Class+02+-+Feb+2

=** Class 2 **=
 * Class Notes**:

to create better, brighter students to compete in the global economy (said by conservatives, liberals, politicians) education = get a job
 * What are the reasons most often given for the purpose of school in the U.S.?**
 * Whose voices are generally included in the pronouncement of these reasons?** - people in the government (politicians)
 * Whose voices are generally not included?** - parents (think someone else will take care of it) and the public (not directing it)

Education and Getting Jobs
 * What were the most important reasons that an applicant did not get a job?** - 72% - attendance, timeliness, work ethic; 2nd - insufficient work experience; 32% - inadequate reading and writing skills
 * To what extent are the "core curricula" important in the hiring of hourly production workers?** - hourly production = doesn't have a salary but has an hourly wage; "core curricula" - has very little importance and the work ethic is more important (examples: factory jobs, labor, assembly lines, Certified Nursing Assistants, part-time jobs)
 * How much math does an entry level worker need to have according to ETS?** - 8th or 9th grade = basic algebra
 * What is the correlation between paper-and-pencil test and getting hired?** - there is no correlation
 * What are the skills that are needed to get an entry level job?** - show up on time, responsible and reliable, basic reading and math skills, positive person in work place

From Education Week 2006: "Manufactures polled were less happy with students' work-related skills than with their academic preparation."; Employers want basic math skills (generally through 9th grade,) reading skills, etc.
 * Employers Say...**

Spring brings up the point that employers need workers that can: endure long periods of mundane work, repetition, withstand being located in uninteresting environments, and being able to follow direction
 * What else is needed?**

The elite design what education should be, politicians have money and funds to get grants and decide how money should be used unlike the regular families, families with money had their kids going to school - power makes decisions Masses are worried about putting food on the tables for their families, working, hoping someone else takes care of it however the general public should be involved. How do policy makers create their policies? - supposed to do it based on what the public is saying; is influenced by money, big companies, lobbyists (paid by people with money to go bother the policy makers) Lobbying Days fall in the middle of the week and in the middle of the day - representatives are supposed to be in their offices - sometimes they are and sometimes they are not and their assistant is there.
 * Arne Duncan** - Secretary of Education - was Superintendent of Schools in Chicago before he became the Secretary of Education; he had a business background with very little experience in education
 * Joe Klein** - had no education background and was all business; Superintendent of New York

starting in the 19th century, goals for public schools included teaching about: patriotism and political values, morality, providing equal opportunity What purposes do each of these serve for political leaders and business owners? - loyalty, patriotism, willing to volunteer for military, providing equal opportunity (spend more money on their family), morality (team player; don't steal' don't be disrespectful; be good; do what you are told
 * Purpose of Schooling and Power**

How do these potentially affect workers, families, people with a low income, people with middle incomes? - They did not get an equal opportunity
 * Early 1900s - 1920s** - communist movement in U.S. - radical movement in U.S. history; communism - reorganize everything to make it better and more stable.

How do the purposes of school connect with: urbanization, industrialization, racial and cultural harmony, juvenile crime (stay in school, less likely to get involved in crime), nutritional health (breakfast programs), epidemic disease (do not spread it, teach them how to protect themselves from it; sneeze into elbow and wash hands)
 * More Goals**

Indigenous Era: Prior to the arrival of the European colonizers (aka "colonists"), education was seen as lifelong, generally informal, connected to nature, spiritual, and in small group or one-on-one settings. Much of this is echoed in what is called "indigenous education" today. ** both A Nation at Risk and the Bell Curve were read by President Reagan and he makes his decision for standardization based of of these (thought about a national curriculum) Standards either follow right in the middle between local control and national curriculum or they start to lean more towards a national curriculum Bush, Sr.** - Goals 2000 - get our students to be the best in the world (led to standards) ** Jessica Morneault**
 * A little history lesson...
 * Massachusetts, 1647:** The Europeans established a law that says teachers and grammar schools must be made available to villages and towns depending on population. The original intention was to keep the "old deluder" Satan away. The focus of these teachings was on Christian morals and values. Taught during winter when no farming had to be done.
 * 1820s - 1840s:** Teaching common moral and political values, equality of educational opportunity, literacy was very low and so was math
 * 1880s - 1920s:** Americanization of immigrants, train work force for companies, anti-communism, anti-radicalism, literally trying to get people to follow directions (was the biggest push), Marxism comes out of this (founding/initial philosophy for communism: in the business world those who are the supervisors get a lot of money for nothing and the people who do the work get paid nothing (Marxism wants to flip it - workers get paid a lot and the supervisors get paid very little)
 * 1920s - 1940s**: Expansion of high schools to control youth and keep youth out of the labor market (fewer people in work place means more people can have work and can get paid more); people of color are still struggling.
 * 1950s - 1980s:** Radical and cultural harmony, War on Poverty, make more scientists and engineers, career education, equality of educational opportunity
 * 1980s - 2000s**: ** Standardization, testing, preparation for a global economy, starts with President Reagan **
 * A Nation at Risk** (** argument that we are in an educational crisis; We will not be the most wealthiest country because of our educational crisis) **
 * Bell Curve** (used statistics to show that there is a gap between the races; concludes that people of color are genetically intellectually inferior)
 * Clinton** ** = standards **
 * Bush, Jr.**** - standards turn into No Child Left Behind **
 * Obama** ** - Race to the Top (have schools apply for grants and if the government likes their idea then the government will give the school the money)

The number one reason for both conservatives and liberals is to be as competitive as possible in today’s __global economy__. Those with power and money 1. Parents 2. Children (who have no voice at all) 3. Teachers It is called a public school but the public has no say in so many crucial parts of the curriculum. 1. 69% or 7 out of ten people didn’t get a job because of attendance, work ethics, and timeliness. 2. 34% not qualified 3. 33% inadequate reading and writing skills Hourly production workers are: factory, laborers, part-time, certified nurse’s aides, ect. Hiring staff looks to see that an individual has at least a 9th grade math background and basic reading and writing skills __Nothing__ the praxis 1 and 2 has no correlation of how good you are as a teacher. Ed week 2006 “manufacturers polled were less happy with students’ work-related skills than with their academic preparation” If you want to keep your job you need to be on-time, have a good attitude, and a great work ethic. 1. Endure long periods of mundane work 2. Repetition 3. Withstand being located in uninteresting environments 4. Follow directions These standards apply to schooling and today’s widget making in “cubicles” The secretary of Education is Arne Duncan. He was the superintendent of schools in Chicago; ironically this is where Obama grew up. Fun fact: you don’t need to have an educational background to become superintendent of schools. You may actually have a better shot if you graduate with a degree in business. The point driving home in class was that the American public stays out of many issues that deal with “public” schools because of 1) the stress of the economy (there are more important things to worry about), and 2) they don’t have the free time. Every couple of weeks our state holds “lobbying day;” conveniently enough this day is held during the middle of the week from 9 – 12. 19th century goals for public schools: 1. Patriotism and political value a. Get a job and respect the boss b. Do their duty c. If our business does better our country does better d. Willing to volunteer for the military 2. Morality a. Team player b. Polite c. Be good and do what you are told 3. Providing equal opportunity a. Have money to spend It is important to remember that the U.S. school system is relatively 130 years old. In the grand scheme of U.S. history rioting has taken a back seat and we are currently in a docile time. When individuals are experiencing suffering they are more apt to speak up; while the middle class is content with the way things are. Quality of life increased = less radical Flat screen in your home = you’ve made it (your living the American dream) Urbanization: didn’t exist until manufacturers moved in then moved out Juvenile crime: keep kids from resorting to other means Nutritional health: we have a flat screen but no food to feed our kids breakfast in the morning Epidemic disease: wash your hands, sneeze into your elbow. Education was seen as life long, generally informal (not to say their weren’t important things going on). Elders: so much wisdom you would be stupid not to listen to them. Used nature as a way to learnt (Today we retain five minutes of thought and then turn on the flat screen to remember what happened in those five minutes) 1st western school included walls, a teacher and the ability to keep the “old deluder” aka Satan away. The school day took place during the winter (when there was no farming to be done), curriculum was based on how to be a proper Christian, and typically lasted anywhere from 3 to 4 hours. Teaching common moral and political values, equality of educational opportunity. Americanization of immigrants, train work force for companies, anticommunism, and anti-radicalism. (Put in place to stop arguing with the government) Expansion of high schools to control youth. (Keep young kids out of the work force, so older individuals can find jobs with competitive pay). Great time to be white … horrible time to be black. Radical and cultural harmony: War on Poverty (made poverty worse, war on anything tends to have a similar outcome). Make more scientists and engineers, career education, equality of educational opportunity. (We choose to go the moon not because it is easy but because it is hard (JFK)). **Post standards.** Standardization (Clinton), testing, preparation for a global economy. “No child left behind” grabbed the baton from Clinton (Bush sequel). Thanks to “A Nation at Risk” and “Bell curve” today’s Reagan education turns 30 plus. This form was a political conservative push to squash any form of social justices. It was said that we are in a educational crisis and we aren’t going to be the wealthiest nation because our slacking in producing an educated citizen. One thing besides what my classmates have mentioned most part of the lessons. But one thing that stood out the most for me is the way that schools, srings sports is a way to prepare the student for the military. But it seems like daily school routines also prepare every student, when you think about it for military services. (Frances V.)
 * What are the reasons most often given for the purpose of school in the U.S.? **
 * Who’s voices count in this discussion? **
 * Whose voices are left out? **
 * What are the most important reasons that an applicant did not get a job? **
 * To what extent are the “core curricula” important in the hiring of hourly production workers? **
 * What is the correlation between paper-and-pencil tests and getting hired? **
 * What do you call someone who had a “C” in their PhD program?**
 * Doctor **
 * What else do you need? **
 * Who are these individuals sitting on your town’s board of education?** (Do they have any background in education… it is stressed that the public don’t accept things at face value)
 * Purpose of schooling and POWER: **
 * How do the purposes of school connect with? **
 * Indigenous Era: 10,000 plus years old **
 * A brief history lesson: **
 * Massachusetts 1647: **
 * 1820’s – 1840’s **
 * 1880’s- 1920’s **
 * 1920’s-1940’s **
 * 1950’s – 1980’s **
 * 1980’s-2000: **


 * __After this lesson can you make a compelling argument about the direction of education today, and if so are you willing to build a better community by creating power among the PUBLIC?__ (Tim Walczak) **


 * Clarifications for the class notes this week**:

=
Purpose of School also connects with: Industrialization, Racial & Cultural Harmony, and Globalization. Industrialization and Globalization relate back to the belief that schools prepare students for the working world; assembly lines, long hours of work, being disciplined, and learning required reading/writing and mathmatical skills. The Racial and Cultural Harmony connection has not been completely successful yet, it would be a great achievement to desegregate schools, but there are so many economical and political issues that hinders "harmonious" equality in education. (Jessica Roberts)======

I believe that there will always be school and districts that have segregated school. As long as there are students who want to go to segregated school there will always be a need to have them in the U.S. I feel that students as well as parents get the wrong impression why their kid's are going to school. Many students do not push themselves to do better than the average students and fall into the 'NORM' of just being an assembly line worker or a labor intensive job. I believe that the U.S does not have a serious push for students to educate themselves and try to accelerate in school and boost the economy in the future. (Greg Grochowski)
 * Clarifications, points, and questions work pursuing for future weeks (Extend the discussion from this week's class):**

I think the whole idea of public education along with whose voices are included versuses whose voices are not included creates an extremely ironic way for an individual to view "public" education overall. As mentioned and talked about in class, this education is called "public education", yet the public's voice such as parents, children, and others outside of the government (of course, the governmental voices are heard), are disregarded. Shouldn't parents have an equal say, if not greater say, in the education of their own children and what policies or qualifications they are limited to? The voices which are not included only creates a bigger gap between the "public voices" such as those of parents, and voices of the "higher up" such as governmental officials. This gap, as it keeps increasing, also creates a social gap between those of different race, ethnicity, socioeconomic status, etc. This is because of the lack of communication within the community due to the busy schedule of parents who are working just to put food on the table, or even the social gap between students themselves because they are on a different levels of a spectrum in terms of family income, race, or intellectual abilities (as talked about in chapter 2 of Spring). Just on another side note, with respect to No Child Left Behind, the notion of getting all students on the same level of proficiency in reading and math is only, in my opinion, hurting/preventing educators to be able to educate their students to the best of their ability, especially when students' levels of reading and math vary greatly simply due to the fact of having a learning disability or a more serious disability. Is this idea reflecting, or supposed to be reflecting, the efforts to obtain equality of opportunity in education? (Mandy Lucente)

Just to go off of what Mandy is saying. I completely agree about who has a voice in public education. What I learned from our class is not really who as a voice in public education bu who takes advantage of their opportunity to voice their concerns. We had a whole discussion on opportunities such as town meetings, and who really goes to them. Someone also mentioned a how people don't really have the time to go to these meetings so they put their trust into the people that were elected into the positions that are able to make changes, but do most people even know who is on these boards, or what is the view on education from these politicians. I know honestly that I couldn't tell you more than one or two people on my city's Board of Ed, or our senators view on education. I do take full responsibility for that, but there are those who don't. I f we are going to complain, then we need to take action, take a minute to read the newspaper or go on your school districts website to see what id new. I mentioned in my blog about how, to me, Kozol seems tobe speaking or the students, he takes their feelings or concerns and does his research and prints them in his book. We as future teachers, and/or future parents need to realize that we are the voice for the children and every little bit helps. Teachers need ot also put this confidence in their students. If children believe from a young age that they are just as important as an adult, they will continue to work hard at whatever it is that they do and to me that is a big part of education. (Kelly Bates)

I would also like to join in on what Kelly and Mandy are saying. I think it is sad that the parents have no voice and I also think its even more sad that communities have barely any idea who is on the Board of Ed committe. As we discussed in class, education is becoming such a business because of what qualifications it takes to become superintendant and the people on the Board of Education that we need to consider ways to get the parents involved. I cannot say that I am not to blame for not knowing much about the Board of Ed but I also think it should be part of the responsibility of the school to get the parents involved and remind them of when upcoming meetings are. After listening to our lesson I am now more aware of how we got to where we are and why there is no creativity left in the classrooms. (Emily Hungerford)

I would like to comment a little on both Mandy and Kelly’s posts. I agree with both students’ concerns on where public education is headed but I must play the devil’s advocate and say that after reading Spring it seems like we knew this was the plan and eventual future of education all along. Yes public education is for the public but it is not created by the public and its actions were never intended to be mandated by the public. On the first page of Spring is he says, a quote I will also use in my blog, “When students enter a public school they are submitting to the will of the public as determined by local, state and federal governments.” Teachers, students and parents never had control over what was going on in the classroom and as public schools get more governmentally narrow minded with such things as NCLB and the chilling truth’s that Kozol speaks of we are at, and possibly beyond, the point where we must rebel- civically mind you- and have our demands spoken for and met. In the time line of education people like William Godwin and Edward Ross have spoke out against public education and its sub goal of subduing society into indifferent machines and now it is our time to be accounted for. (Chris K.)

I never really thought that I was naive when it came to my ideas about education and the influence that politics had over it but after our discussion in class I really felt that it goes to a further extent than I had realized. It is certainly a depressing way to look at education but I do believe it is necessary, especially when we want changes to be made. The new idea being put into affect, replacing "No Child Left Behind" seems just as absurd to me. We seem to continue rewarding those who are doing well and digging others who really need help a bigger hole. I am sure that we can all agree that the schools not receiving money are the ones that need it the most and vice versa. This topic really frustrates me and I definitely had some lingering feelings after class. It does, however, give me hope that changes in education are happening rapidly. These changes are absolutely necessary in order to give each child an opportunity to learn and grow to their fullest potential. As educators it is not only our job but our duty to insure that these changes are made for our students. (Sarah Rousseau)

I feel the same as Sarah as I realize the way I though about our education system prior to taking this class. I never felt the need to question the way that education is handled in the country. Now that I think about how everyone sits back and just lets their students and their children be taught the way the government wants to teach them is pretty sad. I know I never question what is being taught in the school and why, but maybe it is time we do wonder about these things. It is important to be critical and be a voice for the students if you feel that more can be done. I feel that an evaluation of the system is in need and that everyone needs to make sure they realize that this current students are our future and they need to be taught the things that will make them better people and citizens in our country. Not just for the tests and assessments, but for their life as a whole. When we talked about the history and the indigenous people, I felt that this was an important thing to think about and to realize that many people learn from experience and we need to just realize that things can be changed if we take the right steps towards a better education. (Allie Beardsworth)

Prior to taking this class, I never really thought about the history of education. I am interested in learning what has brought education to where it is today, but at the same time I find it very depressing. I don't think political figures should be the only ones to really have a say in what happens in the educational system. However, in todays time those individuals with power and money are the individuals who get to make decisions such as these. No one has been able to come up with a new idea that can be implemented in effectively raising the statistics of the school. This is something that upsets me because there are these people who think they have great ideas and are just wasting money, they obviously aren't thinking at all about the children and their education. Something that I didn't realize about No Child Left Behind was that it is based upon statistics out of Texas alone. With this being the case, I don't think this program should have ever been put into school nation wide. I personally have never liked the ideas behind this program. While the program seeks to put everyone on the same level of education, I think it also holds back teachers and students at the same time. Students who are already at this level are suffering because they are not able to progress and learn new material. Also, teachers are being held back because they are being forced to focus on math and reading statistics rather than teaching the students about other important topics or ideas. I think it is important that those individuals in charge of education to take a step back and evaluate the big picture before they continue making useless changes in the system and really focus on the children getting the education they need. (Allie French)

I was very surprised at the fact that you don't even need any experience in a school to be a superintendent or on the Board of Education. Those with the money get to make all the decisions, and the ones who really care because they are affected feel powerless and therefore leave it to those with the money. I feel that this is an ongoing cycle and will only be changed when those with all the power and the money realize where education is going and will hopefully want to change it. Until then, it is up to us individual teachers. We have to fight our own battles because nobody will fight for us. The change starts with us, we must "be the change we wish to see in the world". Although the discussion about education and who has the power was quite depressing and discouraging, we need to look at it as motivation to want to change things. The only way to go from here is up. (Katya Lagun)

I never really thought much about the history of education, how far we have come in it, and how far we haven't gone. It was surprising to me how little the public really has as far as input. This is supposed to be a public education and those that are affected most don't have the input they need. It also shows that education is not getting students as ready for jobs and the workforce as we all think. After this class I have seen that the most important part of getting a job isn't as much the education one has earned, but ones work ability, timeliness, and how they work with others. I wonder if knowing this knowledge will this change our education system to gear towards work ethics and focus less on higher education, keeping to the basics that job require? (Kristie F.)

The timeline presented in A little history lesson made me question one of the topics presented in the Spring text. Spring talks about the value of the Home Economics course which was introduced in 1917 (according to his timeline) and then references it during the 1940s and 1950s: “A clean and cheerful house, it was believed, would reduce alcoholism because husbands would want to hurry home from work rather than stop at a tavern. Teaching women how to cook healthy meals would give their husbands more energy at work.” (p. 13) I am not commenting on whether or not there is truth to this or not, but the fact is that this theory is not nearly as present (if it is at all) in our society today as it was in 60/70 years ago. Home Economics is not as common as it once was because times are changing as they always are. The time periods used in the timeline last for 20-40 years. Now that we are in the standardization and testing period, I wonder how long it will last. (Laura Vagnini)

During class the topic of educational inflation was brought up. This is an interesting topic. This is an example of supply and demand. This example was used to show how schooling affects the global economy. This concept is simple. The more people that go to school, more people will graduate and enter the work force. This makes job opportunities less for those who have an education and leaves more job opportunities for the people who are working hourly rate jobs. On the contrary, if less people go to school, then there is more of an opportunity for those who are educated to get a job. Also, this impacts the job opportunities that the low income hourly rate workers have. With less people going to school there are more people looking for jobs that provide gratification based on piece work. This goes back to the importance of high school starting in the 1920’s to 1940’s when the United States was in a depression. The working people supported schooling because it meant that the students would be in school and not out looking for jobs. (Elisabeth dos Santos)

I also have not really thought about or researched the history of education prior to this class. It is important to push certain issues and expect the best and not to just settle for anything. I do not agree with how the publics voice goes unheard. The people who are being negatively influenced have no say in whats going on. I do not think its right that the people with money are the ones who make all the decisions. Different social classes have different views and values on issues. By only allowing the people with money (which is only a small group of people compared to the rest of the population) to make all the decisions you are discriminating against the other social classes. Because you do not have money you are not capable of having input in your child's education? Like Obama said its time for a change. (Kari M)

Just as Allie and Kristie had said that they never thought too much about the history of education, I haven't thought much about it myself. I have become more interested in the history education as I began to read more about it especially when I was reading Chapter 2 in "American Education." A part of it talked about how race along with gender "limits the effect of educational attainment on equality of opportunity in the labor market." This "white privilege" as it is referred to would not be present if public education really followed the belief of allowing education to be available to every child regardless of their race, gender, or economic status. Why does this keep persisting in our schools today? It is evident that not everyone will succeed and become as wealthy as some people will however everyone should be able to have an equal chance in pursuing their wealth. Because the strongest voices are governmental voices and not parents and children, we as future teachers need to take action and voice our concerns. It's sad that people will have complaints about the eduction system however like we talked about in class they will not show up to BOE meetings or know anything about them at all. It's also depressing when people will show up to BOE meetings only when a crisis occurs however can't this be considered a "crisis" of where we are at now? We need to step up or our education system will never be changed for the better and children will never receive the education that they deserve. (Danielle Velodota)

I agree with Danielle. We do need to step up and voice our thoughts and opinions about education. Even in Spring’s readings we are narrowing down education for the sole purpose for children to be part of a job force. In schools today, we’re cutting funding for extracurricular activities, arts, science, music, even gym. What is the reasoning for this? Is it because we need to make more time for testing? The students are frustrated, angry, what happened to the times when children would enjoy going to school each and everyday? I also think that it’s sad that now we see the competition of a Global economy as well. The testing, the preparation. And I agree with what Dr. Love said, “We eventually are going to be a nation that isn’t the wealthiest, and because of this education will suffer”. I wonder when things will turn around, and this time it will make a difference in education. (Tara Gleason)

I was very surprised at the fact that you don't even need any experience in a school to be a superintendent or on the Board of Education. (Katya Lagun)

I would like to add on to this responce made by Katya. Katya was surprised that you do not need to have had a teaching backround or experience to be a superintendant or on the board of education. I think that I can see the reasoning for this. I am going to take my head football coach here at CCSU as an example. (please do not repeat this :) ) Being an administartor seems to be a little different than being a teacher. As being a head coach seems to be different than being an assistant coach. I think that to be a teacher, you should have experience in the teaching aspect because you are going to be dealing with kids on an everyday basis and teaching them. Teaching is also an art that is always being improved upon and adjusted based on experiences. However, Being a superintendant or board of ed. member, you are often dealing with money issues. (For the most part). Same goes for my football coach. I don't think the guy knows much about football and in fact I think that he is an idiot, which is besides the point. But he has assistant coaches that deal with the football, kind of like how the superintendant has teachers to deal with the teaching. The assistant coaches handle to football stuff and the head coach deals with scholarship money dispersement, media, recruiting things, travel expenses etc. Just like the teachers deal with teaching the students and superintendants deal with funds, parent issues, media etc. It is kind of a different area. (To me at least). Just my opinion. (Nick C)


 * Responses to the "Bridging Differences" Blog found at:** [|**http://blogs.edweek.org/edweek/Bridging-Differences/**] **Be sure to clearly state which posting you are referring to.** ** Just as a reminder, everyone needs to post something in this category as well as at least one in the one of the above categories. ** ** You should have two postings total this week. **

Responding to Diane's post on Febraury 9th. she talks about the two types of school superintendents. First she goes to talk about the traditional superintendent who has gone through the eductaion system, and may have been a principal themself. This person is more apt to try to fix a school by maybe changing principals and more around staff, maybe bring in new teachers. This is the idea that we have most often of people in this position. Then she goes on to talk about the reformed superintendent. This person is now coming into the school system with barely any educational background. They view their positions as those in a corporation. They are business people who run the schools like that. to me this reminds me of our talking about the istory of education. How there has been a change over the years of how schools are run and what is the main focus of the students learning. Bringing in these business people are taking away from the students, and what is best for their learning. They don't have the training to learn how to see how students learn best, they are more focused on test scores and final products, not the actual learning process. I know they don't directly teach to the students, and the may say that is the teacher's responsibility, but these are the poeple in charge ofwhat resources are available to the teachers, and what may be in their curriculum. I don't think people outside of the educational studies realize how much knowledge goes into learnign about teaching strategies and learning about children as they grow up. I hope to see more thought into the minds and needs of the students and not just of the paperwork that comes out of them. (Kelly Bates)

I also am responding to Diane's post from February 9th. I found the post quite interesting. It was useful to be able to see the differences between the two types of superintendents, one being someone that has more of an educational background and the other having a more business background. I find is sad that as we move forward towards the future of our school systems that more and more superintendents have the business backgrounds. We really need the superintendents with the educational background who have the best interest of the children in their mind instead of producing numbers that look good to the state and to the country. We need superintendents that know where the problem lies and is willing to spend time inside of the school to see what is going on and what difference they can make instead of hovering over a sheet of paper with numbers on it. (Emily Hungerford)

In responding to Diane's post on February 9th I was shocked to read that someone with a business background can be a superintendent of a school. How can someone who has hardly any educational background be a successful superintendent? These superintendents are going to be focusing on statistics.This is going to limit the material teachers can teach their students. They will be focused more on preparing students for tests as oppose to focusing more time on the fundamentals. I do not see how having a superintendent with a business background is going to benefit the students. After all, it is all about the students learning and what is best for them. It would be interesting to know how many people are aware of the qualifications of a superintendent. (Kari M)

I am responding to Diane's post from February 9th. I really enjoyed the way she worded the school systems now. In this case inparticular the superintendents. She started off with the traditional one who was so involved in making a difference, visiting the school. Getting to know how the students work their environment. My favorite part was if the school year or anything was not going well then, the superintendent would take action right away.Now in days you dont see that with the New superintendent, its all numbers. Its either the correct numbers above and or at the level they are suppose to be or else the school is closed. What makes it difficult for me is that the superintendent, has no clue how the school systems are working right now, which sucks. They don't know what to do to make it better they just sit there and expect changes. Whic towards the end part she mentions how teachers are ment to do test preps. It's all mechanical now, electronic how much can you retain, there is no such thing as creativity, imaginations doesn't exist. (Frances V)

Responding to Deborah’s latest post on Feb 4, 2010, I find it interesting that she is a proponent of the smaller school approach yet she focuses on the context in which is it created. She stands firm with this aspect of context and I wish she would elaborate on how she and her colleagues went about the process of closing a large school, what they took into consideration and the specifics in the planning: Nearly 20 years ago a group of us proposed phasing out one big high school in each NYC borough and simultaneously opening six new small schools in available alternate spaces in each neighborhood. We barely got beyond doing one very successful "turnaround" in Manhattan when a variant of this idea swept city after city.” If we knew more, we could then make a comparison between the approach she took and the approach being taken recently by this mass movement to close large schools. I would imagine that Deborah and her colleagues knew the community, the area, and the neighborhood of the school she was working with, the new area where the small school would be located, and hopefully followed up on the effects of the change. I doubt the officials closing the schools today take those same things into account. (Laura Vagnini) "Closing Schools solves nothing" When I read this article I wasn't even surpirsed that many of the voices from parents students and teachers were not even being heard. It was all for nothing when the major has the final decision of what schools close down and when they do. Tey also make it seem that the larger schools cannot provide adequate teaching to the studnets because there are so many students in each classroom and the violence in most schools are through the roof. I really believe instead of closing down large school they hould just hire extra teachers, which would cause the school to have more classrooms going on with less students in each room. Not only does the government close down large schools and open up small one every where, but they also cut the jobs of many well educated teachers.

In response to “Closing Schools Solves Nothing” February 02, 2010 Diane addresses the topic of large schools closing and in their place charter schools pop up. As quoted by Diane “the city closed nearly 100 schools and opened more than 350 small ones. As large schools closed, the new small schools (and charter schools) that replaced them did not take a fair share of high-needs students.” Last semester in my IS 225 class I learned about a topic called “disaster capitalism,” this term is used when in a moment of crisis say a natural disaster (tsunami, hurricane, earthquake) and all hell is breaking loose corporations and governments swoop in to take advantage of the disorder. For example after the tsunami hit Indonesia and virtually cleared out all those fishing villages along the coast, today stands hotels. Its all about making money and by subjecting large schools to students who are not even remotely close to passing any government standard, these large schools are doomed to fail. Charter schools are still funded by the public but are free from adhering to some public school standards. They can not charge a tuition but they can selectively choose who is allowed to attend. So looking at a big picture who’s going to win? A large school that in the case of Columbus High School “only about 5 percent of the students who entered Columbus in 9th grade were on grade level in reading, and less than 15 percent in math, a dramatic decrease over the past decade,” or charter schools that produce numbers such as these [|www.edreform.com/_upload/CER_] [|**charter**] [|_numbers.pdf]. (Tim Walczak)

I recently read “Closing Schools Solves Nothing,” from February 2, 2010. Diane comments on the absurd amount of schools that have closed in the last year and how the smaller schools that are being created are really just a business venture rather than a sincere attempt to better our schools and our children’s education. I agree that instead of “cheering” over this we need to look at the deeper meanings behind it. I was shocked to hear this reaction. It simply means we have given up on these schools. It takes time, effort and of course, money to rebuild these schools and I don’t think that we are going about it the right way. I hate to believe that it all comes down to a simply business transaction but the more and more I look at education and the schools that are struggling, I have to agree. There are many people that feel this way and luckily they are speaking out. “An overflow crowd of 2,000-3,000 parents, teachers, and students turned out for the hearing to protest the closing of their schools; some 350 people signed up to speak against the closings.” Unfortunately, even with this turnout the schools still closed and students had to find somewhere else to go. My favorite quote from the blog seemed to sum up the real reasons behind this struggle…The mayor does whatever he wishes, regardless of the views of parents, students, and teachers. The schools belong to him, not them. Democracy at work.” Not only is this affecting the school system but it also has a huge impact on the community that evolves over time. Constantly moving teachers and students around will break away from this sense of community which is extremely important to the educational system, whether the Mayor would like to believe so or not. The most compelling argument, I believe is that statistically more than half of the displaced students simply ended up in other low performing schools. (Sarah Rousseau) In response to “Closing Schools Solves Nothing” on February 2nd, 2010, Diane reflects on the unfortunate realities of schools that are simply just closing due to the Mayor’s careless decision, as opposed to remaining open and finding solutions and ways to improve the education/learning environment provided for these children. These schools that are “failing” are failing for a reason. This response provided by Diane has only caused me to further think that since these voices, such as the Mayor’s, that actually are heard and are unfortunately the only ones that seem to really matter, then ultimately the school is failing because of //them//. Giving up and not providing any effort towards providing a better education for these children directly impacts NCLB; if the best thing to do is to give up and immediately shutdown schools because they haven’t met the proficiency level on standardized tests, then what is the point of pushing for every child to meet a particular score when the efforts behind trying don’t make a difference in the end? This post also caused me to think about earlier discussions on the notion of “public education”. What is the point of calling this public education if realistically speaking none of the voices that really should matter do not? “Mayoral control”, which allows the mayor to do what he wants, regardless of the views of parents, students, and teachers, completely excludes the voices that should be heard since clearly the decisions being made are really not in the best interest of the students. Closing the schools and opening multiple smaller ones is really just passing the unsolved issues from one school to another, but the Mayor and those who have a say in such decisions seem to turn their heads away from the real problems, especially if what is decided is beneficial to their own personal status and beliefs. (Mandy Lucente)

I read "Closing Schools Solves Nothing" written by Diane on February 2, 2010. I agree with Diane's concern that closing these large, "failing" schools will only create more failing schools, because where are the children from those school supposed to go other than other schools? Diane explains, "With each new round of closures, other large schools are set up to fail". Instead, these schools should be looked as an opportunity for change; simply closing them is taking the easy way out. How can they think that closing bigger schools and opening smaller schools will solve the problem? Don't they realize that these smaller schools will eventually grow into bigger schools and that it's an on-going cycle? These people should be ashamed of themselves for giving up and taking the easy route. They are cowards who cannot deal with the reality of today's education crisis, and they do not realize how much deeper they are digging the hole. Diane brings up this point when she says, "The more they struggled, the more the DOE abandoned them and readied them for closure". As we discussed in class, those with all the money have all the power. Well, how funny it is that when they bring something into society which is looked at as fantastic and positive, they want all the credit. Yet, when they run something into the ground, like these schools in need, they are eager to blame anything and anyone other than themselves. These poor children in struggling schools know that society constantly labels them as failures and looks down on them. Well, if someone gave up on me no matter how hard I tried, I would probably eventually give up on myself, as well. Society cannot just turn its head and pretend the problem isn't there. Oh, it's there, alright, and the more you ignore it and push it to the side, the bigger and badder the problem will get. (Katya Lagun)

I also read "Closing Schools Solves Nothing" Diane on February 2, 2010. I personally agree with an approach to create more smaller schools, especially in inner-cities where there are issues of poverty, single parent homes, and learning disablities. I went to a small Catholic High School, there were maybe about 500 students in the school, My graduating class had less than 100 peers. Overall I would describe my experience at the school as a great experience. Smaller schools allow for a better teacher-student relationship and more availability for help. I also think these smaller schools would benefit big, inner-city schools because it would keep districts smaller, threrefore easier travel to and from school. Also, by creating small schools you could establish schools that primarily focus on providing the proper education for studetns with dissabilities, versus stiking them in the over-crowded and unfocused large schools where majority of the class time is wasted with wait time and off-task behavior. (Jessica Roberts)

In response to Diane’s blog of February 2, 2010, I could relate to the devastation of hearing that a school is going to close. I recently found out that my elementary school is going to close. Unlike the schools in New York that closed because of inadequate standards of a failing school, my elementary school is closing because of the budget crisis in Naugatuck. But in reality this could cause a BIG problem. Like the idea that closing failing schools creates more failing schools, this is the possibility for Prospect Street School. To save some money, our town of Naugatuck is willing to cram students into another school where they will receive less one on one interaction from the teachers. This will indeed lead to a failing school. I’ve thought about protesting, but will it do any good? Just like in New York, the people have no real say in a town with “Democracy at work”. In reality “closing schools solves nothing”.(Elisabeth dos Santos)

In response to: "Arne Duncan at ED: one year" from January 26, 2010. Diane wrote about her thoughts on Arne Duncan and his program called Race To The Top. The article in The //Chicago Tribun//e Diance referances, concludes that Duncan's program has done little to improve the educational performance of the city's school system. This is something that bothers me because I feel as though money is being thrown around and wasted. This money could be used for some sort of program or other idea where the money would be spent effectively. I don't think the program has been thought out well enough. All a school really needs is one person who speaks well and can convince a number of people that their idea is going to benefit the school. Once the school has the money, they don't need to prove anything. In Chicago, Duncan closed a number of large schools and opened a number of smaller schools, similar to what it happening in New York. There really are no drastic results that are coming out of doing this. I could be wrong, but I feel like all of this is a waste of time and money. All of these efforts could be spent towards devising a plan that will actually benefit the children. I feel like the idea behind this plan is similar to how No Child Left Behind developed and was turned into a law. (Allie French)

I also read "Arne Duncan at ED: one year" from January 26, 2010. I agree with you Allie, that so far this idea has gone no where and hasn't shown any improvements. What if some of these schools getting the money don't really use the money they get as they said they will. What about the schools that don't get the money. I just feel that this, like you said Allie, is a waste of time and money. It could have been thought out more, and so far nothing is changing in a good way for the school systems. I feel that this wont really work in getting changes that need to be made. (Kristie F.)

I agree with many of my classmates this week. After I read "Closing Schools Solves Nothing" by Diane on Feb. 2, 2010, I agree with an approach to create smaller schools, especially in inner-cities. I say this because here there are more issues of poverty, single parent homes,learning disabilities, and just not a lot of resources available to them. Some families don’t even have a car, or enough money to ride public transportation. I was fortunate to have the opportunity to go to a small public school, because I lived in a small suburban town. But after last weeks class, many children don’t have these chances, and the system ultimately fails them. Yes, like Kristie F. was saying that changes do have to be made, and I agree, but we are the ones that need to start making a change. Like Dr. Love mentioned in class, showing up to board meetings, voicing your thoughts, and educating ourselves with the history and the foundations of education in America. I’m not shocked by this material, because I read Kozol’s work in the past. I have experienced the differences between urban and rural/suburban schools. What I think is sad is that it’s 2010 and we are still faced with these challenges. (Tara Gleason)

I also read "Closing Schools Solves Nothing" Diane on February 2, 2010 and I totally agree with what Katya said about closing the schools to open smaller ones. Of course these smaller schools will turn into bigger schools only to create more chaos. It's almost as if nothing was done at all and the problem was getting shoved to the side just to turn into a bigger problem given only a short time. I've always liked the idea of smaller classes because it fosters more closer relationships with staff and students while also promoting higher student achievement some of the time, but how long could this possibly last for? In the article it said, "This is a great and terrible charade. It is not about improving education or helping kids. It is about producing data to demonstrate that small schools are better than large ones and that charters are better than regular public schools." I feel like more of just a point is trying to be made rather than anyone else's opinions being listened to about what is best for the children. It just shocked me that the mayor was able to make whatever decision he wanted regardless of what any parents, teachers, or students thought. This might be the reason why some people never want to take part in the BOE meetings because their voice is never heard when it should be! (Danielle Velodota)

I, as well as Tim above me would like to comment on what Dianne said in her February 2, 2010 post about closing large schools and replacing them with smaller schools and in some cases charter schools. Much like the “disaster capitalism” that he speaks during the Indonesian Tsunami, in the aftermath of hurricane Katrina New Orleans saw that business swept in and replaced almost have the public schools with charter schools. However, charter schools, in my opinion are not the answer to our education problems. A PBS news article, [], discusses much of my concern. Charter schools put all the power of education, and teacher hiring into the hands of one person, the principal, and out of the hands of the district board. As a business venture their main goal is high standardized test scores and competition in the RTTT. As Dianne said, “These new small schools are produced not by an educator with a vision, but by a bureaucracy with a business plan.” and later said, “The neediest kids will continue to be pushed out and bounced around until they give up.” Charter schools are the anathema of the schools today’s society needs: those which critically teach a mix of transformative, liberal and traditional views and prepare our children to succeed in today’s world without standardized tests. (Chris K.) I also read "Closing School Solves Nothing on February 2, 2010. This is sad thing that is happening in school systems. I feel that the government needs to evaluate the way things are being handled and the way this is going to effect future students instead of making decisions based on what they see at the moment. I feel that as Diane said about the business plan instead of an educator making the changes, everyone only sees the things that will help the finances. I feel that the main goal should be better taught students and improveent on the education instead of improvement on the test scores and on the city's ratings. I think knowing that the students are learning is a better acheivment then knowing which schools are better then which and maybe knowing why this is, could be helpful in the future for creating better teachers and students. (Allie Beardsworth)

I also read "Closing Schools Solves Nothing" that was written by Diane on February 2, 2010. It shocked me that the New York Department of Education could decide to just close schools and create smaller schools but continue to hurt the bigger schools because the smaller schools did not accept everyone. It also shocked me that the Department of Education never gave the failing schools the resources to change the low test scores and poor graduation rates. If the Department of Education had only given these schools the time of day then the test scores would have gone up and so would have the graduation rates. The mayor did not even give the "overflow of 2,000 - 3,000 parents, teachers, and students turned out for the hearing to protest the closing of their schools." It really shocked me that the mayor had all this control that he could do whatever he wanted. Diane wrote that the "mayor does whatever he wishes, regardless of the views of parents, students, and teachers. The schools belong to him; not them. Democracy at work." I agree with what Danielle said that it was about producing data to show that the smaller schools would be better than the larger schools and that the fact that she brought up about not helping the kids or trying to improve education. (Jessica Morneault)

"Closing School Solves Nothing on February 2, 2010"

To me this boils down to money obviously. I mean this is very sad but there is nothing that can be done about it, especially in today's economy struggles. Who pays for school expenses? the state which is ultimately controlled by our government. It is a shame that public schools are on the top of the list in terms of what the state can cut out in order to save money, but i can see that a school does cost a fortune to run. However is it worth it? Not to me. By closeing down a school in a district, it is safe to assume that there are other schools in the district that these students will now be attending. What does this mean? Overpopulation. Over poulation can cause a variety of problems. And it seems like this is going to be the case for most districts, especially with the shutting down of so many schools. Overpopulated classrooms puts alot of pressure on us teachers. How are we possibly supposed to reach out to these individuals? Nevertheless keep the room under control with 30 to 40 kids. Majority of class time will probably be spent on classroom management issues rather than teaching time. In today's diversified teaching enviornments, successfull class periods would be almost impossible. And the state wonders why there are problems with test scores. (Nick C)