ch.7+resources

 Kelly McCaffrey Chapter 7 Privatization of Schools: Boon or Bane This chapter discussed whether the privatization of public schools is beneficial overall or not. My initial thought before reading the chapter was that privatizing schools is not beneficial but I am only basing that on personal experience. As I’ve stated before, I am the product of public school education and I have always valued my public school experience. After reading this chapter, however, I am a bit torn. The argument for privatizing public schools is that it would cut down on taxes and ultimately provide better education for less money. It also argues that privatization would increase accountability of teachers. Specific goals would be set for private schools which must be met. If the goals are not met, the schools can be changed or closed. This sounds a lot like the No Child Left Behind Act which has not proven to be very successful. NCLB has created a whole new myriad of problems from schools cheating on tests to punishing schools that don’t deserve to be punished. Privatization also offers parents the option of school choice so that students can get the best education possible. This seems like an ideal solution but it’s only ideal for the families that can benefit from it. It sounds to me like another case of “the rich get richer and the poor get poorer”. Families that choose to send their kids to private schools are most likely well-educated and those that don’t are not. While the pros for privatizing public schools did not necessarily sell me on the idea, the cons did not either. Public schools in America have room for improvement. Of course, there are plenty of prestigious public school districts throughout the country that are living up to the standards but too many are not. Because of lack of tax payer funding, schools in low-income areas are failing. The ideas presented in this chapter of why privatizing public schools don’t seem too different from what public schools are trying to do now. It seems like ultimately we want to improve education in general. Teachers who are not doing their job should be held accountable but how can that be fairly determined? Students differ in so many ways and when you have a district in a low income neighborhood it appears as if the teachers are not doing their jobs because the students are not making proficiency. In reality, however, a lot of these teachers are working twice as hard as the teachers who teach in an upper class school district. The environment that these children are being brought up in play a huge part in their academic abilities and achievements and until that can be fixed I don’t think it matters if these children attend public or private schools.



Is Privatization the Hope for the Future? Privatization of public schools is often a suggested modification for schools in low income areas. Chris Whittle contends that many public school systems still operate in an eighteenth-century mind-set and offers an “independent learning” model as a replacement. Privatization would allow for reconstruction  of the educational system. Enabling a private, for-profit educational industry to develop that will provide a wide variety of learning opportunities and offer effective competition to public schools. The world we live in is forever changing and Whittle argues that schools are not changing with the demands of our current society. Whittle states that perhaps more than any other modern-day institution, schooling is nearly impervious to change. We often operate on an “old school” system. Allowing schools to become private, would allow for schools to become adequate to best prepare students for the future, improve the quality of teaching, and through the use of vouchers provide equal opportunities for all learners. Whittle compares the American school system of consistency and reliability with inflexibility to other countries educational values. Even our best students are falling behind in international comparisons. Something must be done to protect the future of America. Although many schools have tried to implement new innovative educational strategies, none are effective enough to cause a significant change. Whittle argues that America does not believe there is a “next” generation of schools. We need to do more than change curriculum and calendars. Teachers need to become aware of students needs and be trained on how to best educate the students of the 21st century. Student’s needs are much different today, than that of the students from the past generations. With privatization, schools would become more competitive to increase student enrollment. Thus, teachers would be recruited or hired on contract to encourage the best quality of teaching in that school. Parents and students would be given school choice or the opportunity to choose which school is the best fit. Not all students learn the same and privatization would allow for schools to specialize in specific areas affording opportunity to position the school as uniquely attractive to students. Teachers would be offered higher pay to ensure an increase in student enrollment. Whittle argues that we reconstr uct schools more appropriate to the modern era, where teacher salaries are competitive with other professionals. In order for privatization of public schools to work, our educational system must focus on how much money the change will cost. We invest very little in changing our schools. Schools today are struggling to meet progress standards for a variety of reasons. Public and private sectors are designed to test the “next” generation schools, but they will continue with out-of-date school designs and continue to fall behind. For a reconstruction of the school systems to work, funding must be available. The use of vouchers is the best way to ensure equality among the citizens. The voucher must be universal, available to all parents, and large enough to cover the costs of a quality education. No conditions should be attached to vouchers that interfere with the freedom of private enterprises to experiment, to explore, and to innovate. 

Lisa Banavich Reaction Paper- Chapter 7 EDUC610 I agree with the author of Position 2: Standards-Based Reform is a Political Smoke Screen. The author states that NCLB is deeply flawed and doing more harm than good in today’s schools. I, and many other teachers, I am sure, completely agree. This kind of school reform will not do any good for our students. If they make mistakes and don’t do well in their testing, they are punished. It is as if we are teaching them that they have to be perfect the first time that they do something. Another aspect of NCLB that does not make sense is how the standards must be the same for every single child. Never mind the differences between various cultures, special needs students, or ELLS. They all must meet the same standard regardless of their circumstances. NCLB has reduced many of a child’s school days to test prep. What will students look like as future citizens after so many years of being asked to meet the standards of a test, but who are not exposed to a wide variety of learning experiences? Will they be able to think on their own? They will have been so used to direct instruction and drill and practice of information, that it is doubtful that they will grow to be critical thinkers. <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 200%;">It thoroughly angered me when I was reading the first position of this chapter and saw this statement: “…the child-centered approach has led to the dumbing down of the school curriculum.” The author also says that teaching to the standards won’t be “as much fun” as the child centered approach, but in the long run it will be more beneficial for the students. How ridiculous! I consider my job as a educator to teach my students so that each one is receiving the kind of individualized instruction that they need to succeed at their level. Of course they are being taught to the state standards and even though I am apparently “wrong”(according to some people )in using a child centered approach, my students work through a rigorous curriculum and are doing well with it. I see my students succeed in my classroom early on in their lives, and I hear in the years after I have them as students about how well they are doing in the upper grades. Something must be right about the child centered approach.