Wednesday, January 25, 2012

Language Lesson from the Math Guy

If I want to get my husband MathMan, the high school teacher, bent out of shape about something, all I have to do is talk about some big, blanket education policy. For example, the mere mention of No Child Left Behind is enough to make him apoplectic.

During the State of the Union address, President Obama proposed that all states pass a law requiring students to stay in school until they graduate or until the age of eighteen, I immediately tweeted that to @MathMan6293. I couldn't see his face because he and Nate were driving home from work and I was at home, cozy, nibbling on a clementine the same shade as Speaker Boehner, but I bet MathMan made that face he makes when I say things like "Chloe called. She needs money." or "When are we going to clean out the garage?" or "How about we watch another Republican debate!"

That, of course, was not the end of the conversation. This is MathMan's take on not just that proposal (which he does not support unless we provide a wider array of options for students within the public school system), but as he puts it, is the primary problem with how we Americans process our policy information.

Oversimplification is the problem. Paraphrasing now:

When our media and elected officials speak in broad terms, they oversimplify the problems and the solutions. They reduce the issues to generalizations. All students. All poor people. All rich people. All business. All old people, all soccer moms, all veterans, all working class, all all all....

What happens is the individual is removed the conversation making it easier to think in terms of the nameless, faceless other. We talk in the abstract about education instead of understanding that we're really talking about the education of millions of children ranging in age from preschool to college, from all sorts of backgrounds, socio-economic situations and with as many needs as there are students.

One-size-fits-all solutions are rarely the answer. They are politically expedient and, I suppose, necessary at times if only to get the conversation started, but if we don't delve deeper, don't put a human face on it, if we don't bring the conversation to the level where the individual is addressed, then we get nowhere. Or worse, we get policies full of unintended consequences like No Child Left Behind.

All of which is to say that I suppose MathMan doesn't want us to reduce our important conversations to the lowest common denominator because once we do, we find that the transitive properties multiply exponentially. Or something.

What oversimplifications work your nerves? For example, I get annoyed by the generalization that the foreclosure crisis was caused by people who wanted big fancy houses they couldn't afford. That is only one segment of the problem and hardly the most influential factor, but when that oversimplification is repeated by the media, the pundits and politicians, it becomes accepted knowledge, facts be damned.

19 comments:

  1. That one-size-fits-all g-strings actually do fit all sizes.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Agree. I was a little dubious about that one although I thought his speech was good overall, about working together, etc. I agree, not all kids fit the same mold. In our town, we actually have what used to be called a "vocational school" for kids who aren't college material but will still need jobs when they get out of school. There are kids who just aren't cut out for book learning or who don't learn the same way other kids do in a classroom where they have to be quiet and listen for hours. There need to be better options for these kids so that when they do go out in the world they are not left without marketable skills. Just saying they have to stay in school till they're 18 does nothing for anyone, including the 9th graders who have to have a bored and hostile 17-1/2 year-old in their classes disrupting their own learning.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Those are all excellent point, Maui. We're hearing noises from business and manufacturing about how we need to train workers differently with up to date skills. I should hope that any education reform would include reforming what we used to call vocational school. I know community colleges are booming, but I don't know if there is any way to measure whether they are teaching the skills that the new manufacturing, etc. demands or are people using them to knock out their core classes before they go to a four year school to finish their degrees.

      Delete
  3. The politicians seem to think the people just want "Bumper Sticker Slogans" for solutions to complex problems. They all think "We the People" can't handle the truth.

    That one-size-fits-all g-strings actually do fit all sizes.
    Back in the 80s at the Jockey lot fleamarket in Anderson, SC I saw panties that were "one-size-fits-all", of course on some they would wrap around several times.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You're so right about the bumper sticker slogans. I reserve comment on those panties.

      Delete
  4. I've only read this far - "nibbling on a clementine the same shade as Speaker Boehner" - and must congratulate you. The laughter that ensued, combined with the multiple cups of coffee I've had, well you know the rest.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yay! To quote that famous philosopher George W. Bush: Mission Accomplished!

      Delete
    2. I think in this case it's "Emission accomplished!"

      Delete
  5. As for what oversimplification makes me crazy - pretty much the past, oh, 20 years of our national political life. One big oversimplification. From Vince Foster through the Blow Job Heard Round The World through The Decider to our current Socialist Atheist Muslim Marxist, I really really really have reached the point where I don't care anymore.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Truly. The last 20 years have been the great downward spiral. More outlets than ever and I swear it's been squandered.

      Delete
  6. I had no idea that you were running this blog again. This blog is how I first met you via Zaius Nation.

    One-size-fits-all fits no one well at all. Schools are already asked to fix all kinds of social problems for which they are not responsible.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It's back! I couldn't go through this election cycle without mouthing off.

      Yes! Schools are asked to do so much with so little. Reforms seems to be more about eroding public education so that it can be privatized more than anything else.

      Delete
  7. At some point the local hs announced all students will be required to take at least 1 AP class. When asked what about special needs students w learning disabilities, and English as a 2nd language students... they shrugged and said it's never been done before.

    I did a whole blog post picking apart a bunch of vague and elusive comments from the SOTU address.

    So I guess what gets on my nerves is the assumption that we are not critical thinkers.
    Throwing out phrases like "the military will be producing power" applause.
    I'm not applauding, I'm asking - what kind of power?
    Fracking? Nuclear? Coal? -- dirty power?
    or wind & solar?

    Same with the States- all states need to require kids to stay in school till they graduate or turn 18.
    How do you make a kid stay in school?
    Who will fund it?

    Even the proclamation teachers should not have to teach to the tests....
    great idea-- but those test results determine funding and measure if the teacher is worth keeping.

    Throwing out a laundry list of ideas without funding, or god help us- requires congressional cooperation to pass, is so much hot air.

    Honestly, I think the Obama camp should just adopt the slogan "I'm not them" to frame the 2012 reelection
    campaign.
    Sure he's flawed, and has made some bad decisions-- but from there it goes from bad to worse.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It's all so frustrating, isn't it? As far as Congress is concerned, can you imagine what would happen to any of us if we acted as such obstructionists, if we flat out refused to compromise?

      Delete
  8. It's going to be an ugly year but you already know that.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It is indeed, Susan. I don't know what we're going to look like as a nation by the time it's over.

      Delete
  9. We'll look like the Incorporated States of America, thanks to "Citizens" United v. the F.E.C. We'll be ugly and fractious, thanks largely to the dim-witted Brown Shirts of the Tea Party, who are too stupid to know when they're being played against their self-interests, and the interests of you and me and our children.

    My Kingdom for a Conservative, and nary a one to be found!!!

    ReplyDelete
  10. Just getting around here to respond, but I agree with you (and with MathMan) completely. I was SO disappointed to hear the line about requiring everyone to graduate from high school. That was also one of my main gripes with NCLB -- which also has a graduation requirement embedded in it. I believe it states that we as a nation will have a 100% graduation rate by 2014, if I'm not mistaken.

    If we require students to graduate, will states suddenly have the funds and resources to make it happen?

    If I require my employer to provide me with a pony, will they suddenly comply?

    ReplyDelete

Tell me about it...