Okay, we read this article about urban vs. suburban vs. rural education. And it made me think, how would I classify the school district I grew up in? For those who don't know, I grew up in the Anchorage School District in Anchorage, AK. I've thought about this since we started talking about urban vs. suburban. Then my professor made an offhand comment last week that kind of annoyed me. She said, "So, rural schools, Dr. Mad Scientist you went to school in Alaska, you should get this." Or something like that. And I was thinking, "Huh? I did *not* go to a "rural" school!"
Anchorage has roughly the same population as Newark. It is admittedly much larger geographically. It actually has more public students than Newark, ~50,000 vs. ~42,000. Anchorage most definitely does not have the bad reputation that Newark does, though Anchorage does have its share of violence, gangs and poverty, and more than its share when it comes to alcohol and drugs.
In terms of education, most, if not all, schools in Newark would qualify as urban. My instructors and people in general seem to agree on that. Anchorage on the other hand has schools that I would classify as urban, many that are suburban, and a few that are pretty rural. Classifying the six high schools that were there when I attended school (two new high schools have opened in the last five years or so) I would call two "urban" two suburban and one rural. Bartlett High is a little weird because it's where all the military kids went. I'd probably call it suburban as well. Now, I've never set foot in a "real" urban high school, like in Newark. Yet. But I do consider my high school, East Anchorage, to be urban. It matches most of my criteria: mostly students from low income families, higher numbers of minority students, more bilingual/non-native English speakers, a lot of students in vocational training (the vocational "school" was built down the street, the "special needs" school which, among other things, is where the teen mothers went, was also down the street). Most parents of students were "working class", the percentage of parents who'd gone to college was not particularly high. All in all, I think I'm justified in saying I went to an urban school. I reserve the right to change that opinion as my experiences broaden though.
I'll let you know how it goes...
EDIT: My wife (Mrs. Dr. Mad Scientist) apparently decided to take a look at crime statistics between Anchorage and Newark, in part based on this post and in part for her own reasons. You can see her analysis on her blog.
Sunday, September 21, 2008
Tuesday, September 16, 2008
The Annenberg Promise
I'm starting off with a brief disclaimer. If you can't tell, my training and experience to date has been as a scientist/researcher. I am realizing that this gives me a very distinctive way of looking at the readings I discuss here. I tend to approach them the same way I would a research article on, say, cell biology or signal transduction. But of course they are very different and are written different ways for different purposes. I think learning to look at things in a different fashion is going to be a major lesson for me. Not that there's anything wrong with the scientists approach to these things, I just know it's not always the best way. Moving on.
As it says in the title, this post is discussing the Annenberg Promise, another article we read for my urban education class. The title of the article is actually, "The Promise of Urban Schools" and it is written by the Annenberg Institute for School Reform. And no, I don't have any real idea who these people are (okay, they're a panel of "experts" in urban education, but that's all I really know) or why they're any more reputable then any other school reform group out there, but I'll set that aside and dive into the article.
The first thing that jumped out at me was a brief section on what is education for? This made me think of what *I* think the purpose of education is. I certainly think education should be more than just job prep. But I don't really buy what I view as the utopian ideal of "education as a vehicle for creating a more democratic and just society". My personal belief on what the purpose of education is? The goal of education is to allow students to learn the knowledge and skills required for them to be successful in life. These skills may include facts and basic knowledge, but also social skills, technology skills and especially learning skills. I think teaching students how to learn is the most important lesson a teacher can impart.
But hey, that's just me.
Agency
Yeah, so the major sections of this paper are all summarized by a vowel. A, E, I, O, U. And the A is for Agency. Agency is the power to cause positive change in ones life and the sense of hope and possibility that one can make a difference. Developing agency involves giving students a positive cultural and social identity and an understanding of their relationship to society. They then discuss ways to promote agency and the reasons why agency is important. Which is all good and I don't really disagree with it. What I wonder about is the feasibility. How can you empower students when many (most) schools operate in an environment of control and punishment? How can you help individual students develop a positive cultural identity in a class of 30, with perhaps a half dozen or more different cultures represented? Take the time to cover every culture? Or do you focus on the majority? I don't believe that's right. Overall I've found myself struggling with the concept that the best (in my opinion) teachers try to individualize the learning process with their students. Working with each students individual strengths and weaknesses, etc. But in practical terms, you can't. There aren't enough hours in the day. So how do you determine the "happy medium" of doing the best job for the entire class? Definitely something I've spent time thinking about so far. Moving on.
Equity and Justice
This section discusses equity vs. equality. Or fairness vs. equal, and how equal is not always fair. They talk extensively about Brown vs. Board of Education as an example of an attempt to increase equality without trying for equity. This is actually the first time I've seriously heard a discussion on Brown having a downside. It's not smething I'd ever really considered. Like most of the lemmings out there I've been taught racism bad, segregation = racism, removing segregation is ergo good. So this article touches on the downside of desegregation, such as the firing of African American teachers and the loss of autonomy and community engagement. But as my wife pointed out, it was still an improvement, right? Eh, I'm going to fall back on my "need more data" excuse. I can see how a plan that was great in principle may not work out great in practice.
Instruction and Curriculum
This section discusses the standards of education, and how urban schools should be held to the same high standards as other schools. Communities should also have a role in the development of standards for "their" schools. It also discusses powerful learning experiences, "highly challenging for learners, even at the risk of failing. They allow learners to explore and build upon their own, nascent ideas and knowledge. And they are bolstered by the caring attention of a teacher." I can agree with that. I like the view of a teacher as a mediator, who is there to guide and moderate the students on their individual educational journey, rather than as a galley master who flogs them along the path he or she has determined to be right. Not sure how to make that come about, but I like it as a concept. The article goes on to discuss some specific examples of these techniques, many of which had me thinking, "How will I go about this when I'm teaching?" Overall I thought this was a great section.
Outcomes and Impacts
My take on outcomes and impacts is that it refers to what the goals of education are, and how can progress towards those goals be assessed. To be honest, I was a little unclear on how the title related to the material here. The article is highly critical of the current paradigm of assessment, i.e. achievement on standardized tests. I wholeheartedly agree with this. I tend to do very well on standardized tests. In large part because I am just a very good test taker. I had a friend in grad school, smart guy and he studied his ass off for our exams. I doubt I studied a third as much as he did but I still tended to get better scores. Guess which of us is now on the faculty of a medical school and which of us is looking at a major carreer change? Because, big suprise, being able to do well on tests is not an indicator of how well you'll do in the real world.
This section also talks about accountability, and how currently teachers, schools and administrators tend to be the ones held accountable for poor student performance, even when they were never given the resources to be successful in the first place. I agree in the injustice of this, and I believe we need accountability throughout the educational process, from the students themselves up to the policy makers. Yes, teachers should be held accountable, but they should not have to bear the whole burden when others are part of the problem as well.
Urban Conditions and Context
There are both opportunities and challenges in urban schools. Then again the same can be said for any school system, and really for any field of human endeavor at all. But I will put forth the idea that in urban schools the relative magnitudes of the opportunities and challenges have been systematically minimized or exagerrated, respectively, by the media and by generally ignorant public perception. The opportunities exist because there are schools and teachers out there right now getting it right. And what one person can do, then so can another. And yes, there are serious and "unique" challenges involved in urban education, but they are by no means insoluble. Otherwise the cities would have fallen into screaming barbarism long ago. Sorry, I get these weird urges to try and sound eloquent from time to time. :-)
Anyways, that's it for this post. It's later than I planned, due to my wonderful experience with the flu. Class again tonight, so I'm sure I'll have more to talk about soon.
As it says in the title, this post is discussing the Annenberg Promise, another article we read for my urban education class. The title of the article is actually, "The Promise of Urban Schools" and it is written by the Annenberg Institute for School Reform. And no, I don't have any real idea who these people are (okay, they're a panel of "experts" in urban education, but that's all I really know) or why they're any more reputable then any other school reform group out there, but I'll set that aside and dive into the article.
The first thing that jumped out at me was a brief section on what is education for? This made me think of what *I* think the purpose of education is. I certainly think education should be more than just job prep. But I don't really buy what I view as the utopian ideal of "education as a vehicle for creating a more democratic and just society". My personal belief on what the purpose of education is? The goal of education is to allow students to learn the knowledge and skills required for them to be successful in life. These skills may include facts and basic knowledge, but also social skills, technology skills and especially learning skills. I think teaching students how to learn is the most important lesson a teacher can impart.
But hey, that's just me.
Agency
Yeah, so the major sections of this paper are all summarized by a vowel. A, E, I, O, U. And the A is for Agency. Agency is the power to cause positive change in ones life and the sense of hope and possibility that one can make a difference. Developing agency involves giving students a positive cultural and social identity and an understanding of their relationship to society. They then discuss ways to promote agency and the reasons why agency is important. Which is all good and I don't really disagree with it. What I wonder about is the feasibility. How can you empower students when many (most) schools operate in an environment of control and punishment? How can you help individual students develop a positive cultural identity in a class of 30, with perhaps a half dozen or more different cultures represented? Take the time to cover every culture? Or do you focus on the majority? I don't believe that's right. Overall I've found myself struggling with the concept that the best (in my opinion) teachers try to individualize the learning process with their students. Working with each students individual strengths and weaknesses, etc. But in practical terms, you can't. There aren't enough hours in the day. So how do you determine the "happy medium" of doing the best job for the entire class? Definitely something I've spent time thinking about so far. Moving on.
Equity and Justice
This section discusses equity vs. equality. Or fairness vs. equal, and how equal is not always fair. They talk extensively about Brown vs. Board of Education as an example of an attempt to increase equality without trying for equity. This is actually the first time I've seriously heard a discussion on Brown having a downside. It's not smething I'd ever really considered. Like most of the lemmings out there I've been taught racism bad, segregation = racism, removing segregation is ergo good. So this article touches on the downside of desegregation, such as the firing of African American teachers and the loss of autonomy and community engagement. But as my wife pointed out, it was still an improvement, right? Eh, I'm going to fall back on my "need more data" excuse. I can see how a plan that was great in principle may not work out great in practice.
Instruction and Curriculum
This section discusses the standards of education, and how urban schools should be held to the same high standards as other schools. Communities should also have a role in the development of standards for "their" schools. It also discusses powerful learning experiences, "highly challenging for learners, even at the risk of failing. They allow learners to explore and build upon their own, nascent ideas and knowledge. And they are bolstered by the caring attention of a teacher." I can agree with that. I like the view of a teacher as a mediator, who is there to guide and moderate the students on their individual educational journey, rather than as a galley master who flogs them along the path he or she has determined to be right. Not sure how to make that come about, but I like it as a concept. The article goes on to discuss some specific examples of these techniques, many of which had me thinking, "How will I go about this when I'm teaching?" Overall I thought this was a great section.
Outcomes and Impacts
My take on outcomes and impacts is that it refers to what the goals of education are, and how can progress towards those goals be assessed. To be honest, I was a little unclear on how the title related to the material here. The article is highly critical of the current paradigm of assessment, i.e. achievement on standardized tests. I wholeheartedly agree with this. I tend to do very well on standardized tests. In large part because I am just a very good test taker. I had a friend in grad school, smart guy and he studied his ass off for our exams. I doubt I studied a third as much as he did but I still tended to get better scores. Guess which of us is now on the faculty of a medical school and which of us is looking at a major carreer change? Because, big suprise, being able to do well on tests is not an indicator of how well you'll do in the real world.
This section also talks about accountability, and how currently teachers, schools and administrators tend to be the ones held accountable for poor student performance, even when they were never given the resources to be successful in the first place. I agree in the injustice of this, and I believe we need accountability throughout the educational process, from the students themselves up to the policy makers. Yes, teachers should be held accountable, but they should not have to bear the whole burden when others are part of the problem as well.
Urban Conditions and Context
There are both opportunities and challenges in urban schools. Then again the same can be said for any school system, and really for any field of human endeavor at all. But I will put forth the idea that in urban schools the relative magnitudes of the opportunities and challenges have been systematically minimized or exagerrated, respectively, by the media and by generally ignorant public perception. The opportunities exist because there are schools and teachers out there right now getting it right. And what one person can do, then so can another. And yes, there are serious and "unique" challenges involved in urban education, but they are by no means insoluble. Otherwise the cities would have fallen into screaming barbarism long ago. Sorry, I get these weird urges to try and sound eloquent from time to time. :-)
Anyways, that's it for this post. It's later than I planned, due to my wonderful experience with the flu. Class again tonight, so I'm sure I'll have more to talk about soon.
Sunday, September 14, 2008
Demographics and Hope...
So this is my first post based on our homework readings. There are two articles we were assigned to read for class last week. The first was on the shifting demographics of urban schools, and the challenges implicit in these shifts. The other article was the Annenberg promise. It is much more hopeful, discussing pros and cons of urban teaching and suggesting possible solutions to the issues of urban education.
So, as I said, the first article is on the shifting demographics of America and how these shifts may/will impact education. First off let me say I am very suspicious of statistical analysis. I do them all the time and it's really not hard to play with the numbers in such a way so that they'll support your viewpoint, regardless of what your viewpoint is. As Mark Twain said, "There are three types of untruths: Lies, Damn Lies and Statistics!"
Anyways, the article itself is fairly straightforward. The first section discusses overall changes in enrollment and debunks the belief that there is a massive "Tidal Wave" of incoming students. Really, there are a few areas/districts that are expecting increases (I'd guess CA, TX and FL, based on the article. Probably other border states as well), but in most of the US enrollment will remain static or even decline slightly. Okay, I can accept that. Though I wonder how they determine where kids now growing up will end up? The same section discusses transiency, and how students tend to move around a lot. What if all the families with young students in San Diego suddenly moved to Iowa? Wouldn't that throw off all the demographic projections being made in this article? I'm sure they have historically proven models for studies like this. I suppose this is one reason why I'm more comfortable with populations I can fit in a petri dish.
The second section states several facts about race in the US. Increased numbers of "minorities", increases racial mixing, increase in people claiming "multi-racial" heritage and increasingly uneven distribution of racial diversity. I hadn't really thought of most of this before, but it makes sense and I can accept that these are all very important issues for education. But the article barely touches on how to deal with these issues. And even if a good plan was put forth, how would it get through the bureaucratic and political mess, get funded and come to fruition?
The third section talks about the aging population in America, many of whoms children are grown and out of school already. Will these people be willing to continue to fund education? I say hell no. Okay, maybe they'll have grandkids in school they'll want to suppport, but I know people on a fixed income and they are uniformly against anything that cuts into that income. Growing up in Anchorage, AK I remember many ballot measures in the 80's that would increase taxes or issue bonds that were soundly defeated. Why? There were more voters without kids than there were with kids. And the ones without kids didn't want to fund the education of other peoples kids. They didn't worry about improving society as a whole or where the doctors and judges that would be supporting them in the future came from. They just didn't want their pocketbooks affected in the here and now. I'd say Alaskans are very shortsighted, but sadly I've found that trait is a lot more widespread then just up north.
The last section discusses race vs. national origin and that the latter will become more important than the former. I've seen this firsthand to an extent. Again, growing up in Alaska, my high school was very diverse. We had a lot of different nationalities represented, particularly from Pacific Rim countries. And yes, different nationalities behaved differently, and had different expectations in behavior. Japanese vs. Phillipino vs. Samoan vs. Alaska Native, they tended to react differently to situations, because they had different cultural standards for behavior than I did.
I also work in a major NYC hospital, and it is very, very diverse. It's not unusual to see labs where less that 20% of the employees are US citizens. And I really believe every nationality on Earth is represented there somewhere. And again, people from different cultures and different nationalities react differently. And the reactions may seem odd to those of us raised in a different culture, but if you try and figure out why they react the way they do it always makes pretty good sense. It's just a matter of making the effort to understand where they're coming from.
Okay, so I write like I talk: Way too much. I'm going to cut this short and review the Annenberg Promise tomorrow. Let me know what you think and I'll talk to you all later.
So, as I said, the first article is on the shifting demographics of America and how these shifts may/will impact education. First off let me say I am very suspicious of statistical analysis. I do them all the time and it's really not hard to play with the numbers in such a way so that they'll support your viewpoint, regardless of what your viewpoint is. As Mark Twain said, "There are three types of untruths: Lies, Damn Lies and Statistics!"
Anyways, the article itself is fairly straightforward. The first section discusses overall changes in enrollment and debunks the belief that there is a massive "Tidal Wave" of incoming students. Really, there are a few areas/districts that are expecting increases (I'd guess CA, TX and FL, based on the article. Probably other border states as well), but in most of the US enrollment will remain static or even decline slightly. Okay, I can accept that. Though I wonder how they determine where kids now growing up will end up? The same section discusses transiency, and how students tend to move around a lot. What if all the families with young students in San Diego suddenly moved to Iowa? Wouldn't that throw off all the demographic projections being made in this article? I'm sure they have historically proven models for studies like this. I suppose this is one reason why I'm more comfortable with populations I can fit in a petri dish.
The second section states several facts about race in the US. Increased numbers of "minorities", increases racial mixing, increase in people claiming "multi-racial" heritage and increasingly uneven distribution of racial diversity. I hadn't really thought of most of this before, but it makes sense and I can accept that these are all very important issues for education. But the article barely touches on how to deal with these issues. And even if a good plan was put forth, how would it get through the bureaucratic and political mess, get funded and come to fruition?
The third section talks about the aging population in America, many of whoms children are grown and out of school already. Will these people be willing to continue to fund education? I say hell no. Okay, maybe they'll have grandkids in school they'll want to suppport, but I know people on a fixed income and they are uniformly against anything that cuts into that income. Growing up in Anchorage, AK I remember many ballot measures in the 80's that would increase taxes or issue bonds that were soundly defeated. Why? There were more voters without kids than there were with kids. And the ones without kids didn't want to fund the education of other peoples kids. They didn't worry about improving society as a whole or where the doctors and judges that would be supporting them in the future came from. They just didn't want their pocketbooks affected in the here and now. I'd say Alaskans are very shortsighted, but sadly I've found that trait is a lot more widespread then just up north.
The last section discusses race vs. national origin and that the latter will become more important than the former. I've seen this firsthand to an extent. Again, growing up in Alaska, my high school was very diverse. We had a lot of different nationalities represented, particularly from Pacific Rim countries. And yes, different nationalities behaved differently, and had different expectations in behavior. Japanese vs. Phillipino vs. Samoan vs. Alaska Native, they tended to react differently to situations, because they had different cultural standards for behavior than I did.
I also work in a major NYC hospital, and it is very, very diverse. It's not unusual to see labs where less that 20% of the employees are US citizens. And I really believe every nationality on Earth is represented there somewhere. And again, people from different cultures and different nationalities react differently. And the reactions may seem odd to those of us raised in a different culture, but if you try and figure out why they react the way they do it always makes pretty good sense. It's just a matter of making the effort to understand where they're coming from.
Okay, so I write like I talk: Way too much. I'm going to cut this short and review the Annenberg Promise tomorrow. Let me know what you think and I'll talk to you all later.
Thursday, September 11, 2008
At long last, Dr. Mad Scientist is joining the blogosphere!
Welcome to the lab! I'd say I started blogging because I feel I have an interesting and unique viewpoint I'd like to share with the world, but I'm trying not to lie as much as I used to. In reality, I'm taking a course in Urban Education. This blog is part of the course requirements, so it my posts will most likely be focused on Urban Education and a number of my posts will be on topics assigned by our instructor. I will also run a little farther afield. Get ready to hear (to a nauseating extent) about Colorado State football, my greatest love (oh, along with my wife and kids, I may post about them too, on occasion).
For those of you who aren't familiar with me, Dr. Mad Scientist is the name my wife refers to me by in her blog. She's a much more established blogger then I am. I recently decided my current/previous career just wasn't doing it for me. I have a Ph.D in a biological science and am currently doing medical research in NYC. I really can not see myself doing it for the next __ decades.
So after a period of self reflection, and more than a little anxiety, I realized the teaching aspects of my previous job were what I enjoyed most about it. I also realized I'm craving the feeling that I'm really making a difference (preferably for the better!) in the world. That lame old cliche about making the world a better place is alive and well in me. So I took a deep breath and applied to go back to school to become a teacher. Specifically I'm looking to teach high school biology, and I'm planning to teach chemistry as well once I get a little more settled.
I ended up in a program that is geared towards producing math and science teachers for urban school districts in general and Newark, NJ in particular. So I will be teaching in Newark Public Schools in the relatively near future. And yes, I've heard from many, many people that I am insane for voluntarily going into Newark. I know, I know, I will be beaten, stabbed, mugged, shot and called mean names. I know the general public perception of Newark is that I would be better off teaching in one of the lower circles of Hell.
But you know what? That's where good teachers are most needed. It's where I think I'll be able to do the most good, and have the greatest chance to actually make the world a little bit better. No, it probably won't be easy (but you will not hear me complain if it is) but it's my experience that the things most worth doing rarely are.
Stay tuned for my first class-related blog post. It will be a scintillating review of a couple articles we read for class. You really won't want to miss it. Well, objectively you probably will want to miss it, but I hope you'll check it out anyways.
Oh, and as a final note, I know the blog looks a little drab right now. I am going to spruce it up a bit and start adding more links and pictures to my posts. I just need to figure out how first. Thanks and welcome to Dr. Mad Scientists lab!
For those of you who aren't familiar with me, Dr. Mad Scientist is the name my wife refers to me by in her blog. She's a much more established blogger then I am. I recently decided my current/previous career just wasn't doing it for me. I have a Ph.D in a biological science and am currently doing medical research in NYC. I really can not see myself doing it for the next __ decades.
So after a period of self reflection, and more than a little anxiety, I realized the teaching aspects of my previous job were what I enjoyed most about it. I also realized I'm craving the feeling that I'm really making a difference (preferably for the better!) in the world. That lame old cliche about making the world a better place is alive and well in me. So I took a deep breath and applied to go back to school to become a teacher. Specifically I'm looking to teach high school biology, and I'm planning to teach chemistry as well once I get a little more settled.
I ended up in a program that is geared towards producing math and science teachers for urban school districts in general and Newark, NJ in particular. So I will be teaching in Newark Public Schools in the relatively near future. And yes, I've heard from many, many people that I am insane for voluntarily going into Newark. I know, I know, I will be beaten, stabbed, mugged, shot and called mean names. I know the general public perception of Newark is that I would be better off teaching in one of the lower circles of Hell.
But you know what? That's where good teachers are most needed. It's where I think I'll be able to do the most good, and have the greatest chance to actually make the world a little bit better. No, it probably won't be easy (but you will not hear me complain if it is) but it's my experience that the things most worth doing rarely are.
Stay tuned for my first class-related blog post. It will be a scintillating review of a couple articles we read for class. You really won't want to miss it. Well, objectively you probably will want to miss it, but I hope you'll check it out anyways.
Oh, and as a final note, I know the blog looks a little drab right now. I am going to spruce it up a bit and start adding more links and pictures to my posts. I just need to figure out how first. Thanks and welcome to Dr. Mad Scientists lab!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
