The single force that has had the biggest impact on my choice to attend college is my family; mainly my parents. Being raised in a household where education is taken very seriously, I was presented with only one option. This option was of course, “You will attend college after high school and pass all four years”. My parents explained and taught me as I matured that it was necessary to have a college degree to obtain any decent job. I always new that I could fall back on a job at McDonalds, but my parents had much higher expectations than that. I knew I could not disappoint them. Also my father has only a high school education and got a job as a contractor as soon as he graduated high school. Granted he owns his own business; he has had to perform hard labor for many years to get to where he is now. My mother, on the other hand, attended a community college and obtained an Associates degree in Finance. Both of my parents encourage and challenge me to surpass their educational achievements in order for me to create more opportunities for myself then they had ever experienced for themselves. This encouragement has helped push me in the direction of college.

A force that is not always known, but was very relevant in my decision to attend college, was society as a whole. Good paying jobs are becoming scarce as technology replaces people, therefore only the most qualified personnel are necessary. Without a college degree there is no way to obtain the best possible job. Also, society still contains class structure. The most prestigious, and most prosperous, classes tend to be made up of people with a higher education. Therefore, society forces me to want to belong in a high class, since this gives better odds of achieving a stable income. Society also provides incentives which encourage children to stay in schools longer. An example of this would be subsidizing education. Tax payers pay for a large amount of public education because they realize that highly educated people largely benefit society. A part of society I hold much closer are my friends. They were a strong force in my decision to attend college. I like to think I am an individual and do not always just follow the crowd, but college was not one of my independent routes. Most, if not all of my friends, found a college to attend. College is the “norm” now and I did not see any reason why I shouldn’t get to join along in the fun too so I hopped on the college wagon with all my buddies.

Schools and teachers have also changed their curriculum towards college preparation rather than the traditional high school learning. Honor classes and Advanced Placement classes are now more prevalent than ever. Honor classes are accelerated learning classes for the above average students and Advanced Placement courses give high school students the chance to earn college credit even before stepping foot on a college campus. Many schools are now so focused on the percentile of college bound students, that non-college bound students are shipped away to other vocational schools to prepare them for an immediate entrance to a job. This technique that is widely promoted does not present students with all of the choices they have and can lead to children entering college with tainted expectations.

The final force which caused me attend college was the pressure I put on myself. I have always set high standards for myself, so college seemed like the best option. Also, graduating high school and completing my degree in college would grant me a high sense of achievement. This future desire for achievement was plenty of a force to get me to college. All of the forces in my life pushed me for a reason. Everyone, including myself, wants me to be able to attain any goal I set out for.

Setting goals is another matter that was instilled into me when I was young. As I grew older my goals tend to become more focused and a bit more challenging to achieve. Even though every person is encouraged to set goals, each person possesses a unique set of goals. I have many personal goals which I hope to accomplish. The goal that is most important to me is becoming independent. Going away to college has helped me to begin completing this goal. Even though my parents are paying for college I use the money I saved from my summer job to purchase items that I need for my dorm room. This has taught me to only buy items that are necessary and also to be a bargain shopper. I am now forced to do tasks that my mother used to do for me such as my laundry, straightening my room and buying food for snacks and other various purposes. These tasks teach me better time management because I have to juggle school work, my social life, my volleyball schedule and also tasks like laundry and cleaning my room. I understand that I am not totally on my own but everyone has to start somewhere. Another goal I have set is to develop a laid back personality.

Ever since I have been young, I have been “the worrier” of the family. It was a trait that my father said I got from my mother. Whenever I had a test in school I would always over study no matter how well I knew the material. Much of my time in high school was consumed with school work and I never really had much of a social life. In coming to college I am hoping to change that about myself. This does not mean that I am not going to study in college; I am just going to use my judgment on how long I study. If I know the material well enough I am not going to waste time studying it longer however, if I do not know the material well I will study until I do know it well. This will allow me to relax and hopefully have a better experience here at Virginia Tech. Being independent and laid back will help me succeed in my career.

After graduating from Virginia Tech it will be time for me to start my career. This will be a hard task as jobs are scarce at this time. When looking for a job, the main requirement will be that it is self satisfying. Money is not as important as long as I get up every morning looking forward to going to work. To many adults I know are stuck in a job that they dread going to everyday and this causes them not to perform at their best. My interests are animals and a few career options I have include a veterinarian, an animal psychologist, or a wildlife biologist. Whichever brings me the most pleasure is the career I will undertake.

While making a decision to attend college may seem like it’s a decision each individual makes by themselves, it is largely influenced by the individuals’ parents, society, and school. The interactions that people encounter shape their individual goals and final outcomes. I hope that I have surrounded my self with positive people that will aid me in becoming independent, laid back and start a self satisfying career. My decision to attend college has only helped to reinforce these goals.

Adults who obtain a college education are a great deal more likely to have a substantially larger salary than those who have only obtained a high school diploma. According to Day & Newburger in a report, published by the U.S. Census Bureau, an individuals lifetime earnings when they have completed a bachelor’s degree is approximately $2.1 million. An individual with only a high school diploma will earn approximately $1.2 million in their lifetime. This $900 thousand difference more than covers the cost of a four-year degree. These figures work out to be a difference in the region of $20 thousand per year more for a bachelor’s degree. Kathleen Porter states, “A full-time student at a public 4-year college pays an average of $8,655 for in-state tuition, room and board.” Using the additional $20 thousand per year in income, it is possible to pay off any debt acquired from college in less than 2 years after completion of the degree. Additionally, professional degrees have an even higher salary range of approximately $109 thousand per year with a lifetime earning of $4.4 million. For each level that is obtained in college, the potential salary benefits will greatly increase. This increase will allow for a continuing education well past the initial four years using only the initial increase that came with a bachelor’s degree. A bachelor’s degree will still provide an increased salary even after school expenses are taken out. This results in the salary from all levels after a bachelor’s degree coming right back into your pocket as extra income.

College degrees also bring security, mobility, and greater productivity to the individual. Job security is one of the benefits of a college degree. Employers are far less likely to fire or lay-off an employee who has obtained a college degree. According to the U.S. Department of Labor, the current unemployment rate for the population 25 years and older with a bachelor’s degree is at 3.2%. In this same age range, the unemployment rate for the population that has only achieved a high school diploma is at 5.5%. This relates to roughly 800,000 more jobless people that have only a high school education. An employee who possesses a degree has shown they are willing to work harder and that they have the skills necessary to continue learning as their job description changes. With the great amount of competition between businesses, the flexibilities that comes from these learning skills is a necessity. Job security and personal security normally go hand in hand. The job security provides the individual with a greater income, which will lessen the risk of running into financial problems in the future. Financial security is not the only type of personal security that is gained. A degree holder will also have peace of mind in knowing that their skills will help them keep a job during hard times. Less qualified individuals will not have that same peace of mind. The greater income also allows for the individual so save more money for the future which can be invested or put into a personal savings account. Next, professional mobility will be achieved. A degree will open up more opportunities, which will allow for a career that is more suitable to the individual. There will not be the urge to settle for just any job that comes along in order to pay the bills and attempt to become somewhat financially secure. The individual will now have a greater freedom to “pick and choose” and find the career opportunity which is the most desirable to that individual. Finally, an employee with a degree will be more productive. This increased productivity results in increased employer satisfaction, opportunities for increased salary. The increased productivity will result in more chances for professional advancement in their current position or improved results in the search for a new career. Employers generally begin their elimination process by eliminating prospective employees that do not have a degree when they are hiring for the more advanced, and higher paying positions. This rule is not set in stone since they also look heavily at professional experience. Professional experience should not be looked upon as a substitute for a college education though since it is generally limited to a few specific areas.

The financial, professional, and personal benefits are not only benefits for the individual, but benefits for their family members as well. The entire family will benefit from the education obtained by the individual. Family members will have the freedom and security to lead a more fulfilling and flexible lifestyle. For instance, a mother may be able to stay at home with a young child instead of taking them to day care due to the need to have two incomes has been reduced by the greater income from the father who has a degree and a large income to sustain the family on. This freedom will allow for all members to have the opportunity to fulfill their goals without as many of the challenges that are normally encountered. Children not only benefit in their younger years from these freedoms, but will also benefit as they begin to become young adults. Children will recognize early on that their family has more possessions and a closer bond than some of their friends families. As they age, children will begin to make the connection between the education level of the parent and the success that the family is sharing. Children will tend to follow in their parents footsteps. One study by the U.S. Department of Education stated, “In many families, the motivation for academic success in adolescence is derived from expectations about the future value of education. For those whose parents attended college, this is the unquestioned and unchallenged path for their children.” (p. 161) Children will have a greater urge to work harder in their basic schooling. After graduating from high school, most will have the desire to obtain a degree for themselves since they have seen the benefits that come with a degree first hand. Next, children will also have higher set of ethical standards. These standards come from the lessons learned by the parent, who has obtained a college education, which then are passed on to the child. These higher ethical standards not only benefit oneself but also society in general. As these ethical standards are passed from one generation to the next, and continuously built upon by each generation, this helps to create a society that cares more about the world around them.

These benefits also come with some pitfalls that you may or may not have considered. The pitfalls should not prevent you from obtaining a college education but are here only so you may prepare for them in advance so that they will be less likely to cause problems once schooling has begun. Younger, first time college students will most likely not have the income to pay for the ever-increasing costs of a college education. The parents of the student generally pay for most of their child’s education which puts the financial burden on them. Student loans may be acquired to offset a portion of the burden from the student and parents, but this comes at a price also. These loans are normally for a large amount and take several years to pay off. The student must strive to complete the education and put it to use once it is completed. If the student fails to finish their higher education, the financial burdens will remain and the salary will not have increased to offset this burden, leaving a greater financial stress on the student.

One of the keys for a successful future is to obtain a college education. As we have seen, this education can greatly enhance your personal and professional life. We all desire success in our lives, a college education is one of the best routes to obtaining this goal. Throughout the process, one must keep focused on what they wish the end result to be. If this focus is lost, the college education will most likely fall out of sight and the student will fail. Finally, remember, the short-term burdens of going to school will eventually be offset by the long-term increase in salary, professional mobility, and a better personal / professional lifestyle.

According to, Ideas and Styles in the Western Musical Tradition has music being around since early primitive man. It was their way of communicating. It is amazing to think that before language was established, before structures were built, and even before history was being written; music was around. Music was being performed in the caves and woods of prehistoric world. From early primitive man on to the likes of Bach, Mozart, and Beethoven music was important in their life. These three men are most noted for music and these men are the people that most non-music (people who do not study music) know, but there is a whole other world of music out there waiting to be tapped into but when schools cut programs it seems that first to go is music.

Why are music/art humanities the first to go? It is because no one stands up and fights for the program. In smaller school districts music programs does not strive as well as basketball, or football does. Children are not interested in the idea of playing music over playing a sport. Also in those school districts they look at the monetary value of each program, and when it gets down to it the athletic program brings money in and music does not, because music programs will not charge admittance into their concerts. I don’t believe, however, that the school districts should look at the monetary value of any program. When it gets down to it, what program does bring in money for the school? Does the English, or Math program bring money in? NO!
The effects of a cut music program is damaging to any school. A Child who found security and a place that wanted and needed them no longer exist. Their life is forever changed. That music geek will no longer be allowed to communicate in that primitive way. The child’s test scores will began to falter, and their overall happiness will fail. I feel that a school should do everything in their power to keep children well motivated when it comes to education. Many times children are more motivated when they are involved in music. “No child left behind,” should be the motto of every school, and the school should realize that cutting music programs really leaves the children behind.

Music education is a program that everyone should fight for. Instead of fight for the basketball team, we the team size is no larger than 15, how about directing your energy towards the music program where the class size can range from any where from 25 students to 500. If test scores show that the child who had music education has a higher score why should there even be a debate over the music program? Cutting music programs should and must stop. Keeping one child away from the joys of making music it like killing that child. I know that it would have killed me if I did not have that safe band room, and band teacher in my not so safe life.

Some debate occurs around the place of assessment in citizenship education, which became a statutory entitlement for Key Stage 3 and 4 students from August 2002. David Kerr, Professional Officer of the Advisory Group on Citizenship , observes that:
?Assessment in citizenship education can make a vital contribution to raising educational standards and improving pupil attainment and achievement.Assessment in citizenship education can contribute to raising standards in the context of the overall values, aims and purposes that underpin the school curriculum and the work of schools.

Others, however, have expressed the view that assessment would lead to ?an inevitable drive to focus on teaching for formal tests . Such a focus, it is said, would be inimical to the view of Citizenship education proposed by the Advisory Group on Citizenship because it would negate the importance given to the active, participatory component of ?effective education for citizenship :

?We stress, however, that citizenship education is education for citizenship, behaving and acting as a citizen, therefore it is not just knowledge of citizenship and civic society; it also implies developing values, skills and understanding. (my italics)

Whatever your position, it is clear that assessment in citizenship education is as much a requirement as the teaching of the subject. In what follows I will examine three aspects of assessment in citizenship education, arising from:

? the statutory entitlement to citizenship education at KS3 and KS4, which means that schools will have to assess their provision to ?ensure that all pupils at least get the opportunity to experience citizenship education.

? the statutory requirement for citizenship education to be included in annual written reports to parents of pupils in years 7 to 9, and for teachers to assess pupils? attainment in citizenship education at the end of KS3.

? citizenship becoming a more established part of the formal curriculum, so that assessment of teaching and learning will occur as a matter of good practice.

Assessment of provision

Since August 2002 schools have had to deliver a Citizenship curriculum that a) provides knowledge and understanding about becoming informed citizens, b) develops skills of enquiry and communication and c) develops skills of participation and responsible action. The Qualifications and Curriculum Authority (QCA) does not prescribe how schools should do this. Rather, the statutory entitlement is established by setting out specific learning outcomes for each key stage instead of the detailed programmes of study given to other subjects, to allow:

? the possibility of different approaches to citizenship education, involving different subject combinations and aspects of the curriculum based on existing good practice in each school?

Three main methods of delivery of citizenship education are available to schools:

- discrete curriculum time for Citizenship
- within existing subjects
- through events and activities within or outside the school environment.

Whichever combination of these contexts is used, appropriate opportunities and experiences need to be made available to all pupils if they are to get their entitlement to citizenship education.

Schools may feel that they already teach much, if not all, of the citizenship programme of study (the most common response I have heard in secondary schools to the introduction of Citizenship as a compulsory National Curriculum subject is we already do citizenship here and have done for years?). However, it behoves a school to assess its provision, particularly in light of comments from OFSTED concerning the inspection of citizenship:
?Where a school?s provision is patchy, owing to heavy reliance on such incidental contributions, it will not meet National Curriculum requirements and should be reported as such.

OFSTED advise, (that) in planning for citizenship, schools need to audit their curriculum carefully to identify existing work that can contribute to citizenship education.? Further, in inspecting citizenship, OFSTED inspectors are directed to find out pre-inspection how the school has organized citizenship. Thus a school needs to audit, review and assess its provision, not least to ensure that it can present OFSTED with this information. More importantly, perhaps, such assessment will allow a school to evaluate its provision in order to improve the planning, co-ordination and application of policy and practices for citizenship education (see Appendix A for a checklist that the school might use to focus its approach to assessing citizenship provision).

Assessment can assist the school in drawing up a statement of its commitment to citizenship, what is going on in respect of citizenship education at the present time and, where necessary, what needs to be done in order for the school to meet its statutory duties ? a framework for action, a citizenship policy statement (see Appendix B for an example of what a citizenship policy statement might look like). Such a statement is desirable, I think, as it:

-indicates what citizenship stands for in the school (in a document that is available to OFSTED, staff, students, governors, parents and the wider community)
- maintains the focus of the school on the aims of citizenship education as stated in government policy and within the local community.

Schools will need to ask how much of the programme of study is being or will be taught through the existing structures. What is suitable and what needs adapting within the curriculum? Which other subjects will have a responsibility for delivering citizenship? In trying to answer these questions the school can show a true commitment to the principles of citizenship education and involve a wide participation. Those responsible for delivering citizenship will obviously need to contribute, but other teaching staff, governors, parents and students should also be involved.

This desirable breadth of participation throws up some questions, of which I will mention but a few. Precisely how could such a wide involvement be fostered and coordinated? One may hope that enthusiasm for the ?new? subject would be high enough to encourage ?non-specialists to give time and energy for a great endeavour. Even were this to be the case, how much should ?non-specialists (young people and adults alike) be expected to assess the existing provision of Citizenship within the school and to suggest ways to improve it? Would young people necessarily have the vocabulary or experience to take part in assessment, evaluation and change in any significant way? Of course, the active element of the citizenship programmes of study demands just this kind of active participation from students learning by doing. The benefit of such participation in defining the school ethos would be, I think, immense (and one which Ofsted inspectors will want to see, that shows citizenship skills throughout the school?s organization):

The ethos of a school is therefore vital to the success or otherwise of citizenship: the ethos is the kind of atmosphere that can be felt as people walk around the school, the way we work with students and visitors and the way we interact with each other. It has been referred to as “the ghost in the machine” ? that untouchable, hidden, but all-so-apparent atmosphere that surrounds a school.

Assessment of learning outcomes

There is a strong emphasis on the summative assessment of pupil progress and achievement in citizenship education. There is a statutory requirement for teachers to assess pupils? attainment in citizenship education at the end of KS3 . This assessment should be made against the end-of-KS3 level description given by QCA:

?Pupils have a broad knowledge and understanding of the topical events they study; the rights, responsibilities and duties of citizens; the role of the voluntary sector; forms of government; provision of public services; and the criminal and legal systems. They show how the public gets information and how opinion is formed and expressed, including through the media. They show understanding of how and why changes take place in society. Pupils take part in school and community-based activities, demonstrating personal and group responsibility in their attitudes to themselves and others.

There is no eight-point scale for citizenship as there is for other National Curriculum subjects. Instead, QCA guidance suggests that teachers assess whether students are working towards, achieving, or exceeding the end of key stage description. Teachers should then report on pupils? progress to parents as they would for any other National Curriculum subject. The mention in QCA guidance of comparable levels of attainment would seem to suggest that reporting back by level is appropriate. Is this a correct assumption to make? If yes, could Citizenship teachers begin to create their own levels of attainment? The eight level descriptors that other National Curriculum subjects have available ?causes problems for teachers who are acutely aware of the problems in using just one level to describe a student?s attainment across a whole range of skills and concepts. Does reporting a student?s level of attainment as ?level 5? in Citizenship give a helpful statement to parents about their child?s development in Citizenship? There is currently little public understanding of what level 5 in Citizenship might signify, although it could be argued that this was also recently the case for English, Maths and Science. Parents have now begun to comprehend what this level means for these subjects and will do so for Citizenship in due time. Are there more useful methods of describing attainment for a subject that is very different from, say, English or Science? A more descriptive approach to a variety of competencies may be more useful.

No formal assessment requirements apply at KS4. However pupils? progress in citizenship education must be reported on at KS3 and KS4. Teachers are given some guidance from QCA about what such a report might include:

- brief comments on the pupil?s progress in citizenship, i.e. strengths and areas for development
- the pupils general progress in the subject

The guidelines are supplemented by sample reports (see Appendix C for an example) to assist teachers in meeting the reporting requirements.

Education is seen to be many things by many people. Ways to a better career, a course to a better income and an avenue to increased social mobility are just a few of the reasons that an improved education is sought. Yet, all these solutions and more are being placed beyond the reach of normal, everyday Australians by the cost. In its efforts to create a healthier higher education system, the government is increasing its outlay. This could have the effect of placing it beyond the reach of the potential higher earnings taxpayers of tomorrow. This essay will consider the arguments for why higher education in Australia should be free of student costs and charges. These arguments will be considered in terms of the ramifications of these costs to students and their studies, the government and society in general.

As previously stated, higher education is sought for different reasons. Each potential student has their own reasons for its pursuit and there is no doubt that education at a higher level is expensive. There is not just the cost of the tuition to consider. Living expenses whilst at study, hidden costs like student unions and parking and the actual study materials like text books also contribute to the expense. The thought of attending a university is tantamount to an impending battle to a new student. The harder curriculum and discipline required is forbidding to say the least. Therefore, with these pressures upon them, it is not fair to add the financial burden as well.

The government argues that it does not expect an Australian student to bear the entire cost. At the moment, the federal government covers approximately sixty (60) percent of the cost of a university degree (Long, 2002). It also contends that schemes such as the Higher Education Contributions Scheme (HECS) and the Youth Allowance or Austudy are designed to encourage potential students to enter the higher education arena. While this may be true, it is a fact that the Government has tightened the Youth Allowance and Austudy eligibility requirements (Birrell, Dobson, (1), no date) which has made it harder for students to support themselves while at university. Private scholarships awarded to students to assist with their fees are now counted as income by Centerlink. Therefore, the amount of a a students Youth Allowance is affected. These changes have a number of implications on the equity of higher education.

If a student is ineligible for either the Youth Allowance or Austudy, their avenues to university become limited. They could become reliant on their parents for an even longer period of time. After having been supported by their parents for many years already, students may be reluctant to access their family’s assistance as a means of financial support through university. They could also be forced to seek part-time employment to subsidise their costs. Not only could this take jobs away from the unemployed, but it also places the student under increased pressure. If a student is working as well as studying, the inevitable conclusion is that there is less time for study. This could result in a poorer academic record than those students who do not have to work part-time. It can also mean that a student is fatigued and not at the peak of their learning capacity. Marshall (2003) maintains that due to scholarships being counted as income, a lot of students are even giving up this avenue of help because they cannot afford to live on the reduced amount of Youth Allowance.

A higher education cost to a student does have its positives. The fact that they have to support themselves, with or without parental help, can be empowering to a student. Feelings of self-satisfaction and confidence can result. It can also teach them, in a way that no amount of schooling can, how to budget and manage money. In terms of their education, few things affect a student’s ability to manage their time like a lack of it. With time to be devoted to work and study, students often become better organised and this skill and the other positives can be carried through for the rest of their lives. However, many of these plusses can become swept away due to pressure felt by the student to keep up the juggling that is caused by the need to meet the higher education costs.

It has been argued by Chapman (1992) that when deciding to go to university, factors like parental education and academic results feature more strongly than the economic factors. In direct contrast to this statement are the figures released after the Youth Allowance changes in 1998. After the changes, some thirty-five percent (35%) of students who were previously receiving Youth Allowance dropped out of higher education after becoming ineligible. This shows that the cost of higher education for these students placed it out of reach and so impacts on its equity.

HECS is a system that was designed to make higher education more feasible for economically disadvantaged students. It works on the principle that students defer their tuition fees and pay them back once they reach a predetermined salary. The unfortunate side-effect of this scheme is that students are often daunted by the thought of this debt and so don’t see university as a practical path. HECS is also promoted as an interest free loan to students. On the other hand, a twenty-five percent (25%) discount is offered to students for payment up-front. Effectively, this means that students who defer are being charged a flat rate of twenty-five percent (25%) interest on their tuition fees. Current rates of HECS accumulations incur approximately 1.7 billion dollars in HECS liabilities for the Government (Norton, 2002). Although this money is paid back through the tax system, the government is proposing reforms to the HECS system in order to increase the amount of HECS a student pays. On their website, the Department of Education, Science and Training (2003) states that the new reforms will, amongst other things, encourage equity within Australian universities. This could prove not to be the case. With students already deterred by the current HECS debt, an increased debt of a proposed thirty percent (30%) could further erode student confidence and university equity (Martin, 2003).

Norton (2002) states that the government currently engenders a net profit through the application of higher education costs. It does this through the repayments of the HECS debt through the tax system and by the increased revenue supplied by graduates higher tax amounts. It then uses part of this profit as revenue to continue to subsidise higher education for the students which is an encouragement for future students. Unfortunately, if they push ahead with the plan to increase the HECS debt, it could result in less students being able to attend university. Bruce Chapman, the creator of the HECS system, believes that the changes to the system will also cause a number of full-time students to drop out due to the rising costs (Martin, 2003). This could cause a vicious circle where the government can’t fill the university places due to the cost of a degree. It would then be less likely to make the net profit that is required to continue to subsidise higher education and so could continue to increase the cost. These effects on students and the equity of universities are just some of the ramifications that the costs of higher education have on students and their studies.

There is certainly no doubt that government subsidisation of higher education has advantages for many areas. Students gain a better career, which usually equates to a better salary. Other benefits are a potentially better social position (Sturman, 1997) and the ability to pass their experiences of university on to their children. Because of these benefits, it is argued that taxpayers shouldn’t be responsible for a student’s education. However, graduates enjoy a higher rate of employment than non-graduates (Birrell, Rapson, no date). Appendix A shows the labour force participation and unemployment rates of both sexes and is divided into two (2) age groups. The table shows people who have only basic skills are more than twice as likely to be unemployed than a graduate with a Bachelor degree. This confirms higher education as a benefit to a student. It also confirms that subsidisation is beneficial to the community. Because of the high rate of employment of graduates, they are able to start paying their HECS debt as soon as they become employed – provided their income is over the income threshold. Also, as previously stated, students who do defer and depend on the taxpayer to fund their education actually pay a penalty of twenty-five percent (25%) on top of their tuition costs for this convenience.

A follow through effect of this higher rate of employment are the benefits that it has to the government. With graduates of higher education more likely to be employed, this helps to keep the unemployment figures down. Another benefit of the subsidisation of higher education is the returns that the government makes upon its investment. The Australian Bureau of Statistics (2002) records that in the year 2000, 695 500 people were studying in an either full-time, part-time or external capacity. It is conservatively estimated that a graduate will earn over $622 000 in their lifetime. On an income that size, the tax rate is approximately fifty (50) cents in the dollar which equates to tax revenue for the government of approximately $311000 per student. Multiply this by the number of students in the year 2000 alone and the figure that the government is earning for its investment is over $219 billion dollars. This benefit far outweighs any deficiency perceived in government subsidies for higher education.

The minimising of higher education costs to students can also have benefits to society as well. As well as helping to keep unemployment rates down, it can also flow on to the type of people that society is producing. Norton (2002) acknowledges that higher education can have a stabilising effect on society. It improves the knowledge base and as previously mentioned, spans across the generations. A study conducted by Monash University shows that the highest percentage of undergraduates (35.1%) had fathers in the professional field (see Appendix B). This confirms the beneficial effect that government subsidisation of higher education can have on society. As well as producing stability, undergraduates are the potential leaders of tomorrow. By keeping the costs of higher education as low as possible, the government is creating the people with the skills to take over the running of the establishment.

In conclusion, the concerns regarding the cost of higher education to students are complex. The issue are relevant to students, the government and society. Government schemes such as HECS and Youth Allowance are designed to encourage students to attend tertiary studies but changes to both systems are making it increasingly harder for students. The extra costs places on students can have benefits. The non-material results of the financial pressure can produce a person who has more to offer to society and the workplace due to the challenges they have met. Unfortunately, these benefits are often not considered when students are faced with the financial pressure that higher costs can bring. The HECS reforms are also making students reluctant to enter higher education especially with the increase of debt after university. However, in spite of this, the government subsidisation of higher education does have its positives. The material benefits to a student such as a better job and higher salary can be added to the non-material benefits. This can results in a person much better equipped to handle employment and life in general than one who has not had those pressures to cope with. The benefits to the government in terms of increased tax revenue also outweigh the expense cause by higher education subsidisation. Finally, the benefits to society in terms of an increased quality of education and lower unemployment rates also offset the cost to taxpayers. Governments and taxpayers need to see that an investment in higher education is an investment in the future.

In 1870 the Elementary School law was passed out in Parliament. It was the first major education law. This was the birth of the modern state whereby tax was raised so that the state could provide schools. Such laws have been made which compel children in the UK to go to school, and it is genuinely believed that the school experience is for their good. Indeed, schools are needed and even more nowadays. Schools are seen as a resource for the larger society (Giroux 1981) however, there is a question that must be asked and considered critically: Is a school experience really a positive asset for children in the UK?

In this essay I will briefly examine how my experience in school formed my opinion on the schooling system and how I learned from it. I will examine the pros and contras of schooling for the young in the UK, exploring the relationships between education and society, and how teachers and teaching are central to the process and outcomes of education. Teachers are at the chalk face of classroom contexts and are also the frontline implementers of educational policy. Throughout this essay, I will observe how the teaching profession has been challenged in the latter part of this century. Continuously, I will question whether all children should go to school and whether there should be different types of schools. Finally, I will discuss what school education would be like if all forms of education were freely accessible to each individual. It is also important to consider how by acknowledging the flaws in the system, students and teachers can change the structure for the better.

MY EXPERIENCE

During the first few years at school, all appeared to go well. My class friends and I were in high spirits, energetic and willing to learn. This ambience of spontaneity was encouraged by teachers to explore, gain knowledge and create. Yet, when I consider what had happened by the time I reached my adolescence, I am forced to identify that the promise of the early years repeatedly remains disappointing. I questioned how something that had commenced so well, ended so badly. Children often complete school with a feeling of defeat. Sadly this is a reoccurring problem, which needs to be understood. There is no denying that a large number of children emerge from school ill-equipped for life in a demanding society. Like in my school, many teachers excuse the unhappiness of the childs experience with the fact that the pupil is unintelligent. They hardly question or justify whether it is what they teach that is inadequate, and it would seem unfeasible that they are the failures.

In my school experience, I would agree with Holt, that some schools are made for teachers and not pupils. Students were left on their own to cope with school demands, fellow classmates, teachers, new knowledge, transitions between education stages, attempts to change and to develop oneself. Being in a private fee paying school, I felt that teachers had forgotten their roles as educators and the importance of encouraging their students. Nevertheless, I did learn something from my experience. I finished school determined that I would make a better teacher and that I would learn from their mistakes. I would be of the same opinion as Henry Giroux (1981) that we need teachers to think critically and to exercise moral and public responsibility in their role as engaged critics and transformative intellectuals.

SHOULD ALL CHILDREN GO TO SCHOOL

Schools can be cheerful or despondent places. One can witness the sheer fun of pupils sharing their knowledge and the solidarity in the staffroom. However, that same person can witness pupil rivalry, boredom and confrontations between members of staff. By attending school, children will not only develop academically but personally too. This will prepare them well for their future.

Schools are places of learning where pupils acquire skills and knowledge. This includes good teaching, cognitive and curriculum matching. Education is a lifelong continual process. Hence schools are sites for cultural reproduction. There is cultural transmission in schools, where teachers are seen as communicating appropriate values of cultural heritage. Attending schools is fundamental in the sense that it is a route towards opportunities and towards democracy.

Furthermore, schools are one of the first steps a child makes towards independence. Indeed, no child benefits from a form of education, which is started too young, but with the right environment in reception classes, which teachers have made every effort to create, they can be extremely constructive places for children. Primary school children conclude that they adored school and their teachers. In addition, schooling helps children develop their social skills; achieve a sense of custom and reason. Children in secondary schools will have a group of educationalists on every subject, whom they can discuss with, ask for advice or help.

Schools are also places of social awareness. Students are influenced by the way they think, how they behave, how they are motivated, how they assign value and how they perceive themselves (Peter Woods, 1990:ix). Groups of pupils assist school via different avenues and from different cultural influences, whether it is based on social class, gender or race. Pupils are equipped with different ways of seeing, thinking and talking, and with different degrees and varieties of cultural capital (Bourdieu and Passeron, 1977). School teaches the youth to look at the world from different positions and perspectives.

Although schools may bring many benefits, there still exists a debate on the types of school. Should there be public schools? Shouldnt schooling be accessible for all children? Parents too often assume that children in private education are dealt with better spoken to more sympathetically and that generally the children receive a better-quality education. Hence, working class children feel unprivileged and inferior to those attending private schools and thus may be discouraged from any form of schooling. The truth may be however, that private schools are often structured in very similar ways to state ones.

WHAT DOES THE LITERATURE SAY

One of the many reasons why schooling is questioned is due to the differential views of why children should assist schools. Do children assist schools to be educated or trained? The Structural functionalist view is that education stresses the activity of schools in training and selecting children so that they fit into some necessary slot in a relatively harmonious society. This view implies that children need to be manipulated in some way for societys convenience. Schools would have set patterns of rules and behaviours as to mould the society. However, there is only a restricted amount of studies made on the pupils view of schooling in Britain. Hence, one could conclude that this is a mistreated issue in educational research.

Research shows that a large number of primary school children tend to enjoy school, whereas secondary school children tend to be less happy with their school experience. The question is until what age children should go to school? and what are the possible reforms needed to change the statistics, so that children enjoy both primary and secondary school?. The long enforced period of national service cannot be treated lightly. The question that must be asked is whether the school experience is as good as it could be made. It is universally recognised that when children start secondary education there is a wide gap between those who are best prepared and those who are least prepared for school learning. The assessment of the experience on these children based on schooling concluded the following that there was a wide range of reasons for this gap but this was mostly due to how teachers treated them.

Teachers are central to the day-to-day work of the school, and are important implementers of educational policy. Teachers and their teaching are critical to contemporary understanding of education and schooling. Peck (1963) concluded that pupil perception of teaching performance was reliable enough and valid enough in most aspects of classroom technique. He also believed that feedback to teachers regarding their performance was a valuable experience. The solution to the problem consists in determining how to transform an existing condition of affair into a desired one that has not yet come into being. To do this it is also important to have a good idea of the desired end state but also to have a good comprehension of the characteristics of the starting point. Hence, teachers need to know what they would like their children to become under their assistance and to understand what children are actually like when the development has begun.

American educationalists (i.e. Holt and Reimar), writing in 1971, concluded that most children leave school after 10 years of attendance with little to show for it. These deschooling writers saw schools as prisons and claimed that the young were antagonistic to the idea of education. An assemblage of parents agreed with Holt and reclaimed their childrens education from the state. The individual families in the UK formed a group that called itself Education Otherwise. These parents exercised their legal right to educate their children at home. The motives for these parents to undertake home-based education was that they genuinely believed that schooling could have harmful effects on their children. Parents and the Local Education Authority (LEA), a home tuition section found that the outcomes were positive, even to the extent that a journalist wrote a book about one familys experience (Deakin, 1973). Parents judged that their system was superior to that of the school system because they stressed the importance of self-education, personal confidence, problem-solving, flexibility and adaptation (Meighan, 1984).

Those who share the same views as deschoolers, go on to say that the British education system has long been marked by sharp inequalities in education outcomes for different social groups. Instead of equalizing conditions and opportunities, schools are seen to divide, exclude and marginalize those that are different. Research in the post-war sociology of education took on board the idea and desire of social mobility and sought systematically to chart the role of education in terms of relative mobility, both within and between social classes. This work responded to the early political arithmetic model of social stratification and social mobility (Glass 1954), which ascertained that there had in fact been little in the way of sustained upward mobility. Historically, equality of opportunity has meant allowing certain clever working class children into grammar schools. However, grammar schools involved unfair competition. They mistreated inequalities, and failed to take account of the ways in which the education system state and independent-privileged the already fortunate.

CONCLUSION

There is no doubt that the English schooling system is fundamentally changing and the transformations that have taken place since 1988 are examples of this process. Viewpoints change through divergence and adjustment. It is essential to recognise that it is both childrens perspectives and the contributions of teachers that lead the way forward for reforms in the school system.

One would agree with Johnson (1990) that,

Teachers must endorse new roles and responsibilities?? Schools depend on cooperation and interdependence among staff members?..There must also be supportive conditions such as leadership among teachers and administrators, labour-management cooperation, and willingness on the part of administrators?

Do pupils recognise the hidden curriculum? This term, used to describe the unofficial 3 Rs - rules, routines and regulations are aspects of learning in schools that are unofficial, unintentional or undeclared of the way teaching and learning are organised and performed in schools. If this is what pupils must learn in order to survive comfortably in schools, should there not be some change? Should we not instead guide the future generation with an understanding that education is a continual activity, that learning is life, rather than fear?

Teachers and parents alike have the role to equip individuals so that they can cope with a rapidly changing world, creatively and imaginatively, rather than with fear, obstruction and fatalism.

As an administrator of the Committee on Preschool Special Education I ensure that children receive appropriate preschool services as mandated by their Individualized Education Programs. It is my duty to guide parents during the referral and evaluation process and ensure them of their due process rights. I then chair the committee of evaluators, special educators, general educators, preschool coordinators, and clinicians, to develop an appropriate Individual Education program for each preschooler in need. I present options according to State Education Department guidelines, and present the continuum of services in terms that parents can understand. I make sure parents and educators are comfortable with the final recommendation of the committee. I then contract the appropriate service providers, utilizing agencies, schools, and independent providers and deliver them in the least restrictive environment for each individual preschool student.

As a member of the Universal Preschool Advisory Board in District 26 I help to ensure that preschool programs are available to all four year olds in this district. I was one of the original members of the Advisory Board when we first implemented “UPK” classes in New York City. I helped select the first preschool sites in the district and continue to evaluate prospective sites and re-evaluate our current program. We now have classes in six public schools and ten private schools, and accommodate approximately eight hundred four year olds in half-day programs throughout the district. I consult with the UPK general education teachers to help identify and accommodate children with special needs in their classrooms.

I am familiar with the broad spectrum of services available for preschool students in both the public and private domains, in special education and general education. Subsequently, children receive appropriate services in a timely fashion, according to State Education mandates, and in the least restrictive environment. Parents are comfortable with recommendations and services. Special education teachers and service providers have workable programs that can easily be implemented. General education teachers have the support they need to accommodate special education students in their preschool classrooms. I help this community educate young children early and successfully. The carry over we sees into school age programs is impressive.

Description of Qualitative Exemplary Practices

I was one of the first Preschool Special Education Administrators hired by New York City when the Committee on Preschool Special Education started in 1989. In those early days, services were only provided to four year olds, and in self-contained classrooms, and only in private special education preschools. Through the years the school district’s jurisdiction expanded to accommodate three and four year olds, not just five to twenty one year olds as in the past. And instead of placing children in segregated classrooms, in privately contracted schools, we allowed for related services, such as Speech/Language, Occupational, and Physical Therapies, and Counseling, to be provided in the regular preschool settings or even in the home. The continuum of services now also includes the Special Education Itinerant Teacher program that provides support in the regular classroom setting, with consultation for the regular classroom teacher, and direct assistance for the student within the class, to maintain that student in that general education class. Another addition to the continuum was the Special Class in the Integrated Setting, which allows for preschool students with disabilities to benefit from a special education teacher and staff, together with their non-handicapped peers, in the same structured classroom. This continuum of services reflects the consideration of the State Education Department mandate that services be delivered in the least restrictive environment. But it is how the CPSE Administrator carries out these mandates that ultimately decides whether children are actually receiving appropriate services in the least restrictive environment.

It is my obligation to inform parents and teachers, and administrators and directors of programs, and clinicians and service providers, of what options are available, according to this continuum of services, and to deliver them in the least restrictive environment. I was instrumental in initially working with the District Office in implementing the first integrated class on the preschool level in this district, which is at P.S. 133. And when parents of the children in preschool integrated classes and SEIT programs started to demand the same type of services when their children entered kindergarten, I helped the district office and CSE review teams in recommending and implementing integrated classes and consultant teacher programs on the school age level. So, we see that what started with preschool services transitioned into the elementary school age level programs. Empowered parents on the preschool level insist on similar services and patterns for success on the school age level.

When CPSE first started we had to classify preschool children with the same specific classifications used on the school age level. It was difficult to categorize, or label children, especially at such a young age. Now, we use one generic term, “preschool student with a disability,” which is a less restrictive means of classifying educationally handicapped youngsters. I remember one particular case of a student with Down’s syndrome. I directed the parent to look at different special education sites in order to place his son in an appropriate class. After looking at one particular site, the father called me and said, “I know my son is mentally retarded, but does he have to be in a class with stupid children?” I learned from this parent’s words. His words opened my mind, and opened my heart. I learned that even children with severe disabilities are entitled to be schooled with non-handicapped peers, given the right support services. Eventually that child was mainstreamed into an integrated class setting. When he transitioned from the CPSE to the school age CSE, that father was well aware of his rights, knew what the continuum of services was, and insisted that his son receive appropriate services in the least restrictive environment just as he had on the preschool level.

It is my goal to inform other administrators and the general public of what services are available for preschool students, and to identify and service children as early as possible. I have done this by personally training new CPSE Administrators in New York City over the past ten years. I sat on the committee that developed the current Standard Operating Procedures Manual for New York City Board of Education. I consult on a daily basis with other administrators, and directors of both special education and general education preschool programs. I assist in the smooth transition of preschool students with disabilities into the school age programs by working with the CSE teams that evaluate and place children for kindergarten. I actively participate on the UPK Advisory board our community. I have run workshops at local preschools to inform parents and teachers about preschool services available in our community. I feel it is my duty in my roles as both special education administrator and general education UPK Advisory Board member to empower parents and professionals, and continually meet the needs of preschool students. Ultimately this empowerment is reflected in parents and professionals in the entire community, preschool and school age.

Brian Noad, who wrote Adult Education in NSW prisons, has pointed out that “it is a human right that prisoners should be allowed access to education”. Prisoners are still humans and although they have made mistakes they have rights just like everyone else. People in prison should be treated like equal citizens and not just as criminals. Brian Noad has also pointed out that “the right of prisoners to educational programs is based on human dignity, and while one community view is that prisoners are enemies of society, they have dignity as persons”. In turn if they are treated with respect and dignity by given the opportunity to education, they will treat others with respect and dignity.

Everyone is equal, even if prisoners are viewed differently; they deserve the right to learn.
Secondly, if you just keep them in prison and away from the real world they will not know how to function once they are released. This may lead them to a life of crime once again. After they serve their prison term and are released they need to be armed with the right tools to survive and education is one of these tools. According to Brian Nomad, “the goal of prison education is to provide development programs which are designed to prepare prisoners to lead law-abiding lives”. While in prison inmates should maintain the skills they have entered prison with and also develop and explore new skills, education would do this. Education would also help them to adapt to prison life easier and help them to make wise choices while in prison and when they are released. Entering prison leads to many complex changes, and certain educational programs could assist them with these changes. Educational programs could also prepare them for re-entry into the community, and to lead law-abiding lives. We should try to help them become better citizens once they are released. Prison just shouldn’t be about trying to punish them for their crimes we should be concerned with trying to shape them as a person.

Also, if you educate them and lead them into the right direction they could help our economy. As John Garmon states in his article, The Power of Prison Education, “it is proven that programs for inmates could improve the economy by helping incarcerated people prepare for life beyond jail, when they are released and able to seek productive jobs and more fulfilling lives- and become fully contributing taxpaying citizens”. Our society would benefit so much if prisoners were given the chance to learn and grow. Education can do so many things for a person and open so many doors. John Garmon agrees that “education is a passport to freedom- not just from incarceration, but also from economic and social distress”. This is what prison should be about isn’t it? We should try to help them get back into our society and give them one more chance to make a difference for the better and not the worse. John Garmon also believes “that by supporting prison education we could save millions by preventing an individual’s return to prison, eliminating costs to victims, courts and prisoner’s family, and lost wages and taxes of an incarcerated person”. In the end our economy would benefit greatly. We would save money by them not returning to prison and they would become fully contributing taxpaying citizens.

Many prisoners are very eager to learn and were just never given the opportunity. Who are we to say who deserves an education and who doesn’t? For the most part prisoners are more eager to learn than children in our school systems. Statistics in Brian Noads article state that “prisoners enrolled in education have an 86 percent class attendance rate; 82 percent enrolled in education courses complete them; and 86 percent achieve their individual learning objectives”. These percents are much higher than our schools numbers. It is ironic that children in our school systems are just handed opportunities to get an education and most of them don’t even bother to go to school. While prisoners have to fight for an education and their attendance and completion rate is much higher. It makes you think about who deserves the educational programs?

On the other hand, we are already spending much more money on prisons than we are on our schools. If we add education to our prisons the cost to run them would far exceed our schools. So while prisoners are getting the education they need some children are not getting the best education they could be getting. Audie Bock, who wrote Education Before Prisons, “estimates that we spend $7,324 per student per year, and $25,000 per prisoner per year”. It doesn’t seem right that education is not top priority. While we are spending so much money on prisoners who’s to say that recidivism won’t be the outcome? If this is the case we just wasted the honest taxpayer’s money. Michael Luevano, the author of Better schools, not more prisons, reported that “in California twenty-one prisons have opened in the past fourteen years”. The last one cost around $4.5 billion dollars just to build. All the money spent on prisons in California come from the same fund that issues money to schools. After $4.5 billion dollars what is left for our schools? Michael Luevano also points out that “prison funding has risen by 847 percent, but funding for education has only increased 116 percent”. Something is not right if funding for prisons is higher than education. The funding for education should far exceed the funding for prisons and their needs. We need to rethink our funding system, and although it is important to keep our society safe, we need to worry about our top priorities, such as education, that make the most sense for our country.

All this money being spent on prisons makes us loose sight of what is really important. If we do not start to focus more on education and emphasize the importance of it, some of these would-be students might turn to crime. Hillary Shelton also speaks out in Michael Luevanos article, she is the director of the NAACP Washington Bureau, she says: “It is sad that our states are finding it easier to contribute more to incarcerating our men and women and creating a downward spiral of poverty and destitution rather than investing through our educational system to create an upward spiral of accomplishment and achievement”. So while we are worrying so much about criminals and spending so much money on them, our children are not getting the proper education to prosper in life. We are sending the wrong message to our children and we are putting too much importance on inmates and prisons. Michael Luevano makes it clear that “ if higher-education institutions are not built for students to pursue careers, then they will be pursuing something else- perhaps on the streets”.

Another argument against education in jails is the concept that to educate prisoners would be turning our nation’s penal institutions into schoolhouses rather than establishments for punishment. Inmates are there because they committed a crime and they should be punished for it, not because they dropped out of school and they want a second chance. Learning should stay in schools and punishment should stay in prisons. If education is of high importance in jails and punishment is not it gives prisons a sort of “softness on crime” attitude. Which should not be the case, if you are in jail you committed a crime and you are not a law-abiding citizen. Inmates should not be offered the same advantages that everyone else is offered. They should have to earn their privileges; they should not just be handed to them.

There are two very important issues here and it is important to remember that both of them affect all of us in a big way. It doesn’t matter which side you support, in one way or another they both affect us. There are many people that believe prisoners should have access to an education for various reasons. It would help our economy because they would know how to live once they were released and how to get a job. It would give them a chance to learn and grow. There are also people who oppose the idea of education in prisons. We already spend three times as much per prisoner per year than we do on students per year. The cost would increase if education was added. Also, a lot of attention and funding is being directed to prisons, which is degrading the importance of education in schools. There are numerous arguments supporting education in prisons and there are also arguments defending our schools and our children. Which side are you on?

People who have question about E-education argue that online education is not good enough to provide high-quality materials by internet smoothly and it is sometimes hard to connect to internet. For instance, a lot of graphic images and sound effects are needed to educate students effectively in online education; however, many people still use modem which does not provide high-speed internet. As a result, technology of online education might be a problem. The other argument against E-education is if students can complete online education successfully without teachers care and attention. Don lake who is board member of the Unite States Distance Learning Association and a director for Californias unified school district points out, about 20% to 30% of students who try online courses fail to complete them. In addition, E-education requires students to be independent in their learning, so some of them feel more difficult than ordinary education. These tell us that students could not become accustomed to online education and teachers are needed for students.

It is true that technology of online education might be one of problems, but problems of technology for E-education can be solved and already solved in some parts. For example, even though some people have concern about technology of E-education, that is not problem any more because ADSL and Cable Internet which are technologies for internet have been developing so fast and companies which are using these technologies such as Road Runner and Direct TV have become very popular; the internet service is fast enough to support streaming motion picture and students can even see each other on internet by web-cam now. As a result, students learning is not interrupted by cutting internet connection or slow internet service. The argument that students could not complete online course successfully is understandable, but there are many students who have done online courses very well without teachers attention. Students in E-education can participate in online discussion and communicate with teachers, so they might feel as if they are taking ordinary class. Also, Shea and Boser emphasize, Arizona State University compared test results of its online M.B.A. students with those enrolled in the traditional program and found that the online students scored higher. Even though students need a lot of responsibility for learning, many students have done online courses very well.

The argument of supporters of E-education is that E-education is efficient than ordinary education. With technology, online education has been able to provide efficient education and is not restricted by time and place. Since we don`t have to worry about time and place conflict, we can save time and money which are extremely important now. For example, online courses usually don`t require particular text books because it can provide many sorts of visual materials by itself. In fact, text books are very expensive for students, so taking online courses might be more efficient than taking conventional courses. Furthermore, online education gives great opportunity those who can not attend ordinary classes because of physical problems. Consequently, cost-effectiveness of online education could be important reason why we choose online course rather than ordinary courses.

Supporters of online education also argue that online education is as effective as ordinary education or even better. The reason why online education can be effective is that E-education has not only visual effect but also audio effect which makes instruction more effective. Online education has started providing face-to-face interaction which makes interaction between students and teachers more effective by computer communication technology. In my case, when I learn something with visual and audio effects, I remember for long time and understand easily than when I use only text. Moreover, online education is more effective when class is large. In large class, interaction between students and teachers is really rare; however, number of students is not problem at all in online education. Thus, it is sure that online education can provide effective instruction to students.

In conclusion, E-education has to be kept going although some people have concern about it. The reason for support of E-education is that there are many good universities and companies that provide high-quality online courses and technology of E-education becomes good enough to support those courses, so students in online course are able to learn effectively as well as students in ordinary class. E-education is one of good way to supplement ordinary education.

Also, Banas and Sherry agree that teachers need to get the attention of their students. One of Glanz disappointments while posing as a student was how boring classes were. Once again Banas had Glanz comment on this problem, and she many suggestions for the teachers to make their classes more active for the students. She suggests that teachers need to find the best and easiest way to present a new topic. Also, to know whom to ask for answers and whom to try to keep silent, when to be comical and when to let the students know that it?s business time. So she is saying that teachers need to be clear cut on the subject, and be well informed but at the same time entertaining to the students in order to get their attention. Sherry once again points to that horrible letter ?F?. The most feared letter for any student, this letter can destroy an entire grade point average, and Sherry says that it can be used as a shell shock to some students who are going through the motions in order to pass. Sherry tells a very compelling story about her son slacking off in class, then the teacher threaten to fail him, and of course he straightened up and was a ?straight arrow?, concentrating very hard on this subject and ending up with an ?A?. There is no doubt about it, hearing that I am going to fail something will grab my attention very quickly. So maybe Sherry is right about having a rude awakening for all those slackers out there and just speak the truth to them, lay it all out on the table and tell the truth. If they are not going to pass tell them that they are going to fail. A shock like that will grab attention from the student.

Finally, both writers worry about the students? futures after leaving high school. Banas says that certain students are infatuated on getting those good grades in order to get into that dream college of theirs, but the students blame the teachers for not teaching a certain course well enough. Glanz is worried about the high school students? future since many admit to cheating on tests or on papers and feel that they have done nothing wrong. If students graduate thinking that they can skate through life by leeching off another person, then they are going to learn a quick lesson when they graduate high school. Sadly many students believe that being honest and doing what is right plays second fiddle to getting the higher grader in the class. Sherry believes in the same thing as Banas, but Sherry takes it a step further by saying that employers of the graduates are going to suffer due to lack of actual education of the employee.

Once again both Banas and Sherry make good points on how we can change our schools for the better, but I must digress for a moment and say something about failing as an eye opener for students. It is pure ignorance to think that just because you tell someone that they are going to fail they will wake up and succeed without any motivation from anyone else. Everyone, not just students, needs someone behind them to encourage them to complete that last obstacle whether it is that extra mile to run, that one more question for the quiz, or writing that last sentence in an essay.