1. History of U.S. Education
1.1. Historical Interpretation:
1.1.1. In 1821, Emma Hart Willard opened the Troy Female Seminary in Troy, New York.
1.1.1.1. The curriculum at this female seminary included so-called serious subjects of study, such as mathematics, science, history, and geography.
1.1.1.1.1. Modeled on the curriculum of single-sex male academics, Troy Female Seminary sought to deliver an education to females that was similar to that of their male counterparts.
1.1.1.1.2. In subsequent years, other female reformers dedicated to education for women, such as Catherine Esther Beecher and Mary Lyon, opened schools for females.
1.2. Reform Movement:
1.2.1. The Rise of the Common School: Historians point to the period from 1820 to 1860 in the United States as one in which enormous changes took place with unprecedented speed.
1.2.1.1. The Industrial Revolution, which began in the textile industry in England, crossed the Atlantic Ocean and brought its factory system with its new machinery to urban areas, particularly in the North.
1.2.1.2. Urban clusters grew more dense as migrants from agricultural areas and immigrants from Europe flocked to the factories, looking for work. By 1850, these immigrants included a significant group Roman Catholics who were escaping starvation in Ireland. Westward expansion, aided in part by the revolution in transportation and in part by the land hunger of pioneers, extended to settlements in Oregeon and California by 1850.
1.2.2. Traditionally, the role of women in Western society has been that of helpmate or homemaker to the male, who assumed the role of provider.
1.2.3. This role for women was vividly described by Jean-Jacques Rousseau in Emile, written in the eighteenth century.
1.2.3.1. Rousseau, in his tract on education, created the female character, Sophie, who was to be the companion of the central male character, Emile, the recipient of a nontraditional but rigorous education. Sophie was encouraged to eat sweets, learn womanly arts, and be a supportive, loving helpmate to Emile.
1.2.4. This prescriptive role for women held sway throughout the nineteenth century and, for some, into the twentieth century as well.
1.2.4.1. Generally, education for women was viewed as biologically harmful or too stressful.
2. Sociological Perspectives
2.1. Functional Theory:
2.1.1. Functional sociologists begin with a picture of society that stresses the interdependence of the social system; these researchers often examine how well the parts are integrated with each other.
2.1.2. Functionalists view society as a kind of machine, where one part articulates with another to produce the dynamic energy required to make society work.
2.2. Education and Mobility:
2.2.1. The belief that occupational and social mobility begin at the schoolhouse door is a critical component of the American ethos.
2.2.2. Most Americans believe that more education leads to economic and social mobility; individuals rise and fall based on their merit.
2.2.3. MacLeod (1995) found that working-class boys often reject the prevailing "attainment through education" ethos by emphasizing their relative lack of economic and social mobility through cultural values that glorify physical hardness, manual labor, and a certain sense of fatalism.
2.2.4. Private and public school students may receive the same amount of education, but a private school diploma may act as a "mobility escalator" because it represents a more prestigious educational route.
2.2.5. For middle class, increased education may be directly linked to upward occupational mobility
2.2.5.1. For poor and rich, education may have little to do with mobility.
2.3. Inadequate Schools:
2.3.1. Urban education, in particular, has failed to educate minority and poor children.
2.3.2. Differences between schools and school systems reinforce existing inequalities.
2.3.3. Students who attend suburban schools and private schools get a better educational experience than other children. Students who attend the most elite private schools obtain substantial educational benefits, both in terms of their actual educational experience and the social value of their diplomas.
3. Schools as Organizations
3.1. Nature of Teaching:
3.1.1. "The Complex Roles of the Teacher: An Ecological Perspective" (1984), Heck and Williams described the many roles that teachers are expected to play in their lives. These roles include colleague, friend, nurturer of the learner, facilitator of learning, researcher, program developer, administrator, decision maker, professional leader, and community activist. This is a daunting list and it leaves out the most important role of the teacher: the caring, empathetic, well-rounded person that can act as a role model to students, parents, and other professionals.
3.1.1.1. It takes a great deal of emotional energy and imagination to maintain a sense of personal equilibrium in the face of meeting the needs of so many diverse groups.
3.1.2. Teachers must be skilled in so many areas of technical expertise and human relations.
3.1.3. According to Lieberman and Miller, the central contradiction of teaching is that teachers have to deal with a group of students and teach them something and, at the same time, deal with each child as an individual.
3.1.3.1. The teachers, then, have two missions: one universal and cognitive, and the other particular and affective.
3.1.3.1.1. Teachers, according to Lieberman and Miller, are best viewed as craftspeople and most of the craft is learned on the job. Teaching is somewhat messy and personal undertaking.
3.1.4. What is key in teaching is the exercise of control. Control precedes instruction. Without control, there are few opportunities for learning, and yet control can stifle learning.
3.1.5. Good teachers are creators. They take the dailiness of teaching and turn each day into a special event. A great teacher can turn a mundane lesson into an exciting intellectual voyage, and a poor teacher can make students reject learning altogether.
3.2. Professionalism:
3.2.1. Teacher socialization is very limited compared to other professions and there is little evidence that the socialization processes associated with becoming a teacher are highly professionalized or represent standards of behavior congruent with other professions.
3.2.2. Educational researcher Linda M. McNeil has written about what she calls the contradictions of control. She pointed out that "in theory, the bureaucratic design of schools frees teachers to teach by assigning to administrators and business managers the duties of keeping the school 'under control.'"
3.2.3. On one hand, teachers are expected to be autonomous, thoughtful experts in education. On the other hand, the conditions of their employment leave little scope for autonomy, thoughtfulness, or expertise.
3.2.4. In the mid-1980s, Goodlad and two colleagues created the Center for Educational Renewal at the University of Washington. Using the Center as a base, they conducted a number of studies about teacher education in the United States.
3.2.4.1. Goodlad's findings included the following: "(1) A debilitating lack of prestige in the teacher education enterprise, (2) Lack of programs coherence, (3) Separation of theory and practice, and (4) A stifling regulated conformity."
3.2.5. Goodlad believes that a teacher education program should include a clearly articulated relationship between education and the arts and sciences. He believes that students should stay together with teams of faculty members throughout their period of preparation and that universities should commit enough resources to ensure first-rate teacher education programs.
4. Educational Inequality
4.1. Functionalists:
4.1.1. Functionalists believe that unequal educational outcomes are the result, in part, of unequal educational opportunities.
4.1.2. It is imperative to understand the sources of educational inequality so as to ensure the elimination of structural barriers to educational success and to provide all groups a fair chance to compete in the educational marketplace.
4.1.3. This perspective has been the foundation of liberal educational policy in the United States since the 1960s.
4.2. Cultural Difference theorists agree that there are cultural and family differences between working-class and nonwhite students, and white middle-class students. Working-class and nonwhite students may indeed arrive at school with different cultural dispositions and without the skills and attitudes required by the schools. This is not due to deficiencies in their home life but rather to being part of an oppressed minority.
4.2.1. The key difference in this perspective is that although cultural difference theorists acknowledge the impact of student differences, they do not blame working-class and nonwhite families for educational for educational problems. Rather, they attribute cultural differences to social forces such as poverty, racism, discrimination, and unequal life chances.
4.2.1.1. There are a number of different varieties of cultural difference theory. First, researchers such as anthropologist John Ogbu (1978, 1979, 1987) argue that Africa-American children do less well in school because they adapt to their oppressed position in the class and caste strucure.
4.2.1.2. Ogbu argued that there is a "job ceiling" for African-Americans in the United States, as there is for similar caste-like minorities in other countries, and that African-American families and schools socialize their children to deal with their inferior life chances rather than encourage them to internalize those values and skills necessary for positions that will not be open to them.
4.2.1.3. Although this is a complex, and at times a hidden, process, the results are lower educational attainment and performance.
5. Educational Reform
5.1. School-to-Work Programs:
5.1.1. In the 1990s, school-business partnerships became incorporated into school-to-work programs. Their intent was to extend what had been a vocational emphasis to non-college-bound students regarding skills necessary for successful employment and to stress the importance of work-based learning.
5.1.2. On May 4, 1994, President Bill Clinton signed the School-to-Work Opportunities Act of 1994. This law provided seed money to states and local partnerships of business, labor, government, education, and community organizations to develop school-to-work systems.
5.1.2.1. Using federal seed money, states and their partnerships were encouraged to design the school-to-work system that made the most sense for them. While these systems were different from state to state, each was supposed to provide every U.S. student with the following:
5.1.2.1.1. 1) Relevant education, allowing students to explore different careers and see what skills are required in their working environment.
5.1.2.1.2. 2) Skills, obtained from structured training and work-based learning experiences, including necessary skills of a particular career as demonstrated in a working environment.
5.1.2.1.3. 3) Valued credentials, establishing industry-standard benchmarks and developing education and training standards that ensure that proper education is received for each career.
5.1.3. The law did not create a new program, but allowed states and their partners to bring together efforts at education reform, worker preparation, and economic development to create a system - a system to prepare youth for the high-wage, high-skill careers of today's and tomorrow's global economy.
5.1.3.1. Although the school-to-work programs were well intentioned, researchers (Charner, 1996; Mortimer, 1996) have suggested that these programs often failed to fulfill their promise.
5.1.3.2. The U.S. system of vocational education remains a "second-class" educational track, which often does not equip students with a sound liberal arts foundation and is not adequately connected to career opportunities. Unlike other nations, such as Japan and Germany, U.S. students who do not wish to go on to post-secondary education are not given adequate career paths.
6. Politics of Education
6.1. Conservative:
6.1.1. This perspective, developed by William Graham Sumner, compares society to the evolutionary theories of Charles Darwin. The strong individuals must compete to survive. Human and social evolution must adapt to changes within the environment.
6.1.1.1. http://www.biography.com/people/charles-darwin-9266433
6.1.2. The conservative perspective views the role of the school as essential to both economic productivity and social stability.
6.1.2.1. Economic Productivity: The rate at which goods or services are produced especially output per unit of labor
6.1.2.2. Social Stability: Social stability is a sociological perspective that states a group always seeks to maintain equilibrium by forcing out ideas and individuals that disagree with popular opinion.
6.2. Traditional:
6.2.1. This view of the school system has traditional values of the U.S. society, such as hard work, family unity, individual initiative, etc.
6.2.1.1. http://patriotupdate.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/Screen-Shot-2013-04-26-at-12.42.46-PM.png
7. Philosophy of Education
7.1. Idealism:
7.1.1. Generic Notions:
7.1.1.1. Plato distrusted the the world of matter; he believed that it was in a constant state of flux. Therefore, matter was an inaccurate measurement of truth since it was constantly changing.
7.1.1.2. Plato's method of doing philosophy was to engage another individual in a dialogue and, through the dialogue, question that individual's point of view.
7.1.1.3. Plato thought that education was important as a means of moving individuals collectively toward achieving the good.
7.1.2. Key Researchers:
7.1.2.1. Plato (427-347 B.C.), St. Augustine (354-430 A.D.), Rene Descartes (1596-1650), Immanual Kant (1724-1804), and George Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel (1770-1831).
7.1.3. Goal of Education:
7.1.3.1. Educators who subscribe to idealism are interested in the search for truth through ideas rather then through the examination of the false shadowy world of matter.
7.1.4. Role of the Teacher:
7.1.4.1. It is the teacher's responsibility to analyze and discuss ideas with students in order for students to move to new levels of awareness so that ultimately they can be transformed.
7.1.5. Method of Instruction:
7.1.5.1. Idealist teachers take an active part in their students' learning. Through questioning, students are encouraged to discuss, analyze, synthesize, and apply what they have read to contemporary society. Students are also encouraged to work in groups or individually on research projects, both oral and written.
7.1.6. Curriculum:
7.1.6.1. For idealists, all contemporary problems have their roots in the past and can best be understood by examining how previous individuals dealt with them.
7.1.6.2. Many idealists also support a back-to-basics approach to education, which emphasizes the three Rs.
7.1.6.2.1. The 3 Rs: reading, ‘riting and ‘rithmetic
8. Curriculum and Pedagogy
8.1. Developmentalist Curriculum:
8.1.1. This curriculum relates to the needs and interest of the student rather than the needs of society.
8.1.2. This curriculum emanated from the aspects of Dewey's writings related to the relationship between the child and the curriculum, as well as developmental psychologists such as Piaget, and it emphasized the process of teaching as well as its content.
8.2. Major Stakeholders:
8.2.1. State Senators - District 4: Richard Shelby (R) and Jefferson "Jeff" Sessions (R)
8.2.2. House of Representatives - District 4: Robert Aderholt (R)
8.2.3. *State Superintendent: Thomas R. Bice, Ed. D.
8.2.4. *Representative on State School Board:
8.2.5. Local Superintendent: Greg Pendley
8.2.6. Local Board Members (Winston County): Allin Bailey, Joey Boteler, Ellen Oliver, Ralph E. Williams, and Larry Yancey (President).
8.3. My approach to Curriculum
8.3.1. I believe that everyone is equal and that everyone should be treated the same way. I would relate more with the Developmentalist Curriculum because I like to relate more to the child's needs rather that what something in a book tells me to teach them. However, I'm not saying that I do not trust the book, I do believe that a child can and will learn anything if they have someone/something to follow.
8.4. Transformative Tradition:
8.4.1. This tradition rests on a different set of assumptions about the teaching and learning process.
8.4.2. Transformative educators believe that all teaching begins with the active participation of the student and results in some form of growth.
8.4.3. The transformative tradition tends to reject the scientific model of teaching and instead views teaching as an artistic endeavor.
9. Equality of Opportunity
9.1. Educational Achievement and Attainment of African-Americans:
9.1.1. From 1973 to 1986, the gaps in reading and mathematics between 13-year-old African-Americans narrowed and then increased from 1986 to 1999.
9.1.1.1. For 17-year-old African-Americans, the gaps in reading and mathematics narrowed until 1988 and then increased from 1988 to 1999.
9.1.1.2. These gaps have remained relatively constant through 2008.
9.2. Responses to Coleman: Round Three
9.2.1. Geoffrey Borman and Maritza Dowling applied the most sophisticated statistical tools to evaluate educational data in a similar manner as Coleman had done in 1966.
9.2.2. Borman and Dowling's findings partially confirm both Coleman's original data from 1966 and his 1982 study.
9.2.3. Formal decomposition of the variance attributable to individual background and the social composition of the schools suggests that going to a high-poverty school or a highly segregated African-American school has a profound effect on a student's achievement outcomes, above and beyond the effect of individual poverty or minority status. Specifically, both the racial/ethnic and social class composition of a student's school are 1 3/4 times more important than a student's individual race/ethnicity or social class for understanding educational outcomes.
9.2.4. In other words, where an individual goes to school is often related to her race and socioeconomic background, but the racial and socioeconomic composition of a school has a greater effect on student achievement than an individual's race and class.
9.2.4.1. Borman and Dowling, similar to Coleman in his 1966 study, argue that race and class are predictors of academic success.
9.2.4.2. However, Borman and Dowling break from Coleman's 1966 argument that schools don't matter. Instead, Borman and Dowling argue that school segregation based on race and socioeconomic status and within school interactions dominated by middle-class values are largely responsible for gaps in student achievement.
9.2.4.3. Borman and Dowling's study concludes that education reform must focus on eliminating the high level of segregation that remains in the United States' education system and that schools must bring an end to tracking systems and biases that favor white and middle-class students.