Not the Smartest Kids on the Block

Those of us with
the will, the educational insight and the financial wherewithal to make certain
our children are well educated will celebrate Amanda Ripley’s new book, The smartest kids in the world: and how they
got there. I’ve waited for someone to tell the truth about education and
the American culture and family, and Ripley does precisely that. But first, a story
from a few days agoSadly, an interaction with a resident family in my
apartment is typical–and instructive. The family, young and with obvious
financial resources, has a couple toddlers and has decided to buy their first
home. They indicated that they’d looked at the market and decided not to buy in
our older suburb, St Anthony, but move a half-mile into the next suburb, New
Brighton, where they found a newer house they preferred. I couldn’t resist. I
asked whether they’d checked out the distinctions between the two school
systems and they nodded. The New Brighton school system, by Minnesota standards
though once fairly good, has been going downhill for years, and is merely an
adequate suburban system now. Our daughters graduated from it and went on to
the most exclusive colleges in the nation and have all succeeded very well in
their vocations. But my wife, who served as a reserve teacher for years,
learned to her chagrin about the St Anthony system after we’d settled in New
Brighton. It’s easily one of the finest in the metropolitan area and is in a
community that will maintain a high standard. Why, I wanted to ask (but
didn’t), would you buy a home in a second class school system, that’s obviously
on downward skids when you can send your kids to an outstanding system?

I
referenced the issue, but it was obvious that the young father was uninterested
in the conversation. So it goes!
Although my two elder daughters alluded to the failures
of their public school system while they were in college, it was my youngest
who actually set me straight for sending her “unprepared” to a top East Coast college.
Her first year at college was shocking, she said, largely because she was
unprepared for that educational onslaught. She eventually succeeded very well,
gaining a superb education along the way. But she chided me for sending her to
a public school system that was second-rate. I commented that her message was
appropriate, but that we lacked the smarts and the financial wherewithal–at
the time–to do differently.In a NYTimes blog entitled Likely to Succeed, Annie Murphy Paul reviews Ripley’s new book which
details the smarts for the entire American public. It’s her conclusion that
grinds at me. After reporting on three school systems from Europe of which many
of us are knowledgeable, systems in which kids on average outperform us by
startling degrees, she comes to a messy truth. It is a conclusion reflected in my
conversation with the young father: For
all our griping about American education, we’ve got the schools we want.The conflict in
valuesAmanda Ripley has contributed to Time Magazine, The
Atlantic and is now a fellow at the New America Foundation. In her new book she
shows how and why other nations and cultures educate their children so much
more effectively than we do. This does not ignore that fact that we have some
great public and private schools, but they are schools for the few, rather than
the masses. My children have seen to it that our three grandchildren are
gaining a superb education in a Los Angeles suburb (German immersion and
International Baccalaureate), at a famous prep school in Cambridge, Mass and at
an outstanding public junior high school in Lexington, Mass for children with
learning difficulties. But those are all unique situations—limited to location,
personal income and focused on corporate expats.Ripley’s reporting is especially challenging and unique
in that she enlisted “field agents” who could penetrate other countries’
schools, each studying for a year.Finland ensures high-quality teaching from the get-go,
permitting only top students to enroll in teacher-training programs which are
far more rigorous than comparable American colleges.  This rigor is reflected in the work demands
upon all Finnish students. They understand that the only way to graduate from
college and get a fine job is through a culture of rigor. American students, in
contrast, have been able—in the past–to gain a good job without high
achievement. That, of course, has changed, and American students and parents seem
ignorant of those differences. Thus, school work and the educational culture
lack significant rigor.“Rigor on steroids” is the case in South Korea. Korean
education is relentless and excessive, but it also feels more “honest.” The
students know what hard work is all about. In contrast, American students are
typically eased through high school, ill prepared to compete in the global
economy.Finally, Ripley assesses education in Poland. Poland has
scaled the educational heights in “record time” by following the internationals
curriculum: well-trained teachers, a rigorous curriculum and a challenging exam
required of all seniors. One of the American students in Poland nailed the
issue for many American schools: the core
curriculum in American schools is sports. In Poland, sports don’t figure into
the school day, he told Ripley.No wonder Ripley argues that for all our griping,
we’ve got the schools we want. As a consequence, on average American students
are not likely to succeed in the global economy. Hopefully, the insights
generated by her masterly book can generate the will for American schools and
the public to make the necessary changes. But I’m not hopeful.Flickr photo: billy3001 
Link to original post

Uncategorized

Leave a Reply

Not the Smartest Kids on the Block

School
Those of us with the will, the educational insight and the financial wherewithal to make certain our children are well educated will celebrate Amanda Ripley’s new book, The smartest kids in the world: and how they got there. I’ve waited for someone to tell the truth about education and the American culture and family, and Ripley does precisely that.
 

But first, a story from a few days ago
Sadly, an interaction with a resident family in my apartment is typical–and instructive. The family, young and with obvious financial resources, has a couple toddlers and has decided to buy their first home. They indicated that they’d looked at the market and decided not to buy in our older suburb, St Anthony, but move a half-mile into the next suburb, New Brighton, where they found a newer house they preferred. I couldn’t resist. I asked whether they’d checked out the distinctions between the two school systems and they nodded. The New Brighton school system, by Minnesota standards though once fairly good, has been going downhill for years, and is merely an adequate suburban system now. Our daughters graduated from it and went on to the most exclusive colleges in the nation and have all succeeded very well in their vocations. But my wife, who served as a reserve teacher for years, learned to her chagrin about the St Anthony system after we’d settled in New Brighton. It’s easily one of the finest in the metropolitan area and is in a community that will maintain a high standard. Why, I wanted to ask (but didn’t), would you buy a home in a second class school system, that’s obviously on downward skids when you can send your kids to an outstanding system? I referenced the issue, but it was obvious that the young father was uninterested in the conversation. So it goes!

Although my two elder daughters alluded to the failures of their public school system while they were in college, it was my youngest who actually set me straight for sending her “unprepared” to a top East Coast college. Her first year at college was shocking, she said, largely because she was unprepared for that educational onslaught. She eventually succeeded very well, gaining a superb education along the way. But she chided me for sending her to a public school system that was second-rate. I commented that her message was appropriate, but that we lacked the smarts and the financial wherewithal–at the time–to do differently.

In a NYTimes blog entitled Likely to Succeed, Annie Murphy Paul reviews Ripley’s new book which details the smarts for the entire American public. It’s her conclusion that grinds at me. After reporting on three school systems from Europe of which many of us are knowledgeable, systems in which kids on average outperform us by startling degrees, she comes to a messy truth. It is a conclusion reflected in my conversation with the young father: For all our griping about American education, we’ve got the schools we want.

The conflict in values
Amanda Ripley has contributed to Time Magazine, The Atlantic and is now a fellow at the New America Foundation. In her new book she shows how and why other nations and cultures educate their children so much more effectively than we do. This does not ignore that fact that we have some great public and private schools, but they are schools for the few, rather than the masses. My children have seen to it that our three grandchildren are gaining a superb education in a Los Angeles suburb (German immersion and International Baccalaureate), at a famous prep school in Cambridge, Mass and at an outstanding public junior high school in Lexington, Mass for children with learning difficulties. But those are all unique situations—limited to location, personal income and focused on corporate expats.

Ripley’s reporting is especially challenging and unique in that she enlisted “field agents” who could penetrate other countries’ schools, each studying for a year.

Finland ensures high-quality teaching from the get-go, permitting only top students to enroll in teacher-training programs which are far more rigorous than comparable American colleges.  This rigor is reflected in the work demands upon all Finnish students. They understand that the only way to graduate from college and get a fine job is through a culture of rigor. American students, in contrast, have been able—in the past–to gain a good job without high achievement. That, of course, has changed, and American students and parents seem ignorant of those differences. Thus, school work and the educational culture lack significant rigor.

“Rigor on steroids” is the case in South Korea. Korean education is relentless and excessive, but it also feels more “honest.” The students know what hard work is all about. In contrast, American students are typically eased through high school, ill prepared to compete in the global economy.

Finally, Ripley assesses education in Poland. Poland has scaled the educational heights in “record time” by following the internationals curriculum: well-trained teachers, a rigorous curriculum and a challenging exam required of all seniors. One of the American students in Poland nailed the issue for many American schools: the core curriculum in American schools is sports. In Poland, sports don’t figure into the school day, he told Ripley.

No wonder Ripley argues that for all our griping, we’ve got the schools we want. As a consequence, on average American students are not likely to succeed in the global economy. Hopefully, the insights generated by her masterly book can generate the will for American schools and the public to make the necessary changes. But I’m not hopeful.

Flickr photo: billy3001 

Leave a Reply