Major Philosophies of Contemporary US Education

“United States education” is an amalgamation of various educational systems created and governed by relatively small groups of people differentiated by locale and culture. Since the 1960s the US Government has tried to emphasize a curriculum based on the philosophy coined essentialism (Sadker 279); however these smaller groups of like minds bonded by culture and familiarity tend to strive to preserve personal histories and culture through perennialism (Sadker 281). As technology advances and communities become nearly national and global a mixed thread of social reconstruction and progressivism (Sadker 283) bind these philosophies together into what could be argued is the general form of contemporary US education.

Essentialism attempts to build educational foundations in maths, sciences, English, American history, and some argue, nationalism, while rigourously tracking “progress” through standardized testing. While essentialism seems to favor the forward analytical thinking of tomorrow's practical and disciplined leaders proponents of perennialism argue that such emphasis on testing and rote memorization must be balanced with the immersion of the mind in traditional lessons of morality and literacy penned by history's great thinkers. Yet both of these of philosophies seem to be “top-down” instructor oriented philosophies that exclude a view of the changing social landscape.

Social reconstructivists point out that many of “history's great thinkers” are “old white men” and that the struggles and viewpoints of minorities and women have been suppressed. They seek to add those crucial pieces of the puzzle back into US classrooms (Sadker 285) so students are exposed to the very real social problems and situations they will have to deal with as adults. Linking these philosophies together is progressivism. Progressivism (Sadker 283) seeks to apply pragmatism in education. Students are encouraged to use the knowledge gained by essentialism and the lessons learned from perennialism (whether good or bad) to analyze and tackle the situations presented by social reconstructivism. Combining these philosophies reveals the general view of contemporary US educational philosophies.

Sadker, David Miller, Teachers, Schools, and Society. 2010 McGraw-Hill, New York.

Image: Classroom Management, Its Principles and Technique by William C. Bagley". BetterWorldBooks .com. Accessed 2012 Nov 27. [http://www.betterworldbooks.com/classroom-management-id-1176552066.aspx]

The Role of Federal Government in Education

Conflict has always been a great motivation for forward thinking, new technology, and the drive for better education. As the Soviets dominated the Space Race in the 50s the United States Congress passed the National Defense Education Act (NDEA) to “enhance the security of the nation” (Sadker, 251). Legally decisions on education should be left to the state, as the 10th Amendment to the United States Constitution states that anything not specifically mentioned as the job of the Federal Government should be left to individual states to frame as they please. While Americans took the NDEA in stride in the late 1950s and early 1960s (possibly because of positive propaganda or a general national desire to seem as bright and upwardly-mobile as rival countries), today states stand firm in their desire to decide what their students learn. Should the government be able to decide what the national education standards are?

"Colonial recitation lesson" - Sadker p238

The early leaders of the United States may have wanted to keep education out of the hands of the government for the same reason they wanted religion and state separate: to prevent Government curtailing their freedoms by telling the populace what to think (Sadker, 251). It could also have been that education was primarily a religious education to prepare young people to battle “Satan” by being able to read the Bible (Sadker 238) and the Constitutional framers had already instituted a separation of church and state. Still, as early as 1785 the government was able to set land aside for “public educational purposes” and use federal money to support the multitude of institutions that arose. Benjamin Franklin has established a secular “academy” in 1751 and a hundred years later there were over six-thousand academies (Sadker, 241) with practical curricula, most of them supported by federal money.

As time went on the government funded teacher training, veteran's tuition, school meal programs, head-start programs, bilingual education programs and much more (Sadker, 252). In the 21st century they have agreed upon a National Standard for Education. Yet because the states still hold education separate adoption is voluntary and some of the more religious states refuse even though their schools are, and have been, successful products of Federal development.

Sadker, David Miller. Teachers, Schools, and Society, 2010. Page 151.

The Goals of American Schools

An American child spends the majority of it's formative years in school. Around age 18 the new adult is expected to emerge from their educational cocoon full of knowledge that will make them successful and happy. What is this knowledge? While there are National Standards for Education (by the Common Core State Standards Commission) they are not mandatory and have only been adopted by 45 states and three territories. Even having adopted such standards to make it easier for students to transfer between states, the individual states largely decide what is to be taught in their schools by school board committee and popular vote.  In general, the goals of America's schools follow a few common themes: academic advancement, social and civic study, personal development, and vocational readiness .

http://www.nap.edu/

A school's primary goal is to give a student a sense of history and a sense of the future. American schools tend to focus on U.S. History, state history, and United States geography, while reinforcing the importance of mathematics and technology in the job markets of the future. English and communication skills are required for all students, for all twelve years, but foreign language tends to be only found in secondary education requirements, and then may be required for only one or two semesters. There are those who argue such a nationalistic view of education could actually hurt American children's chances of competing in the international job market.

Schools are seen by many as a tool to transform children into nationally-minded reconstructionists aimed at repairing the social inequities perceived in today's society. These persons feel that the best way to prepare these children to do real good  is to tie their education into societal contributions such as school-to-work credits and service credits like volunteer requirements. These methods may actually foster a more democratically-minded and socially aware adult who is better equipped to handle national politics than children given rigidly academic educations.

1. “Kansas Evolution Hearings Part 6” http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/kansas/kangaroo6.html Accessed 2012, September 14.
2. Sadker, David Miller. Teachers, Schools, and Society, 2010. Page 151.
3. Image credit: "National Science Education Standards", National Academy Press, Washington, DC. Accessed 2012 Nov 17. [http://www.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=4962]

From Melting Pot to Cultural Pluralism

To completely describe Americans in terms of culture requires a carefully constructed and open-ended definition that integrates and qualifies the terms “melting pot” and “cultural pluralism”. While both terms describe the people who either immigrated or were born into cultural subsets within the large country, neither can adequately describe the country's culture on its own.

Melting Pot - Longwood.edu

The term “melting pot” is used to describe the idea that immigrated persons are automatically American simply by adopting the freedoms and rights of the Constitution of the United States. Each immigrant now pursues happiness while being legally protected from racism, sexism, agism, and religious persecution. All flavors of religion, race, and cultural identity are absorbed into the term American much as many colors of wax crayons are melted together to form one mass of multicolored wax. However, like describing the blended colors of melted crayons by the predominate hue, constraining American culture to the “melting pot” definition strips the immigrant groups of their individuality.

The term “cultural pluralism” describes those persons who, though mixed in the melting pot of America, retain their cultural or religious individuality. They are American but they are also African, or Jewish, or Hawaiian, or Sikh. While this may better describe Americans by embodying the dual nature of the young country composed of so many immigrant groups, it could be argued that it detracts from the “American identity” by forming clearly defined borders between the cultural, religious, or racial groups.

In order to completely define America and the people who choose to live there one must use at least both of these terms. People of diverse backgrounds live together under the shared promise of personal freedom protecting their pursuit of happiness, and can define themselves by both their ancestors and their culturally dissimilar neighbors. American culture is best defined as a melting pot for cultural pluralism.  

1. Nurmi, Amanda. "English Only: A Contradiction." Published 2012 April 19, Language & Identity: Spain & Greece 2011. Accessed 2012 Nov 17. [http://blogs.longwood.edu/spain2011/2012/04/19/english-only-a-contradiction/]
2. Sadker, David Miller. Teachers, Schools, and Society, 2010. Page 151.