As U.S. Secretary of Education, I often spoke of the importance of a quality math and science education to every student's learning experience. In those days, we talked about the need for every student to compete and succeed in the new information-based society.
Now, the stakes are even higher. Indeed, our future as a nation depends on our commitment to ensuring that every student -- not just the select few -- achieves far higher levels of math and science learning.
We've learned in this economic crisis that the old ways of doing business just don't work anymore. We know we must do banking differently; we must approach the business of making cars differently; we must see our place in the global community differently; and we must begin a renewed effort aimed at innovative reform of the education system for our students and for the future economic prosperity of this nation.
In short, it's time to "do school differently."
To do that, we have to ask ourselves, "What kinds of schools and systems of education are necessary to transform mathematics and science education and deliver it equitably to all students?" And in doing so, we must begin a new journey to accelerate innovation at every level and jump-start our future.
One way to begin such a journey is with the facts. We know that changes in the global economy already are beginning to require the ability to analyze and problem-solve in ways we could not have even imagined a few decades ago.
In 2007, the Bureau of Labor Statistics projected that 54.7 million American jobs would open during the decade from 2004 to 2014, and that more than half of them would require a college degree. Of those jobs, the ones that are predicted to produce the highest wages are those that require the skills gleaned through quality math and science instruction in our public schools, as well as in our colleges and universities.
We also know that at the same time, in 2004, wage declines for those with only a high school education put this group below the middle 50 percent of family incomes in the United States for the first time since we began tracking such data.
I could cite a litany of statistics, but the evidence is clear and compelling. And "doing school differently" to respond to these changes must be built on a new, national mobilization that makes our collective advantage in the world our number one priority.
We must make certain that every man, woman, and child in the United States has the science, technology, engineering, and math skills to allow them to contribute to and gain from the country's future productivity, and to understand policy choices, and participate in building a sustainable future. These are skills essential to all, regardless of their chosen professional path.
We must take a closer look at schools that are succeeding and recognize that they are doing so because of high expectations for every student, effective engagement of students, parents, and teachers, and a level of personalization that meets every student's learning style.
We have to replicate, where possible, the innovative, entrepreneurial approaches that are altering the marketplace for functions such as teacher recruitment, data management, and professional development. These and other ways of doing school differently are changing the way many school districts do business and advancing the notion that old ways of carrying out core operations are not good enough.
We must insist that our colleges and universities are at the table as full partners to the K-12 community, that science-rich institutions are fully accessed and integrated into core math and science curriculum, and that the business and philanthropic communities are pushing math and science education to the fore at every opportunity.
And we must do all we can to bolster the efforts of the states and the U.S. Department of Education to develop common standards across the country, in order to ensure that students in every state are able to compete globally on a level playing field.
These are not new concepts. What must be new is the level of intensity with which we approach these new economic realities with focus on innovation, collaboration, and mobilization at every level.
On June 10, the Carnegie Corporation of New York - Institute for Advanced Study Commission on Mathematics and Science Education will kick off this national mobilization and will hear from our bold, new U.S. Secretary of Education Arne Duncan, as well as the business, philanthropy, labor, civic, and education communities about new efforts aligned to our shared vision for American education.
The challenges we are facing demand transformational change at all levels -- from the classroom to the boardroom and beyond. It's time for us to embrace this new understanding and get to work doing what we know we must to secure the future for every American family and community.
They are not run to serve the parents or the children. I have nothing against teachers or school employees. I am a former public school teacher myself.
However as long as the government runs the schools and the government is run by the wealthy, the wealthy will run the public schools for their own benefit, not for the benefit of the children.
This article is the perfect example of this type of thinking. Public schools should provide lots of trained workers so the corporations can have lots of good, skilled workers who know math and science and are compliant, don't complain, are used to being bored, and are used to conforming in large institutions. This is somehow much more important than the student's interests, ideas, strengths, and gifts.
However I also think that K-12, and college especially, should be put on TV for the majority of students. The bricks and mortar lecture system that is currently in place is focused on jobs for educators. It has lost sight of educating the masses. Many people can't learn at their own pace when they're herded together by age. The way the current system is, if you don't catch on by the time you're 18 or 19 years old, you're out of the public education system. The continuity of education is gone. If you still want to learn, you have to go elsewhere and it'll cost you. There's no continuity. That's the built-in age discrimination of the bricks and mortar lecture system.
Lectures should be put on TV and be accessible to the public. It would be cheaper that way and more people would have access to public education. The only reason to herd people together is for test taking, so they can't cheat. Imagine the money that could be saved and the people that could be educated.
Ya'll can keep up this science vs well rounded education debate forever, however the fact is that if people want to survive, they need to be able to work--either for themselves or someone else. But almost no classes exist that teach people about the job market, how to identify jobs they can do or will want and effective job search techniques. The education system is driven by people like Mr. Riley who have grandiose ideas with little connection to the reality of earning a living.
Time to get out of thinking in terms of teachers lecturing to bored students.
Focus on education, rather than indoctrination.
Focus on interests and natural ability, versus cookie cutter grading systems.
Focus on and reward of individual achievement, opposed to dumbing everything down so everyone feels all squishy and cuddly and proud of themselves without having to work.
The United States, once again, needs to get over the idea that we need to start everything from scratch. Yes, I know that puts a lot of money into the hands of suits doing pointless studies, and into the hands of beaurocrats with nothing more demanding to do than ask a lot of silly questions, and into the hands of various "officials" who need to do their little song and dance supporting their particular stance- while the problem continues.
Let's take a look at countries that exceed our own "successes"...and maybe do some of the things they're doing.
Changing schools isn't enough. We have to change attitudes as well.
1) Parents.
2) Schools.
3) Teachers.
oh BS! it is in sales or politics (as in if you are good at office politics!!!!)
ask any science types reading this
We're supposed to be educating CITIZENS and HUMANS not just employees.
My Dad is an artist, by the way. My Mom is overjoyed that I am not... since that actually allows me to help them survive their retirement on a bit more than a shoestring budget.
:-)
:-)
In middle school, a study of linguistics so that kids understand how different languages code for different interpretations of 'reality'. (For example, some languages do not code for the concept of linear time which we take for granted, how would that change your perceptions ?)
More options in high school for those who are not interested in going on to college. There is absolutely nothing wrong with apprenticing to learn a skill or going to trade school. College is not for everybody, and it is always possible to take classes later as a 'life-long learner'.
More flexibility for time schedules and ages, especially in the younger years. Here is how I would sort out the different grade levels : K thru approx. grade four -- small schools close to neighborhoods, with extended hours as these are the kids who need the most supervision while parents work. Grades five through nine (approx). -- middle schools with more emphasis on academics and community involvement by students. High school -- different tracks depending on interest and aptitude, with 'crossover' potential built in.
It's always bothered me that these PUBLIC school buildings are only accessible on School District terms. We have paid for them, why are they locked up so much of the
:-)
It would also be nice to teach to our kids how calculus codes for pretty much everything in the physical world... one has to know how to speak "calculus", though...
:-)
Because while we don't know what the next generation of jobs will require we DO KNOW what makes a better human being.
Now... about those jobs... we know quite well what they will require. And it's not the easy stuff. It's the hard stuff like physics, chemistry, biology, computer science (as in "computer science", not as in "system administrator" and web designer).
And let me assure you... there are very few theoretical physicists who are not VERY decent people. But there are also very few indecent people who are theoretical physicists. So the "better" part will automatically come by teaching your kids.
I'm not saying that home schooling isn't a viable option for many people and for many reasons. I'm just saying that there still needs to be some sort of "state" standard that needs to be met.
:-)
All my kids were reading on 9th grade or higher level by the end of kindergarten. Despite this, my daughter's first grade spent 4 months reading one picture book. I was told that scheduling prevented her from going to another class for reading.
I believe in GOOD public schools, but there is seriously something wrong with the current system of public education. We can't afford private school, so I homeschool. I don't have a teaching degree, but I do have a BA and 2 MA's, and I don't force my children to work far below their level because of "scheduling." They are receiving a classical education in math, science, language arts, Latin, history, art and music. When I find I can't teach them something, I find classes. Our local schools are so bad that there are an estimated 10,000 children homeschooling in our metro area. We have a huge pool of private teachers available who love to work with our kids. And before I hear the "socialization!" argument, there is a park day scheduled every afternoon of the week, as well as group classes available. My family has about 1 afternoon a month without some kind of social gathering.
Yes, there are some parents who should not homeschool, but tarring and feathering an entire group is unfair. There are good ones and bad ones, just like public schools.
You cannot expect to transform public education with people who do nothing but make excuses for their miserable performance, blame parents, society, administrators, etc., all while collecting their (now) sizable paychecks for very little work. Good teachers don't quit because the kids or parents or even the administrations are bad -- good teachers quit because they know that they are surrounded by lazy, incompetent "colleagues" that the union has made all but impossible to terminate.
The kind of effective, energetic school environments where kids love to learn and perform to the best of their abilities exist all over the place. Just look for a place where you can fire a lousy teacher or administrator without 3 years of hearings, and where the school board has a backbone. Accountability, hard work and a little courage is all it takes.
Teachers are expected to parent upwards of 30 young people in addition to teaching them a plethora of subjects, skills and facts. We help administer schools through committees, meet and counsel parents about their students, "differentiate" curriculum for learning disabled kids, teach social skills and manners, celebrate birthdays, participate in school community events - even organize them, grade papers, plan our teaching days, and listen to this kind of abuse from all walks of society - all for much less than $45,000 a year - with a Master's Degree!
"collecting sizeable paychecks" - yeah right! In your alternate universe!
Whether FabricAssassin is a lazy parent who fails to monitor his/her child's study habits or simply an underacheiving student seeking to assuage their own sense of accountability by projecting the blame onto somebody else, he/she is clearly nowhere within ICBM range of being qualified to properly evaluate this issue.
What if a hybrid public/private system was created where half of the space available in the best schools were allowed to be bid on and the other half gets determined by a lottery system where every child in the city that wanted to go there was eligible? The better the school the more funding, the better teachers it could attract. Those that couldn't afford it would still have a shot at attending..
You asked a what if, and I will give you a simple answer: You would have an extremely class-based education system in which a "lucky few" poorer students would occasionally get a chance to escape their horribly underfunded local schools, but the wealthy always would. Those of us who are actually thinking about the CHILDREN would be repulsed by such a plan.