| The Bridge has a pretty good collection of articles today about the education reform currently being debated. There are three, including this one, this one, and this Op-Ed. The upshot of the three is that this program of super choice would probably result in a boon for some children, and not so much for the others. Guess which ones benefit the most? Also, that a lot of choice in schools, which is already available, isn't dependent on a successful academic curricula. It's based on other stuff, like transportation and geography. The Op-Ed approaches the issue by trying to sort out whether it would achieve what the governor sets out to achieve based on how the governor defines success in education. I think this is part of the problem. The governor defines success in education in raising the percentage of people with college degrees. Having more people with college degrees would be good. But I think that's a shallow way to look at an education. I think we need to educate people for the sake of educating them, that teaching them how to read and write and understand history are important in their own rights. I think someone has been successfully educated if they can communicate how evolution works, how to do a problem of geometry, and if they can explain the importance of the Magna Carta; not just because they get themselves a degree. |
