Challenging issues and rays of hope: the education and life conundrum.

Every country has its own challenging educational issues. Every country has its rays of hope--those classrooms or programs that provide opportunities for children to overcome obstacles and go on to succeed in education and life. This year's International Focus Issue of Childhood Education highlights some of these challenges, and describes the commitment and ingenuity of educators who offer exemplary educational opportunities for children. In Africa, Asia, Australia, Europe, North America, and South America, educators are struggling with what the roles of schools should be and what should be taught. An Irishman living in Canada, Kieran Egan (1992) has considered these education conundrums that stretch across geographical and intellectual borders:

* Different people define education as leading to different things. Do we try to socialize our students so that they value the same things we value and thus create a homogeneous culture of people with the same values? Alternatively, do we teach our students to think logically/critically, thereby creating a heterogeneous population that challenges the status quo?

* Do we believe our children should master basic skills, or do we value experience?

* Is it better to focus on the process of tasks or is this immaterial? Does it matter how you accomplish a task, as long as the task is complete and accurate?

* As a teacher, are you child-centered? Do you follow a child's initiation, wherever that leads, or is it more important to focus on subject knowledge?

Current issues in education are based on society's perception of what is currently considered important. Lee Shulman, President of the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching and former president of the American Educational Research Association, said, "My vision of good teaching includes nurturing the moral and spiritual development, the civic engagement, and the socialization of students" (Tell, 2001,p. 6). Aristotle observed that educating the mind without educating the heart is no education at all. In a similar vein, Howard Good (2002) believed education to be about the heart, the mind, and courage. He wondered:

What defines somebody as educated? Is it getting a certain score on a standardized test? Is it passing through a prescribed curriculum? Is it being employable after graduation? If you listen to politicians and educational bureaucrats, you will probably think so. But who in his or her right mind wants to listen to politicians and bureaucrats? (p. 29)

Good (2002) then paraphrased Peter Berger's The Homeless Mind:

The central thesis [is] that modern society has left most of its members feeling like orphans. [Berger] note[s] that the traditions and affiliations--familial, occupational, ethnic, religious--from which people once drew a sense of belonging have been destroyed or degraded by the forces of modernization, with the result that the world has become a colder, darker, lonelier place. Recent statistics suggest that it is especially cold and dark and lonely for young people. (p. 30)

On the one hand, education is academic, standards--and content-based. This raises many issues. Should testing define the curriculum or should the curriculum determine the test? Do we teach a broad curriculum with shallow knowledge or do we teach a narrow curriculum to greater depth? Should our limited resources be directed to the students with the greatest needs, or to the students who are most likely to produce the greatest economic benefit to society? On the other hand, the above critics view education as more than just school and routinely blur the lines between a child's life inside and outside of school.

Historically, school has been considered as "falsely" separate from the child's home and community experiences (Gale & Densmore, 2003). With the development of socio-cultural theory and Bronfenbrenner's (1979) ecological system theory, the dynamic relationships between school, home, community, and government have received clearer focus and understanding. Although one could argue that there has always been a relationship between home and school, there has been a clear division between the role of teachers/school and the role of parents/home. Over time, this demarcation has blurred considerably.

The influences of outside events and circumstances are now recognized as important contributors to a child's success in school (Swick, 2004). Research has clearly shown the impact that poverty has on all areas of a child's life (see, for example, Baxter, 1993). Research also has shown teachers to have lower expectations of children who come from lower socioeconomic groups, minority groups, or who have been identified as having a disability (Contenta, 1993; Gale & Densmore, 2003). Many children do not have a large circle of support at home. They have few or no siblings; they may live with one parent or no parents; they do not live near extended family; or both parents may work long hours or shift work. Schools try to fill these gaps. The teacher's role has expanded beyond academics to include social and emotional development, health and safety, independence, and employment possibilities.

Deconstructing Social Reproduction

In most countries, education is valued as a right for all children. If schools are to honor that right, then they must provide for a child's needs. Doing so without being socially reproductive needs to be a conscious effort. The shifts in the delivery models and curricular focus for children with disabilities are good examples of the deconstruction of social reproduction and of how the lines between home and school issues have lost their distinction.

Traditionally, school was where students learned academic skills in an orderly, obedient, and uniform manner, and where they were socialized toward societal values (Contenta, 1993; Gale & Densmore, 2003). If that was not possible, they were segregated to a setting where their learning was focused on basic skills or simulated life skills that were not functional or developmentally appropriate (Hemmeter, 2000). If they were not successful in the segregated setting, or there was no program to address their needs, they often dropped out. Community and home needs and experiences were not priorities.

A student's path beyond school was often predetermined by the teachers' expectations of potential success; the skills taught to the students were based on these expectations (Egan, 2003). Clearly, many students' abilities and interests were underestimated and overlooked. Students were streamed into schools and programs, based on perceived ability (Contenta, 1993). The students learned discrete skills in these settings that often did not transfer to employability or to living independently.

Education has become much more transdisciplinary and teachers are encouraged to collaborate with service providers, community programs, and employers, in addition to the family and student. Students with significant physical, emotional, and cognitive needs are experiencing more inclusive programs with support from a variety of service providers (i.e., agencies, teachers, volunteers, interventionists, etc.). Those students who would have historically been segregated are attending school and community recreation programs with their peers, completing successful cooperative placements, attending postsecondary programs, finding employment, and living independently. Only our expectations limit their success.

Rays of Hope From Around the World

As you read the current issue of Childhood Education, consider the synergy between life and education--whether formal or informal. Consider the context of people's lives and their access to education. Consider the values, priorities, and needs that children have from one country to another. The challenge is to learn from one another. The following articles represent examples of the rays of hope that shine on some of the issues that plague education throughout the world.

Szente and Hoot illustrate that integration of technology into Ethiopian primary schools, through a USAID grant, offers the potential to bridge the gap between recommended teaching/ learning strategies often touted as best practice in the West and the more typical rote methods of instruction found in developing countries.

Krystyna Nowak-Fabrykowski reports on the past and current status of orphanages in Poland. Her article describes a Children's Home in Lodz that has brought multiple services together to focus on the holistic development of its charges. The article provides many examples of the successes the orphans educated at this home achieved--both educational and life successes.

In Tata Mbugua's article about education in Kenya, she refers to access to education as a fundamental issue, especially for the children affected by the AIDS pandemic. Whereas questions about standards and curriculum still present challenges to the Kenyan teacher, concerns about health are a very real priority. The article describes how education is becoming available for all children and highlights the Nyumbani Children's Home as a ray of hope.

Elaine Frankel provides a snapshot of the care and education of children with special needs and their families in Canada, Australia, and the United States. Child care providers from each of the countries address common perceived barriers to the inclusion of young children with special needs. Those who were most successful in being inclusive employed an ecological approach to overcoming the obstacles to inclusion.

Anne Graham has described an educational program for 6-to 19-year-olds that could benefit many children and families throughout the world. The article focuses on teaching children to effectively cope with change, loss, or grief, highlighting a program, Seasons for Growth, that has been successful in Australia, Canada, and England in helping children develop protective resilience factors.

Finally, Marilene Proenca from the University of Sao Paulo and Miguel Neneve of the University of Rondonia describe their experience with an innovative teacher education program designed to decentralize higher education in Brazil. This graduate program addresses the social disparities that exist within Brazil with the goal of giving voice to the excluded. The graduate program constructed work that favored the link between curriculum and local customs.

These articles demonstrate a few regional, national and international efforts to address the concerns that are most pressing to the children and students in each community. Common to all of the programs is a respect for and valuing of experiences relevant to the students, and the desire to provide whatever will address their needs.

References

Baxter, S. (2003). Voices of children in poverty: A child is not a toy. Vancouver, BC: New Star Books.

Bronfenbrenner, U. (1979). Ecological systems theory. Annals of Child Development, 6, 187-249.

Contenta, S. (1993). Rituals of failure: What schools fail to teach. Toronto, ON: Between the Lines.

Egan, K. (1992). The roles of schools: The place of education. Teachers College Record, 93(4), 641-656.

Egan, K. (2003). Testing what for what? Educational Leadership, 61(3), 27-30.

Gale, T., & Densmore, K. (2003). Engaging teachers: Towards a radical democratic agenda for schooling. Berkshire, UK: Open University Press.

Good, H. (2002). Off to see the wizard. Education Week, 22(15), 29-30.

Hemmeter, M. L. (2000). Classroom-based interventions: Evaluating the past and looking toward the future. Topics in Early Childhood Special Education, 20, 56-61.

Swick, K. (2004). The dynamics of homeless families: Implications for early childhood educators. Childhood Education, 80, 116-120.

Tell, C. (2001). Appreciating good teaching--A conversation with Lee Shulman. Educational Leadership, 58(5), 6-11.

James Ernest and Isabel Killoran, Guest Editors James Ernest is Assistant Professor, Special Education & Communication Disorders, Valdosta State University, Valdosta, Georgia. Isabel Killoran is Assistant Professor, Faculty of Education, York University, Toronto, Canada.