FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail

A Way to Fix Our Education System?

by DAVID MACARAY

An education question:  Whose fault is it when healthy fourth or fifth-grade students miss 15 to 20 days of school each year, when they regularly show up late to class, and when they rarely if ever complete their homework assignments?  Do we blame these 10-year old kids for these lapses….or do we blame their parents?

When the circumstances change, when it’s a high school senior or college student who exhibits the same lack of discipline, we know instantly whom to blame.  Clearly, it’s the student’s fault.  But because 10-year olds are still at the mercy of their parents—depending on them to feed and clothe them and establish a household work ethic—laying even part of the blame on the kids seems not only unrealistic but counterproductive.

Yet, bizarre as it seems, in the public school system, when kids miss class or fail to turn in their work, it’s neither the child nor the parent who gets the blame.  It’s the teacher.

In contrast to private schools, where entrance exams are required, tardiness and excessive absenteeism are not permitted, and recalcitrant students are routinely booted out of class, public schools are all-inclusive, warm body institutions.  Attendance is not only free, it’s compulsory.  It’s mandatory.  Which means that many of the less motivated, poorly prepared students are going to come to regard it as one cut above prison.

Because public school teachers have to play the hand they’re dealt, what are they supposed to do with a classroom full of uninspired, truant, tardy, undisciplined kids who are there only because the law requires it, and whose parents offer little or no support or encouragement?  What are teachers expected to do with students as unprepared, and unreceptive as these?

Answer:  They’re supposed to play dumb.  They’re supposed to pretend that these students’ home life doesn’t matter, that the universe begins and ends in the classroom.  They’re supposed to shut up, stop whining, and go about the task of getting these kids ready to achieve high test scores.  Get them to behave like “serious” students so that the American tax payer won’t feel cheated by underwriting teachers’ salaries.

Ask any public school teacher, and they’ll tell you that their “dream class” would consist of students who had gotten sufficient sleep the night before, eaten a nutritious breakfast, completed their homework assignments, and are sitting at their desks, bright-eyed and busy-tailed, ready and relatively eager to learn their lessons.  The students don’t need to be budding geniuses or Junior Einsteins.  They don’t even need to be above average.  All they need to be is relatively prepared.

One way of achieving this “dream class” is to appeal directly to the parents.  Instead of wasting hundreds of millions of dollars on consultants, experimental techniques, teacher bonuses, and outreach programs, that money should be spent directly on the parents.  Offer them money for their child’s performance—for perfect (or near perfect) attendance, for their child completing his or her homework each day, for improved test scores.

Naturally, people will argue that such an expenditure is unAmerican, that it is not only wasteful and reckless but that it sends the wrong message, encouraging materialistic remuneration for something—a good, solid education—that should be its own reward.  They’re absolutely right.  A good education should be its own reward.  But, clearly, in many families, in many neighborhoods, and under way too many circumstances, it ain’t.

And instead of painting ourselves into a self-righteous corner—refusing to budge because of adherence to some abstract principle relating to virtue being its own reward—we should come to grips with sociological realities and proceed accordingly.

High school jocks and academic whizzes are given scholarships for performance on the athletic field and in the classroom.  Correspondingly, because fourth-graders are still at the mercy of their home environments, such “scholarships” should be given to their parents.  Give a family $100 if the kid misses one day a year or less; give them $100 if the kid turns in all (or almost all) of his homework; give them $200 if the kid improves his annual test scores.

These underachieving, undermotivated 10-year olds are going to require some sort of impetus, something to keep them focused academically.  It can’t simply be their teachers.  It has to be the people who play the most important and decisive role in their lives.  It’s has to be their parents.

And if it takes money to achieve that goal, then so be it.  Since when did the notion of paying for stuff become alien to us?  We bailed out Wall Street.  We bailed out General Motors.  Is it so farfetched to begin investing in the American family by offering cash incentives?  Clearly, we need to do something.

DAVID MACARAY, a Los Angeles playwright and author (“It’s Never Been Easy:  Essays on Modern Labor”), was a former union rep.  He can be reached at dmacaray@earthlink.net

 

 

 

 

More articles by:

David Macaray is a playwright and author. His newest book is How To Win Friends and Avoid Sacred Cows.  He can be reached at dmacaray@gmail.com

Weekend Edition
February 23, 2018
Friday - Sunday
Richard D. Wolff
Capitalism as Obstacle to Equality and Democracy: the US Story
Paul Street
Where’s the Beef Stroganoff? Eight Sacrilegious Reflections on Russiagate
Jeffrey St. Clair
They Came, They Saw, They Tweeted
Andrew Levine
Their Meddlers and Ours
Charles Pierson
Nuclear Nonproliferation, American Style
Joseph Essertier
Why Japan’s Ultranationalists Hate the Olympic Truce
W. T. Whitney
US and Allies Look to Military Intervention in Venezuela
John Laforge
Maybe All Threats of Mass Destruction are “Mentally Deranged”
Matthew Stevenson
Why Vietnam Still Matters: an American Reckoning
David Rosen
For Some Reason, Being White Still Matters
Robert Fantina
Nikki Haley: the U.S. Embarrassment at the United Nations
Joyce Nelson
Why Mueller’s Indictments Are Hugely Important
Joshua Frank
Pearl Jam, Will You Help Stop Sen. Tester From Destroying Montana’s Public Lands?
Dana E. Abizaid
The Attack on Historical Perspective
Conn Hallinan
Immigration and the Italian Elections
George Ochenski
The Great Danger of Anthropocentricity
Pete Dolack
China Can’t Save Capitalism from Environmental Destruction
Joseph Natoli
Broken Lives
Manuel García, Jr.
Why Did Russia Vote For Trump?
Geoff Dutton
One Regime to Rule Them All
Torkil Lauesen – Gabriel Kuhn
Radical Theory and Academia: a Thorny Relationship
Wilfred Burchett
Vietnam Will Win: The Work of Persuasion
Thomas Klikauer
Umberto Eco and Germany’s New Fascism
George Burchett
La Folie Des Grandeurs
Howard Lisnoff
Minister of War
Eileen Appelbaum
Why Trump’s Plan Won’t Solve the Problems of America’s Crumbling Infrastructure
Ramzy Baroud
More Than a Fight over Couscous: Why the Palestinian Narrative Must Be Embraced
Jill Richardson
Mass Shootings Shouldn’t Be the Only Time We Talk About Mental Illness
Jessicah Pierre
Racism is Killing African American Mothers
Steve Horn
Wyoming Now Third State to Propose ALEC Bill Cracking Down on Pipeline Protests
David Griscom
When ‘Fake News’ is Good For Business
Barton Kunstler
Brainwashed Nation
Griffin Bird
I’m an Eagle Scout and I Don’t Want Pipelines in My Wilderness
Edward Curtin
The Coming Wars to End All Wars
Missy Comley Beattie
Message To New Activists
Jonah Raskin
Literary Hubbub in Sonoma: Novel about Mrs. Jack London Roils the Faithful
Binoy Kampmark
Frontiersman of the Internet: John Perry Barlow
Chelli Stanley
The Mirrors of Palestine
James McEnteer
How Brexit Won World War Two
Ralph Nader
Absorbing the Irresistible Consumer Reports Magazine
Cesar Chelala
A Word I Shouldn’t Use
Louis Proyect
Marx at the Movies
Osha Neumann
A White Guy Watches “The Black Panther”
Stephen Cooper
Rebel Talk with Nattali Rize: the Interview
David Yearsley
Market Music
FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail