Rbb Rabbi Aaron Friedman Summary

First, he points out the issue on how inner-city schools are still failing because they are lousy schools that use the same approach each year and still no improvement. Furthermore, science says that students lose ground in the summer, which causes them to lose what they learned the previous school year. Although, science has proven this to be true businesses to use science to better inner-city schools education. In addition to, inner schools failing and losing what they learned poor people are not aware of how critical and important the first three years of brain development. However, wealthy people and educated people are aware of the role of language, stimulus, and response. This causes those who are educated and wealthy children to have an advantage over poor

With landmark Supreme Court decisions in regards to education such as Brown v Board of Education, which made segregation within schools illegal, one would be inclined to believe that modern schools are void of any inequality. However, at a deeper glance, it is apparent that there is a glaring inequality within public school systems at the national, statewide, and even district-wide level. Such an inequality has drastic results as the education one receives has a high correlation to the college they will attend, and the job they will work. It is in society's best interest that public school systems be improved to equally supplement students with the tools necessary to succeed. While the public school system aims to reduce the inequality within it, they have proven ineffective in guaranteeing children of all races and economic classes an equal education.

Cheryl Jorgensen, the work of a scientist-philosopher named Thomas Kuhn in 1962 is referenced regarding disability and competence where Kuhn stated that, “intelligence … can be reliably measured… mental retardation is defined as low levels of intelligence… [these students] … can’t learn much general education content… we aren’t sure that students know, understand, can learn, or have something to say, we presume that they don’t, can’t, and probably never will” (2005, p. 5). Dr. Jorgensen refutes this theory and goes on to support it by citing other works on research suggesting that students with disabilities have shown greater progress when they are challenged with high expectations and good, supportive, nurturing instruction. “Children learn best when they feel valued, when people hold high expectations for them, and when they are taught and supported well” (2005, p.

One of the difficulties in identifying the needs of low-income students is the profound cultural barriers which exist that prevent their strengths and deficits from being identified. Children from low-income homes frequently have poorer vocabularies and a weaker basis of the type of knowledge that is frequently considered 'intelligence' on most forms of assessment. A low-income child's IQ may be high, even though he lacks a framework of accepted middle-class knowledge. "In January 2003, the National Academy of Sciences released a report on the seeming overrepresentation of minorities in special education and underrepresentation of those students in gifted education. The NRC reported that, nationwide, 7.47 percent of all white students and 9.9 percent of Asian students are placed in gifted programs. Meanwhile, 3.04 percent of African-American students, 3.57 percent of Hispanic students, and 4.86 percent of American Indian students are classified as gifted" (GT-minority identification, 2003, ERIC Clearinghouse). The discrepancy, the NAS believed, could not be solely explained by talent alone but was at least partially rooted in the methods of identifying students labeled as gifted. Biases in standardized and other tests identifying student strengths, combined with prejudices, however unintentional, amongst educators and administrators lead to under-identification of the gifted

He then adds that in order for or Nation to accomplish this we would need to use the same sort of selection criteria for pre-college teachers as we do for other professionals such as doctors or college professors. He believes that this would allow for a cutback on unneeded teaching positions to focus on more efficient teaching strategies allowing to recruit the best students as teachers which as he believes, it’s a necessary condition for successful education.

The authors Mike Rose, Gerald Graff, and Charles Murray are all scholars in education. Each one of them brings concrete facts about education in America. They all believe that education is very diverse and that it can come from anywhere not just school. For example Mike Rose writer of the text “Blue Collar Brilliance” explains how intelligence is used more in labor jobs than normal jobs. He believes that intelligence is overlooked. For example he talks about how when he was in his mothers store he would observe and analyze the things around him. He then started to realize the amount of work that waiters do such as communicate with customers, write down orders, and memorize who ordered what. He believes that intelligence doesn't just come from school and that it can be from anywhere. Furthermore Gerald Graff a professor In education argues that what teachers teach to students in schools limit students intellectualism as he gives personal experiences such as topics that were interesting to him he seemed very knowledgeable and therefore his hidden intellectualism was shown. In addition Charles Murray an American Political Scientists writer of “Are too Many People Going To College” talks about how more people should be going to college. He believes that basic education should be taught early on in elementary and middle school. He also mentions that people who don't pursue higher education doesn't mean there intelligence are any less than the ones getting post secondary

Policy makers focus on high test scores to help to fund the schools, not focusing on teaching how the succeeding generation should expand their knowledge and continue to reach for a higher education. Schools focus on reading and mathematics, but the “...educated consumers of schooling want their students to have a full, balanced, and rich curriculum.” These affluent parents want their children to have a more diverse education, including the arts and extracurricular activities. Although this is in more affluent schools, poorer schools are forced into only focusing on the core classes that are required by state for standardized testing since they do not have the resources to do otherwise. In the article, “Still Separate, Still Unequal,” Kozol reads a letter from a student in a poor school, wishing Kozol could “make her school into a ‘good’ school-- ‘like the other kings have’”

In the article “America Needs Its Nerds” by Leonid Fridman, the author is trying to inform his audience about how the US has a lack of support for the extremely smart, and driven people that want to learn and don’t have to be forced. While some of America is acting like the extremely intelligent are different, but in a bad way and should be socially outcasted. It actually should be the other way around. Americans shouldn’t mock or bully the people that strive to learn they should treat them as they would want to be treated. When those people grow up they will most likely be the ones to help America thrive and prosper.

As Horace Mann worked in Massachusetts State Board Education, he thought if poor people receive the education as same as rich people, the society will be “balance”, which is the “revenge of poverty against the rich.”(110) His idea was just a hypothesis at that time because he actually didn’t know how the society would change in next 200 years. For example, nowadays, top 1% of US population control 35% of US wealth, and the 10% controls 73.2%, which means another 90% of US citizens only make 26.8%. Even though in America, all children are able to go to school because of program “No child left behind” in 2001, the wealth of the top 1% hasn’t dropped down for 13 years. Education gives people knowledge, but it doesn’t help them get richer, so education can’t “balance the society”. Students from different classes will go to different schools and receive different education, so how the society can be equalized if the education is not “balance”. According to the book Public School Administration by Ellwood Cubberley, dean of Stanford University, “Our schools are… factories in which the raw products (children) are to be shaped and fashioned… And it is the business of the school to build its pupils according to the specification laid down,” (148) which mean education is turning children into the “pupils,” so the society is able to

I am a proponent of ability grouping. I believe that the best way to make progress is taking students and breaking them up into leveled sections so that they can achieve to their highest potential. To me, this is the only thing that truly makes sense. In an article from Newsweek.com entitled America Hates it's Gifted Kids (2014), by Chris Weller, while No Child Left Behind from 2001 did help to improve the scores of underachieving students across the nation, by some degree, we did terrible things for our gifted students. Many of these were left to fend for themselves. Gifted programs were often unfunded in order to handle the needs being created for underachieving students. When our gifted children may someday become our inventors, engineers, and doctors of the future, why on earth is their education and growth not as important as a student with special needs, or anyone else? We build individualized education plans for students who struggle, those with needs, yet we ignore other special abilities. Why can't we build a plan for them as well? Why don't we build a plan for each student, so that instead of a one-size-fits-all education, we provide a track for all students to run on based on their strengths and weaknesses. In this manner, all can continue to grow. There is nothing that says a student who begins in one group cannot move up. There is nothing that says a student who struggles in math couldn't be a high achieving reader. In the Education Week (2004) article on tracking, the major concern against ability grouping has to do with labels. That the majority of students in low level ability groups are poor and minority, and that ability grouping sets a stigma on that particular population. Yet that is where they achieve! By giving specialized instruction at each individual level, all have a chance to grow, instead of lagging further behind, stagnating, or creating a greater challenge when their unique needs aren't met, and further

Since its creation, America as a whole has prided itself on the ideal that “anything is possible” in a world of equality and opportunities. In truth, the world is not equal in opportunities. It shouldn’t be. Since there exists a disparity in standardized test scores, it may indicate that the richer students are more prepared for increased rigor. Moreover, the poorer student, shall he exhibit a desire to be admitted into an honors program, would ultimately discover a method to improve his scores, since an expensive prep program is not a panacea for lower test scores. The skills tested in standardized tests, such as critical thinking and problem-solving, are often not explicitly taught in normal classroom settings, but instead are developed internally through daily observations. The second student, who may be lacking in these skills, will better perform under a setting at which no additional stress from his status as a distinguished student, whereas the first student has accustomed himself in this situation and can perform well under pressure. As a result, honors program are, in fact, assisting the students by placing them under the ideal situation.

These children are defrauded not just of an education, but also of the ability to be socially mobile. Researchers of the American Psychological Association found that education level directly correlates with socioeconomic status. A lack of education undermines any individual’s true capability, preventing them from surpassing their academic limitations. Potential important figures and world leaders may never come to be if not given the tools to become what they can become. The next generation’s Einsteins and Gandhis will not exemplify their prowesses if never given the rudiments

America is often enamored of itself as the champion of equality in every aspect of its society; however, this is often not the case. This is true in every aspect of life, but is very evident specifically in the American education system. Although America claims to give an equal education to all, regardless of any external factors, economic class often plays a role in what type and how good of an education a student may receive. Since education is the basis for future success, this inequity resulting from socioeconomic status implies that this is where inequality in everyday life starts, and that the system generates this inequality. If this is true, then one might ask, what then is the purpose of education? If economic class predetermines

The Woodson Foundation, a large nonprofit social service agency, is teaming up with the public school system in Washington, D.C, to improve student outcomes. It appears the schools have problems with truancy, low student performance and crime. The teachers are discouraged to help students due to the disrespect and behavioral issues in the classroom. The turnover rate for the best teachers is high, they tend to leave and go to schools that aren’t as troubled (629).

Graff says that putting students in classes in the contemporary system is wasting and limiting students’ potential and creativity (198). Complaining that intellects do not meet the success standard set by schools, Graff proves that schools limit the intellect students can achieve in their academic career (198-199).