I approached this initial reading and reflection assignment with apprehension; I feared I would have little about which to discuss from a personal perspective. The majority of my academic experience, from kindergarten through college, has taken place at private Catholic educational institutions. My knowledge of public schools consisted narrowly of issues I read about, heard about, and discussed with friends who attended public schools or with my mother who worked in a public school for 5 years as a school nurse.
David Tyack’s Seeking Common Ground: Public Schools in a Diverse Society has provided me a more comprehensive perspective on the history and theory behind public education, and education overall, in the United States. In particular, I found inspiration in his closing paragraph:
“At its best, public education has allowed citizens to make choices about schools that reflect what works not just for the individual
but also for the community.” (p. 180)
From this perspective, my family’s decisions to educate me at Catholic schools, and the economic sacrifices involved with these decisions, occurred within the realm of public education and exemplifies Tyack’s theme of democracy in education. My parents decision did not necessarily reflect a desire to purchase a ‘better academic product’ for me. Instead, they sent me to religious schools because, as Tyack (2003) notes, “religious schools have been organized around differences or conscience and character”; my parents felt it “their duty to pass on [to me] specific religious beliefs” (p. 167). After high school, I largely chose to continue my education at a Catholic Jesuit university for the same reason.
I believe that all aspects of my educational journey have helped to form my personhood. Many of my teachers looked for the potential in each and every student with whom they worked and encouraged all to excel. Beyond championing my personal academic rigor, my teachers guided my personal moral development. In this regard, I strongly agree with the Tyack’s (2003) theme of unity, in that “the survival and stability of the republic depends on the wisdom and morality of its individual citizens” (p. 9). The flavor of my moral development happened to be Catholic. For secular public schools respecting separation of Church and state, I believe a challenge lies in attempting to guide student development based on a general code of morality while respecting student personal faith and religious beliefs. Despite this challenge, the responsibility of the education system to guide student personal development holds true.
In addition and perhaps in relation to the moral development of students, I believe schools have a responsibility to provide a protected place for students to learn tolerance, confront stereotypes, and feel safe enough to explore deeply who they are and who they want to become, as they mature into young adults. The common experience of labeling and stereotyping people based on sex, ethnicity, sexual orientation, faith practices, etc. should be allowed to be openly and respectfully discussed. In contrast to the practice of ‘Americanization’ (essentially homogenization and assimilation) described by Tyack (2003) to be so prevalent in schools in the 20th century, I believe we should teach our children to honor and appreciate the unique abilities, beliefs, and backgrounds we all have. Our students will be citizens of a global society; they need to know how to respect the individuality and differences of others in order to succeed on the global stage.
Along with shaping morality and teaching tolerance, I believe that public education should provide students access to quality academic studies, even in the face of diversity in ethnicity, socioeconomic status, and schooling options; however, I do not believe there is a one-size-fits-all fix for education inequality. Each student has unique talents and interests, which they should be encouraged to pursue. The public educational system has the responsibility to guide students and to ensure that they master the basic academic competencies required to thrive as productive members of society. I believe the ability to provide for oneself, if possible, is a basic human right; this starts with a comprehensive education. We must also strive to teach students how to think on their own, to reason, to form well-supported opinions; reforming educational policy and addressing other systemic inequalities requires a well-educated citizenry.
More specifically, I hope that in my time in the Philadelphia school district, I can inspire a new generation of young adults and nurture in them a passion for the life sciences. I agree with Tyack’s (2003) analysis that, since the early 1920s when students began exercising control over certain parts of their educational journey, “students often [choose] easy or faddish subjects rather than ambitious courses” (p. 175). Arguably, the hard sciences fall into the category of ‘ambitious courses’. As noted previously, each student is unique and thus not every student will exhibit talent and interest in the hard sciences; however, I fear that many students in secondary schools today miss out on an opportunity to explore their interest or exercise their abilities in the sciences because of a lack of motivating and dedicated teachers, inadequate training of students or teachers, and the fear of failing. I believe our students need more competent backgrounds in the sciences in order to garner more robust interests in domestic science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) careers. I personally had the opportunity to follow my passion for the biological sciences because of a highly motivating and dedicated high school biology teacher.
In addition to pursuing my passion for science in college, I discovered the joys of teaching as I taught SAT and MCAT prep classes and tutored students; however, my appreciation of educational policy did not blossom until after college, during my year teaching in an urban elementary school in Newark, New Jersey (2008-2009). Over the course of my education, my engagement with the Catholic faith and the Jesuit ideal of social justice have encouraged me to seek a career path in which I could work with others, encourage respect for their individual dignity, and potentially make a difference in their lives; I hope that teaching will afford me the fulfillment I seek. The enjoyment I received from teaching during college and afterwards, along with my passion for the sciences and my interest in learning more about education policy, directed me to the field of urban education. I followed the path to public education as I felt it would provide me the best opportunity to interact with the most students as well as learn the most about education policy. I believe there is an important advantage teachers gain through teacher education programs and certification practices that I would miss should I pursue a career in a parochial or private school.
How to tailor education to fit the needs of each student while still providing quality education for every student is a question that remains to be answered. I find that partaking in discussions addressing the possibility of education equality end in frustration and resignation on my part; there are so many moving cogs and unwanted wrenches to identify in the machinery that keeps education chugging along in our country. Tyack’s book helped me realize that these attempts to perfect the public education system in the United States are as old as the republic itself. Frustration is inevitable; making the choice to face and embrace this frustration in the hopes of imparting lasting improvements to the realm of public education is one of the greatest choices about our schools that public education allows us to make.
REFERENCE
Tyack, D. B. (2003). Seeking Common Ground: Public Schools in a Diverse Society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press
David Tyack’s Seeking Common Ground: Public Schools in a Diverse Society has provided me a more comprehensive perspective on the history and theory behind public education, and education overall, in the United States. In particular, I found inspiration in his closing paragraph:
“At its best, public education has allowed citizens to make choices about schools that reflect what works not just for the individual
but also for the community.” (p. 180)
From this perspective, my family’s decisions to educate me at Catholic schools, and the economic sacrifices involved with these decisions, occurred within the realm of public education and exemplifies Tyack’s theme of democracy in education. My parents decision did not necessarily reflect a desire to purchase a ‘better academic product’ for me. Instead, they sent me to religious schools because, as Tyack (2003) notes, “religious schools have been organized around differences or conscience and character”; my parents felt it “their duty to pass on [to me] specific religious beliefs” (p. 167). After high school, I largely chose to continue my education at a Catholic Jesuit university for the same reason.
I believe that all aspects of my educational journey have helped to form my personhood. Many of my teachers looked for the potential in each and every student with whom they worked and encouraged all to excel. Beyond championing my personal academic rigor, my teachers guided my personal moral development. In this regard, I strongly agree with the Tyack’s (2003) theme of unity, in that “the survival and stability of the republic depends on the wisdom and morality of its individual citizens” (p. 9). The flavor of my moral development happened to be Catholic. For secular public schools respecting separation of Church and state, I believe a challenge lies in attempting to guide student development based on a general code of morality while respecting student personal faith and religious beliefs. Despite this challenge, the responsibility of the education system to guide student personal development holds true.
In addition and perhaps in relation to the moral development of students, I believe schools have a responsibility to provide a protected place for students to learn tolerance, confront stereotypes, and feel safe enough to explore deeply who they are and who they want to become, as they mature into young adults. The common experience of labeling and stereotyping people based on sex, ethnicity, sexual orientation, faith practices, etc. should be allowed to be openly and respectfully discussed. In contrast to the practice of ‘Americanization’ (essentially homogenization and assimilation) described by Tyack (2003) to be so prevalent in schools in the 20th century, I believe we should teach our children to honor and appreciate the unique abilities, beliefs, and backgrounds we all have. Our students will be citizens of a global society; they need to know how to respect the individuality and differences of others in order to succeed on the global stage.
Along with shaping morality and teaching tolerance, I believe that public education should provide students access to quality academic studies, even in the face of diversity in ethnicity, socioeconomic status, and schooling options; however, I do not believe there is a one-size-fits-all fix for education inequality. Each student has unique talents and interests, which they should be encouraged to pursue. The public educational system has the responsibility to guide students and to ensure that they master the basic academic competencies required to thrive as productive members of society. I believe the ability to provide for oneself, if possible, is a basic human right; this starts with a comprehensive education. We must also strive to teach students how to think on their own, to reason, to form well-supported opinions; reforming educational policy and addressing other systemic inequalities requires a well-educated citizenry.
More specifically, I hope that in my time in the Philadelphia school district, I can inspire a new generation of young adults and nurture in them a passion for the life sciences. I agree with Tyack’s (2003) analysis that, since the early 1920s when students began exercising control over certain parts of their educational journey, “students often [choose] easy or faddish subjects rather than ambitious courses” (p. 175). Arguably, the hard sciences fall into the category of ‘ambitious courses’. As noted previously, each student is unique and thus not every student will exhibit talent and interest in the hard sciences; however, I fear that many students in secondary schools today miss out on an opportunity to explore their interest or exercise their abilities in the sciences because of a lack of motivating and dedicated teachers, inadequate training of students or teachers, and the fear of failing. I believe our students need more competent backgrounds in the sciences in order to garner more robust interests in domestic science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) careers. I personally had the opportunity to follow my passion for the biological sciences because of a highly motivating and dedicated high school biology teacher.
In addition to pursuing my passion for science in college, I discovered the joys of teaching as I taught SAT and MCAT prep classes and tutored students; however, my appreciation of educational policy did not blossom until after college, during my year teaching in an urban elementary school in Newark, New Jersey (2008-2009). Over the course of my education, my engagement with the Catholic faith and the Jesuit ideal of social justice have encouraged me to seek a career path in which I could work with others, encourage respect for their individual dignity, and potentially make a difference in their lives; I hope that teaching will afford me the fulfillment I seek. The enjoyment I received from teaching during college and afterwards, along with my passion for the sciences and my interest in learning more about education policy, directed me to the field of urban education. I followed the path to public education as I felt it would provide me the best opportunity to interact with the most students as well as learn the most about education policy. I believe there is an important advantage teachers gain through teacher education programs and certification practices that I would miss should I pursue a career in a parochial or private school.
How to tailor education to fit the needs of each student while still providing quality education for every student is a question that remains to be answered. I find that partaking in discussions addressing the possibility of education equality end in frustration and resignation on my part; there are so many moving cogs and unwanted wrenches to identify in the machinery that keeps education chugging along in our country. Tyack’s book helped me realize that these attempts to perfect the public education system in the United States are as old as the republic itself. Frustration is inevitable; making the choice to face and embrace this frustration in the hopes of imparting lasting improvements to the realm of public education is one of the greatest choices about our schools that public education allows us to make.
REFERENCE
Tyack, D. B. (2003). Seeking Common Ground: Public Schools in a Diverse Society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press