Joanne Yatvin, veteran educator, now retired after a long career as teacher, principal, superintendent, and president of the National Council of Teachers of English, offers the following observations:
I recently read two articles about education in the New York Times. One recounted the shortage of teachers in many U.S states, while the other was about the shortage of students in rural areas of South Korea. Each article was fascinating in its own way; the first one for its lack of candor about why teachers are in such short supply, and the second for its many details about the range of services still offered in a public school that has only one student left. Let me explain.
The writer of the first article attributes the teacher shortage solely to economics, claiming that the massive teacher layoffs of the past few years were the natural result of the recession and that today’s lack of teacher applicants is due only to “fewer people training to be teachers.” At the same time she says nothing about the number of teachers who have left their jobs voluntarily. Thus she can also avoid mentioning the issues that have rocked the teaching profession and our public schools for the past several years, such as rating teachers by student test scores, the bad-mouthing of public schools in the media, and many governors’ preference for charter schools. She also fails to mention that the states hurting most for teachers offer low salaries and suppress teachers unions.
Admittedly, the second article is of a different genre altogether; it describes the culture in South Korea and explains the economic changes that have sent almost all young families and their children to the industrialized cities. But most interesting to me were the writer’s emphasis on the positive attitudes of local people toward education and his detailed description of the last student’s schooling. He shows readers the student’s positive attitude toward learning and the teacher’s close attention to both the academic and social growth of his student.
As evidence of the community’s continuing dedication to education the writer describes the almost empty school where there are still big screen TVs, computers, table tennis tables, telescopes, book-filled shelves, and musical instruments all the classrooms. In addition, he tells us that a painting teacher and a guitar teacher still come to the school twice a week to give lessons to the lone student. The local educational office delivers two lunches to the school every day.
In recounting all of this, my purpose was not to criticize one writer and praise the other, but to give you just a taste of the differences between the two countries in their treatment of public education. With all our wealth, power, and sense of “American Exceptionalism” we can surely give our schools, our teachers, and our children a better deal than what they have now.
Reblogged this on David R. Taylor-Thoughts on Texas Education.
What a great comparison! One truly cares about the student while the other focuses on everything except the student. We are in a people business and so it’s caring first.
One article is pure bias by omission, the other is genuine human interest.
The NY Times isn’t all crap. It’s editorial board is.
Its
It’s an autocorrect thing.
That’s not fair to the editorial board, but the editorial board is an utter failure regarding education.
Joan Yatvin is GREAT! Joan can see the insane education policies of this country.
Yes, if I had to choose one word to describe the less-than-stellar performance of our educational system, I would choose “value.” Many of our citizens do not value education,especially for other people’s children.
Many citizens likely don’t realize the harm that they do when they devalue our teachers. For example, when Campbell Brown blathers on about “the bad teachers” she plants false beliefs in the minds of many and discourages young people from entering a profession that garners so little respect. Her efforts at “reform” will likely weaken our system even more.
It’s not easy to fix problems of attitude, but this is what I would suggest:
States should have strict standards for new teachers. No “waivers” or “emergency” credentials should be granted, especially for poor children of color, as they are now. Once teachers are credentialed, they should have professional autonomy (i.e. help to run their schools and make almost all decisions regarding their classrooms) and should be evaluated by their peers. And of course salaries should be equal to those of other professionals who are required to have five years of college.
That would be a start.
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/02/opinion/sunday/south-koreas-education-system-hurts-students.html?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&module=c-column-top-span-region®ion=c-column-top-span-region&WT.nav=c-column-top-span-region
Flerp,
I immediately mirrored your thoughts when I saw the Korean system being lauded. Just what we need, more students with ‘dead eyes’ and more student suicides. And, where are the great Korean thinkers?
I fully recalled that article.
To me this was a matter of the nature of the coverage, as I wrote above.
In East Asian countries, parents take the blame when their children don’t learn in school. They don’t blame the teachers. They support teachers, and sometimes the teachers have to step in and protect the children from their own parents when the parents are too demanding.
When our daughter was seven, I told her that if she wasn’t learning in school it was not the teacher’s fault, because it was her responsibility to learn and she could learn even in a classroom with an incompetent teacher.
When our daughter graduated from high school, she’d earned straight A’s from third grade through high school and graduated with honors as a scholar athlete with a 4.65 GPA.
In June 2014, she graduated from Stanford with a BA in biology.
While she was still a student at Stanford, I asked her if she’d had any incompetent teachers K – 12. She thought about it and said “TWO” (she had 40 – 50 teachers k – 12), and she also earned A’s from them and those two teaches didn’t destroy her future and keep her from learning.
Even incompetent teachers teach but just not as good as the competent ones and students are responsible for learning.
Today at our convocation in our Title 1 district we were shown a map of the US and its poverty rates by state which show that over 50% of the states are impoverished.
We were then told that education was the only hope that we had to change it, and that the “next Bill Gates” could be in our classroom and that we needed to help that child get out of poverty to become the next Bill Gates. Please note that we get Gates’ grants.
Sigh.
I don’t want the next Bill Gates developed in my class. I don’t need to help the next mega billionaire who is insensitive to others on my conscience. I want to help the next Martin Luther King. I want the next Gandhi or Jane Goodall. They will be more effective in helping fight the effects of poverty or injustice.
So crazy…nobody can think critically anymore who makes decisions for us little people.
To have the next
What’s missing here is the fact that Bill Gates didn’t go to a public school. He went to one of the best private schools in the country where he sends his own children. I wonder how many of today’s billionaires lived in poverty and attended public schools.
It seems that the “self-made man” is a myth for 95% of the Fortune 400.
95 percent of the Fortune 400 were born with opportunities that American children who live in poverty do not have.
35% grew up in poor to middle class circumstances
Over 60% grew up with substantial privilege and 22% of the Fortune 400 inherited up to $1 million
11.5% inherited over $1 million
7% inherited over $50 million
21.5% inherited enough to make the Fortune 400 richest list without earning a cent on their own.
The answers might be found here: http://inequality.org/selfmade-myth-hallucinating-rich/
Thank you for the voice of sanity Lloyd:)