From small one-room school houses to mega high schools with thousands upon thousands of students, our educated populations and those needed to be educated have grown over the years, but does that mean that our classroom sizes should as well? With larger high schools and more students, and admittedly fewer teachers, the student to teacher ratio has been skewed and all levels of educational classrooms are crammed. This situation is one of high discussion right now as research studies show a correlation between productive student learning, or lack there-of, and class size.

A study done by the Center for Public Education found, via studies from over 80 different schools, that the ideal class size for high school and college students is 18 students with one teacher. This size is optimal for learning as there is still room for group work and class activities but the teacher is not overwhelmed by too many students at a time. Although some students may come from this, my high school had over 25 students per class and others around the United States average even more.  But the study also shows that from grades K-3, students benefit greatly from even smaller class sizes and therefore more teacher attention while their development is critical. Students from these smaller classes during the grades of K-3 have shown higher academic achievement in later years.  At all levels of education, clear benefits could be seen as soon as the number of students per class fell below 20.

If these numbers are applied specifically to the university level, the immediate realization is frustrating. In classes as large as 200 students with one professor, the learning levels will not be as high. Universities combat this by offering more classes, which is challenging schedule wise and expensive, or hiring more professors, also expensive. But the main way they handle the skewed ratio is via TAs and LAs or teaching and learning assistants. These individuals can aid the professor in instruction, but the quality of teaching is often not at high from these individuals.

Yet, the implications of changing this issue are very large, clearly there are large benefits but the expense of doing so is also very large. According to a study from Brookings University, increasing the student to teacher ratio by merely one student would save roughly 12 billion dollars a year! Meaning that the idea of lowering this ratio would cost much more. In their article, “Class Size: What Research Says and What it Means for State Policy,” the university shares that, “it appears that very large class-size reductions, on the order of magnitude of 7-10 fewer students per class, can have significant long-term effects on student achievement and other meaningful outcomes. These effects seem to be largest when introduced in the earliest grades.” The benefits are clearly there, but policy wise a change will be hard to bring about due to the fiscal downfalls. Due to the failings in our financial budgets for state educations cuts will be made in the coming years in public schools rather than bettering areas of education that are in need. According to Brookings and other policy sources, the funds would not be reallocated to support decreasing class sizes when so many other areas of education are in need of funding. Teacher’s salaries, early childhood educational program, special needs education, technology in classrooms, and so much else demand the limited funds that exist at all.

The image above reflects the national budget over the last few years and the amount delegated to education. All the numbers are too large to fully grasp but the red lettering below indicates that the percent of the budget allocated to public education has decreased by more than 3% in the last 3 years alone! Not only are the funds not able to be allocated to decreasing student to teacher ratio but the funds are not being allocated to education in general as they were only a number of years ago.

With a global world and ever developing society the need for better educated individuals is greater than ever before. Yet the funds to support this demanded level of education and the classroom sizes needed to respond to educational needs are not possible. If nothing more, this blog has hopefully shed some light on modern issues within the education sector of society and encouraged all of you to truly consider the course of education within our society in the years to come, and the voice you possess to speak into that course.

 

With modern advancement in technology the educational sphere is being largely impacted. From computers to smartphones to interactive projectors, classrooms are changing and although there are clearly pros and cons to this influx of modern technology, the question remains, is it bettering our educations or hindering them?

Most people would argue that the pros to technology far outweigh the cons, especially within education. But the cons must still be addressed in hopes that they too can be addressed and handled well as technology moves its way further and further into fields of society. I asked two friends to share their views on technology within education, one of them shared that, “technology should be used minimally in any aspect of society, face to face interaction promotes higher educational experiences and a reliance on technology is dangerous.” A surprising but valid standpoint, in the sense that face to face interaction is so key and social skills need to be developed further especially during our educational times. But the article, “Pros and Cons of Technology in Education,” by Susie Kelley addresses this point by saying that although there is a valid concern that technology could hinder our social development, it doesn’t need to. We can institute greater use of technology and do it in such a way that promotes social work and relational development. Technology can improve group work and presentations as well as group learning. Rather than limiting social interaction, it could provide a new dynamic to it and help students learn to adapt and incorporate more parts when interacting with one another.

My other friend, shared his opinion on technology within the education field by saying, “Many pros and cons to technology in education; a large pro is that it enables research and provides a huge resource but one of the biggest cons is that it is also very distracting.” And he is so right! One of the biggest cons to technology in education. In this article, “Technology and Student Distraction,” from the Derek Bok Center for Teaching and Learning at Harvard University,  it is shared that according to studies, over 92% of college students report using their phones to send text messages during classes, and I am sure that if any Penn State professor was asked they could support this statistic. When giving children a piece of technology to learn from the fear of distraction is even greater and more real. This con can be seen as an outlet for teaching children about how to be responsible and engage when they need to. And if that isn’t a strong enough argument there are learning programs and systems that limit technology uses during learning or instructional periods of time. As far as college students learn, technology will always be a distraction but once that age is reached students must learn for themselves the consequences of not paying attention during lecture.

According to the article, “7 Ways Technology is Impacting Modern Education,” technology is pushing our educational levels to new heights in many ways. One being that students can actively engage with their learning material. This means that students can learn by doing in new ways that weren’t possible before. Geography can be seen via google maps, rather than just via an image. Another aspect is that technology strongly ties back real issues and real world application to what students are learning. Via websites and news articles, billions at the fingertips of each student, they can clearly connect how what they are learning about is affecting and part of the world around them, this then makes them more eager and motivated to learn. Modeling and simulation software also enables students to learn in ways that they never could have beforehand. This technology allows them to visually see how planets orbit or how storms develop or how the earth has changed over thousands of years. Another huge way that technology is bettering education is in the connectivity of the world that it enables. Virtual groups and discussion boards connect students to people around the world that know more than they do and are different from them, by doing this they are able to gain a larger perspective and understand the world around them better as a whole.

 

Although I’m sure the debate surrounding technology will continue for years to come, the benefits that come from technology in school settings and beyond are undeniable and will certainly continue to shape the course of learning forever.

 

Differing levels of education, or perhaps more accurately, differing qualities or extents of education, vary greatly depending on region as well as many of the other factors I have examined throughout the course of my past blog posts, but one that corresponds largely to the aspect of region is that of urban, suburban, or rural status.

Urban regions tend to be hubs of sorts. Hubs of culture. Hubs of intellect. Hubs of people naturally, but also hubs of poverty and hubs of high living costs. How does this all play into education? Well essentially in every way, with more people and more diversity comes a larger importance on the schools and the need for high levels of education, and high quality levels of education in order to better prepare citizens as positively contributing community members.

And this need corresponds quite directly to the reality of the differences and disparities between urban and rural educational results.

The graph above reflects the differing levels of education attainment between populations in the urban area versus those from rural areas, as well as between the year 2000 and 2016. Both regions reflect a positive change over the last 16 years as more people are recieving their college degrees and there are less people without at least high school diplomas. But it is clear that the urban populus has a higher percentage of individuals with college degrees and fewer individuals with high school diplomas or less. This statistic alone favors the educational opportunities in urban areas but when attempting to see a more wholistic view of educations across regions more than just numbers need to be examined.

There is a general consensus that although the statistics may show better percentages in urban areas that does not necessarily mean that their educational systems are “better.” Rural high schools largely depend on public or religious schools and often lack college level academics, meaning that there may be more high school graduates but the move to a college level degree would be harder to achieve. Urban populations often rely on public and religious institutions as well but due to the large number of citizens who populate cities there is also a larger push towards private institutions, institutions which often require money. But then within urban settings colleges are more readily accessible meaning that the transition to higher education could be somewhat easier for those who are already living in urban environments. What’s more the culture surrounding the educational environments is very different, with less emphasis put on the importance of education often in rural communities.

According to the National Center for Education Statistics, about 1/4 of public school students attend rural districts and although the quality of these schools is often higher with a beneficial ratio of students to teachers and students to resources statistics show that many students do not go farther than a high school level degree. This has been decreasing but specifically white males continue to fall short in this category and are being surpassed by their white female counterparts, according to the article, “Solving the Rural Education Gap.” Sadly it is also much more challenging for minority populations in rural communities to statistically perform well. It is no surprise then that areas in which the educational levels are low there are worse economic outcomes, the root of many issues within communities stem from poor levels or poor qualities of education.

The challenges that face the urban community are more geared in the direction of lack of resources and educators as well as motivating students and general cost that is associated with high quality educations. Public schools too often do not support the high populations that crowd them in urban communities, there is then a push towards religious or private institutions which segregate students, face their own issues with diversity, and are exclusively geared, not towards the students that need the most help, but towards those already succeeding, those who excel athletically or musically, or those who have parents to fit the bill.

According to an article entitled, “Most Urban Schools in the U.S. Get a Failing Grade,” from Futurity, an online newspaper, out of the 50 cities they collected data in, less than 15% of the students took the SAT/ACT! This statistic alone is staggering, but then partner that with shocking statistics about the issues of racism, such as the fact that black students are twice as likely to recieve out of school suspensions, and we should be appalled as Americans that our cities are failing at educating the young people of our country.

This issue surrounding our educational system and where/how frequently it falls short could be discussed forever and analyzed again and again. The true question and discussion needs to be about what is next? How can we solve this issue? Because first and foremost we need to be supporting our young people to create a better environment for the young people to come.

In today’s world the debate over genders and how we should respectfully interact with those around us is a heated one to say the least. There are strong views on both sides from those that strongly feel that there are two clear genders and should be treated us such to those who view the issue of gender as fluid and fight for a fairness and levelling between the normally categorization of genders. This debate steps into the workplace and politics but also the classroom and it can put teachers in a difficult stance as they must work to respect the wishes of the parents, the authority within the school, and the children themselves.

A number of psychological studies show issues within this issue, as there is subconscious bias in each of us against or towards a certain genders. It is ingrained in each of us that boys and girls should be treated differently, whether we agree with that or not. And after studying teachers and how they control their classrooms it is evident that teachers inadvertantly, generally, treat little girls and boys differently. On the online database known as Educational Psychology there is a concise article that gathered data and information from a number of studies to clarify the ways that boys and girls are treated differently, it is entitled “Gender Differences in the Classroom.” The article clearly addresses that teachers need to monitor their bias and be aware of teaching children equally, but it also acknowledges that physically, relationally, and psychologically, boys and girls are different. This is not an all encompassing truth, but generally boys are more active and restless than girls so school environments are often more challenging to them. This then aligns with teachers needing to address boys more directly or more sternly. This response by the teachers can either be seen as an unnecessary and unequal form of treatment towards boys or a necessary response to their differing behavioral tendencies. Although, as mentioned, there are always outliers and the article states that these children that perhaps do not align with the normal gender roles, that are still largley in place across our society, would then benefit from more affirmation and emotional support from the teachers. This should not be seen as favoritism or bias but rather a teacher responding to individual children’s needs.

Interestingly enough the studies show that teachers tend to interact with boys 10-30% more than they do with girls. David Sadker reaffirms this sad fact in his book, “Failing at Fairness: How America’s Schools Cheat Girls.” This correlates to the fact that boys tend to be more assertive and vocal in social situations but still the truth behind this is limiting to girls in educational settings. Again I used the word ‘tend’ because there are always those that do not fit this average. But a sad fact reflecting right back on the teachers is that, “the tendency is to praise boys more than girls for displaying knowledge correctly, but to criticize girls more than boys for displaying knowledge incorrectly.” (Educational Psychology Database) Just imagine how this truth manifests itself in girls’ confidence levels and perpetuates the less assertive nature of females within society.

In Susan Goldberg’s article, “Gender in the Classroom,” she analyzes these patterns of behavior and societal response as well and talks about the negative affects that inserted stereotypes can have on individuals and society as a whole. She shares that we, the general public, don’t seem to be argueing for no genders whatsoever but rather for a breaking down of stereotypes that limit individuals and a destruction of societal aspects that stop us from living equally, as men and women.

Goldberg states, “What we are aiming for, though, are classrooms and schoolyards where all students can learn to their full potential. Too often, however, gender stereotypes—and their real-life applications—get in the way of that. Whether boys are seen as, and therefore conditioned to be, less empathetic, or girls grow up falsely believing they aren’t innately good at math and sciences, we all lose out.” Just to restate it, “we all lose out(!)” In her article, she uses the word “disrupt,” we must disrupt the stereotypes that hold us back but it does not mean that filling other stereotypes is bad per say, the argument is that stereotypes and social norms should not have the control over each of us that they do, we should each be allowed to be our own self and schools should be a place that foster this perception. Goldberg continues to discuss small biases that we are unaware of and unintentionally negative comments in regard to genders and assumptions.

The way to start combatting these stereotypes and the negative effects they produce, isn’t to necessarily just say that boys and girls should become naturally more alike and genders should be done away with necessarily, but rather each of us must combat our own biases and force ourself to check what we are saying and how we are acting. This is especially true of teachers as they have such an influential role in shaping young children.

 

 

 

The U.S. fails in terms of foreign language education. In comparison with other countries around the world where students will speak anywhere from 2 to 10 different languages by their teenage years, students in the U.S. generally go through their entire educational experience, usually including college, never learning to actually speak another language. This is largely due to the fact that second languages are rarely taught before the 6th or 7th grade in the U.S., at the point of puberty, when children generally lose their strong ability to pick up new language skills.

The debate that often surrounds this discussion is then, do we institute earlier educational practices for children in order to educate them on othe languages and cultures around the world?

Most people would support this assertion, but there are those that would not.  In the educational sense, U.S. students lack understanding of geography and national cultures. We suffer as a society from lack of understanding and appreciation towards other countries and their heritages. With increased language exposure students would also be learning more about other groups of people and where their beliefs and differences come from. This exposure is invaluable as a huge problem in the modern world stems from a lack of understanding and appreciation towards the diversity that exists.

 

Furthermore, research shows that students who are exposed to secondary language education have better test scores and higher cognitive ability because they are better at stretching and using every part of their mind. If a student is actively engaging their brain to understand a different language and understand what others are saying better than they will be better listeners and learners in other subjects as well. With more and more practice and exposure these parts of our brain improve within that secondary language as well as within the person’s primary language. This is incredibly valuable for communication skills within indivuals and their improvement of their first language.

What’s more, one of the largest and best arguments towards starting language education early, is that it allows us to communicate and connect with people around the world directly. Being able to speak to someone in their native language is an incredible gift and often can bridge the gap of distance between people. By speaking another’s language it allows you to get to know them on an individual level and appreciate who they are and what they have to share with you, what they have to teach you. By learning another language there is an awe and an appreciation for diversity and the language is a tool to understand it better and dive deeper into that awe.

I have learned a second language by immersing myself in another culture, another country, around people I didn’t know. And as I learned that language I was able to get to know those people better and appreciate where I was staying more. But if I had known the language from the beginning of my time I know that I could have known the people better and appreciated the culture more from the get go. All people should learn another language, simply in hopes of equipping them to live in an interconnected globalized world.

Although despite these thoughts and statistics, there are still those who disagree. They would say that teaching foreign languages is not essential, especially not earlier on in school. One point of view of this is that English is the most largely spoken language in the world, and therefore as Native English speakers there is little need to learn another language and meet others where they are at in their language abilities because the majority of the world does speak our language or has access to learn it. Others would also so that financially and in economic sense it doesn’t really make sense to invest in further foreign language education. Paying more educators and supplying more classroom materials for these classes doesn’t necessarily make sense for public schools as they already have so many expenses and other areas where they could be investing more funds. And similarly to this argument, some would say that rather than encouraging further foreign language eduction, classes for computer sciences or civic engagement should be added to curriculum.

The arguments for and against further foreign language eduction within primary and secondary schools within the U.S. are extensive and diverse. Hopefully the conversation between the two sides can continue on and steps can be made in order to bring the U.S. further into the global relationships and support a greater appreciation for the diversity that surrounds us. Only more time and analysis of global interconnectivity will reveal whether there is a true need for a higher level of foreign language education within the U.S.

 

Over the years the need for strong educators and higher levels of education has increased but somehow teachers’ salaries have been declining. As mentioned in my most recent post, the yearly pay of educators in many states has declined significantly and is generally in poor shape, yet with larger and larger populations and the push for better educations teachers need to be more frequent in number and better trained than ever before. As such, teachers have gotten fed up. They are doing jobs that are worthy of pay far greater than what they currently earn and have begun to speak up in order to demand a higher pay.

I recognized this dilemma only recently when I had my own experience, as I considered becoming a teacher. For a short month last semester I debated changing my major from an engineering degree to that of Spanish education. My mom, a teacher in a nearby pennsylvania school district encouraged whatever I decided but seemed uneasy about my decision, like most parents would be. But after a week or two when I was mulling over the decision she worked up the courage to tell me directly what she was thinking about my possible decision. She had talked to her fellow teachers, who I had in high school and they were all so upset that I would think about becoming a teacher. They begged her to talk to me, saying their hours and workloads were heavy, their pay lower than ever and the public education system a mess to work within. They would not recommend being a teacher to anyone they said. How sad is that?! If our own public teachers wouldn’t advise anyone to become a teacher how will the future generations be educated?

This issue is upsetting and worrisome for our future in the United States. And this issue began to truly manifest itself in 2018 as many teachers around the country took to the streets or walked out of classrooms in order to fight for better union rights and higher pay.

The movement began in West Virginia in Febuary of 2018 with a walk out that shut down schools throughout the state, in all 55 counties. Over 20,000 public educators left their classrooms demanding a 5% pay raise for all public employees with the educational field. Technically all labor strikes are illegal in West Virginia, so although it was not coined a strike, the teachers refused to work, 9 school days were cancelled, until they accomplished their goal (The 2018 Wave of Teacher Strikes, Stan Karp). This was a huge success for these teachers and a necessary win as West Virginia teachers have seen their salaries fall by more than 11 percent since 2009 and nationally, teachers’ salaries are down by roughly 5%. More students, less teachers, less funding, this equation just doesn’t add up.

WV may have been the first state to model a teacher ‘strike’ but it’s success spurred on others throughout the country. Walk outs, marches, protests have been held in Arizona, Colorado, Oklahoma, and Kentucky, most of which have also been successful to some extent.

There was discussion for a period of time about how the protests seemed to be only in primarily republically leaning ‘red’ states or ‘purple’ ones but with California predicting teacher protests that correlation does not seem to affect the cause of these strikes as directly as analysts originally thought. Yet still the stance that politicians take on this issue is revealing and makes them nervous as election dates near, none want to be seen as “anit-teacher.” There are more and more rumours as we dive deeper into 2019 about strikes in Illinois, Washington, and even Texas. Texas is especially surprising as there are strict laws about teacher strikes and the stripping of benefits that would result from them, yet despite that threat teachers still seem motivated to strike for their salaries and resources. Washington teachers rejected a ‘mere’ 6.9% pay rise and seem convicted to keep fighting.

Most teachers claim that they are truly protesting for their students. They want them to have the best educations possible and hate to leave their classes for a period of time, knowing the wholes in curriculum that it creates, but in the long run they believe it will be for the greater good. Teachers across the nation are being forced to represent to their civic classes the true act of democratic participation, as they stand up for their own political beliefs and use their voices to fight for what they think is fair. Statistics show that the majority of the nation is on their side but it’s still need to be seen where this funding to pay teachers more will come from and how politicians and legislators will respond to the issue as time progresses. Hopefully educators will remain in classrooms long enough to teach but short enough to make a change.

Last week I shed light on the differing perspectives that exist towards higher education within the U.S. today, this week I hope to shift focus to our institutes of secondary education, and specifically teachers’ salary. This issue has been highlighted recently by the strikes that have been held around the nation over the past year by teachers who refuse to continue to take pay cuts or simply work for such low amounts, I’d like to dive deeper into these strikes in the coming week but for now simply look at the statistics behind these debated salaries, how they have changed over the years and how they compare between states.

The Washington Post released a telling article in March of 2018, written by Valerie Strauss, entitled, “How much (or how little) do teachers earn – state by state.”  In her article, Strauss pulls from raw statistics over the last 40, nearly 50, some years to educate readers about the evolution, or in some sense, the lack there of, of teachers’ salaries. The average teacher’s salary in the United States as of 2017 was $45,701. Surprisingly low in many people’s eyes, or even worse, not surprisingly. Many people are aware of the hard tasks that teachers have to educate the youth of the nation, and most are also aware and seem to believe that teachers are not paid enough for the work they do. According to Chalkbeat, an online educational news platform, 68% of the population agrees that teachers should be paid more, but how does this compare to the actual changes over the recent years? In fact many state’s have decreased their teachers’ salaries over the past 18 years, in reference to the charts below the far right column is shocking in the case of states such as Arizona or Colorado where the salaries have decreased by more than 10% since 2000. The difference in pay between states is also staggering when looking at the second right-most column, where you can notice that a teacher in the state of New York could earn nearly 80 thousand a year compared to the mere 42 thousand of that in South Dakota, nearly half!

A Forbes article by Niall McCarthy entitled “Where U.S. Pay is Highest and Lowest,” shows slightly differing data as in the info-graphic below. And he too highlights the grand disparities between salaries of different states.

These disparities among states and the generally low salary of teachers creates a public opinion that it is all well and good to be a teacher but that you will be underpaid and over-worked. Many public school teachers today would remind students of this before suggesting a higher educational degree in education. This public opinion and understanding than leads to a slowly decreasing amount of full time school teachers. According to the National Center for Education Statistics, there were roughly 3.6 million full time primary and secondary teachers working in 2017 which was 1% less than in 2006. The current student to teacher ratio within the country is 16:1, and yet that statistic will vary from state to state and school district to school district. Individuals are not incentivized to become teachers if the pay is low and the work is extremely difficult in comparison, and the possible effect this could have in the future is very negative, as teachers are an essential part in educating those who will fill all other professions and aspects of our government and daily life.

There is the commonly heard phrase, “If you can’t do, teach!” To which teachers would most likely laugh off or embrace jokingly, but there is an aspect of dysfunction in that phrase that we can’t seem to truly embrace and value in our society. We must recognize that not only can teachers “do” but they can then explain, educate, inform, aid, elevate those around them. Teachers are the individuals who have devoted themselves to serving others and creating those who will change the world. Seemingly only 68% of the nation can see this, and without a greater awareness and appreciation of teachers and what they do, there will likely be fewer and fewer of them, or possibly just more on strike.

I look forward to next week as we look to analyze the different teacher’s movements around the world and how individual teachers are speaking up in order to fight for better pay and resources, funding and support, to better educate young people.

 

As students attending a university and pursuing our secondary education, we have a unique perspective of the academic climate that currently exists. Many would say that their college experience thus far has been largely positive, although there are also those who would quickly offer many critiques. This diversity in opinions is present in other societal circles as well, even among researchers and reporters as they attempt to understand the current condition of higher education in the United States. There are those who would say that the level and access of education are declining while others would say that academia in the U.S. is at an all-time high standard. Throughout this post I hope to accurately align two of these opposing views and insert my own commentary as a current college student attending a public university.

 

Steven Brint, a sociology professor and author, evaluates that “American universities have never been stronger” in his article “Is this High Education’s Golden Age?” which was published in The Chronicle. He claims that despite people’s pessimism towards high education today, universities and graduate and research programs are doing exceedingly well in today’s modern sociopolitical and economic climate. According to Brint, many believe that universities have “forsaken their social and cultural responsibilities,” as they have been marketized, but he retorts that nonetheless, universities are educating more students at a higher level than ever before. Brint shares statistics such as the fact that research expenditures grew by more than 10 times between 1980 and 2010 and that Federal funding was at $30 billion in 2017. Apparently graduate degrees have become more common and overall attendance of universities is up, and this increase of education benefits the students greatly, as college educated individuals are expected to earn more than $1 million more than high school educated citizens. Brint writes, “as the telecommunications industry anticipates the day when every person owns a smartphone, so, too, does higher education anticipate the day when every qualified person will hold a degree, credential, or certificate.” This is a bold statement to say the least, and seems to combat the idea that universities are failing to educate their students, but perhaps it eludes to the real issue that many other authors and sociologists point out. Perhaps this debate about institution’s golden ages is suffering from a rhetorical issue of differing arguments. As Brint argues about the statistics and the financial success of universities as more citizens are graduating every year, many other writers don’t deny these facts but argue that Brint and others are overlooking a greater issue beneath simply the raw statistics.

 

Anne-Marie Slaughter is one such writer, political scientist, lawyer and foundation president, declares that those statistics may be true but she moves back to a universities “social and cultural responsibilities.” In her article, “The Broken Promise of Higher Education,” published in The Atlantic, she declares the statistic that ONLY 59% of college students graduate within six years! This means that most now a days don’t even graduate within 4 years, the typical college degree length. Slaughter shares that is is du to lack of finances or poor academic preparation or simply factors of life preventing students from completing their degree. Those who do not graduate face higher rates of unemployment and debt from the years of university they did pay for before dropping out. Slaughter proposes that as a society we must ask who is responsible for this “abysmal national graduation rate?” 58% of people believe that universities are responsible for their student’s success and yet we are still faced with the current graduation rate which reflects very poorly on our universities, even if Brint’s statistics are true that there are more students graduating now than in the past. Slaughter goes on to share that this graduation rate reflects itself in national opinions, the economy, and political viewpoints. Her article ends by her saying, “[people] are proudly watching their friends and family members receive their degree- but for those who don’t graduate, their debt loads and dashed hopes paint a much darker picture of American high education.”

 

And there seems to be the issue of the argument, Brint’s side seems to only be focusing on the “golden age” whereas that of Slaughter seems to be focused on the “darker picture.” In order to get an accurate image of the current climate surrounding higher education in the U.S. the stance needs to be more wholistic and recognize that the true image is a mix of both, more gray than golden or dark.

 

Yes, more students are graduating and that should be something to celebrate and continue encouraging that. The marketizing of universities has not been completely negative as the diversity of schools has grown and they are more incentivized to better themselves. But it is also true that the “abysmal graduation rate” must be addressed. As a student I can claim responsibility for us all, we need to take responsibility in general for our educations, but the whole weight does not rest on us alone. Our universities must come along side of us and lift us up, offering resources and help to students who financially or academically or physically require it. I can see this aid here at Penn State in the form of scholarships and tutoring centers and organizations like “Best Buddies.” Yet there seems to always be more to be done, so rather than fixing our eyes on and analyzing the idea of a golden age, we must spur on progress in the hopes of actually reaching it.

To get in touch with Penn State and work to make the University better, contact a hotline or email a dean and have yourself and your ideas heard!

https://www.psu.edu/hotlines

https://ed.psu.edu/internal/deans-office

Thank you so much for visiting my site! My name is Tori Lenze and I am a second semester student at the Pennsylvania State University. I am currently pursuing a degree in Mechanical Engineering with a minor in Spanish.

I hope you enjoy reading my posts and how I approach different civic issues that face our modern society, feel free to leave comments, concerns, suggestions, questions and/or feedback, I’d love to hear what you think!

Site Provider:

Sites At Penn State.