CUNNINGHAM: VOC TRACK FAILED, COLL FOR ALL HAS PROBLEMS BUT STW IS VOCATIONAL TRAINING FOR ALL STW HAS OPPONENTS ON THE LEFT \doc\web\98\10\vocall.txt AGAINST STW: Linda Darling-Hammond, John Goodlad, Alfie Kohn, Ann Lieberman, Deborah Meier, and Nel Noddings. Date sent: Sat, 05 Dec 1998 13:32:11 -0500 To: "ClearingHouse" From: "George K. Cunningham" Subject: [education-consumers] School to work Send reply to: "George K. Cunningham" ===================================================================== I am on a lot of different lists in addition to this one. One of these lists is called XMCA, which promotes activity theory and cultural psychology. It is very liberal or maybe radical. One of its members, for example is Ken Goodman, the whole language guru. I usually just lurk, but the subject of school to work came up in the form of opposition to corporate meddling in schools. I sent the following message. the response was mainly supportive. there were a few dissenters who were quickly pummeled by others. It serves to point out how STW is opposed by both liberals and conservatives. For further evidence see the latest issue of Ed Weekly. First of all, there is the front page article that is predicting the demise of STW and a letter strongly criticizing the standards movement (an offshoot of STW). Of course they claim that STW is being promoted by conservatives like those on this listserve, I suppose. It is signed by a whose who of liberal educators: Linda Darling-Hammond, John Goodlad, Alfie Kohn, Ann Lieberman, Deborah Meier, and Nel Noddings. Here is my post to the other listserve. I think everyone realizes that there are many students in the typical high school who are not going to go to college. It seems to make sense that they would be better off if they were educated differently from college bound students. They should instead be prepared for careers, which will begin upon graduation. What wrong with that? It is has been tried and it didnt work. It is the way schools were structured when I was in high school in the early sixties. Group intelligence tests were administered and those with the higher scores were enrolled in chemistry, physics, English literature, geometry, and trigonometry. The students with lower scores took auto and wood shop, business math, typing, shorthand, and home economics. In their senior year they participated in programs which allowed them to work half of the school day in local businesses. No one noticed, or if they did, was much concerned that those in the latter group seemed to come mainly from the lower socio-economic classes. Later when schools were desegregated it became difficult to ignore the fact that most of the students being directed into the vocational track were African Americans. This is why many schools have moved away from these forms of groupings towards preparing all students for academic careers. Educational reform through standards and high stakes accountability, also forces schools to prepare for the same academic tests. If there is a problem with requiring all students to prepare for college, there may be a greater problem with structuring high schools so that they prepare all students for non-college careers and this is what is promoted by nationally mandated school to work programs. In New Jersey there is a great deal of controversy about a proposal set to be implemented next year, that would require all students to select a career from a list 14 government-sanctioned career possibilities by the end of 10th grade. The list of jobs, which is to be determined by a local Workforce Investment Board includes such tantalizing titles as "waste management," "administrative services" and "manufacturing, installation and repair." These boards are created to link schools to the workplace by establishing partnerships with local businesses and industries. All students would be required to work no less than one day per week in the workforce and along with their parents enter into a contract with the school and the employer. Kentucky (my state), like New Jersey has participated in the sharing of the 1.1 billion in grants administered through the 1994 School to Work Opportunities Act. At an open meeting on the subject, a parent asked STW official how these programs would effect her daughter who planned to go to college and then attend medical school. She was told that it is not the role of public schools to prepare students for college and if this was her interest, she should consider enrolling her daughter in a private school. A favorite argument in support of STW is in the form of a rhetorical question. What career would you prefer for your child? That they earn 22 dollars an hour as a plumber with a high school diploma or work in a book store for 8 dollars an hour with a college degree. It is in the form of rhetorical question because it is believed to require no answer. They find it inconceivable that anyone would choose the latter option. ===================================================================== EDUCATION CONSUMERS CLEARINGHOUSE networking and information for parents and taxpayers on the internet Subscriptions & Archives: http://education-consumers.com or You are currently subscribed to education-consumers as: arthurhu@halcyon.com TO UNSUBSCRIBE: Send a blank email to leave-education-consumers-989462S@lists.dundee.net ===================================================================== For less mail, click on the following link and choose 1) a daily digest, 2) a daily list of subjects, or 3) no mail (read postings on Web) http://lists.dundee.net/scripts/lyris.pl?enter=education-consumers For more help & info: http://www.lyris.com/help or The idea of vocational ed for all is the crux of why STW will fail. It is the vocational track of Europe, which has been abandoned by Britain and is crumbling in Germany which is the basis of STW, no other nation proposes vocational education for all students. You can also add "savage inequalities" Jonothan Kozol to the list of progressives against STW. So why can't we mobilize the left against STW and performance based tests that flunk 95% of minorities, and progressive education schemes that leave minorities unable to read or calculate? Date sent: Sat, 05 Dec 1998 13:32:11 -0500 To: "ClearingHouse" From: "George K. Cunningham" Subject: [education-consumers] School to work Send reply to: "George K. Cunningham" ===================================================================== pummeled by others. It serves to point out how STW is opposed by both liberals and conservatives. For further evidence see the latest issue of Ed Weekly. First of all, there is the front page article that is predicting the demise of STW and a letter strongly criticizing the standards movement (an offshoot of STW). Of course they claim that STW is being promoted by conservatives like those on this listserve, I suppose. It is signed by a whose who of liberal educators: Linda Darling-Hammond, John Goodlad, Alfie Kohn, Ann Lieberman, Deborah Meier, and Nel Noddings.