January 26...Labaree’s Competing Purposes of Schools
Are there any major purposes of
schooling left out by Labaree? What do you make of his conclusion (Is there any
hope to push back against the predominant notion of education as a private
good?)?
I personally feel as though Labaree nailed the major purposes of education on the head. I can't think of anything he may have left out. Through his historical evidence of education over time, it is clear that the purpose of education has transitioned from a public good to a private good. No matter what, the values and goals of education will continue to change in order to meet the needs of society. In his conclusion, Labaree makes an excellent point about the constant contradictions the institution of education faces. It's a constant battle of a game of tug of war with one side pulling and the other being pulled, and ending with someone to feel as though they were treated unfairly. It’s a battle that can’t be won. When it comes to credentials, education is merely a puppet. It's all about being the best, having the best students, the best teachers, the best curriculum, and the best scores. People look at school in terms of what it can do for them and choose accordingly, thus schools are forced to show off their best qualities in order to stay in business. In the end, it’s not about learning or gaining knowledge and skills, it’s all about the credentials. As far as the possibility of pushing back against the notion of education as a private good, I think there is hope. Labaree states that the vision of education as a public good is instilled firmly within the education system, but I still fear that the market may get the best of it. I hope for change and think it is possible. It just takes the right people to make it happen.
Nothing is perfect in life, which means there is always room for improvement. However, understanding what is at the root of a conflict can be an issue for various topics and ideas. Labaree is able to break down three alternative goals that have been at the root of the educational conflict over time. After reading it was clearly evident how the commitment of education has changed from a public good to a private good. With education being a public good it promoted the idea that higher education was for any citizen no matter the race, ethnicity, gender, or disability. As society and social norms change with time so does the idea of education. With education being a private good it promoted the idea that an advantage can be made, which has the potential to outshine others. It is very clear to see that these days. For example, when I was in elementary school I am sure that the idea of AP and dual enrollment classes were not on the top of a high school student’s mind, however, when I was a high school student that is all I could think about. This mindset is a direct representation of how education has turned from a public good to a private good. The three alternative goals: democratic equality, social efficiency, and social mobility, can be inefficient though. There are many factors that push each goal in a different direction. Unfortunately there can never seem to be a balance between the three goals. Educational credentials are the way society is connecting schooling and the economy and translating educational attainment into social attainment. By doing this students are loosing the motivation to learn because they are now honed in on the idea that credentials are far more important than knowledge. Throughout the history of education there has always been conflict and contradiction, however, it always subject to change due to the norms of society (I would like to think there is hope to push back the idea of education as a private good, but I do find it hard to achieve considering the type of society we live in).
While reading this article it became evident that there was a steady shift in education being considered a public good to a private good. Labaree discussed three alternative goals of American education that have been the source of conflict over time. The three goals included democratic equality, social efficiency, and social mobility. The three goals change from a public good (democratic equality), to a public good in service to the private sector (social efficiency), to a private good for personal consumption (social mobility). I never took the time to really think about all of the purposes of schooling, but Labaree really went into depth about purposes, and I don't think there were any I could have added. It's so sad that education has become focused on "winning" over "learning." I agree with Michelle that "People look at school in terms of what it can do for them and choose accordingly, thus schools are forced to show off their best qualities in order to stay in business." It has become a competition of reputational rank, rather than a public good to better the community and the citizens in the community. Instead of focusing on who has the "best" they should focus on giving everyone an equal opportunity to learn. From Labaree's conclusion, it is discussed that with all of the goals pushing and pulling against each other, it in turn creates a "no-win" situation. The three goals need to find balance between all of them to provide the best possible purposes/goals for education and society. I do have hope that there will be a push back against the predominant notion of education as a private good, and I think that because the education system has been vulnerable to change in the past (and present) there could be some hope in the future. It doesn't seem likely with the strong presence of "social mobility" looming overhead, but there is always a chance!
As for a general overview of how the public educational system works for students, Labaree does a great job in condensing all thoughts into the three goals listed throughout the article. I do agree with the shift of education as a public good to a private good. However, I also believe that Labaree only took a few classrooms into consideration. During my time as a Practicum student at VCU, I have seen the focus of the classroom be a community versus an individualized and highly competitive arena. It was interesting for me to witness this in Richmond, because when I was growing up (apparently during the push for social efficiency), there was always this discreet competition going on with "Student of the Month" or "Best All-Around" awards. As young students, we were never aware that we were competing against our classmates, but somehow developed angst towards our peers… Recently, I have seen schools put an emphasis on the community. For instance, instead of nominating "Student of the Month", I have seen this unique reward system where students nominate their classmates for upholding certain characteristics. These characteristics were set by the school guidance counselor; she chooses a word each month like "respect", "honesty", "responsibility", etc., and the students are able to nominate a classmate that they believe upheld that characteristic this month. At another school, I have seen a teacher put focus on the success of the class versus the success of each individual when it came to a test. She created a bar graph, displayed on one of her classroom walls, which had the class' average of the test scores. She had a red, horizontal line going through the 80 to show that that is where the class needed to be. Although she had to focus on the content that students either understood or did not understand as individuals, simultaneously, she developed a system that allowed her to appeal to the all learning levels, helped each student be successful, and more importantly, allowed students to help other students be on track. To me, that seems like some schools are pushing toward the idea of "public good”. With that being said, I think we all need to be a little optimistic in that there is hope to have an educational system that can focus on a private good, but also promotes the importance of community.
I personally found accurate Labaree’s detailing of the three goals of schooling as democratic equality, social efficiency, and social mobility. In his analysis, the first two goals are often at cross-purposes while the third goal somewhat overlaps with both of the other goals. The result is that the first two goals of democratic equality and social efficiency often cancel either other out, allowing the third goal of social mobility to predominate. Labaree’s analysis of the metriocratic ideology behind conceiving of schooling as a private good fascinated me. Labaree is right that the metriocratic belief in a school as a way to distinguish winners from losers creates a system in which “high levels of education and social attainment is a real possibility for students no matter what their social origins…Yet the probability of achieving significant social mobility through education is small, and this probability grows considerably smaller at every step down the class scale” (64). In order for credentials to have value, educational systems must limit access to opportunities. At the same time, in order to provide the credential with value (even with the potentially misleading construct that the credential-owner earned the credential through merit rather than privilege) there needs to remain the appearance of a fair competition. Labaree posits that it is not a problem that there are different goals in education so much as that there is a lack of balance between the goals. I think one of the problems with balancing these goals is that in modern American society there is little agreement about what the “public good” entails. Controversy occurs around the kinds of received values the greater community wants to impart on young people in order to make them good citizens. For instance, different tax-payers want to impart young people with either more conservative or more liberal beliefs about government and American history. Some members of the community want young people brought up in a particular faith tradition while others want to teach scientific rationalism or a completely different set of spiritual values altogether. Futhermore, in teaching the liberal arts (or other subjects whose value goes beyond their ulility in the marketplace), tension exists between teaching the traditional “Western White Men” curriculum and teaching multicultural perspectives that are more representational of diversity. Part of why the goal of enhancing the public good could have lost traction is that, among such a polarized public, it is hard to sell tax-payers and institutions on education as the transmission of cultural values. Additionally, focusing on education as preparing students to be productive workers is harder in a world in which the needed skills for productive workers keep changing. To me, the job markets seems very unpredictable at this time. The kinds of workers that are needed keep changing as technology makes new skills needed while rendering other skills obsolete. Nevertheless, there have been some attempts to offer training in contemporary technical skills to students. However, I wonder if the vagueness of what it would mean to educate children with “civic virtues” in a diverse society or to give children the skills they need for a rapidy-changing economy is part of what has allowed the social mobility goal of education become predominant.
The conditions of schooling and the purpose for an education have drastically changed since its first arrival in the United States. As Labaree explained, education was a way to create a certain type of citizen that the Puritans wanted for a democratic society. Decades ago, it was used to create workers for factories that transitioned into wartime factories. In the 1980s and 1990s, education was a way to individually get ahead and credentials have become the only way to do so. At a time when climbing the corporate ladder seemed like the only successful option to most students, education was a huge stepping stone to get to the top. Today, with all of the testing and standards imposed in public school, education has become a public good. It’s portrayed as a sound investment when taxes for education are continuously rising, but it begs the question of who is benefitting from this increase. As Labaree points out with his interpretations of the three purposes of school, education has shifted from benefitting the student to benefitting the society around them. As “charter schools and consumer choice are the current icons” of what public school should be, current public schools are becoming “renamed as government schools” (73). In order to privatize public education, all public control will have to be withdrawn to restore education to what it once was. These drastic changes in education didn’t occur over night, and Labaree notes numerous times that these trial and errors have proved to be good lessons about what our education system should be. With that being said, after making mistakes regarding education and seeing the shift from a private good to a public good with now useless credentialism, we can only go up from here.
In the article Public Goods, Private Goods: The American Struggle Over Educational Goals by David Labaree, Labaree states three major purposes of schooling. This includes democratic equality, social efficiency, and social mobility. I think Labaree was pretty accurate on his three major purposes of schooling. However, they all seem to focus on the child in the since of individual rather than a part of a community. These three concepts make me think of climbing the ladder to better yourself in a “I/me” focus but being in practicum classrooms, I observe more of a since of community, and students focusing on how they can help others. For example, I have seen several teachers use the bucket filling system, where students are asked to write something nice about their peers. I think because of the pressures public schools have such as having students achieve high test scores to be competitive with the other United States, this makes them a public good. Students education being a taxpayer investment also makes it a public good. Considering this, I think it would be hard to push back the idea of education as a private good unless society as a whole was willing to let go of those two things being of such high importance.
Overall, Labaree did a great job summarizing the purposes of schooling. Labaree’s three goals for education: democratic equality, social efficiency, and social mobility contained many of the ideas that we discussed as a class last week. For example, some of the major goals both our class and Labaree discussed were equal access for everyone, schooling as competition, and taxpayer investment. Upon reading the article, I can see why Labaree notes that these three purposes of education can work together but often pull education into two different directions. Labaree nails the idea that the effectiveness of education has been impaired due to the two competing ideas: education as a private good vs. public good. It is extremely clear that education as a public good has almost gone to the back burner while education as a private good seems to have taken over throughout history. Although it is often a tough battle, I do think there is hope for education to make a shift towards becoming a private good. Labaree refers to the historical goals of education as a pendulum, shifting from one view to another. This is exactly why I feel there is much hope and with future educators, we can make the shift by focusing on the individual rather than the individual’s test scores. I also think it is important that we have a balance between these two ideas. There will always be one side pulling away to put their ideas in the spotlight while the other side does the same. I am confident that we can find a balance between the two opposing views while keeping education as a public good as our main focus.
In Labaree’s article, Public Goods, Private Goods, he discusses the three main goals of America’s schools. How they weave in and out between being both a public and a private good. Right now, I do believe we are pushing more toward education as a private need, we’ve become a bit individualistic in the needs to beat one another to the top opposed to creating a “whole self”. I don’t think Labaree left anything out in his description of this political war within the educational system, or maybe I am missing something. From what we covered in last class, each one of our points was brought up within this. It was a brilliant precursor to what we believe public education is and how it is seen. Democratic equality, social efficiency, and social mobility are all necessary to help establish a plethora of differing individuals, but I think that we may be going about it all wrong. However, this is also where things can get sticky regarding to views. I think that there is a way we can push back against the view of education as a private good. What that method is? I’m not entirely sure. We will really have to push for it though, and I think it’s possible that after the increase burnout of students with this drive for competition, which would be a negative method, may be what brings the issue back to the plate. Those defining what education should be are not really those who are in the classrooms and dealing with the students on a regular basis. They just want results. Or at least that is how it seems.We can only hope that we don’t bring out own economic/educational downfall from greed and impatience.
While reading Labaree’s article on the competing goals for education, I noticed he defined the three goals as very distinct and separate purposes. While he did argue that balance may be the only way to reconcile the naturally contradicting purposes, I feel like the purposes themselves were rather overgeneralized and he ignored the mutual goals of each, the overlapping areas of each. One thing I had a hard time wrapping my head around, was the argument of public versus private goods. For me, the idea of education as a private good that increases individual attainment being wholly in conflict with education being for the betterment of the community is inaccurate. Casting social mobility as this cold form of credentialing is ignoring the benefits. Without the ability for individuals to attain higher learning, where would the great minds and innovators of society be formed? I think that the idea of grouping by ability does not have to be exclusive or discriminatory, but really, can offer every student additional opportunities for an EQUITABLE education as long as it is in addition to, and not a replacement for, whole class and cooperative learning. I believe education, like most things, is a never-ending balancing act. As the weight continues to shift from one end to another, we move back-and-forth trying to find a perfect equilibrium. I believe the competitive yet symbiotic nature of the three purposes means there will be a perpetual motion swinging from goal to goal with no final resting spot, no equilibrium but no permanent imbalance either.
Labaree provides a well-rounded explanation regarding the purposes of schooling, including democratic equality, social efficiency, and social mobility; however, I believe an important function, or purpose for schooling, could be effective communication. Individuals acquire effective communication skills by observing and participating in daily life situations. Individuals develop values, norms, and attitudes based on life experiences with others, in school and outside of school. The ultimate goal of schooling is to provide students with the tools to be successful in life and become life-long learners. Public schools play a vital part in opening up communication between peers and people of higher positions for real-life “practice,” if you will, about how to effectively communicate to achieve goals and advance in life. Is there any hope to push back the notion of education as a private good? In this day, school has become primarily a place to acquire credits, certifications, and credentials. Parents of today’s society highly value education, but I feel only because they want to see their children get ahead in life. Wanting your child to “get ahead” in life is okay, but what about the idea of going to school to explore unknown territories, spark an interest for life-long learning, or simply develop a love for investigating or researching? While there is hope to push back against the notion of education as a private good, it is important to expose parents and society as a whole on the notion that education is more than just getting a piece of paper to advance to the next level…
This article by Labaree was very interesting and brought up great points regarding the education system and how it has changed over the years. It focused mainly on the three points or goals, which are Democratic equality, social efficiency, and social mobility. Starting with education for the public good (democratic equality) and moving towards a private good (social mobility). I believe that Labaree is complete in defining the purpose of schooling. Each of the topics talked about are both broad enough to cover major topics and narrow to provide necessary details when it comes to schooling, therefore covering almost everything about our education system to date. I can relate almost all three points to different levels of schooling and not just in the elementary level. Everyone is offered the opportunity to go to school and they are taught the same curriculum at a young age. In our society, we want everyone to contribute to our society and culture and having the same foundation of basic knowledge will allow you to do so. It's for the public good that you gain this knowledge.
Especially in today’s society, elementary school parents, and sometimes students, choose the school that is suited best for them. If possible, the selection is the school with the best of everything, including curriculum, teachers and opportunities. I believe, as you get older, you go to school more for a personal reason and schooling becomes more for the private good. For example, if you want to become a teacher you go and take specific classes for that purpose. If you want to become a doctor you are going to get specific training for that profession. It is your choice to focus on a specific education. In the end, you will of course be contributing to the overall good of society and the good of the public you serve. No one forced you to learn these specifics.
In the conclusion of the article, Labaree discusses how each one of these goals contradicts the other and brings new problems and ideas to the forefront. I agree and recognize that with every new idea there may be a problem. Society often shifts its focus and that potentially causes new problems. The positive sides to societal shifts may be new and better ideas. This is how it’s always been and how it will continue. Currently parents and students may focus solely on what is the best for them and them alone, so schooling may continue to be mainly a private good. Possibly one day society will get past the success of an individual and look at everyone and emphasize in education what is good for the entire society.
I believe Labaree included all of the major purposes of schooling, as these were all of the purposes we discussed as a whole class. After reading several of the comments, one of my peer's really stuck out to me. "the idea of education as a private good that increases individual attainment being wholly in conflict with education being for the betterment of the community is inaccurate." I completely agree with this statement and hope she doesn't mind that I quoted her. Many individuals strive to be better or have different abilities which requires a more individualistic approach. There must be a balance. Students should be able to progress in their own lives and must also work together to become members of a society. I believe that there is hope to provide the proper balance between public and private good in education.
Reading about Labaree’s three goals (democratic equality, social efficiency, and social mobility), made me more aware of the aspects of education today. Schooling was set out so young people can learn about how society works, and what they need to know to be responsible citizens. While students are doing this, they are gaining skills for themselves. This is when social mobility comes into play, because not everyone can achieve the same goals or get the same position. While I think these three goals go hand in hand, I think Labaree is missing something crucial. I advocate for public schooling over private schooling because of what the students learn when the teacher is not teaching. It is what the students learn from each other. To live in a semi peaceful world, we need to learn how to interact with people who are different from ourselves. We all have different backgrounds, religions, cultures, and values. The younger that people realize this, the better. Over time, education has shifted from a public good to a private good. Parental involvement and pressure we set on ourselves has made educational systems a competitive environment to be in. Education has shifted from the need to get ahead, rather than to be life-long learners. I think this is why people go into education today, so they can change this competitive ideology.
Labaree spends a lot of time discussing the view of education for the purpose of being competitive and moving up socially, so I don't necessarily think that this is something that he left out, but I do think now a huge aspect of public education revolves around competing with the rest of the world. I was only five years old at the time the article was written, but I imagine that in 1997 there was less focus on world competition than there is now in the age of mass outsourcing. While I do not believe that competing with the rest of the world should be a purpose of education, though it is a good measure of how we're doing, but it absolutely is. Without some massive overhaul of the entire educational system I do not believe that we will move back to the point of education being a public good rather than a private good, at least within my lifetime. This is a point that is brought up constantly and I'm sure everyone is tired of hearing it but it will be relevant until it's not. The biggest problem with education and education reform is that no one wants to listen to teachers. Teachers don't make enough money to be influential within the political system that controls education, and those who do have enough money rarely choose to be teachers. As a culture, the United States has grown impatient, especially with money. Politicians, etc. are not willing to spend the money it will take to truly invest in our education and infrastructure because it does not yield the profits they want immediately. Labaree mentions that from an economic standpoint, investing in schools and education makes a lot of sense. Unfortunately, the benefits do not come quickly enough, and those who make these decisions have the money and power to ensure that they and their families do have access to the education that everyone should be entitled to. To summarize, unless we find some miracle cure for public education that also allows it to become immediately profitable, there will be no real change to the educational system. I suppose things could change with, say, total revolution, but I do not see that happening.
Paige Michanco Upon reading the article Public Goods, Private Goods: The American Struggle Over Educational Goals, by David F. Labaree, I began to get a better sense of our class discussion surrounding the purpose of education. In his article, Labaree focuses on three goals of education. His three goals are democratic equality, social efficiency, and social mobility. He describes these goals as either a public good or a private good. While I do feel that Labaree touches on some very important purposes for education, I would have to say that there could be other reasons for education as well. Some other purposes for education that I find to be important are socialization and communication. Being able to be a part of a social function is important for several reasons, and I think school is a very important part of socializing kids, especially at young ages. I also think school and education help with communication skills. Having kids work in groups and being able to present ideas to classmates would only benefit them later on in society. As far as education being known as a private good instead of a public good in the future, who knows? I feel that school today focuses more on the ‘piece of paper’ that you get at the end instead of going to simply learn something new or explore more about the things one wonders about. I think it is important to focus on what else education has to offer other than this idea of hierarchy—jumping from one level to the next.
When reading this article, I quickly realized that many of the points Labaree highlights as the major purposes of schooling, were discussed in our first class meeting. When we were posed with the question about what we believe the purpose of public school is, many of our answers aligned with his. Labaree discusses three alternative goals for education that have caused controversy over time: democratic equality, social efficiency, and social mobility.
Labaree states early in the article that, “The problem is not that we do not know how to make schools better but that we are fighting among ourselves about what goals schools should pursue.” This really stuck out to me; it shows that we have the ability and knowledge to better our educational system, but that the whole public versus private good and political aspect of it is interfering with making it more effective.
I feel that in the elementary and secondary years of a student’s education, education can and should be looked at as a public good versus a private good. During these early years, every child has access to an education and to obtain an education to become a functioning member of society. We want children to go to school so that they can learn the skills and communication skills necessary to provide benefits to their community. I personally feel that education starts to turn into a private good when secondary schooling is over. Students are urged to attend universities to continue their education in order to obtain a good job. Students want to attend universities with good reputations because they know it will help them when applying for jobs. In our generation now, many people aren’t satisfied with a bachelor’s degree and often continue their education because they know it will make them a more favorable applicant when trying to get employed, or earning a higher income. With that being said, when individuals dedicate more time to their education, they in return will provide the community larger benefits because of their higher level of skills. This where I think the social efficiency and social mobility are intertwined and get confusing. I’m not sure if we will be able to change the view of education as a private good or not. I am optimistic that society has the ability to see education as a benefit to the entire community again, therefore being a public good.
It seems as though we have all been taught from an early age the private value that an education can offer us. In many ways we are taught to follow through with an education (getting good grades), in hopes of continuing our education (for many to get into a good college), to get a good job based on our degree. This schema is even compounded some by graduate school and other post-grad credentials. Following the pyramid structure or stacking that Labaree speaks of. The watering down or inflation of credentials is also on the rise as there are not enough positions in the work force to hold all. The drive for students to continue education for the sake of credentials is still strong though, because jobs that are to be filled in many cases do require these credentials. It is a catch 22 in this aspect, and the fact that many see continuing education as a worthless game as it takes more time and resources than are available to a majority of students. Not wanting to sound too bleak, and even reflect on myself as I am still in school and have always considered how my educational choices will affect me, I would argue that there is still public good sprinkled among the private focus of education. The public aspects might intertwine with the private, but I still believe that some form of well rounded, or liberal base to education is positive for all. Regardless of what we are looking to accomplish through school, the values, interpersonal skills, experience, and knowledge that is received does hold value in my opinion; individual as well as collective value. Education, knowledge, and values influence choices that are made when students become members of society. Although the education and knowledge has greatly moved to “what is on the test,” I still think there is learning. I still think that through curriculum, teachers, and administrators, however rigorous standards have become, that information can spark students’ interests and also foster growth that would not happen without school at every level. On the other private end, from my experience I do not think those invested in sending children to school (parents, grandparents, future parents, etc.) will ever not want what they see as best for their children or students. As the reading describes, what is best ends up being what is better than at least some, which will always trump the equality for all public aspect. It does seem that having so many opposing interests will always be pushing one end while pulling the other. I think in many ways we are seeing Labaree’s descriptions play out even more in today’s society than was observed even 10 years ago. We are living in an interesting time for education, and possibly even more interesting will be to see how the future of education unfolds.
I feel as though Labaree did a great job explaining the goals for American education by comparing their focuses in this article. Labaree discussed the three goals of educational conflict: democratic equality, social efficiency, and social mobility. In short, democratic equality (public good) emphasizes citizenship through higher education and equality, social efficiency (public good) focuses on training for the workforce, and social mobility (private good) is an educational meritocracy system where the focus relies on the individual consumer. It is very apparent that schooling has slowly become more of a private good with the competitive nature of today’s society. As much as it bothers me to say, I feel as though it would be a long shot possibility for the push back against the notion of education as a private good. The need for higher credentials has taken over our school systems and promoted social mobility as a predominant mindset for our children. One could be optimistic for change to education as more of a public good, but the controversy among these goals and competitiveness of our society will continue test education in America.
Personally, I feel as if the three main goals that Labaree has extensively explored are the goals that education strives to achieve. It all depends one from what perspective within the schooling system that you view from as to which goal you focus on. Many of the more broad issues with schooling fall into the democratic equality goal. The issues that are discussed at the higher levels in education are ones that work towards making everyone have equal opportunity. When you get to the community that the school is in, the issues examined are more about the social efficiency of the school as the students prepare to enter the workforce or move onto higher education. Finally, within the schools, there are issues that fall under social mobility. Students are encouraged to compete with one another through class rank, GPA, and grades in their class. This breeds that desire to rise through the ranks of their fellow classmates. I find Labaree's break down of the goals of education and the politics surrounding them to be a very interesting read.
Labaree was very thorough in explaining the three major purposes of schooling and do not believe he missed anything. Democratic equality was explained as the more traditional role of academics preparing people for a wide range of political and social roles in the community, a public good. Social efficiency gets more specific in its needs to improve and provide human capital to enhance productivity in all aspects of the economy, deemed a public good. Social mobility is focused on the individual status along with the attainment of credentials over the efforts to help people fulfill roles in their community and economy, a private good. It is highly distressing to see how our cultural values have shifted far from the progression of bettering our communities and strengthening our economy to, essentially “buying” our value in place of human capital(actual skills, knowledge and experience). I think that most educators put their hope in the day that education will be transformed back in a public good but I think it would require a tenacious leader to do it. It would be a lot of work to fight against our current culture in which we value individualism above all else, yet I still believe it’s possible.
I believe Labaree accurately covers the major purposes for education in his 3 goals of democratic equality, social efficiency, and social mobility. These ideas reflect the shifting focus of schools over the years, now with the focus on social mobility and how school can help an individual succeed better in life. I definitely agree that there has been a big shift from the view of education as a public good to as a private good, now when parents send their child to school they want everything the teacher does to better their child and provide the opportunities needed for them to be competitive in the world. One of Labaree’s arguments that stuck out to me was that there isn’t a problem with the goals for education it’s that the goals are competing and education is deficient in meeting all the goals. And that when the 3 purposes are in conflict it has opened the way for the social mobility goal to dominate and influence education. I have seen this shift in educational focus as I have grown up in the system when there was so much pressure in High School to take AP classes and judgment on college choices because I had a high GPA I was expected to choose a higher perceived institution. In schools there is so much focus on achievement and competition for the individual, which shifts the focus from the other goals mainly because of their view of education as a public good. However, I do believe that education still has a chance to reform and be more adept in meeting the 3 goals and shifting away from being a private good. There are still some aspects of this public view in education such as equal access with the emphasis on more inclusion classrooms; push for character education is again present and discussed in our courses, as we are upcoming educators. Also there is still evidence I believe of the social efficiency model in a way with the rise of charter schools and specialty programs because the programs can better prepare individuals for higher education and then the job force by providing them with more specialized instruction in math or science than in normal curriculum. These are only a few instances of the other goals still being present and it will differ from school to school and that is part of the hope, every school will be different based on the faculty and community so there is always room for change to come about with so many differing viewpoints in play.
I feel that Labaree accurately defined and analyzed our issues in the field of education. At their educational roots, the three terms that Labaree outlined, defined, and analyzed make sense and should benefit all Americans involved. Labaree however shows the reader that the three terms outlined in this section overlap, cause confusion, and what is meant to actually try and compliment one another, actually ends up causing conflicts with our educational structure. In my opinion, education in America should be free and offered to every American who desires to learn. I want to believe in the idea of Democratic Equality, but in this day in age, Social Mobility seems to keep people motivated. We live in a society that promotes individual success rather than group success or an equality of success. People are attracted to things that they perceive will benefit them in some shape, form, or fashion. I am not saying this is a bad thing, but this is how we as a culture act in today’s society. Individual education progression is no different. People will take their education more seriously if they know that it will benefit their careers and social standing in the long run. Labaree’s discussion in pages 56-57 regarding Meritocracy allowed me to gain a better understanding on our educational framework and how its worth as a private commodity is still standing strong. Everything in a general education classroom setting is somewhat competition based. General education students compete for grades, academic standings such as valedictorian, class president, etc., and college placement. I have been in classrooms where teachers use forms of competitive games to assist students with test reviews and comprehension. This method keeps students engaged, motivated, and eager to learn more. I thought Labaree’s conclusions were solid and well thought out, but I sensed a tinge of pessimism throughout this section. In a way, I think he meant to write like this because the different factors and terms discussed throughout the previous pages cause more harm to one another rather than complimenting one another. I think to change the educational framework is possible, but it will take a lot of work from everyone involved. Labaree’s subsection on credentialism beginning on page 71 was intriguing. Education seeks credentialism in many ways. I believe a couple of ways that credentialism reinforces itself in the school system is the credentials that we give to students for various grade achievements, club activities, or sports recognition. Additionally, I believe another facet of credentialism is the way teachers and school systems as a whole can receive certain honors or grants for state-wide test scores, number of students graduating, etc. This mentality works well when students go on to obtain bachelor, graduate and other professional degrees. Additionally the idea of credentialism works very well when students obtain said degrees and seek high paying jobs and social stature.
In the article, Labaree discusses that the central problems in American education is fundamentally political and that we are fighting amongst ourselves about what goals schools should pursue. He also goes on to discuss the three defining goals for American education: democratic equality, social efficiency, and social mobility. Labaree was quite thorough in discussing these goals that I do not think he left out any other major purposes. He says in the end we have ‘an open structure of education that vulnerable to change’ and I think change is what we need to find a nice balance between public and private.
I believe Labaree did an excellent job explaining in detail the major purposes of schooling. Democratic equality, social efficiency, and social mobility were defined well, and I believe that these goals/purposes should be the laying foundation on how stakeholder, teachers, surrounding community, etc. should look at schooling today. Having a solid foundation will help those in the education field have a better understanding of their roles/purposes and how they play a major part within schools. The goal that tugged at me the most was the social efficiency piece. Many of Labaree’s notes (in this section) related to the work of a school counselor, especially the piece about preparing students for the workforce. School counselors play a major role in prepping students for the workforce that, believe it or not, begins in elementary school. It's nice to be able to relate my field of work with this article. Many fail to recognize how important our role is, so I appreciate the fact that the social efficiency piece relates to counseling.
I think that listing educational goals as broadly as Larabee did has the advantage of covering almost any conceivable core function of public schooling, except perhaps "to keep the kids supervised for the day."
I want to believe that it is possible to push back against the growing conception of education as a private good, but I fear that the culture of selfishness it stemmed from is too deeply ingrained in our society at this point to be uprooted. "Anyone can make it" has been misheard as "I can make it" enough times that I do not know how it can be undone. I hope it can, because the direction it is leading education is drawing it further and further away from an equitable and societally beneficial institution, but I cannot think of how.
In David Labaree’s article over the different struggles of educational goals he talked about three alternative goals that could be the reason there is so much educational conflict. I personally think that he nailed this and shared a lot of information that backed up his findings. One of the things he mentioned was the tension between public and private rights, which is a huge issue. Over time, education has changed in order to meet the needs that people are expecting to change at the point in time. Education will continue to change throughout the years to meet these needs. It is so frustrating that education has become such a competition with who has the best scores and that in turn results in funding. We should be focusing on the children that are being left behind and the children that aren’t being challenged enough, along with the “middle” ranged children. We need to better the community and not focus on such competition. We are constantly striving for our studens to achieve high test scores, but does that mean they are actually learning the material or just learning how to answer a question correctly. Through Labre’s goals, he comes to the conclusion that they are working against each other versus working together to get things done. They need to balance each other out versus constantly competing with one another.
Labaree’s article was well crafted in explaining the three underlying goals of American education: democratic equality, social efficiency, and social mobility. One point that really resonated with me was on page 68: “By structuring schooling around the goal of social mobility, Americans have succeeded in producing students who are well schooled and poorly educated. The system teaches them to master the forms and not the content.” This is absolutely true of American education today and by continuing to operate in this “Will this be on the test?” mentality, we are robbing students of the true essence of learning and discovery. This emphasis on teaching to the test coupled with the pressures of underlying competitiveness among students in secondary education is taking its toll on our young students and is detrimental to their overall well-being. Although this article was written nearly twenty years ago, Labaree’s premise still remains true today unfortunately. Although there is much change that still must occur across the board in education to move away from what Labaree calls the “dominance of the social mobility goal over the others”, I do believe there is hope change can happen with enough support. We all know that change, in many circumstances, does not happen quickly or without opposition. I hope that those of us in the education field are in the midst of a paradigm shift of sorts, an effort to move away from social mobility being the overriding goal and to move towards more balanced goals that are both public and private in nature. A couple of ways in which I believe schools and educators are succeeding in fostering the democratic equality goal are by implementing the requirement for students to log volunteer hours as a part of various academic clubs and specialty centers and by focusing on core values of respect, responsibility, honesty and accountability starting in elementary and middle schools. These are examples of ways in which public education can support developing students who are stronger, more productive and contributing members of society. In addition, to build upon the social efficiency goal, vocational opportunities at the high school level are being expanded and supported financially to provide opportunities for students to attain competency in skills and trades and other job related fields for future real-life work. While there is still much needed change, both by those within education as well as with politicians, I believe that American education can move away from the opposing beliefs that occur between the public good goals and the private good goal of social mobility to more balanced goals for education as a whole.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteI personally feel as though Labaree nailed the major purposes of education on the head. I can't think of anything he may have left out. Through his historical evidence of education over time, it is clear that the purpose of education has transitioned from a public good to a private good. No matter what, the values and goals of education will continue to change in order to meet the needs of society. In his conclusion, Labaree makes an excellent point about the constant contradictions the institution of education faces. It's a constant battle of a game of tug of war with one side pulling and the other being pulled, and ending with someone to feel as though they were treated unfairly. It’s a battle that can’t be won. When it comes to credentials, education is merely a puppet. It's all about being the best, having the best students, the best teachers, the best curriculum, and the best scores. People look at school in terms of what it can do for them and choose accordingly, thus schools are forced to show off their best qualities in order to stay in business. In the end, it’s not about learning or gaining knowledge and skills, it’s all about the credentials. As far as the possibility of pushing back against the notion of education as a private good, I think there is hope. Labaree states that the vision of education as a public good is instilled firmly within the education system, but I still fear that the market may get the best of it. I hope for change and think it is possible. It just takes the right people to make it happen.
ReplyDeleteBrittany Milteer
ReplyDeleteNothing is perfect in life, which means there is always room for improvement. However, understanding what is at the root of a conflict can be an issue for various topics and ideas. Labaree is able to break down three alternative goals that have been at the root of the educational conflict over time. After reading it was clearly evident how the commitment of education has changed from a public good to a private good. With education being a public good it promoted the idea that higher education was for any citizen no matter the race, ethnicity, gender, or disability. As society and social norms change with time so does the idea of education. With education being a private good it promoted the idea that an advantage can be made, which has the potential to outshine others. It is very clear to see that these days. For example, when I was in elementary school I am sure that the idea of AP and dual enrollment classes were not on the top of a high school student’s mind, however, when I was a high school student that is all I could think about. This mindset is a direct representation of how education has turned from a public good to a private good. The three alternative goals: democratic equality, social efficiency, and social mobility, can be inefficient though. There are many factors that push each goal in a different direction. Unfortunately there can never seem to be a balance between the three goals. Educational credentials are the way society is connecting schooling and the economy and translating educational attainment into social attainment. By doing this students are loosing the motivation to learn because they are now honed in on the idea that credentials are far more important than knowledge. Throughout the history of education there has always been conflict and contradiction, however, it always subject to change due to the norms of society (I would like to think there is hope to push back the idea of education as a private good, but I do find it hard to achieve considering the type of society we live in).
Savannah Crowder
ReplyDeleteWhile reading this article it became evident that there was a steady shift in education being considered a public good to a private good. Labaree discussed three alternative goals of American education that have been the source of conflict over time. The three goals included democratic equality, social efficiency, and social mobility. The three goals change from a public good (democratic equality), to a public good in service to the private sector (social efficiency), to a private good for personal consumption (social mobility). I never took the time to really think about all of the purposes of schooling, but Labaree really went into depth about purposes, and I don't think there were any I could have added. It's so sad that education has become focused on "winning" over "learning." I agree with Michelle that "People look at school in terms of what it can do for them and choose accordingly, thus schools are forced to show off their best qualities in order to stay in business." It has become a competition of reputational rank, rather than a public good to better the community and the citizens in the community. Instead of focusing on who has the "best" they should focus on giving everyone an equal opportunity to learn. From Labaree's conclusion, it is discussed that with all of the goals pushing and pulling against each other, it in turn creates a "no-win" situation. The three goals need to find balance between all of them to provide the best possible purposes/goals for education and society. I do have hope that there will be a push back against the predominant notion of education as a private good, and I think that because the education system has been vulnerable to change in the past (and present) there could be some hope in the future. It doesn't seem likely with the strong presence of "social mobility" looming overhead, but there is always a chance!
As for a general overview of how the public educational system works for students, Labaree does a great job in condensing all thoughts into the three goals listed throughout the article. I do agree with the shift of education as a public good to a private good. However, I also believe that Labaree only took a few classrooms into consideration. During my time as a Practicum student at VCU, I have seen the focus of the classroom be a community versus an individualized and highly competitive arena. It was interesting for me to witness this in Richmond, because when I was growing up (apparently during the push for social efficiency), there was always this discreet competition going on with "Student of the Month" or "Best All-Around" awards. As young students, we were never aware that we were competing against our classmates, but somehow developed angst towards our peers… Recently, I have seen schools put an emphasis on the community. For instance, instead of nominating "Student of the Month", I have seen this unique reward system where students nominate their classmates for upholding certain characteristics. These characteristics were set by the school guidance counselor; she chooses a word each month like "respect", "honesty", "responsibility", etc., and the students are able to nominate a classmate that they believe upheld that characteristic this month. At another school, I have seen a teacher put focus on the success of the class versus the success of each individual when it came to a test. She created a bar graph, displayed on one of her classroom walls, which had the class' average of the test scores. She had a red, horizontal line going through the 80 to show that that is where the class needed to be. Although she had to focus on the content that students either understood or did not understand as individuals, simultaneously, she developed a system that allowed her to appeal to the all learning levels, helped each student be successful, and more importantly, allowed students to help other students be on track. To me, that seems like some schools are pushing toward the idea of "public good”. With that being said, I think we all need to be a little optimistic in that there is hope to have an educational system that can focus on a private good, but also promotes the importance of community.
ReplyDeleteJulia Katz
ReplyDelete1/24/16
I personally found accurate Labaree’s detailing of the three goals of schooling as democratic equality, social efficiency, and social mobility. In his analysis, the first two goals are often at cross-purposes while the third goal somewhat overlaps with both of the other goals. The result is that the first two goals of democratic equality and social efficiency often cancel either other out, allowing the third goal of social mobility to predominate. Labaree’s analysis of the metriocratic ideology behind conceiving of schooling as a private good fascinated me. Labaree is right that the metriocratic belief in a school as a way to distinguish winners from losers creates a system in which “high levels of education and social attainment is a real possibility for students no matter what their social origins…Yet the probability of achieving significant social mobility through education is small, and this probability grows considerably smaller at every step down the class scale” (64). In order for credentials to have value, educational systems must limit access to opportunities. At the same time, in order to provide the credential with value (even with the potentially misleading construct that the credential-owner earned the credential through merit rather than privilege) there needs to remain the appearance of a fair competition.
Labaree posits that it is not a problem that there are different goals in education so much as that there is a lack of balance between the goals. I think one of the problems with balancing these goals is that in modern American society there is little agreement about what the “public good” entails. Controversy occurs around the kinds of received values the greater community wants to impart on young people in order to make them good citizens. For instance, different tax-payers want to impart young people with either more conservative or more liberal beliefs about government and American history. Some members of the community want young people brought up in a particular faith tradition while others want to teach scientific rationalism or a completely different set of spiritual values altogether. Futhermore, in teaching the liberal arts (or other subjects whose value goes beyond their ulility in the marketplace), tension exists between teaching the traditional “Western White Men” curriculum and teaching multicultural perspectives that are more representational of diversity. Part of why the goal of enhancing the public good could have lost traction is that, among such a polarized public, it is hard to sell tax-payers and institutions on education as the transmission of cultural values.
Additionally, focusing on education as preparing students to be productive workers is harder in a world in which the needed skills for productive workers keep changing. To me, the job markets seems very unpredictable at this time. The kinds of workers that are needed keep changing as technology makes new skills needed while rendering other skills obsolete. Nevertheless, there have been some attempts to offer training in contemporary technical skills to students. However, I wonder if the vagueness of what it would mean to educate children with “civic virtues” in a diverse society or to give children the skills they need for a rapidy-changing economy is part of what has allowed the social mobility goal of education become predominant.
Stephanie Furnish
ReplyDeleteThe conditions of schooling and the purpose for an education have drastically changed since its first arrival in the United States. As Labaree explained, education was a way to create a certain type of citizen that the Puritans wanted for a democratic society. Decades ago, it was used to create workers for factories that transitioned into wartime factories. In the 1980s and 1990s, education was a way to individually get ahead and credentials have become the only way to do so. At a time when climbing the corporate ladder seemed like the only successful option to most students, education was a huge stepping stone to get to the top. Today, with all of the testing and standards imposed in public school, education has become a public good. It’s portrayed as a sound investment when taxes for education are continuously rising, but it begs the question of who is benefitting from this increase. As Labaree points out with his interpretations of the three purposes of school, education has shifted from benefitting the student to benefitting the society around them. As “charter schools and consumer choice are the current icons” of what public school should be, current public schools are becoming “renamed as government schools” (73). In order to privatize public education, all public control will have to be withdrawn to restore education to what it once was. These drastic changes in education didn’t occur over night, and Labaree notes numerous times that these trial and errors have proved to be good lessons about what our education system should be. With that being said, after making mistakes regarding education and seeing the shift from a private good to a public good with now useless credentialism, we can only go up from here.
Amanda Kern
ReplyDeleteIn the article Public Goods, Private Goods: The American Struggle Over Educational Goals by David Labaree, Labaree states three major purposes of schooling. This includes democratic equality, social efficiency, and social mobility. I think Labaree was pretty accurate on his three major purposes of schooling. However, they all seem to focus on the child in the since of individual rather than a part of a community. These three concepts make me think of climbing the ladder to better yourself in a “I/me” focus but being in practicum classrooms, I observe more of a since of community, and students focusing on how they can help others. For example, I have seen several teachers use the bucket filling system, where students are asked to write something nice about their peers.
I think because of the pressures public schools have such as having students achieve high test scores to be competitive with the other United States, this makes them a public good. Students education being a taxpayer investment also makes it a public good. Considering this, I think it would be hard to push back the idea of education as a private good unless society as a whole was willing to let go of those two things being of such high importance.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteAlexandra Harrell
ReplyDeleteOverall, Labaree did a great job summarizing the purposes of schooling. Labaree’s three goals for education: democratic equality, social efficiency, and social mobility contained many of the ideas that we discussed as a class last week. For example, some of the major goals both our class and Labaree discussed were equal access for everyone, schooling as competition, and taxpayer investment. Upon reading the article, I can see why Labaree notes that these three purposes of education can work together but often pull education into two different directions. Labaree nails the idea that the effectiveness of education has been impaired due to the two competing ideas: education as a private good vs. public good. It is extremely clear that education as a public good has almost gone to the back burner while education as a private good seems to have taken over throughout history. Although it is often a tough battle, I do think there is hope for education to make a shift towards becoming a private good. Labaree refers to the historical goals of education as a pendulum, shifting from one view to another. This is exactly why I feel there is much hope and with future educators, we can make the shift by focusing on the individual rather than the individual’s test scores. I also think it is important that we have a balance between these two ideas. There will always be one side pulling away to put their ideas in the spotlight while the other side does the same. I am confident that we can find a balance between the two opposing views while keeping education as a public good as our main focus.
Chelsea Auernheimer
ReplyDeleteIn Labaree’s article, Public Goods, Private Goods, he discusses the three main goals of America’s schools. How they weave in and out between being both a public and a private good. Right now, I do believe we are pushing more toward education as a private need, we’ve become a bit individualistic in the needs to beat one another to the top opposed to creating a “whole self”. I don’t think Labaree left anything out in his description of this political war within the educational system, or maybe I am missing something. From what we covered in last class, each one of our points was brought up within this. It was a brilliant precursor to what we believe public education is and how it is seen. Democratic equality, social efficiency, and social mobility are all necessary to help establish a plethora of differing individuals, but I think that we may be going about it all wrong. However, this is also where things can get sticky regarding to views. I think that there is a way we can push back against the view of education as a private good. What that method is? I’m not entirely sure. We will really have to push for it though, and I think it’s possible that after the increase burnout of students with this drive for competition, which would be a negative method, may be what brings the issue back to the plate. Those defining what education should be are not really those who are in the classrooms and dealing with the students on a regular basis. They just want results. Or at least that is how it seems.We can only hope that we don’t bring out own economic/educational downfall from greed and impatience.
Allie Bryan
ReplyDeleteWhile reading Labaree’s article on the competing goals for education, I noticed he defined the three goals as very distinct and separate purposes. While he did argue that balance may be the only way to reconcile the naturally contradicting purposes, I feel like the purposes themselves were rather overgeneralized and he ignored the mutual goals of each, the overlapping areas of each. One thing I had a hard time wrapping my head around, was the argument of public versus private goods. For me, the idea of education as a private good that increases individual attainment being wholly in conflict with education being for the betterment of the community is inaccurate. Casting social mobility as this cold form of credentialing is ignoring the benefits. Without the ability for individuals to attain higher learning, where would the great minds and innovators of society be formed? I think that the idea of grouping by ability does not have to be exclusive or discriminatory, but really, can offer every student additional opportunities for an EQUITABLE education as long as it is in addition to, and not a replacement for, whole class and cooperative learning. I believe education, like most things, is a never-ending balancing act. As the weight continues to shift from one end to another, we move back-and-forth trying to find a perfect equilibrium. I believe the competitive yet symbiotic nature of the three purposes means there will be a perpetual motion swinging from goal to goal with no final resting spot, no equilibrium but no permanent imbalance either.
Labaree provides a well-rounded explanation regarding the purposes of schooling, including democratic equality, social efficiency, and social mobility; however, I believe an important function, or purpose for schooling, could be effective communication. Individuals acquire effective communication skills by observing and participating in daily life situations. Individuals develop values, norms, and attitudes based on life experiences with others, in school and outside of school. The ultimate goal of schooling is to provide students with the tools to be successful in life and become life-long learners. Public schools play a vital part in opening up communication between peers and people of higher positions for real-life “practice,” if you will, about how to effectively communicate to achieve goals and advance in life.
ReplyDeleteIs there any hope to push back the notion of education as a private good? In this day, school has become primarily a place to acquire credits, certifications, and credentials. Parents of today’s society highly value education, but I feel only because they want to see their children get ahead in life. Wanting your child to “get ahead” in life is okay, but what about the idea of going to school to explore unknown territories, spark an interest for life-long learning, or simply develop a love for investigating or researching? While there is hope to push back against the notion of education as a private good, it is important to expose parents and society as a whole on the notion that education is more than just getting a piece of paper to advance to the next level…
Maureen Boster
ReplyDeleteThis article by Labaree was very interesting and brought up great points regarding the education system and how it has changed over the years. It focused mainly on the three points or goals, which are Democratic equality, social efficiency, and social mobility. Starting with education for the public good (democratic equality) and moving towards a private good (social mobility). I believe that Labaree is complete in defining the purpose of schooling. Each of the topics talked about are both broad enough to cover major topics and narrow to provide necessary details when it comes to schooling, therefore covering almost everything about our education system to date. I can relate almost all three points to different levels of schooling and not just in the elementary level. Everyone is offered the opportunity to go to school and they are taught the same curriculum at a young age. In our society, we want everyone to contribute to our society and culture and having the same foundation of basic knowledge will allow you to do so. It's for the public good that you gain this knowledge.
Especially in today’s society, elementary school parents, and sometimes students, choose the school that is suited best for them. If possible, the selection is the school with the best of everything, including curriculum, teachers and opportunities. I believe, as you get older, you go to school more for a personal reason and schooling becomes more for the private good. For example, if you want to become a teacher you go and take specific classes for that purpose. If you want to become a doctor you are going to get specific training for that profession. It is your choice to focus on a specific education. In the end, you will of course be contributing to the overall good of society and the good of the public you serve. No one forced you to learn these specifics.
In the conclusion of the article, Labaree discusses how each one of these goals contradicts the other and brings new problems and ideas to the forefront. I agree and recognize that with every new idea there may be a problem. Society often shifts its focus and that potentially causes new problems. The positive sides to societal shifts may be new and better ideas. This is how it’s always been and how it will continue. Currently parents and students may focus solely on what is the best for them and them alone, so schooling may continue to be mainly a private good. Possibly one day society will get past the success of an individual and look at everyone and emphasize in education what is good for the entire society.
Erica Sudduth
ReplyDeleteI believe Labaree included all of the major purposes of schooling, as these were all of the purposes we discussed as a whole class. After reading several of the comments, one of my peer's really stuck out to me. "the idea of education as a private good that increases individual attainment being wholly in conflict with education being for the betterment of the community is inaccurate." I completely agree with this statement and hope she doesn't mind that I quoted her. Many individuals strive to be better or have different abilities which requires a more individualistic approach. There must be a balance. Students should be able to progress in their own lives and must also work together to become members of a society. I believe that there is hope to provide the proper balance between public and private good in education.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteAshley Slater
ReplyDeleteReading about Labaree’s three goals (democratic equality, social efficiency, and social mobility), made me more aware of the aspects of education today. Schooling was set out so young people can learn about how society works, and what they need to know to be responsible citizens. While students are doing this, they are gaining skills for themselves. This is when social mobility comes into play, because not everyone can achieve the same goals or get the same position. While I think these three goals go hand in hand, I think Labaree is missing something crucial. I advocate for public schooling over private schooling because of what the students learn when the teacher is not teaching. It is what the students learn from each other. To live in a semi peaceful world, we need to learn how to interact with people who are different from ourselves. We all have different backgrounds, religions, cultures, and values. The younger that people realize this, the better. Over time, education has shifted from a public good to a private good. Parental involvement and pressure we set on ourselves has made educational systems a competitive environment to be in. Education has shifted from the need to get ahead, rather than to be life-long learners. I think this is why people go into education today, so they can change this competitive ideology.
Corinne Tilley
ReplyDeleteLabaree spends a lot of time discussing the view of education for the purpose of being competitive and moving up socially, so I don't necessarily think that this is something that he left out, but I do think now a huge aspect of public education revolves around competing with the rest of the world. I was only five years old at the time the article was written, but I imagine that in 1997 there was less focus on world competition than there is now in the age of mass outsourcing. While I do not believe that competing with the rest of the world should be a purpose of education, though it is a good measure of how we're doing, but it absolutely is.
Without some massive overhaul of the entire educational system I do not believe that we will move back to the point of education being a public good rather than a private good, at least within my lifetime. This is a point that is brought up constantly and I'm sure everyone is tired of hearing it but it will be relevant until it's not. The biggest problem with education and education reform is that no one wants to listen to teachers. Teachers don't make enough money to be influential within the political system that controls education, and those who do have enough money rarely choose to be teachers.
As a culture, the United States has grown impatient, especially with money. Politicians, etc. are not willing to spend the money it will take to truly invest in our education and infrastructure because it does not yield the profits they want immediately. Labaree mentions that from an economic standpoint, investing in schools and education makes a lot of sense. Unfortunately, the benefits do not come quickly enough, and those who make these decisions have the money and power to ensure that they and their families do have access to the education that everyone should be entitled to.
To summarize, unless we find some miracle cure for public education that also allows it to become immediately profitable, there will be no real change to the educational system. I suppose things could change with, say, total revolution, but I do not see that happening.
Paige Michanco
ReplyDeleteUpon reading the article Public Goods, Private Goods: The American Struggle Over Educational Goals, by David F. Labaree, I began to get a better sense of our class discussion surrounding the purpose of education. In his article, Labaree focuses on three goals of education. His three goals are democratic equality, social efficiency, and social mobility. He describes these goals as either a public good or a private good. While I do feel that Labaree touches on some very important purposes for education, I would have to say that there could be other reasons for education as well. Some other purposes for education that I find to be important are socialization and communication. Being able to be a part of a social function is important for several reasons, and I think school is a very important part of socializing kids, especially at young ages. I also think school and education help with communication skills. Having kids work in groups and being able to present ideas to classmates would only benefit them later on in society.
As far as education being known as a private good instead of a public good in the future, who knows? I feel that school today focuses more on the ‘piece of paper’ that you get at the end instead of going to simply learn something new or explore more about the things one wonders about. I think it is important to focus on what else education has to offer other than this idea of hierarchy—jumping from one level to the next.
Jordan Lee
ReplyDeleteWhen reading this article, I quickly realized that many of the points Labaree highlights as the major purposes of schooling, were discussed in our first class meeting. When we were posed with the question about what we believe the purpose of public school is, many of our answers aligned with his. Labaree discusses three alternative goals for education that have caused controversy over time: democratic equality, social efficiency, and social mobility.
Labaree states early in the article that, “The problem is not that we do not know how to make schools better but that we are fighting among ourselves about what goals schools should pursue.” This really stuck out to me; it shows that we have the ability and knowledge to better our educational system, but that the whole public versus private good and political aspect of it is interfering with making it more effective.
I feel that in the elementary and secondary years of a student’s education, education can and should be looked at as a public good versus a private good. During these early years, every child has access to an education and to obtain an education to become a functioning member of society. We want children to go to school so that they can learn the skills and communication skills necessary to provide benefits to their community. I personally feel that education starts to turn into a private good when secondary schooling is over. Students are urged to attend universities to continue their education in order to obtain a good job. Students want to attend universities with good reputations because they know it will help them when applying for jobs. In our generation now, many people aren’t satisfied with a bachelor’s degree and often continue their education because they know it will make them a more favorable applicant when trying to get employed, or earning a higher income. With that being said, when individuals dedicate more time to their education, they in return will provide the community larger benefits because of their higher level of skills. This where I think the social efficiency and social mobility are intertwined and get confusing. I’m not sure if we will be able to change the view of education as a private good or not. I am optimistic that society has the ability to see education as a benefit to the entire community again, therefore being a public good.
Travis Luck
ReplyDeleteIt seems as though we have all been taught from an early age the private value that an education can offer us. In many ways we are taught to follow through with an education (getting good grades), in hopes of continuing our education (for many to get into a good college), to get a good job based on our degree. This schema is even compounded some by graduate school and other post-grad credentials. Following the pyramid structure or stacking that Labaree speaks of. The watering down or inflation of credentials is also on the rise as there are not enough positions in the work force to hold all. The drive for students to continue education for the sake of credentials is still strong though, because jobs that are to be filled in many cases do require these credentials. It is a catch 22 in this aspect, and the fact that many see continuing education as a worthless game as it takes more time and resources than are available to a majority of students.
Not wanting to sound too bleak, and even reflect on myself as I am still in school and have always considered how my educational choices will affect me, I would argue that there is still public good sprinkled among the private focus of education. The public aspects might intertwine with the private, but I still believe that some form of well rounded, or liberal base to education is positive for all. Regardless of what we are looking to accomplish through school, the values, interpersonal skills, experience, and knowledge that is received does hold value in my opinion; individual as well as collective value. Education, knowledge, and values influence choices that are made when students become members of society. Although the education and knowledge has greatly moved to “what is on the test,” I still think there is learning. I still think that through curriculum, teachers, and administrators, however rigorous standards have become, that information can spark students’ interests and also foster growth that would not happen without school at every level.
On the other private end, from my experience I do not think those invested in sending children to school (parents, grandparents, future parents, etc.) will ever not want what they see as best for their children or students. As the reading describes, what is best ends up being what is better than at least some, which will always trump the equality for all public aspect. It does seem that having so many opposing interests will always be pushing one end while pulling the other. I think in many ways we are seeing Labaree’s descriptions play out even more in today’s society than was observed even 10 years ago. We are living in an interesting time for education, and possibly even more interesting will be to see how the future of education unfolds.
Emily Meade
ReplyDeleteI feel as though Labaree did a great job explaining the goals for American education by comparing their focuses in this article. Labaree discussed the three goals of educational conflict: democratic equality, social efficiency, and social mobility. In short, democratic equality (public good) emphasizes citizenship through higher education and equality, social efficiency (public good) focuses on training for the workforce, and social mobility (private good) is an educational meritocracy system where the focus relies on the individual consumer. It is very apparent that schooling has slowly become more of a private good with the competitive nature of today’s society. As much as it bothers me to say, I feel as though it would be a long shot possibility for the push back against the notion of education as a private good. The need for higher credentials has taken over our school systems and promoted social mobility as a predominant mindset for our children. One could be optimistic for change to education as more of a public good, but the controversy among these goals and competitiveness of our society will continue test education in America.
Brittany Gifford
ReplyDeletePersonally, I feel as if the three main goals that Labaree has extensively explored are the goals that education strives to achieve. It all depends one from what perspective within the schooling system that you view from as to which goal you focus on. Many of the more broad issues with schooling fall into the democratic equality goal. The issues that are discussed at the higher levels in education are ones that work towards making everyone have equal opportunity. When you get to the community that the school is in, the issues examined are more about the social efficiency of the school as the students prepare to enter the workforce or move onto higher education. Finally, within the schools, there are issues that fall under social mobility. Students are encouraged to compete with one another through class rank, GPA, and grades in their class. This breeds that desire to rise through the ranks of their fellow classmates. I find Labaree's break down of the goals of education and the politics surrounding them to be a very interesting read.
Maria Foy
ReplyDeleteLabaree was very thorough in explaining the three major purposes of schooling and do not believe he missed anything. Democratic equality was explained as the more traditional role of academics preparing people for a wide range of political and social roles in the community, a public good. Social efficiency gets more specific in its needs to improve and provide human capital to enhance productivity in all aspects of the economy, deemed a public good. Social mobility is focused on the individual status along with the attainment of credentials over the efforts to help people fulfill roles in their community and economy, a private good. It is highly distressing to see how our cultural values have shifted far from the progression of bettering our communities and strengthening our economy to, essentially “buying” our value in place of human capital(actual skills, knowledge and experience). I think that most educators put their hope in the day that education will be transformed back in a public good but I think it would require a tenacious leader to do it. It would be a lot of work to fight against our current culture in which we value individualism above all else, yet I still believe it’s possible.
Maddy Kilgore
ReplyDeleteI believe Labaree accurately covers the major purposes for education in his 3 goals of democratic equality, social efficiency, and social mobility. These ideas reflect the shifting focus of schools over the years, now with the focus on social mobility and how school can help an individual succeed better in life. I definitely agree that there has been a big shift from the view of education as a public good to as a private good, now when parents send their child to school they want everything the teacher does to better their child and provide the opportunities needed for them to be competitive in the world.
One of Labaree’s arguments that stuck out to me was that there isn’t a problem with the goals for education it’s that the goals are competing and education is deficient in meeting all the goals. And that when the 3 purposes are in conflict it has opened the way for the social mobility goal to dominate and influence education. I have seen this shift in educational focus as I have grown up in the system when there was so much pressure in High School to take AP classes and judgment on college choices because I had a high GPA I was expected to choose a higher perceived institution. In schools there is so much focus on achievement and competition for the individual, which shifts the focus from the other goals mainly because of their view of education as a public good. However, I do believe that education still has a chance to reform and be more adept in meeting the 3 goals and shifting away from being a private good. There are still some aspects of this public view in education such as equal access with the emphasis on more inclusion classrooms; push for character education is again present and discussed in our courses, as we are upcoming educators. Also there is still evidence I believe of the social efficiency model in a way with the rise of charter schools and specialty programs because the programs can better prepare individuals for higher education and then the job force by providing them with more specialized instruction in math or science than in normal curriculum. These are only a few instances of the other goals still being present and it will differ from school to school and that is part of the hope, every school will be different based on the faculty and community so there is always room for change to come about with so many differing viewpoints in play.
James Biedenharn 1/26/15. 8:30 AM
ReplyDeleteI feel that Labaree accurately defined and analyzed our issues in the field of education. At their educational roots, the three terms that Labaree outlined, defined, and analyzed make sense and should benefit all Americans involved. Labaree however shows the reader that the three terms outlined in this section overlap, cause confusion, and what is meant to actually try and compliment one another, actually ends up causing conflicts with our educational structure. In my opinion, education in America should be free and offered to every American who desires to learn. I want to believe in the idea of Democratic Equality, but in this day in age, Social Mobility seems to keep people motivated. We live in a society that promotes individual success rather than group success or an equality of success. People are attracted to things that they perceive will benefit them in some shape, form, or fashion. I am not saying this is a bad thing, but this is how we as a culture act in today’s society. Individual education progression is no different. People will take their education more seriously if they know that it will benefit their careers and social standing in the long run. Labaree’s discussion in pages 56-57 regarding Meritocracy allowed me to gain a better understanding on our educational framework and how its worth as a private commodity is still standing strong. Everything in a general education classroom setting is somewhat competition based. General education students compete for grades, academic standings such as valedictorian, class president, etc., and college placement. I have been in classrooms where teachers use forms of competitive games to assist students with test reviews and comprehension. This method keeps students engaged, motivated, and eager to learn more.
I thought Labaree’s conclusions were solid and well thought out, but I sensed a tinge of pessimism throughout this section. In a way, I think he meant to write like this because the different factors and terms discussed throughout the previous pages cause more harm to one another rather than complimenting one another. I think to change the educational framework is possible, but it will take a lot of work from everyone involved. Labaree’s subsection on credentialism beginning on page 71 was intriguing. Education seeks credentialism in many ways. I believe a couple of ways that credentialism reinforces itself in the school system is the credentials that we give to students for various grade achievements, club activities, or sports recognition. Additionally, I believe another facet of credentialism is the way teachers and school systems as a whole can receive certain honors or grants for state-wide test scores, number of students graduating, etc. This mentality works well when students go on to obtain bachelor, graduate and other professional degrees. Additionally the idea of credentialism works very well when students obtain said degrees and seek high paying jobs and social stature.
Jamie Whittaker
ReplyDeleteIn the article, Labaree discusses that the central problems in American education is fundamentally political and that we are fighting amongst ourselves about what goals schools should pursue. He also goes on to discuss the three defining goals for American education: democratic equality, social efficiency, and social mobility. Labaree was quite thorough in discussing these goals that I do not think he left out any other major purposes. He says in the end we have ‘an open structure of education that vulnerable to change’ and I think change is what we need to find a nice balance between public and private.
Christeena Claiborne
ReplyDeleteI believe Labaree did an excellent job explaining in detail the major purposes of schooling. Democratic equality, social efficiency, and social mobility were defined well, and I believe that these goals/purposes should be the laying foundation on how stakeholder, teachers, surrounding community, etc. should look at schooling today. Having a solid foundation will help those in the education field have a better understanding of their roles/purposes and how they play a major part within schools. The goal that tugged at me the most was the social efficiency piece. Many of Labaree’s notes (in this section) related to the work of a school counselor, especially the piece about preparing students for the workforce. School counselors play a major role in prepping students for the workforce that, believe it or not, begins in elementary school. It's nice to be able to relate my field of work with this article. Many fail to recognize how important our role is, so I appreciate the fact that the social efficiency piece relates to counseling.
I think that listing educational goals as broadly as Larabee did has the advantage of covering almost any conceivable core function of public schooling, except perhaps "to keep the kids supervised for the day."
ReplyDeleteI want to believe that it is possible to push back against the growing conception of education as a private good, but I fear that the culture of selfishness it stemmed from is too deeply ingrained in our society at this point to be uprooted. "Anyone can make it" has been misheard as "I can make it" enough times that I do not know how it can be undone. I hope it can, because the direction it is leading education is drawing it further and further away from an equitable and societally beneficial institution, but I cannot think of how.
Colleen Barry
ReplyDeleteIn David Labaree’s article over the different struggles of educational goals he talked about three alternative goals that could be the reason there is so much educational conflict. I personally think that he nailed this and shared a lot of information that backed up his findings. One of the things he mentioned was the tension between public and private rights, which is a huge issue. Over time, education has changed in order to meet the needs that people are expecting to change at the point in time. Education will continue to change throughout the years to meet these needs. It is so frustrating that education has become such a competition with who has the best scores and that in turn results in funding. We should be focusing on the children that are being left behind and the children that aren’t being challenged enough, along with the “middle” ranged children. We need to better the community and not focus on such competition. We are constantly striving for our studens to achieve high test scores, but does that mean they are actually learning the material or just learning how to answer a question correctly. Through Labre’s goals, he comes to the conclusion that they are working against each other versus working together to get things done. They need to balance each other out versus constantly competing with one another.
Cabell Miltenberger
ReplyDeleteLabaree’s article was well crafted in explaining the three underlying goals of American education: democratic equality, social efficiency, and social mobility. One point that really resonated with me was on page 68: “By structuring schooling around the goal of social mobility, Americans have succeeded in producing students who are well schooled and poorly educated. The system teaches them to master the forms and not the content.” This is absolutely true of American education today and by continuing to operate in this “Will this be on the test?” mentality, we are robbing students of the true essence of learning and discovery. This emphasis on teaching to the test coupled with the pressures of underlying competitiveness among students in secondary education is taking its toll on our young students and is detrimental to their overall well-being. Although this article was written nearly twenty years ago, Labaree’s premise still remains true today unfortunately. Although there is much change that still must occur across the board in education to move away from what Labaree calls the “dominance of the social mobility goal over the others”, I do believe there is hope change can happen with enough support. We all know that change, in many circumstances, does not happen quickly or without opposition. I hope that those of us in the education field are in the midst of a paradigm shift of sorts, an effort to move away from social mobility being the overriding goal and to move towards more balanced goals that are both public and private in nature. A couple of ways in which I believe schools and educators are succeeding in fostering the democratic equality goal are by implementing the requirement for students to log volunteer hours as a part of various academic clubs and specialty centers and by focusing on core values of respect, responsibility, honesty and accountability starting in elementary and middle schools. These are examples of ways in which public education can support developing students who are stronger, more productive and contributing members of society. In addition, to build upon the social efficiency goal, vocational opportunities at the high school level are being expanded and supported financially to provide opportunities for students to attain competency in skills and trades and other job related fields for future real-life work. While there is still much needed change, both by those within education as well as with politicians, I believe that American education can move away from the opposing beliefs that occur between the public good goals and the private good goal of social mobility to more balanced goals for education as a whole.