Really Covering Citizenship - School Board Election Time

Tonight we attended a session with the candidates for the Buffalo Board of Education at the Merriweather branch library.  First of all, for those of you not from the state of New York, yes, school board elections are in May, not in November with the other elections.  It does encourage a lack of broad representation in the sense that those that make a special effort to turn out in May usually have some vested interest of some sort, for better or for worse.  Anyway, there were a couple of things that struck me about the evening.

The first was that I was covering citizenship much better compared to the parents (and teachers) of school students.  Out of about 30,000 students in the district, there were perhaps 10 from what I could see, presumably school kids, in the audience.  Where were the students?  Surely they have vested interest in what happens.  I can only guess that some kids, the trouble makers who were alluded to regarding suspensions, don't care and the "good students" are too busy doing homework, going to activities, and going to bed early.  Either way, it is clear to me that homeschooling, with its lack of homework, lack of suspensions and relative lack of need for a bed time permits more engagement in the political process.  It is sort of a microcosm of the way the corporatocracy has kept people too busy to participate and notice that our state and national elections are bought.  Between busy or disengaged students and disadvantaged parents who need to work multiple jobs to have a living wage, I am sad but not surprised.  I hope I was setting an example for my kids that I tried to ascertain which candidates are good.

The second thing that struck me was that all the candidates were mainstream in the sense that they stated what you would expect.  No one, even the more interesting candidates, was outraged about mandatory kindergarten, for example, which to me is a big attack on parents rights and freedoms to decide what is right for their children.  There was all the "working together" and "caring about the community" rhetoric of course.  It was much easier to see which candidates not to vote for.  Sergio Rodriguez boldly stated how much he as for mandatory kindergarten and even mandatory Pre-K in the typical more-school-is-better approach to learning.  Clearly, he has not read what I have read about child development and the ways children learn.  Several candidates, including Sam Davis who most directly seemed to address it, stated that they wanted to eliminate waste and get the money into the classrooms.  This shows the ignorance of the candidates.  It is an extremely small percentage of what is spent that isn't directly or indirectly mandated by state education law and related applicable laws and contracts developed under those laws.  It is not to say that all tax dollars are put to good use.  I would certainly overhaul the entire education system, but such things would have to occur at the state level.  Making a note of those who mentioned this also eliminated several possible candidates for me.  I was pleasantly surprised that so many stated fairly directly that they wanted the good programs to be spread across the district to neighborhood schools rather than concentrated in a few schools in an unfair manner.  Unfortunately, this didn't help differentiate the candidates too well even though Wendy Mistretta seemed to articulate this best of all that spoke on this.  I agree with them on the inherent unfairness obviously, but it wasn't a differentiating factor.  Only one candidate, Daniel Reynolds, spoke about child centered learning at all.  He didn't state it directly, but alluded to it by wanting to teach students via their interest in hip hop.  My fear is that between not explaining it well and acting somewhat strange in that he included singing and dancing during the session that he may not be taken seriously.  He also seemed to be one of the more interesting ones in terms of his own education.  However, despite this he was for mandatory kindergarten when I talked to him although at least was open minded enough to tell me he would do further research on his position after speaking to me.

Anyway, I haven't finalized my choices yet other than deciding who not to vote for.  Whoever gets elected, however, the proof of educational improvement to me will be in how many of the students attend next year's board candidate forums because it will show whether or not the teaching methods have instilled enthusiasm and priorities.

Mandating Kindergarten and the Continuing Wrong Direction of Education

This morning my fibromyalgia was bad and I woke up very bored and too stiff to do much, so I put on the news despite that fact that I am always on guard for a corporate/materialism agenda.  One of the stories was about the Board of Buffalo Schools requesting that the NY state legislature mandate kindergarten in a similar manner to Syracuse and New York City.  I was alarmed by the story as the tone is such that the Board expects that starting academics earlier will achieve better educational outcomes.  No one seems opposed or is even questioning it.  There is no discussion of what is actually better for children or what helps them learn.  Are they developmentally ready for serious academics at age 5?  Does the emotional trauma of taking children away from parents on a full-time basis at such a young age detract from their ability to learn?  Does the existing type of schooling even work well enough to necessitate more of it?  With the increasing amount of data available in the information age, should there be less traditional instruction and more focus on critical thinking and data retrieval?  Why is more and more schooling needed to achieve adulthood?  The conventional wisdom seems to be Pre-K (age 4) through graduate school (age 24 or 26) on a full-time basis to be considered "competitive" for jobs.  Shouldn't the structure of the economy and labor market be remedied rather than piling on more schooling to be "competitive"?  Why isn't the willingness to work hard enough to achieve reasonable employment success anymore?  This sounds like the corporate powerhouses making demands and the well-meaning yet very misguided educational industrial complex excitedly taking on the task.  It seems unfair to me that 5 year-olds must be the sacrificial lambs when the adults can't solve the economics and politics to make opportunities more fair.

With all these sorts of increasing instruction efforts there is only talk about better "outcomes" or being more "competitive" whether it is mandatory kindergarten, extending the school day, or extending the school year.  Has anyone looked at the data?  Many of the countries with which we "compete" don't have the educational systems we think they have.  For example in Scandinavian countries, while early schooling has been expanded, serious academics are mainly postponed to age 7.  In the U.S., we are pushing it down to kindergarten and even pre-K.  We also assume homework is good for kids, but according to Alfie Kohn in the The Homework Myth, many studies have debunked homework for both academics and responsibility enforcement.  If you read his book you will see how politics have emphasized homework despite the data.

My main hope can be that homeschoolers in Buffalo will not be burdened with reporting for an extra year because of this, but it seems to me that without an exception made for homeschoolers it will be the case.  Unfortunately, New York is already one of the most burdensome states on homeschoolers requiring quarterly reports, plans, and even standardized tests at some grade levels.  This is incredibly unfair since the homeschool children I know in Buffalo are performing as well or better than those who attend Buffalo public schools.  If the school board and the state legislature actually cares about educational outcomes, they would make an exception for homeschool families from this extra reporting rather than penalize them for their superior performance.  If you live in Buffalo contact your state representation and your school board members and tell them that they are not be doing what is in the best interest of children by going forward with this.