Poetry of Emotion: Poem #2: Being the Happiest

Poetry of Emotion: Poem #2: Being the Happiest:  My name for it:The Rose Of  Beauty  Photo Website Credit:  kzi.dromfjm.top Walking down a  bright line that has 100 thousand colorful...

Hope for the Future, Peace for the Present

Hope for the Future, Peace for the Present

“I am proud of the people from the community who have come out to say they don't want this anymore. There are people who are marching right now to bring calm to our community. There are people who want so much for there to be peace and to protect the values of our community. There are people who want so much for there to be peace and to protect the values of our community. I'm proud of them. I'm also very concerned because what I'm seeing is not -- it is just not acceptable. And I shouldn't -- went to one of the elementary schools near the -- in the western district, Gilmore elementary school this morning, and talked to some fourth graders. And the first question the young lady asked me is why are people trashing my neighborhood? I didn't have a good reason -- I didn't have a good answer for her. It is so frustrating that people think that this makes sense to destroy our community, when we know that those people who live there that are already hurting, are going to be the ones that pay for that.”
                                                                                                (Stephanie Rawlins-Blake, Mayor of Baltimore, 2015)

 

The April Riots, started by teenagers, called into question how such large sections of the population could become so disenfranchised in an era of increasing social connectedness. Yet, teachers have witnessed the development of a disenfranchised and even subversive population since the implementation of increasingly standardized models of education within public schools. These models diminish the role of socio-cultural norms and aspirations of local communities for those of a nationally dominant socio-cultural group, whose discourse is increasingly controlled by corporations. The creeping inequality of the past is now a tidal force of disparity as evident in the enduring struggle of schools to close the ever widening Achievement Gap.

While Delpit revises the Achievement Gap as an Opportunity Gap, the realities of identifying what the gap truly represents, why it needs to be closed in order to provide stability and how this can be accomplished remain ever present.  As a social institution, the school must begin to address the varied ontological approaches toward education within modern pedagogy in order to reconcile the dissonance between formal and informal cultural perceptions of ‘teaching and learning’. Only when the gap between societal needs and communal needs are bridge, then can the public education system begin to truly address these disenfranchised youths. As it was during the mid-1800’s, so public education must remain, “the great equalizer of the conditions of men—the balance wheel of the social machinery” (Mann, 1848, p. 92).

            The effect of the great balance wheel will be marginal if the gulf between the formal institutionalized culture of public education and the informal social culture of the communities the system is serving continues to exist. The extent of the Achievement Gap within communities in transition will be examined in order to demonstrate the breadth of the problem using the data from a school transitioning from one demographic to another as evidence. Then the work of three educational philosophers will be reviewed so that the public education system can bridge the gap between the conception of ‘school’ as a social institution and ‘school’ as a communal one. First, John Dewey explains what must be done; return the focus of the ‘school’ to the interest of the ‘community’ over the corporations. Second, Paulo Freire provides a reason why this must be done; to empower the marginalized and oppressed to claim their education. Third, Jerome Bruner creates a methodology explaining how this can be accomplished through the use of local ethnographic research to examine the ontological relationship between formal and folk pedagogy. Finally, the distinction between ethnological approaches in education and the misguided application of culturally relevant pedagogy will be examined.

Baltimore, like many other urban centers in the Rust Belt of the post-industrial American landscape, is a proving ground for social practice. Indeed, the Northwest corner of Baltimore city, along the county line, is experiencing a social melding as residents from Baltimore’s Westside move up and out into the county to pursue the American dream. The schools at the forefront of this migration must now face the realities of chaos, uncertainty, and violence many experience on a daily basis. This difference between cultural paradigms is captured in the “Achievement Gap” evident among students.

Pikesville High School is one school straddling this shifting paradigm. Recent data trends published by MDReportcard.org and Baltimore County Public Schools, Data Warehouse demonstrate that a disproportionate number of African-American students failed to meet various requirements for graduation, testing (SAT and HSA), and attendance. Pikesville High School currently has 881 students enrolled (Pikesville High School, www.bcps.org, 2014), with 45% African-American, 40% White, 8% Asian, 5% Hispanic/Latino, and 2% Two or more Races (BCPS, Data Warehouse, 2014). While African-American students comprise the majority of the population, a disproportionate number of African-American students experience delayed graduation with only 82.68% graduating in four years, when compared to 91.75% of the White population, 91.67% of the Asian population and 100% of the Hispanic/Latino population. Although overall graduation rates rose across the school, among African-Americans the graduation rate actually fell by nearly 7%. (BCPS, Data Warehouse, 2014)

There is further data to demonstrate the discord between the needs of the school and that of the community. According to 2013 SAT data published regarding student performance, there are major discrepancies between the performance of African-American students and students of other races, particularly White-students. Beginning with participation on the SAT, of the 71% of students who took the SAT in 2013, 100% of the Asian population and 84% of the total White population sat for the SAT, compared to only 55% of the total African-American population and 40% of the total Hispanic/Latino population who took the SAT. This data shows a strong correlation among variables, such as attendance affecting African-American performance on standardized tests even beyond the SAT, including AP-exams (BCPS, Data Warehouse, 2014). African-American performance on the Advance Placement Exams is much lower than the performance of students from other backgrounds. Only 8% of African-American students enrolled at the school participated in AP-Exams, compared to 31% of Asian students and 50% of White students. Among the African-American students who took the AP-Exams, only 58% passed compared to 72% of Asian students and 79% of White students. (BCPS, Data Warehouse, 2014).

With such strong a correlation between racial background and performance on standardized tests, other questions arise regarding the cause of this disparity. The reality reflected is not necessarily one of academic ability, but rather availability of opportunity. This data represents the reality of the opportunity deficit at Pikesville High School, and the distribution of African-American students across ability groups, with few African-American students enrolling in GT or AP-classes, few African-American students identified as Special Ed., but large numbers of African-American students enrolled in various entitlement programs. African-American students at Pikesville High School are not necessarily facing an Achievement Gap as such, but more an Opportunity Gap (Ladson-Billings, 2013, p. 105) perpetuated by continued ontological and socio-cultural distance between the socio-cultural norms of the school and those of their communities.

According to Delpit, African-American students do not enter school with equal levels of opportunity as their peers, particularly White, because of relative socio-cultural differences. These cultural differences are often marked by more than stark distinctions in clothes, custom, and habit, but by varied discourse styles, language, and ontological dissonance between the formal culture of social institutions and the informal one of the community. An example of the effect of these cultural differences is when a teacher often mistakes difficulties with code-switching between dialects as difficulties in reading and writing (Delpit, 1995, p. 58). When the socio-cultural norms of the community clash with those of the school, the Opportunity Gap is widened further (Delpit, 1988, p. 292). If these socio-cultural differences are unaddressed, “we are left with only an abstraction…an inert and lifeless mass” (Dewey, 1897, p. 78) who is foreclosed from reaching any meaningful achievement.

John Dewey would rail against the proliferation of standardized testing, blatant corporate insight and overreach in the modern American school. In fact, Dewey would argue that the same policies and programs currently in place to address the needs of marginalized groups are actually marginalizing them further by increasing social isolation. “[Schools] when separated from the interest of home and community” (Dewey, 1916, p. 108) by distance, whether socio-cultural, or geographic, increase the isolation of social groups. This isolation decreases the free mixing of groups within society, and creates further disjunction. As corporations continue to see education as a burgeoning market and schools as consumers, the needs of communities go overlooked because the public education system seeks for solutions from without rather than from within. Attempting to ‘buy’ a way out through the purchase of licensed curricula products rather than examining the communities in which the school is embedded, only serves to create distance between the school and its stakeholders. The isolating distance between institution and community creates “rigidity and formal institutionalizing of life…[promoting]…static and selfish ideals within the group” (p. 108). In this way, industry bleeds into social life, and dehumanizes those who fail to meet the industrial criteria for success.

In place of a prefabricated curriculum implemented in a top-down bureaucratic structure, Dewey suggests that both teachers and students learn best from experience. The teacher, and indeed the school, must return the focus not on ideals and targets set from without, but on those set from within the community. Free from the shackles of bureaucratic oversight, teachers must be able to function autonomously in order to be loyal to their own experiences as they meet the needs of the students placed before them. Teachers must be given the time and opportunity to generate meaningful educational experiences that authentically engage their students. According to Dewey, learning can only occur through authentic educational experiences that promote the reciprocal exchange between intrinsic change within the student and extrinsic change beyond the student. Although this may be achieved with a purchased curricular aid, the “moving face of an experience” (Dewey, 1938, p. 113) is not equal among all students, but requires the involvement of the teacher to personalize the experience based on the conditions of the student, the family, and the community. Therefore, the educator must be able to “judge what attitudes are actually conducive to continued growth and what are detrimental” (p. 113). This requires the teacher to weave the classroom experience into the socio-cultural context of the surrounding community to facilitate the construction of knowledge through personal connections made by students. The specific contextual requirements of experience-based, constructivist learning are not entirely incompatible with a top-down boxed curriculum; however, the task becomes more difficult the more marginalized the community the school serves. As Freire would warn, this further perpetuates the marginalization of a community, ultimately feeding a repressive system. 

From Paulo Freire’s perspective, the public education system becomes a dehumanizing and oppressive entity when it acts on the needs of the institution over the needs of the student.  An education system not focused on the needs of the communities it serves becomes an “exercise of domination [stimulating] the credulity of students, with the ideological intent…of indoctrinating them to adapt to the world of oppression” (Freire, 1972, p. 201). Essentially, an educational system imposed from the top-down only seeks to satisfy the needs of those at the top at the expense of those on the bottom. Students are rewarded based on how well their performance matches the expectations of the dominant group, not how their performance empowers them to succeed. Such an approach is “necrophilic” (p. 200) and seeks to overwhelm, control, and oppress in order to maintain a static, stagnant, society. This approach predominates corporate and industrial thinking that seeks to perpetuate the means of their own success. When this corporate consciousness invades the public institutions the actions of individuals and their participation in social life is reduced to simply an “illusion…[where they] only submit to and become a part of those who act” (Freire, 1972, p. 200). In other words, the powerless are separated by their worth to those who are in power. When this occurs in schools, large sections of populations are alienated because their socio-cultural background does not fit the one sanctioned by the corporations, industries or institutions. Oppression is a natural product when the public education system as a social institution defines itself by the demands of industry and capitalism over those of the community and local society.

Education from a corporate, industrial, capitalistic perspective becomes a commodity to buy and trade. From a corporate perspective, education, like all other commodities, follows the economic principles of supply and demand. These principles categorically exclude segments of the population from having an education based solely on availability of capital and profitability to the corporate entity. When schools return their focus to meeting the needs of their students and communities, agency will shift back to the student. This shift will turn students from “objects of assistance” (Freire, 1972, p. 204) to “critical thinkers” (p. 204). Students will be able to “develop their power to perceive critically the way they exist in the world with which and in which they find themselves; they [will] come to see the world not as a static reality, but as a reality in process, in transition” (Freire, 1972, p. 204). In other words, they will regain hope. Without hope, what else do students have left to lose?     

Instilling hope for a future that is better than the present is the real mission of education. This is the way “[the great] balancing wheel of social machinery” (Mann, 1848, p. 92) works to create stability. John Dewey described what schools must do to operate at their best, focus on the community and the students. Paulo Freire articulates why schools must serve the community, in order to liberate the oppressed, and create authentic hope for future change. Jerome Bruner explains how this can be accomplished through reimagining the school as not only a social institution but a cultural one as well.

As an institution, the public education system strives for lofty ideals, but is often mired in the political reality of reflecting only one life-way and culture among many. As Bruner suggests, the educational institution will not be able to make any significant changes until it reconciles the dissonance between its formal institutionalized culture and that of surrounding communities. Bruner states that “education is not simply a technical business of well-managed information processing, nor even simply a matter of applying “learning theories” to the classroom or using the results of subject-centered “achievement tests”. It is a complex pursuit of fitting a culture to the needs of its members and of fitting its members and their ways of knowing to the needs to the culture” (Bruner, 1996, p. 43). As a social institution, the public education system must accept the fact that it is a cultural one as well, whose primary role is to act as a cultural-informant that bridges the distance between dominant and marginalized social groups. The inability to perform this role is what is being perceived as the Achievement or Opportunity Gap.

Beginning with the individual, Bruner suggests that each child be warmly invited to participate in a separate culture created by the school that intentionally bridges the reality of the family with that of society. Bruner states, “My counsel is not that we throw children in over their heads [as is the case now]. It’s only that we should give them an opportunity…to enter the culture with awareness of what it is about and what one does to cope with it as a participant” (Bruner, 1996, p. 82). Teachers must become ethnographers in order to act as cultural-informants for their students. This can only be accomplished by focusing the effort of the school squarely on the community, and integrating as part of the community.

Turning to integrate into the community, the school, and its participants must seek to become part of the community. They must seek to actively engage with members of the community in order to better understand the socio-cultural context in which meaning is made, and identity is derived. Experience within the community will provide teachers with insight into the pedagogy of the surrounding community. Bruner calls this culturally-specific pedagogy “folk pedagogy” (p. 44). At a cross roads between the psychological and cultural construction of meaning, understanding the ‘folk pedagogies’ of a community will enable a teacher “to situate…knowledge in the living context that poses the “presenting problem,” to borrow a bit of medical jargon. And that living context, where education is concerned, is the schoolroom—the schoolroom situated in a broader culture” (Bruner, 1996, p. 44). Not only will this provide the individual teacher insight into the student, but it will also validate their role in the community as communal-participant and meaning-maker. Enhanced cultural insight will allow participating members of the school community to be aware of the messages hidden within pedagogical choices. This is important because as Bruner states, “Pedagogy is never innocent. It is a medium that carries its own message” (Bruner, 1996, p. 63) to which students are inherently attuned.  

While in comparison to Dewey and Freire, Bruner appears to be taking a microscopic view of education, he is merely expressing in exquisitely fine detail the function, importance and level of interaction a school must have in order to connect with the community. The conception of a school as social institution when reduced to its essence is primarily about the relationships and exchanges between three entities: family and student, student and student, and student and teacher (Gastaldi, et al, 2015, p. 103). Bruner’s conception of the teacher as ethnographer and folk-pedagogy as a vehicle for creating cultural meaning across social groups presents a distinct difference from current applications of culturally relevant pedagogy   By lumping students into vast cultural/racial groups, such misapplied culturally relevant pedagogies leave teachers teaching to little more than national caricatures of each student based on racial stereotypes and sweeping generalizations rather than individual, social and community specific realities. Schools must move beyond the “heroes and holidays” (Lee, at al., 2007) approach and must be willing to conduct ethnological research in order to truly examine the cultural ontology, learning relationships and folk pedagogies within specific communities. This examination of ontology must attend to the reciprocity and relationship among all parties invested in the successful education of the nation’s youth, with particular attention to the student-teacher relationship. The nature of this relationship should be viewed as a cultural artifact that embodies the cultural appropriations of dichotomous power/authority structures and exchanges within a perceived social hierarchy.

In the aftermath of the April Riots, the citizens of Baltimore, of Maryland, and of the nation faced the ugliness of a reality so easily overlooked. Teenagers on their way home from school, obsessed with the notion of a purge (after the movie starring Ethan Hawke), where the poor would rob from the rich to redistribute wealth and balance society, held a city in their grasp. As they looted and burned their neighborhoods, they released the violence and chaos many experience privately across a national media landscape for public consumption. Those in positions of power and authority seemed surprised by the lack of respect for law and order, and the willingness to commit violence demonstrated by the city’s youth. Many educators and police officers were not. We know firsthand the price that must be paid when a social institution created to instill hope and serve the most vulnerable is corrupted and becomes a model for oppression in service to the power-elite. When the job of teaching becomes tied to tests and not to students, the schoolhouse becomes new ground for venture capitalists and not humanitarian outreach, and students are judge based on their current corporate worth and not the value of an undetermined future, there is no way out. Hope still exists, teachers must rekindled it student-by-student. The public school’s mission for the 21^st century must be to reach into the community, heal the wounds from the inside out, and remind every student that they are more than the sum of their test-scores.

.

             

             

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

References:

Baltimore County Public School (2014) Profile of Pikesville High School, Data Warehouse,
            https://www.bcps.org/schools/profiles/pikesvillehs.pdf

Bruner, J (1996) The Culture of Education., Cambridge, MA, and London, UK., Harvard
            University Press

Delpit, L. (1988). The silenced dialogue: Power and pedagogy in educating other people's
            children. Harvard Educational Review, 58(3), 280--299.

Delpit, L (1996) “Other People’s Children: Cultural Conflict in the Classroom”. New York: 
            The New Press

Dewey, J (1897) “John Dewey: My Pedagogical Creed”, The School Journal, Volume LIV,
           Number , (pp. 77-80)

Dewey, J (1916) “Democracy and Education” In T. Johnson & R. Reed (Eds), Philosophical
            Documents in Education (pp. 105-110). Pearson Education Inc, Upper Saddle
            River, New Jersey, 2012

Dewey, J (1938) “Experience and Education” In T. Johnson & R. Reed (Eds), Philosophical
            Documents in Education (pp. 110-119). Pearson Education Inc, Upper Saddle
            River, New Jersey, 2012

Freire, P (1972) “Pedogogy of the Oppressed” In T. Johnson & R. Reed (Eds), Philosophical
            Documents in Education (pp. 196-206). Pearson Education Inc, Upper Saddle
            River, New Jersey, 2012

Gastaldi, Longobardi, et al. (2015) “Parent-Teacher Meetings as a Unit of Analysis for Parent-
            Teacher Interactions”  Culture & Psychology, Vol. 21 (1) 95-110,
            DOI: 10.117/1354067X15570488, SAGE Publications Inc.

Ladson-Billings, G (2013) “"Stakes is High": Educating New Century Students” : The Journal  
            of Negro Education, Vol. 82, No. 2, The 33rd Annual Charles H. Thompson   
            Lecture, pp. 105-110

Lee, Menkart, Okazawa-Rey (2007) Beyond Heroes and Holidays: A Practical Guide to K-12
            Anti-Racist, Multicultural Education and Staff Development, San Francisco, CA,
            Teaching For Change

Mann, H (1848) “Report No. 12 of the Massachusetts School Board” In T. Johnson & R. Reed
            (Eds), Philosophical Documents in Education (pp. 196-206). Pearson Education Inc, 
            Upper Saddle River, New Jersey, 2012

Rawlins-Blake, Stephanie (2015) “Press Conference of Maryland Governor Larry Hogan” 
            Originally Aired April 27, 2015 - 20:00ET, Anderson Cooper 360              
            http://www.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1504/27/acd.01.html, accessed 11/21/2015

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Globalization & Unsustainablility

Globalization and Unsustainability

            In 1977, pop-icon and androgynous starman David Bowie had rented a flat in Berlin overlooking the Wall. As the snow fell on a cold winter night outside his window, he paused and noticed two young lovers walking just on the other side. For a moment the excesses and indulgences of his rock-and-roll lifestyle faded away as he watched the couple holding hands, stopping now-and-then for a quick kiss under the pale flickering street lamps. Suddenly aware that someone was watching them, the couple looked up to see Bowie standing at his window looking down on them. After a nod and a silent exchange of well-being, the couple turned suddenly as Bowie was distracted by the glamorous overindulgence of his party. Promising the rich and fabulous in the adjoining room that he would only be a moment, he stole another look out of his window. The light under the street lamp was empty, falling-snow slowly erasing their footprints, as cries and shouts could be heard through the fierce industrial night in the distance just beyond the Wall. Pulling the curtains closed, Bowie disappeared into a drug filled haze of stardom and fame.

            While that story has been embellished with half-memories, and artistic licence, there is truth crystallized in the song, “Heroes”. Sadly David Bowie will be remembered more for his drugged filled life of excess, demonized by the glut of Western Civilization, and not as a prophet of pop-culture like Bob Dylan, a musical savant like Jimi Hendrix, or as a martyr for peace like John Lennon. However, in that moment on that snowy night staring into East Berlin, David Bowie captured a truth that would later set the world on fire. The dreams of those oppressed, the dreams to be on the other-side, the dreams to be heroes free to live in pursuit of the simplest desire—love—would come to define an entire generation, century and globe.

            Although the Berlin Wall fell in 1989 and is often cited as the moment when the world began globalizing, the full impact would not be felt until 2005, at least for me. Washing my hands in the men’s room at my first school, in my second year as a teacher, I noticed a magazine in the corner trashcan, the title long forgotten, but whatever was on the cover made me stop, fish it out, and start reading. The article that caught my attention highlighted the failing of U.S students to stack up against other students from nations across the First-World. The nations at the top—from which the US was noticeably absent—were familiar, Japan, China, Germany, and then...Finland!?

I will never forget the glowing hum of fluorescent lights as I stood gobsmacked in front of the mirror. I knew the state of U.S. education was poor, but Finland? I kept reading. Finland? How did Finland make it up there? If Finland was in the top three, where was the U.S.? Well, we were solidly in the middle of the pack, sandwiched between Italy, and Estonia. Not that there is anything wrong with either country, but at the time Italy had just officially switched from the Lire to the Euro amidst much groaning from other more affluent EU-nations, and Estonia was still experiencing birth pains after the fall of the Iron Curtain. How could the most powerful and affluent nation, experiencing unprecedented economic growth at the time, be languishing in the middle of the pack in education? The article said nothing concrete, except that teachers in the countries at the top received pay and respect more in-line with doctors and lawyers, but the authors continued to place blame on the American teacher, as they lauded the newest piece of education legislation- No Child Left Behind, or NCLB.  

Of course the problem is much bigger than simply just bad teachers, lack of accountability, and imperialistic unions, but that was not the rhetoric then. After the events of 9/11 and the fall of the Twin Towers, the U.S began a lumbering march across the world to not only bring those responsible to justice, but to also remake much of the world in our own image. Under the onslaught of Right-Wing propaganda, notions of Patriotism were reduced to unquestioning loyalty to the President and the Republican agenda of Hawkish excessive spending, a laissez-faire free market, and unbridled greed as the citizenry was fattened line-by-line on a gruel of American Exceptionalism and unchecked arrogance.  President Bush was going to fix everything from the scary world beyond our boundaries to those moocher teachers and their unions festering at the heart of American Education.

Why was the U.S. scoring so low? Why couldn’t some high school graduates even read? The teachers, you see, were lazy. So, quality controls needed to be established that would hold them accountable for the failings of their students. Like a factory that conducts quality control measures of their products through a battery of stringent tests, so to would the education system. There was no need to look abroad for other options. Americans are global leaders, and NCLB would fix the problem by raising erroneous standards with no bothersome research necessary. Politicians across the country claimed to have the answers, and sought to singlehandedly reform American education without those pesky professional educators. And, why not? We’re Americans. We lead not follow. We innovate not stagnate. NCLB would do it. Tests and higher requirements for graduation would do it. Those teachers would do it... or else!

According to PISA, 2009, NCLB turned out to not be the answer. Schools, now like factories, ceaselessly pump information into their students, continuously test, and reward, normally affluent, schools that do well, while penalizing, normally underprivileged, schools that do poorly- just as NCLB was designed to do. However, the U.S, still sandwiched in the middle, with China and Finland secure at the top, continues to languish with all of its efforts, time, and money wasted. The problem with NCLB is that it is a short-sighted, politically motivated, and unresearched piece of legislation that spuriously conflated academic institutions with industrial factories. NLCB attempted to solve a national problem in education by applying 20^th century thinking to a 21^st century global problem. The legislators in the first decade of the 21^st century failed to consider the present parameters as defined by globalization into their policies; foreign, domestic and educational. The systematic failure to adapt to the evolving globalized world of the 21^st century has lead to the implementation of policies that are not only unsustainable but carelessly nationalistic.   

Educational reform is not new in the U.S. In fact, the greatness of the U.S. educational system had always rested on innovation. However, the difference in the early 21^st century was not the education landscape, but rather the global one. The 1990’s saw more and ever swifter change that rapidly overtook the U.S in a deluge that continues to reverberate. “[T]he real landmark was the fall of the Berlin Wall, the dissolution of the Soviet Union, and the collapse communism” (p. 2, Yergan, “Globalization...”).

The world irrevocably changed when communism fell, as markets opened and people who had opined for a better way of life suddenly had access to it. “The dawning awareness of all these ongoing economic phenomena- the renewal of trade, the mushrooming of capital markets, the development and diversification of foreign investments-accompanied by the sense of collapsing borders due to communication and travel brought forth the term globalization to describe the process” (p. 2- 3, Yergen). The world began to shrink, or “flatten” as Friedman is fond of saying. Business could now be conducted on a global scale without much restriction, goods and money flowed into places that had previously been blocked off, and many reaped the benefits of global markets. While many nations (particularly in the West) prospered, still many more became increasing impoverished. Locked out from the opulence of Capitalism many nations suffered, as the West hummed along blindly to the tune of big money, corporate greed, and private wealth.

Subtly the world began to change. As these changes in technology, business, and governments began building momentum, the U.S found itself vulnerable in ways that had been unimaginable. Without nations posing a threat, in an era of stability and prosperity, the U.S enjoyed a decade at the top as the sole superpower. During that time the paradigm of countries worldwide began to shift. Countries full of people who for long had yearned for freedom, now had it, and now wanted to become players on the world stage. Capitalism spread, and these new markets wanted to modernize. They studied, they prepared, and they carefully, slowly, initiated changes that would make them more competitive on a global scale. While the countries beyond much of the Western hemisphere sought these changes, the countries at the top sought to maintain the status quo- safe in their false sense of superiority.

That is until the events of 9/11, when the world came literally crashing into the U.S. A world that seemed the same as it always had, but now was strikingly different. A world whose paradigms had changed. A world the U.S had become out-of-touch with. A world full of new evils to tame, different stakes at risk, and rules for engagement neither created nor bound by those of the Geneva Convention. From the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989 to 9/11, in the span of little more than a decade, the game, the playing field and the players had changed right under nose of America. “The convergence of globalization and technology will eventually touch everyone. These forces are far larger than any individual [or nation]. They are ferocious, impersonal, and inescapable... It is incumbent on all...to understand how these two forces are shaping American lives” and global politics (p. 54, Friedman/Mandelbaum, “That Used to be Us”, 2011).

The old American paradigms are down, and new ones must be established as globalization and technology will continue to shape the global culture of the 21^st century. Since the role of the U.S. in the world has changed, much of what the U.S had done in the past can no long be sustained. Unfortunately many “Americans seem unable to grasp the magnitude of the challenges that face us” (p. 28 Zakaria, Are America’s Best Days Behind Us?). The U.S currently operates under a series of policies, infrastructure and institutions that are decades old. Most built in the 1950’s and 60’s when the U.S. was at its zenith. From the interstate to immigration, the current policies of the 21^st century U.S reflect the major concerns and paradigms of the mid-20^th century.

The data attests to the crumbling of America. “According to the Organisation for Economic Co-operation, and Development (OECD), our 15-year-olds rank 17^th in the world in science...25^th in math. We rank 12^th... in college graduation (down from No. 1 for decades). We [are] 79^th in elementary school enrollment. Our infrastructure is ranked 23^rd... we’re 27^th in life expectancy, 18^th in diabetes and [second][1] in obesity” (p. 28, Zakaria). It appears the mighty are in the process of falling.

The U.S has lived with an overinflated sense of grandiosity for far too long, and now the cracks are beginning to show. The U.S government currently cares too much about the state of big business and special interests and not nearly enough about the foundations of a good economy. “Reducing funds for things like education, scientific research, air-traffic control, NASA, infrastructure and alternative energy will...hurt the economy’s long-term growth” (30, Zakaria). Just as the U.S is forcibly cutting these funds, other countries “from Germany to South Korea to China are making large investments in education, science...and infrastructure” (30). At a point in time when corporations are now considered people, and there is no cap on election-campaign finances, the painful truth is evident, “America’s success has made it sclerotic” (31, Zakaria). The “political system...has become [so] allergic to compromise and practical solutions” (33) that it’s surprising when anything gets done, even something as routine as appointing four heads of office after a two-year wait. Even now, as Congress squabbles and politicizes every decision on the floor, the rest of the world continues catch-up.

            Though decidedly Post-American, the modern world still looks much the same as it did in the past. However the pundits paint it, the past was never as rosy as it is so nostalgically memorialized. The U.S may be “the first globalized nation in history” (Sr. Claire, notes) but that title was born through a long and bloody labor that would be unwise to repeat. For much of the brief history of the nation, Congress directly avoided meddling in world affairs. Having adopted a Foreign Policy of Isolationalism immediately after the founding of the country in 18^th century, the U.S was content to focus inward, fulfil her manifest destiny, and create one sovereign nation from sea-to-shining-sea. Foregoing invitations to join the global community. (Sr. Claire, notes, 2013)

            Shortly after securing independence from the British Empire, the U.S was petitioned by France during the French Revolution to send troops over and help stabilize our ally. Since France had virtually supplied the U.S with the means of fighting and winning the Revolutionary War, the French government felt it was right to return the favour. George Washington, hesitant to stretch the continental army and fledgling navy too thin, refused to send aid, setting the precedent for a policy of Isolationalism for more than a century. That Isolationalism came at a cost. The U.S turned her back on Europe just as Europe erupted. Revolution, war, and Napoleon set the stage for the stalemate that became World War I. Roused from her stupor just in time, the U.S charged in, pushed back Germany and helped end the Great War. In the aftermath, President Wilson was eager to join the League of Nations, and returned to Congress with the first invitation to go global. Congress refused. (Sr. Claire, notes, 2013)

With the U.S noticeably absent yet again from the world stage, revolution raged across Europe. This time the monarchy in Russia was overthrown, and the communists under Lenin sent forth a second invitation for the workers of the world to join with the Soviets in a global revolution against capitalist-pigs.  Europe eventually found itself at war again, World War II. Again, the U.S joined the fight in the 11^th hour, invaded Hitler’s Fortress Europe, with her allies England and the USSR, the Nazi’s were defeated and the continent destroyed. In 1945, with victory in the West against Germany and in the East against Japan, the U.S and the USSR stood as the last remaining superpowers. Each with a wary eye on the other. In order avoid another outbreak of total war, the U.S revived the idea of the League of Nations, and, finally working globally, installed the United Nations in New York City, as the Iron Curtain fell over the communist Eastern Europe. (Sr. Claire, notes, 2013)

Sixty years on, the U.S rests as the only superpower, but rest it does. With less civic engagement, more derisive arguing, and a shrinking middle class, the U.S is only a shadow itself. “Democrats and Republicans have become more like hostile tribes than colleagues with different political views but common goals” (244, Friedman/Mandelbaum, “That Used to be Us”, 2011). The U.S has become unfocused and complacent within the global arena. As Friedman and Mandelbaum outline, “the country has strayed away from three of the core values on which American greatness depended in the past. The first of these changes [was] a shift from long-term investment and delayed gratification...to short-term gratification...The second change is the loss of confidence in our institutions and in the authority of their leaders across the society...The third shift in values is a weakening of our sense of shared national purpose, which propelled us in—and was reinforced by—the struggle against fascism in World War II and against communism in the Cold War” (278-279, Friedman/Mandelbaum). As Friedman/Mandelbaum put it, “We...let ourselves go” (279), and are bursting at the seams.

As the old paradigms of the 20^th century shift, and globalization converges with technology, a deep sense of unrest and unhappiness pulls apart the threads of domestic life in the U.S. Something festers deep in the heart of democracy. Something isolating, nagging, and niggling. It is shouted from television screens and bantered back-and-forth over social media. America is deeply divided, and increasingly polarized. Her citizens retreat into their homes, shy away from civic-engagement, and refuse to enter into civil discourse. Each side so bent on winning the argument that few fail to remember what makes the American political system unique. It is “a political system that allows us to keep working on collective solutions to vexing problems but refuses to take any question off the table permanently [calling] forth creative capacities that lie dormant under autocratic rule...[it is a system that] will help us develop the habits of heart required for the health of the body politic” (77, Palmer, Healing the Heart of Democracy, 2011).  

The American populace have seemingly lost the stomach for debate, and the heart for democracy. The further engrossed each person becomes with their own technological worlds, the less they rely on each other. Under the spectre of mass consumption and consumerism, modern life has become a disconnected and disjointed experience where interaction with neighbours is no longer essential, but bothersome. “The less we depend on each other, the more we weaken the interdependence that helps us develop democratic habits of the heart. [Conversely,] the less interdependent we are, the more likely we are to become people among whom consumerism trumps citizenship” (87, Palmer). As the primary venue for commerce shrinks into the home, out of public and into private life, the western citizen becomes isolated, increasing distrustful of others beyond their small circle, and leery of public engagements. Currently, the decline in public life of the American citizen has led to the deep divisions, polarizations and ultimately partisan politics that are stifling the country. The world resembles reality less-and-less, and more what the individual fears. When every stranger on the street is perceived as a threat, then all civil discourse is soon to fade. The paradigm has shifted domestically. America is no longer a nation of citizens cooperating together, but a nation of partisan clans beating their shields threatening the sustainability of American democracy. (76- 115, Palmer)

Such tension is pulling America apart. The American Democracy will be unsustainable if its citizens do not participate in civil discourse, public life, and are willing to cooperate. Ironically, at a time when everyone is permanently plugged into the media all day long, no one is willing to listen, and even few feel empowered enough to speak up. America is unwinding in this era of globalization and outsourcing. The political system has become unsustainable as big money (corporate or private) games the system, buys the media, and intentionally confuses the populace. When America was presented with the 2^nd invitation to go global by joining the communist revolution, the American worker thought fighting for more rights was a great, noble and necessary thing; however, they recognized the gains that could be had from sharing in the wealth generated by Capitalism, and so developed Labor Unions. Only collectively could these underprivileged workers band together with a voice loud enough to be heard. The government stepped in, forced the elite to allow their wealth trickle down, and allowed America to enjoy an era of prosperity with the emergence of a strong and essential middle class. Those Social Contracts between employee and employer from the early age of Americana made the nation strong (notes on Packer, The Unwinding of America)

Now corporations are considered people, the media is in the control of an elite few, and lobbyists have more political clout than the average voter. Big money is truly running the show, from polarizing the electorate with intentionally misleading propaganda, to working around the tax code, shuffling money over-seas, and outsourcing jobs- the middle class is in trouble. When big money has the ability to buy elections and the media, “big money becomes the enemy of democracy” (Sr. Claire, notes). As the middle class declines, so does democracy.

As the inequality of wealth becomes even starker in modern America, economists and political scientists believe the U.S has entered a new Gilded Age. During the past twenty years systematic inequality has been dominated by a new class of super-rich. The only difference is that, this time around, the super-rich are hedge fund managers and financial magnates instead of oil and rail barons at the turn of the 20^th century. As a result of the first Gilded Age, the 20^th century experienced two great inequalities: 1) The Inequality of Gender (confronted during the Women’s Liberation Movement) and 2) The Inequality of Race (confronted during the Civil Rights Movement). However, in the 21^st century the greatest inequality will increasingly become the access to education. In the High Tech economy, there will no longer be any outlets for unskilled, uneducated workers due to increased automation in agriculture and factories. (Sr. Claire, notes)

This sense of hopelessness rumbles through America in dark gray clouds that rain on every citizen. The current decline of the middle class has more impact on education than any classroom teacher and is the biggest crisis facing education today. Since the largest problems with education extend far beyond the academic institution, any reform that seeks to impede a student’s progress through school, take money from schools that need it most, and pressurize teachers/administrators across the country is unsustainable. The education system will collapse under the strain instead of ascend.

The legislators who created NCLB forgot one key difference between factories and schools. Schools deal with humans, and schools are charged with handling the social ills of the time and community. Diane Ravitch, former education guru and author of “The Death and Life of the Great American School System” was a principle architect of NCLB and laments at how such a good idea can go horribly wrong. “My support for NCLB remained strong until November 30, 2006. I can pinpoint the date exactly because that was the day I realized that NCLB was a failure” (99). She recounts attending a conservative conference in D.C where the results of NCLB were being analyzed. It soon became clear that the bill was not working. Summing up the presentations, she says:

“The various presentations...demonstrated that state education departments were drowning in new bureaucratic requirements, procedures, and routines, and that none of the prescribed remedies were making a difference...Choice was not working...many parents and students did not want to leave their neighbourhood school, even if the federal government offered them free transportations and a the promise of a better school...As I listened to the day’s discussions, it became clear to me that NCLB’s remedies were not working. Students were offered the choice to go to another school, and they weren’t accepting the offer. They were offered free tutoring, and 80 percent or more turned it down...Adult interests were well served by NCLB. The law generated huge revenues for tutoring and testing services, which became a sizeable industry. Companies that offered tutoring, tests, and test-prep materials were raking in billions of dollars annually from federal, state, and local governments, but the advantages to the nation’s students were not obvious” (100-101, Ravitch)

Federal mandates, and increased oversight by state governments did nothing to improve student scores. NCLB did funnel money into private hands, but had no effect on student performance primarily because students are people and not a product pushed off an assembly-line. Moreover, NCLB required that 100 percent of students in the nation be proficient in reading and math by the year 2014. In 2006, Ravitch knew that this was unfeasible, but the political rhetoric continued, and she was slowly fazed out of the NCLB-committees that she had started. “The consequence of mandating an unattainable goal...is to undermine states that have been doing a reasonably good job of improving their schools and to produce ‘a compliance-driven regimen that recreates the very pathologies it was intended to solve’” (103). As 2013 turns to 2014, NCLB has clearly done more harm than good to the public education system—just like the education professionals said it would.

Billions of dollars, political determination, and 20^th century modes of accountability failed to address the problem of educating a nation. Where to start fixing the problem then? In this Ravitch echoes Palmer’s message to heal the heart of democracy through civic engagement. Admittedly, Ravitch does not know how to make American students more competitive globally, but she does notice a rising tide of apathy that needs to be stemmed. This apathy for education, community, government, and even their own personal wellbeing needs to be changed into action. Ravitch suggests that schools should endeavour to teach to the whole student, including arts/music, history/English, reading/writing, math/science but most notably civics and government. The modern American student is apathetic because they lack the agency to care. They are acted upon in an oppressive test driven education. They need to be inspired to take action, and empowered to participate in society instead of hiding away from it. The purpose of a public education is to create an informed, politically aware, publically minded, global citizen. Moulding the next generation into the caring, compassionate, hard-working Americans the government wants should trump the banality of increasing test-scores. Ironically, to do one would solve the other. A caring, hard-working student is a student who will strive to perform their best.

            More testing is not the answer. Looking abroad, the difference between the high achieving countries and the U.S functions more as an agent of culture and less an agent of government. “Currently, a central part of the problem in American education is that government officials are trying to remake teaching from afar” (116, Mehta, Why American Education Fails). NCLB failed to increase performance by raising standards because it focused on teachers as the problem and not the solution. “Teachers [need] to be seen as experts, like those in other professions. The state could then shift its function from holding teachers accountable to taking on roles in which it has more of a comparative advantage and is more likely to be effective” (116). Understandably schools and education are seen as the great equalizer between the rich and the poor, however, the state needs to own that mission. Only when the effects of poverty can be mitigated through services rendered at school or through school can lasting achievement be sustained. “The government should not try to micromanage education from above, putting forward an endless array of requirements, regulations and accountability targets, in the hopes that doing so will somehow force schools to improve” (116, Mehta). The education system must be reformed from the bottom up beginning with the student and teacher, not the bureaucrat down.

            “Created in the era of the assembly line, [the school system] was never intended to push its students to engage in the kind of complex learning and critical thinking that the 21^st century U.S economy demands” (116, Mehta). The entire institution needs to be realigned to come to terms with an evolving 21^st century paradigm. While revising social-institutions may take time, Wagner highlights some changes that could be done immediately in his book “The Global Achievement Gap”. The education system and schools can start by invigorating the curriculum through interdisciplinary instruction. Furthermore Wagner outlines seven specific skills that teachers should strive to instil in their students. 1) Critical Thinking and Problem Solving. 2) Collaboration across Networks and Leading by Influence. 3) Mental Flexibility, Agility and Adaptability. 4) Initiative and Entrepreneurialism. 5) Effective Oral and Written Communication. 6) Accessing and Analysing Information. 7) Curiosity and Imagination (67).

In essence, Wagner calls on teachers to begin teaching in such a way that motivates students, generates a sense of ownership and direction over their learning, and creates individuals that can apply information in novel ways. Testing for rote memory and factual recall through multiple-choice tests provides no useful data because students no longer need to rely on their working memory for all the facts and figures they require. With the advent of the internet and Google, the importance in teaching has shifted to creativity, vitality, imagination, and perseverance. Wagner sums this change up nicely when he quotes what skills the Partnership for Global Awareness feels 21^st century students to should have. 21^st century students should be able to:

·         “[use] 21^st century skills [such as critical thinking and problem solving] to understand and address global issues.

·         [learn] from and [work] collaboratively with individual respresenting diverse cultural, religious, and lifestyle [choices] in a spirit of mutual respect and open dialogue in personal work and community contexts.

·         [understand other nations and cultures, including the use ofnon-English languages” (25, Wagner)

 

The call for education to go global has resounded for over a decade. The failures of NCLB have not gone unnoticed by those in office. Arne Duncan, US Secretary of Education follows Wagner’s lead as he quotes Wagner saying, “there is a happy ‘convergence between the skills most needed in the global knowledge economy and those most needed to keep democracy sage and vibrant’” (74, Duncan, Back to School, 2010). Duncan continues stating that the competitive model at the foundation of NCLB “is a recipe for protectionism and global strife” (74). In line with Drucker, Duncan points out that a more sustainable goal for the education system should not be a squabble over much needed funding, but rather a more “virtuous” (74) goal that should resonate in the heart of every teacher. Duncan states that, “Americans must realize that expanding educational attainment everywhere is the best way to grow the pie for all...[this] is the path to prosperity” (74).

Realizing access to education threatens to become the great inequality of the 21^st century, Duncan affirms the assembly-line approach presumed by NCLB is out-dated, instead suggesting a new model for education that seeks to improve the lives of all students meeting them where they are, and not penalizing them for who they are, or where they are from. Education professionals need to reclaim the profession and start teaching with a mind for the future. Schools need to become future oriented and incorporate modern subjects such as “programming, multimedia literacy and creation, astronautics, bioethics, genomics, and nanotechnology” (44, Prensky, Turning on the Lights, 2008). The curricula needs to modified to reflect the current needs of society. While remaining grounded in core subject material, students need not be made to memorize information for standardized tests, but rather challenged to apply their knowledge  to address real problems. The global community will no longer wait for the youth to earn graduate degrees before requiring them to make a difference, they must be empowered and inspired earlier to be participants in education, the community, and the world.

            Change is not longer on the horizon. Change is rumbling overhead. Prepared or not, the old will be washed away as time relentlessly marches on. Ironically, the fundamental change needed for the modern student to survive in the global community has already taken place. The Millenial has taken matters in their own hands. Through social media, technology and global networking the Millenial has decided their current educational experiences are outdated and irrelevant (the possibly greatest reason for such low scores on standardized tests). They know that what is being taught in school no longer matters the way it once did.

The Millenial, obsessed with selfies, celebrity tweets, and internet memes, only needs time to mature. Imagine how much global change can be accomplished if these students applied as much as effort as they do to facebook, instagram and tumblr to solving actual problems of the world. When this generation of media savvy, self-assured, over-confident selfish teenagers becomes adults—their pride will not let them fail. “A generation’s greatness isn’t determined by data; it’s determined by how they act to the challenges that befall them” (34, Stein, The New Greatest Generation).

David Bowie sang of a young East German couple yearning for the freedom to be themselves, to be in love, and to escape into a world of endless possibilities—where they could even swim like dolphins in the ocean. For Bowie the shame was on the other side of the Wall. The shame of the West was not rescuing generations of people from oppression and turning their back. With the fall, millions of people, like the East German couple, were unleashed on the world. People who simply craved the opportunity to pursue happiness. As their dreams became reality, the world changed. As the world changed, those responsible for the construction of the Wall, on both sides, slowly become irrelevant. With the old guard go the vestiges of the past, and like the Wall, soon what is left is a crumbling relic.

The American education system needs to change. The youth need to be allowed to pursue their dreams, and not subjected to a battery of archaic tests, worn ruins of a harsh industrial epoch. The potential for change is immense—it can make the impossible possible. America needs to turn and face these changes, not wall itself up and refuse to acknowledge the rest of the world. The youth understand. They know. They are not afraid to turn, face the changing world and demythologize the old myths of domination. The old institutions need the courage to do the same or else the possible will become impossible as the truths once held by ‘we the People’ become self-irrelevant.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Bibliography:

Duncan, A (2010) Back to School. Foreign Affairs, vol 89 no. 6; 65- 74

Friedman & Mandelbaum (2011) That Used to be Us. New York, New York: Farrar, Straus and
          Giroux

Mehta, J (2013). Why American Education Fails. Foreign Affairs, May/June 2013; 105- 116

Palmer (2011) Healing the Heart of Democracy: The Courage to Create a Politics Worthy of the
          Human Spirit. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass

Program for International Student Assessments, 2009, released by The Organization for Economic
          Cooperation and Development (OECD), The New York Times

Prensky, M (2008) Turning on the Lights. Educational Leadership, March 2008; 40- 45

Ravitch (2011) The Death and Life of the Great American School System: How Testing and Choice
          are Undermining Education. New York, New York: Basic Books

Stein, J (2013). The New Greatest Generation. Time, May 20 2013; 27- 34

Suarez-Orozco, M (2005) Rethinking Education in the Global Era. Phi Delta Kappan, Nov 2005;
          209- 212

Wagner (2010) The Global Achievement Gap. New York, New York: Basic Books

Yergen, D (2002) Globalization, The inside story of our new interconnected world. Social
          Education, vol 66 no. 2; 111- 116

Zakaria, F (2011) Are America’s Best Days Behind Us? Time, March 14, 2011; 28- 33

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Appendix:

Reflection:

“Heroes,” David Bowie

I chose to incorporate this song into my paper because it describes the flowering of hope even in the midst of great oppression. The oppression in the song being extremely relevant to the story of a globalized world. The Berlin Wall, the rise of communism, and the systematic oppression of millions of people under communist, totalitarian regimes is not just a problem of the past, but a problem lurking in every future. Just as the Western powers stood by, stymied, when the Wall was built, so too is the US government standing by as a second wall is built to keep wealth and eventually education from the hands of many. Uneducated people are easier to lead, quicker to believe lies, and easier to please (as Rome knew all too well). Whether deliberately cauterizing the public or not, these big-money entities are confusing the populace with conflated realities, half-truths and fear-mongering. The propaganda masquerading as news on FOX is not entirely different from the state run media of the Eastern Bloc, and is just one reason of many why educating the populace is of paramount importance.  

Political ranting aside, Bowie paints a picture of a very normal couple trapped in an enemy country. He calls the listener to identify with them, humanizing—not demonizing—the struggles and threat of communism. In playing on the listeners sympathies, he is able to generate compassion, as he strains to sing out the final chorus. Instead of fearing the other, we come to have pity and sympathy for the other. The effect of this song directly relates to Palmer’s message in the ‘Healing the Heart of Democracy’. The people in a democracy need to care about each other, not be fearful of each other. We need to accept and acknowledge that, though strangers, we hold common ground, and should be able to help one-another. Healing the Heart of Democracy must start with compassion.

 

 

The Logo:

            For the Logo I choose three images. The first, an image of a Westerner giving his shoes to someone in poverty, while the recipient appears overjoyed, embarrassed, and grateful. The second, a bumper sticker that spells out “Coexist” using symbols from a variety of religions. I have this bumper sticker on my car, and I cannot for the life of me understand why it angers many people. Since when has tolerance become unfashionable? Religious tolerance is the main ingredient necessary in creating a vibrant and loving global world. Finally, the last image is another bumper sticker (I want to put on my car) that quotes the Dalai Lama, “Compassion is the radicalism of our time”. I agree with Palmer and the Dalai Lama, compassion and love are the verbs needed to make any positive traction in the global culture. Palmer uses a quote from Karen Armstrong’s book “Charter of Compassion” that struck me as a radical departure from the diet of superiority, exceptionalism and hate most Americans are fed.

“The principle of compassion lies at the heart of all religious, ethical, and spiritual
traditions, calling us always to treat all others as we wish to be treated ourselves. Compassion impels us to work tirelessly to alleviate the suffering of our fellow creatures, the dethrone ourselves from the centre of the world and put another there, and to honour the inviolable sanctity of every single human being, treating everybody, without exception, with absolute justice, equity and respect” (29, Palmer)

 

I wrote it in my journal and plan to keep it with me.

 

 

 

 

 

David Bowie: Changes Lyrics
Songwriters: Wilson, Eleanor / Lorentzen, Mari / Reed, Caroline / Ellis, Simon / Rohen, Emma

Chorus: Ch-ch-ch-ch-changes (turn and face the strain) Ch-ch-changes Don't tell them to grow up and out of it Ch-ch-ch-ch-changes (turn and face the strain) Ch-ch-changes Where’s your shame You’ve left us up to our necks in it Time may change me But you can't trace time Coda: Strange fascination, fascinating me Ah changes are taking the pace I’m going through Chorus: Ch-ch-ch-ch-changes (turn and face the strain) Ch-ch-changes Oh, look out you rock n rollers Ch-ch-ch-ch-changes (turn and face the strain) Ch-ch-changes Pretty soon now you're gonna get a little older Time may change me But I can't trace time I said that time may change me But I can't trace time

Versus I:

Oh yeah
Mm
Still don't know what I was waiting for
And my time was running wild
A million dead-end streets and
Every time I thought I'd got it made
It seemed the taste was not so sweet
So I turned myself to face me
But I’ve never caught a glimpse
Of how the others must see the faker
I’m much too fast to take that test

Chorus:

Ch-ch-ch-ch-changes
(turn and face the strain)
Ch-ch-changes
Don't want to be a richer man
Ch-ch-ch-ch-changes
(turn and face the strain)
Ch-ch-changes
Just gonna have to be a different man
Time may change me
But I can't trace time

Versus II:

Changes lyrics © Kobalt Music Publishing Ltd., Sony/ATV Music Publishing LLC, Universal Music Publishing Group, CHRYSALIS MUSIC GROUP, TINTORETTO MUSIC, EMI Music Publishing

I watch the ripples change their size
But never leave the stream
Of warm impermanence
So the days float through my eyes
But still the days seem the same
And these children that you spit on
As they try to change their worlds
Are immune to your consultations
They're quite aware of what they're going through

---

[1] Zakaria says we are No. 1 in obesity, but I took the liberty to change that in light of the following article, “Mexico surpasses US in Obesity Levels” www.telegraph.co.uk, 11 July 2013