To continue the discussion we had in class, I would like to bring in the piece by Kitzhaber (257). In this piece, it assesses the "present" (it was published in 1963) state of freshman comp. As we started discussing with the Brereton piece, when English was first being introduced, there are still many flaws in the program. Kitzhaber cites many reasons such as syllabuses going out of date rapidly, "confusion in purpose, content, and organization; inexpert teaching; poor textbooks" as explanation as to the unrest in freshman comp (258). He also makes the note, almost obviously, that these reasons are the same the professors themselves are blaming high school composition teachers for the unpreparedness of college freshmen.
Brereton's subjects knew that the programs they were developing were sub-par, but they were merely getting started, so why, after almost 70 years (the programs he examined began in 1895) are there still these problems? Is it the constant change of the language as we discussed? Is it truly inexperience of professors and teachers? If so, how do we assess these changes and "fix" this problem. Are these issues that are seen at CSU-Pueblo? How are they being addressed?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I see some of the same problems that Kitzhaber saw, but I also see a lot of progress. Writing is not as sterile and removed from reality as it was in his day (although I can't really speak for the freshman comp class). Many modern writing classrooms are alive, engaging students with techniques and technologies that foster great writing.
ReplyDeleteI too saw the same problems, but I also know that they're not universal. I grew up in Wyoming where the standards were much higher than in Colorado (we had to have 36 credits to graduate as opposed to the 21 credits here). But our education system was better because the local economy was stronger due to revenue generated by coal mines, oil fields, and ranching. More money meant the state could pay the teachers better, the schools could afford better equipment, and therefore our quality of learning was better.
ReplyDeleteBut since I've been back in Colorado, I've noticed several problems with the system. There's many devil-may-care teachers who aren't so concerned with providing a good education to children as they are with proving a point to administrators. Parents are not as involved with their kids' education. Kids are not as challenged to succeed, i.e. 1+1=3; you may have answered the question wrong, but that doesn't matter just so long as you feel good about yourself. Teachers have to constantly deal with budget cuts, and oftentimes provide supplies for children out of their own pocket. Many are laid off on a regular basis. Principals are shuffled around from school to school like they're playing musical chairs. And I can list a few dozen other examples, but you get my point.
So I would ask what role the local economy plays in education. Are places where the economy is thriving churning out better prepared students than places where the economy is struggling?
Oh, the local economy plays a huge role as do budget cuts, big decisions to be made by the school board, constant movement of teachers from one grade/area of scholarship to the next. It's absolutely NUTS!
ReplyDeletePicture this: Two schools are side by side. One who's population is 10,000 and has the typical Wal-Mart, mom and pop shops, maybe a strip mall, and is relatively self-sufficient. The other has a population of 2500, a small grocery store, a few gas stations, and its primary economic benefit is the two prisons within the city limits. This second town is reliant on the first town for Wal-Mart runs, any "big city business" (DMV is there, hunting licenses, etc), and town A has a bigger, more economically advantaged school just due to the number of people.
This is the difference that I see on a daily basis -- it blows my mind to hear people say "kids are kids" when we all know that the background of the student is a major driving factor in what takes place in the classroom. So yes -- I believe the local economy plays a huge role in the turnout of the students. Am I going to slack off because of that? HECK NO! I bring my A game every day! :-)
There is a money crisis is education, national and state budgets continue to be slashed even while the costs of education in this technology driven age of learning skyrockets. Writing is one of those things where you never know who's going to be good at it or from where the next great writer will emerge. Even in optimal conditions teaching writing is extrememly challenging. Economically poor schools turn out academically poor students, it's undeniable that this is the norm if not always the rule. Teachers definitely occupy the position of the underdog.
ReplyDelete