- Dating back to the mid-1600s children in the colonies were taught literacy so that they could read the Bible and have a firm foundation in their Calvinist religion.
- Fast forward to after the American Revolution - there was an effort rooted in the struggle for Universal Human Rights (and the early abolitionist movement) to model an educational system after those existing in Europe. Many public and parochial schools were established between 1750-1870.
- It was illegal in most Southern States to teach literacy to slaves or their children in the 1830s.
- States adopted laws for compulsory education from 1852 (Massachusetts) through 1918 (Mississippi was the last state to adopt compulsory education).
- In 1864 Congress made it illegal for Native American children to be educated in their own language and started placing children in boarding schools as young as the age of 4 with the stated purpose to "kill the Indian and save the man."
- In 1896 the Supreme Court ruling of "separate but equal" officially legalized segregation.
- From 1876-1900 Industrialization forced families into cities and factories. Children as young as 3 were put to work. Many children worked between 10-14 hours each day to help support their families. Removing children from the workforce to attend school, was seen as a way to build a docile and obedient workforce which would serve the interests of the capitalist class. Popular struggles resulted in a minimum work age, workplace safety regulations, the 40-hour work week, and later desegregation.
 |
| Child labor in the U.S. circa 1908-1912 |
The American educational system of today is not a federal system. It is actually a patchwork of state and local laws and regulations. Funding public schools from local property taxes results in a highly unequal and unjust system of education. In areas where homes are valuable and/or owner-occupied, schools are funded well; where home prices are low and/or there are many rental units schools struggle to provide safe and secure buildings let alone meet the educational needs of the students. The U.S. Department of Education's role is limited to enforcement of federal laws, generally related to civil rights. Most regulations pertaining to schools are decided at the state level as a result of the Tenth Amendment to the US Constitution. However there is an emphasis from the Federal Government to standardize education and prioritize language and math facts over civics, arts, and critical thinking. Disparities between spending on students varies significantly between states. Arizona ranks very low in their per student spending. In 2015 we were third from the bottom compared to all other states. The range of per capita spending on student in 2015 was from $6,575 in Utah to $21,201 in New York
It is in this context that parents' today make choices about how to educate their kids. During many conversations with friends and colleagues I have heard three general schools of thought - the first is a direct result of our public educational system which does not question, but rather accepts as a fact that children are better off attending a public school (often the benefits of 'socialization' are touted). Putting aside the fact that socialization occurs for all humans in the company of other humans and that children do not provide the best roles models for each other - I find the "it was good enough for me so it is good enough for my kids" argument to be lacking on many levels. The world has changed significantly since the turn of the 20th century and our educational institutions have not adapted commensurate with the significant changes in understanding about our world, technology, etc. A more sophisticated view of the current system of public education maintains that this is an important social institution and one that we should support through participation. The truth of this view is that the flaws of the system will not change if we do nothing. Because homeschooling is impractical for most Americans some say we must improve our public schools through advocacy and participation.
The second school of thought is critical of our institutions of learning and sees them as deficient in creating a citizen who can employ critical reasoning to solve the complex problems of today. Critical parents and educators recognize the limitations of public schools - namely that these institutions must manage large numbers of young people in the most efficient manner possible which often means that children are treated as numbers instead of as people. Such dehumanizing treatment is not intentional, nor is it easily remedied by these institutions. Examples include the mandate for young children to eat lunch in 15-20 minutes (or less if they have to wait in line for a school lunch), rules restricting toileting which result in predictable accidents and shame, and restrictions on water consumption. Of course adults would never allow themselves to be forced to urinate in their pants by their leaders, but this is what we consider normal when it comes to managing populations of minors. Such institutionalized treatment produces institutionalized thinkers and actors who need constant supervision and strict rules for success. However, in most aspects of life this is not what people encounter - we must create our own systems to govern our behavior and we are encouraged or required to be critical thinkers when it comes to being good citizens, employees, friends, and family members.
The third school of thought I have encountered centers on faith, but encompasses another critique of the system that rings true. For instance, the Amish feel an 8th grade education is sufficient preparation for assuming adult roles in the community. In Arizona there is a large Mormon (LDS) community and homeschooling is valued in these households. These families are critical of public schools due to their secular nature and their lack of instruction in life skills. Life skills are certainly lacking in today's public education - there are many young adults who find themselves unable to make even basic recipes when they leave their parents' nests. Home economics or similar courses which taught household finances and other practical skills seems to be a relic of the past in this age of standardized testing.
 |
| Public education circa 1933 in KY |
Parents are often angry when institutions do not treat their children with respect and dignity, but this training is exactly the type that serves the interests of power. How do you take a free-spirited child who wants to run, explore, and play and convert them into a cubicle drone? Answer: You send them to institutions of public education where they are conditioned to accept dehumanizing treatment. The process of making kids sit all day every day with brief recess is how we teach them that sedentary life is what is expected and what is normal. This also goes for directing attention. For example, when a child is engaged in a topic public education stifles it by forcing the child to move onto the next subject with the other students instead of digging deep and asking lots of questions about the interesting concept(s). This serves employers by ensuring that the workforce can focus on mundane or routine tasks each day without employing critical thoughts that would threaten power. The net result is that creativity and curiosity are limited - children learn that it is best to be entertained and school is a necessary evil. Children do not learn to explore or question their environments and they become sedentary. How does this model of education help us solve the pressing social problems of today? How will we lead the world in innovation and technology when students see education as boring? What type of future are schools preparing kids for? After all, there are few factory jobs that require people to work on the mindless assembly line. My prediction is that the future of education - as with all jobs - will be driven by technological algorithms. Technology will allow students to explore topics of interest in greater depth at their convenience for low cost or free. After all, traditional lecture-based classrooms are already obsolete and part of an outdated pedagogy according to experts.
As I mentioned in a previous post I attended a Lutheran, parochial school from K-8 and then public high schools, community colleges and states universities. My educational path was traditional in that I learned to sit, pay attention, and absorb instead of question. Certainly my private school in particular imparted knowledge upon us instead of trying to make active learners of the students. I didn't find topics that were of profound interest to me until I discovered sociology in college and then public health through my career. When I did find these topics I thought about them continually and applied the concepts and knowledge to my observations of the world. I also talked about the concepts with anyone who would listen or engage me - my explorations or interest didn't stop at the end of a classroom lecture. When I imagine young learners being able to fully explore ideas, experiments, and concepts I don't picture that happening in a traditional classroom with 30 kids.
To be continued...
No comments:
Post a Comment