In Ken Robinson's (2013) TED Talk entitled, "How to
escape education's death valley", he discusses the dropout crisis and
disengaged students in the United States. He attributes the dilemma in
U.S. education to 3 main reasons: 1) policy, 2) curiosity, 3)
creativity.
Reason #3) creativity, relates to lack of teacher influence: Robinson says that teachers have become "de-professionalized" whereas teachers should be viewed as the "lifeblood of success" (2013). He says that in the United States we have individualized teaching and learning whereas teacher input is needed in order to create policy. He says that education is about people not just data. Most people get into teaching because they want to help people and they want to make a difference. For many policy-related reasons, it is difficult for teachers to accomplish what they have set out to do. Teachers in the U.S. are not held in as high of regard as they are in other countries around the world. Teachers do not have the support that they need, on a school-to-school, community, and nation-wise level.
Reason #3) creativity, relates to lack of teacher influence: Robinson says that teachers have become "de-professionalized" whereas teachers should be viewed as the "lifeblood of success" (2013). He says that in the United States we have individualized teaching and learning whereas teacher input is needed in order to create policy. He says that education is about people not just data. Most people get into teaching because they want to help people and they want to make a difference. For many policy-related reasons, it is difficult for teachers to accomplish what they have set out to do. Teachers in the U.S. are not held in as high of regard as they are in other countries around the world. Teachers do not have the support that they need, on a school-to-school, community, and nation-wise level.
In Geoffrey Canada's (2013) TED Talk entitled, "Out failing schools. Enough is enough!", he compares the current state of education and the policy decisions being made to a business plan that is not working that continues to stick with the same plan year after year. He poses the question - why, in education, do we not allow innovation? Why are we not willing to try something new? He discusses the flaws with the current state testing setup: we test in April, but get the results in July, and then have new students in August. He (and I'm sure many teachers) would like the testing done earlier in the year and have the results by September or November in order to actually be able to use the data and help students. We says that we cannot stifle innovation and should change how things are being done in education because the we want to help kids. He suggests setting up a network of support for students, even for after they graduate, and refusing to let them fail. In my own experience, in my PLC group we could use common assessments and get data, but we never had the time or opportunity to fully use that data to make changes. Also, when I would present new ideas to my PLC group, many people were resistant to change. For example, when suggesting different methods of assessment (other than multiple choice), people were resistant because it took more time to create, more time to grade, and they did not feel that the benefits outweighed the costs. Doing the same thing year after year becomes comfortable for people, but in order to improve our practices, teacher need to be open to making changes and trying something new.
Diane Ravitch (2013) states that, "Test scores [should not] be the sole measure of the quality of a school" (p. 238) and that good teachers do not necessarily equal higher test scores because students change from year to year. I feel as though these sentiments are felt and agreed upon by many professionals in education. However, due to many state and nationwide policies, a great deal of time is spent in preparation for that big standardized test at the end of the year.
Labaree (1997) concurs and suggests that one of the educational ends that would be beneficial is that teachers should help students develop into competent individuals with a broad skill set. I think that this aligns with many universities ideas about providing students with a liberal arts education as well as with many high schools that offer classes such as mechanics, wood shop, and work-study or internship programs. The information that I learned in my arts and humanities classes provided me with a better understanding of people from different cultural and socioeconomic backgrounds. The internship that I had in high school where I shadowed a high school science teacher ultimately lead me to the conclusion that I belonged in the classroom myself. The children of today are going to be the voters of tomorrow; they are going to be the ones coming into the work force and making decisions that will affect the population as a whole, and providing them with a well-rounded education will hopefully shape them into more open-minded and conscientious individuals. The problem in the United States is that due to budget cuts and a lack of funds from the government, schools are cutting arts and physical education programs left and right. (Canada also talks about this in his TED Talk.)