Get Schooled

By Karen Armsby

December 30, 2005 11:04 AM | Link to this

Earning a desk sounds like a unique way to open the student’s eyes to the fact that not everything in life is given to you. With hard work, attention, and good performance you earn your way in life.

On the other hand the group punishment concept completely negates the earned concept, because no matter how hard you try, how much you have accomplished, or how well you behaved, someone else can have your earned rights taken away.

Sounds a lot like our taxation system, doesn’t it?

By Carrie

December 30, 2005 12:01 PM | Link to this

The concept of being punished as a team lets each individual know that they are part of a team. Even though they may not want to meet the standards for themselves they will try to do it for the team. On the flip side, if someone is having trouble meeting a standard then the team will rally around and support that individual until they can stand on their own again. Any retaliation against the individual would result in more group punishment, but it could happen. I would imagine there would be words exchanged and a lot of “Thanks a lot, so and so�, but that would be a motivator for meeting expectations and standards in the future. I would be interested to hear from some of the students who went through this program and have graduated. They would probably have the best perspective on this type of school program.

By Lee

December 30, 2005 12:06 PM | Link to this

So this school buys into a program called “Knowledge is Power Program” in which individual achievement is not as important as group achievement. Sounds like what they are teaching is Socialism. Anybody read any good Karl Marx books lately?

Just teach. Leave the game playing on the ballfield. Quit buying into every half-baked program that comes along. Oh yeah, and quit wasting my tax money..

Jeez, and people ask me why I send my kids to private school…..

By Lee

December 30, 2005 12:22 PM | Link to this

In the original post, it said this program was thought up by a bunch of basketball players. Yeah, now there’s a bunch of academic achievers….

The average graduation rate for college basketball players is what, about 10%? It wouldn’t be that high if not for Duke…

By Carrie

December 30, 2005 12:39 PM | Link to this

Actually, corporations spend millions of dollars per year on programs to promote teamwork and most bonus programs have both company and team performance components so this is not just a bunch of basketball players coming up with a half-baked idea. Discipline is very important in all aspects of our lives. Also, many people posting on this blog have said that the military could deal with a lot of the behavioral problems in schools. This concept is taking those ideas and putting them into practice.

How is an 80% graduation rate a waste of tax dollars?

By Carrie

December 30, 2005 12:44 PM | Link to this

One correction, 80% have gone on to college so I would assume even more actually graduated. Also, the article did not mention who the basketball players were (NBA or college or which division in college). Many high school and college athletes have pursued academic interests and used what they learned on those teams to become very successful leaders. Nike has run an entire campaign around encouraging our daughters to participate in sports in order to improve their self esteem and leadership skills.

By Scholar Dog

December 30, 2005 12:59 PM | Link to this

My child attends Kipp Ways Academy and I don’t have a problem with my child earning his desk, chair or school polo. They earn these things by completing school work, home work and showing discipline. I find that in the traditional APS schools they can care less if our kids get it are not. If they get it fine, if not they are sent to alternative schools. Hats off to our Kipp Ways Scholars.

By Ernest

December 30, 2005 01:05 PM | Link to this

If a parent buys into this for their children, that is their perogative. One can’t argue the successes this program has had. I’m personally against ‘group punishments’ and would not put my children into a program/setting that uses this. Children have no control over who is in their group and the ‘motivation’ others would bring. The group can only be as strong as the ‘weakest link’. Asking them to ‘police’ themselves can be counterproductive. To each his own.

By Jake

December 30, 2005 01:07 PM | Link to this

Earning a chair sounds fine, but I don’t like the group punishment. I hear you Carrie but my daughter gets that team stuff where it belongs, in her case on her soccer teams. It sounds to me like using peer pressure to influence behavior, perhaps trading one evil for another. If I remember correctly, peer pressure was one of the bad things about those high school years.

By Lee

December 30, 2005 01:10 PM | Link to this

Carrie, Nike has run an ad campaign encouraging our daughters to participate in sports in order to sell more stuff.

Corporations encourage teamwork because they have a common goal of making more profits.

No, every year, I hear about our schools adopting a “new” reading program, or math program, or whatever program a central office paper pusher gets sold on. They spend thousands of dollars on these programs only to scrap them in a year or two. Sometimes it doesn’t take that long.

Learning is an individual effort. I expect the teacher to be pushing my child to achieve her highest level, not tutoring little Johnny because the whole group has to wait until Johnny gets a clue.

Which, if schools would go back to grouping classes by ability level, they wouldn’t have to wait, they entire class could be moving at a steady pace…

By Carrie

December 30, 2005 01:22 PM | Link to this

So your child is not in school so that he/she can find a job and make money in the future. Is he/she not being trained to work and function in corporate america? Again, this school is obviously not for your child if you feel this strongly against it. And the Nike campaign, in addition to MANY other non-profit campaigns encourages our daughters to participate in sports because it benefits them in the classroom. Studies have proven that girls tend to not speak up in class as much as the boys so we should encourage their self esteem in any way we can.

They used to seperate classes by ability level, but too many parents think their child is brilliant and will pitch a fit if their child is not in the gifted group so it doesn’t work.

By Carrie

December 30, 2005 01:23 PM | Link to this

Jake - check with your daughter…I’m sure she utilizes what she learns on the soccer field in many aspects of her life.

By Carrie

December 30, 2005 01:25 PM | Link to this

Lee- I am still eagerly waiting to learn how the 80% rate of students going on to college is a waste of tax dollars?

By scuse me

December 30, 2005 01:30 PM | Link to this

I’m with you on this one Lee. I can’t imagine any parent with an IQ of over 60 buying into this group concept of educating their little darlings unless the kids are dumb as dirt too.

By Carrie

December 30, 2005 01:33 PM | Link to this

I also disagree with the assessment that learning is an individual effort. This feeds into the me, me, me concept. No one person can do everything well and that is when a team becomes very important. Isn’t beneficial for the team members who are stronger in Math to help the team members who are stronger in English which would lead them all to move on as a stronger unit?

Will still feel as strongly about individual achievement when the school tells you that your child failed a math test because little Johnny was ready to move on and your child just couldn’t get it? But don’t worry, she is excellent in Geography and probably won’t use math too much anyway?

By Carrie

December 30, 2005 01:35 PM | Link to this

I am totally open to any opposing view on this as long as it can be backed up with a fact or two……or even a logical argument that does not involve insults or name calling. If you have to resort to that then you probably could benefit from some time at this exact type of school.

By scuse me

December 30, 2005 01:36 PM | Link to this

Hey sweetheart, are you just wanting to argue? ;-)

We could mass produce a whole generation of drones by providing group education.

By Carrie

December 30, 2005 01:36 PM | Link to this

And saying your an idiot or your IQ is 60 is not a logical argument. Also, if it helps at all, my IQ is high and I am a mensa member.

By danielle

December 30, 2005 01:40 PM | Link to this

I like the idea. Being a high school teacher, I try very hard to get my students to make the “right choices” every day. In my “world” one kid might not care if the whole class gets in trouble because there is always a friend to back him up…. or a parent to call the school and complain about the teacher. But KIPP seems to have the system where the child won’t get any support if he choses not to listen. In other words, the student is in a position to make the right choice to be accepted. I like the idea and wish I could observe their teaching first hand. Sounds a lot like the movie “Coach Carter”. Great movie and message behind it.

By scuse me

December 30, 2005 01:45 PM | Link to this

Here’s my problem,

I have an extremely gifted child. He is quite capable of producing his own work as has been demonstrated by teachers asking to keep it to show future classes how the projects should look when completed.

When given a group or team project he no longer controls his own fate or final grade. If teamed with kids that don’t give a rats behind his grade is controlled by them.

So someone please explain how this is right.

By Jake

December 30, 2005 01:49 PM | Link to this

Sure she does Carrie. Seven years ago I had a somewhat negative impression about the whole ‘soccer mom’ scene. Now I know better, it’s been wonderful for her in many ways. But I’m with Lee on separating the kids, not lumping them all together, for academics and behavior. My daughter has also benefitted from being in gifted class since 3rd grade and having more opportunity to work at her own pace. My corporate experience is most of that team stuff was a fad in the 80’s that largely disappeared because it didn’t work, and it was replaced by individual accountability. Punishing me, or my daughter, for someone else’s bad behavior or mistake just doesn’t seem very fair to me. And troublemakers should be removed from polite society and the learning environment.

By Carrie

December 30, 2005 01:50 PM | Link to this

I’m glad you brought up the issue of drones. This actually promotes the opposite. It acknowledges each individual and how their individuality and strengths promote the greater good.

I work in a team environment. I have a coworker and friend who I have worked with at multiple companies for many years. We each have strengths and weaknesses that compliment one another. We are also in direct competition with each other. We are the same gender, age and education level. This could foster an environment of hostility, but it doesn’t. We both wanted the opportunity to manage a project, but she was given the job first. Instead of whining about it, I helped her when she needed it so when my turn came to do this she did the same for me. We are both 31 and make well into the six figures because of this type of behavior. Clients ask for us on their projects even years after we worked with them on something else because we got the job done well and were pleasant to be around. I have run into people who put themselves and their glory first and, many times, they annoy everyone and people refuse to work with them. Clients have even sent quite a few home.

By scuse me

December 30, 2005 01:55 PM | Link to this

Not every one is cut out to be a team player.

This is generally true of some of the brighter kids. So you really think they should be held back for the benefit of a few kids that may be either stupid or lazy?

By Carrie

December 30, 2005 01:57 PM | Link to this

Okay, so both of your children are gifted…..in every subject? Wow, typically kids are stronger in one area than another, but here we have not one, but TWO who are gifted in everything they do. I have no problem seperating children by ability. I was in the gifted program, too. Originally, they had advanced classes, but, according to parents, around 90% of my school was advanced so they created the AG (Academically Gifted) group. Now only about 70% fell into this category. When we got to our senior year many of us placed into AP courses. Shockingly, those of us who placed into AP Calculus and Chemistry were still in the AG English class.

Your children may be very gifted in many ways, but there will always be something they need help to do. And helping others is not only a trait that I hope we ALL want to instill in our children, but it is a great way to reinforce concepts and build self esteem.

By scuse me

December 30, 2005 02:00 PM | Link to this

Pretty much.

By Carrie

December 30, 2005 02:01 PM | Link to this

Your child will become a very lonely person if they are taught that they are above everyone else and should always put themselves above any greater good. They may be very smart, but they may not be well liked.

By Carrie

December 30, 2005 02:04 PM | Link to this

Typically, in my experience in the corporate world, those who think they are so bright and aren’t cut out to be a team player don’t do very well. And I’m not a big Ra-Ra, go team person, but I do know that if I don’t get my work done then others may suffer and that is not fair to them.

By Who

December 30, 2005 02:05 PM | Link to this

Carrie - You’re (not your) a MENSA member who can’t write a correct English sentence? Really now, you’re (not your) kidding, right?

By Carrie

December 30, 2005 02:09 PM | Link to this

Who-As I stated earlier not everyone is perfect or gifted in every area. This just proves it - even a Mensa member can make mistakes.

By Karen Armsby

December 30, 2005 02:09 PM | Link to this

There are pros and cons to using a teamwork approach in school. I have three college kids who all had team projects throughout K-12. Some teams worked very well, some not so well becuase there were one or two slackers who would not do their parts, and some teams were a disaster when they all let the smart kid(s) do the work. My middle daughter is standing next to me and says that teams worked well when students were ability grouped, i.e. when the gifted kids were all on the same team it worked and when the general population of kids is on a team then they worked well together.

I don’t believe in group punishment at all because I have known some little sociopaths who in elementary school had no sense of guilt or shame for causing problems, acting out, and ruining it for everyone. Peer pressure just didn’t work on them and the rest of the class was demoralized.

Children should be rewarded and punished individually for their good behavior. Children should not be made to correct, instruct or punish other children for their bad behavior. That is the adult teacher’s job.

By scuse me

December 30, 2005 02:09 PM | Link to this

Carrie,

Are you familar with the Scouting program (BSA)?

BSA provides yound men the opportunity to work individually on advancement and merit badges. They are rewarded on an individual basis as well.

They learn team skills while performing tasks that require more people.

Both are critical skills for a young man to develop into the kind of young men that Scouting turns out.

I’m not advocating not teaching team concepts. I do advocate rewarding students based on individual merit.

By Karen Armsby

December 30, 2005 02:11 PM | Link to this

I meant rewarded and punished individually for thier good or bad behavior.

By Jake

December 30, 2005 02:12 PM | Link to this

Gee Carrie I’m confused, what is it really about? The emotional joy of hitting one out for the team, the spiritual joy of corporate success and a six figure income, or trying to control behavior through peer pressure? If I were goal setting for my daughter, the only intrinsic goal would be happiness (are there any others?). Academic achievement is a means to that end, better grades and SAT scores mean more college opportunity. Good college with good grades means lots of job opportunities, so you can do what you love and make a decent living doing it. Oh and FYI mine has excellent verbal skills and makes district honors band, but she really has to work at the math to do well.

By Jake

December 30, 2005 02:19 PM | Link to this

I’m starting to get it, you just have some sort of strong fundmental belief in the greater glory of the team. I once made 152 on Stanford-Binet, but I never had any interest in JOINING MENSA. As scuse me pointed out, the team thing just isn’t for everyone. And I wouldn’t describe myself as lonely either.

By scuse me

December 30, 2005 02:19 PM | Link to this

Carrie,

Did you fill out a group or team admissions for college?

Didn’t think so. It’s still pretty much the same, based on individual merit.

By Carrie

December 30, 2005 02:21 PM | Link to this

Again, I think we are educating our children to become productive members of society. This will include becoming gainfully employed at some point, correct? In work, you will not always be teamed with peope who have the same level of intelligence and you will have to cope. This might mean that you will do all the work on a project and share all the credit.

Personally, I get satisfaction from doing my job well, getting along well with 90% of my coworkers and having built great friendships while working with people over the years. I also enjoy a nice salary, but my point (that I think was missed) is that neither of us would have done as well had we not aligned ourselves together to support each other. I get spiritual satisfaction from my church, friends and family.

By Carrie

December 30, 2005 02:25 PM | Link to this

I wasn’t trying to indicate that I am so much smarter than anyone when I mentioned Mensa. Scuse me spent a better part of yesterday being very condescending to me and calling me “sweetheart” in order to put me in my place. He also stated only someone with a 60 IQ would think this is a good idea and I was merely pointing out that my IQ is much higher than 60 and I like the idea.

I apologize if I have offended anyone.

By Karen Armsby

December 30, 2005 02:26 PM | Link to this

Jake and Carrie, Aren’t you mixing two concepts here, teamwork, and team leading?

Teamwork goes hand in hand with individual preparation and work. Teamwork is used in athletics, in the performing arts, in the classroom and in business. However when one team member is not performing up to potential and despite the group’s best efforts, that team member never contributes their fair share, then it is seldom the decision or the responsibility of the group to correct, punish, or exclude that member.

There is usually a team organizer and leader, who is the classroom teacher, the coach, the manager, the supervisor, the director, in other words SOMEONE IN CHARGE who puts the teams together, and keeps them operating smoothly .

I think kids can and should learn teamwork and cooperation, skills they will use in many ways throughout life. But the team leader, the teacher should be the disciplinarian, not the kids.

By scuse me

December 30, 2005 02:28 PM | Link to this

Personally I’m happy for you that your life is so complete. Understand However, that not everyone would be satisfied with that life.

Individualisim is every bit as important to them as your group thing is to you.

Actually, I guess I’m kinda that way. I’m not lonley! I can party with the best of them but when I’m working just leave me alone and let me do the job I’m capable of.

By Carrie

December 30, 2005 02:31 PM | Link to this

In my work environment we have had people that don’t do their share. Typically, it takes a while, but after enough people voice complaints and concerns that person is down sized or let go. It may not happen on that particular project, but they will generally wash out.

By Carrie

December 30, 2005 02:34 PM | Link to this

Again, as I stated before, this type of school may not be for everyone. I have read a few of these blogs this past week and a number of people have stated that the disruptive students and at risk youth would benefit from the military. This school is putting that concept into practice so I would think more of you would support it.

By scuse me

December 30, 2005 02:35 PM | Link to this

Condescending?

Let’s not start that again.

I apologize if I had offended you.

And what I actually said today isn’t what you think you read either.

I said ” I can’t imagine any parent with an IQ of over 60 buying into this group concept of educating their little darlings unless the kids are dumb as dirt too.”

I did not say “only someone with a 60 IQ would think this is a good idea”

Reading for comprehension must not be one of your strong suits either.

By Jake

December 30, 2005 02:37 PM | Link to this

Oops. What about the other 10% you don’t get along with so well Carrie? Could they be the same people that were disruptive in class 10 or 20 years ago? The ones I don’t want interferring with my daughter’s education? I think you should suspend all your work activity until all 100% of you follow the rules and bond well. Isn’t that what you’ve been defending, the Kipp Way?

By Carrie

December 30, 2005 02:41 PM | Link to this

You’re correct, scuse me (see Who - I learned from you when you slowed down long enough to correct me) - I chose not to quote you and paraphrased instead.

To my point again, I have an IQ over 60 and I like the concept. I can only hope my children will be as dumb as me.

By Carrie

December 30, 2005 02:43 PM | Link to this

I don’t have to get along with everyone to work with them. There are people I don’t like, but I learned to put those differences aside to achieve our goals. That is the Kipp way.

By the way, thank you so much for helping me make my point so well.

By scuse me

December 30, 2005 02:45 PM | Link to this

EXCELLENT

but speaking of the little hellions, there’s a link from education news.org today to http://www.texaspolicy.com/pdf/2005-12-DAEPs-pb.pdf

It’s a good read on DAEP’s

Take the time to read it

By Carrie

December 30, 2005 02:46 PM | Link to this

Scuse me - I just caught your last line about my reading comprehension. When I took the GMAT that was actually where I scored the highest (top 2%) so it has definitely improved since high school.

By Jake

December 30, 2005 02:52 PM | Link to this

Good point Karen, but I don’t believe I was mixing the two. When someone makes an error at my daughter’s soccer practice, the entire team often has to run a lap or do crunches. That’s fine because they need to learn inter-dependence to succeed on the soccer field. When someone is disruptive in my daughter’s class, I want that person removed so there isn’t the constant interference with her learning. The original post said “if one student gets in trouble, the whole class is punished.” Again I submit that’s not teamwork or team building. That’s using peer pressure as a substitute for adult team leading to modify inappropriate behavior. Behave or the team is punished with the implication that the team will then punish you. While this may be very effective in the short run, as would shoving a .357 down the little darling’s throat, I believe it’s ethically and psychologically inappropriate.

By scuse me

December 30, 2005 03:19 PM | Link to this

Wondered why you’d let that one slip by. LOL

By Carrie

December 30, 2005 03:49 PM | Link to this

I don’t think the concept of peer pressure, in and of itself, is a bad thing. There is both good (peer pressure to abstain from drugs) and bad (peer pressure to try drugs). The school is using the concept of peer pressure to foster good behavior. For example, if a student makes rude comments to a teacher in a traditional school many of the other students would laugh or join in and the offending student might get positive feedback from his or her peers for bad behavior which would encourage more of the same. In this environment the feedback from his or her peers would be negative so the behavior would change.

By luvs2teach

December 30, 2005 04:22 PM | Link to this

Interesting points…

On the topic, I think this is a perfect demonstration of someone breaking the “one-size-fits-all” mold. As a charter school, parents have the choice to enroll (or remove if they find out it’s not for them) their children. I like the idea of children earning things - too often, learning for learning’s sake is a concept over their head. When they can see a tangible result (i.e. a desk) then it may have more meaning and more motivation for them.

I am currently reading (yeah, I’m catching up on my reading this week - I think this is the third book I’m mentioning!) Freakonomics by Steven Levitt - VERY interesting!!! One of the economists he mentions is Roland Fryer, an African American economist who has studied, among other things, paying underachieving students for good grades. Children from poverty typically live in a the here and now, and working for a better job in the future is meaningless (kind of like telling a 2-D creature about a cube - makes no sense in their world). The idea of earning a chiar, a desk, etc, may be a more feasible way of making the rewards of education real.

As far as group punishment goes, I have mixed feelings. I have had groups that were so bad collectively, I felt I had no choice but to “punish” the whole group. I say punish, but in most cases it was a matter of teaching with the book what I had planned to teach with a hands-on activity. If I felt the group couldn’t handle the activity, then they weren’t going to learn much from it anyway. This is an absolute last resort, and only something I do if I can’t isolate the problems. On the flip side, I have rewarded the few that were behaving well when that’s feasible.

Back to Freakonomics, the author’s also mention a book by Judith Rich Harris called The Nuture Assumption that basically stated how peer pressure is key to children’s developing personalities. Debating that idea of course is the thought that parents, by choosing where they live and their children’s playmates, influence the peer group - it becomes a chicken/egg scenario.

Essentially economists found, by studying an “unintentional experiment” that happened as a result of a school choice lottery in Chicago Public Schools, that (with the exception of vocational high schools) it doesn’t matter whether a child gets into a school s/he chooses or stays at the home school - if the parent asked for choice, the students tend to do better whether they change schools or not.

Are the results of KIPP due to the program, or due to the fact that parents who put their children in these programs are more likely to be concerned and active parents at home?

By Jake

December 30, 2005 04:34 PM | Link to this

Ultimately the responsibility for establishing and enforcing social norms does lie with the group, all of us as society. However, as several bloggers already pointed out, we don’t generally expect children to determine or enforce society’s mores. I also ascribe to the theory that positive reinforcement works better in the long run and is ethically superior to negative reinforcement, so earning the chair is good, punishing the entire class is bad. You’re really making an ends justifies the means argument, if the goal of the peer pressure is good so is the peer pressure. I believe that is a logical fallacy and I disagree. My personal recollections of peer pressure are almost all negative reinforcement, being criticized, bullied, belittled, and ostracized from the group.

By Lee

December 30, 2005 04:41 PM | Link to this

Carrie, as far as the 80% graduation rate, it was noted that the KIPP schools were an alternative to public schools. As others have noted, more than likely, these are kids of parents who place an emphasis on education. BTW, my daughter’s private school has a 98% college attendence rate. When I pulled her out of public middle school, she was a straight A student who always made in the high 90’s. First year of private school, she made mostly B’s.

I have been in the corporate world for about 30 years. I remember when the “Team” concept took hold in the late 80s and early 90s. Since then, we’ve gone full cirle back to individual accountability. This is not to say that you can’t have team projects or do things as a group. But, if your entire class structure is based solely on this precept, I cannot agree with it.

As far as group punishment, in certain situations it is warranted. However, I think some teachers use it as an easy way to deal with problems because they don’t want to take the time to deal with individual problem children.

By karen Armsby

December 30, 2005 04:42 PM | Link to this

Jake, I meant that your discussion with Carrie was discussing two different issues, exactly as you pointed out, teamwork or building vs. peer pressure for behavior modification, which I think is wrong to make kids do.

Regarding soccer teams, my daughters played soccer, too, through high school and on club teams. On the older teams the coach did not punish the whole team with drills and running unless the whole team was not pulling together at practice and games. Individuals who were not doing their job or were not in top condition got their own laps to run, not the whole team. And individuals were chosen by the coach to start or play depending on their individual preparedness and ability to play well. Team work depends on each individual being prepared on his/her own to participate with and contribute to the team. You cannot have good teamwork without well prepared individuals, no matter if it’s for a class, a sports team, a volunteer group or business.

By Carrie

December 30, 2005 04:42 PM | Link to this

Again, this type of school may not be appropriate for everyone. This concept has worked well in the military and with many sports teams. I disagree with your assessment of peer pressure, but will agree to disagree.

Children experience peer pressure everyday in one form or another that cannot be controlled by any adult. Promoting postive peer pressure is a good thing, but that is just my opinion.

Happy New Year!!!

By Karen Armsby

December 30, 2005 04:52 PM | Link to this

Carrie, I agree with you that children naturally exert peer pressure in their interactions with siblings, friends and classmates at lunch and play. However, I think that group punishment in the classroom setting crosses the line from peer pressure to adult manipulation. It is simply adult imposed peer pressure. It creates anger and frustration in those kids who behave well, but have to constantly monitor the misbehaving kids.

The peer pressure created by the threat of group punishment distracts the students from their primary task in school, to learn. I didn’t send my kids to school to monitor other kids’ behavior or to tell other kids how to behave. I sent them to pay attention to the teacher and learn and do their work. Handling behavior problems is the adult teacher’s responsibility, not the kids’ responsibility.

By Lee

December 30, 2005 04:52 PM | Link to this

Oh, and as far as peer pressure, way back when, I we got punished because of some goofball, there would be a little extracurricular activity behind the gym at recess. Is that the kind of peer pressure you want?

One other thing, ain’t it funny, everybody online makes a six figure salary, has a 150 IQ, was class Valedictorian, etc. etc. I didn’t realize there were so many people like me….. lol

By Carrie

December 30, 2005 04:54 PM | Link to this

I do want to clarify a few points. Individual accountability is very important in work. I’m not saying that it is not. Most bonus programs have COMPONENTS of company and team performance. I do not subscribe to the RA RA, go team mentality of the 80’s.

It has been beneficial to me to align myself with people who have complimentary skills. Instead of always trying to be the shining star I support those I work with who, in turn, support me. I still get individual recognition, but not at the expense of everyone else. Even someone who conquers Mt Everest has a team to support their efforts even if you only remember one person’s name.

I would expect a 98% rate of college bound graduates at a private school for multiple reasons. I still say that an 80% rate for a public school (even if it is an alternative school) is not a waste of tax dollars and is still a good thing.

By luvs2teach

December 30, 2005 04:57 PM | Link to this

The groupwork issue has my attention because it’s so frustrating!

First, as a student, when I went back to school in the early nineties (as a science major), groupwork in college classes was all the rage - we were told “this is how businesses are run” and “this is how you’ll being working when you get in the ‘real world’.” To an extent I did work on teams like sales teams, but in the end, it came down to individual accountability - did I make my quota or not?

As a parent (prior to my teaching), my daughter (my brilliant, opinionated, loner daughter) would come home from school dismayed that she had yet another group project. She would complain about getting stuck with slackers and having to do all the work to maike sure she got a decent grade. I had to work with her a lot to teach her how to delegate and work with her group members’ strengths and weaknesses - I was lucky that I had recently been through that and COULD help!

When I started teaching, I was told in my ed classes and inservices how “valuable” cooperative working was, and how it is different from traditional “groupwork.” “Studies show…” was the mantra. Unfortunately, true cooperative learning is VERY difficult to implement well (you really have to have yuor groups trained so they know it’s not about the “smart kid doing all the work”) - after seven years and lots of books, lectures, and inservices, I would only say I get the results I want from it about 50% of the time. I limit my use of it, but I do use it, because it’s one of those “things” that administrator look for you to be doing in your classroom (and because as a science teacher it cuts down on supplies).

Learning to get along with and delegate responsiblities is a valuable skill, however, not the only skill. I think group learning has its place, but it also smacks of a passing flavor of the month in education, much like differentiation is now the “hot thing.”

By Carrie

December 30, 2005 05:00 PM | Link to this

And everyone online has a gifted child that is the shining star of the class only to be brought down by everyone else’s brats.

Lee - if you review my comments and points you will notice that I did note that retaliation could be a problem. Again, this concept is effectively used in the military and many of these students do benefit from it. I have not done any name calling on this blog and have tried to articulate my points while being respectful to others. I have no reason to lie about myself and am just trying to point out how cooperation with projects and groups has been beneficial to me and what those benefits have been.

By Karen Armsby

December 30, 2005 05:01 PM | Link to this

This will be my last post for 2005. Thank you to Patti our blogmistress and to all of you bloggers, smart (or not) : ). It’s been fun, see y’all next year! P.S. Drink responsibly, or have a designated driver, and tell someone “I love You” at midnight!

By scuse me

December 30, 2005 05:02 PM | Link to this

Where y’all comming up with these graduation rates? everything I’ve read indicates we have a high school drop out rate of somewhere between 40-60%

By luvs2teach

December 30, 2005 05:02 PM | Link to this

Lee - you KNOW I don’t make six figures, LOL

By SWC

December 30, 2005 05:03 PM | Link to this

Carrie -

One man’s “Greater Good” is another man’s tyranny. One man’s “teamwork” is another man’s commune. One man’s commune is another man’s gulag.

Fact: In this country we value the individual.

Teamwork has its place, but using it as a method to indoctrinate little children into being perfect little leftists is not how we do it here, as much as you may dream that it be so.

My kid gets a desk.

By Ernest

December 30, 2005 05:09 PM | Link to this

I simply want to wish the Get Schooled bloggers best wishes for a Fruitful and Prosperous New Year! I look forward to more interesting conversations in 2006.

By WFC

January 2, 2006 08:32 AM | Link to this

“Cooperative Learning” is a useful teaching tool used in moderation. It teaches students “real world skills” and “real world pain” if the experience is well designed, meaningful and has real consequences. I’m a high school history teacher and use one (and only one) cooperative experience per semester. What do the students learn from this?

(1) Everyone doesn’t values education the same. (2) Everyone does not have the same skills. (3) Organization is important. (4) Everyone’s work is interdependent. (5) Deadlines are important. (6) Individual roles on the team must be defined. (7) Lots of other things.

Why don’t I use the process more often? I’m the teacher and I’m the only one in the classroom who truly knows and understands world history. Students need constant contact with and guidance from me. That’s why I’ve studied world history for thirty years. Cooperative learning is only a tool.

One of the problems with education is that the “powers that be” are always looking for a panacea… some new method or technique that will solve all our educational problems. I’ve seen dozens of “fads” come and go over the years. The secret for a good teacher is to take what is useful from each passing fancy and incorporate it into his/her teaching.

By jim dumond

January 2, 2006 09:34 AM | Link to this

Wow WFC,

Not to sound egotistical or become argumentative but I’d really like to hook you up with a 16 year old that is constantly enlightening his world history teachers.

Happy New Year.

By Nikole

January 2, 2006 12:44 PM | Link to this

Schools are the perfect place to start teaching kids to work together for the good of the entire community and not just themselves. Individualism breeds greed and selfishness. Kids should learn to do well in school and on their jobs for their own happiness and ask themselves how what they do for a living is helpful to our society rather than making lots of money and buying lots of things. I wish more parents would send their kids to these types of schools.

By scuse me

January 2, 2006 02:49 PM | Link to this

Some of you folk scare the hell out of me!

Freedom and liberty to be an individual is a bad thing and you want a forced educational system to enforce a doctrine that says everyone is equal and must work for the common good and put all personal ambition aside?

Why not just take your kids with you to one of several South American countries and quit attempting to undermine the one thing that’s made this nation great.

By WFC

January 3, 2006 09:07 AM | Link to this

Dear Jim…. I would love to have your “into-world-history-16-year-old” student in my class at Northview High School. Challenging students make for better teaching. Actually I’m not surprised that a bright kid can hang in there with most world history teachers given how it’s possible today to teach high school world history after having only taken five world history classes. However, I’m “old school”…my degrees are in history rather than “social studies education.” What a wonderful thing it is to have students who “bring something to the table.” I have a few but only a few.

By Nikole

January 3, 2006 11:36 AM | Link to this

scuse me, your opinion of what makes this country great, is one of its major flaws in my opinion. I am a firm believer in being blessed to be a blessing and I think we would be much better off if other so-called Christians in this country felt the same way.

By jim dumond

January 3, 2006 01:21 PM | Link to this

WFC,

Thanks,

The kid reads everything on history he can find, including the encyclopedia. Favorite channels (for the past 8 years) have been the history and discovery channels. Carries a couple of books in his backpack by James W. Loewen, who authored such books as Lies My Teacher Told Me: Everything Your High School History Textbook Got Wrong and Lies Across America: What Our Historic Sites Get Wrong, for quick reference and aspires to be a History professor one day.

I think he’ll make it!

BTW, if you’ve not read the books mentioned above, I highly recommend.

By scuse me

January 3, 2006 04:47 PM | Link to this

Nicole,

Mind if i call ya Nicki?

Freedom and liberty is what’s wrong with this country?

Hey, feel free to move—oh and you can thank freedom and liberty for that too.

By WFC

January 4, 2006 08:14 AM | Link to this

Amen, Jim…

Sounds like a great kid. We need teachers with a passion for history. I’ve read Loewen and he usually hits the nail on the head. The problem with public school texts is that they are almost always “political” in that conservative school boards in Texas and California dominate the selection process. I’m conservative myself in many ways but am disgusted with the ways that texts are adopted. That’s why I limit their use in my classroom with the exception of the A.P. classes where the texts are somewhat more balanced. Even in those classes I make a point of introducing many interpretations of events. Tell your guy “good luck” and keep at it. Somebody has to push for better instuction in history!!!

By Nikole

January 4, 2006 09:26 AM | Link to this

I was not talking about freedom and liberty, but capitalism and individualism

By jim dumond

January 4, 2006 09:38 AM | Link to this

Actually the problem with public school texts is that it is what we are teaching kids. Somewhere down the road this will bite us squarely on the bottocks.

I commend you for going out on a limb to assure students get a balanced view of history but it becomes obvious you don’t teach in Gwinnett County. Unfortunately here teachers are forced to stick strictly to the book. I will say that some of the brighter teachers have found some very creative ways around it by being sick or needing a personal day during certain periods of study and arranging for a sub they know will go into factual occurance rather than follow the book and perpetuate the lies.

By scuse me

January 4, 2006 09:42 AM | Link to this

capitalism and individualism?

You’re still welcome to move to a country that doesn’t hold to these ideals. Hey, but then you’d have to sacrifice freedom and liberty as well. It’s just not possible to have them all at the same time.

By Nikole

January 4, 2006 11:48 AM | Link to this

In a country with a majority of Christians, it is very much possible to live a life of freedom and work for the greater good of your society. If I did not believe that, I most certainly would move.I do not accept can’t or impossibilities and charter schools and alternative schools are one means of developing a new solution-minded American citizen rather than some of the close-minded individuals that are routinely found on this blog.

By scuse me

January 4, 2006 12:15 PM | Link to this

Exactly why would you want to bring religion into what otherwise had been an intelligent conversation?

By Nikole

January 4, 2006 12:54 PM | Link to this

Because my spirituality is what drives my opinions, thoughts, beliefs, and it is hypocritical for so many others in this country to be of similar religion and still support efforts that are divisive or self-serving. I find it sad that religion(truth) seems unintelligent to you and I hope (and pray) that one day you reconsider your position.