Throughout viewing the classroom segments, I could not help but notice a certain geographic pattern. Some classrooms were highly equiped with computers and technology. One classroom had GIS set up and ready to go. Other classrooms were limited to simple paper maps and the white board at the front of the classroom. The have and have nots as far as resources go are a direct phenomena of geography.
There will always be disparities among schools, particularly as long as they are highly funded by property taxes. And this is where the geography comes in. When we link education to such a thing as property values, then perhaps we are enabling a vicious cycle. If we trluy want some some sort of classroom parity across our country, or at least across states, then the system of funding must change. If we do not wish to end the cycle, then wealthier sections of Denver (an example from the series), and less wealthy areas like Alabama and urban Philadelphia (also from the series) will remain unequal as far as the teaching resources that are available.
I wonder if the producers of the series intended for this by including diverse geographic U.S. locations. For me, the disparity showed up regardless of intent. Just something I geography related that I noticed in the series and wanted to mention.
Channel-talkgeography mailing list
Received on Fri May 2 12:30:40 2008