AJC.com > Blogs > Get Schooled > Archives > 2006 > June > 05 > Entry
DEL.ICIO.USIntel Guy Says: Don’t Bother With State Comparisons
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
Craig Barrett, Chairman of the Board and former CEO of Intel, was the opening speaker at the Education Writers Association conference I attended in New Orleans last week. His topic: Storm Clouds Over U.S. How Different if the U.S. from its International Competitors? Is the U.S. Falling Behind.
I’ll sum this up fast: There is no reason to spend so much energy comparing Georgia kids to Florida kids or Atlanta kids to Gwinnett kids, Barrett believes. (My favorite recent comparison someone showed me: Atlanta is improving its test scores faster than the state of Georgia. Hmmmmm…..) Compare internationally, Barrett says. When he can’t find the employees he needs locally, he goes to India and China. Those who brag about being the best in the state or the best in the country ignore this larger picture.
A reporter asks Barrett if he also goes to India and China because the labor is cheaper. My notes trail off on this one, but I think he says something about that being a tough issue and notes that he has grandkids in college …
Barrett says American kids need better teachers. They need teachers who know how to teach them the high-level math and science they need to compete. Good teachers also engage and motivate students, he says. A national curriculum will never happen, so why spend time talking about it? Get better teachers. Period.
The next speaker disagreed sharply with Barrett. I’ll tell you who and why tomorrow… (Also, CRCT scores are expected to be released today…stay tuned!)
Until then, any thoughts on how to get better teachers into the classroom, especially in math and science?
Comments
By lynn d
June 5, 2006 08:36 AM | Link to this
I think the focus on math and science exclusively is dangerous — reading is really fundamental to all learning. A new study recently showed that education majors aren’t being taught how to teach reading.
I was not a science or math major (liberal arts) in college and I had really uninspiring professors in both those areas for my required courses. I can’t help but think that part of the problem lies in the fact that college level instruction in math and science for education majors might not be any better than what I experiences. I wonder if the problem is really one that is top down rather than bottom up.
We need top notch professors to teach future teachers how to teach science and math at all levels. We also need a way to instill confidence in new teachers at the elementary level in their ability to teach math.
By Karen Armsby
June 5, 2006 09:12 AM | Link to this
While I agree we need better science teacher preparation in elementary and middle school in Gerogia, IMHO the rest of the teachers are well qualified. I’m going to risk sounding like a broken record, but here goes. No matter what school, school system, state, or country, successful students are a result of a three part effort; good parenting, good teaching, and attentive, diligent students.
Parents are the first teachers, and when their kids go away to school they continue to reinforce good study habits, discipline, and attendance.
Teachers who have classes of diligent students and who can control discipline will have more successful students. Teachers depend on parents to partner with them in reinforcing learning, completion of homework, and good attendance and disipline.
Students who take responsibility for their learning, work diligently, and behave in a respectful and civil manner will be more successful.
By Dan
June 5, 2006 10:09 AM | Link to this
I think it is primarily a function of work ethic. Students who come here from China India and Africa tend to excel within the very same system with the very same teachers, because they are driven by the desire to take advantage of the incredible opportunity before them. Many americans view it as a right and as a process where someone educates them rather than they use the tools presented to educate themselves
By SNY
June 5, 2006 10:13 AM | Link to this
Karen,
While I agree with you 100% about the 3-part rule, one would have to wonder how long math and science has been lacking. The reason I ask is because yes, parents should be helping their kids at home but what if they don’t know or don’t have the answers because they don’t have a strong background in math and science. I am a strong believer in the fact that there are a lot of parents out there that want to help their kids, but can’t. I am that way with science. I’m an accountant so I can handle the math part, but to be absolutely honest, (so no one get to having a hissy fit about this) I am going to need my daughters teachers to help her and me. I know to some of you that may sound really bad, but it is the truth. So far, my daughter has been lucky. She likes science, but she is only going into the 4th grade. It will start to get harder soon. Then I’ll be taking my lunch hour and sitting in her class during science class if that’s what it takes.
So back to my point, some parents may not have been given the opportunity to understand the material as well as they should because of poor teachers that they encountered. What do we do when parents cannot help because they themselves don’t understand.
By Karen Armsby
June 5, 2006 10:22 AM | Link to this
SNY, I agree that science teacher preparation and curriculum is less than desirable in elementary and middle school. However, my kids had excellent science teachers in high school and one is an architect grad of GaTech and one is studying mechanical engineering at GaTech, and both did very well with Tech math and science, with their high school preparation.
IMHO and I’ve said it a lot, Reading is the key to all learning, whatever the subject, and the goal in all grades should be on improving reading skills, and reading increasingly complex material.
By C.R.H.
June 5, 2006 11:26 AM | Link to this
SNY…you are not alone. Science teachers are very aware that most parents do not have a good grasp on science. Science changes SO fast, the stuff you learned in school is not the same stuff we teach today. I didn’t know anything about gel electrophoresis in high school, but now we do it in HS science classes. All the new technology & information gained is almost overwhelming. Math; however, hasn’t changed much in the last 10-20 years.lol
To stay on topic…science teachers need the facilities & equipment to do their job. Some other quick suggestions; smaller classes (labs can be very dangerous with 30 kids!), a different pay scale (try to find someone with a chemistry or physics degree to work for $34,000 a year!!)
By SNY
June 5, 2006 11:54 AM | Link to this
Karen,
So, are you saying that I shouldn’t have to sit in the class with my child if she has the right kind of science teacher? I’m serious about do that. I don’t know any other way for me to learn the subject. If anyone can give me other suggestions, I’m all ears.
I just don’t want my child to fail because I have no clue.
By Bev
June 5, 2006 12:28 PM | Link to this
I find the “no child left behind” policy is really hurting our schools. Many teachers are so busy trying to catch up the ones who are a little slow that the bright kids and the average get ignored. The instructors are responsible for the test failure rate, and two or three really slow children can mess up her pass rate. These children would benefit quite a bit by being in a classroom that could teach to their level and not having a teacher that must teach to so many different levels. Our daughter is a teacher and has so many children in her classroom that speak little or no english, and they have significantly lowered her ability to push the more academically gifted child.
By decaturparent
June 5, 2006 01:23 PM | Link to this
We will never have highly educated public school graduates as long as NCLB and political correctness are around. If NCLB sticks, it will ensure that by the end of this century all the USA will be good for is providing cheap, low skilled labor to China and India, the new world economic powers.
I know that tracking is unpopular because the lower level classes tend to have mostly minorities, but why not at least have multiage classes. In such a scenario, for instance, slower second graders could be in class with above average first graders. This would really help teachers not have to handle such a wide range of ability. Then you can have racially balanced classes and still have everyone learning at a more appropriate level for them.
EQuality is great - but not all humans are equal. I am not a genius, and I just had to get over that fact. Others should be able to get over it also. So long as we continue to have policies that promote equality at the expense of excellence, we will continue to lose our ability to compete globally.
By C.R.H.
June 5, 2006 02:10 PM | Link to this
Decaturparent…I agree, but try telling that to a parent who thinks their child is an “honors” student even when the kid can’t function in an on-level class!
By Laf
June 5, 2006 06:18 PM | Link to this
Higher pay, better training, and more support.