As I read Andrew Delbanco's story on the "Scandals of Higher Education" I became angry myself with our academic system in the United States. I feel that the wealthy are able to send their children to higher caliber colleges and universities because they have the money to get them to that point. For example: These parents can send their children to the best private schools with the best college guidance counselors and best SAT prep tutors. The system, in a sense, is rigid to serve the wealthy because these students are better equipped to attend Harvard, Yale, or Princeton, for example. Delbanco described his thoughts on these colleges recruitment status, "Our richest colleges could and should do a better job of recruiting needy students, which would require spending more money on the effort to find and support them." I agree with this statement completely. Some of these students may be attending private high schools on scholarship or an everyday public high school, but regardless, it needs to be recognized that these kids are capable of the Ivy's academic arena. The collegiate system is getting tougher to get into as the years go by and I was happy to see that this article recognized that and supported view points that go against the norm of society.
Andrew Delbanco, through the utilization of a variety of essays, conveys an underlining problem within the university system.Colleges are failing to provide an equal opportunity to students of disadvantageous upbringings.The elite campuses of America remain a stronghold for wealthy Americans, while erroneously proclaiming equality in regards to the application process.Qualified students are being left behind.The blame is not solely the universities, but can be attributed to the society we live in today.
The college admission process is complicated, often leaving students in a vague grey area in regards to top-flight school.The process is neither fair nor unfair to all students.Standardized tests, once thought to be the great academic equalizer, reveal the systems problems.Universities publish reports of the median scores of its accepted students.According to these scores, students can gauge their possibility of admission.The system rewards good scores.Good scores can be obtained by anyone, but not everyone.Wealthy students score higher due to the resources available to them, so elite schools are riddled with privileged students. Not to stay that they are not qualified, but a test score is not the only marker of intelligence and often discredits qualified students.Society is consumed with the importance of numbers.Whether test score, ethnic, or gender diversity colleges are expected to portray themselves as being a place of equality in regards to educations.
The removal of standardized testing, however, is not the solution to the growing class disparity.The intent of the test is to indicate natural ability, and give an opportunity to students from poor high schools.
I sympathize for the deans of admission.Applications struggle to convey the entire person, which makes the decision process difficult.I do not believe in any quick solution to this problem, and question where the middle class comes into this debate.
So many people are disgruntled over the current system, but it is what we have. Play the game.
Most of the time when I think about the stereotypical poor slums of Chicago I think about gangs and violence and a poor learning community. I'm guessing most people probably think the same thing. Reading this story I find it amazing that these fifth graders care about their school. Most kids that attend schools that are run down and dirty don't normally care about their education. If I had to go to a school like that I probably wouldn't care about my education either. If the government doesn't care enough about my education to give me a decent learning environment why should I care about my education either. It's incredible that these kids care enough about their school to try and make a difference. The other part of the article that interested me was the teaching style of Brian D. Schultz. I think it's a lot easier to learn when you can related it to your own life. Towards the end of high school the English classes started adopting a new style. For every story we read we had to write a couple sentences about how we could relate the story to our life, to another story, and to the world. I think that learning style definately helped me connect with the story which in turn raised my grade. I think it would be beneficial to all students if teachers tried relating the work that we do to the real world so we could better understand it.
Living in Delafield, Wisconsin, a suburb of Milwaukee, I knew I was very fortunate to be provided with the opportunity to get a great education. As far as school systems are concerned, all I really knew was that as you approached inner city Milwaukee schools, the quality of education definitely went downhill. Until reading this article, I had not realized the extent of the conditions of such schools.
I agree with Mr. Schultz that social class is a determining factor in the way students are taught. This is sad but true. I was appalled by the statements of the conditions of the students’ school. Just hearing about the children not having an adequate learning facility made me empathize with them. The poor conditions of the building were injustices to the students. There was no way the students should have had to be expected to further their knowledge and learning experience in such conditions. I found Mr. Schultz’s notion that “the role of a teacher is to provide opportunity and space to students. A teacher must ultimately embrace intelligence, allowing students to leverage what they know, and what they already can successfully accomplish.” to be a very powerful statement. Mr. Schultz knew what the children needed in order to learn, and he wanted to be able to provide this for them. He wanted the students to use their imagination, creativity, and interest to develop a love for learning.
It is true that all students deserve to receive good instruction, dedication, and nurturing from reliable resources. These resources are the schools. The statement from Tavon, “We think everyone should have a good home and a good school. Don’t you agree?” came across as very strong. That shouldn’t be something a child should have to fight for. It should be something that the child can take advantage of in order to prosper and better themselves as a person. The students needed this school setting in order to demonstrate and practice their intelligences. I found it remarkable how eager the students were to pursue this problem of their falling down school. They wanted to know how they could influence change. They knew that they deserved an equal opportunity to have a great school.
It was really mindboggling to realize how much the students wanted to learn once they were learning about a topic that affected them and they were passionate about. Their goal was to make a difference in their learning facility, and be equipped with a good school. This ultimate shared goal united the students to work together and seek accomplishment. I am proud of the students for writing so many letters to representatives and showing them everything that was wrong with their school and why they deserved a new one. I applaud them for never giving up on their goal and continually trying to influence the ultimate decision makers.
In the scheme of things, a decent school is absolutely nothing to ask for. It should be assumed. All children are entitled to one and deserve to be provided the opportunity to get a good education. I thought it was true that even though the students did not get their new school, they had already won by fighting for something they believed in and accomplishing multiple improvements within the school. The students’ confidence and willingness to work toward their goal was extremely impressive for a group of 5th graders. I was intrigued by the concept of “superb alternatives” and like the sentence, “They needed to know that while they were fighting for what they believed in, they were accomplishing, receiving, and experiencing ‘superb alternatives’ even if they did not get the perfect solution.”
The students put forth an incredible amount of effort towards spreading the word and getting others involved. They took on leadership roles. The numerous letters supporting the students and encouraging them, as well as replying to letters the students sent, was shocking. I couldn’t believe that the group of 5th graders had spread the word the way they did. I thought the happiest part of the outcome was that the students began believing in themselves and realizing their capabilities. It is true that “Now awakened, the young peoples’ intelligence and inspiration, interest and imagination, certainly drove their learning.” Student interest definitely contributed to their success. The project of working towards a new school was important to them. I believe that this article and education can be concluded by the line, “The students were given the prospect and responsibility to be active participants in the development and design of their own learning, fostering an ‘enabling education.’”
I saw Living Savage Inequalities as an eye-opening story about the democracy of education. Brian D. Schultz’s idea of letting his eleven-year-old students set the curriculum for the class seemed risky, but ended up being nothing short of genius. The students in Schultz’s class were forced to think outside of the textbook norm for the first time, and chose a problem that they all cared deeply about: improving their school.
I think that this is a prime example of how education is an inevitable experience that is most valuable when it isn’t forced upon someone. The students in classroom 405 transformed from unmotivated and unprepared to willing and motivated, and it was because the criteria directly related to them. These underprivileged children all of the sudden were learning how to “prepare documentation including their survey results, photos, and written assessments.” Attendance and discipline were no longer an issue and they were operating above their previous level. I don’t believe that any of this would have happened if Schultz didn’t give them the opportunity take leadership and apply what they were learning to their everyday life.
I thought the article "Living Savage" gave great insight into the underpriveledged school systems of America. Large cities, such as Chicago, Milwaukee, Detroit, and others continue to be racially segregated, in not just neighborhoods, but obviously schools and important places. The article highlights the broken school systems of these large cities extremely well by describing the 5th graders situation. It's upsetting that elementary school kids have to fight for what should be rightfully theirs in the first place, which is a safe and sanitary environment to learn in. I think it's incredible that 5th graders are learning about their government and petitioning at such a young age. Their teacher gave them a wonderful opportunity to learn, achieve, and create change for themselves. The knowledge they will aquire will surely not go to waste.
On the other hand, I wonder what kind of education they have to sacrifice in order to fight for a better school. I wonder how much math and science they can learn with the remaining time, drive, and yearning for knowledge they have left over from their main goals. While their efforts for their school is applaudable, I hope they still have the opportunities to be like any other 5th grade student. I hope they are able to learn about multiplication, division, and about scientific things, like the ecosystems and what molecules are. At the same time, I wonder if they are able to learn mathematic and scientific concepts, how useful these concepts would be within their lives.
I chose to reflect on this reading because I felt that the opinions of Patrick Allitt were ones with which I agreed firmly. The statement "I think more American colleges should offer the chance to specialize right from the outset to those students who want it" is very agreeable because some people know exactly what they want to do and know what they are passionate about. Like Allitt says, the American system is unlike the British because the student has to pay for those costs of education since they are benefiting from the education. If we are paying thousands of dollars, we should be able to choose if we want to specialize right away rather than having general education classes, considering we have to deal with the costs.
On the other hand, students also should have that choice to take general classes if they are undecided on a major, which is where I stand. Personally, I have no idea what I plan to major in, so taking a variety of classes has helped eliminate some possible ideas I've had for majors as well as sparked interests. All in all, I agree that there should be that choice of having early specialization.
One other point I wanted to touch on was the topic of college applications. In America, you cannot simply rely on academics and the grades you got in high school to be accepted into top colleges. Allitt makes the point that his daughter was encouraged early on to join many extracurriculars, anything that will make her stand out above just academics. While I do agree that people should be accepted on more than just grades, the extent is almost ridiculous. A lot of the clubs at my high school ended up with students who really did not care what the club was about and did not participate to their fullest potential. They would just join to be able to put it on their college applications and make themselves "look good". Just an interesting thought I guess.
