Only in France could university students go on strike, but on strike they have gone. Tables and chairs have been piled in front of every building door on campus, guarded by students sipping tiny cups of espresso. The gates have been symbolically been chained shut though access to the campus is still possible through side gates and huge spray painted signs litter the campus indicating rallies during the day. Strikes have been spreading across campuses nation wide for several weeks now, but it was only yesterday that our students voted to shut down our university. For how long? Who knows, until the student government decides that classes should resume I suppose. My grammar class yesterday was interrupted by yelling students and fire alarms until they threatened to lock us in the building, which brought our work to a rather abrupt halt.
I suppose that I should back up and explain why the students are so upset. It's important to understand though, how the French university system differs from ours. In France at the end of high school all students sit a test called the Baccalaureate or le Bac. There are several types, which specialize in various subjects. Once a Bac has been obtained the student then has the right to attend any university in France, completely subsidized by the government. All universities in France have the same funding, the same status and the same opportunities. Unfortunately these are not huge and in my experience most higher education establishments in France are shabby and poorly equipped at best. The classes I have attended are unorganized and impart little to no valuable knowledge. Even my visit to Alex's College of Engineering was depressing and the students spent the better part of the hour chatting and joking about women. In fact most French students go to university because they have nothing better to do. The government provides extensive subsides and discounts to students on everything from rent to museum fees. Since the unemployment rate for, even degreed, young adults in France is shockingly high, many postpone job hunting with classes. The problem is many students put zero effort into their studies and roughly 50% of first year French university students fail their exams at the end of the year. Though they generally have the chance to retake their tests, most don't, and in effect squander millions of Euro (in the form of €7,500 a student a year) for the French government and its citizens each year.
For the past 20 years French administrations have been trying to reform the university system with zero success, yet during his campaign Sarkozy declared he would. Last summer he passed his first education law giving French universities the option to privatize. This has huge implications. In effect it will allow individual universities to begin to draw in outside funds to better equip their campuses, hire superior teachers and increase opportunities to their students. Obviously some universities will have better success in this than others and as a result will begin to stratify the higher education system in France, much like in the United State. Think: a degree from Stanford is "worth" more than a degree from Southern Oregon University. Currently in France no such stratification exists in France. However, if it were to start, it is likely that the schools would also begin to implement screening processes much like our college applications that would try to weed out students that may not be serious about a degree. While to my American sensibilities this doesn't seem completely senseless, it is considered a direct attack on the rights of French students to freely attend any university of their choice after high school.
Unfortunately their solution is: refusing to go to class. I think this illustrates how simply figurative their protest is. If the right to education is so important, why refuse what you currently have to show your distain for what you might get. That's like saying I'm not going to eat lunch because I don't like what you're serving for dinner. To me it seems that perhaps the most reasonable, possibly more advantageous route would be to discuss dinner while eating lunch. It also seems important to consider the fact that those students who actually care enough to fight for their education are probably the students that haven't much to worry about when it comes to passing exams. I'm puzzled. It's almost as though they are fighting to maintain a certain level of No-Child-Left-Behind-ness in their higher education system. I suppose though if you were suddenly to put admission standards on public high schools in the United States there would be an equal outcry. Since the University system in France is government subsidized it is essentially the same thing. On the other hand, our high school education, in my humble and possibly limited opinion, is a bit more effective than what I've seen of French universities. So maybe Sarkozy hasn't approached the issue is the most direct of ways, and his motives may be more financial than educational, but the end result is worth considering.
Did I really just spout a bunch of anti-socialist propaganda? Me, the left-wing, opportunity for all, equality rocks, pro social services, Oregonian? I suppose, but I think I'm begging to see, that like for most things there is a happy medium. Oh gosh, no I'm not becoming a centrist either. Is it possible to have equal opportunity, or universal access to public services and not expect mediocrity? France has managed to build an outstanding socialized Health Care System, but now it's on the verge of collapse due to bankruptcy, and don't expect anything to happen in a hurry. So how do you encourage taxpayers to be interested in giving over even more of their pay check for education when 50% of what's being currently spent is 100% wasted? Is it wrong to expect a level of excellence to attend a place of learning, but where do you draw the line? University, High school, Middle School, Elementary School, Pre-School? I think we'll all agree we've hit rock bottom when there are admissions standards on pre-schools (yes, I'm ignoring financial limitations for the moment as they don't apply in France). Because somewhere, you have to consider the fact that some students fail for reasons not related to motivation, and they deserve an education too. Students in inner-city schools, or students that simply don't have parents that taught them the alphabet before pre-school (maybe they don't even speak English) would generally not make the cut in an "intelligence" based admission process at the pre-school level, yet I do not believe these kids are less intelligent or necessarily less capable than the child of what we consider educated, affluent parents. Education is (or should be) a right, and it should be available to all who desire it. So how then, do you judge motivation? Make students take polygraph tests to enroll in university. Are you sure you're going to study this next year? Do you
really want to be a student? Give any American high school student the same test upon entering high school and she'll reply, "No!", but we'll all agree in the same breath that high school is important, education is important, K-12 education is mandatory! So maybe the French should prosecute flunking students, that would cut down on the number of un-motivated students. Right. But the bigger question still remains: When is it acceptable to forgo equality in favor of excellence?
I suppose that I should back up and explain why the students are so upset. It's important to understand though, how the French university system differs from ours. In France at the end of high school all students sit a test called the Baccalaureate or le Bac. There are several types, which specialize in various subjects. Once a Bac has been obtained the student then has the right to attend any university in France, completely subsidized by the government. All universities in France have the same funding, the same status and the same opportunities. Unfortunately these are not huge and in my experience most higher education establishments in France are shabby and poorly equipped at best. The classes I have attended are unorganized and impart little to no valuable knowledge. Even my visit to Alex's College of Engineering was depressing and the students spent the better part of the hour chatting and joking about women. In fact most French students go to university because they have nothing better to do. The government provides extensive subsides and discounts to students on everything from rent to museum fees. Since the unemployment rate for, even degreed, young adults in France is shockingly high, many postpone job hunting with classes. The problem is many students put zero effort into their studies and roughly 50% of first year French university students fail their exams at the end of the year. Though they generally have the chance to retake their tests, most don't, and in effect squander millions of Euro (in the form of €7,500 a student a year) for the French government and its citizens each year. 
For the past 20 years French administrations have been trying to reform the university system with zero success, yet during his campaign Sarkozy declared he would. Last summer he passed his first education law giving French universities the option to privatize. This has huge implications. In effect it will allow individual universities to begin to draw in outside funds to better equip their campuses, hire superior teachers and increase opportunities to their students. Obviously some universities will have better success in this than others and as a result will begin to stratify the higher education system in France, much like in the United State. Think: a degree from Stanford is "worth" more than a degree from Southern Oregon University. Currently in France no such stratification exists in France. However, if it were to start, it is likely that the schools would also begin to implement screening processes much like our college applications that would try to weed out students that may not be serious about a degree. While to my American sensibilities this doesn't seem completely senseless, it is considered a direct attack on the rights of French students to freely attend any university of their choice after high school. 
Unfortunately their solution is: refusing to go to class. I think this illustrates how simply figurative their protest is. If the right to education is so important, why refuse what you currently have to show your distain for what you might get. That's like saying I'm not going to eat lunch because I don't like what you're serving for dinner. To me it seems that perhaps the most reasonable, possibly more advantageous route would be to discuss dinner while eating lunch. It also seems important to consider the fact that those students who actually care enough to fight for their education are probably the students that haven't much to worry about when it comes to passing exams. I'm puzzled. It's almost as though they are fighting to maintain a certain level of No-Child-Left-Behind-ness in their higher education system. I suppose though if you were suddenly to put admission standards on public high schools in the United States there would be an equal outcry. Since the University system in France is government subsidized it is essentially the same thing. On the other hand, our high school education, in my humble and possibly limited opinion, is a bit more effective than what I've seen of French universities. So maybe Sarkozy hasn't approached the issue is the most direct of ways, and his motives may be more financial than educational, but the end result is worth considering. 
Did I really just spout a bunch of anti-socialist propaganda? Me, the left-wing, opportunity for all, equality rocks, pro social services, Oregonian? I suppose, but I think I'm begging to see, that like for most things there is a happy medium. Oh gosh, no I'm not becoming a centrist either. Is it possible to have equal opportunity, or universal access to public services and not expect mediocrity? France has managed to build an outstanding socialized Health Care System, but now it's on the verge of collapse due to bankruptcy, and don't expect anything to happen in a hurry. So how do you encourage taxpayers to be interested in giving over even more of their pay check for education when 50% of what's being currently spent is 100% wasted? Is it wrong to expect a level of excellence to attend a place of learning, but where do you draw the line? University, High school, Middle School, Elementary School, Pre-School? I think we'll all agree we've hit rock bottom when there are admissions standards on pre-schools (yes, I'm ignoring financial limitations for the moment as they don't apply in France). Because somewhere, you have to consider the fact that some students fail for reasons not related to motivation, and they deserve an education too. Students in inner-city schools, or students that simply don't have parents that taught them the alphabet before pre-school (maybe they don't even speak English) would generally not make the cut in an "intelligence" based admission process at the pre-school level, yet I do not believe these kids are less intelligent or necessarily less capable than the child of what we consider educated, affluent parents. Education is (or should be) a right, and it should be available to all who desire it. So how then, do you judge motivation? Make students take polygraph tests to enroll in university. Are you sure you're going to study this next year? Do you really want to be a student? Give any American high school student the same test upon entering high school and she'll reply, "No!", but we'll all agree in the same breath that high school is important, education is important, K-12 education is mandatory! So maybe the French should prosecute flunking students, that would cut down on the number of un-motivated students. Right. But the bigger question still remains: When is it acceptable to forgo equality in favor of excellence?
No comments:
Post a Comment