Part 4
Tyler Lovallo
Part 4
In this part of the book there were some things that I was agreeing with and somethings that I did not agree with as well. Also, there were some things that I just assumed that were going on and some sort of things that I aspired. Now thing that I agreed with was “Corporate leaders and business associations viewed schools as crucial in producing a trained workforce that would strengthen American international competitiveness” (Pg176, P3). I agree with this because back then all of the learning that they were getting was basically for them to get good at being in a workforce. Also, I agreed with this because this is good because it can be a competitive thing going on to show that there is someone out there trying to outwork you and that you should try your best no matter what. Another thing I agreed with is "Now a century later, the coalition of business leaders, public officials, and educators says that more and more tough academic subjects equip graduates with essential knowledge and skills not only to perform well in an information-based workplace but also to secure America’s global economic supremacy” (Pg.181, P2). I liked this because it shows that maybe in the future the students could help the economic supremacy after they learn a lot more depth in each of the subjects. Also, there are way more things to learn about than the standard subjects within the topics taught. Something I disagreed with was “They called for 6 national goals, one of which asked American students to rank first on international tests in math and science by the year 2000” (Pg177, P3). This was something I disliked because it would put more pressure on the students and it could be hard for them to focus because this would be something that they would be thinking about and it could cause them to do worse and mess up a lot more. One thing that I aspired was · “Any school that was failing would be shut down and reorganized, much like a failing business” (Pg190, P1). I aspire this because this just shows that they are trying to make the best educational schools possible. Also, this shows that they really want all of the students to become successful. This is good because it shows that they care and are willing to do whatever to be successful. Then one assumption I had was “In 1992, New York began allowing students to seek enrollment in any public school in the city” Pg.190, P3). I would assume that all of the schools are just opened to let anyone enter and get an education at this point. Also, I would think all of the students are going to pick the same ones as their friends and the better schools as well.
Tyler,
ReplyDeleteYou've chosen some excellent points from this section (4) to comment upon.
I'll push back a bit on the one you chose to agree with where a threat to close a school would be an incentive for a school to get better. While I agree with you that every child should have access to a high quality school, there are many external factors that influence child learning, achievement and well-being. There include poverty, health, housing, and many more. Schools that serve children and families in high poverty and high crime neigborhoods (not necessarily concurrent), may be an important local institution in providing education and other related supports. Children from these neighborhoods may face more challenges in academic achievement. Should schools be closed because they serve children with more external problems related to poverty? In the 2000's when this law was enacted, many neighborhood schools that were primary pillars of support to families and children were closed, despite the protests of families and communities. While schools that do not provide high quality education should change, they may need more support and more resources vs. threats and punishments. Just some food for thought.
Great job, thanks!
Professor Knauer