I was at the YMCA yesterday, pushing the old bones through another workout, and a crowd gathered around a TV where Bill Gates was giving a speech.
He was reading the speech the way he does, one shoulder slumped down like a hipster from the 50s. The expensively-crafted words did his work for him. He didn't need to work to sing. It's good to be king.
And his message was simple. High schools suck. The words were repeated gleefully as far away as Beijing. "When I compare our high school with what I see abroad I am terrified for our work force of tomorrow."
Both my kids are in high school, Bill, and I'm terrified too. But platitudes won't get it done. Neither will all your money.
As the Waltons are finding with their own education initiatives, the problem goes much deeper than that. The Wal-Mart founding family, which together has a fortune that puts your own in the shade, Bill, has worked for years on "systemic reform in education, with special emphasis on primary and secondary education." They have given heavily to charter schools in Arkansas, a total of about $200 milllion in the last few years, and achievement has kept going down anyway. Most of their money has gone to Arkansas, their home state, which still ranks 36th in education.
Which states rank highest? Blue states, Bill -- Massachusetts and Connecticut and Vermont and New Jersey. States where the citizens are willing to tax themselves heavily, buy the best education talent at every level, and teach science.
All your money, all the Waltons' money, is just a drop in the bucket. What's needed here is political will. Until parents value education enough to pay for it, and get well-trained professionals to do it, nothing will happen.
Achieving that political will, however, means challenging and defeating the enemies of learning. I'm talking about parents who object to every controversial topic, preachers who insist on teaching their creed ahead of real science, jock-sniffers who think schools exist to create sports stars, trade groups who want their political aims taught as revealed truth, and politicians who cater to these attitudes by teaching to tests, by emphasizing "values," and by dumbing-down the curriculum.
The struggle of class, against class, of making a better class and a classier graduate, is a political struggle, Bill. A political struggle.
And the sooner you realize that, the sooner you see who your friends and your enemies are here, and the faster you wipe that smirk off your face thinking $100-200 million is going to get the job done, well the better for all our kids. Including yours.
Dana Blankenhorn has been a business journalist for over 25 years and has covered the online world professionally since 1985. He founded the "Interactive Age Daily" for CMP Media, and has written for the Chicago Tribune, Advertising Age, and dozens of other publications over the years.
1. Jon Lowder on February 28, 2005 05:19 PM writes...
What is amazing to me is how many people buy into the notion that by throwing money at the education problem we'll make it better.
If how much money being spent on schools was a true barometer of success, then the D.C. schools would out-perform their suburban neighbors by a long shot.
The truth is that while money does have an impact the most important factors in a school's success are home life first, and parental involvement in their childrens' education.
Beyond the obvious importance to the children, a school that has heavy parental involvement also has a greater level of accountability for teachers and staff. Basically, if a teacher doesn't perform they quit or transfer to get away from the harassment doled out by those attentive parents.
Unfortunately many parents don't have the desire to be involved, or perhaps they don't understand the potential impact of their involvement. With their apathy they allow their schools to harbor teachers who prove the old axiom, "Those who can't do, teach."
My personal opinion is that teaching is a job that offers the greatest chance for influence. If you do it well you literally impact dozens of people per year for the rest of their lives.
I would argue that if we are to throw money at the problem it should not be spent on facilities, but on people. Attract the brightest with high salaries and train them to help children overcome their own roadblocks. Give them a warm room, some paper, pencils and good texts and let them work their magic. Then we can worry about computer labs, new science facilities, etc.
This last comment comes from a life-long jock: get sports out of the schools. Let clubs, Little Leagues, etc. carry that weight. (Note: Sports does not equal physical fitness). Let the schools use the freed resources for their core mission.
Permalink to Comment