How did I not know this?

I really had no idea that our educational system has not been through any major changes from its time of invention! I had assumed, up until last week's discussion, that America's educational systems had went through the same social changes that our American society went through during the civil rights movement, the passing of the IDEA laws, and discrimination laws. When Ira said that the way we run our schools dates back all the way to President Jefferson's time, where the main reason for school was to "scape a few gems from the mess", and that many schools "failed 50& of the students because of our society's need for manual laborers," I was shocked I didn't know any of this. I also felt mislead not only for myself, but for everyone else in education programs in universities across America, who are spoon fed the idea that our TE and CEP classes are "so innovative" with talks of mainstreaming, technology in the classroom, and those engaging teaching techniques we are learning that will change the "old days of pencil pushing worksheet time". When in fact these changes only enrich a certain population of children's learning. Specifically, the kids, I think, who would have succeeded in the traditional academic form of schooling anyway. To me, many of the changes to the curriculum and to the philosophy of teaching styles DO NOT account for those children with any kind of special needs, because our education systems have not done the major changes needed to be a completely Universal Design for Learning environment. From reading Ira's blog, I learned that not even the most necessary schooling needs such as the building construction of many schools today are not UDL appropriate. So my perspective has changed and I now know that our education system is something that is outdated and not clearly effective because "our society has changed but our education systems has not." (Sarah said this) :)

Digital Text Debate

Ya know, I like digital text. I believe in the accessibility, free cost, and ease of using Googledocs to publish anything you want, because it takes the power away from publishers when it comes to censorship. Typically publishers could have clout in changing the plot of a story for fear of the majority of readers would not like it and book sales would go down. Or publishers could make the cover of a novel more sexy with good looking people or some hip graphic design that was not the original intent or direction the author was thinking. It is this freedom and creative license that "open source" (hope I used this term correctly) technology like Gooogledocs gives anyone who wants to become a "published author", a level ground to let their unedited written opinions and narratives to be read. In tying in what I said up above and the course readings, I guess I was just really unaware of "magic 1920s law" that determines which books are public domain and which books are bound by copyright laws. I guess since I was one of those kids whose mom took me to the library twice a week, I just felt that any book I needed I could grasp at my local library. But digital text does make accessibility easier, and local libraries are not always down the street as mine was growing up. So I do think digital text is a fully positive thing, and do not really care about copyright laws anymore because they limit accessibility.