“People are alarmed and thinking about science, and perhaps this alarm could be turned toward a constructive result.”
These were the words of former President Dwight D. Eisenhower in 1958, one year after the launch of the Soviet spacecraft Sputnik. This led to the passing of the National Defense Education Act.
The good: various scholarships and loans were made available to public and private schools, along with new and improved scientific equipment.
The bad: the federal government had dipped its hands in public schools and taken over. It told schools that math and science were more important and schools lost a localized approach.
“It trumped all of the state and local control on issues in the public school system,” Elizabeth Lewin said, a professor in the department of educational administration at Southern Illinois University Carbondale.
So what is more important: increased funding from the national government or schools having a narrower and more local approach?
It’s an important question that must be addressed. But will the issue be approached if local news dies?
Newspapers are dying fast, including local ones. As a result, newspapers have taken a new approach to attracting readers: more pictures and graphics, new layouts, and less focus on hard news. This creates less focus on education, which should be the top matter on a community’s agenda.
Unless there are newspapers, there will not be newsrooms. Without the newsrooms, there is less communication between reporters and local news goes down the drain; local reports on education require the collaboration of editors and reporters who know the community. If local news dies, all focus shifts to education on a national level.
While this is bad news, there are reasons to be optimistic. The federal government has implemented various educational policies that have helped many communities.
For the last eight years, the No Child Left Behind Act has dominated education news. Numerous school districts have reported improved test scores and expectations for teachers have gone up. In 1972, another federal act, Title IX, increased benefits and funding for girls’ athletics.
While these mandates sound nice on the surface, they did not have the same effect on every school district.
In some districts, NCLB has created controversy. Some teachers feel that the curriculum has narrowed and there is no deep understanding of material. Test scores may be higher, but students could be learning less; teachers know what they have to teach and may zip through the material. Some believe this means less focus on a broader understanding of material and more emphasis on specific ideas.
Even Title IX had its problems, according to Lewin.
“It was really hard, as a coach of girls’ sports, for me to look at my male counterparts, knowing that many of them are losing,” Lewis said. “It was great that I was getting gym time to practice…but however, I didn’t want to see the boys not have that opportunity.”
The fact is this: these federal policies have a huge impact on a local level, both good and bad. Their effects vary according to certain communities, making local news extremely important.
Who knows Carbondale better than its local reporters? Who will report on the academic achievement gap at Carbondale High School? How will parents know the amount of funding going towards their child’s local education?
“So much is cultural, and those who are reporting and writing must understand that,” Lewin said. “There is a huge difference in what is allowed in a curriculum in a Carbondale district and what may be allowed in a Harrisburg district.”
As online-based news grows, more attention must be put on education. Local newspapers need to press the issues and keep parents interested.
What is more important: knowing national statistics for the latest federal educational mandate or knowing how it will affect your child?
No comments:
Post a Comment