some thoughts on revamping public education
|
|
| Also listed in: US-ED |
I need to do a ton of research to make sure I'm not completely off the wall here, but I think I've nailed down 2 core ideas that would vastly improve public education without breaking budgets.
1. Year-round schools with a rotating schedule. Break the students up into 4 sections, (A, B, C & D). Each section goes to school for 9 weeks, then has 3 weeks off. If Section A starts the school year on September 1st, then Section B will start on September 21st, Section C will start on October 12th and Section D starts on November 2nd. Because of the 3 week break between quarters, only 3/4 of the students would be in the school at a time. That's a 25% increase in capacity just from changing the schedule. And since the quarters are 12 weeks (including the vacation), there are still 4 weeks of time leftover in the full calendar year to allow for holidays. Another perk to this plan is that schools that are not currently at or over capacity can switch to this plan and have smaller class sizes.
2. This works hand-in-glove with my second idea - making the schools themselves bigger. Instead of having 20 elementary school buildings for 500 kids each, why not have 5 large school buildings for 2000 students each? The county/school board/district can expand and renovate existing schools to fit the larger student body without having a huge impact on the grounds/outdoor facilities by adding an additional level, using space more efficiently and getting rid of portable classrooms. The leftover school buildings can be sold to help fund the expansion of the buildings we keep. Now why would you do this? Simple. In the long run, it is much more cost-effective to maintain 5 large buildings than it is to maintain 20 smaller buildings. Especially when you consider the redundant facilities like gymnasiums, theatres, sports fields, libraries and cafeterias.
When you combine the first two changes, you can actually afford to pay teachers more because you simply won't need as many. This means the school board can be more selective when hiring so the students benefit from having better, well-paid instructors.
So what are your thoughts?
1. Year-round schools with a rotating schedule. Break the students up into 4 sections, (A, B, C & D). Each section goes to school for 9 weeks, then has 3 weeks off. If Section A starts the school year on September 1st, then Section B will start on September 21st, Section C will start on October 12th and Section D starts on November 2nd. Because of the 3 week break between quarters, only 3/4 of the students would be in the school at a time. That's a 25% increase in capacity just from changing the schedule. And since the quarters are 12 weeks (including the vacation), there are still 4 weeks of time leftover in the full calendar year to allow for holidays. Another perk to this plan is that schools that are not currently at or over capacity can switch to this plan and have smaller class sizes.
2. This works hand-in-glove with my second idea - making the schools themselves bigger. Instead of having 20 elementary school buildings for 500 kids each, why not have 5 large school buildings for 2000 students each? The county/school board/district can expand and renovate existing schools to fit the larger student body without having a huge impact on the grounds/outdoor facilities by adding an additional level, using space more efficiently and getting rid of portable classrooms. The leftover school buildings can be sold to help fund the expansion of the buildings we keep. Now why would you do this? Simple. In the long run, it is much more cost-effective to maintain 5 large buildings than it is to maintain 20 smaller buildings. Especially when you consider the redundant facilities like gymnasiums, theatres, sports fields, libraries and cafeterias.
When you combine the first two changes, you can actually afford to pay teachers more because you simply won't need as many. This means the school board can be more selective when hiring so the students benefit from having better, well-paid instructors.
So what are your thoughts?
We continually hear of students underachieving and dropping SAT scores. We continually blame it on classrooms and teachers.
As a teacher, who left teaching to continue research on my own, because schools in this country have absolutely NO CONTROLS -- it's time to put determine a national standard. Every student must be held to the same standard. Whether they live in rural Arkansas or Newark, NJ or a special school in New York City.
Do you realize that inside the belt of public education, NYC has such specialized schools that in ANY other part of the country they would be called PRIVATE schools. To their thinking these are special education classes for the privileged thinking students.
The most pronounced benefit of a nationally standardized educational system, is that we know that their would be no difference between special education and special privileges. Classroom costs, teacher independence, preferred techniques would NOT be lost. So long as the student passed his exam -- which he takes in the SAT anyway. Moreover, teachers who fail to get their students prepared would be clearly identified -- the kids failed!!
I have not read it yet, but today's Wall Street Journal ran an editorial on this very subject. It had no impact on me, because I had to work under the nationalized system and KNOW that it works.
I also think that peer tutoring programs can make a huge difference for all students. When you pair up successful students with those who are struggling, you elevate both kids. I tutored underclassmen in Spanish my junior and senior years of high school which got me some great recommendations for college and it helped me make a few new friends. And the students I tutored improved by at least one letter grade and it helped them develop study skills. There were dozens of peer tutors in my school and, in my opinion, that's a big reason why it's among the top public high schools in Maryland. One extra perk is that this requires next to no effort on the part of teachers or administrators. All they have to do is match up the students.
This country has moved so far away from tolerating that form of correction that I suspect expulsion or "study rooms" might be a better solution.
In a boarding situation, we had "enforced" hours to do your assignments and prepare for the next day. A teacher (rotated) oversaw from afar but maintained student focus on their assignments. If the student had a question or problem, the teacher was there to guide them through the solutions. I could easily see this technique being used as a study hall situation -- during the actual classtime (NOT afterschool) so that the student was forced to keep to the subject. NOT escape it.
If I told you that I have too many graduate school teacher friends who can tell you about the academic values of corporate wannabees. Their goal is not remotely "what social value can I create", it is "what's in it for me", "how can I get a piece of the existing pie".
When these two elements have skimmed off all of the best students in our schools to achieve higher result scores, we will be left with a public education fighting for funding and desparate for results.
We must come to the fundamental agreement that nobody foresees throwing out public schools. SO! What do you propose!!
Stop corporate raiders and religious extremeists from depriving the public schools from a workable, revised model.
If we go back to the national standard I proposed above, we would have to hold these raiders to the same standards. Their students would pass or fail. Their teachers would pass or fail. Their schools would pass or fail. And funding could be appropriately directed. If you want to be a private school, you won't get public funding. If you want a home school, you must live up to appropriate standards. Teachers, classrooms, financial accounting, and (since you're private) taxes.