good and bad points

One part of these chapters that really stood out to me is that on page 161 in Chapter 9. It read: "The decision as to what grades and ages, if any, are to be assigned to specific levels must be, we believe, a decision to be reached within each school district on the basis of local data and experience as to developmental levels of children, existing graded school organizations, and school facilities." The problem with this is that it allows for lower standards in urban settings. Having increasingly variable standards from district to district will lead to a lowering of the bar. It will not have the effective amount of oversight. Perhaps in the last 30 years we have focused to much on adjusting the structure of middle schhols, junior highs or whatever you want to call them and not reflected enough on content and how much the kids are learning. Allowing districts to decide their structure and curriculum based on students that are behind other districts is completely regressive. That does not mean that there shouldn't be a community and local influence on the education system, but it has to be a collaboration.
This brings me to a point that I agreed with in chapter 10 (pages 170 - 171). Some of the transformations that could be positive were bullet points on these pages. One was, teach a core academic program that involves CRITICAL THINKING. Second, reengage families in the education of adolescents. In many districts this could be the biggest challenge of them all. However, when successful, it would reap the greatest benefits. A sense of family and values is missing in many districts and a re-urging of that sense will encourage people to care about their child's development and show immediate response.

Statistics make me CRAZY!!!!

I belive somebody in our class already used the old witticism "70% of all statistics are made up", but I thought it was worth repeating. Chapter 7 in this book was completely hypocritical because it spent this first half of the chapter blasting how people misuse statistics, but then it turned around and completely did the same thing. It threw out numerous statistics on violence, pregnancy, etc. The one that got me the most was that they made a comment about teenage mothers being poor, but they seem to claim that the statistic was irrelavent because they were poor before they were pregnant. WHAT!!?? THAT IS EXACTLY THE POINT OF THE STATISTIC!! They shouldn't be having children because they do not have the means to support them. So, we need to concentrate on that group (dare I say the word teenagers...oh my god, I said it!) and educate them on safe sex. Is that singling them out? YES, it's supposed to!
Look, we can sit here and argue statisics all day long, but the point is that they are skewed to help the person or group presenting them. This was one thing that the book said right, the problem is that they turned around and did it themselves. It doesn't take a genius to turn on the TV and see some of the absolute filth that is played to young people. "Reality TV" that is so far from reality that it should be called something else. Violence, sex, drug use and other degradations are prevelant in our entertainment. You don't need statistics to see that these things are more prevelant in our teenager's societal lives. Does this mean that adults aren't doing it? Of course not, it means that they were teenagers once absorbing these things and now SOME of them are doing them. Kids bringing guns to school and shooting up teachers and other students. This happened fifty years ago, maybe once or twice, but not frequently. If you believe that these things can be a regular part of our teens everyday viewing and lifestyle without some negative effects. then you are probably the ones guilty of promoting such behavior. It is true that statistics drive me crazy, but I also am reasonable and can judge the odds and relativity on this subject.

Don't remember much curriculum

At the end of class last week, I had a brief conversation with Amy about Middle School. It was in regards to the changes people go through during that time. The reason I was thinking about it was because of the personal narrative project she had assigned that week. It made me realize something about my childhood education. I can remember the curriculum from grade school and high school, but not really too much from middle school. Meaning, I can tell you pretty much what I learned in specific classes in high school and grade school, but I don't recall what exactly was taught in my middle school classes. Of course, I remember going to classes and that I did learn things, but it seems relatively less important than the self-learning (if that is a concept) that occurred. What I DO remember from junior high is things relating to my personal life, my friends and emotional changes. I think it speaks volumes to what people go through in middle school. It is more of a time of creating a self-awareness than academic learning. Am I crazy or does anyone else have this sort of recollection?