Re: "The National Anthem should be sung in English" - What part of "unconstitutional" do conservatives not understand?


"the q is silent" <james.c.wagner@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1146960149.698883.313740@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
William Innes wrote:

Unfortunately, education tends to be a pretty trendy business (and a
business it is...from a soapbox for politicians to millions of $s that
are
made by text-book publishers, who often
the driving force behind what curriculum is taught/not taught). And for
a
lot of years what was taught in the area of "Language Arts" (why they
just
don't call it "English" is beyond me...) was
"whole language." Whole Language tried to make literature relevant and
meaningful and most of all, fun/enjoyable. While those are all
worthwhile
objectives, unfortunately the basic (and much more
boring and dry matters) such as rules of grammar, not to mention correct
spelling, kind of got tossed out the window while educators perused what
they felt would be a more meaningful way of teaching the English language
to
students. The result? Well, you have a bunch of kids who've passed
around
a stuffed/plush pig while reading CHARLOTTE'S WEB...and will be saying
"Some
pig" until their last day on Earth...but they can't construct a coherent
paragraph to save their lives.

I remember all of this, though I didn't experience it myself, since I
spent my entire pre-college education in Catholic schools. But this is
what was all the rage at a lot of public schools at the time...

In retrospect, I feel pretty fortunate to have gone through Catholic schools
for my elementary years (where the same perennial teaching of English took
place...and they pretty
much were able to ignore the trends or flavors of the month when it came to
how to teach English).
Despite their good intentions, educators tend to go a bit overboard whenever
a new approach is brought to light...and they're so desperate for some sort
of quick-fix, that they very
often embrace damn near anything under the sun (all too often leaving more
tried and true techniques in the dust).
Like I wrote earlier...it's a trendy business (and, unfortunately, too many
educators are such damn sheep, that they seldom question the very
techniques/practices that they're so quick to champion).


So, the pendulum has now swung to the other extreme. Rules of
grammar/English are now drilled into the heads of students for countless
hours on end.
It's gotten to the point where a lot of schools (including those in our
district) teach nothing but English and Math all day long.
Yeah, I can see the necessity of this when the great majority of students
entering our district's high schools barely have a functional literacy
skill
rate.
The downside to this, though, is that the student who lives for art or
music
or athletics when attending school doesn't have a great deal of
motivation
to get out of bed in the morning.
And this reworking of the curriculum isn't just happening in elementary
schools...in our high schools, the students who are way below the
national
average with their English/Math skills will spend about five of their six
hours in the school day immersed in just those two subjects (with an hour
set aside for Physical Education, which is a state requirement).

...This stuff I've only read about in the news, since it's such a
recent phenomenon - the extreme result of what happens when you
institute a program like No Child Left Behind (or Jeb's prototype in
Florida) and all but force people to teach to a test. I can't even
imagine this, it just sounds really strange to me, as I always had such
a variety of subjects in school.

And a variety of subjects...besides making a person a bit more well-rounded
(at the very least, it allows one to hold his/her own at a cocktail
party)...also develops one's critical thinking skills.
I mean, even the religion classes I had in Catholic schools helped develop
these skills (especially since I was the sort of student who tended to
question everything).
Needless to say, history, civics, government, science, etc. courses also
help develop one's ability to think critically.
The way the current curriculum is set up, there isn't much room for
independent thought (let alone critical thought).
That in itself is downright frightening.

And, yeah, we are teaching to the test....and I'm the first to admit that
I'm as guilty of it as the next person.
Sure, I try to throw other stuff in there as well (to help keep the
students...along with myself... interested).
A lot of my colleagues tend to scoff at this practice, but come the end of
the day, our performance is judged on how well a student does (or how well a
student doesn't do) on their Standardized Testing.
So, I figure that if Standardized Testing is akin to a World Series, then
there's really no sense in my having students shoot academic hoops...
for better or worse, I figure that I may as well put them in the academic
batting cage.


As a teacher, I can understand the necessity. I find it downright
criminal
to pass along a student to the next grade when he or she is
reading/writing
two or more years below his/her grade level (same when their math skills
are
as frighteningly low). On the other hand, it has sapped a lot of joy out
of
the job. I wake up knowing that I'm going to spend the day drilling
subjects/verbs/direct objects into their little heads. Teaching other
things such as history or how to play baseball or music kind of kept the
job
a bit more interesting (and also went a long ways towards keeping the
students a bit more engaged). Still, drastic times/circumstances pretty
much call for drastic measures.

I hope that sometime in my professional lifetime, they'll manage to find
something of a balance in the way that the pendulum swings....

I hope so, too, it sounds like a pretty dreadful Catch-22 at the
moment. But hopefully in several years, when the kids who are now
having these basic skills drilled into their heads in grade school
finally get to high school, they'll have enough mastery of it that the
higher-ups will be able to restore some of the essential variety of
education. Assuming the current system successfully imparts those basic
skills, of course.

You've pretty much nailed what the line of thinking is from those that are
making these pretty drastic curriculum decisions.
And, yeah, it is a case of having students bite the bullet for a few
years...get 'em up to speed in the two core subject areas (English &
Math)...and then, by being equipped with better literacy/problem-solving
skills, they'll be better able to immerse themselves into other subject
areas (such as history, science, civics, government, etc.).
And I can understand the reasoning behind this.
Right now, given the very very low skills in English and Math that so many
students have, teaching subjects such as history or science to them would be
about as meaningful as speaking Swahili to these students for a chunk of 55
minutes.
I mean, it's bad...really bad.

On the other hand, even if we immerse these students in nothing but English
and Math for five of their six hours of the school day, it really isn't
going to be worth a damn if they continue to come from homes where the
parents are indifferent or completely lacking in any interest in their
child's academic success...or if school districts continue to feel too
paralyzed to meet disciplinary/behavioral issues head-on and in a more
proactive manner. Right now it's pretty appalling the behaviors that
student manage to get away with (both in and out of the classroom while on
campus).
Ours is a district that keeps a careful tally on the demographics of
students being suspended. Hence, the goal is to keep the number of
suspensions/expulsions of Black or Latino students to a minimum.
The result? A lot of black, white, Latino, Asian and other subgroups of
students.....most of whom tow the line and do the right thing...are robbed
and deprived of having a calm and productive learning environment.

I've never been one who buys into the thought that we should be color-blind
when it comes to schools....besides being unrealistic, it also fails to
acknowledge the wealth that comes from diversity (and the way that various
cultural/ethnic backgrounds serve to broaden the horizons/outlook of all
students at a campus). On the other hand, I do think that when it comes to
discipline/behavior, then it would be wise on the part of administrators to
be color-blind...and adhere to reasonable behavioral/social expectations.
Yeah, I realize that they're trying to avoid Saturday School from looking
like the Black Boys Club or a mini Barrio....on the other hand, by having
such a condescending policy, they also do a great disservice to ALL
students, the majority of whom are trying to get ahead (and that would
include white kids, black kids, Latino kids, Asian kids, Pacific-Island
kids, etc.).

Another obstacle that starts to rear its ugly head...you can see roots of it
once a student gets into the middle school grades (5th - 8th) and it really
hits home as they advance into high school...is that a lot of these students
have bought hook, line and sinker into a subculture that actively encourages
young adults to dumb themselves down.
The glamorizing of the gangsta lifestyle (and this is something that
afflicts students of just about every ethnic background) is one of the
hugest obstacles that a lot of educators in the public school system meet on
a daily basis. It's downright criminal the way this cancerous infiltration
has so corroded and squandered the drive and motivation of many a student
with tremendous potential and talents.


Interestingly, I think a lot of the private schools have been getting
it right for a while now, at least in my experience. Obviously they
don't have to bow to the pressure of all these government programs. But
I remember getting a very good balance of math, science, history, phys
ed, and both literature and vocabulary/grammar. And religion, of
course...

Same here...and for years I tried to bring those very same things into my
classroom (sans the religion, of course, since I teach in the public school
system).
Yeah, a lot of it...at the time...felt as though it was drill and kill. And
a lot of it lacked creativity (I remember much of it being "turn to pg. 43
and do problems #1-35).
But, damn, something worked.
That said, I've got to say that I really didn't enjoy school all that much
until I got to college....

My grade school had a big focus on language skills, actually. English
and Language Arts were two separate classes - the former was reading
actual literature, the latter was learning grammar and vocabulary and
close reading skills. I always thought that was a great way to work
things.

And that is the exact balance that should be used in schools.
I agree completely.
Unfortunately...again going back to the sheepish nature of many
teachers...they really don't have a keen sense of balance.
It's either one extreme or the other.
This doesn't come as any surprise...I'm constantly shaking my head at the
lack of pragmatics on the part of many of my colleagues.
Very often they cannot meet a deadline to save their life...they are unable
to handle a contractual dispute without someone to hold their hand...and
they seem
to think wallow in guilt should they ever say the word "no" to an
unreasonable request from a principal, a student or a parent.
Come to find out, though, that a lot of these folks have never had a job
outside of teaching...so, they've pretty much went from being in school for
nearly 20 years to going right back into school to teach (and their
experience in the "real world" is often little to none). I think a lot of
us who've had a lot of jobs/experiences away from a school setting see the
world...and also recognize the need for balance (and tend not to embrace any
new idea with the same zeal as one would the Second Coming) more than those
who've never had to hustle out a living in the "real world" (for lack of a
better term).
I don't mean to knock my colleagues...for they do tend to be a dedicated
bunch (and often define the term "do-gooder"...to the point where it verges
on "martyr")...but common sense and objectivity are not always their
strongest suits...



.