[MD] Imaginings

[John Carl]

Ok,
back late, so a little loopy.  drove by DQ University.  A sad collection of
ugly boxes in the middle of fallow farmland.

Freshman parent orientation, speech by the president of the college, various
faculty, my recent dialogue with Arlo ringing in my brain.

an interesting day.

On Wed, Sep 16, 2009 at 6:55 AM, Arlo Bensinger <ajb102 at psu.edu> wrote:

>
> So far, John, the only "diversity" you have talked about is "religious".
> But there are areas of the USA with very, very "less diverse culture"
> regarding religion that fare worse than schools in areas with much more
> religious diversity. By your logic, schools in largely "uni-religious" areas
> should fare much better than schools in  "poly-religious" areas. Hence, a
> school in rural Oklahoma should fare better than here in State College, as
> State College is quite a bit more "religiously diverse" (in many ways, as
> well).
>

Right.  Regional differences can be significant as well.  And as I ponder
the crux of my problems with the one-solution-for-all-subcultures issue, I
come upon two important points to consider.  First, this is a state issue.
 I'm mainly focused on K-12, which fall under local jurisdictions.  The feds
haven't that much to say about it, except what George Bush and his No child
left behind, fiddling interference.   Something no self-respecting
conservative would have been doing, but never mind that.

The state I'm contemplating is California.  We have a state as big as some
countries, and about as diverse as any in the union.  Vouchers were on the
ballot some years back, and so comparisons with Wyoming and Oklahoma are
probably beside the point.   Most of what is in my mind about vouchers and
the education system, applies to California.    Every state is different.

And a solution to the whole thing comes from a Bioregional solution, wherein
local mores direct the local laws and we don't have a big American Federal
Govt imposing ANY rules on the bioregional entities anymore.


So... keeping the above in mind, I continue.


>
> In fact, I can point to two local school districts; State College and Bald
> Eagle. One (SC) is very diverse, has many, many students from a number of
> ethnic and international populations. The school has Muslims and Christians
> and Jews and even Hindus. The other (BE) is nearly exclusively "white",
> mostly all rural, and nearly 100% Christian. SC consistently fares better,
> among the top, while BE fares much worse.
>
> By your reasoning, BE should outperform SC across the board. By virtue of
> it having a "less diverse culture" is should respond much better to "central
> planning". Why is this not the case?
>
>

Your academic measurements of "much better" do not tell the whole story.
 They don't tell the stories of the individual students, who have differing
needs, and they don't tell the story about the kind of society that is being
formed long after the testers put their #2 pencils away.

Some of what I am asserting about the value of vouchers is on this exact
point - that the kind of academic culture that you call "better" is not
everybody's cup of tea.




> [John]
> Reasons for failure are probably too numerous to elucidate.
>
> [Arlo]
> Oh but we can. And my pointing the success of the public schools in Finland
> and Japan point to the single biggest "reason for failure", and that is lack
> of community investiture and community involvement/support, as well as a
> lack of real integration of the schools and the local communities.
>


Well here again Arlo, I'd say  vouchers would produce more community
investiture.  You always invest caring in something you  freely choose.  You
put your ego into your choice, for one thing, wanting to justify to the
world you made the right decision.  When you have no choice, you figure, why
bother attending pta meetings or home school organizational meetings - it's
all part of the system that is bigger and beyond you like the talking heads
you see on tv.



>
> [Arlo]
> The "government" is "we the people", and yes we have been wrong in assuming
> one learning environment fits all (damn that Fordist worldview!). And we
> need to change that. We need greater diversity in how we offer education,
> from charter schools, to integrating vocational education, to allowing
> students to gain credit by volunteering, working, apprenticing, taking
> college courses, workshops, etc. But this is reforming public schools. And
> that is what we should do.
>

Ok then here we are in agreement.  We are still arguing the means to these
noble ends you lay out and I offer vouchers as representing financial clout
behind student and parental choice.

What you say "what you should do" is all well and good.  But if you are
suggesting that the best implementation of what should be done is the same
channels and system that produced what we got, then I question your logic.

and your motives.



> [John]
> But to mandate an education antithetical to one's beliefs AND to force one
> to pay for it, seems like it's going just that much too far;  an angry
> backlash can be expected.
>
> [Arlo]
> Give me some examples here. I assume "secularism" is one, that "religious"
> populations don't want their kids to learn about evolution, or geology, or
> astronomy, or other ways that "science" contradicts "the book" (of whatever
> religion).
>
> But this is where it ceases to be about what education best serves the
> student, and what best serves the parents. THAT is an important change in
> the argument, and if that is where we are going, let's stop even bothering
> to talk about how to improve "learning" and let's just talk about "funding".
>
>

You know Arlo, there is this worldview called "Subject Object Metaphysics"
which is railed against quite a bit on this forum... You ever stop and think
how its perpetuated?  What active social agent inculcates this "thing" we
all brand as evil, outmoded and wrong?

hmmmmm???


I do believe there are some problems in the educational system.  Yup.  And
I'm much more willing to put the needs of the students above the needs of
the parents.  Because I AM a parent, and what I care about is how my
children thrive in the world to come.  I don't matter so much.




> [John]
> Yes, even if American Schools did well academically, I'd encourage a system
> of open choices.
>
> [Arlo]
> OK, so its not really about improving learning. It is about funding.
>
>
I only bring up the funding to illustrate the fairness the "moral hazard" as
is popular to call it.  Funding is not my forte, since I never seem to  have
any ...

Sleepy John over and out