Get Schooled

By Hiding

October 9, 2006 01:01 PM | Link to this

Yes I care. I’ve made up my mind for Denise. Kathy Cox would never have won to begin with if she hadn’t been been confused with the other Cathy Cox.

Yes Kathy was a classroom teacher, yes she shows up for work unlike the person before her. But I’ve watched her in operation, and she just isn’t that bright, doesn’t seem to “get” complex problems, and makes decisions based primarily on how they make HER look with an eye toward her own reelection.

Denise is sharp and I think it is to our benefit to have someone that has deminstrated competence in problem investigation and decision making to tackle the challenges we face in education.

Sometimes those who were born and raised in the nest can’t see that it needs cleaning.

By JustMe

October 9, 2006 01:07 PM | Link to this

Anyone but Cox. So, I guess that I will vote for Majette.

Cox does not have her head on straight (see evolution). Although Majette is not from “education”, I do think that she has her head on straight. Maybe, as some put it, we need a non-education person (no classroom experience) in charge to make it right….

I don’t know, but I am certainly ready for a change.

By V for Vendetta

October 9, 2006 01:08 PM | Link to this

Jeez! This is like picking which type of gun you would want to shoot yourself in the head with. No matter which you choose, the power to inflict severe bodily hard remains. I will have to think long and hard about this one. Still, that evolution thing was pretty stupid… .

By Taxpayer

October 9, 2006 01:33 PM | Link to this

I agree with David Chastain that the state superintendent’s position should be filed by appointment. We have far too many elected officials in Georgia, many of whom are not even qualified to be dogcatcher. The best and the brightest do not always offer themselves for election for many reasons, such as a lack of money or a distaste for the muckracking nature of a campaign. However, if I must choose, I’ll go with a formula that has worked before: ABC — Anyone But Cox.

By fed up

October 9, 2006 01:57 PM | Link to this

Which one is the most likely to call NCLB the farce that it is? That’s the one I will vote for.

By SNY

October 9, 2006 02:25 PM | Link to this

Cox is wasting her money and anyone else that backs her. We don’t want her around. Honestly, I don’t think that our kids can afford for her to stay around. We need someone who will put our children’s needs first. She has proven over and over again that she doesn’t care about our kids. Education is too important to be put on the back burner. Denise has my vote hands down!

By Rita

October 9, 2006 02:44 PM | Link to this

I agree with fed up. We need a superintendent that will stand up to the educrats! It needs to be about the kids, not federal dollars.

By ATLteacher

October 9, 2006 02:58 PM | Link to this

I’m guessing most of the people posting here haven’t met Kathy. She’s hard working and purpose driven. She’s successfully rewritten the curriculum and getting national acclaim for doing so. While there’s a lot of room for improvement, test scores are finally on the way up. The GAE gave her the nod (hardly a right wing fringe group), and she’ll get my vote.

By JustMe

October 9, 2006 03:14 PM | Link to this

Kathy did not rewrite the curriculum! Do not give her the credit for this. The GPS were not written by her at all!!!

By Taxpayer

October 9, 2006 03:21 PM | Link to this

What difference does it make whether we have met Kathy Cox or not? I’m sure she’s quite charming in person. Unfortunately, I and the other folks posting here have had to live with the consequences of her poor leadership and disastrous decisions as state superintendent. Fed Up has a great point about choosing the candidate who will do the most to get our schools out from under NCLB, which has cost the school system in my county millions and resulted in half-empty schools on one side of the county and schools jammed to overflowing on the other.

By GAeducator

October 9, 2006 03:47 PM | Link to this

Kathy Cox has shown little leadership development during her time in office. It is shocking how much the department of education has grown in personnel since she became superintendent. It is also shocking how many of those “new positions” are filled by people who are not public (or even private) school educators. I will be looking seriously at the libertarian candidates for all state races. Maybe it is time for a sweeping change in Georgia.

By decaturparent

October 9, 2006 04:31 PM | Link to this

I’m with Fed Up too! Hey Patti.. how about finding out for us which candidate is most hostile to No Child Left Educated so we can figure out who to vote for!

By yesiamworried

October 9, 2006 04:51 PM | Link to this

This is a position that should be appointed.

Kathy Cox is a big kiss up to the Bush administration. She has applied for almost no waivers to NCLB compared to other states.

In Georgia, the consequences fall almost exclusively on the schools, not the systems, which is where the real power lies to make a difference. But the powers that be (including Cox) don’t want to upset the good old boy (and girl) school board members.

By Lisa B.

October 9, 2006 05:07 PM | Link to this

I am going to vote for Kathy Cox. She is working very hard to tackle huge problems that can’t be fixed in one term. Our state curriculum has improved, and test scores are beginning to rise. The fact that GAE endorsed Kathy Cox seals my vote for her. I know that GAE researched candidate records before making endorsements. While Denise Majette may be a sharp woman, I don’t think changing superintendents at this time will benefit Georgia’s students.

By Janine

October 9, 2006 05:45 PM | Link to this

The evolution thing did it for me with Cox….But, in addition, the CRCT is a joke. We need a super who will say that it’s* NOT OK *for third graders to pass the CRCT by answering correctly 17 of over 40 questions. We need someone with enough spine to tell the feds to keep their money and let us educate our children instead of testing them to death. We need someone with enough brain activity to know that reining in teachers and implementing scripted lessons is absolutely NOT the way to go. Cookie cutter education does not and will never be the answer to our problems. Does Majette fit the bill??? Don’t know , but willing to try.

By luvs2teach

October 9, 2006 06:35 PM | Link to this

Wow - it really bothers me that so many people think that the only alternative to Cox is Majette…

There is a third party in the equation, and the is the Libertarian Party, and their candidate, David Chastain.

Doesn’t it seem backwards to anyone else that we elect the Superintendent, but the board is appointed?

By Jeff

October 9, 2006 06:55 PM | Link to this

Samples of both candidate’s answers to PAGE’s questions:

How do you plan to retain quality teachers? Cox: Salaries up, health care down, “Master Teacher”, new teacher evaluation system Majette: stricter student discipline policies, improved teacher protections, paid sabbaticals every seven years, support collective bargaining

Most critical challenge to the Superintendent today? Cox: “My goal is to lead the nation in improving student achievement!” Majette: “The superintendent’s greatest challenge is to change the culture of complaceny.”

Vouchers: Cox: Pro Majette: Anti

Prayer in schools: Cox: “The current state law requiring a moment of quiet reflection has been successfully implemented in Georgia schools for a number of years now. It has also withstood a constitutional challenge. If students want to use that time to pray, I fully support that.” Majette: “Where and if one prays must be an individual, private choice. Corporate prayer in public schools should not be imposed by teachers, coaches, school systems, legislatures, or courts. People of faith will find appropriate ways and places to pray whether they are told they can or told they cannot.”

“Please describe your views on the teaching of the origins of life in the public schools.” Cox: “The new science curriculum recently recieved the highest grade possible for its treatment of evolution by the Fordham Foundation. The report said ‘The treatment of biological diversity and evolution is straightforward and comprehensive.’ See more at www.edexcellence.net/” Majette: “Teachinf Darwin’s theory of evolution is an essential part of preparing our children to compete in today’s world. Stickers and disclaimers have no place in 21st century education.”

“How do you propose to make sure there is a quality teacher in every Georgia classroom during the next four years?” Cox: monitor work place conditions, more on-site professional development, train principals to make teachers a bigger part in decision making Majette: bonuses for multilingual, math, science, and SpecEd; more paras, pay and time off for extra training, retraining and continuing education, mini-sabbaticals and flex-time

Other topic covered (let me know if interested in responses):

Positions in public education; assessment tools; funding priorities (other than salary and benefits); Views on testing; 25-year retirement without penalty; improve public ed in GA over the next four years?; educator technology proficiency; culturally and linguistically diverse GA; what change Cox made would have the most impact/ what change Cox made would you (Majette) change or eliminate

From Jeff: I’ll comment on my position in the next post, this was just to make their stands more clear!

By Lisa B.

October 9, 2006 07:04 PM | Link to this

I agree that the Superintendent should be appointed. However, given the choice, I will have to go with Cox.

The CRCT was supposed to have been “fixed” last Spring. The children had to answer more questions correctly to pass. The passing score in Reading and Language was changed from 300 to 800. In the past, it was way to easy for kids to pass the CRCT. I’m not saying its difficult enough now, but at least they have to get half the answers right!

By Jeff

October 9, 2006 07:08 PM | Link to this

My views:

By a 9 - 6 margin in the 15 question PAGE questionaire, I go with Cox. (Actually I should probably call it a 9.5 - 5.5 to be more accurate.)

Majette is simply too hostile to religion, and too open to “multi-cultural” education.

Issues I have with Majette: 1. overly (and overtly) hostile to religion other than hers in responses to both evoution and and prayer in schools. 2. Her evolution response SCREAMS that she has already closed her mind in regards to a topic that will never truly be scientifically solved. 3. Collective Bargaining: I’ve seen industries where joining a union - even one you wholeheartedly DISagree with is forced on you, and opening the door to collective bargaining will only lead us down that road for education.

Issues I have with Cox: 1. Her emphasis on testing. TESTING SUCKS!!!!! We need a truly objective measure, but not one that involves ONE TEST! (My idea? Create state-wide common tests for the end of each unit, and instruct it to be given when that unit is completed. Then, if you only want one score per year, take the average of all the unit tests from that year.) 2. Her methods of retaining teachers don’t interest me at all, and I’m one of the mystical 1st year teachers that stats say will leave within 5 yrs!! 3. She COMPELTELY ignored one of the questions in particular, and I HATE when politicians do that!

By jim d

October 10, 2006 08:15 AM | Link to this

This is the problem in Georgia, Not only do parents not have a choice in education but voters don’t have any real choices at the polls.

No Change in Georgia’s educational rankings for at least another four years. Wow, when you put it that way it’s a whole nuther high school generation wasted.

By GAeducator

October 10, 2006 08:25 AM | Link to this

I was disappointed that PAGE did not allow all three candidates the opportunity to be heard on the issues. I don’t believe that either GAE or PAGE hears and or represents all Georgia educators. Each organization has its own agenda for the political arena in our state.

By V for Vendetta

October 10, 2006 08:43 AM | Link to this

GAE and PAGE suck. If they had our best interest in mind, they would be raising holy hell about issues that are already a problem.

Terrible representation is one of the major factors contributing to the crap we put up with on a daily basis. There is no “safe” soapbox for teachers. Why do you think everyone with half a brain more or less hides their identity on this blog?

By KA

October 10, 2006 08:52 AM | Link to this

Jeff, Thanks for posting the candidates positons. I heartily disagree with your reaction to Majette’s position on evolution, because *evolution has NOTHING to do with religion!!! And science is not the place to discuss any religious views!!!!

By KA

October 10, 2006 08:55 AM | Link to this

V, So, do you want collective bargaining?

By KA

October 10, 2006 09:10 AM | Link to this

I’m voting for Majette, and I think she can win. It will be refreshing and revolutionary to have an analytical attorney mind running the show instead of an educrat groomed and controlled by the power minded pyramid of school admins. I hope Majette overhauls the management stranglehold that the administrative overlords have over the schools and thereby restores control of teaching, assessment, and discipline to the teachers in their classrooms. Teaching is an industry that is micromanaged to the point that I don’t know how y’all put up with it! Down with NCLB, down with endless poorly designed state testing (bring back the ITBS!!), down with PC fear of lawsuits by whining students and parents, down with teacher lunchroom and bus and coach duty. Let the Teachers TEACH!!!

By sobegape

October 10, 2006 11:20 AM | Link to this

While waiting for my son’s Beta Club meeting to end last week, I had the opportunity to speak with one of the other parents. She told me, and I have not verified this, that within the next two years, 8th graders will not be allowed to take Algebra I. She emphasized that this decision came from the state and not the county school system. Now, how are our students supposed to compete if you start dumbing down the curriculum? If I find this to be true, it will be the MAIN reason that I WILL NOT vote for the incumbent.

By JustMe

October 10, 2006 11:23 AM | Link to this

KA -

You said a mouthfull with that last sentence…. I would love to support anyone that simply leaves teachers alone to teach their class of students to the best of their ability. These administrators do not understand that their role SHOULD be to support teachers, and not to interfere with the teaching process!

By Jeff

October 10, 2006 11:54 AM | Link to this

sobegape:

Since I’m a math teacher, let me comment on the Algebra 1:

Algebra 1 will no longer exist in two years, and this is a GREAT thing. No longer will math be viewed as distinct subjects, which it really isn’t, and will instead be viewed as multiple subjects working as one. To get a sneak peak at this, take a gander at www.georgiastandards.org/math_frameworks.aspx and look at the 6th or 7th grade curriculum. This is the same format you will see in the HS level Math, Basic Math, and Accerlated Math series. As one using the 6th rgade version for the first time, I ABSOLUTELY LOVE IT!

By Jef

October 10, 2006 12:04 PM | Link to this

Also, trust me on this:

One of my main difficulties is that the kids HATE the new curriculum due to the fact that it FORCES them to THINK. QCC’s did not.

The State Board constantly says it, but I see it on the front lines everyday: This truly is a GREAT curriculum!

By Jef

October 10, 2006 12:04 PM | Link to this

Also, trust me on this:

One of my main difficulties is that the kids HATE the new curriculum due to the fact that it FORCES them to THINK. QCC’s did not.

The State Board constantly says it, but I see it on the front lines everyday: This truly is a GREAT curriculum!

By sobegape

October 10, 2006 12:52 PM | Link to this

Thank you, Jef. I will check the website a little later, but I would like to know what it is exactly that you like so much about this new curriculum. My son is an 8th grader taking Algebra I for high school credit. Although I don’t have any children coming along after him, it worries me that the children are not being pushed to learn and that the curriculum will set expectations too low. How is an 8th grader taking Algebra I not being forced to THINK?

By Jeff

October 10, 2006 01:30 PM | Link to this

Sobegape:

So much of math can be taught two ways: one in which you memorize facts, or one in which you analyze the data and actually THINK about the math you are doing, rather than just regurgitating numbers.

For example, when doing factoring: QCC (with its ‘Algebra 1’, ‘Geometry’, etc classes) would say “Here’s 30 problems for you to do where you find the factors of various numbers.”

GPS, with its Math, Basic math, and Accelerated Math says “Part II: Secret Number Juanita has a secret number. Read her clues and then answer the questions that follow: Juanita says, “Clue 1” My secret number is a factor of 60.” 1. Can you tell what Juanita’s secret number is? Explain your reasoning. 2. Daren said that Juanita’s number must also be a factor of 120. Do you agree or disagree with Daren? Explain your reasoning. 3. Malcolm says that Juanita’s number must also be a factor of 15. Do you agree or disagree with Malcolm? Explain your reasoning. 4. What is the smallest Juanita’s number could be? Explain. 5. What is the largest Juanita’s number could be. Explain. Suppose for Juanita’s second clue she says, “ Clue 2: My number is prime.” 6. Can the class guess her number and be certain? Explain your answer. Suppose for Juanita’s third clue she says, “Clue 3: 15 is a multiple of my secret number.” 7. Now can you tell what her number is? Explain your reasoning. 8. Your secret number is 36. Write a series of interesting clues using factors, multiples, and other number properties needed for somebody else to identify your number.”

By sobegape

October 10, 2006 01:44 PM | Link to this

Hmmm…I guess it depends on the teacher. My son’s Algebra I teacher gives problems very much like that one, Jeff.

By sobegape

October 10, 2006 01:51 PM | Link to this

Also…where is the higher-level math going to be taught? I guess that’s concerning me as much as anything else. Are we now going to go back to lumping students together regardless of ability? I checked the website, and I see the distinction on the high school level, but not before. I really don’t see how this is helping anything. I honestly think that it is a gimmick. But then, I’m not a teacher. And I only have one child who will be in high school next year. So maybe I shouldn’t comment at all. (No one has to agree with that last statement!)

By decaturparent

October 10, 2006 02:15 PM | Link to this

Yep… you can mix the classes as much as you want in K-5, esp with LA and reading, but I don’t see how you can avoid ability grouping for math in middle school because math ability really does vary greatly by that age.

Jeff, do the advanced math kids get what you called “accelerated math”? There really needs to be an outlet for the kids who are ready to move on and an outlet for the kids who need some remediation.

I say this as the mother of a kid who is very gifted in math … but at the same time… I myself definitely would have spent my entire school time in remedial math! I guess you could say I can see both ends of this issue.

You know … the aversion toward ability grouping is getting so huge that I bet one day they will just give everyone the same grade in the same class so that no one knows that anyone else did better or worse than them! ;)

By GAeducator

October 10, 2006 02:29 PM | Link to this

Looks like the blog has gotten way off track. Yes the new GPS is a necessary improvement over Georgia’s former curriculum initiatives. However, Kathy Cox’s role in the revamping was to support the change. She did not initiate the development of GPS. Many states (including our neighbor S.C.) had performance based standards before now. Much of Georgia’s curriculum came from the America’s Choice reform model, which has been around for over 6 years. Don’t give Kathy Cox credit for something she did not do. As for NCLB, that is a federally mandated law, not a state regulation. The CRCT is the state’s interpretation on the regulation that every state must assess students at their grade level. The ITBS will not meet the federal requirement. As I stated before, both GAE and PAGE have their own political agendas, so beware of their blanket support for candidates.

By jim d

October 10, 2006 02:58 PM | Link to this

Indeed Jeff,

It also will be requiring every teacher to teach the exact same thing on the very same day.

What happens to the ones that don’t get it?

I’m sure they won’t be left behind cause that would be in violation of the LAW

By jim d

October 10, 2006 03:07 PM | Link to this

Jeff,

Here’s the real problem I see with the new curriculum. As I understand it, teachers will have no creative license to teach at a pace or in a manner so that every student will gain the most knowledge from the lesson they are attempting to teach. Sice everything is paced at the speed the Government has deemed appropriate, no time will exist to reach the students that don’t pick it up immediately.

And this improves education how?

By Jeff

October 10, 2006 03:38 PM | Link to this

Regarding “high level” below the HS level:

As it currently exists, all students currently operate under exactly the same curriculum, regardless of percieved “level”. ALL students will be pushed equally hard, and ALL students will have exactly the same things demanded of them. Definetly challenges - in Majette’s words that I like so much - the “culture of complacency”. (Yes, I am one of the old school that believes that the VAST majority of “special needs” cases are simple laziness. I do acknowledge a real need in some students, but the number of real cases is FAR lower than the size of most SpecEd enrollments.)

BTW: Math ability really doesn’t differ until HS. It is not until HS that true, abstract operational math is REALLY encountered, even with GPS.

jim:

The State does have recommended pacing, but each teacher is free to develop their class as they see fit. I am in a situation where I am under orders from the school level to follow it exactly, but there is no state mandate ordering me to do so.

By jim d

October 10, 2006 03:54 PM | Link to this

Jeff,

It’s comming! It already exists in several schools and school districts that I’m aware of.

Get ready.

By jim d

October 10, 2006 03:58 PM | Link to this

Oh and Jeff,

I just have to exception to your statement “Math ability really doesn’t differ until HS”.

This may be true in a generalization but by no means can be taken as a definitive answer. It fails to take into account the exceptions that do occur, like 10 year olds doing college work.

By Jeff

October 10, 2006 04:05 PM | Link to this

Jim:

For the most part, when I look at any two kids in my classes and why theyir grades are different, I see one of two factors:

Present Laziness

or

Past Laziness.

Maybe a combo of both. (Note that there are a couple of exceptions, as I do have a couple of students that are genuine SpecEd, but other than those the only exceptions I would make would be the prodigies.)

By SET

October 10, 2006 04:16 PM | Link to this

I looked up the Wikipedia article on Denise Majette.

A candidate with an education and background like that never runs for school superintendent. She would be a rare opportunity for your voters to select to handle the insane and arcane rules of running a school system. I’d be inclined to vote for her even if I disagreed on some policy matters because the bureaucratic problems you face probably transcends policy.

And there is reason to believe that as a politician she’s not going to stray too far from the voters wishes. Most of her duties are financial and government interfacing anyway.

And it seems she has years as a trial judge. These are skills that aren’t often for sale. She’s probably left wing to my right wing but… I’d suspect she’s probably going to be more adept at crisis management than the standard candidate would be.

Is the opponent just an ordinary Educrat?

By WFC

October 11, 2006 09:31 AM | Link to this

The superintendent of schools has almost NO influence on the learning that occurs in a classroom. It simply doesn’t matter unless you get a crook who steals money which should be going to help kids.

By KA

October 11, 2006 09:45 AM | Link to this

WFC, So why have a superintendent of schools, if she has nothing to do with instruction?

By Lisa B.

October 11, 2006 12:02 PM | Link to this

SET, I really appreciate your comments. Your posts frequently cause me to evaluate issues in another light. I will take another look at Majette.