Blog #5: Teaching, Cost-of-Living, and Happiness

How well are teachers paid in Nashville versus Atlanta?

Questions such as these can not be answered without taking into consideration the cost-of-living for the two cities. Georgiou, Villarreal, and Moore, (2005), research associates and senior policy analyst for the conservative think tank NCPA (the National Center for Policy Analysis) report in their 2005 publication titled "Teacher's Cost of Living Matters More," that public officials and teachers unions often compare a particular city to the national average. That is good to information to know but it does not tell one how one's standard of living will be affected. As their data shows, one working as a teacher in Memphis, making the average salary of $45,000 would actually be taking a significant pay cut insofar as standard of living if he or she took a job at $59,300 in San Francisco. Their data shows that when one compares "apples to apples" the adjusted salary goes down from $50,800 in Memphis to $32,700 in San Francisco.

This above information is good to know but other matters must be considered. Depending on what one values in life another type index may be necessary. For example one may be glad to take a pay cut, maybe not as extreme as the above example of Memphis versus San Francisco, but a pay cut none the less if some other "valuable" consideration were attained by this move.

An interesting idea also related to this is the idea of not measuring the validity of something, a country for example, by its GNP (Gross National Product) but by happiness. This make sense. In a three minute YouTube video (What is Gross National Happiness?, n.d.) narrator Morten Sondergaard explains how the seventeen year old King of Bhutan devised a GNH (Gross National Happiness) measure. He noticed that many first world countries were striving hard for happiness largely by fiscal means. And some were achieving this. But in addition to stress and other bad elements there was a large portion of the population in these countries that were not doing well at all. That were not happy. Also, he noticed the effect of the successful group took a serious toll on the environment. He, starting his reign at seventeen, did not want such a legacy associated with his name or his country.

The Bhutanese King devises his GNH measurement by balancing economics with emotional and spiritual well being. These apparently is a good or valid measurement as seen by its use in more and more countries today. People working with this GNH idea are currently (i.e. 2011) working in areas such as "bioplastics" and "fuel from the forests" -- the latter being a program where the trees are not cut down but are tapped for their turpentine which is then converted into fuel.

Please see references below for current teacher salaries working with Metro Nashville Public Schools and a cost-of-living website showing the Nashville/Franklin area to be less costly than the national average.

Many things should be considered when contemplating the results of one's work.

References:

Georgiou, D., Villarreal, P., and Moore, M. (October 24, 2005). "Teacher's cost of living matters more." National center for policy analysis.
Retrieved from
http://www.ncpa.org/pub/ba535

2011 Cost-of-Living Index: Nashville/Franklin TN. (n.d.) Retrieved from http://www.williamsoncounty-tn.gov/index.aspx?NID=715

"What is Gross National Happiness?" (n.d.) YouTube video retrieved at http://youtu.be/7Zqdqa4YNvI

Teacher Salary Schedule (n.d.) Retrieved from http://www.hr.mnps.org/Page50417.aspx

Two strikes, two outs and the Centrist fielder is up to bat.

 

If this was a baseball game the competition would be between three guys; two college players (not double “AA” or triple “AAA”, just college level guys) and the pitcher for the Texas Rangers. Waxler and Kyriakou are the guys hoping to get on a minor league team.

They all wrote articles on cultural issues but Hirsch is not a dabbler in the field. To his credit as a journalist, Kyriakou has published in the Huffington Post -- one article. Hmmm. Whereas Waxler is working with his wife in real estate, teaching middle school social sciences and working in education in other ways too.

But Hirsch is a different story. For instance he published a book back in 1987 (Cultural Literacy: What Every American Needs to Know) which went to #2 on NY Times Best Sellers lists and remained on the list for six months. (Wikipedia, n.d.)

I like a little “bio” on who I’m reading. But I digress. If you’re interested, check out Twitter and Facebook for the college boys and roll back your C-Span tapes and check out the impressive stats at Wikipedia for our Yale grad.

Ok, the game’s delayed due to rain (like I had time to watch it!? Krishnaaaa!!! Or is that “Jeees!!” for the not so multiculturalistically correct?), so let’s “dabble” into some education issues. 

<< Enter “reflective mode” >>

Setting: the year 2006. 

The immigrant issue has brought 500,000 and 300,000 protesters, perhaps a new form of civil rights not just for blacks, to the cities of Los Angeles and Chicago respectively. Political matters relative to this are debated in the Senate and House. One side would like their tax money and other issues such as an English language requirement. The other side thinks maybe a fence along the border will fix the problem. (Kyriakou, 2006)

Comment: People living in Mexico don’t like it.

Next…

Setting: “n.d.” (Is time actually real anyway???)

Location: Middle school social science class.

Mr. Waxler advocates incorporating cultural events into class discussions. While discussing the Vietnam War for example, students are encouraged to think about this conflict from various perspectives. Waxler (n.d.) reasons that this type thinking, in which they formulate arguments and make critical judgments leads to deeper thinking which leads to more retention which translates into higher standardized test scores.

Comment: Who won the Vietnam war? It was the U.S. right? We (you know, us white guys) always win don’t we? What do you mean we walked away, tails dragging? “It wasn’t really a war!!”

(i.e. I was never taught this. I was in high school when the war finally ended, and I don’t think the press or the schools really knew how to handle it. I think they were too afraid to discuss it. I think ideas as to who we were as a nation and what our place in the world was were not so developed at the time. We are a diverse country. Figuring out our place is still evolving.)

Next…

Setting: Paper on multiculturalism and the idea of a centrist curriculum, 1992.

In an “Ah ha!” moment E.D.Hirsch, Jr. has realized that minorities, such as blacks in America, do not do poorly on tests due to intellectual insufficiencies  but due to a lack of exposure to the ideas and concepts they find themselves confronted with. This leads him to conclude, “We will achieve a just and prosperous society only when our schools ensure that everyone commands enough shared knowledge to communicate effectively with everyone else…” (Hirsch, 1992)

In South Africa Hirsch also sees “that only through teaching this centrist common core is there a chance for all citizens to attain equal economic opportunity and live in harmony….”

Hirsch develops his ideas on multiculturalism. He sees one form as ethno-centric and the other as a cosmopolitan model. The former suggests a loyalty to the tribe or ethnic group in which one has taken birth (something many would postulate as being out of the individuals arena of choice). He sees the other as one of choice by the individual. In other words, “just because I was born in a culture that went to the Mosque on Tuesdays and ate pickle burgers on Fridays during Lent-Hoshana doesn’t mean I have to!” 

Hirsch feels it is a presumption to insist that ethnicity defines who one is. He feels that within a cosmopolitan form of multiculturalism one can freely choose who he or she is

Hirsch makes the following point: “If we assert the right of all peoples to their own ethnicity, do we also sanction the ethnic intolerance that characterizes many cultures?” 

Hirsch favors the centrist idea of being a citizen of the world as a whole. He feels that an evolutionary change will occur in regard to America’s culture. He does not feel that this idea of a centrist culure, in which one is a citizen of the world will drown out the great diversity America contains.

Comments: “We must know the present need of human society. And what is that need? Human society is no longer bounded by geographical limits to particular countries or communities. Human society is broader than in the Middle Ages, and the world tendency is toward one state or one human society… Human society, at the present moment, is not in the darkness of oblivion. It has made rapid progress in the field of material comforts, education and economic development throughout the entire world. But there is a pinprick somewhere in the social body at large, and therefore there are large-scale quarrels, even over less important issues. There is need of a clue as to how humanity can become one in peace, friendship and prosperity with a common cause.” (Bhaktivedanta, 1962)

Perhaps the field of education, which is neither science, religion, nor philosophy, is the mechanism for bringing people together for the common cause of truth, acknowledging our common source and destiny!

Truth is not bereft of diversity. But what is diversity without truth?

References:

Bhaktivedanta, A.C. (1962). Preface to the Srimad Bhagavatam. Retrieved from http://vedabase.com/en/sb/1/preface

Hirsch, E.D.  (1992). Toward a centrist curriculum:  Two kinds of multiculturalism in elementary school.  Core Knowledge Foundation

Kyriakou, Niko.  (2006).  Organizer’s see 'new civil rights movement' in immigration protests.  OneWorld.net

Waxler, Adam.  (n.d).  Multiculturalism in school curriculum.  ESL Teachers Board

Multiculturalism: Right, wrong or indifferent?

Multiculturalism is the idea that countries actually consist of more than one culture. For example in the United States there are certain areas where the prominent culture is Chinese. Witness Chinatown in San Francisco. Or certain sections of New York City are predominantly of a Jewish ethnicity or culture.

As our text illustrates (Webb, Metha, & Jordan, 2010) these ideas on culture are also part of, if not problematic to, education. Many questions arise regarding teaching such subjects as History or Social Science. A main question becomes: Whose culture (or viewpoint) are we to teach? For example Columbus Day is approaching and I’ve seen some posts on Facebook regarding this from a multicultural aspect. This is good. People can understand, when properly informed, that others have their viewpoint of things. In other words the dominant (or previously dominant?) “white” viewpoint and history of Christopher Columbus and the early settlers in America may be considered a terribly unfair viewpoint from which to discuss the events that happened.

According to one of our articles (Taylor, S., n.d.) it is now happening that many white people are open to this idea but in some sections of the U.S. the dominant culture of that area is in fact influencing education and curriculum to the extent that their culture’s history is being told and the former “white” history is not mentioned.

In other areas of the world nations such as the Netherlands have swung from mono-culture to multiculture and now back to a mon-cultural approach (Why multiculturalism, n.d.). The reasoning for this basically is that many felt that the multicultural approach was forcing a national culture on those who did not want it. In other words immigrants to the Netherlands from Russia for example were required to learn and be taught (and thus identify with) Russian culture. Maybe they didn’t want that.

I see some things that are blatantly wrong and can be fixed by adjusting the viewpoint from which things are described.

Some bad aspects of this, as pointed out by (Why multiculturalism, n.d.)  is that this multiculture idea ends up being a political thing called “nationalism.” And probably a large percent of people see plenty wrong in that. Others of course may not.  For example, and this is another bad aspect (in my opinion), the Pithissippi Burning article (Tobia, P.J., 2009).  discusses how some obviously racists elements in the north western U.S. are promoting literature which in fact advocates nationalism. In this case a twisted white supremacist nationalism.

As future (or present) educators how do we deal with this? 

Learning about cultures other than ones native culture is a good place to start. And in these time here in the U.S. of a large amount of racial and cultural mixing is already well underway.

What exactly is culture? What is race? Some (Why multiculturalism, n.d.) indicate that race and culture are not real things: 

“Multiculturalism restates the core of biological racial doctrines, substituting words like ‘culture’, ‘identity’ and ‘roots’ for the often discredited word ‘race’. Yet the discredited race doctrines were themselves a biological variant of older doctrines of ethno-cultural identity.”

I’d say that’s a fairly accurate statement; that we no longer consider there to actually be any deep or biological difference in people of this world. Nothing beyond the superficial. Nothing beyond how and where we grew up. But we, our actual selves, are all people.

I guess my sentimental ending to this would go as follows:

We’re all in a race. Wearing differnet tennis shoes. Some have Nikes, some Reeboks. Some no shoes at all. But we’re all running down the road to win. And winning means making decisions so as to help the most number of people that you can along the way and at the finish line. Then you run the next race with the same intent.

References:

Taylor, S. (n.d.). “The Challenge of 'Multiculturalism' In How Americans View the Past and the Future”. The Journal of Historical Review, vol. 12, no. 2, pp. 159-165.

Tobia, P.J., February 23, 2009. “ Pithissippi Burning: Race, White Nationalism and American Culture.” The Nashville Scene.

Webb, L., Metha, A., & Jordan, K.F. (2010). Foundations of American Education. (6th Ed.). Columbus, OH: Merrill.

“WHY MULTICULTURALISM IS WRONG.” Nation Planet. Retrieved from our D2L webste.

 

My reaction to the U.S. News and World Report’s article on religion and education in the U.S. by Jessica Calefati (2009).

The first of two issues discussed was devoted to the moment of silence issue. It occurred in Illinois where a federal judge ruled against schools requiring a moment of silence. According to the article this meant prayer or personal reflection. Proponents wanted a law to require prayer in public schools and a judge said it was unconstitutional. Those against it, such as the ACLU, felt it was a veiled mechanism of bringing prayer into the schools.

The next issue was whether the Texas State Board of Education should revise its science curriculum. The issue here was evolution. The current science curriculum requires science students to “explore and critique ‘the strengths and weaknesses’ of all scientific theories.” Proponents of a new wording to the curriculum not only feel there are no scientifically verifiable weaknesses to Darwin’s theory of evolution but they also want to change the wording so that it would call on students to “analyze and evaluate scientific explanations using empirical evidence."

What are my initial thoughts? I think those proposing a change in the Texas curriculum have stayed within the boundaries of science. Their suggested wording makes sense – insofar as science goes. I do take issue with the statement which said there were “no” scientifically verifiable weaknesses in Darwin’s theory of evolution. That doesn’t mean that a future Texas student, when allowed to discuss evolutionary theory, will not come up with a new idea that supersedes Darwin. It just means that right now the best explanation of the data is Darwin’s theory.Flags go up when one sees another being overly defensive, as opposed to detached.

They could have accomplished the same thing by wording it something like the following: “Whereas federal courts have banned the teaching of creationism and intelligent design, we would like to emphasize that discussion on evolution (or the changing of life over time) in science class is not prohibited, but is to be confined to the realm of science wherein the data is to be analyzed and evaluated using scientific explanations and empirical evidence.” This of course allows for my personal thinking that there are possible new and very interesting explanations for the abundant data. I generally think that people, scientists in particular perhaps, are afraid of the religion issue in general and the “separation of church and state” clause  from the Constitution – i.e. the First Amendment which says, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof."

As to why I think scientist are afraid of it, I feel it is because they know they are actually getting outside of the area of science. When they discuss things such as evolution, this naturally leads to a broader topic which is outside of the purview of science; that being such subjects more open to opinion and speculation as philosophy, cosmology, metaphysics and ontology. In other words one who is taught, via data collected from fossils and geologic records, that our life forms have begun from a primitive state and through time have come to be what they are today, may next ask the bigger questions such as where did it all come from and is there meaning to life? These are questions that push the limits of the scientific method. They push them right into the realm of their dreaded enemy – religion. I say this because I feel the difference between religion and scientific methods stretched to the limits is very insignificant.

Generally I feel men need to understand that the various religions on the planet are not unlikely sources of subtle, hidden, time-pondered deep questions of the nature of reality. They are in fact good sources of knowledge on such deep and subtle issues.

But don’t get me wrong, there are plenty churches or religions which apparently fail to  acknowledge the value of science. And neither are they open minded in their willingness to consider others opinions.

Humility is always a good option.

Reference:

Calefati, Jessica (2009). Religion in Schools Debate Heats Up. U.S. News and World reports. Retrieved from http://www.usnews.com/education/blogs/on-education/2009/01/22/religion-in-schools-debate-heats-up

Saturday morning 9-10-11

Hi.
I've been out of town so I'm working hard to catch up and understand what all this course (Educational Foundations) entails.
Also I'm hoping my textbook arrives soon.

Intro

Hi, I'm a little short on time right now. So for tonight my plan is to simply and quickly set up this blog. More to follow.
Thanks!