Delphi Technique

Reading chapter six of America’s Teachers: An Introduction to Education (Newman, 2006) reminded me of the Barenaked Ladies song It’s All Been Done (Page, 1998). As I read the conflicting sides of each argument regarding education as far back of the Civil War, I kept thinking how none of this sounded new. It’s all been done before, and we are still debating many of the same issues. Newman (2006) put it another way, “Despite promoters’ claims to the contrary, few educational wheels are brand new. Most have been reinvented. Sold to the public as innovations, they are more like retreaded and recycled tires” (p.180). The purpose of education, the way in which education is managed by state and federal governments, and whom we educate (and how) will always be, in my opinion, a hot debate.

Educational policies researcher Joel Spring (1996) discussed many arguments and historical background about various education topics found in the United States. For example, Spring tells us about the historical development of the Common Schools movement and the underlying groups—such as workingmen and political parties—that influenced the movement. In addition, Spring points out some of the implications the movement had on religious, ethnic, and multicultural groups. One particular idea that caught my attention was from the chapter entitled, “The Ideology and Politics of the Common School.” Indeed, my entire conceptual understanding of K-12 education had been predicated on the idea that high schools were part of the original conception of public

In chapter one, Joel Spring covers the topics of the history and political goals of public school. From the beginning of the public school education system politics seemed to have a hand inside public schools. Joel Spring mentions about the controversial goals of education. The main topic for this chapter seems to point towards the political approach to the goals of education. Now not all goals are bad but they do have an underlining that can spark a debate whether it is between the parents, students, teachers, or politicians. Goals such as subject matter, patriotism, should public schools override the objections of the parents over subject matter. A good quote from the book “American Education” is “Education goals are a product of what people believe schooling should do for the good of society.” With such a simple definition of what educational goals are ends up being much scrutinized. Everyone has an opinion sometimes they turn out to be great ideas and other times not.

This is her best supporting statement because it is the most accurate and easiest to verify, just ask any current student or teacher in a public educated school system, higher test scores equal higher ratings for the school. Furthermore, she not only offers a clear and persuasive outline of the various issues facing public educators today, she offers ideas for how to fix those issues. For example, she explains the importance of how parents need to get involved with where they are sending their children to school and need to be the ones to put their foot down with these test score curriculum school systems. Ravitch suggests, “An educated parent would not accept a school where many weeks of every school year were spent preparing for state tests. An educated parent would not tolerate a school that cut back or eliminated the arts to spend more time preparing for state tests” (Ravitch 108). However, this is the area where the reader may disagree with Ms. Ravitch, as the suggested solution, may be her weakest argument because, it seems that a more dynamic solution would not only include the parent, to change the ways the schools are, but more importantly, it would include the student. This only makes sense, as the students are the most vested in this argument and are the ones most impacted by what is going on in the classrooms, if they want change,

John Gatto’s “Against School” is a persuasive essay arguing both the ineffectiveness and negative outcomes of today’s public school system. Not only does Gatto provide credibility with his experience as a teacher, but he also presents historical evidence that suggests that the public school system is an outdated structure, originally meant to dumb down students as well as program them to be obedient pawns in society. Fact and authority alone do not supplement his argument. Gatto also uses emotional appeals, such as fear and doubt, to tear down the reader’s trust in the schooling system. Although it may seem to be so, Gatto’s argument is not one sided. He also offers suggestions to make the educational system more efficient at the hands of

Diane Ravitch is a historian of education at New York University. She makes a very compelling, but extremely one-sided argument that educational reforms such as “No Child Left Behind” are causing students to have lesser opportunities in schools. Her argument is directed towards school boards, parents, and lawmakers who have the ability to change school and state policies on education. She wants those people to believe that the current school system is not effective in giving students a quality education and preparing them for life. Diane Ravitch’s argument brings up a question for readers: Is it beneficial for students when schools cut funding to non-tested subjects? According to Ravitch, most of the schools in the country, except for the ones in the most affluent communities base their

Diane Ravitch, an “educational historian”, answers four questions in her book, Reign of Error. Is American education in crisis? Is American education failing or declining? What is the evidence for reform being promoted by the government and adopted by many states? What should we do to improve our schools and the lives of our children? According to Ravitch, the “crisis” concerning American education is actually a myth. In this book, she addresses myth after myth providing adequate clarity and information. She looks deep into the facts and brings to light what is actually happening in education in America in the following areas: test scores, achievement gaps, graduation rates, teachers and test scores, merit pay, charter schools, virtual school, government involvement of failing schools. In the latter chapters she offers specific solutions with detailed plans and recommendations to preserve and improve American education. Ravitch’s thesis is that American public education must be protected against government privatization and that we must work together to improve our schools. I couldn’t agree more with Ravitch. Government involvement in education has negatively impacted education since the passing of NCLB. Our focus has changed from being innovative teachers to cookie cutter teachers. Government officials should not make decisions without advice from educational professionals. We must all work together to make education work.

“Unintended Educational and Social Consequences of the No Child Left Behind Act” Journal of Gender, Race and Justice, no. 2, Winter 2009, pp. 311. EBSCOhost. In this peer-reviewed academic journal article, Liz Hollingworth, an associate professor in the College of Education at the University of Iowa, explores the history of school reform in the United States, and the unintended consequences of No Child Left Behind (NCLB). Hollingworth states that the great promise of NCLB is that schools will focus on the education of low-achieving students, reducing the gap in student academic achievement between White students and African-American, Hispanic, and Native American student populations. Hollingworth states that an unintended consequence of NCLB was that teachers and school administrators had to shift curriculum focus in an effort to raise test scores, but in some cases, they had to also abandoned thoughtful, research-based classroom practices in exchange for test preparation. NCLB also affected teachers, highly qualified teachers left high-poverty schools, with low performance rates especially those schools where teacher salaries are tied to student academic performance. Hollingworth concludes her article by stating “we need to be wary of policy innovations that amount to simply rearranging the deck chairs on the

Public Education reform has emotional, political, and economic ties due to the impact America endures from the public school system. New American Academy writer Yehudi Meshchaninov writes,

Bush’s No Child Left Behind Act is a renewal of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, which is an aid program for disadvantaged students. Although it does sound as if the Act is helping children all across the country, Alexandra Robbins thoroughly explains otherwise in her book, The Overachievers: The Secret Lives of Driven Kids. Within pages eighty five through eighty nine, Robbins thoroughly shows her negativity to the Act and why it’s hurting children rather than helping them. She uses hard facts, such as the emphasis on tests, altered curricula, and the corrupt college admission process to prove her point.

As Ravitch refers to it “ the national testing ground for market based reforms” (Ravitch, 2010, p. 69) Bloomberg and the new Department of Education implemented balanced literacy, sending in literacy coaches and mathematic coaches to monitor the use of these strict commands. He then created a program called “ Children First”. According to Ravitch it quickly immersed into controversy, stating, “ many teachers complained of micromanagement, since they had to follow the new directives about how to teach even if they had been successful with different methods”(Ravitch, 2010, p. 73). Just like NCLB, teachers were being forced to teach a certain way, which results in students learning one-way, no other options. Ravitch who once supported Bloomberg’s ways, found herself questioning the fact that “ the public was taken out of public education” (Ravitch, 2010, p. 77). This reform program led to more complaints by parents and educators and as a reoccurring issue, many felt that they had no say in what was going on in the classrooms. To exclude the parents from the decisions being made is one thing but to disregard the educators input is ludicrous. The educators are the closest to the children; they work with them everyday. This reform program just led to more labeling of the children and schools, using labels like “ SINI schools (schools in need of

Education is a sensitive subject with a very divisive line. Many strongly believe in the system. Bill Gates stated, “It's hard to improve public education - that's clear.” Others oppose it just as strongly. Friedrich Nietzsche felt, “In large states public education will always be mediocre, for the same reason that in large kitchens the cooking is usually bad.” In Texas, this has always been a concerned issue for parents, teachers, and communities. It is not just a normal topic, but a major political topic, in which the state government has shown continuous efforts to compare and evaluate the standards in which students and teachers must follow. Proper education is now something that is decided for students and

It is common for groups to hold drastically different opinions on the same issue due to different perceptions of the issue at hand. Lindblom describes it in this way: “Social objectives do not always have the same relative values. One objective may be highly prized in one circumstance, another in another circumstance” (1959, 82). As social construction theory would suggest, policy makers employed arguments of equality when advocating for ESSA, “With this bill, we reaffirm that fundamental American ideal that every child — regardless of race, income, background, the ZIP code where they live — deserves the chance to make out of their lives what they will” (Obama 2015). Despite social constructions which view children positively, they have little political power, which oftentimes prevents meaningful beneficial reform from taking place. Rather, policy makers often make symbolic gestures, yet in 2015 public opinion met educational indicators and feedback with regards to educational reform before ESSA (Schneider 1993, 338). Oftentimes, there are competing versions of a problem definition that can prevent a policy from moving forward, but that was not the case in 2015. Diverse groups converged to agree on a problem definition, which was that NCLB was a failed initiative and something had to be done to address

Democrats and Republicans should challenge the No Child Left Behind Act. Even though the No Child Left Behind Act has good intentions to help children, there are many hazardous strategies involved. The No Child Left Behind Act may do more harm than good. The strategies in the No Child Left Behind Act do not contain research evidence to support the law. The No Child Left Behind Act guidelines that were published in December, 2002 by the United States Department of Education, insist that parents of students in poorly performing schools be allowed to transfer them to a different school, even if it causes overcrowding somewhere else.

Public education in the United States is perhaps one of the most critical issues we face as a nation. Once pronouncing the United States as a “nation at risk”, the educational institution began to implement one reform strategy after another. In efforts to improve schooling for K-12 students, education reform has fiddled with class size, revised graduation requirements, and created standardized testing just to name a few. Unfortunately, traditional public schools are still failing to provide students with a quality education. This is disheartening as we learn that the United States lags behind in math and science compared to our international counterparts. It is safe to say that educational reform has spent billions of dollars over the