Education
See other Education Articles
Title: New PBS Documentary on Education in America is Creating a Stir
Source:
ITA
URL Source: http://www.intellectualtakeout.org/ ... ducation-america-creating-stir
Published: Jun 14, 2017
Author: Kerry McDonald
Post Date: 2017-06-14 18:47:57 by Anthem
Keywords: market schools, education, PBS
Views: 4442
Comments: 21
Why is it that innovation occurs frequently in other areas, but not in education? This spring, PBS has been airing a three-part documentary series, "School, Inc.", spotlighting some of the successes of education choice and free-market schooling options around the world. "School, Inc." is the brainchild of Andrew Coulson, an education policy researcher who left a successful career at Microsoft to answer a perplexing question: Why is it that innovation occurs frequently in other areas, but not in education? Entrenched in a static, factory model of education, American public schools haven't changed much since the Industrial Revolution. "School, Inc." explores the 19th century origins of mass schooling, noting how the Prussian system of compulsory schooling that was ultimately adopted in the U.S. squeezed out other popular forms of education, and prevented ongoing innovation. Some educationists are outraged that PBS accepted and aired this documentary. In a Washington Post article this week, public schooling advocate, Diane Ravitch, writes that she "was repelled by the partisan nature of the presentation, "and finds it "puzzling" that PBS would air this "lavish and one-sided production." They will learn about the “success” of the free market in schooling in Chile, Sweden, and New Orleans. They will hear about the miraculous charter schools across America, and how public school officials selfishly refuse to encourage the transfer of public funds to private institutions. They will see a glowing portrait of South Korea, where students compete to get the highest possible scores on a college entry test that will define the rest of their lives and where families gladly pay for after-school tutoring programs and online lessons to boost test scores. They will hear that the free market is more innovative than public schools. PBS had a more balanced response to Ravitch's criticism, stating in an email reply to the Post: "PBS and local member stations aim to offer programs that reflect diverse viewpoints and promote civic dialogue on important topics affecting local communities...In addition, PBS aims for a balance of viewpoints across the entire PBS schedule. Within this series, there are comparisons and criticisms of both public and private education models." By airing "School, Inc.," PBS demonstrates a praise-worthy commitment toward meaningful discourse on education policy and potential reforms. Rather than attacking media outlets for presenting diverse opinions on important public policy topics, we should applaud their efforts to facilitate open dialogue and share disparate views. Debate the message, but don't kill the messenger.
Ravitch concludes her scathing article by saying that the PBS documentary "is an advertisement for the demolition of public education and for an unregulated free market in education." 
Uninformed viewers who see this very slickly produced program will learn about the glories of unregulated schooling, for-profit schools, teachers selling their lessons to students on the Internet.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 2.
#1. To: Anthem (#0)
(Edited)
How do you define innovation? The new "core curriculm". The dilution of course material so that everybody gets A's and graduates with honors for demonstrating ability to find the toilet? Innovation and diversity have too often been code words for dilution of competence.
I don't know how Andrew Coulson, or anyone else, would define innovation. I define it as hiring teachers who have achieved mastery. I don't mean plodding through a University teacher's training then adding another year of "masters" classes. I mean achieving mastery in the real world: Science teachers who mastered their work as scientists, math teachers from the STEM fields, English teachers who were/are writers or editors, and so on. In short, make teaching a second profession; even accommodating people who still work in their fields by having part time positions available for post primary schools. Require a minimum IQ of at least the top of the first SD -- 115 or so -- for primary teachers who may go directly from Univeristy training to classrooms (the training includes an intern period). As for the curriculum, that I think will have to work itself out through market competition. If parents can choose schools, then the success rate of students will show up in the school's reputation after a decade or two. Some people will be competent enough to look through the curriculum and judge it for their children. Other's may accept their judgment and follow them to the schools they choose. This will shortcut the reputation building cycle for some. I taught technical classes at a large corporation, and was involved in curriculum development. Among my peers there were some very smart people, many Phd's. I learned a potful just going to lunch with some of them. Every one of us agreed that shows like Sesame Street were short circuiting attention spans rather than developing that discipline, nor was it teaching anything of substance in the "3 R's". Television largely does the same for adults. Yet, the tool, if made interactive via the Internet can leverage a great teacher to a hundred or more students, and not just a talking head. He'll have the benefit of film or animation sequences to illustrate a process (as seen on youtube), on screen applications from simple spreadsheets or drawing / text to advanced applications for any field. Anything you can do on a whiteboard can be put on screen even if you can't draw as slick as the artist who does those progressive whiteboard animations for con artists selling bullshet on the Internet...
#7. To: Anthem (#2)
I'll go along with that.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#2. To: rlk (#1)
Replies to Comment # 2. I define it as hiring teachers who have achieved mastery. I don't mean plodding through a University teacher's training then adding another year of "masters" classes. I mean achieving mastery in the real world: Science teachers who mastered their work as scientists, math teachers from the STEM fields, English teachers who were/are writers or editors, and so on.
End Trace Mode for Comment # 2.
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]