Get Schooled

By luvs2teach

November 16, 2006 10:54 AM | Link to this

I don’t know about a national curriculum, but I will throw this thought out there:

With all the transiency we have in this country now, there are kids who definitely have gaps in their education (science and other subjects) due to moves - not just state to state, but even from one school to another within a state on county.

I don’t think the science problem is solely curriculum related. We have been pushing science (and social studies) to the side with the emphasis on remediation in reading, writing, and math.

We also don’t have class schedules designed to be able to teach science well - it’s hard to do a quality lab in 45 minutes.

Finally, too many kids are trained to look at science as knowing the right answer instead of knowing how to discover an answer.

By Jeff

November 16, 2006 10:56 AM | Link to this

Q1: How fair is it to give a kid a test that includes questions that are NOT multiple choice? A1: It is COMPLETELY fair, or at least as fair as life is anyway. LIFE IS NOT A MULTIPLE CHOICE TEST!

Q2: How fair is it to give a kid a test that include concepts they have never studied??? A2: Students? Study? YEAH RIGHT!!!! They won’t even do their assigned CLASSWORK, much less STUDY!

By Nikole

November 16, 2006 11:01 AM | Link to this

APS should focus on actually teaching science and social studies in elementary schools. Students spend so much time on reading that they do not even get to learn other subjects. I’d expect them to fail when they are not getting any science until middle school.

By Recently Retired

November 16, 2006 11:20 AM | Link to this

What is wrong with a national curriculum? We seem to be about comparing kids in GA to kids in other states with completely different curriculums. A standard curriculum between states might make the comparison a little more valid. Do other countries use one standard curriculum throughout the country or does each province, state, burgh set their own?

By JustMe

November 16, 2006 11:27 AM | Link to this

I recently found out that a particular middle school still does social promotion. In other words, even if a student does not pass a single core subject in the 6th grade, they are still promoted to 7th grade. Even if a 7th grader is reading on a 3rd grade level, they are still promoted to 8th grade.

Is anyone else as angry as me? No wonder our middle school CRCT scores are in the toilet! No wonder our high schools are packed with students that believe that they will pass without doing any work! No wonder our HSGT scores are so low!

As I have stated many times. Things MUST be fixed starting in the 1st grade and work up - not from the top down. Stop “giving” participation grades. Stop allowing students to turn in work at the end of the semester - give them zeros!!! They must understand that there really are negative consequences. We cannot wait until high school and then expect them to suddenly perform - they will not.

By EducatorX3

November 16, 2006 11:54 AM | Link to this

Personally, I like the idea of a national curriculum - with some flexibility. The Georgia Performance Standards are closer to the curriculum suggested by most of the professional content organizations, but it is not yet fully implemented.

As for teaching science and social studies in elementary schools - there is nothing in the K-5 curriculum for either subject that is not taught again in middle school and/or high school. If these babies can’t read, write, and do math, they can’t read the science text or write the lab report or compute the data. Now, I know you can teach children to read using informational text but I also know that many of our elementary teacher-prep programs require very little advanced science or social studies coursework. These teachers are experts in teaching reading, writing, and math. Let them do that job - and do it well - without adding the other content areas until the child is reading? In my perfect, make-believe school, students would not have “official” science or social studies instruction until third grade, and only then if the students are reading on grade level. If they are not yet on grade level, they would continue to get “learning to read” instruction rather than “reading to learn.”

Think about it….is a 7 year-old really ready to learn about photosynthesis? Science can be about strutured play and experimentation at the lower levels. I did many things as a child out of curiosity without knowing they were science experiements. It didn’t hurt me to not study the specifics until later. (Since I used to teach science, I might even say it helped develop my understanding through discovery learning. I wonder if my parents knew that was happening??? :0 )

JustMe - I have to share something I heard at a conference last week. A well known educational writer was discussing the concept of giving zeros. He said if the assignment is worth giving, then it is worth making the student do it. (I agree.) Then he went on to explain that if we really want to prepare students for the real world and real consequences, there would be a penalty for doing the work on time, but it would still be done. To prepare one for the real world we shouldn’t allow them to not do something that was assigned. His examples were great: If a principal tells a teacher to have grades completed by Friday, and they aren’t done, does the teacher get told, “oh never, mind. Don’t do your grades?” If we don’t pay our taxes by April 15, does the IRS send us a letter saying, “Oh never mind. Don’t pay your taxes. We will give you a zero?” If we keep a book past its library due date, does the librarian tell us to keep the book? I agree, we have to teach responsibility, but I think allowing students to not do what was assigned is teaching them something entirely different. Just a thought.

Have a good one!

By SET

November 16, 2006 12:18 PM | Link to this

I guess this question goes back to “what is our mission statement”. Are we mainly interested in playing PC games or are we trying to make the most academically with what we have to work with?

Only a certain percentage of adolescents have the IQ to finish high school. That percentage may be different from state to state and region to region. And yes, ethnicity is a major factor in this. Sad but true.

If you set a “national curriculum” that is intended to match a high school graduate, or worse, a university bound high school student, you brand the other students hopeless failures - when they are not hopeless and not failures. They’re just different. You can see the difference even within a family grouping (have 4 or 5 kids, there will be a smarter one and a dumb one, the others average).

I’d support either a lowest common denominator where we say that at least a set level is required to be considered a voting citizen. Or, to have a tiered national curriculum, with one tier for HS graduate, one for university bound, and perhaps a vocational ed level as lowest common denominator. (Does the UK do something like this already?)

But my point is that we should not further engage in the fantasy that one size fits all and that we are all alike. That fantasy is part (combined with no discipline) of what has ruined what was once the best school system in the world.

Educate the bright, train the dull.

By jonny

November 16, 2006 12:19 PM | Link to this

By Buy Danish

November 16, 2006 12:40 PM | Link to this

Patti,

Georgia’s science curriculum is excellent and very challenging, and the fact that they fared poorly on a national test doesn’t mean much since, as it is pointed out, they learn different concepts at different times.

As for the fairness of giving a national test, what difference does it make? Isn’t it just an indicator like the Iowa Test of Basic Skills?

I am completely opposed to national curriculum standards. Were they to come about I could easily forsee politically-correct sociology overtaking the curriculum.

Let the States devise their own curriculum. I don’t want San Francisco gender and race obsessed “educators” dictating what our kids should be learning. There’s too much of that already.

This is a bit off topic, but as the mother of a seventh grader, IMHO where Georgia does a poor job is in “social science” and “English Lit”

In “Social Science” (Social Studies for you newbies) they are spending far too much time studying meaningless trivia - right now it’s insignificant details about Africa, and not nearly enough about American History - of which they know just about nothing.

As for English literature - it virtually doesn’t exist. The emphasis is on “Language arts” grammar and writing. Reading literature together as a class is the best way to get that sort of foundation as the students learn writing and grammar by example.

Jeff,

Are you a teacher? If so, perhaps a different school would be appropriate. There are plenty of great, hard-working kids out there. You just need to find them.

By Jeff

November 16, 2006 12:50 PM | Link to this

Buy Danish… take a look at one of the other topics here… I won’t be a teacher much longer

By Patti Ghezzi

November 16, 2006 01:01 PM | Link to this

Hi Jeff, I think I didn’t convey well what I meant by the fairness of the NAEP and it not being an entirely multiple choice test. If a child has not yet heard the word “photosynthesis,” she might still be able to guess right on a multiple choice test. But on a question calling for her response, and no word bank, she is going to be at a loss.

I love the fact that the NAEP is not all multiple choice. The press booklet had some sample questions and responses, and you can really see the kids’ thought process by their answers.

Patti

By the real EW

November 16, 2006 01:11 PM | Link to this

Patti,

I think it starts in elementary, my daughter is in the third grade, we just received ITBS scores back, and she was in the 90 percentile in Math and Reading however in Science a 20! In SS a 56! I was so super HOT! But as a middle school teacher, I know that students come in grossly unprepared in Science and SS, because elementary school is so concentrated on Reading and Math. So now as a parent, seeing this I have to find some supplemental materials for Science and SS for my daughter so she can be ahead of the game, plus she loves Science and I would love for her to take the path of a Science career as most girls don’t get “into” science.

As for the National Curriculum, I really don’t know if it would help. We have to start a very aggressive program for the students who can’t even read, write and add on level, I promise you in some schools we are at more than 50% of students not on level.

JustME, you must have just relocated to Rockdale County, yeah they school system made AYP, but they will promote any student who failed all subjects who passed the CRCT in a heat beat, or they will flat out socially promote.

By Jeff

November 16, 2006 01:18 PM | Link to this

Patti,

HOPEFULLY the question is designed to say more “What is photosynthesis” than “What do we call how plants breath”. If this is the case, she might not be able to give an exact definition, but she SHOULD be able to explain herself. No word bank necessary.

Por ejemplo: If I was asked that question, unless I was directed to write x number of sentences or y length of paper, I would simply say something to the effect of “how plants breath and/ or eat”, which, at its most basic level, is true. Now, from a college educated level, I can tell you that photosynthesis is the process by which chlorophylls in plant green cells produce energy by converting CO2 (Carbon Dioxide) into O2 (Oxygen). Even I could not tell you HOW that happens - but I’m Math (truly CS, but CS is an offshoot - at its most basic level - of math).

From an educator though (granted, not a science educator): If question says “What is photosynthesis” and I get back “How plants breathe and/ or eat” or something that gets that point across, I can give them the points there. If I ask “What is photosynthesis” and you tell me it is the process by which salt water is converted into fresh water (desalination, btw), then I know you have no clue what you’re talking about.

By Buy Danish

November 16, 2006 01:24 PM | Link to this

Jeff,

I have taken a look at the other subjects here and I know that griping about the kids and their parents is an oft-repeated theme. Some of those complaints are entirely legitimate, some are not.

All schools are not alike. If you found a nice middle-class school to teach in and you might be pleasantly surprised. There are bad apples everywhere, but in some schools there are a lot of really nice shiny ones.

By Jeff

November 16, 2006 01:45 PM | Link to this

Buy Danish:

Without overtaking this topic as well (and I didn’t mean to overtake Swept Under the Rug y’all!):

I have Asperger’s Syndrome, which makes it impossible for me to relate to others in any “normal” way. I cannot read people the way that “normals” can, and I cannot separate work, home, and church the way most “normals” can. Because of these two aspects, I will never truly understand classroom behavior nor how my own actions are truly seen. And because of this, I can never be a true teacher - at least today’s variety of it.

By high school teacher

November 16, 2006 02:24 PM | Link to this

SET, we may not agree on many issues, but for this one, you hit the nail on the head!

By SET

November 16, 2006 02:38 PM | Link to this

high school teacher:

It makes me worry when too many people agree with me… Maybe the end is getting near! I’m supposed to be an extremist remember?

By Ernest

November 16, 2006 02:40 PM | Link to this

HST, you beat me to it, SET comes through again with another thoughtful comment!

JustMe and other teachers, is it fair to say that the problems with grade inflation start at the ES? I ask because with my youngest ES children, I find myself ‘lightening’ up and telling my darling wife it is OK if the kids get a zero IF we use that to remind them of their responsibility for turning in HW on time or whatever the case. My rationale being if they learn consequences early in their academic career, it makes it easier on us as they reach MS and HS. After all, do college recruiters look at your ES GPA? I’m sure many can imagine my darling wife has other comments on that….

By Kage

November 16, 2006 02:44 PM | Link to this

While I don’t think a national curriculum is in order, I do think our new science curriculum is wanting. When we tried to find new textbooks for upper elementary, there were none that correlated even remotely to the new standards. The majority of other states teach a similarly paced science curriculum. Ours are so far off of that path that it’s going to affect our performance on nationally normed tests. We’re taking the MAP test. Not only are our science scores terrible, but the data is useless. We’re getting back information that 4th graders don’t know x, y, and z, and we’re thinking of course not, it’s not taught until 5th grade. The new standards are just as misaligned as the old ones. I’m sad that Georgia missed this opportunity to get on track with the rest of the country.

By JustMe

November 16, 2006 02:57 PM | Link to this

EducatorX3 -

We will have to agree to disagree. Students SHOULD be given zeros if they do not do the assignments.

In my class, they can turn in assignments one day late with a penalty. After that, it is a zero and they cannot make it up.

Why do I feel that way? Well, as a practicing teacher, I must review the homework or assignment before a test is given. With your way, all a student would do is wait until I give the answers or work them on the board, copy whatever I do on a paper, and then turn it in with a smile and say, “I’m done!” Do you really think that a student should be rewarded at all for this (even a grade of 10)? If so, then YOU HAVE GOT TO BE KIDDING!!!!!

By jim d

November 16, 2006 03:21 PM | Link to this

A national Curriculum?

Why not?

But before you answer that question pick up a copy of “The Road to Serfdom” by Friedrich A. Hayek.

By JustMe

November 16, 2006 03:22 PM | Link to this

EducatorX3 -

Also (I forgot to add), if you do not pay your taxes, there is a very good chance that you go to jail for tax evasion. They do not ever say: “just pay us whenever you feel like it.” This is what you are teaching the students - there is no penalty for late, work does not matter, do whatever you want, etc.

By Yesterday'squestionanswered

November 16, 2006 03:33 PM | Link to this

Well, if you wanted to know if students drag in the afternoon (when science is generally taught) NOW you have your answer. These scores are a direct result of the heavy-handed top down style of APS bureaucracy. There are many teachers who try to fit in science when they can, only to be told not to do it because “it’s the reading block” “it’s the math block” etc. Like they aren’t READING a science book! And isn’t it interesting; teachers are told “no excuses” about test scores, but what does APS do? Talk about the number of kids on “free and reduced” lunch. What’s the word I’m looking for? Hypocritical?

By EducatorX#

November 16, 2006 03:45 PM | Link to this

JustMe, I don’t think our ideas are as far as part as it might seem. I certainly do think there are limits on how long you can wait for something. And like you, once the assignment has been discussed, reviewed, reworked, explained, etc., the penalty for late work would be major - even a zero, if it is deemed appropriate, BUT, I would still want the student to do the work.

When I taught in middle grades classrooms, I was in a school with an inverted bell curve - we had lots of wealthy families with Mom at home waiting for the bus with milk, cookies, and a college education. Then we had lots of kids living far below the poverty level who went home to babysit siblings while Mom worked the night shift.

I had a hard time deciding (and still do) if homework should be graded. So much depends on the purpose of the assignment, the time allowed to do it, the age of the student, etc.

With your one day policy with a penalty, you have made it very clear what you expect. Based on your posts, I have the impression that you get good work out of the majority of your students. Don’t you wish we had the secret formula to getting it from all of them?

By EducatorX3

November 16, 2006 03:53 PM | Link to this

JustMe, I went back to read what I had posted. I didn’t go into specifics about what I believe but was just sharing what this author had said.

I agree with you…even a grace period has an end! My biggest point is that some kids just need a bit longer sometimes to “get it.” So, it depends if we are talking about grading or assessing.

If my assignment is to find out what they know, then they don’t have to worry about what grade they get. If the assignment is to practice a skill, then they should be able to show me what they know and generate questions about what they didn’t know - again, there is not a grade involved. But if it is an assignment that is to be graded, I want students to have sufficient time but to also have a limit.

We aren’t so far apart. (I just wish I could send some of them to jail for not getting it done!)

By pd

November 16, 2006 04:46 PM | Link to this

How can we assess Georgia students in science using one standard measurement, when the science curriculum in Georgia differs from one county to the next?

By Kage

November 16, 2006 05:05 PM | Link to this

It shouldn’t differ from one county to the next. The QCCs are statewide, as are the GPS. For instance, the Solar System is taught in 4th, Rocks & Minerals in 3rd, regardless of your county. Now resources with which to teach these standards vary widely from school to school never mind county to county.

By Broken Record

November 17, 2006 08:44 AM | Link to this

I don’t support a national curriculum as I oppose any federal control of a profession that IMO operates best at the local level. Teachers should teach the kids how to read well, math skills, how to comprehend, how to think critically, how to reasearch, in short how to LEARN. Teachers should develop these skills through a variety of subjects offered. But on a national level WHO would decide what subjects in what particular order, and what’s included or excluded? As different as our blogging opinions are here, the battle would be insane over the best standards, material, publishers, and yes, political agenda, for a national curriculum. It would be an administrative cash cow boondoggle! If teachers would just focus on developing learning skills in the students, then the students would have the ability to master whatever subject matter was presented. Back to Basics on the Level Level!!!

By Lee

November 17, 2006 11:08 AM | Link to this

I think BR has hit upon the main focal point of a national curriculum. That is, federal control of the education process.

After all, NCLB was a smashing success, so why not!

By jim d

November 17, 2006 11:54 AM | Link to this

I think perhaps BR has already read Hayek’s “The Road to Serfdom”

By Broken Record

November 17, 2006 12:14 PM | Link to this

jim, No I haven’t read it, but I’m going to the library, and will check it out, thanks!

By jim d

November 17, 2006 01:00 PM | Link to this

enjoy the read

By Competitive

November 20, 2006 05:54 PM | Link to this

I am not a big fan of federal education, but a national curriculum is becoming a must. We have too many parents moving their kids all over the country to allow such huge gaps in education. Make it simple, these are the topics taught in each grade level/subject during the Fall semester and these are taught during the spring. Teachers take the basic curriculum guide and develop unit and lesson plans to meet the needs of their students.

I think we need more than just a national curriculum, however. We need a national grade scale. How much sense does it make for 70% to be passing in one system and 60% passing in the next. That’s just dumb, but that’s American education.

We also need a national online student records database. IEPs, discipline files, lost textbooks, grades, and other information significant to the education of a child should be available the instant a student walks into our classroom, not months later as is often the case today. Some schools don’t even send the records of a student when they are requested.

Another thing we need is a national definition for SPED and gifted qualifications. It is crazy to me that we have to retest students who are served in other states for SPED or gifted.

Common sense tells us that our teachers and students needs are not being met with the excessive localization of education in our country.