Thinking about Education of the Future

Proposing a Dramatically Different School System

Page Contents

Philosophy of Education Contents - - - Master Contents, Material for Educators and Parents

Introduction

This web site presents various actions and curriculum which can significantly improve various kinds of present day educational endeavors. In the author's view, they are interim measures. He feels the entire educational system needs to be overhauled.

This page discusses some general philosophical ideas about how a possible future system of education could be configured to contribute to producing a truly robust society. It is assumed by the writer that the discussion is not exhaustive, may be modified in the future, that some elements may be left out, and there is still a huge amount of work still remaining. Go to Page Contents.

Assumptions
 
For the most part, these are assumed to be true.

 Go to Page Contents.

Problems with the Present System
Failure to Meet Student Needs
 
The usual public school attempts to be all things for all students. As is common with such one-size-fits-all systems, it doesn't do any of the functions well. The teachers try to meet the widely varying and often divergent needs of all these:
Teachers usually can only touch upon each of these needs. They keep on trying very hard to be all things to all students. The stress upon them is enormous! They become frustrated. They burn out. They leave the profession. We have a shortage of teachers; I wonder why? - - - Duh!
 
The students are not having their individual needs met. Too many of them fail, tune out, and then drop out. I wonder why? - - - Duh!
 
Yes, you can undoubtedly point at teachers who against these enormous odds are doing a good job (under the circumstances). They are the Super Teachers, and are heroes in my book. But this society doesn't have many people of Super-Hero stature. At least for the foreseeable future we must "make do" with ordinary people. We have to create systems wherein the work of ordinary people results in extraordinary results. It can be done only through specialization.
 
Even Super Teachers often cannot do the optimum job with each and every student. They may be able to bring a poor performing student up to an acceptable level of performance, or a fair student up to "A" grade level. But can they bring all students up to their BEST possible level of performance? Usually they do not have the time, resources, available specialists, support structures, nor administration backing to do that! The school system gets in the way.

Too often there are debates between advocates of different school methods. Too often these debates are at least in part fueled by sociocentricity: "My education system is better than yours!" There is no one type of school which fits all children. There is a wide variation between children and their schooling needs. Just as the present typical public school CANNOT be all things for all students, neither can any of the other education models!

Go to Page Contents.

Failure to Meet Society's Needs

 
The history of our country shows that diversity led to the robustness of our society. The melting pot idea is a valid one. The diverse strengths bought to our society were available to help us to grow dramatically. When different ideas were needed, there were people to think those ideas, and who had the ability to implement them.
 
The concept of a one-size-fits-all education system works to remove diversity of mental abilities form our nation. This would be true even if our schools worked perfectly, and were staffed by Super Teachers. If we believe that diversity is good, then we must agree that our present school system, no matter how well run, is bad for our future growth. As a result of our schools, we cut ourselves off (as a society) from that which made us strong. It sounds a lot like shooting one's self in the foot!
 
Today we seem to assume that all students should go to college. That idea has been around for a long time. Our schools and society seem to focus on that goal. We teach assuming that every student is on a path headed for college or university, and that our society needs 100% college educated people. Neither assumption is correct. To try to push a student towards college, in case he decides that is what he wants, is a mistake. If you push anyone, adult or child, too far in a direction he doesn't want to go, they will find a way to rebel.
 
Goals much more important than a college education are:

See the section, below, titled "'State' Minimum Proficiency Requirements" for a suggested list of society's needs.

Go to Page Contents.

 
A Proposal for a Future School System    

System Specifications

A really good school system should:

  1. Recognize and accommodate every student's learning style.
  2. Capitalize upon the student's abilities, talents, and interests.
  3. Teach students how to think.
  4. Provide a core of knowledge deemed necessary for citizens of this age and country.
  5. Be able to function well, regardless of the degree of involvement of individual parents.
  6. Be flexible and accommodate the changes in the growing student.
  7. Allow any student to advance as far as his inclination drives him, and in a direction which he chooses.
    • Provide very good assistance for the student with learning difficulties.
    • Provide very good assistance for the struggling student.
    • Service the average student.
    • Stretch the advanced or bright student.
  8. Help students find their passion, and capitalize upon it to teach general academics.
  9. Develop cross-generational interchanges, learning experiences, and social interactions through public service and internships.
  10. From a moderately young age (10?) start exposing students to the real-world. What are the long range options? What are various jobs like?
  11. Provide opportunities to explore in greater depth the various educational and work options the student would have in the future. This might begin in about the 7th grade. It could include short internships of a few days, or over the summer internships in High School. Go to Page Contents.
Paths
 
One replacement for our current (dominant) school system would be a variety of schools and school paths freely available for use by anyone in our society. Different schools would offer education based upon different models of teaching. Their educational goals could be different. They can design for a limited number of student needs, and thus greatly improve their efficiency and effectiveness. Having such diverse options would strengthen each child's education, because his needs are specifically addressed and satisfied. Below are a few possible variations. Obviously, there can be mixtures of these types, such as a private school, specializing in computer technology, and keeps students and teachers together throughout the path.
Go to Page Contents.
Entering the School System; Picking the First Path
 
A diverse school system would have designed into it several alternative paths for starting a child's school life. (See a graphic for a Path Examples.) When a child becomes school age his parents can work with a specially trained Advocate and the child to attempt to discern what would be an appropriate school in which to place that child. If the parent is not able or not willing to make that decision, the system will do so, based upon an analysis of the child's needs and characteristics.

The first few years of school would have the present goals of socializing the child to work in groups, and the beginning of academic studies. Added to this would be close and coordinated observation of each child in class, and by parents to determine characteristics such as:

Go to Page Contents.

Changing Paths

It must be emphasized that children change over time, and the school path used may have to be switched to accommodate the student. The standard method for reevaluating path is initiated by the system at defined points in any schooling path. The Advocate and the parents working together would evaluate the student. Alternatively, the school or the parents can at any time initiate a review of the student, working with the system to determine if the child should move to a different schooling path. In either case, it is the parents and not the school system who makes the choice to move the student to a different educational path.

Students can switch paths from less rigorous to a more rigorous path, but may have to start in the second school path at a lower level than if they had been the typical student who started on that path in the first place.

An example is arrow #1 on the drawing "Path Examples" (paths.rtf is a rich text editable version). Here we see a student who is very bright and intensely interested in computers. Because in the Waldorf school, he started to read much later than the typical student (which is common), he may have to start in the new path at a lower level.

Another example is shown as arrow #2 on the drawing "Path Examples." Here we see a child who was a slow starter. He is now moving forward at a fast pace. As he developed he showed a propensity for self-directed study. He is moved from the remedial, or slow path, into an Open School, Self-Study path. Although he is now moving forward nicely, he is still behind, so he is placed into the faster track, but at one level lower.

Example #3 is a student who is tuning out to academic studies, but is very interested in computers. He does not need to change levels, just paths.

Example #4 is a student who is tuning out to the abstractions of academic studies. He is very bright and loves the challenges of solving real-world problems. He switches paths into Open School, Self Study.

This sort of schooling system would provide flexibility to channel the student into the path where he is happy and likely to benefit the most. He should be able to progress at a rate which more closely matches his own developmental rate. If the system is designed and implemented correctly, the great majority of students should be able to develop closer to their maximum capability.

Go to Page Contents.
Advocates
 
A new class of education worker is defined here, the Advocate. Job description:
Go to Page Contents.
System Regulation and Access

All schools in a system are required to maintain the content of a standardized web page which describes their school in full detail. (Exact contents shall be developed later.) They must submit that information periodically or upon demand to a web master responsible for this database. That submission will be on a digital form found on the system's web site. It shall not contain information identifying students by name or address. An example is given below.

This systemwide database contains one Record for each path in the system: - - - (NO jargon!)

A specialized search engines provided to help find schools with desired characteristics. It shall have multiple "AND" and "OR" search criteria, coupled with field definitions. The above database has these purposes.

(1) Aid families in finding a school path suitable for their child.

(2) Aid finding open teaching and staff positions.

(3) Aid determining the number and location and types of new school paths to set up, or paths to be discontinued because of lack of demand.

Advocates are to input into the system each request for paths which are not available. These paths shall be part of the path database, but checked as "Not Available."

Go to Page Contents.

Entrance Requirements

 Somewhat arbitrary transition points for transfer between paths could be:
Each of these in each path shall have minimum entrance requirements. When attempting to transfer between paths, if the student is not able to pass the entrance requirements, a judgment shall be made as to the level in the path for which the student is ready, and started in the new path at that level.
Go to Page Contents.
"State" Minimum Proficiency Requirements

To graduate from the system, (equivalent to graduating from High School) the student must demonstrate a minimum proficiency established by the State. The student must demonstrate a level of proficiency necessary to carry on a reasonably good life and involvement in our society. The following is a first attempt to set down a list of recommended minimum abilities our society needs its citizens to possess. It should not be considered to be exhaustive.

A student enrolled in say a math-rich path would be required to take a minimum curriculum of social science, history, etc. However, these required classes can be taught by pulling in when possible the math which illustrates and amplifies those subjects.

NOTE: The "State" standards are not a legal requirement placed upon all citizens. They are a requirement for the issuance of a graduation certificate. While it is possible that even in such an adaptable system, some will choose to not study, and therefore not be able to pass the standard test. While this is lamentable, it will probably be much rarer that the current drop out rate. Thus the society will be much better off than it is with the present system.

Go to Page Contents.
Dealing with Stigma

School systems have long seemed to be paralyzed from taking effective remedial actions because of a fear of stigmatizing the student, and thus stunting his or her emotional growth, or of engendering the wrath of parents. The author believes this is a false issue.

Trying to protect students from stigma is virtually impossible, and thus doomed to failure. If a child is struggling to keep up in class, he doesn't have to be told. He knows it already. He sees he is having trouble. He may be slow or need help, but rarely is he stupid! Also, his class mates may let him know rather cruelly. He doesn't like to be in that "place," and is hoping for a way out! He is hoping to be rescued!

Simply "protecting" them by a social (or compassionate) promotion is likely to be damaging and counterproductive. Without mastering the material he should have learned, he starts the next level at an ever greater disadvantage, thus making ultimate failure more assured.

If he is just kept back with little or no explanation or little or no support to get him through the rough spot, then anxiety that he is flawed and a failure-in-life sets in. That is bad.

One of the major goals of this suggested school system is the detection and intervention as early as practical. The student can be provided with tutoring, held back, or transferred into a different path.

If we really are teachers, then we should TEACH the slow student how to deal with his problem. If properly handled, a slow student can be made to understand that being held back, or moved to a remedial path is really in his own best self-interest. We need to teach:

 

In a school system like the one being presented on this web page, moving between paths will soon be seen by students and family as a normal thing, and defined as being in the student's own best self interest. Also, age tied to education level will become much less significant. The new class of education worker referred to here as an Advocate will also be trained in helping families find diagnostic and helping specialists, and in helping the family in the demystification the child's difficulty.

Go to Page Contents.

Tracking Vs. No Tracking

Over the years the author has been aware of the tracking vs. no tracking debate. In his High School there were trade classes as well as college prep. He took some of both! Even as a teen, that seemed like a good system.

But "someone" said, if the school system decides that student "A" was not "smart" enough to get into college, how do we (the school system) know we have made the correct judgment? After all, sometime "slow" students end up doing just fine in college. And if we have made the incorrect choice, haven't we prejudged, and therefore forced the student to become less than he could otherwise be?

So people began to think that all students should go through the same program, and resources be brought to bare such that everyone could go to college if they wanted to. The school systems seemed to take that approach.

But there were problems. The schools attempted to have a one-size-fits-all program. Everyone received the same lessons, and had the same requirements to pass. But not everyone is the same. The system lacked understanding of how the brain develops differentially between people. Students have their own brain development timetable, and it doesn't always fit the school's timetable.

Trying to provide the resources to bring all students up to a high standard did not work. Not enough money, understanding of how to help learning impaired, or trained persons were available.

And the poorly supported and inadequately trained teacher struggled on, trying to cope with a wide range of academic ability students.

Then we seemed to come nearly full circle. We now have educators who say we need to "track" students together, going through the same curriculum, but keeping the slower of poorer students together. (It happened at the school where the author taught.) But other educators and collected data tell us ability tracking is not working either. Even average students do not reach their potentials, because too much class resources are spent trying to bring up the poor or learning disabled students. - - - And the debate rages on again!

Go to Page Contents.

Wisdom & Logic Applied to Designing a New School System

As pointed out on the Wisdom essay on this site, "A wise judgment, action, or decision is one which brings the greatest good to the greatest number, both in the short run and in the long run, while at the same time thwarting evil intentions and minimizing negative outcomes."

In the case at hand, that means:

The design of the present school system PREVENTS far too many students from reaching their potentials! Bright students do not reach their potential. Slow students do not reach their potential. Learning disabled students slow everyone down, and may not reach their potential either. Society gets very few people who have reached their potential.

Many of the poorer or slower students may drop out and sink to the bottom of society. There, they at best become marginal contributors, and at worst become very violent and evil people who prey upon the rest of us. (True, some will manage to pull themselves up by their bootstraps and become good and productive citizen - but not as a result of the school system!)

Our present school systems are not wise. Their designs lack good systems thinking (sorry folks, that's engineer-speak!). Just look at it!

We have a system which:

Some Fundamental Concepts to Aid Thinking

Should everyone go to college?
No. People have different interests, skills, learning styles, intelligences, and emotional strengths. It doesn't make any sense at all to try to push them through a one-size-fits-all system. In fact, it can be very damaging to try! Our society needs a wide variety of people and skills. That wide variety gives us strength and adaptability. It simply doesn't make sense to try to force people into paths in which they will not be happy, not follow well, and not be efficient in their life's work.

Should everyone progress at the same rate?

No. We all develop at different rates. It is simply ridiculous to try to hammer upon many student to assure they all develop at the same rate in all the same areas as does the "average' student. We try to speed up the slower student, often frustrating him, and possibly causing him to drop out of school, and/or otherwise produce an antisocial citizen. The really bright students are bored stiff, waiting for the rest of the class to catch up with them, so the class can go on to something new. Educators know these things. Why do they insist on doing them???
Should the school system have the sole power to channel students into tracks or paths?
No. Regardless of the educator's belief that he knows best, it is the parents who have the moral and ethical responsibility for their own children, their development, and their schooling. Often the parents have good insight into their own children, which is better than that of a bureaucrat.

It is a moral crime:

 Go to Page Contents.
 
What Should We Do Instead?

Tracks (paths) have major advantages, if done right.

 
Students and their parents should be free to choose the path which is likely to be the best one for that student. It is not an automatic or easy process. They should receive help from people explicitly trained to help in making that decision.
 
It should allow for a fairly wide variation of paths.
 
The professional educators (Advocates) assisting the family MUST be able to operate without bias, pressure, or influence from any school.
 
Clearly defined methods for path (track) shifting must be provided.
 
How can we do better? The author believes the design of the new school system proposed on this web page is a good start at reaching a wise solution to our schooling problems.

It is wise because it:

Go to Page Contents.

Socialization Concerns

I can hear it now!
"But Mr. Andrews, its not good to disrupt a student's social life by transferring him between paths."
 
First Point: True, they will complain bitterly that you are destroying their lives. They do that because as children, their point of focus is upon Now. They have difficulty even imagining The Future. But most children are actually very flexible. When The Future becomes Now they usually make new friends fast.
 
Second Point: Given that a disruption in social life does not have lasting effect, and that success or failure in school DOES have a very long lasting effect, moving to a different path makes very good sense!
 
Third Point: Families often move to other school districts, even other cities or states, and the children adapt.
 
Fourth Point: Part of a person's education MUST be to learn to adjust and adapt. If they fail in this, they are likely to have a lifetime of frustration and unhappiness. Isn't it wise to expose them to changes while they are young, and have loving adults around them to guide them to learn how to adjust?

Go to Page Contents.

Implementation
 
Jurisdiction

The largest governmental organization involved in overseeing schools should be the individual state. This allows a rational continuation of the State colleges and university systems, which are integrated with the primary and secondary school systems.

 
If they choose to do so, states can participate in one or more national non-governmental organization. These would function as a channel for coordination between state systems. They can produce non-binding recommendations, and are supported by voluntary levies paid by participating states.

Startup

 
A computer model of the entire system should be built before any implementation begins. The process should begin at the top.
  1. Define the entrance requirements for State University.
  2. Define the entrance requirements for Jr. Colleges.
  3. Define the State Minimum Proficiency Requirements for graduation from Level 12.
  4. Define the entrance requirements for college Prep Level 9.
  5. Define the various paths, K - Level 8. This is not a limiting list!
  6. Define the entrance requirements for the various levels for each path, including Kindergarten.
  7. Write the curriculum for each level of each path which will be the starter set of paths.
  8. Write the curriculum for Advocate training.
  9. Train a cadre of Advocates.
  10. Create the Web Site.
  11. Special training of the teachers. They are major observers of each student.
  12. Start with a few large school facilities, which can support several paths each. Advertise and open for business. These are pilot schools. Use them to refine the system before expanding.

This sort of system should work best in areas of dense population, such as cities and dense suburbs. This makes it easier to provide a wider variety of paths, without requiring long travel times.

Transportation

If bussing is required, children would go to the nearest school, and take a bus from there to the path-school in which they are enrolled.

Schools could have several paths within the same facility. In fact, it should be encouraged. This could help ease switching paths for students. This has already been done in some school systems.

Financing

Financing should initially be done with vouchers. One voucher will pay for the cost of a block of time in any of the schools in the system, including Home Schooling, say for one semester or one quarter. Each school path must support its cost with standard accounting documents before it will be paid for vouchers.

If the system works as designed, the overall cost of education should drop substantially. This will occur because of greatly reduced costs for remedial teaching now required, because of the major inefficiencies now in the system, and the mismatch between the needs of individual students and the teaching methods and services provided. - - - NOTE: In 1998 we spent $65,000,000,000 on the remedial sections of education! That is about $1350 for every student in the country.

After bugs are shaken out of the system and it becomes stable, financing considerations should be reviewed. The ultimate goal is to place separation between the government and schools, thus allowing greater freedom to create diverse school options. The voucher system should have a built in termination clause, such as automatically ending 4 to 6 years after implementation. At that time, taxes should automatically drop by the average cost for education. Parents will pay tuition for the school of their choice, and schools will pay a service fee for school system administration. System administration is open to competitive bid, say every 5 years.

There will be some people who will refuse to pay any of their own money to educate their own children, and will refuse to home school or unschool. Possibly there could be a mechanism wherein a default path is available, paid by the government, wherein only the minimum standards are taught. Those children would receive at least a functional education, while there would still be a considerable incentive for non-dead-beat parents to choose a suitable path for their children.

Evolution

The system should provide for an orderly evolution. One form would be the ultimate separation of school and federal government. At that point is should be illegal for money to flow from the federal governments to local schools.
 
A second form of evolution is of the paths available. This is probably best regulated by market forces. The database and web site proposed earlier facilitates this. Changes in school needs quickly become recognized, along with a measure of the numerical demands present in a geographical area. It provides a direct and almost realtime measure of the changing educational needs. This information would be used to:
  • Form new schools,
  • Discontinue schools,
  • Merge schools
  • Modify schools
  • Split schools into more Paths.
  • Create new Paths.

Page TOP - - - Philosophy of Education Contents - - - Rethinking Education Contents

Master Contents, Material for Educators and Parents
 
 

24 Apr '03