Job Discussion Forums

[kev7161]

Many of you know of GW Bush's education policy in America stating that all children shall receive a fair and equal education and schools are responsible for ensuring this (or face financial penalties).

http://www.collegeboard.com/parents/article/0,3708,703-704-0-28284,00.html

(for more info)

Do you think this policy is do-able? Do you think it could fly in China? Of course, I know in poor, rural areas some kids get little to no education, but do you think you could apply this in your own classroom(s)? Most of us know that classes of 50+ seem to be a little . . . absurd, but how do you, as a teacher, manage to insure all your charges are getting what they need from you? Or do you care one way or another?

The reason I bring this up is, I will soon be teaching 22-25 little first graders: Math, English, Science, Language Arts, etc. I have no idea what the situation will be. Will I have a classroom of screaming monsters or will I have well-behaved little boys and girls? Will I have an opportunity in my busy days to focus on the ones that just aren't getting it? Will the language barrier prove a major hinderance? What about the kids who have a greater aptitude toward English? With 35-minute classes, I'm guessing I won't have time to single out students who need extra help and try to give that help to them (remediations).

Of course, I want every student to succeed, but I'm worried. This is a new program, so I know all eyes will be on me but, as a teacher, that is secondary to trying to keep all kids going down the same path towards a common goal. Thoughts?

[virago]

Yeah right, no child left behind in China. No way. We are in a country where money and status is more important than God! Of course there are going to be little worthless urchins left behind.

If they dont have money for a good education, don't have money to go to the right university and don't have money to pay for expensive relationship building karaoke then they are going to be left behind.

[Don McChesney]

Bob Hawke, an Australian (Ex) Prime Minister said in an oft quoted speech,

"By the year 2000 no child in Australia shall be living in poverty."

It's all talk. Who actually believes anything a polititian says??

[Henry_Cowell]

[Roger]

Well, America is a laggard in education behind many other western nations so I do not understand why you put that son-of-ashrub's statement on the top of this thread. Or are you trying to compare like with like? Then, yes, maybe you are on to something!

But on the other hand, you as a teacher used to respect the INDIVIDUAL are per definitonem a different teacher than the Chinese teacher who teaches not students but CLASSES. Of course, there must be qualitative differences between these two fundamentally divergent approaches.

I do not know if your primary school pupils will scream during YOUR lessons; if they do you may question as much their own cultural background as your method. Or if your method is sound you should question the school's policy on discipline. It seems to be a private school as very few public schools in this country have small classes; in addition no public school in China uses English as the language of teaching. I once saw a Taiwanese-invested school in Dongguan where English was used in teaching history, maths and sciences; the pupils were well-behaved, but you may point out that their parents were holders of Taiwanese, Brazo;oam, Korean and other passports.

[amandabarrick]

[Don McChesney]

Unfortunately, in China what our students NEED are high scores on their Graduation papers, and not necessarily good understanding and usage of English.

As long as Chinese Universities, parents and employers rely on marks, and not ability, the students NEEDS good scores, however obtained.
If we spend too much time getting good basic English into them, however well we mean, this is not what the school may want.

[randyj]

As Amanda and Henry have pointed out, the 2002 "No Child Left Behind" law relies on additional testing, so maybe the United States is moving in China's direction, rather than the other way around. Last year in the Houston Independent School District a scandal occurred involving suspicious TAKS (Texas Assessment of Knowledge and Skills) scores. The superintendent, Kaye Stripling, retired August 31, 2004. Her predecessor was Rod Paige, who President Bush named Secretary of Education in 2001. The Chinese have an idiom, 天下乌鸦一般黑 (Crows are black all over the world).

[rogerejones]

I would just add that the NCLB legislation amounts to nothing more than political cronyism and the privatization of public education. To quote:

"Tempe, Ariz. (Tuesday, June 21, 2005)- No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) funds flow from the government, through the states, and into the hands of private,for-profit companies, according to "No Child Left Behind: Where Does the Money Go?" a policy brief released by the Education Policy Studies Laboratory at Arizona State University.

The brief's author, Gerald Bracey, finds that the money schools and districts spend on implementing NCLB requirements and on sanctions for failing to meet NCLB achievement goals are funneled mostly to private companies in the testing, curriculum, and Supplemental Education Services (SES) industries. Some of these companies have close ties to President George W. Bush and his family. In addition, Bracey says testing companies and SES providers are rarely held to the same level of accountability that NCLB demands of public schools."

http://texasedequity.blogspot.com/2005/06/nclb-funds-enrich-for-profit-companies.html

One of these corporations, to which Bush has personal ties, is the McGraw-Hill Corp, which reaps astounding benefits from testing requirements.

Can we expect anything less from the Bush administration? Educational policies, just like military and trade policies, are based on the flow of riches into the coffers of giant corporations. NCLB only exacerbates the inequality already inherent in the U.S. public education system.