I've heard a lot of talk about the schools relevance lately, but I think it is also important to consider the gift of free education, its origin, and the relevancy of this first public educational school system,
Free education was first employed by the American Puritans with the sole purpose of teaching the children to read the bible. For this purpose, the only relevant courses were undoubtedly those courses that taught the children to read. After teaching the children to read, the school had served its purpose by teaching the children courses that were relevant to their society.
Obviously, as the goals and aspirations or the society have changed, it has been necessary to initiate changes in the educational system. At long last we get to the subject of this editorial: Changes have been occurring too slowly in recent years, and change NEEDS to be made to bring the schools' courses back up to their former position of social relevancy.
Please don't get the wrong,I'm not trying to kill of useful courses such as the sciences, English, history, and mathematics; I'm justt condoning the removal of useless courses and the realization of courses that are useful in the "Real" World (also I condone courses that are relevant and/or interesting, but we'll get to that later). The courses I would like to see disposed of are the non-educational courses that are frequently described as "Crip" courses (the courses that teach nothing, serve no purpose, and take up otherwise valuable time). Examples of these courses are abundant in any school system; a random sampling of these subjects would include: Study halls (even the teachers must know that no studying ever gets done); teachers' aides; Physical education; Reserve Officers Training Corps; art; and to a large extent, many of the shop courses.
The cessation of these courses would prove to be of no great loss to the school, and might even improve the quality of the uninterrupted education that results. At this point, it is important to note that students do have a voice in the creation or death of a course, which was recently illustrated when the teaching of Latin at Grady was stopped since an insufficient number of students showed any interest. In the previous example, students exercised the power of killing a course that was non-relevant in their real society. In the same mariner, students have the power to institute new courses by showing that a sufficient number of students ire interested in the subject.
So much for the bad courses, and now to the good. Grady has already implemented several socially relevant courses in addition to the mandatory courses some of which are not really relevant. Some of these courses include: Typewriting, shorthand, CSL, D.E., P.E.C.E., and a relatively small course in computer programming. While the Grady administration has done better than most, a great deal remains to be done.
In addition to courses that are merely based oil relevance, it would also be instrumental to introduce new courses that are both relevant and interesting (it is a known fact that education proceeds at a faster rate when the subject matter is interesting), change of this type has just recently appeared in file shape or sex education (controversy, controversy, controversy), but this just barely skims the surface. Courses of interest could also be introduced with subjects based on any of the "New" social problems (revolution, Environment, comparative religion (some schools already have this), new politics, and a vast array of others that are too numerous to even start to name). Through introduction of courses of this type, education would become interesting as well as relevant. Thus, through the criterion of both relevancy and interest, change would not occur merely for the bake of change, but for the bake of improvement (which is monstrously overdue). Education based' on such a criteria would be all education preparing students for the real world they will meet at the end of their high school engagement.
In the words of the great one: It's not the sea that makes you sick, but the motion of the ocean (Roskin ------ 69).
Concerning college plans, the seniors seemed much more certain of the future than the Juniors. 91% of the seniors are headed for college while 14% are choosing careers and only 5% are undecided. Indecision plagued the juniors with 15% uncertain, 5% not going and 78% college-bound.
Upperclassmen were asked to rate the teachers and the counselors. Teachers were rated poor by 6% of the upperclassmen. One-third (33%) said they thought the teachers fair while 51% called them good, An excellent rating was awarded to Grady's teachers by 10%. Counselors received a poor rating in the eyes of 9% of the student body. One-fourth (25%) of the upperclassmen called Counselors fair. 39% rated them as good while 27% praised them as excellent.
MATH: STRONGEST AND WEAKEST
35% of the juniors named Math as the subject of trouble. English and Foreign
language were second and third with 22% all(] 10%, respectively However,
the same juniors also placed Math above all as their strongest subject with
32%. English ranked second again and Social Studies third.
Miss Mary Reedy, Math teacher, gained the Spotlight as the juniors' choice for the teacher most helping the student for college work, with 29%. Mr. Willie Watts, Instructor in Science, was a close second with 27%. Mr. Ulysses Locklear, of the English department, had 22%.
The Senior Class was of a different mind, however. Almost 48% indicated math as their strongest area of study and science was a distant second with 21%. English got the nod from 53% of the seniors polled as their weakest subject.
Miss Reedy was also the seniors' choice as the one who helped most for college. Miss Leola Spears, a teacher in Social Studies, was second with 29%.