Teacherly Musings 3–Continued
What kind of students are we trying to produce here? –students with big heads, and hands suited mainly for punching a keyboard or pushing a pencil? Students who are all assumed to be headed for college? Students who are isolated from their families and communities? Stressed-out students? Our stated goals would sound much nobler than this. I believe a disconnect exists between our stated goals and the design of our program. Therein lies the problem.
Even a well-executed program as currently designed is unlikely to lead to the goals we have identified as worthy, or goals that are necessary for maintaining the way of life idealized in our culture. A one-to-one correspondence between stated goal and program design is impossible without a whole lot of time spent examining goals and implementing them, and perhaps it’s impossible, even with gargantuan effort. But we must try. I consider the alternatives unacceptable. We can keep it simple (and mindless) by plopping other people’s agendas and methods into our setting and go with the “canned” version, even if it doesn’t reflect our values. We can adjust our values to fit those of the ones who offer a “canned” version. What we must do instead is to be very clear about our goals, and very diligent in evaluating each element of our program to assess its consonance with our goals. A balanced life for students overall while they’re in our program ought to be part of what is considered.
Another part of what ought to change is that we broaden our view considerably on what school buildings are for. They ought to be considered community learning centers–not only for children and young people between the ages of 6 and 18. While we may still need building principals, we especially need community education directors. They could organize once-a-week story time for preschoolers, classes for seniors on memoir-writing, reading circles for people in mid-life trying to keep their brains alive, methods of Bible study for all ages-- the list could go on.
Another positive change would be to offer honorable options other than the “graduate-after-completing-a-state-mandated program, i.e. Two-Year Diplomas such as Community Life (basics plus a modified speech and composition requirement, for example), a Christian Service diploma, (heavy on Social Studies, development of teaching skills, and Bible), a Domestic Arts program, and a Job Training Program. The last two could explore a broad spectrum of possibilities–a different aspect for each semester or quarter in school. Those who choose to pursue a state-approved diploma would come back for the last two years and squeeze in all the remaining requirements for graduation during that time. An extended school year for the purpose of completing additional individualized studies could be considered for students in that phase of their schooling. Currently, any two-year student has only one title to show for their two years of effort: Dropout.
Christian schools have another inherent schedule complication because, in addition to the state guidelines, they add required Bible courses. This, of course, is an effort to do what I recommend doing–which is to have the curriculum reflect our values. Bible classes should not be dropped, but those who want to look at the big picture ought to be cognizant of what it does to the overall workload for students. The bottom line is that we can’t forever add to the requirements for graduation, keep options open for taking electives, and keep the school day and year the same length without stacking the workload higher in the existing time frame.
School board members have relatively long terms in our system–five years, I believe. This is better than shorter terms, except that when a board member is inclined to inactivity, resists change, or has an agenda counter to true education purposes, it goes on for much too long. People who come to the job with previous experience in school work ,or with the time and diligence to be thorough in learning about and carrying out their job are likely to be able to accomplish something worthwhile during their board tenure, even if it lasts only five years. Without any of the above factors present, it’s not likely to extend much beyond maintaining the status quo during one term of service. Perhaps a long-term volunteer “vision” group to advise the board would be in order. (To be concluded)
Even a well-executed program as currently designed is unlikely to lead to the goals we have identified as worthy, or goals that are necessary for maintaining the way of life idealized in our culture. A one-to-one correspondence between stated goal and program design is impossible without a whole lot of time spent examining goals and implementing them, and perhaps it’s impossible, even with gargantuan effort. But we must try. I consider the alternatives unacceptable. We can keep it simple (and mindless) by plopping other people’s agendas and methods into our setting and go with the “canned” version, even if it doesn’t reflect our values. We can adjust our values to fit those of the ones who offer a “canned” version. What we must do instead is to be very clear about our goals, and very diligent in evaluating each element of our program to assess its consonance with our goals. A balanced life for students overall while they’re in our program ought to be part of what is considered.
Another part of what ought to change is that we broaden our view considerably on what school buildings are for. They ought to be considered community learning centers–not only for children and young people between the ages of 6 and 18. While we may still need building principals, we especially need community education directors. They could organize once-a-week story time for preschoolers, classes for seniors on memoir-writing, reading circles for people in mid-life trying to keep their brains alive, methods of Bible study for all ages-- the list could go on.
Another positive change would be to offer honorable options other than the “graduate-after-completing-a-state-mandated program, i.e. Two-Year Diplomas such as Community Life (basics plus a modified speech and composition requirement, for example), a Christian Service diploma, (heavy on Social Studies, development of teaching skills, and Bible), a Domestic Arts program, and a Job Training Program. The last two could explore a broad spectrum of possibilities–a different aspect for each semester or quarter in school. Those who choose to pursue a state-approved diploma would come back for the last two years and squeeze in all the remaining requirements for graduation during that time. An extended school year for the purpose of completing additional individualized studies could be considered for students in that phase of their schooling. Currently, any two-year student has only one title to show for their two years of effort: Dropout.
Christian schools have another inherent schedule complication because, in addition to the state guidelines, they add required Bible courses. This, of course, is an effort to do what I recommend doing–which is to have the curriculum reflect our values. Bible classes should not be dropped, but those who want to look at the big picture ought to be cognizant of what it does to the overall workload for students. The bottom line is that we can’t forever add to the requirements for graduation, keep options open for taking electives, and keep the school day and year the same length without stacking the workload higher in the existing time frame.
School board members have relatively long terms in our system–five years, I believe. This is better than shorter terms, except that when a board member is inclined to inactivity, resists change, or has an agenda counter to true education purposes, it goes on for much too long. People who come to the job with previous experience in school work ,or with the time and diligence to be thorough in learning about and carrying out their job are likely to be able to accomplish something worthwhile during their board tenure, even if it lasts only five years. Without any of the above factors present, it’s not likely to extend much beyond maintaining the status quo during one term of service. Perhaps a long-term volunteer “vision” group to advise the board would be in order. (To be concluded)
posted by Mrs. I at
12:05 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home