Re: unexpected obstacles

[John Clement <clement@HAL-PC.ORG>]

> I'm not an expert in politics, but I know enough to
> recognize a political problem when I see one.
>   -- You can't solve a political problem by sharpening
>      your physics skills.
>   -- You can't solve a political problem by sharpening
>      your pedagogical skills.
>   -- Directly arguing your case to the schools administrators
>      might help, but it's hard and risky and won't solve the
>      whole problem.
>
> Part of politics involves sizing up your opponents and
> rallying your allies.
>
> One thing that might help is an indirect approach through
> the business community.  These folks have a vested interest
> in a no-nonsense education system.  They don't want to hire
> graduates who require spoon-feeding;  they want to hire people
> who can deliver a message to Garcia.
>
> So this suggests a possible line of action.  In every town
> there is some sort of "business leaders' breakfast club".
> Track these people down.  Tell them what the issues are.
> Get them to put pressure on the school board and school
> administrators.
>
> This won't be easy, and it isn't the whole story, but it
> might help.  Refinements and other suggestions would be
> welcome.

Absolutely, it is a political problem, but it is also a social problem.
There is ample evidence that we are living a new gilded age.  In the 50s
there was social pressure that mandated low CEO wages compared to the middle
class.  There was a feeling that we should have an egalitarian society.
This social contract has broken down and the difference between the top
wages and the middle wages is now more typical of the 1890s.  Now the
diploma and good grades are looked at as necessary for advancement.  It was
probably never true that the majority of students considered education to be
a goal, but the number who do think that way has dwindled.  I am sure we can
all name some prominent politicians who have gotten their positions and
degrees through influence and family pressure, not through hard work and
intelligence.

Part of the problem of business leaders is that many have bought into this
same mentality.  They have also bought into the idea that "traditional"
education, rigorous curricula, and high stakes testing are the answers.
They will tend to view curricula that push thinking over memorization as
being "soft". Rigorous usually means more memorization, not more
understanding, and the high stakes test often test for exactly that.
Constructivist teaching (PER) tends to get a poor reception from many
influential conservatives.  Although the conservative wing in teaching does
not exactly line up with conservatism in politics, it lines up
substantially.  Some good examples of this is the report brought out by the
secretary of education where it was recommended that teacher certification
be done away with a criterion for teaching.  It essentially echoed the ultra
conservative educators, and ignored the research that shows that certified
teachers achieve better results.  See:
http://www.aera.net/pubs/er/eronline.htm
There are also anti research comments by other members of the administration
about not using students as guinea pigs.  How can you find out what works
without testing different methods?

John M. Clement
Houston, TX