July 2008

Sun	Mon	Tue	Wed	Thu	Fri	Sat
		1	2	3	4	5
6	7	8	9	10	11	12
13	14	15	16	17	18	19
20	21	22	23	24	25	26
27	28	29	30	31

The great enemy of the truth is very often not the lie -- deliberate, contrived and dishonest, but the myth, persistent, persuasive, and unrealistic. Belief in myths allows the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought.

-John F. Kennedy

Florida High Schoolers Could be Required to Declare a Major

Would it make sense to ask high school students to have more freedom and control over their own studies? I recognize that for most students, one of the worst parts about being in high school is the lack of control over their own curriculum. It really doesn't matter how much you hate math, poetry, or phys ed. You are going to take it. Is this paternalism? Or is it a realistic requirement when providing children with an education? To what degree could 13-year old could be expected to map out an education plan for themselves? Can we expect that children that age know what is best for themselves?

Legislation that unanimously cleared the Florida Senate Education Committee last week would require incoming high school freshmen to declare a major and a minor course of study. I think there are some obvious problems with this plan, and I would like to see how they will be addressed.

1) What majors will be offered? They will have to be pretty broad, because some schools won't have the resources to offer more than a basic "math and science", "social sciences", "arts and humanities" option.
The Bradenton Herald reports that vocational coursework would count - "fields like carpentry or auto repair."

The district in which I teach (in Virginia, not in Florida) is big enough to offer a math/science center, a foreign language center, an IB program, and a lot of vocational opportunities - but that's a big district with a relatively flexible budget. Let's not kid ourselves into thinking that all of these kids will be able to pick bioinformatics. What will be the bare minimum a district would have to offer under this law, and how is that bare minimum different from the current required courses? There is a possibility this will just be an extra stack of files in the guidance department for many rural schools.

2) What if a kid wants to change majors? At the college level, this is easy enough. Worst case scenario is that it takes you longer to get your degree. So if a high school junior says that she feels she was misinformed about what "social sciences" entails, and she wants to switch to a hard science major, do you tell her "no"? Do you tell her she will graduate high school a year late? Obviously, the answer to these two questions will have to be "no". So what exactly is the point of calling it a "major" if it is really just an opportunity for students to pick and choose their classes?

3) What minimum competency would be required in the core classes? I suppose districts could default to the federal standards of minimum competency in math and ~~English~~ language. If you think the bare minimum is enough, then ok. But some people choose to learn more and we encourage that, ok? You do want to express yourself, don't you?

It is my understanding that many other countries have a system like this for their public schools. In particular, I have had several scientists and engineers from Germany tell me that they were separated from students with other interests by age 14. Provided that this is voluntary on the part of the student, this seems like an idea with potential. I would love to hear from any readers who are more familiar with a comparable working system.

And for you libertarian readers who would say "this, too, would be best addressed by privatization of all schools", please answer the question of what subjects must be studied under the Florida plan, or under total privatization. Are you so libertarian as to support a parent's freedom to send their child to madrasses? I am not just playing devil's advocate - I feel that question to be at the heart of the issue of unmotivated students in public schools, which is exactly the problem this Florida bill hopes to address.

Posted by Wulf on April 12, 2006 at 01:07 PM

Trackback Pings

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.atlasblogged.com/cgi-bin/mt/mtb.cgi/266

Comments

No requirements is a non-starter. It would never pass political muster. From a philosophical standpoint I have no issue with schools having complete lattitude in choosing curriculum.

From a practical standpoint, basic algrebra, composition (or some form of written communication), US Constitution, and generic science (maybe a quarter each of biology, physics, chemistry and something else) would be the bare minimum.
Most would include American history and basic world history.
I'll guarantee that physical education will be included though I don't think it should be.
I'd love to see basic econ and basic computer ed (word processing and spreadsheets), but I doubt they would be.

Anything beyond those core items, I don't think students actually retain any knowledge if they aren't interested in the subjects.

Posted by: Chris at April 12, 2006 4:37 PM

Chris, I think you might be surprised WRT the computer skills. Most schools have computer requirements and would not be interested in reducing them.

Personally, I definitely think PE should be a requirement for all students. I feel this way for several reasons, including (but not limited to) the fact that it is shameful that our schools graduate students who are so out of shape that they cannot even be accepted to military or police training. See
this post.
There is also the fact that kids who do not get exercise have more difficulty paying attention. Athletic rigor helps academic rigor.

I haven't seen much on this in the teaching blogosphere, but I think it is a story that deserves more discussion.

Posted by: Wulf at April 13, 2006 4:36 PM

I woudl imagine that most people would agree with you on PE, but for those that truly detest PE (I was not one of those) forcing them to take it isn't going to do much good. I think that the core curriculum should stick with those things that are essential in the real world and I just don't see PE being one of them.

Even if we graduated only Hard Bodies, those that choose not to exercise would be reduced to gibbering bodies of jello in no time. The ridicule and embarrasment that some feel in PE doesn't seem worth it IMO.

Posted by: Chris at April 16, 2006 12:15 AM

I definitely understand that point of view. And I think it needs to be addressed in the curriculum.

My wife has very poor depth perception. She has long argued that if PE is mandatory, there should be an option to take a class that does not involve projectiles. I am not sure how many horrific childhood dodge-ball experiences combined to build this opinion, but it, and yours, are totally legitimate. A program that permits weight training or even an hour of constant walking would be better than canceling PE.

I think part of the problem with PE (and math, and art) is that many students are only taught that they suck at it. They aren't really taught why it is important, or how they can come to love it, or how they can improve their skills dramatically.

(Disclosure: I was one of those art students. I repeatedly passed art solely on the basis of having an "A" in everything else. I resented having to take it, and I was mocked pretty heartily. Stupid art classes!)

Posted by: Wulf at April 16, 2006 8:36 AM

The great enemy of the truth is very often not the lie -- deliberate, contrived and dishonest, but the myth, persistent, persuasive, and unrealistic. Belief in myths allows the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought.

-John F. Kennedy

Florida High Schoolers Could be Required to Declare a Major

Trackback Pings

Comments

Post a comment