These responses are from other journals.

-- Anonymous, November 11, 1998

Answers

I recently received a journal in the mail for the first time. It is the NEA Higher Education Journal called Thought & Action. I found the very first article interesting. It was written by Janelle Wilson who is an assistant professor of sociology here at UMD!

The article is entitled Generation X: Who Are They? What Do They Want? Apparently, there has been a marked decline in the caliber of student that attend college these days. The author begins by describing the student of the 70s that she has heard so much about. They were well read, disciplined, and cared about learning for the sake of learning, unlike the more apathetic and even clueless student of today. She has anecdotes about the casualness of todays student. Behaviors that rarely occurred twenty years ago are common place. One example is the increasing tendency to come and leave at will. Another mentions a pair of students making out in class. I first reaction was, I see this behavior every day in high school. Why should college be any different. Todays student is tremendously casual about school. More and more behaviors can be seen that suggest this. From brining pop to class, to sleeping in class, to blatant public displays of affection in the hallways. One can clearly see, that for many students, school is something other than a source of education. It is a place to socialize pure and simple. These same students resent expectations and rebel at the rules of the institution. Often, I have wondered if these students are even educable. Respect is not something freely given, it must be earned.

More and more it seems, we teachers are fighting to maintain control of our classes. Our response to this, seems to come down to trying to invent new ways to reach this wayward Generation X. Personally, I believe many of these new pedagogies amount to nothing more than appeasement. The fact that these non-productive, undisciplined behaviors have reached into the collegiate level was inevitable. Consider that the worst cases dont get to college. It could be worse.

The bulk of Wilsons article focuses on comparing the lives of Generation X to those of their parents (and grandparents), the Baby Boomers. Wilson suggests, very accurately I imagine, that a sense of doom or pessimism clings to this generation. They admire the nostalgia of the past when futures looked brighter. There was a good chance that you would own your own home, raise a family, and find happiness. There was less stress, more promise, and the world seemed a lot less complicated. I recently went to see the movie Pleasantville. This is practically the whole point of the movie even though the twist at the end suggests that life had its problems back then too.

A student in one of Wilsons class summed it up when he wrote while commenting on the portrayal of Generation Xers in a Surge commercial. He wrote, Lets face it, the youth of today have nothing to do but compete for a can of sugar. This poses a question that is worth asking. What do these students have to look forward to? The world is different than it was two decades ago. Satisfying employment was more plentiful and it was more secure. College was far less expensive. With the retirement age creeping up higher, Boomers are hanging on the there jobs longer than ever. Wilson quotes Harold Hellenbrand who says that this has been one of the few moments in history when it has been easier for the elders to pursue happiness than for the young.

I found myself thinking, what will these kids need to make a place for themselves in the future. My answer is that many will need much more than they are willing to work for. I can overlook the lyrics in todays music. I can overlook the grunge style of dress and hair style. But I have a terrible time overlooking the extreme laziness and disrespect that so many of these kids display. They may have a harder time of it than we did, but thats the hand that was dealt. Apathy and rebellion are not the answer to the problems this generation will face. Those attitudes only serve to compound the problems making the future look even more bleak.

Wilson finishes by observing that the traditional, hierarchical models of teaching doesnt work very well with this generation. She advocates experiential exercises, hands-on learning and in class discussions as practices that she finds best reach this new contemporary student. That may be true, until this new student begins to find that methodology boring as well. I am very skeptical of the new innovations in teaching that result in a loss of content. If I use to do 12 chapters in my math class but now, because of experiential learning can only complete 10, I think that somebodys been cheated. Ultimately it is the student who will suffer because they cannot compete. I cannot accept new philosophy of education which spews out slogans like less is more or I dont teach content, I teach kids.

The final report is not written about the effectiveness of these experiential methodologies. My fear is that we may go to far trying to reach kids who are just daring us to try and reach them. It is very close to appeasement. How much will we give up before we just expect that they will accept the responsibilities of learning and conform to them rather than the other way around.

-- Anonymous, December 02, 1998

APPLAUSE! APPLAUSE! I agree entirely on your ideas of the students of today. What is it going to take to get them to see the value in their education? When will they begin taking responsibility for their own learning. I feel teachers are given such an unrealistic task of educating children that refuse to learn. I also agree that the institute of learning is not just an institute of learning any more. It is more of a social warehouse of sorts. What did those poor folks do when they did not have telephones and had to "catch up" with friends at school? I, too, am sceptical of the "new methodology" of today's education, but I am willing to give other methods a try before I find the best methods that work. Thanks Tim for your thoughtful response.

-- Anonymous, December 29, 1998

APPLAUSE! APPLAUSE! I agree entirely on your ideas of the students of today. What is it going to take to get them to see the value in their education? When will they begin taking responsibility for their own learning. I feel teachers are given such an unrealistic task of educating children that refuse to learn. I also agree that the institute of learning is not just an institute of learning any more. It is more of a social warehouse of sorts. What did those poor people do when they did not have telephones and had to "catch up" with friends at school? I, too, am sceptical of the "new methodology" of today's education, but I am willing to give other methods a try before I find the best methods that work. Thanks Tim for your thoughtful response.

-- Anonymous, December 29, 1998

Hi Tim, I enjoyed reading your review of this article. I agree with your statement about who should be conforming to whom. I wonder too if what we are seeing at school isn't part of a bigger problem with many of today's youth.(Did I really just type that, I am now officially OLD!!) I read and agree with much of what John Rosemond (child pshchologist, author and columnist) has to say about children, discipline and parenting. Some of his concerns regarding today's youth is that they have not had to experience working hard for things. Many parents (baby boomers) provide for their children a very comfortable life. We tend to give them too much that they have not had to earn or wait for. By doing this, what can we expect of them in regard to a healthy work ethic. Many children today are deprived of the "priviledge" of having to want for anything . Many are used to immediate gratification . I think this is reflected in thier apathetic attitude toward school and work in general. It is hard for them to set goals for themselves and work toward them. Many of us regarded school as a necessary step toward realizing our vision of our adult life. I wonder if our students are motivated by thier long-term goals.

-- Anonymous, January 17, 1999

Professional Journal Response 2/24/99

The article I chose comes from winter issue of The American Educator and is entitled Beyond Assumptions. It was written by Harold Wenglinsky. The article studies the correlations that exist between school disciplinary policies, delinquency, and achievement. It contrasts how the severity of school discipline policies affect the reoccurance of different types of offenses. The author divided discipline problems into three catagories: drug offenses, non- serious offenses such as skipping class, and serious offenses such as fighting and acts that lead to out of school suspension.

Unfortunately, the study found that while tough disciplinary policies do have an impact on most serious and nonserious offenses, they have little effect on the worst offenses such drug use and violence. This suggests that students that engage in these activities are not concerned about consequences or are able to evade security measures. The study also found out that there was a strong correlation in students with a past history in delinquency becoming repeat offenders. Nothing surprising in that. Also males are more likely to be problems than women.

The author also looks for a link between school disorder and student achievement. The study found found that school order is closely tied to student achievment. Drug use had a negative impact on math and science but not reading and social science achievement. While serious and nonserious offenses had a negative impact on student achievment in all four academic areas. The author write;  student disorder erodes the learning environment for all students. and A sound disciplinary policy is a prerequisite for a sound academic policy. Not that any of this is new. It was interesting reading a report that put together empirical evidence to make what common sense tells us scientific. The question is now, what do we do with it?

-- Anonymous, February 24, 1999