My initial reaction to the documentary was probably just what the producers wanted – I was disturbed, shocked, and ready to mount a crusade against the American education system, or maybe even American pop-culture in general (that’s how edgy my Catholic side actually is which is also disturbing). Half an hour into the documentary I allowed the skeptical artist side of me to cock his eyebrow and tweak his jaw a bit…
One particular scene in the video stood out to me. The Chinese boy sits down and positions his books, thermos, and writing utensils on the desk in front of him, then winces and repositions them. He repositions them a second time and is almost frustrated that even after three different combinations of object-placement, he failed to achieve the optimum feng shui and places his head in his arms.
At this point in the documentary, I noted that the reaction of the audience was probably what the producers intended. There was a whispered sigh all around me suggesting “aw how cute” just as the director cut to the next scene. Now, part of me does agree that the Chinese boy’s struggle with obsessive compulsive disorder is indeed humorous (“Monk” is one of my favorite shows), but looking further into the scene I am just as disturbed by the Chinese boy as the future-sorority-pledge-American-girl.
After watching this part of the documentary, I really started to think about which society is more adequately balanced. The Americans had more color in their lives, and apparently get more exercise with all the sports-playing yet they studied less than the students in the other countries. And in the other countries they studied more, sure, but playing chess was looked at as a waste of time by the Indian boy’s dad, and the Chinese boy was pent up about his desk arrangement.
So what is the adequate balance? I don’t know enough about Chinese and Indian culture, so I can’t begin to criticize them fairly. But I do have my beliefs as to what a meaningful American life is like, and I think that while the documentary does throw very valid issues at our faces, we cannot look at our nation in the mirror and wish for the education genie to make us exactly like these other countries. The level of expectation for our students is inadequate as far as those high school exit exams suggest, but having a colorful life where we have time to smell the roses and appreciate the weather (and have time to practice for Saxon Day and put on plays and go to the movies with friends and geek out about “Lost”) is significantly important.
The Greek system? Yeah, I don’t agree with pretty much anything I’ve ever seen while visiting my cousin’s sorority (which is supposedly an academic-based sorority regardless of the fact that they forced their pledges to miss their midterms so they could go to some event where they poured dog food on frat boys – I’m being serious). But should we set the level of expectation for our students so high that our colorful American boiling pot becomes monotone? I don’t think so.
I pretty much agree with my French-teaching Asian counterpart that the documentary is biased and that we shouldn’t jump to a hasty crusade against all facets of American culture based on it. Of course, this is coming from the guy who hung a pirate flag in his classroom during his first semester as a teacher.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
I don't think anyone--even the filmmaker--wants to take away all our American privileges. We are blessed to live in a nation where we have the opportunity for leisurely pursuits. The problem is that leisurely pursuits are far too high on most people's list of priorities; and many young people seem to view leisure as an inalienable right.
And the further problem is that the pursuit of leisure will not keep Americans competitive in the global economy. And then we won't be able to afford leisurely pursuits, anyway.
Good points. But where is the line drawn between pursuit of happiness and pursuit of leisure? And by what/whose measure is happiness gauged? I agree that leisure in the gluttonous sense shouldn't be the top priority in people's lives, but the desire didn't seem all too out of place to me, at least in the male American student (not so much the female).
He works hard to afford things at his part time job. That shows a great devotion, in my opinion, to the idea that you need to work for the things you want. He didn't expect people to hand him things even if they did (Purdue scholarship for example).
I can agree with you that if all of America strives only for leisure that the country will collapse in on itself. But, generally speaking, in the struggle for comfort is the idea that you will need to work hard to achieve it, and I think the male American did embody this idea.
I agree in the sense that I think he has a higher likelihood of being successful than the girl does.
However, what will make American youths more competitive in a global job market: studying an extra 20 hours a week, or working at a pizza place 20 hours a week?
The problem is that as globalization continues in all areas, this kid won't just be competing against other Americans, against whom he would probably do well. He will also be competing against Indians and Chinese, and Brits, Germans, Japanese.... What relevance does his part-time job have in that competitive context?
I'm actually sort of opposed to high school students having part time jobs. When I was in high school, a teacher of mine once put it this way.
If you start a part-time job while you're in school, you can expect your grades to drop one letter, across the board. The reason is simple. As humans, we do need some down time; some "free time," to rest and unwind. When you're not working a part-time job, you have more of that time, and so you also have plenty of time to devote to studying as you should. But once you start working, you have less of that time available. However, you are going to take that down time, and guess where it's going to come from? Your study time.
I experienced this firsthand in my second year of college, when the first quarter I started working part time I dropped from an "A" average to a "B" average. I was able to bring it back up starting the next quarter, after making some adjustments, but it was a very real phenomenon.
A lot of parents (and some students) seem to think that there is some great value to working a part-time job while you're in high school. Do you learn things from it? Sure. But at what cost?
I agree that the young man in the film did a lot of work. Maintaining his grades, while working part time, and also being involved in some extracurricular clubs. I'm not knocking him for not working hard. (Although he clearly has not been challenged enough in his classes.) Like most of our students, he seems to have a reasonable work ethic, seasoned with a fair amount of procrastination.
The point is not how much work he does, as one of the commentators in the film said, but the distribution of that work.
20 hours a week studying versus 20 hours at a pizza place. Over four school years, that amounts to 3,000 or so hours--about 130 days--studying versus serving pizza. Which, in the end, will produce the more skilled, knowledgeable, desirable, competitive employee in the global job market?
I don't want to get too much into personal finance, but I would agree with Noah that working part time is in almost every case a bad idea.
One big effect I've noticed is that an increased income often incurs an increase in reliance on that income. Most of the people stuck at Palomar have progressed to the point where they have begun to make a decent amount of money (i.e. not minimum wage), but are forced to keep working to support their expenses. This naturally means that there is less time/energy to focus on school.
I saw our ex-student David Legg at Wal-Mart a couple weeks back. I asked him if he was going to school. He replied that he was trying to make enough money so that he could afford to take classes at Palomar. This sort of situation is unfortunate.
I'll tell you all what I told one of my students this year.
"You're giving up basketball to get a job? Your working days are just beginning. You'll probably be working, hopefully pretty regularly, for most of the next fifty years. Your window of basketball opportunity is right now closing."
I would say the experiences he lost on the basketball court were in no way replaced by those he gained in his food service environment.
I echo Jonathan here. Here's another common conversation.
So, you're getting a job. Why?
"So I can get a car!"
What will you do with your car?
"I can drive it to work!"
Noah is really on to something. The time spent at the part-time job is largely counter-productive.
Post a Comment