I grew up in Princeton, NJ and attended elementary school in the early 1960s. At the time, we students were prime candidates for research, and we were exposed to numerous studies and tests in our classrooms, conducted by local research groups and the university. I can remember what seemed like crazy experiments - one in particular presented each student with a block of square paper, much like those note blocks we have on our desks today, with about 500 sheets. Each sheet had two black boxes. One box had an x when erased; the other had nothing. We were given an eraser and asked to erase at random - all 500 sheets! I remember my 5th grade brain thinking, “what is THIS all about?!”
However, one great experiment was to begin teaching us a second language in 2nd grade. We began French, first with short lessons in the main classroom, and then full classes followed. By 8th grade, I was near-fluent. I went on to study a number of other languages in high school and college, and to this day, I have an ease in picking up vocabulary, accents, etc.
The article linked above chronicles research done by Northwestern University that indicates the many advantages to raising bi-lingual children, even a delay in Alzheimer’s.Most interesting, though, is that speaking multiple languages actually fine-tunes our nervous system.
This is compelling evidence for why all schools in the US should be teaching a minimum of two languages from kindergarten on - not to mention that being bi-lingual will add to one’s global assimilation.
Cecelia Kang of the Washington Post visited two Washington area private schools, Flint Hill and Washington Waldorf to observe and compare technology use. Flint Hill is using technology extensively as a resource in classes. Washington Waldorf is using little technology, believing hands-on experiential education is best - technology can come later.
I would weigh in somewhere in the middle. We need to remember that technology is a tool to support learning, not drive it. We also need to prepare our students to be tech-proficient as they move to college and the working world. To do otherwise is irresponsible. However, the offset multi-tasking and an inability to research beyond google, hands-on, experiential education is equally as important. The ability to take simple props and to creatively think through problems is a skill all employers will be looking for in the future - the ability to manipulate, collaborate, create, synthesize, take risks, etc. will be the expected skills of future employees - and, can students learn this if they rely completely on technology and the internet?
Marion Brady blogs about the Common Core and how it is misaligned with the needs of the 21st Century.
http://www.edweek.org/ew/articles/2012/05/16/32collegeboard.h31.html
David Coleman will begin in October as the new College Board Head. Though it is wonderful to see an educator take the helm of the CB, his focus on changing the SAT will raise a number of questions. With a desire to revamp the SAT to align with the new Common Core Standards, Mr. Coleman has the world of charter and independent schools concerned. The outcry has focused on everything from the role of the new SAT in college admission, to the CB continuing to make its mark as the future, unelected “school board” of American education, to whether this is simply further embedding standardized testing as the measure of a good education.
Currently, the SAT is an aptitude test, versus the ACT, which is an achievement test. If the SAT moves in the direction of aligning with the Common Core, it would seem this means a fundamental change from aptitude to achievement? If so, why would we not just use the already well-established and growing-in-popularity ACT?
If this change in the SAT occurs, will college admission offices set a different standard for charter and independent schools? Or, will we see the number of test-optional colleges continue to grow?
From Fox Business:
http://www.foxbusiness.com/personal-finance/2012/04/27/private-school-education-worth-cost/
This article approaches the above question by sharing tips for financing a long-term commitment to tuition at a private school. An increasing number of parents are taking out loans as early as the lower school grades, raising concerns about long-term debt and the ability to eventually pay for college.
As the product of a private school education (Princeton Day School), with sibling graduates as well (Lawrenceville, PDS, Miss Porter’s), and a private school husband (Loomis Chaffee), and finally, a private school son (Gilman), I have seen first hand the benefits of investing in private education, especially during the teen years.
From my own experience as a student and a parent, I can say, without a doubt, that the skills learned in private school carry over to one’s career. Confidence, the ability to speak in public, a foundation in the classics, exposure to technology, the ability to collaborate in the classroom, on the stage, on the field, and a healthy sense of how to work with a diverse population of people, both young and old, and an active network of alumni/ae mentors produce the holistic experience necessary to be a successful adult. The college experience truly becomes just the icing on the cake. In fact, the skills I see my son exhibit in the work world can be traced back to his high school education more so than his university experience.
In 34 years of private school teaching, I have also witnessed this in my students, no matter what their socio-economic background.
So, is the tuition worth the investment? Yes, it is. Can students receive the same quality education at a public or charter school? Yes, they can. The difference lies in the consistency of a private education’s outcomes. All children benefit, not just the ones in the gifted/talented or college prep programs.
A parent just sent me a link to a blog entry on Momastery:
http://momastery.com/blog/2012/04/23/bragging-rights/
I read this post on parents’ bragging rights and found myself thinking back to my own experiences with this. I had a friend who brought stories about her “gifted” daughter into every conversation, whether the topic was related or not. It even got to the point where she suggested some of us should enroll her daughter in our school so we would have a future National Merit Finalist. All her bragging caused us, her friends, to roll our eyes and begin to shut out what she was saying. And, in the end, when her daughter did not live up to all the bars her mother had set, it was heart-breaking to listen to the mother search for other minor gifts to highlight.
However, the impact of this was probably not great for me. I found myself doing just the opposite. As I worried about my son not reaching his potential, I now realize I all-too-often did not recognize the areas in which he was “gifted,” or more accurately, a “natural.”
Today, as a young man with passions and an incredible commitment to social justice, I am proud of my son. And, what do I find myself doing? When asked what my son does, I brag. Wow - I never thought I would get there. It’s probably good I don’t belong to Facebook. At least at this point, I only brag when asked!
A short article in The Week ties strong working memory skills to IQ to daydreaming.
Two interesting articles about Facebook.
The first talks about Facebook as a resource for tracking potential depression/suicide in adolescents and college students. The article suggests that as many as 40% of college students post what the American Psychological Association would cast as depressive or suicidal thoughts on the social network site. College personnel are paying closer attention to this phenomenon.
Jump to the second article which describes a new app that can be synced with Facebook to allow an enemies designation as an opposing option to friending. Personally, the thought of this app gives me, as an educator, the chills. The thought that this could be an added tool to an already mine-ridden field of social networking adolescent drama simply ramps up the chances of students choosing self-harm in response to comments they cannot control.
wonderful description of the skills needed in today’s world
There were two education pieces in The New York Times, both posted on my birthday, that addressed the current issue of the influence of colleges on high school curriculum and the impact of privilege on college admission. Both of these topics are near and dear to my heart.
About a year ago, I organized a small conference for local independent school educators and local directors of admission (from prestigious liberal arts colleges) to view and discuss the film Race to Nowhere. After the conference, I wrote a short opinion piece based on what I had heard that day. I post it here below because, despite the fact I know many editors, no one was willing to publish this controversial piece. I welcome your comments.
Money, Money, Money
It’s driven by the money. Sound familiar?
A group of about 50 independent school faculty and administration gathered in a Mid-Atlantic city to discuss the implications of the hot new indie documentary, The Race to Nowhere. Though the film does not reveal anything new to those of us in the trenches every day, it has created a grassroots conversation that is spreading like wildfire across the country and especially in communities with competitive independent schools and well-heeled public schools.
On the surface, the concern is a genuine one for the health and wellness of our next generation. With the drive to excel and to build a stellar, while also unique, résumé, high school students are sleeping less, suffering from anxiety, and simply counting the days until graduation and that keenly sought college acceptance that will sport a prestigious sticker on the back window of the Mercedes or Volvo. As families consider private schools, parents with students as young as first grade are eyeing a school’s college list and are touring the upper school facilities. And for those schools who have replaced AP courses with rigorous electives? Have they seen a change in the stress? Not really. As colleges beat the mantra drum of taking the most rigorous program your high school offers, students still seek the most competitive classes, as many as they can handle, even if it means giving up Saturdays and Sundays and sleeping a maximum of five hours a night. Give up drama? Give up crew? Stop doing community service in a far away land? Never. All of this, and more, is necessary to stay in the game.
So, why do I say it’s all about the money?
We all recognize the rat race we have created. We all, in our hearts, want our children to have their childhoods back. We all know that many students are simply memorizing to master tests rather than thinking critically and deeply. We all know that anything less than a B+ often becomes a crisis. We want it to stop.
But then enter Bond Ratings. Want to build a new health and wellness center on your college campus? Want a new dormitory, academic center, concert hall? Well, that loan will depend on your bond rating. And, the bond rating is partly determined by the health of your admissions yield, and that will depend on your rankings, and that will depend on the percentage of applicants to admits and enrolls, and that will depend on how successful you are in attracting students to your campus and thus, to apply. No wonder a dean of admission from a prestigious small liberal arts college says, “I am no longer just an admission officer, I am a spammer.”
But, no one is to blame. The high schools tell the colleges that they are the tail wagging the dog. The colleges tell the high schools, “if you change, we will have to respond and change, too.” The real problem, though, is who will be brave enough to take the first step? Who will risk the potential drop in enrollment in a tight economy?
We all want healthy, happy, successful children, but until we redefine what success means, and until we are willing to cut the umbilical cord of upward mobility, excess consumption, and the badge of honor in saying, “Oh, my son plays lacrosse at Princeton,” we are risking a future where the next generation of young adults will learn their race has truly been to “nowhere.”
