 |
||||||||
|
12/31/2002 03:11:00 AM | Brad Plumer re: Education and the Government Mr. Stevenson quoted me in his latest post on the Observer, so I feel obliged to reply, though I don't quite understand why he quoted my statement that the federal government has nothing to do with education. (He neither refuted it nor addressed it). Oh well, any excuse to continue my drivel... 1) Mr. Stevenson writes: "If I had the power, I would have stringent standards to becoming a teacher and make it a capital crime to be an unqualified teacher in the public schools." Make stricter standards and fewer tachers will be available. As Mr. Alessandroni has noted, teachers already make less than plumbers. What incentive do teachers have to undergo even MORE training? Privatize education, however, and force schools to pay for top-notch teachers, and both skill-level and salaries will go up. Schools can't turn profits by hiring cheap, unskilled teachers anymore than Morgan Stanley can save money by putting unskilled laborers in analyst positions. Both will pay handsomely for quality. 2) "[What] coporatization of media and the creation of profit-driven news does is dumb-down the public." Too true, which is why privatized education would probably only work in conjunction with some sort of federal educational standard. Maybe this is what Karsten was getting at (and I missed it earlier, apologies). And I wonder... would it be possible for "corporate" education to create a "dumbed down" education? Would schools start teaching their students "ways to play the game," ie: learn how to take SATs, learn how to get into college, learn how to interview well, but NOT learn those useless liberal arts? How do we avoid this (assuming it should be avoided)? Or do we need to? Sure, current private schools churn out their fair share of tools, but plenty of private schools (Jesuit schools, anyone?) offer the sort of education that would make the Dartmouth Observer drool. So it's not obvious that privatized schools would turn into another form of "mass consumption," but we should still take the possibility seriously. 3) "The debate about public education should be, in my mind, how can we construct an educational system that will give the least advantage as well as the most advantaged the tools to fulfill the basic duties of citizens in America? " What are these duties, again? And please, I'd love to hear where trigonometry fits into all of this... :) perma link |
| 0 comments
0 Comments: |
Dartmouth The Free Press Alums for Social Change The Green Magazine The Dartmouth Dartmouth Observer Dartmouth Review Dartlog Inner Office The Little Green Blog Welton Chang's Blog Vox in Sox MN Publius (Matthew Martin) Netblitz Dartmouth Official News Other Blogs Ampersand Atrios Arts & Letters Altercation Body and Soul Blog For America Brad DeLong Brad Plumer CalPundit Campus Nonsense Clarksphere Crooked Timber Cursor Daily Kos Dean Nation Dan Drezner The Front Line Instapundit Interesting Times Is That Legal? Talking Points Memo Lady-Likely Lawrence Lessig Lean Left Left2Right Legal Theory Matthew Yglesias Ms. Musings MWO Nathan Newman New Republic's &c. Not Geniuses Ornicus Oxblog Pandagon Political State Report Political Theory Daily Review Queer Day Roger Ailes SCOTUS blog Talk Left TAPPED Tacitus This Modern World Tough Democrat Untelevised Volokh Conspiracy Washington Note X. & Overboard Magazines, Newspapers and Journals Boston Globe Ideas Boston Review Chronicle of Higher Education Common Dreams Dissent In These Times Mother Jones New York Review of Books New York Times Salon Slate The American Prospect The Nation The New Republic The Progressive Tikkun Tom Paine Village Voice Washington Monthly Capitol Hill Media ABC's The Note American Journalism Review Columbia Journalism Review CQ Daily Howler Donkey Rising The Hill Medianews National Journal NJ Hotline NJ Wake-up call NJ Early Bird NJ Weekly Political Wire Roll Call Spinsanity Search Search the DFP  |
|||||||
The opinions expressed here are not necessarily those of Dartmouth College or the Dartmouth Free Press.