The Value of Education

This is no heart-felt plea for respect.  No rhymed verse poetic “Ode to the Teacher”. It isn’t even a slam poet’s version of why teachers make a difference (no offense, Taylor Mali).  Instead it is some truth, packaged in the form of a few notes from Linda Darling-Hammond’s The Flat World and Education.  For many years my parents have told me and taught me the value of education.  But, I’m one of the minority in this department, I believe.  Many students, past and present, do not realize the importance that a good education has, or the power that comes with having one.  They aren’t the only ones.  Many of their parents don’t see the connection as well.  But, the buck doesn’t stop their either.  Alas, the focus of this entry will be about groups that don’t value education as much as they should, or don’t show that they value it to a level that is commensurate with other highly-achieving nations.

We’ll start from the top, looking at why it is more socially acceptable to spend money on prisons than it is on educating the same persons who may soon be filling those beds and solitary cells.  Ours is a nation that apparently only sees how education affects those who can afford it, or those who would have used it no matter how they received it.  Darling-Hammond focuses on another clientele as she notes the disparities between what we say we value, and what actually gets done.  It’s the difference between an espoused platform and a platform in use, to borrow a phrase.  Darling-Hammond points out that from 1987 to 2007 spending on corrections grew by 127% in the U.S., while education spending saw gains of only 21% (2010).  What these, and other similar numbers, scream is our willingness to be a reactive society, instead of a proactive one.  This business model always fails.  And let’s be frank, that’s largely what today’s public school system is set up to resemble:  a business.  But it’s a business that is slow to produce measureable results, at least in the eyes of politicians who promote, sign off on, and legislate these expenditures.  Instead of policy-makers funneling more money towards schools that teach would-be leaders, continuing learners, and valuable members of economies, they prefer to react to the consequences of failing to do the former.  Nations that value education invest in its possibilities, while our nation’s slighting of its potential as a salvation for some pretty serious social and economic issues shows what we really value. 

If we want to continue this numbers game, we can.  Darling-Hammond factors out what those on the fringe of education cost our society.  $200 billion dollars a year.  Not providing valuable educational processes, experienced, trained, professional teachers, and adequate facilities that have access to technology both in and out of the classroom costs our country that much money in lost wages and taxes, social services costs, and of course, crime due to school dropouts (Darling-Hammond, 2010).  These are students that either see education as a waste, or have been taught that it is a waste – through cultural, social, or other means.  It seems as easy solution to me to funnel that $200 billion – or a marginal portion of it at least – towards facilities, teachers, curriculum upgrades, and technology and see where that leaves our prisons, juvenile justice system, and social services offices.  The hope is (just like all good business models, because, say it with me, that’s realistically what schools are anyway…) that the return on investing in the educational futures of these students would be measureable in not just standardized test scores, but in economic and social fashions.  Surely, this sounds good to those politicians discussed earlier, right?  How could it not.

But saying we need to invest this money elsewhere is too short-sighted, too vague.  How about a portion of it for teacher’s professional development/education, just like they do in other highly-achieving nations?  This idea would help to clarify just how to invest some of those poorly allocated monies.  Darling-Hammond points to a number of eye-popping ways in which other countries educate, train, and develop teachers that could, if implemented correctly, help to accomplish some of those aforementioned ROI’s.  For example, increasing the expectations of teacher education programs to include more clinical training and coursework, all funded at government expense (now there’s a way to show how much education is valued…).  Mentoring programs for all beginning teachers, and not just the one hour lunch meetings that I was a part of.  Instead, how about expert teachers leading the focused sessions, with reduced teaching loads and shared planning?  Or, my personal favorite, embedded professional learning communities in schools.  15 to 25 hours a week of shared planning, action research, time for attending conferences and institutes, and participating in retreats would surely show dividends in quality of teacher development and expertise in the classroom.  To be even less “greedy”, I’d settle for 2.5 hours a week to help my department as we consider how to align our current curriculum with the Common Core Standards that our state has adapted.  Most in the department would love to truly devote some time to going through this process, but with various other obligations on top of our regular teaching loads it is nearly impossible to conceive, let alone accomplish.

The burden of valuing education can be shared by many different entities.  Policy-makers need to show a commitment to changing the cultural value of education.  Teachers and administrators need to raise professional standards of accountability and commitment.  And in so doing a cultural understanding about the value of education needs to come to the forefront, as a true option for those who otherwise would not see it as one.  These changes are all possible – just look at other highly-achieving nations who have passed us by, thanks to their focus on the value of education.