After reading the part about innovations that were once considered deliberate reforms were eventually not seen as reforms because they were so pervasive, it not only made me think about all the things where currently that is the case, but in 10 years from now what innovations or recent implementations will be taken off of our current ”scoreboard of successful changes”? Tyack & Cuban gave the example of blackboards once being praised as a magical new technology which were eventually green chalkboards, then in some places the dry erase boards, and now we have SMART boards or Promethean boards. In 10 years, will the new technology of the interactive boards not be considered a highly successful innovation anymore? I think in some areas they will be but in York County there is a good possibility they won’t which is definitely attributed to the “uneven penetration of reforms” that Tyack and Cuban talk about. I also think it all comes down to who has the resources and who doesn’t. Even within York County, each districts’ resources vary. I went to Clover High School years ago and as students we had everything we needed. Other schools, within a 30 mile radius, were struggling for text books and we probably had extra. I ran across a student in another class last semester that currently teaches in Clover and she made the comment that sure she would make more money teaching in NC but didn’t think she could give up the luxuries she currently had. They all have an interactive board in their rooms but even less than 10 miles away in Rock Hill that’s not the case. Less than 20 miles away in Charlotte, schools are struggling for basic supplies much less a luxury like that. I would think the fact that not all schools have the ability or resources to implement new ideas, practices, and technologies at the same rate greatly impacts reform. And what about those schools that can’t do it at all? Are they just left behind? With classroom instruction being where most people want improvement, if they can’t afford the basics much less the latest technologies then how do you justify criticizing the teacher or the instruction?
Another point that caught my attention in the text was that in 1972 most people believed that in order to get a better job and make more money you needed secondary schooling. Now it doesn’t stop there. You need a masters degree to get a better job and make more money.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
This is a good reading analysis post, Allison. It demonstrates an understanding of the concepts in the reading and applies them in another context.
I really liked your post, Allison, and wanted to add a bit to it. I think that even within certain districts or counties, schools are unevenly distributed resources. I went to a uniform school that consisted of 97% white population and a 3% minority population. A school in the same district, no more than ten miles down the road had a much higher minority population and free-reduced lunch. With your post, I made the connection that even teachers within my school would NEVER go to teach at the other school. My high school did not lack in any resources while the other school's building was falling apart. Does that have anything to do with the distribution of population? I think so. With pride people would talk about how our school is much better, rather than be upset that one school was delegated many of the newest resources and best teachers. Obviously the other school was struggling and could have used many of our excess resources. Even within districts, administrators should equally distribute resources, money, and teachers if we want to bridge the achievement gap that exists.
Post a Comment