BAD ATTITUDE PART OF THE BLACK PROBLEM?

If attitude does not matter, how come immigrant blacks do better than native-born ones? Could it be that immigrants try harder etc.?

Black students with U.S. ancestry appear to be less represented in college than race-based statistics indicate, as immigrants make up a disproportionate share of admissions, a Princeton University analysis found. First- or second-generation immigrants made up 27 percent of black freshmen entering 28 top-ranked colleges in 1999, according to the study released Tuesday. Such immigrants accounted for only 13 percent of all U.S. blacks aged 18 or 19 that year, the researchers found.

'Double their share'''In other words, the representation of immigrant-origin blacks at selective institutions of higher education was roughly double their share in the population,'' said the report by Princeton sociology professor Douglas Massey and his colleagues at the New Jersey school and at the University of Pennsylvania.

The findings may revive claims that affirmative action designed to help the descendants of slaves are more likely to benefit high-achieving immigrants from countries such as Ghana, Nigeria and Jamaica, the authors wrote.

Goes beyond race preferences''It's a very complicated, messy issue,'' said Terry Hartle of the American Council on Education.''If it were easy, we would have figured it out a long time ago.''

The study highlights a problem with college admissions that extends beyond disputes over racial preferences, said Harvard University law professor Lani Guinier. ''This is not a debate about affirmative action; this is a debate about the very core mission of higher education,'' Guinier said. ''I want them to tell me what their graduates are doing to serve the larger society, not what their applicants got on a timed test.''

OK, Lani. How about Colin Powell and Barack Obama? Are they "serving society"? They are of black immigrant origin. Disproportionate success among black immigrants is not confined to the exam room. That bad attitudes are a problem among American blacks is also shown by the way black females do much better than black males

Source





The evolution of education

Australian education writer Kevin Donnelly states the argument for a traditional education in specific knowledge, as opposed to the prevalent approach that simply learning anything is better than nothing

In arguing that the school curriculum should be centred on particular subjects such as mathematics, history and English. the American Federation of Teachers draws on a view of education closely associated with the rise of Western civilisation that can be traced back hundreds of years. Where the approach known as outcomes-based education - especially the various versions adopted in Tasmania, the Northern Territory, the ACT and Western Australia - gives priority to so-called competencies and generic skills, the AFT approach is to place the disciplines centre-stage. Yet the Australian Education Union and other local professional bodies are staunch advocates of OBE.

In part, the reason for the AFT arguing its position is that after experimenting with OBE during the early to mid-1990s, all American states dropped it in favour of what is termed a standards approach. Similar to a syllabus approach to curriculum, a standards approach is year-level specific, focuses on traditional subjects, regularly tests students, and gives teachers a clear and concise road map of what students should know and be able to accomplish after a set period of time.

Since the time of the early Greek philosophers and sophists, evolving over the centuries and incorporating aspects of the Judeo-Christian tradition and historical movements such as the Renaissance, the Reformation and the Enlightenment, a liberal-humanist view of education is concerned - to use English 19th-century poet and schools inspector Matthew Arnold's expression -- with "getting to know, on all the matters which most concern us, the best which has been thought and said'".

As noted by Australian former educationist academic and writer Brian Crittenden, while subjects have evolved, there is also much that has remained constant: "In any area of systematic knowledge there is a range of key concepts, basic theories and method. They are not immune to change, but are relatively long term. They are the defining features of a discipline or area of systematic knowledge. In several areas (such as the physical sciences) content has changed fairly rapidly, although methods have tended to be more enduring and, in all cases, there is at least a core of relatively stable knowledge. The acquisition of a discipline's skills of inquiry needs to be closely related to the learning of its key concepts, theories and other content."

While OBE is consumed by the tyranny of relevance, a liberal-humanist view of education acknowledges and values the past. The reason for studying history is not simply so we are saved from repeating the same mistakes. As important is the recognition that, as individuals and as a society, we are involved in an unfolding narrative that began thousands of years ago and which continues to unfold into the future. Being part of that narrative promotes a sense of belonging to something more lasting and significant than the often mundane routine of day-to-day existence.

One of the strengths of a liberal- humanist view of education, in an era of social dysfunction, alienation and loss of meaning, is that there is a strong and life-affirming story about how Western civilisation has evolved and how, while being far from perfect, we are no longer ruled by superstition, bigotry and ignorance.

David Green, an analyst at the London- based Institute of Economic Affairs, in summarising an address to the Mont Pelerin Society given by historian Max Hartwell, describes a liberal-humanist view of education as follows: "The content of a liberal education, he [Hartwell] says, should embrace civility, morality, objectivity, freedom and creativity. By civility, he means respect for other people; by morality, the elementarv maxims such as honesty and fairness; by objectivity, belief in the disinterested examination of facts and arguments, without fear or favour; by freedom, the principle that children should be equipped to exercise personal responsibility; and by creativity, belief in the advance of knowledge: not the perfectibility of man, but the possibility of progress.

"Hartwell points out that a liberal education can be more easily defined negatively than positively: it is not utilitar- ian or interest-serving; it is not vocational or professional; it is not specialist or one-sided; it is not conformist and uncritical: it is not education for doing: it is disinterested, it is general and universal, it is critical and inventive, it is education for thinking and understanding."

Bruce Wilson, the man partly responsible for Australia's adoption of OBE, acknowledges that any curriculum must recognise the importance of particular subjects. After referring to the research associated with an American publication, How People Learn, undertaken by the National Research Council of the US, he says: "The report offers powerful confirmation of the key idea in this paper: that transferable, higher order learning, what I am calling deep understanding, is inseparable from a well-organised body of content knowledge which reflects a deep understanding of specific subject matter."

A liberal-humanist view of education values the aesthetic, the moral and the spiritual, as well as the rational. A well-rounded education should encompass the spiritual and moral value of the literary canon represented by Greek tragedies, Shakespeare and the romantic poets as well as great artworks and classical music. As noted by 20th-century US writer and child psychologist Bruno Bettelheim, young children need a steadv diet of those myths. fables and legends that tell us so much about emotions such as betrayal, love and bravery and, as a result, help to develop psychological maturity and resilience.

It is also the case, contrary to the belief that all learning is subjective and relative, that there are certain interpretations of the world that are closer to the truth than others. Ptolemy's version of the heavenly movements was superseded by Copernicus, and William Harvey dispelled many of the beliefs about the heart's operation and how blood circulated around the body.

Contrary to the criticism that the traditional academic curriculum is unchanging, history shows us that disciplines evolve, and what is accepted as true at one stage is open to scrutiny and debate. As noted by Tony Gibbons, when discussing science as a subject: "The purpose of science is to seek explanations of the physical world. Proposed explanations are tested against the physical world and. depending upon the success in accounting for that physical world, may be accepted as a step in the search for truth. The matter is a search, a quest, for the condition of scientific inquiry is one in which there is progress from one theory to the next."

One of the most strident criticisms of a liberal-humanist education is that it is used to reproduce capitalist societies, where those already privileged are able to maintain and consolidate their power and control. If such were truly the case, then why is it that members of the Left have been so successful in their long march through the education system? The reality is that the very system attacked as socially unjust and closed has granted them the freedom to mount their critique and to subvert the school curriculum. A traditional education, instead of simply reinforcing the status quo, provides a vantage point from which to criticise and improve the world.

In relation to literature. for example. one need only read poems such as William Blake's Holy Thursday, novels such as One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich and the plays of Bertolt Brecht for evidence of the conservative curriculum's powerful and damning critique of society. When studying history, in particular the advent of popular sovereignty, the rule of habeas corpus, the abolition of slavery, the Chartist movement and the movement to universal franchise, it soon becomes obvious that the education system provides an independent site to measure our freedom. Instead of stifling debate and preserving elitism, a liberal-humanist education provides the very knowledge, understanding and skills needed to improve society.

While many politicians, bureaucrats and teacher educators seek to use the education system to further their own agendas, often based on short-term political expediency, ideological bent or self-interest, one of the strengths of a liberal-humanist education is that it is based on the belief that schools and universities should remain autonomous and free of outside interference. Education should not be used as a handmaiden for those either on the Left or the Right who are seeking to impose a form of managerialism that reduces learning to what is cost effective.

The above edited extract from "Dumbing Down" by Kevin Donnelly appeared in "The Australian" newspaper on January, 27, 2007




(Conservative) Australian Federal government push for national High School curriculum

Labor premiers have been challenged by the Howard Government to embrace a national education framework, after a high-level report found "bewildering" inconsistencies across school curriculums. In the latest challenge to states' rights, Federal Education Minister Julie Bishop yesterday promoted a unified system - and signalled she would push the national agenda at a key meeting in April.

"I am concerned that students, teachers and parents are being let down as many aspects of school education get hijacked by teachers unions and state education bureacrats," Ms Bishop said. "Instead of learning basic facts in subjects like history, children are being taught according to an ideological agenda." ....

Ms Bishop, addressing a business audience in Brisbane, ramped up her push for national consistency as she released a report highlighting the depth of the problem across five subject areas. The Australian Council for Educational Research study portrayed an alarming jigsaw of Year 12 curriculums. In one of the most glaring cases, the study found 27 different types of maths classes for pre-university students, and 20 different history courses, with only two called "Australian history".

There was only 25 per cent consistency in English courses, while 50 per cent of history classes used the same material. The results were more positive in more challenging subjects such as chemistry and physics, where there was up to 95 per cent consistency across the nation.

Flagging a showdown with the states at the national meeting of education ministers in April, Ms Bishop cited the growing number of remedial English and maths classes being taught in universities as evidence that the states were failing on standards. "There is nothing to stop the state and territory governments from adopting a nationally consistent approach at any time in the past," she told the Committee for the Economic Development of Australia. "The differences are grounded in history of the states and territories and their education systems, and in the different sets of compromises that have had to be struck by curriculum and assessment agencies with their respective stakeholders over the years."

With a population of just 20 million people, Australia had nine different senior secondary certificates with a "bewildering array of variations", Ms Bishop told the conference. "There are differences in the number and types of subjects that are offered, assessed and certificated; differences in assessment methodologies and differences in the codes used to report results."

ACER chief executive Geoff Masters said the findings reinforced the need for common subject content across the nation's schools. "There's a pretty strong case for having a very significant proportion of courses common across all states and territories," Mr Masters said.

But state ministers hit back at their federal counterpart, saying her national agenda was politically driven and out of date. They had been working together towards greater national consistency for several years. "NSW already has a rigorous, highly regarded curriculum and end-of-school credential, and we are concerned that any move to impose a national system would result in a lowering of standards for NSW students," NSW Education Minister Carmel Tebbutt said. "Where it can benefit students and the wider community, NSW supports moves towards greater national consistency, something we have been working co-operatively towards for several years."

Victoria treated the proposal with scepticism. "What Victoria doesn't want to do is lower the high quality educational standards in Victoria just to meet some artificial target proposed by Ms Bishop to satisfy a political agenda," Education Minister John Lenders said.

South Australian Education Minister Jane Lomax-Smith said the federal Government had commissioned many reports into curriculum issues without serious financial investment. "This is just another distraction to take attention away from federal Labor's funded education plan for real improvements in science and mathematics."

The ACT welcomed alignment of curriculum standards provided it did not compromise its education system. Federal Labor education spokesman Stephen Smith said he favoured a national curriculum "with the obvious and sensible local and regional variations".

Source

***************************

For greatest efficiency, lowest cost and maximum choice, ALL schools should be privately owned and run -- with government-paid vouchers for the poor and minimal regulation.

The NEA and similar unions worldwide believe that children should be thoroughly indoctrinated with Green/Left, feminist/homosexual ideology but the "3 R's" are something that kids should just be allowed to "discover"

Comments? Email me here. For times when blogger.com is playing up, there is a mirror of this site (viewable even in China!) here. My Home Pages are here or here or here.

***************************