If anyone sees me after 1 pm on Monday through Wednesday, I'm usually angry and willing to yell at whoever will listen.
I *hate* education law. I really like the professor (and how he brings up current events). I like the topic. The cases make me sorta mad. But, what makes me the most mad is how people make the issues so black and white. (literally and figuratively).
For example, I am not a fan of the No Child Left Behind Act. And, I don't like standardized testing (probably because I'm super bad at it) but I think there is something to be said about learning how to do things by rote. We naturally like formulas. We like knowing how to write a good paper. Where would our world be if we put our thesis sentence in our last sentence of a five page paper, simply because we wanted to keep it a surprise? You can be a good writer and be original but still work within formulas.
Also, I am all for giving people critical thinking skills. That's one of the biggest pleasures about doing theater in prisons/juvenile facilities - seeing kids (or adults) who never thought they could make decisions (because society didn't let them or because they were given no voice) decide what the next scene would look like or how a certain character would develop.
But, (...and this is going to sound controversial...) when it comes to school and where to put resources, it gets much much harder. That's why doing ABE (adult basic education) classes in prison took much more out of me (& most other volunteers). There was this certain reality that we had to face. Here are people in prison, we educate them, how far is that going to go? (versus taking them to a fantasy world of theater...). Obviously, prison is an extreme and I don't mean to say that people living in the worst areas of Detroit are already locked in life's prison (or do i mean to say that?)
I'm just saying that perhaps it's not the best for us, liberal (or even conservative) educated people in law school to decide what's best for these kids. Maybe they just want to learn how to do math so they can balance a checkbook, not so they can come up with their own theorem. Maybe they don't care about Nikki Giovanni even though we think that if they could hear and analyze that one poem, it will give them hope and change their life. Maybe they can't care. Maybe school isn't even safe for them because the rival gang owns the territory and are still hungry for retaliation from some incident that happened last year.
I'm not saying to throw these kids lives away or not give them the best. They're kids with a future. I just don't think everything is as black and white as people in my education class make it. (NCLB = bad. Critical thinking = good. Learning by rote = bad.)
I think someone brought up a very valid point that this is how the "rich kids" do it to succeed (by paying for SAT classes) b/c for the rest of our lives we are judged by standardized testing. Now, we're putting people on an equal footing to practice for those "entrance exams" that decide who goes to what college and who goes to what law school/med school/etc. And, we complain about critical thinking. We don't say that the rich kids lack critical thinking but I know at least in the
super expensive private school I went to from 1st - 6th grade, we took standardized tests almost every other year. Maybe that was mandatory. But no one complained that our curriculum was only aimed at those tests.
Also, while it's true that some schools can't afford computers so they don't have neat (sarcasm intended) requirements like my sister's school where students have to turn in their original papers on websites to check plagerism
(for example), they also don't have to be presumed guilty plagerizers until proven innocent and can be treated with maturity (and a presumption they'll follow the school's honor codes. Just like good ol' times).
For example. I don't know. As I said, I don't agree with NCLB. But, on the other hand, I don't think anything is just absolutely wrong or absolutely right. And, arguing against something that shows improvement reminds me of the self-interest argument against leftist lawyers - if people aren't oppressed, leftist lawyers don't have a job. How's that for having an interest in "holding the people down" and not finding a happy solution?
just some stuff I'm chewing on.
[*ADDITION: Yea, someone brought up a good point. Practical courses. Everyone talks about practical courses like they're for people with a zero IQs or hicks that aren't able to read Shakespeare. Personally, I think me and some other people at
my alma mater could've used an auto shop class. Then, maybe I'd be able to change a tire instead of being a helpless girl along side of a Pittsburgh road (which, like all Pennsylvania roads, we all know are famous for their potholes) in case I forget my AAA card at home].
