I used to work at an independent bookstore. I loved it. To me it was the essence of what a business should be. It invited in strangers who had like minds. All of the people who shopped there (except for the folks who just lived nearby) shopped there because it was part of the community. The owners lived there, the buyers for the store had an office in the back. If an author had recently had her book of cowboy poetry published by Podunk Press, she could probably get a signing and always have a copy of her book on the shelves.
Taking it back to theatre (as I will do), I prefer theatre to film, because film must appeal to such a huge mass of audiences that it usually waters down the product in order to appeal to more. Theatre can speak to subject matter that appeals to the region of the company. Theatre can speak to matters that might just appeal to a few people.
So, I have a preset idea when it comes to centralizing anything. To me this is synonymous with homogenization ( and thought I am ok with the concept for Milk, I deplore the idea for culture). It speaks of a person or small group of people making decisions for a large group of people they don't know or understand. When were all sitting in an office in New York or Washington DC, who is thinking of Albuquerque, New Mexico? Pretty much no one. To me this is treating education like Starbuck's or worse Applebee's. It assumes that everyone wants bacon on everything (Seriously, Applebee's, what is with all the pork?).
BUT (yes, this blog has a big but)
I also come from a very, very....very small town. The folks there understand the culture of the people in the community and the students. They understand the lingo...they know my dad. Everyone knows my dad. I should also mention that the mom and pop restaurants there use plenty of pork (Seriously, Wagon Wheel, what is with all the pork?) I would not be cool with leaving these people in charge of education either.
Why? Because they have a very limited world view. They are full of biases, misconceptions, and have incredibly closed minds. If left to their own devices, school might become solely about Louisa May Alcott and welding. I say that with love...I type that with love.
So where does that leave me? In a big ole hybrid of the centralized and de-centralized, I suppose. Of course, we need national standards. We need to know that everyone leaving the school system has had a chance to learn many of the same things, but we also need to leave plenty of leeway for curating the educational system for potential regional and cultural differences. Is that kind of what we have now? Is that something we are slowly stumbling toward? I haven't a clue.
But, hey, that dress looks nice on you.
Leonard I am not a big pork eater so I agree with you about why so much pork J
ReplyDeleteI completely agree with you about your viewpoints of education. I feel that you have made good points on both centralized and de-centralized. I like the statement; “To me this is treating education like Starbuck’s…” to relate to de-centralized education. I also like how you related centralized education to theatre. I also feel like I am torn between both centralized and de-centralization of education. The pros and cons for both are strong, perhaps someday there will be equality between them both.
Leonard,
ReplyDeleteI liked reading your blog...you are pretty funny! I do agree with many of you ideas about serving the masses, and providing kind of a cookie cutter education. I guess the perfect solution would be a mix of the two....some local control, and some Federal control. I say this primarily because as parent I think it is really important to ensure that kids in NM are learning the same as kids say in Northern Virginia...a very affluent area. I want all children to be have the opportunity to be exposed to excellent curriculum. How do we do that do you suppose?
Leonard,
ReplyDeleteYou’re post was definitely entertaining and thought provoking. I share a lot of the same conflict about centralization and decentralization of education. Especially when you put it into the context of the “Starbucks” of the world and “homogenization”. I don’t tend to like “cookie-cutter” style anything and so to think of the standardization of education as such definitely has a negative connotation. The hybrid in between. That’s usually where we settle on something as debatable as this. It will definitely be interesting to see how this all pans out over the next decade, but I think we all agree; something has to be changed.
Especially as far as math and chemistry goes, two courses in which there is a certain amount of surety as to what is fact, a national set of teaching standards could be beneficial. In a class like English, there could be some leeway in what is taught, literature-wise, as long as certain other standards are met (like standards pertaining to grammar, vocab, and essay-writing). That way, not every eighth-grade student has to read a "A Rose for Emily," but they should be expected to be ABLE to read and understand "A Rose for Emily."
ReplyDeleteAlso, I think that one of the benefits of a more nationalized school system would be a healthier disperssion of funding around the country, so that kids in poorer areas have the same resources as kids in high-rise penthouses.