It
is common knowledge that society sends its entire population through an
education system in order to maintain a competent society. The idea is to
invest in the people to produce a workforce that can do the jobs our economy
demands. Somewhere along the way, this system has been undermined and is no
longer producing a populace that is productive. American is number one in the
world in incarcerated citizens per capita (Nation Master), number seven in
literacy (Huffington Post), number 31 in math (Huffington Post), number 23 in
science (Huffington Post), number three in median household income (Huffington
Post), and number four in labor force (Huffington Post).
As
teachers, we are expected to take in every student, teach them Math, Reading,
Writing, Science, and Social Studies and have them be able to prove their
competency on a standardized test every year. The budget has continued to be
cut, classrooms have gotten larger, the content the students are expected to
learn in order to graduate has decreased, and the economic situation for the
students arriving at school has become worse. Teachers are expected to do more
with less.
This
poses the question: What is the objective of school in today’s world? I would
like to be able to say that the education system is still trying to produce a
competent workforce filled with entrepreneurs, inventors, and future world
changers but I cannot confidently say that. I thoroughly believe that our
education system has been intentionally undermined in order to produce people
just smart enough to maintain the status quo, but not smart enough to ask questions.
First Lens
The
first lens I look at this situation through is the Relationship Lens. According
to Baird, the relationship lens is asking the questions: “What is a fair
system?” and “How do I care for those with no power?” It focuses on the
relationship between a person and the community. It also asks whether or not
the citizens are receiving “fair treatment”; are the rules being administered
fairly; are the people receiving fair compensation; is blame being placed
fairly (Baird p.241).
According
to Rawls, people want to be ethical and just but they possess a “Veil of
Ignorance” that forces them to think they are being just while they are
possibly being unjust. They are ignorant to their place in society and think that
because something is fair for them, it is fair for all. Rawls uses a
metaphorical Cloud of Oppression to
explain this. The cloud is raining down acid rain, which represents oppression,
and every person possesses pieces that form their protective umbrella against
this rain. Everything in your life that puts you in a category without
oppression is a piece for your umbrella. If you are white, heterosexual, male,
Christian, and possess a lot of money, you will have a larger umbrella than a
black, homosexual, female, atheist who is in poverty. Rawls says people are
ignorant to others who possess a smaller umbrella and are unsympathetic to
their situations.
A
great example of this is our Judicial System. Is the system fair and does it
care for those who do not possess power? When looking at the statistics, I
would have to say it is not. When 1 out of 3 black males spends time in the
prison system while only 1 out of every 17 white males goes through the prison
system, it is clear the system is flawed. When 1 out of every 9 black males
between 20 and 34 is currently in prison compared to 1 out of 30 for all males
in that age range, it is clear the system is flawed (Prisoners of the Census).
Looking
at the education system through the Relationship Lens poses a problem because
of Rawls Veil of Ignorance. How do [mostly] middle class, white teachers teach
a populous filled with different races, genders, religions, and financial
backgrounds? How do you have a mature approach without having a Utopia
viewpoint that is unreachable? To do so we must first recognize the Cloud of
Oppression that rains down upon our students. This forces us to do research
into the demographics of our students. We must begin with finding out the
answer to some questions. We must find out what the free/reduced lunch rate is,
what the race breakdown is, what the average household income is, and we must
understand the culture of the students we work with. Some cultures think school
should be done at school and kept separate from home, for example, while other
cultures want to be involved in every aspect of the education process. Instead
of trying to force these cultures to adapt to our own ideals of what school is,
we must adapt teaching to meet the needs of the students. If we can do this, we
can begin to form an education system that is fair for all students who enter.
They will have rules and expectations that are fair and not necessarily equal.
This approach must be taken in order to adjust for the America we live in that
favors the rich, the white, and the powerful and return it to the country where
the American Dream can still be achieved.
Second Lens
The
second lens I incorporate in this dilemma is the Results Lens. According to
Baird, the Results Lens is asking the questions: “What do I want?”; “What are
mutually good results for all in this situation?”; “How can I be a partner in
creating a better world?” It also focuses on how to maximize satisfaction, how
to maintain efficiency, how to remain loyal, and how to avoid conflicting
interests (Baird p. 209).
J.S.
Mill said that there are higher and lower satisfactions. He theorized that it
is ethical to delay small, immediate gratification in order to attain a larger
one. He said, “It is better to be Socrates Dissatisfied than to be a pig
satisfied.” My best explanation of this quote is to compare it to The Allegory of the Cave (Republic Book
7). In the story, a group of people are shackled entirely, causing an inability
to move or look anywhere besides this wall. It is dark but there are shadows
casted onto the wall. Because these people were born and have always lived this
way, this is the only reality they know. One day, a person comes down into the
cave and breaks the shackles off one of the men. He tries to explain the truth
to this man - the reality of the situation - but the truth is too much to bear.
He refuses to believe him. After some time, the Caveman is willing to venture
on, so his Rescuer takes him higher in the cave behind where they have been
shackled. He shows the Caveman the fire, the people, and statues that had been
behind them causing the shadows to appear on the wall and the voices that were
heard. Again, the truth is far too much to bear. It hurts the cave man gravely.
After some time, as before, the Caveman is willing to venture on. The Rescuer takes
him outside but the sun is so bright he cannot see. He fell to the ground in
agony. He then started to touch the grass and see the shadows casted by the
trees. He could later see reflections off the water and then the water itself.
He could see the trees and plants and, eventually, he was finally able to see
the sun. He was finally able to comprehend what the Rescuer had tried to explain
to him. He could finally see reality in all its glory as well as its horror.
This was his deliverance. The Caveman was given the chance to go back into the
cave and tell the others what he saw. When he did, the others called him a
fool. They resisted and told him to come back and stay with them because that
was the true reality. But as much as the Caveman’s discovery hurt, he refused
to go back. He knew that it was better to know the truth and the hurt than to
live in blissful ignorance. In this context Mill’s quote is saying that it is
better to pursue the ‘sun’ and never see its light and feel its warmth than to
stay shackled inside the cave, ignorant of the beauties you are missing out on
in life.
Looking
at the education system through the Results Lens poses a problem because in
order to find what mutually good results are for all in this situation, you
must look at the possible outcomes for the students, the teachers, and the
future of society. In order for this to be accomplished, we must meet what
Aristotle called Arete in his States of Character chart. This means
that we must want to do good for all parties involved, set a plan for that to
be accomplished, and the results must also be good for everyone involved. This
has proved difficult because it is impossible to know the results before we set
forth on the plan. This forces we as educators to constantly research teaching
practices that work and do not work elsewhere. We must be willing to challenge
ourselves, make mistakes, and adapt based on what we learn from our mistakes.
It
also proves difficult because it can lead to being so numbers oriented and so
cut and dry that one can neglect to have the compassion needed for students to
be successful. Without compassion, we will inevitably cut out the straggling
students and immediately cut out a teacher who may struggle in their career.
Ethical Maturity
Incorporating
these two lenses together is extremely important to solve this problem and achieve
Ethical Maturity. If you look at this dilemma through just the Relationship
Lens, you will soon realize that this is a Utopian viewpoint. It paints a
picture where everyone gets along and is compassionate towards one another; and
that is simply not how our society works. The most likely result of using only
this lens is becoming so focused on keeping the struggling students on the
bottom moving up, that we stop challenging the top students. This would result
in lowering the ceiling in education as opposed to raising the floor. This
would end in economic and societal failure because we would no longer produce
the entrepreneurs, inventors, and the people who will make changes in this
world in exchange for the citizens landing in the middle.
If
we look at this dilemma through just the Results lens, we will notice that it
neglects compassion. It goes straight for the numbers and cuts out the ‘fat.’
It is currently the system that we are using. We have standardized every aspect
of learning where we try to produce ‘cookie cut’ students and we discard the
ones that do not fit the mold. It also pushes out teachers who use
unconventional methods of teaching, even when the teaching method may be
successfully teaching the students. Using only this lens has caused educators
to teach toward the test and teach students what to think instead of how to
think. It is solely quantitative and not qualitative.
The
best approach is to combine the two lenses. We must push students towards
results while maintaining compassion for the different views, backgrounds, and
learning styles of our students. We must continue to question what results we
actually want out of students and research how we get from point A to point B.
We must realize that because starting point ‘A’ is different for everyone, it
must be possible for ending point ‘B’ to be adaptable, as well. We must also
realize that some teachers ‘drive a car’ to get to their destination while
other teachers may ‘take a taxi’ or ‘take the train.’ The important thing is
arriving to the destination, not micromanaging how they get there.
Proposal One
My
first proposal is to address the teacher accountability. We cannot allow for
teachers to keep their jobs if they become complacent or ineffective. Teachers
are paid to teach and the foundation of our future is placed in their hands. If
they are not successful, then they are in the wrong profession. To solve this
problem I think we must get rid of tenure. It is the biggest blockade between
getting rid of ineffective teachers and bringing in new, effective ones.
I
know that this does not please the teachers involved so it does not meet both
lenses. In order to please the teachers and stay ethical with the Results and
Relationship lens, I propose a middle-ground, three-year tenure. This new
tenure gives a teacher three years of job security, which will push teachers to
try new things and be willing to make some mistakes without being in fear of
losing their job, but also keeps a teacher from getting complacent because they
have to be evaluated again in three years.
The
evaluation process is where it becomes most difficult. This is where using both
lenses is extremely important. You must form several committees in each school
that evaluate these teachers. The committee has to be made up of a district
member, a member of the school, a parent, and a student. During an evaluation
year, a teacher is observed by three different committees on three separate,
random occasions. Each committee documents tangibly what they observed and
votes whether they think the teacher is effective or not. A teacher must have at
least two committees that think they are not effective in order to be put on
probation. If the teacher is put on probation, they have the next year to be
evaluated a second time and be considered ‘effective.’ If they are effective,
they receive three years of tenure and if they are not effective after their
probation period, they are let go. This is the best way to keep both the
interests of the students and the teachers in mind and not give one individual
too much power over what constitutes a teacher being ‘effective.’
Proposal Two
My
second proposal is to increase the pay of teachers nationwide. Currently, the
teaching profession is only sought after by wide-eyed optimists who want to
make a real difference in this world and those who like having a lot of days
off throughout the year. There is no fiscal incentive for the best and
brightest who seek financial reward for all their hard work. Our society values
wealth above all and we look down on middle-class teachers, policeman, and
firefighters while putting rich athletes and CEOs on a pedestal. If we pay
teachers a six-figure income like we pay lawyers and doctors, it will attract
people who want a career that is both fulfilling and financially stable.
By
attracting smarter, harder working, and more capable people into the education
field, it will undoubtedly improve how information is presented to the students
and will lead to brand new ways to measure the amount of knowledge a student
has. We need the best and brightest to teach the future’s best and brightest
and return this country to the ‘Shining City on the Hill.’
Proposal Three
My
next proposal is probably the most difficult one to accomplish because it
involves changing how we educate students throughout their entire lives in
school. I propose instituting an ‘Abilities Based’ system that moves students
to the next grade based on their abilities, not their age. Through this
approach, if a student is ready to graduate high school at age 12 they may. If
you are not ready to move on at 22, that is ok. The goal is to have citizens
who are prepared for the world when graduating, not just waiting for them to
turn 18 and wishing them luck.
In
order to accomplish this complete overhaul, we must do a top-down approach. We
must change what colleges expect in order to enter. No more Index scores based
on GPA and ACT/SAT scores. Every student who graduates and is college bound
will be prepared to handle college scholastically. The Universities will then
have to find another way to decipher talent because we will be graduating only
prepared students.
If
we are willing to remove Capitalism from this process entirely, we can imitate
what Iceland does. Iceland has seven Universities and any student who graduates
their [high school] education program and is eligible to attend college, must
be admitted to the state-run schools if they apply (Iceland). If we do this
correctly, it will force a high expectation for what is acceptable for a
student to graduate high school.
Proposal Four
My
next proposal seems like a path that has already begun. It will allow for
different pathways for students while they are in high school. It is a fantasy
to say that every student belongs at a University and it is ridiculous to force
students to wait until after graduating to start preparing for their career. If
a student knows what they want to do with their life at a young age, they can
begin taking College/Vocational courses that meet their learning requirements
for their chosen career path. They will still need to fulfill their high school
expectations to graduate, but they will enter college with many of their
requirements finished or finish high school ready to start their career.
This
will benefit both society and the students because it will reduce the amount of
time they spend in school after graduating high school. As a result, this will
reduce the amount of money they will need to take out in loans for their
housing and food while attending school and will create more workers sooner
which will stimulate the economy and pay taxes.
Proposal Five
My
final proposal is a faux pas in today’s society because with our fear-based
corporate media, we have demonized the word Socialism, making anything
‘Nationalized’ sound evil, and anything Capitalistic sound like the best
option. I propose that we continue publically funding K-12 education but extend
it to vocational schools and Universities until 5 years of education are
fulfilled after high school. The reason we started paying for education through
high school was because a high school diploma was needed to make America the
great country it used to be. Now, we cannot compete with the rest of the world
without a college education, so it is now time to extend our education benefits
towards a college degree.
The
way I propose paying for this is starting a “Future Investment” tax. One does
not begin paying the tax until after graduating college, but once they do, they
pay a small tax throughout the remainder of their lives to invest in future
students. Iceland uses a similar system and ends up paying an average of about
$6,000 per person as opposed to in American where, after interest, a college
degree costs an average of $100,000 (Iceland). This plan will make college cheaper, will
allow more people to receive a college education, and inherently creates a more
educated populous. A more educated populous will, in turn, create a more
prosperous economy and a stronger community.
Conclusion
The
education system is currently broken. We are producing less educated students
with every graduation class and are no longer competing with other countries in
the World Market. Teachers are expected to do more and more, while given less
to work with. The economy for the poverty class and middle class has not
bounced back after the recession, which results in students coming to school
hungry or from a home where their parent is never home because they have to
work constantly to make ends meet. There are so many issues involved with this
problem that cannot be controlled by educators or the education system. Despite
these outer issues, the education system can be fixed. It is a long road but
you can be accomplished.
If
we attack this problem ethically using the Results Lens combined with the
Relationship Lens, it will get solved. Combining those lenses will result in a
plan that is both qualitative and quantitative; that is numbers based while
remaining compassionate towards all those involved. I believe that my five
proposals of completely changing tenure rules, evaluating teachers, increasing
teacher pay drastically, doing a top-down approach for abilities-based
education, creating career pathways in high school, and nationalizing education
through college will drastically improve, if not solve, our education problems.
It can be done and must be done. Our society must stand up against the
Plutocracy and fight for these changes. I hope one day to be in a position
where I can help implement these desperately needed changes.
Work
Cited
Baird,
Catharyn. “Everyday Ethics: Making Wise Choices in a Complex World.”
EthicsGamePress.
Denver, CO. 2nd Edition 2012
Rawls, John. “A Theory of Justice.”
The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 1971
Plato.
“The Republic.” Trans. Benjamin Jowett. The Internet Classics Archive.
Web Atomic and
Massachusetts Institute
of Technology, 13 Sept. 2009. Web. 4 Nov. 2009. <http://classics.mit.edu/Plato/republic.html>
