Friedman (2010) really struck me when he stated "Let's get out of the way and let the moderate majorities there, if they really exist, face their own enemies on their own. It is the only way they will move and we can be the wind at their backs, but not their sails." This is something that I have been saying since the bombing of Serbia in 1999 when I was here living at that time. So much money was wasted on the fight between Serbia and Kosovo by NATO, but nothing was accomplished there.
Spending money on our military to solve problems in other countries is only making us a more troubled and uneducated nation in itself. By trying to "help" other nations, we are investing our hard earned, well-deserved money on someone else's land. We need to invest in our own home and our people instead of trying to solve everyone's problems. By spending like this, it takes away resources and focus from the development of our nation and our future goals, young leaders, and stimulating growth in education. Can you imagine taking away the money as Friedman stated from the Pentagon and putting it back into our schools? Imagine the things we could do in teaching our future innovators and problem solvers and world leaders...
What can educators do without funding from the government? This is the question that comes to mind when I think about what we can do at a local, state or national level. I believe educators themselves are trying to do as much as we can for our students, but we can only go so far with our hands tied behind our backs. Funding for science programs are not consistent across the nation, and perhaps students who are going to private schools are better off than the rest of the population. This is a mere small population.
We need to first come up with a program that would stimulate young people within and outside schools, get funding from local congressmen and create science initiatives. What I would recommend is that we introduce a mandatory science coordinator from K-6 in order to present Elementary teachers with the support they need to implement science into their curriculum successfully. This may help to release the pressure off teachers who are not familiar or comfortable teaching many of the main concepts that young children should understand. Science should be a fun and rewarding experience for people of all ages. I believe this support system would have a ripple effect in Education, students would feel more free to experiment, explore and not afraid of science, the teachers as well. This could in fact create a new situation where WE, the United States, produce the next Sputnik situation for others around the world.
I believe that the United States STEM educators are on the road to improvement, but we have a very large road block ahead of us because the US as a whole are not on the road to improvement. We continue to spend large chunks of our national budget on fighting for other countries, on weapons, on military operations and training, instead of Education. Other countries, like Scandinavian countries (Sweden, Norway, Denmark and Finland), keep their budget for themselves, and invest into their education system. Not only are they at the top for high school graduates, they are also at the top for literacy and scientific literacy compared to other countries. For the time period of fighting other countries fights, our high school and college graduates have declined and other countries have pulled ahead. "The U.S. once led the world in college graduates, but this number has flat-lined for Americans" (CNN, 2011). Until we find the courage to pull back, and become a bit selfish with our money and time spent trying to put our noses into other countries political affairs, and depend on others to provide us with oil, then unfortunately, our education programs will continue to suffer, and the next Sputnik moment will never come.
References:
CNN.com (2010, November 3). How U.S. graduation rates compare with the rest of the world. Retrieved from: globalpublicsquare.blogs.cnn.com/2011/11/03/how-u-s-graduation-rates-compare-with-the-rest-of-the-world/
Friedman, T. L. (2010, January 17). What's our sputnik? New York Times. Retrieved from: http://search.proquest.com/docview/434270918?accountid=14872
Spending money on our military to solve problems in other countries is only making us a more troubled and uneducated nation in itself. By trying to "help" other nations, we are investing our hard earned, well-deserved money on someone else's land. We need to invest in our own home and our people instead of trying to solve everyone's problems. By spending like this, it takes away resources and focus from the development of our nation and our future goals, young leaders, and stimulating growth in education. Can you imagine taking away the money as Friedman stated from the Pentagon and putting it back into our schools? Imagine the things we could do in teaching our future innovators and problem solvers and world leaders...
What can educators do without funding from the government? This is the question that comes to mind when I think about what we can do at a local, state or national level. I believe educators themselves are trying to do as much as we can for our students, but we can only go so far with our hands tied behind our backs. Funding for science programs are not consistent across the nation, and perhaps students who are going to private schools are better off than the rest of the population. This is a mere small population.
We need to first come up with a program that would stimulate young people within and outside schools, get funding from local congressmen and create science initiatives. What I would recommend is that we introduce a mandatory science coordinator from K-6 in order to present Elementary teachers with the support they need to implement science into their curriculum successfully. This may help to release the pressure off teachers who are not familiar or comfortable teaching many of the main concepts that young children should understand. Science should be a fun and rewarding experience for people of all ages. I believe this support system would have a ripple effect in Education, students would feel more free to experiment, explore and not afraid of science, the teachers as well. This could in fact create a new situation where WE, the United States, produce the next Sputnik situation for others around the world.
I believe that the United States STEM educators are on the road to improvement, but we have a very large road block ahead of us because the US as a whole are not on the road to improvement. We continue to spend large chunks of our national budget on fighting for other countries, on weapons, on military operations and training, instead of Education. Other countries, like Scandinavian countries (Sweden, Norway, Denmark and Finland), keep their budget for themselves, and invest into their education system. Not only are they at the top for high school graduates, they are also at the top for literacy and scientific literacy compared to other countries. For the time period of fighting other countries fights, our high school and college graduates have declined and other countries have pulled ahead. "The U.S. once led the world in college graduates, but this number has flat-lined for Americans" (CNN, 2011). Until we find the courage to pull back, and become a bit selfish with our money and time spent trying to put our noses into other countries political affairs, and depend on others to provide us with oil, then unfortunately, our education programs will continue to suffer, and the next Sputnik moment will never come.
References:
CNN.com (2010, November 3). How U.S. graduation rates compare with the rest of the world. Retrieved from: globalpublicsquare.blogs.cnn.com/2011/11/03/how-u-s-graduation-rates-compare-with-the-rest-of-the-world/
Friedman, T. L. (2010, January 17). What's our sputnik? New York Times. Retrieved from: http://search.proquest.com/docview/434270918?accountid=14872
Would a K-6 Science Coordinator be provided by each district, state or national governing body? When I read this, I thought about how our district (and most districts in my state) have "specialists" which are PE and Music. These positions came out of the need for increasing physical education in young people and creating awareness in the arts (music). Perhaps we could have the same initiative for science positions in the schools?
ReplyDeleteJanie
Hi Janie, I think you blog is very thought provoking. We need to start focusing on our own country. The article, A New Vision for Teaching Science by McGinnis and Robert-Harris, mentioned to focus on fewer standards with an emphasis on mastery. This way teachers could focus on inquiry and engineering. However, the second problem lies with funding. We have no funding at all for science for my school. What I use I have to purchase out of my own pocket or help from parents. If we want to be competitive with other countries, we must provide the resources for our schools and teachers.
ReplyDeleteJanie,
ReplyDeleteYes. I think a Science Coordinator or a Science Coach should be provided by each district because this way the district standards may be the same as well as the expectations of this person who would work between the schools within the district. All teachers would work with the same person who has really taken hold of science education and can lead them in the right direction as far as inquiry, and curriculum design, in order to incorporate project-based learning, authentic assessments, and the meaningful standards that district has selected. This person could form a curriculum committee of educators between the district schools as a sort of professional science community who would discuss issues and collect data in order to compare successes or struggles within their district. Then, these issues could be taken to the state level for funding. Just a thought.