Cost of Living

           It is a common misconception that teachers who are paid higher than the national average are better off than some teachers who are paid below that average. However, the analysis from the article, Teachers’ Cost of Living Matters More, suggests that cost of living – the quantity of goods teachers can purchase with their current salaries – should be considered rather than comparing salaries to the average. Analysis from the article of 50 metropolitan areas concludes that, after the adjustment for cost of living, “some cities regarded as higher-paying are actually below average, while cities that appear to pay so-so wages are actually quite generous” (Georgiou, Villarreal, & Moore, 2005). An example of this situation is San Francisco; elementary school teachers in San Francisco have an average salary of $59,284, which is 2^nd in the nation among the 50, but when adjusted for the cost of living that figure decreases to $32,663, which ranks 49^th out of 50.

For me personally, this is a topic that has been on my mind for some time now. Most of my family currently lives in San Diego, CA, a place I have contemplated moving to since I graduated high school. As I am currently working on a Master’s degree in Curriculum & Instruction here at Middle Tennessee State University, I obviously did not make the move to California. I decided to stay here in Tennessee and attend MTSU because of the affordability, and the one factor that always turned me away from the move was the cost of living. The chart used for the San Francisco example can be reexamined to support my decision. The average salary for teachers in San Diego, CA is $50,385 with a rank of 12 out of 50. This seems pretty good before measuring this number with the adjusted value for cost of living, which is $35,210 with a rank of 44 out of 50. I tend to agree with the conclusion posted in the article: “Because the cost of living varies widely from city to city and region to region, public officials and teacher unions should consider how much a teacher’s dollar can buy, not just numerical pay, when discussing teachers’ wages” (Georgiou, Villarreal, & Moore, 2005). Ultimately, I still would like to move to San Diego one day, and as an upcoming educator, I hope that teacher salaries become properly adjusted for cost of living so that people like myself can afford to live in places like San Diego while having a career as a teacher.   

Reference:

Georgiou, D., Villarreal, P., & Moore, M. (2005, October 24). Teachers’ cost of living matters more. Retrieved from https://elearn.mtsu.edu/d2l/lms/content/viewer/main_frame.d2l?ou=2975445&tId=19133317

More Multiculturalism

           The article, Toward a Centrist Curriculum: Two Kinds of Multiculturalism in Elementary School, talks about the concept of diversity by introducing two different views on the subject of multiculturalism. The first view, introduced by Herman Melville, is called “cosmopolitanism.” This first view is considered universalistic, and the literal meaning of cosmopolitanism “means being a citizen of the world, a member of humanity as a whole” (Hirsch).  The second view, ethic loyalism (ethnocentrism), is a “particularistic view that stresses loyalty to one’s local culture” (Hirsch). To further differentiate between the two views, cosmopolitanism gives an example of the great city of Alexandria where there were “people from every race, nation, and continent rubbing up against each other to form a microcosm of the world” (Hirsch). The ethnic loyalist on the other hand “holds that each culture has a duty to preserve its own identity against the larger cosmopolis” (Hirsch).

            So, how do these two views of multiculturalism relate to the schools and classrooms? Well, it is said that the subjects of American history and literature are moving toward Melville’s vision of cosmopolitanism with the adoption of a curriculum developed by the Core Knowledge Foundation, a group that specializes in the development of a specific core elementary curriculum (Hirsch). The Core Knowledge Foundation created the Core Knowledge Sequence, which is a specific sequence of knowledge for elementary grades that makes up approximately 50% of a school’s curriculum; this leaves another 50% of the curriculum to have local variation, “including integration with more ethnically-centered curricula” (Hirsch).  This split of the curriculum helps incorporate the particularistic view of ethnic loyalism, but in the end the article says that cosmopolitanism is the “only valid multiculturalism for the modern era” (Hirsch).

For me personally my schooling from the elementary grades through high school followed the view of cosmopolitanism, meaning that the curriculum was suited for a diverse student population, which all of my schools had. Adam Waxler in an article titled Multiculturalism in School Curriculum said “different cultures and perspectives can and should be incorporated throughout the various units within the traditional curriculum.” This is very ideal to the schooling I received, and it is definitely the kind of schooling that would represent a “true friend of diversity” (Hirsch). Ultimately, to achieve a true multicultural education, we have to follow the traditional curriculum, but teach in ways that address “various perspectives and allow students to draw their own conclusions” (Waxler).

References:

Hirsch, E.D. (n.d.). Toward a centrist curriculum: Two kinds of multiculturalism in elementary school. Retrieved from https://elearn.mtsu.edu/d2l/lms/content/viewer/main_frame.d2l?ou=2975445&tId=19133313

Waxler, A. (n.d.). Multiculturalism in school curriculum. Retrieved from https://elearn.mtsu.edu/d2l/lms/content/viewer/main_frame.d2l?ou=2975445&tId=19133312

Multiculturalism

            Before interpreting and giving an opinion on the articles regarding multiculturalism, I feel it is important to address the definition of multiculturalism first. Multiculturalism is the doctrine that several different cultures (rather than one national culture) can coexist peacefully and equitably in a single country. This definition comes in handy when reading the two articles because it gives some perspective on how these specific situations relate to the concept of multiculturalism.

            The first article, Pithissippi Burning: Race, White Nationalism and American Culture, looks at the concept of multiculturalism from an extreme point of view. The meaning of this article can be summed up using a sentence contained within the reading, a sentence that to my knowledge expresses an extreme view on multi-racial societies. “The idea is that white people (“Aryans,” actually) move to Washington, Oregon, and Idaho, and drive out the “mud-people” who currently call it home, as well as any federal government and law enforcement” (Tobia). This sentence has racism written all over it (as intended), but this is actually how some people, very few hopefully, view the world today. This group of people has resentment toward all types of minorities; they ultimately feel that the “minority is gaining mainstream adherents” (Tobia) much to their chagrin. This is like day and night in regards to the definition given for multiculturalism. This is definitely an extreme point of view from a small group of people, but this article just shows that some people have not only not embraced the idea of diversity and multiculturalism, but they have went to excessive measures to promote their idea of white nationalism.

            The other article, The Challenge of ‘Multiculturalism’ In How Americans View the Past and Future, has to do more with multiculturalism and its’ relation to the classroom. This article does not express an “outer limits” type view like the last article; instead, it is a much more centered article that discusses the challenge of multiculturalism in regards to teaching American History. In this article different parties have different perspectives on how American history should be taught, which leads to the disagreement on whether a “multicultural” history or an exclusionist history is more fitting. “The ‘conservative’ view is that explicitly racial histories are illegitimate. America, it is argued, must be united by a common history, and exclusionist histories will disunite us” (Taylor).  The exclusionist view is that “America is already disunited by race, and no approach to history can change that. Just as it would be impossible to use the same history book in both France and England, it is impossible to write a single American history that satisfies, white, black, Indian, Hispanic, and Asian” (Taylor).

             So whose view is correct, and what should we do to make both sides happy? Personally I don’t think there is a definitive answer because one party will always feel as if they are receiving the short end of the stick. A potential solution was brought about in California when the “California Board of Education adopted guidelines for a new history curriculum that would ‘accurately portray the cultural and racial diversity of our society’”(Taylor). The idea was good, but the guidelines and books adopted for this change were met with scrutiny by racial activists, who still insisted on an exclusionist history.  Ultimately any sort of exclusionist view is going to be hard to achieve in this day and age when diversity fills the public education classrooms. It is going to be tough to appeal to all of the existing racial groups, but as the title mentions, this is the “challenge” that we must endure.   

Taylor, S. The challenge of ‘multiculturalism’ in how americans view the past and the future. The Journal of Historical Review, 12(2), 159-165.

Tobia, P.J. (2009, February 23). Pithissippi burning: Race, white nationalism and american culture. Retrieved from https://elearn.mtsu.edu/d2l/lms/content/viewer/main_frame.d2l?ou=2975445&tId=19133306

Religion in Schools

After reading the article, Religion in Schools Debate Heats Up, the first argument essentially was whether or not schools should be required to observe the moment of silence. Well, what is a moment of silence? A moment of silence is a short period of time utilized for prayer, reflection, or meditation. Is observing a moment of silence a problem? According to the article, “District Judge Robert Gettleman said the law was an unconstitutional breach of the separation of church and state. Defenders of the law argue it is a student's personal choice whether to pray or reflect more generally; therefore, proponents say, the law does not force religion on public school children.” So, what should be done with the moment of silence? For me personally, I tend to agree with the defenders in the article; a moment of silence does not have to be used for prayer specifically. Reflection, meditation, remembrance, and paying respects are all activities that can take place during this short period of time. A moment of silence lacks any specific religious formulation, which is why I feel that it is not a breach of the separation of church and state.

The second portion of the article dealt with the changing of the state of Texas’ science curriculum in order to make it “more difficult for teachers to discuss possible weaknesses in evolutionary theory” (Calefati). “Scientists testified before the board that the "strengths and weaknesses" language is unacceptable because there are no scientifically verifiable weaknesses to Darwin's theory of evolution.” Furthermore, they felt that teaching about weaknesses in evolution would lead to the incorporation of Creationism into the curriculum. The only problem to this whole debate is what parents brought to the school board, and I tend to agree, which is that there should be “nothing wrong with debating a theory that is not proven fact” (Calefati). 

I understand that Creationism or Intelligent Design cannot be taught in the classroom due to “separation of church and state,” but that does not mean that something that has not been proven as fact (evolutionary theory) should not be discussed or debated from an opponent’s viewpoint. Some in favor of teaching evolution say that evolutionary theory should be “subject to investigation and analysis for their incompleteness, but not for their weaknesses” (Scharfersman). If they don’t want to call it a weakness, then call it “incomplete,” but you can still discuss the incompleteness of evolutionary theory. Either way, it still hasn’t been proven fact, so it should still be open to discussion, from students who either believe in evolution or who are skeptics.

References:

Calefati, J. (2009, January 22). Religion in schools debate heats up. Retrieved from https://elearn.mtsu.edu/d2l/lms/content/viewer/main_frame.d2l?ou=2975445&tId=19133302

Schafersman, S. (2009, January 17). The rhetoric and history of the false and unscientific “weaknesses” of evolution. Retrieved from http://texscience.org/reports/weaknesses-evolution-jan2009.htm

 

Innovators vs. Makers

When I read through the biography of Horace Mann, I immediately felt as if this man truly had an influence on public education known today. An innovator is one who creates something new, often for the first time, and Horace Mann fits this definition perfectly in regards to his work involving educational support. When reading about the “makers,” I didn’t get that initial jolt that told me that these men had as much influence on today’s public education as when I read about Horace Mann.  The makers that I read about were men of wealth, men who may have had some form of education, but their influence on the public education of today was more indirect.

            As I read about the life of Horace Mann, I knew that I was learning about a man who had a direct influence on public education past and present. In the late 18^th and early 19^th century students in public schools only attended classes for a couple of weeks in the winter, which is unbelievable when thinking about the amount of time spent in the classroom today. When did the change happen someone might ask? Well, Horace Mann’s idea to improve education started when he established the state board of education, which subsequently led to the increase in the length of a school year to six months, which is much closer to that of today’s school year. This was only one of the many improvements that Mann made to education, but it is one of the great examples of his role as an innovator.

Andrew Carnegie, the steel baron, was the one “maker” who stood out when thinking about today’s public education. Ironically, Carnegie himself is said to have had minimal formal education himself, but he was taught early the importance of learning. So what exactly did Carnegie do to influence the public education known today? Personally, I feel as if Carnegie had more of an indirect influence on the public education, whereas Horace Mann had more of a direct influence; for me this was the major difference between the innovator and the maker. Carnegie is said to be one of the richest men in history, and his money donations to establish schools, universities, and libraries shows that he thought education was of utmost importance.  So if one of the richest men in history thinks so highly of public education, then there has to be some merit there to show its’ importance. Additionally, Carnegie’s life could be a model for the students of today’s society. Through education and hard work, you can achieve success much like Carnegie, even if your wealth doesn’t reach $309 billion (Lubin)!

References:

Lubin, G. (2010, September 2). The 20 Richest People of All Time. Retrieved from  

http:// www.businessinsider.com/richest-people-in-history-2010-8?op=1