Chicago Politics and Public Education

Week eight’s class was more of two classes put together.  The first half of class we discussed the popular topic of The Party Machine, and the second half of class we had a guest speaker who discussed with us topics in the Chicago Public Schools.  I know both of my paragraphs are brief, but I found both topics of the week eight class very interesting and wanted to include them both.

In one of our readings, Swanstrom and Judd introduce how the party machine was able to begin, “the emergence of a mass electorate, and industrialization,” (pg. 3).  These two factors did make it easier to control the politics in the city, however I think he skips over some key issues during the beginning of the party machine.  First, women did not have the same rights as men, and didn’t even get a vote until the early 20^th century.  Second, African-Americans were facing prejudice and discrimination and for the most part were not voting either.  This means that the party machine not only appeals most to white men, but was put together, run by, and voted on by white men.  The party machine has changed greatly since women and African-Americans gained the right to vote (and is not for the most part extinct as Judd and Swanstrom stated) and has been looked at on a more equal (but not completely equal) level.  If the party machine had started with such equality, do you think it would have made the same decisions and had the power that it did when it started?

Now on the complete opposite side of the spectrum, there was our guest speaker on education in Chicago.  Although I found what he said to be relevant and interesting, I had to disagree with several of the topics he brought up.  I do believe that a teacher’s union is important so that good teachers are able to keep their jobs and so that they get decent pay, benefits, and support staff.  However, I also believe that tenure is a horrible program.  There are assessments made every year for teachers, but it is based on one class that the principal or administration sit in on.  A horrible teacher can teach one or two good lessons to keep their job, and blow off actually teaching the rest of the year.  A merit based program would not only keep a closer eye on these teachers, it would reward teachers who go above and beyond what they are expected to do.  Now I would like to mention that the information that I speak about is mainly from District 202 in Plainfield, so not everything I’m saying maybe 100% true for Chicago, but I do believe there are enough similarities.