Tags » ‘crossroads’

What is the future of Education?

September 26th, 2012 by

I’ve been doing a lot of thinking lately on what, exactly, the future of the American Education System is going to be, if we continue down the road we’re currently traveling… AND what the future could or should be, given our current level of technology development, social and cultural development, and the current damage being dealt to the next generation via our outdated, outmoded, and detrimental clinging to paradigms in education that were relevant 50 – 100 years ago, but are now counterproductive.

All this against the backdrop of my first experience as a PARENT within the education system… my child has just begun 1st grade…

Transforming an entrenched, funded, and “we’ve always done it this way” mindset within the education system is a daunting task.  Sometimes it feels too big, too overwhelming.  But, by the same measure, if someone – if I – don’t start, we’re going to have a real hot mess in (probably) less than a decade’s time.  Some folks think we already have a real hot mess now.

So, stop number one on this train ride, is thought provoking material from “The Innovative Educator” blog.  One teacher chimes in with “20 Things” – 20 insider observations – that he thinks outsiders should know about the education system… and another teacher comments on each of the 20 items. They don’t always agree, but the sum of their observations sheds much light on what is going wrong, or is about to go wrong, in today’s schools.

20 Things an Educator Wants the Nation to Know About Education

What do you think?

Introducing Generation Four (G4) in School-Age Care

December 28th, 2009 by

What do we mean when we talk about “Generation 4″ – or G4 when it comes to the Out-of-School-Time profession?

G4 is a direct thought-line descendant from “Generation Theory”- work that was pioneered and authored by the Ollhoffs, et. al. at Concordia University’s department of After-School Time (a subdivision of their Education Department).

In a nutshell, Generation Theory traces the purposes and defining characteristics of School-Age Care programs. Generation 1 had as it’s focus a simple warehousing of children while parents worked- a utilitarian viewpoint. Generation 2 followed with child-centered and developmental activities. Generation 3 took the long view of the child, family, school and culture, and promoted School-Age Care as an integral piece to the overall socialization of children and youth.

Through the heyday of the Youth Development Movement of the mid-to-late 1990′s (and early 2000′s), Generation 3 and Youth Development Theories seemed likely to create a critical mass nationwide in Out-Of-School-Time arenas and were poised to win the day as the gold standard for Out-of-School-Time philosophy. The National Afterschool Association (NAA) published it’s “Purple Bible” for quality baselines in School Age Care. Concordia University in St. Paul rolled out its groundbreaking School-Age Care degrees, both for undergraduate and post-graduate work.

Then came the Bush years (and, in California, the Schwarzenegger years)… No Child Left Behind became law, and Prop 49 was passed in California setting in motion a conflict for the soul of the Out-of-School-Time profession. Should after-school (School Age Care centers and Out-of-School-Time-focused organizations) continue in the vein of the Youth Development philosophy, or should they be co-opted as second-fiddle actors in the rush to boost school-day test scores?

Today, we stand at that crossroads.

Generation 4 will either see the continued development and implementation of Youth Develoment strategies and professionalization of the after school field, or it will fall as we see Out-of-School-Time disappear and be co-opted into a longer school day. At this point, it could go either way.