2 Million Minutes: Is there really a crisis?

“When I was growing up, my parents used to say to me: ‘Finish your dinner — people in China are starving.’ I, by contrast, find myself wanting to say to my daughters: ‘Finish your homework — people in China and India are starving for your job.’” -- from Thomas Friedman's The World is Flat

First, let me thank you all for your attention to the film this week. You probably know my answer to the question in the title of this post. I do think there is a crisis - a quiet crisis that is more dangerous than any crisis we face as a country. But this blogging session is not about what I think. It is your opportunity to give your opinion about 2 Million Minutes, about the so-called crisis in American education, and your feelings about your experience with American education.

The film 2 Million Minutes tells the story of how six students use their 2,000,000 minutes (4 yrs) of high school. It quickly becomes obvious that the two students from India and the two from China spend far more time in school and studying than the two students from the United States. While all six students went on to college, the Indian and Chinese students were disappointed that they did not get into their first choice of schools. What does this say about them? Are they weaker students than the film portrayed? Or did they just set their sights higher than the American students?

So, how does all of this relate to you?
Are you concerned or alarmed by what you saw? Do you think that American students like you should be doing something different? Should school officials and teachers being doing something different to help improve how American students are performing?

Is there really a crisis?
You may think that all this talk about a crisis in American education is just dead wrong. What do you think? Is there really a crisis? Do you think that you'll be prepared to compete for the really good jobs when you graduate from college?

Do you think American students spend enough time in school and studying? Do we spend too much time on other things - sports, TV, video games, etc.? Do you think that you should make changes in the amount of time that you study?

Regardless of how you feel about 2 Million Minutes, there is a lot to talk about and debate. I want this to be the most active blogging session so far. Read all of the comments that have been made, enter your own comment, then come back often throughout this week to continue the conversation. The only thing that I ask, is that you keep the conversation thoughtful and intelligent. Be sure to give reasons for the opinions you offer.



Before commenting, take a few minutes to watch the following video:



Helpful Links
USA Today article about 2 Million Minutes

Boston Globe - My lazy American students

This session will end at 12 am on Monday, April 2.


Student Sleeping image from Flickr

Debriefing "12 Angry Men"

I hope that you enjoyed our viewing of 12 Angry Men.  As you know, using two and a half class periods to watch a movie is not something that I take lightly.  However, I believe that there are many elements making up this film that make it a great investment of time.  Your only grade related to the movie will be comments that you make on this blog post.  Make your comments thoughtful and after commenting check back to continue the debate/conversation.  Here is a little background on the movie:

From http://plays.about.com/od/plays/a/twelveangry.htm

At the beginning of Twelve Angry Men by Reginald Rose, the jury has just finished listening to six days of trial proceedings. A nineteen-year old man is on trial for the murder of his father. The defendant has a criminal record (and a lot of circumstantial evidence piled against him). The defendant, if found guilty, would receive a mandatory death penalty.

The jury is sent to a hot, crowded room to deliberate. Before any formal discussion, they cast a vote. Eleven of the jurors vote “guilty.” Only one juror votes “not guilty.” That juror, who is known in the script as Juror #8 is the protagonist of the play. As the tempers flare and the arguments begin, the audience learns about each member of the jury. And slowly but surely, Juror #8 guides the others toward a verdict of “Not Guilty.”

 Click here for a list and description of the 12 jurors.

Here are a few questions to discuss and debate:

• Which characters base their decisions on prejudice?
• Does Juror #8, or any other character, exercise “reverse discrimination”?
• Should this trial have been a hung jury? Why / why not?
• What are the most persuasive pieces of evidence in favor of the defense? Or the prosecution?
•  What does the movie teach about the art of persuasion?

Use these questions to stimulate thought and drive the discussion.  I look forward to reading what you have to say.

The commenting will end at the end of Friday, March 9.