curriculum of Compulsory Schooling http://www.amazon.com/Dumbing-Down-C...1344508&sr=8-1 over the weekend. He was so excited by Gatto's ideas that he went back to work the following Monday and told the other teachers and principal about what he had learned. The workplace harrassment began almost immediately. By the end of the next school year he was blackballed by the school district. He couldn't get a teaching job anywhere in the state for the next four years. It was only when he stopped listing his two years teaching for that district on his resume that he got hired (immediately) and received stellar reviews for his work for the rest of his life.

He wanted to see a Jeffersonian system of public education. Thomas Jefferson wanted an educational meritocracy. Under his plan, all children would be provided three years of public education to learn how to read, write and do basic math. After that, the best student from each primary school would be given 2-3 more years public education. After that, the best student from each grammar school would be given 6 more years of high school at public expense. Those that didn't progress to grammar or high school would become laborers or go into the trades as apprentices. The top 50% of high school students would be given a free college education to study anything they wanted.

http://www.educationnews.org/article...al-wisdom.html

There was no NCLB and "Every child deserves to go to college" cr*p because it was well understood that not every child was college material. It was considered a great opportunity to become an apprentice and learn a trade. Nowdays, it seems that nobody wants their child to grow up to be a plumber, electrician, HVAC repairman or auto mechanic, even though those jobs are needed and can pay very well.

High schools no longer offer vocational education; smart children that are not academically inclined are being forced into college-prep curriculums. They are bored out of their minds, often labeled ADD and drugged, and become school dropouts.

The founder of Summerhill, A.S. Neill, believed that if children are not required to attend classes but are instead given a rich environment to explore and learn from on their own, they can learn all the requirements for high school graduation in only a few years when they are ready and motivated. "Summerhill: A Radical Approach to Child Rearing" is a fascinating book:

http://www.amazon.com/Summerhill-Rad...1348967&sr=1-1

Warehousing children in 12 years of compulsory education keeps them in a prolonged state of immaturity and separates them from society. When children are prevented from having involvement in their community they see no value in it. If, for example, a child is involved in building a house as an apprentice under adult supervision, they learn so much that cannot be taught in a classroom. I believe a child is not as likely to vandalize a house if they know how much hard work goes into building that house. Likewise they are not going to join a gang if they have positive involvement with adult mentors on a daily basis.

Hi, Shiny!--

The story of what happened to your husband after he talked up Gatto is appalling. Thank goodness he was able to find work after that.

Re Gatto: Much of Gatto's critique of public schooling is brilliant and rich with insight, but I think his usefulness stops there. Gatto is a libertarian. He has no quarrel with capitalism and his ideas for school change do not challenge the social order that makes the schools what they are, except, of course, that he wants to disengage children's education from State control. But the State is only the most visible part of the problem, and not the most important part. The State--the whole governing apparatus--answers to a higher power: Wall Street and the corporatocracy and the military-industrial complex. Gatto's approach does not challenge the real power but feeds right into it. Aside from a historical critique of the Prussian model of schooling intended to produce docile factory hands, he doesn't seem to recognize or criticize the current assault on children and their families by the ruling elite (I haven't read anything truly up to date from Gatto, so I may have missed something).

But take, for example, the "Jeffersonian" idea of education that you mention. That model would in no way challenge the role of education in reinforcing social inequality; in fact it would reinforce it. (Elements of the Minnesota Business Partnership Plan that I describe in my speech are quite compatible with Gatto, e.g., having all kids leave school at age 16, with only an educational elite to return and go on to college.) Gatto also seems to support privatization of public schools--a key element of the Business Roundtable reform plans--as well as Home Schooling, which I see as a non-solution to the problem. (I haven't read Summerhill for years, but I think there's a lot of good in it.)

The education system reflects the society it is meant to reproduce. I believe that we need a revolution in society--I mean, to overthrow the capitalist State and break the stranglehold of the sociopaths on our society--and to create real democracy.

We can educate our young people for one of two purposes: to teach them to fit into a world over which they will have no control, or to understand their world and to change it. The first is education as we have it now, education to meet the needs of capitalism. The second is what I call Education for Democracy.

Rather than proposing new structures for schooling--for example, Gatto's Jeffersonian model--in my view we should instead be mobilizing teachers, parents, and students to fight to transform the schools as part of the struggle to transform the society; we should be building a revolutionary movement in the schools. In practical terms this would mean, for example, investigating all those things in school policy and practice that tend to undermine children's development, make students dependent, undermine teachers, reinforce inqequality, etc., and seek to eliminate these practices; we would also seek to identify and strengthen all those elements of schooling that nourish critical thinking and self-confidence in students, etc. (Working with teachers and union staff, in 1985-86 I developed a long range plan for the MN Education Association called "Education for Democracy" which included Ten Principles for Education Reform and a strategy for building a movement in the state to transform the schools. Unfortunately the plan was never fully carried out; a new state union president got in who, after promising fully to support "Education for Democracy," backed down and fired the staff most involved with it.)

Unfortunately I don't have time right now to develop these matters further.

[shiny!]

Re: We're all part Cave-Man (Neanderthal) except for the Africans

Hi, Shiny!--

The story of what happened to your husband after he talked up Gatto is appalling. Thank goodness he was able to find work after that.

Re Gatto: Much of Gatto's critique of public schooling is brilliant and rich with insight, but I think his usefulness stops there. Gatto is a libertarian. He has no quarrel with capitalism and his ideas for school change do not challenge the social order that makes the schools what they are, except, of course, that he wants to disengage children's education from State control. But the State is only the most visible part of the problem, and not the most important part. The State--the whole governing apparatus--answers to a higher power: Wall Street and the corporatocracy and the military-industrial complex. Gatto's approach does not challenge the real power but feeds right into it. Aside from a historical critique of the Prussian model of schooling intended to produce docile factory hands, he doesn't seem to recognize or criticize the current assault on children and their families by the ruling elite (I haven't read anything truly up to date from Gatto, so I may have missed something).

But take, for example, the "Jeffersonian" idea of education that you mention. That model would in no way challenge the role of education in reinforcing social inequality; in fact it would reinforce it. (Elements of the Minnesota Business Partnership Plan that I describe in my speech are quite compatible with Gatto, e.g., having all kids leave school at age 16, with only an educational elite to return and go on to college.) Gatto also seems to support privatization of public schools--a key element of the Business Roundtable reform plans--as well as Home Schooling, which I see as a non-solution to the problem. (I haven't read Summerhill for years, but I think there's a lot of good in it.)

The education system reflects the society it is meant to reproduce. I believe that we need a revolution in society--I mean, to overthrow the capitalist State and break the stranglehold of the sociopaths on our society--and to create real democracy.

We can educate our young people for one of two purposes: to teach them to fit into a world over which they will have no control, or to understand their world and to change it. The first is education as we have it now, education to meet the needs of capitalism. The second is what I call Education for Democracy.

Rather than proposing new structures for schooling--for example, Gatto's Jeffersonian model--in my view we should instead be mobilizing teachers, parents, and students to fight to transform the schools as part of the struggle to transform the society; we should be building a revolutionary movement in the schools. In practical terms this would mean, for example, investigating all those things in school policy and practice that tend to undermine children's development, make students dependent, undermine teachers, reinforce inqequality, etc., and seek to eliminate these practices; we would also seek to identify and strengthen all those elements of schooling that nourish critical thinking and self-confidence in students, etc. (Working with teachers and union staff, in 1985-86 I developed a long range plan for the MN Education Association called "Education for Democracy" which included Ten Principles for Education Reform and a strategy for building a movement in the state to transform the schools. Unfortunately the plan was never fully carried out; a new state union president got in who, after promising fully to support "Education for Democracy," backed down and fired the staff most involved with it.)

Unfortunately I don't have time right now to develop these matters further.

I like your ideas but don't think we can change the current educational system for the better; it's just too dysfunctional. We will have to create a new paradigm of education out of the ashes of this one. In daily practice, school administration has become more authoritarian and rigidely entrenched every year. Too many parents are uninvolved, not only with the schools but even with their children. Teachers' morale is low because they have very little choice anymore in what and how they teach. Every minute of their day, every interaction with their students, is micromanaged by political legislation and district administrators- people who haven't a clue how to teach or manage a class full of students. The paperwork burden on teachers has reached incredible proportions in the name of "accountability". The districts actually like it when experienced teachers quit so they can replace them with newbies low on the pay scale.

The Federal government provides about 5% of the schools' funding but mandates 80% of the paperwork that has to be filled out. Standardized testing is out of control and all it accomplishes is that students are now only taught to perform for the tests. Standardized tests are required of special ed children who can't even read or write. A 14-year old child with Down's Syndrome who can perform at a 2nd-grade level is not tested to see what she knows. Instead she must test at a 9th-grade level and feel like a failure. It's totally demoralizing for both the students and their teachers. Parents can opt their children out of standardized tests but they don't know that, and teachers who tell them so risk losing their job. Schools with a high percentage of special ed students have low performance scores because of the way testing is mandated.

My husband taught at a middle school where 25% of the students were classified as special ed with learning and/or severe emotional/behavioral problems. Nobody seems aware of or outraged at the fact that such a huge percentage of our children are so damaged. If a germ struck down 25% of the children in this country they would declare a national emergency and pull out all the stops to find a cure like they did with polio. Politicians debate funding for special ed children but don't address the many causes of the problem.

Public education is both a collosal failure and a huge success. It churns out illiterate, apathetic dropouts at an astounding rate. It also successfully creates exactly the kind of people it was intended to create, i.e. people who can't think. People who can't think tend to stay passive as long as they get their bread and circuses, especially if they are dependent on the government for their bread.

At this point I believe the system will have to collapse before anything better can take its place. If all funding for public schools dries up, the schools will close down. Then I could see neighbors joining together, turning a garage into a classroom for the kids in their neighborhood and hiring a teacher to teach them. Sort of a combination of home schooling and the one-room schoolhouse.

What and how they teach will vary wildly. Will they get a teacher who understands Bloom's Taxonomy and uses every lesson to teach critical thinking skills? Will they be enlightened like Summerhill or will they only demand rote memorization, or only teach religious texts? Hopefully enough bright, independent minds will make it in the next generation to provide enlightened leadership, creating the kind of education system you envision.

[Dave Stratman]

Re: We're all part Cave-Man (Neanderthal) except for the Africans

I like your ideas but don't think we can change the current educational system for the better; it's just too dysfunctional. We will have to create a new paradigm of education out of the ashes of this one. In daily practice, school administration has become more authoritarian and rigidely entrenched every year. Too many parents are uninvolved, not only with the schools but even with their children. Teachers' morale is low because they have very little choice anymore in what and how they teach. Every minute of their day, every interaction with their students, is micromanaged by political legislation and district administrators- people who haven't a clue how to teach or manage a class full of students. The paperwork burden on teachers has reached incredible proportions in the name of "accountability". The districts actually like it when experienced teachers quit so they can replace them with newbies low on the pay scale.

The Federal government provides about 5% of the schools' funding but mandates 80% of the paperwork that has to be filled out. Standardized testing is out of control and all it accomplishes is that students are now only taught to perform for the tests. Standardized tests are required of special ed children who can't even read or write. A 14-year old child with Down's Syndrome who can perform at a 2nd-grade level is not tested to see what she knows. Instead she must test at a 9th-grade level and feel like a failure. It's totally demoralizing for both the students and their teachers. Parents can opt their children out of standardized tests but they don't know that, and teachers who tell them so risk losing their job. Schools with a high percentage of special ed students have low performance scores because of the way testing is mandated.

My husband taught at a middle school where 25% of the students were classified as special ed with learning and/or severe emotional/behavioral problems. Nobody seems aware of or outraged at the fact that such a huge percentage of our children are so damaged. If a germ struck down 25% of the children in this country they would declare a national emergency and pull out all the stops to find a cure like they did with polio. Politicians debate funding for special ed children but don't address the many causes of the problem.

Public education is both a collosal failure and a huge success. It churns out illiterate, apathetic dropouts at an astounding rate. It also successfully creates exactly the kind of people it was intended to create, i.e. people who can't think. People who can't think tend to stay passive as long as they get their bread and circuses, especially if they are dependent on the government for their bread.

At this point I believe the system will have to collapse before anything better can take its place. If all funding for public schools dries up, the schools will close down. Then I could see neighbors joining together, turning a garage into a classroom for the kids in their neighborhood and hiring a teacher to teach them. Sort of a combination of home schooling and the one-room schoolhouse.

What and how they teach will vary wildly. Will they get a teacher who understands Bloom's Taxonomy and uses every lesson to teach critical thinking skills? Will they be enlightened like Summerhill or will they only demand rote memorization, or only teach religious texts? Hopefully enough bright, independent minds will make it in the next generation to provide enlightened leadership, creating the kind of education system you envision.

Shiny!--

I agree with much of what you say here and you say it with wonderful clarity.

But I think you overestimate the success of the schools in turning out "illiterate, apathetic" young people. Just using comparisons such as international tests like the TIMSS, US students test at or near the top in reading and math, if you compare students at the same grade levels and of similar socioeconomic status.

The differences in international comparisons come in for two reasons: the higher incidence of poverty among US students, and the fact that most US students complete 12 years of schooling. Wealthier school districts in the US test near the top in the world. International comparisons of 17 year olds are skewed by the fact that about 80% of 17 year olds in the US are still in school and are included in the tests, while in European (where most students leave school at age 15) and many other countries the tests include only the 20% or so who have been chosen to complete high school. Even so, US students come out well.

The idea of starving the schools for funds is a terrible one, I think. This suggestion is a good illustration of the poisonous nature of Gatto's approach. More than 80% of our young people are in public schools. Big Business forces have been trying to terrorize and control them more absolutely for years. Adding to the terror would in no way liberate or help them. It would simply mean assisting the worst forces in our society in their attack on young people.

I think you don't recognize--or at least don't mention here--the extent to which students and teachers manage to resist the deadening nature of the schools. Many teachers do succeed at raising the students' expectations of what their lives should be like. Many of them succeed in sharpening young minds and encouraging critical thinking. Many students resist the competitive culture of schooling and support their friends and build wonderful relationships. Many students learn to question things deeply, including questioning their teachers and what they are being taught.

There is a powerful counterforce in the schools. Teachers and students, some more than others, of course, act in many different ways to achieve their own goals in the face of the stultifying goals of the policy makers. This is, after all, exactly why public education and teachers are under such ferocious attack from the most powerful people in our society. This is why legislators are imposing all these tests and trying to snatch any control at all out of the hands of teachers and force them to follow a script and lesson plans created for them. Teachers and students are under attack precisely because they have resisted top-down control with enough success to worry those in power. Why else would the Business Roundtable mount this decades-long, nationwide effort to control what goes on in the classroom? Teachers are not under attack because they have failed, which is what they are told by the media and the politicians and corporate CEOs; they are under attack because they have succeeded--at raising expectations that the capitalist system cannot fulfill.

So I am more hopeful than you. There is a force for change in the schools--the people in them. We should not join in the attack on the public schools. Instead we should support the best of what they do and build a real movement to change them.

[oddlots]

Re: We're all part Cave-Man (Neanderthal) except for the Africans

Finally!

[shiny!]

Re: We're all part Cave-Man (Neanderthal) except for the Africans

Shiny!--

I agree with much of what you say here and you say it with wonderful clarity.

But I think you overestimate the success of the schools in turning out "illiterate, apathetic" young people. Just using comparisons such as international tests like the TIMSS, US students test at or near the top in reading and math, if you compare students at the same grade levels and of similar socioeconomic status.

The differences in international comparisons come in for two reasons: the higher incidence of poverty among US students, and the fact that most US students complete 12 years of schooling. Wealthier school districts in the US test near the top in the world. International comparisons of 17 year olds are skewed by the fact that about 80% of 17 year olds in the US are still in school and are included in the tests, while in European (where most students leave school at age 15) and many other countries the tests include only the 20% or so who have been chosen to complete high school. Even so, US students come out well.

The idea of starving the schools for funds is a terrible one, I think. This suggestion is a good illustration of the poisonous nature of Gatto's approach. More than 80% of our young people are in public schools. Big Business forces have been trying to terrorize and control them more absolutely for years. Adding to the terror would in no way liberate or help them. It would simply mean assisting the worst forces in our society in their attack on young people.

I think you don't recognize--or at least don't mention here--the extent to which students and teachers manage to resist the deadening nature of the schools. Many teachers do succeed at raising the students' expectations of what their lives should be like. Many of them succeed in sharpening young minds and encouraging critical thinking. Many students resist the competitive culture of schooling and support their friends and build wonderful relationships. Many students learn to question things deeply, including questioning their teachers and what they are being taught.

There is a powerful counterforce in the schools. Teachers and students, some more than others, of course, act in many different ways to achieve their own goals in the face of the stultifying goals of the policy makers. This is, after all, exactly why public education and teachers are under such ferocious attack from the most powerful people in our society. This is why legislators are imposing all these tests and trying to snatch any control at all out of the hands of teachers and force them to follow a script and lesson plans created for them. Teachers and students are under attack precisely because they have resisted top-down control with enough success to worry those in power. Why else would the Business Roundtable mount this decades-long, nationwide effort to control what goes on in the classroom? Teachers are not under attack because they have failed, which is what they are told by the media and the politicians and corporate CEOs; they are under attack because they have succeeded--at raising expectations that the capitalist system cannot fulfill.

So I am more hopeful than you. There is a force for change in the schools--the people in them. We should not join in the attack on the public schools. Instead we should support the best of what they do and build a real movement to change them.

Lately I've been tending towards pessimism and bitterness, so thank you for presenting the positive side of this issue. One reason why schools in the USA often score lower than schools in other countries- even quite poor countries- is because we provide education to special needs children when other countries don't. We have a significant percentage of students who can't perform well on tests and it skews the results when compared to countries that don't provide special education. If you didn't factor in the scores from special ed students, our scores would be much higher.

IMO, eliminating the Department of Education, or schools simply opting out of federal funds would be a net win. For only 5% of their funding, the federal government burdens schools with massive amounts of paperwork. If they cut out all that paperwork, teachers would have much more time available to spend with students. School districts could eliminate adminstrative jobs, leaving more money available for the classrooms. Teachers would have more freedom to teach according to the needs of the students, instead of being micro-managed by bureaucrats in Washington who are not educators. I think these wins would more than offset the financial loss.

It's the teachers who care the most who are the most demoralized. My husband was always a subversive teacher. He loved teaching but hated the bureaucratic educational system with a passion. In California in the 80's he taught all subjects to a room full of warring gangsters for nine years. He was in a portable building with about forty ninth and tenth-graders and one classroom aid. The principal didn't want to be bothered with the "troublemakers", so he was left alone to teach as he saw fit. He would set a goal for the students to learn such-and-such, then with his help he let the students design their own individual study programs to attain that goal. Every student would get plenty of one-on-one time with him to discuss their progress. It was a great method for getting kids self-motivated to learn. He was able to turn around about 75% of his students to the point where they could go back to regular classes and graduate. He could walk through gangland territory without fear because so many of the gangsters were "his" kids and they loved him. A good number of them eventually became soldiers, nurses, auto mechanics, plumbers... a huge accomplishment!

In New Mexico he helped develop an award-winning "School-to-Work" program for special ed middle-schoolers. An English teacher, science teacher, and math teacher each taught a vocational skill in their classroom and the students created their own businesses. The English teacher had a bakery; the kids had to learn how to read and write recipes in addition to baking cookies. They sold the cookies at school and made money for field trips and classroom equipment.

The science teacher had a greenhouse and taught the kids how to grow plants. They grew and sold tomatos, peppers, other vegetables and flowers in 6-pack containers and gallon pots.

My husband taught math, woodshop and plumbing. The kids learned math concepts by figuring out how much wood they needed to build dog houses and Bat Boxes, how to calculate their expenses and market the finished products for retail. They went to Home Depot to negotiate prices with the store manager, which entailed learning conversational skills, how to dress nicely, and how to show up on time. Their Bat Box business won an an Entrepreneurial award for best student-run business in the entire state, and these were special ed kids, not regular ed.

One year for their final exam the students had to assemble and install a toilet. The fastest team did it in seven minutes. The year after he left to move to Arizona, the school district disbanded their program and gave the businesses to regular ed students.

He really loved teaching special ed kids because they are so individualistic, so creative, so resistant to all efforts to force them into conformity. Many of them are quite smart but struggle because they don't process information in "normal" ways. He never let them feel sorry for themselves, always told them, "You're NOT dumb! You just learn differently than other people do so don't ever believe you're dumb."

Extraordinary teachers like him are pretty rare. Teachers do the job because it's their calling... the job is just too hard to do only for the money... but so many are getting burnt out because the system is so hostile to creativity. I hope the force for change you see picks up speed, because too many good people are getting chewed up and spit out of that machine.

[Dave Stratman]

Re: We're all part Cave-Man (Neanderthal) except for the Africans

Lately I've been tending towards pessimism and bitterness, so thank you for presenting the positive side of this issue. One reason why schools in the USA often score lower than schools in other countries- even quite poor countries- is because we provide education to special needs children when other countries don't. We have a significant percentage of students who can't perform well on tests and it skews the results when compared to countries that don't provide special education. If you didn't factor in the scores from special ed students, our scores would be much higher.

IMO, eliminating the Department of Education, or schools simply opting out of federal funds would be a net win. For only 5% of their funding, the federal government burdens schools with massive amounts of paperwork. If they cut out all that paperwork, teachers would have much more time available to spend with students. School districts could eliminate adminstrative jobs, leaving more money available for the classrooms. Teachers would have more freedom to teach according to the needs of the students, instead of being micro-managed by bureaucrats in Washington who are not educators. I think these wins would more than offset the financial loss.

It's the teachers who care the most who are the most demoralized. My husband was always a subversive teacher. He loved teaching but hated the bureaucratic educational system with a passion. In California in the 80's he taught all subjects to a room full of warring gangsters for nine years. He was in a portable building with about forty ninth and tenth-graders and one classroom aid. The principal didn't want to be bothered with the "troublemakers", so he was left alone to teach as he saw fit. He would set a goal for the students to learn such-and-such, then with his help he let the students design their own individual study programs to attain that goal. Every student would get plenty of one-on-one time with him to discuss their progress. It was a great method for getting kids self-motivated to learn. He was able to turn around about 75% of his students to the point where they could go back to regular classes and graduate. He could walk through gangland territory without fear because so many of the gangsters were "his" kids and they loved him. A good number of them eventually became soldiers, nurses, auto mechanics, plumbers... a huge accomplishment!

In New Mexico he helped develop an award-winning "School-to-Work" program for special ed middle-schoolers. An English teacher, science teacher, and math teacher each taught a vocational skill in their classroom and the students created their own businesses. The English teacher had a bakery; the kids had to learn how to read and write recipes in addition to baking cookies. They sold the cookies at school and made money for field trips and classroom equipment.

The science teacher had a greenhouse and taught the kids how to grow plants. They grew and sold tomatos, peppers, other vegetables and flowers in 6-pack containers and gallon pots.

My husband taught math, woodshop and plumbing. The kids learned math concepts by figuring out how much wood they needed to build dog houses and Bat Boxes, how to calculate their expenses and market the finished products for retail. They went to Home Depot to negotiate prices with the store manager, which entailed learning conversational skills, how to dress nicely, and how to show up on time. Their Bat Box business won an an Entrepreneurial award for best student-run business in the entire state, and these were special ed kids, not regular ed.

One year for their final exam the students had to assemble and install a toilet. The fastest team did it in seven minutes. The year after he left to move to Arizona, the school district disbanded their program and gave the businesses to regular ed students.

He really loved teaching special ed kids because they are so individualistic, so creative, so resistant to all efforts to force them into conformity. Many of them are quite smart but struggle because they don't process information in "normal" ways. He never let them feel sorry for themselves, always told them, "You're NOT dumb! You just learn differently than other people do so don't ever believe you're dumb."

Extraordinary teachers like him are pretty rare. Teachers do the job because it's their calling... the job is just too hard to do only for the money... but so many are getting burnt out because the system is so hostile to creativity. I hope the force for change you see picks up speed, because too many good people are getting chewed up and spit out of that machine.

Your husband sounds like a very talented, committed, and caring man. The story of him being able to walk through the toughest neighborhoods without fear is testimony both to his positive effects on the kids and of the openness of young people even from the roughest backgrounds to people who really care for them.

Thankfully your husband is not entirely alone, though school authorities may try to make him feel that way. There are many other creative and committed teachers (my daughter, a high school history teacher in Boston, is one) out there, and they need our support.

[Raz]

Re: We're all part Cave-Man (Neanderthal) except for the Africans

Lately I've been tending towards pessimism and bitterness, so thank you for presenting the positive side of this issue. One reason why schools in the USA often score lower than schools in other countries- even quite poor countries- is because we provide education to special needs children when other countries don't. We have a significant percentage of students who can't perform well on tests and it skews the results when compared to countries that don't provide special education. If you didn't factor in the scores from special ed students, our scores would be much higher.

IMO, eliminating the Department of Education, or schools simply opting out of federal funds would be a net win. For only 5% of their funding, the federal government burdens schools with massive amounts of paperwork. If they cut out all that paperwork, teachers would have much more time available to spend with students. School districts could eliminate adminstrative jobs, leaving more money available for the classrooms. Teachers would have more freedom to teach according to the needs of the students, instead of being micro-managed by bureaucrats in Washington who are not educators. I think these wins would more than offset the financial loss.

It's the teachers who care the most who are the most demoralized. My husband was always a subversive teacher. He loved teaching but hated the bureaucratic educational system with a passion. In California in the 80's he taught all subjects to a room full of warring gangsters for nine years. He was in a portable building with about forty ninth and tenth-graders and one classroom aid. The principal didn't want to be bothered with the "troublemakers", so he was left alone to teach as he saw fit. He would set a goal for the students to learn such-and-such, then with his help he let the students design their own individual study programs to attain that goal. Every student would get plenty of one-on-one time with him to discuss their progress. It was a great method for getting kids self-motivated to learn. He was able to turn around about 75% of his students to the point where they could go back to regular classes and graduate. He could walk through gangland territory without fear because so many of the gangsters were "his" kids and they loved him. A good number of them eventually became soldiers, nurses, auto mechanics, plumbers... a huge accomplishment!

In New Mexico he helped develop an award-winning "School-to-Work" program for special ed middle-schoolers. An English teacher, science teacher, and math teacher each taught a vocational skill in their classroom and the students created their own businesses. The English teacher had a bakery; the kids had to learn how to read and write recipes in addition to baking cookies. They sold the cookies at school and made money for field trips and classroom equipment.

The science teacher had a greenhouse and taught the kids how to grow plants. They grew and sold tomatos, peppers, other vegetables and flowers in 6-pack containers and gallon pots.

My husband taught math, woodshop and plumbing. The kids learned math concepts by figuring out how much wood they needed to build dog houses and Bat Boxes, how to calculate their expenses and market the finished products for retail. They went to Home Depot to negotiate prices with the store manager, which entailed learning conversational skills, how to dress nicely, and how to show up on time. Their Bat Box business won an an Entrepreneurial award for best student-run business in the entire state, and these were special ed kids, not regular ed.

One year for their final exam the students had to assemble and install a toilet. The fastest team did it in seven minutes. The year after he left to move to Arizona, the school district disbanded their program and gave the businesses to regular ed students.

He really loved teaching special ed kids because they are so individualistic, so creative, so resistant to all efforts to force them into conformity. Many of them are quite smart but struggle because they don't process information in "normal" ways. He never let them feel sorry for themselves, always told them, "You're NOT dumb! You just learn differently than other people do so don't ever believe you're dumb."

Extraordinary teachers like him are pretty rare. Teachers do the job because it's their calling... the job is just too hard to do only for the money... but so many are getting burnt out because the system is so hostile to creativity. I hope the force for change you see picks up speed, because too many good people are getting chewed up and spit out of that machine.

My wife would have written these exact words if describing the state of public education today. She has spent a total of 28 years either as a bureaucrat in the state department of education, or in the classroom as a 4th grade teacher - both regular ed and special ed.

But she wouldn't be able to write such wonderful words about her husband.
Yours must have been a truly remarkable man, shiny!, and your loss is very, very great.