Saturday, October 04, 2008
Education, we don't need no
Why is education not an issue in the United States? I wonder, has it ever been?
This is a Gallup poll showing the priorities of the American voter:
By the way, this is one of the few polls I could find that actually lists education as a seperate subject. Most polls don't even mention education and just throw it on the "other" pile.
You see, it's right under abortion. Wait, what? Abortion is a bigger issue than education!?
..
Let me explain to you how this blows my mind. In The Netherlands, education is at least a 20% issue I estimate. Abortion hasn't even been a main stream issue since the 70's, and probably (hopefully) never will be again.
I know the comparison isn't entirely fair, because Holland has a parlimantary system with proportional representation, which means that political parties can set their own priorities and still end up with a good election result. For instance, you have the center-right liberal party (VVD) who has safety and immigration as their most important issues, a left-wing socialist party (SP) who care more about social security/health care and poverty, and even a Christian party (CDA) that sits more in the center of the political spectrum. (Note that abortion is not even an issue with the latter, showing how one religion can be so different based on how people choose to interpret it's fundamentals).
But you know what? Every single party makes education important. Parties do not get away by not having a laid out plan for what they want to do with the the educational system.
I do not fully understand why it's not imporant to people here. Usually when education is mentioned it's because the candidates are having a rally on a university campus. You don't hear it in the debates (or did I miss something?). If you do hear it, it's a one-liner such as "we need to make sure that every student can get loans to go to college"
It's amazing that this is where it is at: making sure that young people are able to start out their lives with a gigantic financial burden. Not making education more affordable, but making loans more accessible. Because borrowing money works out so well for the country, right? ¶ 10/04/2008 12:42:00 PM
This is a Gallup poll showing the priorities of the American voter:
| The economy | 42 | |||
| The situation in Iraq | 13 | |||
| Energy, including gas prices | 13 | |||
| Health care | 13 | |||
| Terrorism | 12 | |||
| Illegal immigration (vol.) | 1 | |||
| Abortion (vol.) | 1 | |||
| Education (vol.) | 1 | |||
| Other | 4 |
By the way, this is one of the few polls I could find that actually lists education as a seperate subject. Most polls don't even mention education and just throw it on the "other" pile.
You see, it's right under abortion. Wait, what? Abortion is a bigger issue than education!?
..
Let me explain to you how this blows my mind. In The Netherlands, education is at least a 20% issue I estimate. Abortion hasn't even been a main stream issue since the 70's, and probably (hopefully) never will be again.
I know the comparison isn't entirely fair, because Holland has a parlimantary system with proportional representation, which means that political parties can set their own priorities and still end up with a good election result. For instance, you have the center-right liberal party (VVD) who has safety and immigration as their most important issues, a left-wing socialist party (SP) who care more about social security/health care and poverty, and even a Christian party (CDA) that sits more in the center of the political spectrum. (Note that abortion is not even an issue with the latter, showing how one religion can be so different based on how people choose to interpret it's fundamentals).
But you know what? Every single party makes education important. Parties do not get away by not having a laid out plan for what they want to do with the the educational system.
I do not fully understand why it's not imporant to people here. Usually when education is mentioned it's because the candidates are having a rally on a university campus. You don't hear it in the debates (or did I miss something?). If you do hear it, it's a one-liner such as "we need to make sure that every student can get loans to go to college"
It's amazing that this is where it is at: making sure that young people are able to start out their lives with a gigantic financial burden. Not making education more affordable, but making loans more accessible. Because borrowing money works out so well for the country, right? ¶ 10/04/2008 12:42:00 PM
Comments:
<< Home
This has struck me as well. Last month I was canvassing about, tracking concerns, and I think I heard "education" mentioned twice of the 700-something people I talked to.
I think we don't really know how ignorant we are.
I think we don't really know how ignorant we are.
That's why I love Obama's idea: doing community service in exchange for your education. I would have gladly done that versus taking out so much in loans.
There's more, here .. not solely for higher education:
http://www.barackobama.com/issues/education/
There's more, here .. not solely for higher education:
http://www.barackobama.com/issues/education/
I like Obama's idea too, only Paulie has it right. Why is it that LOANS must be made more accessible, rather than education.
My take, as a foreign-born citizen, is a simple one: America has always proven that education is not a prerequisite for making a lot of money and having a very good life. America has always been about innovation and entrepreneurship, and less about education and the importance of it in the workforce. The fallacy is that most of the time, education is vital in the workforce here, but the American worker is flying on a dream...the dream that one day soon he/she will hit it big with his/her business idea. Or invention. Or "talent."
What's amazing to me is that, at a "local" level, if you ask any person he/she will stress how flawed our education system is, how we are in a shortage of good teachers, how teachers' pay is low and they have no incentives, in effect how much we need to concentrate on re-building this system...and on the other hand, these same people are the ones who call well-educated politicians, or just well-educated citizens Elitists and snobs and intellectuals.
What's wrong with striving to be educated (not formally even. Education doesn't have to mean a college degree necessarily)??
The defensive attitude is amazing, and quite comical. What most people deem as "high-brow" and "elitist" and "intellectual" is basically a well-spoken, well-educated person explaining his/her position. In listening or reading people such as Hitchens, Susan Sontag, Katrina VanDenHeuvel, Thomas Friedman, David Brooks, George Will, William F. Buckley Jr., and even...yes EVEN William Saffire, I don't feel these people "talk down" to me. They use intelligent sentence structure, logic, syntax, and line of argument to express their positions.
Your average "Joe Six-Pack" may not necessarily understand the line of reasoning, and immediately will deem the speaker an elitist. I challenge any conservative/Republican Joe-Six Pack and McPalin supporter/Hockey Mom to read prominent (and now, sadly dead) conservative writer William F. Buckley Jr. and tell me exactly what his position is. I'll take the odds that these people, without knowing his allegiance, will label him an "intellectual/elite/professorial" snob.
Stay in School!
My take, as a foreign-born citizen, is a simple one: America has always proven that education is not a prerequisite for making a lot of money and having a very good life. America has always been about innovation and entrepreneurship, and less about education and the importance of it in the workforce. The fallacy is that most of the time, education is vital in the workforce here, but the American worker is flying on a dream...the dream that one day soon he/she will hit it big with his/her business idea. Or invention. Or "talent."
What's amazing to me is that, at a "local" level, if you ask any person he/she will stress how flawed our education system is, how we are in a shortage of good teachers, how teachers' pay is low and they have no incentives, in effect how much we need to concentrate on re-building this system...and on the other hand, these same people are the ones who call well-educated politicians, or just well-educated citizens Elitists and snobs and intellectuals.
What's wrong with striving to be educated (not formally even. Education doesn't have to mean a college degree necessarily)??
The defensive attitude is amazing, and quite comical. What most people deem as "high-brow" and "elitist" and "intellectual" is basically a well-spoken, well-educated person explaining his/her position. In listening or reading people such as Hitchens, Susan Sontag, Katrina VanDenHeuvel, Thomas Friedman, David Brooks, George Will, William F. Buckley Jr., and even...yes EVEN William Saffire, I don't feel these people "talk down" to me. They use intelligent sentence structure, logic, syntax, and line of argument to express their positions.
Your average "Joe Six-Pack" may not necessarily understand the line of reasoning, and immediately will deem the speaker an elitist. I challenge any conservative/Republican Joe-Six Pack and McPalin supporter/Hockey Mom to read prominent (and now, sadly dead) conservative writer William F. Buckley Jr. and tell me exactly what his position is. I'll take the odds that these people, without knowing his allegiance, will label him an "intellectual/elite/professorial" snob.
Stay in School!
# posted by 
: 9:44 AM
: 9:44 AM
I suspect that education is not an issue because both sides basically agree that it's a problem and also agree to the general outlines of a solution. Thus, there is no traction for them to distinguish themselves from each other on that issue.
They both basically agree with the premise that the education system is doing a poor job of producing the right kind of product. They might quibble about what the right product is, but they agree that the education system is a factory that should produce products. They agree that the system should be managed for efficiency and accountability.
Obama and McCain both agree that schools are supposed to follow the moral path of discrimination, they only disagree about how to make the discrimination. I followed the link that stefaddink provided to Obama's site and listened to his speech on education. In that speech he is clearly committed to the idea that the education system is supposed to be a servant to the economic system, just like all the other politicians.
The problem is that a true alternative is completely off their radar. My site is about creating that kind of alternative.
--
Enjoy,
Don Berg
Site: http://www.teach-kids-attitude-1st.com
Blog: blog.Attitutor.com
Post a Comment
They both basically agree with the premise that the education system is doing a poor job of producing the right kind of product. They might quibble about what the right product is, but they agree that the education system is a factory that should produce products. They agree that the system should be managed for efficiency and accountability.
Obama and McCain both agree that schools are supposed to follow the moral path of discrimination, they only disagree about how to make the discrimination. I followed the link that stefaddink provided to Obama's site and listened to his speech on education. In that speech he is clearly committed to the idea that the education system is supposed to be a servant to the economic system, just like all the other politicians.
The problem is that a true alternative is completely off their radar. My site is about creating that kind of alternative.
--
Enjoy,
Don Berg
Site: http://www.teach-kids-attitude-1st.com
Blog: blog.Attitutor.com
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home
