Get Schooled

By Tony

July 9, 2007 12:31 PM | Link to this

You state that there are “so many ways for a school to make AYP” as if the schools have AYP handed to them on a silver platter. Unfortunately, this twists one of the realities: schools who miss the target in one subgroup, even with the “second look” can become a Needs Improvement school. One of the fallacies of NCLB is its hypothesis that all student subgroups should perform on the same levels. When schools are faced with the defecits of special education students, ELL students, and the effects of poverty on the economically disadvantaged it is ridiculous to propose such an idea of equity.

The revisions that need to be made to NCLB are basic and necessary. It would be better that the whole mechanism be dumped in favor of local decisions, but I don’t think that will happen.

The current testing frenzy being forced upon education is doing much more harm than good because it is narrowing what is taught in schools. The evidence of this becomes much more alarming when you talk with gifted and high achieving students. They will share with you details of the things they must endure as a result of this phenomenon. My children have had to lose valuable class time to take practice and predictor tests. This past year my son was pulled from his physics class on several occasions for such nonsense.

The list of changes as presented by Mrs. Cox and the board of education would give good schools a little breathing room, but ultimately the requirement for all children to be on grade level will be impossible to meet. At that time, there will finally be undeniable proof that public schools have failed. This will be quite ironic for a nation that has one of the most educated citizenries of the world.

By mmm

July 9, 2007 1:36 PM | Link to this

Tony, we do not have one of the most educated citizenries in the world.

By jim d

July 9, 2007 2:14 PM | Link to this

Indeed, we must have one of the most ignorant citizenries in the world if we believe even for one moment that penalizing a public school system will help it improve.

By Lisa B.

July 9, 2007 3:40 PM | Link to this

I love “differientiated consequences.” (noted with sarcasm) My Lord, the DOE wants us to differentiate instruction, but all students must pass the same tests. The DOE wants to hold all schools accountable to the same standards, but now wants to “differientiate the consequences” when schools fail to meet those standards. Which way does the DOE want it? If all school and students are NOT the same, why hold them all to the same standards in the first place? Is the DOE now making excuses for some students and some schools? What happened to the old standard line that “if our expectations are high enough, all children will achieve on grade level”?

It is impossible for all schools to succeed under the current laws. I agree with Jim D. It’s ridiculous to think schools can be punished into succeeding. Our weakest schools need the most support and the best teachers; not consequences.

To answer Bridget’s question, it may be worse for elementary schools to have too few pass the tests. If high numbers of kids are already failing in elementary school, that pretty much dooms high school graduation rates down the road.

By just a teacher

July 9, 2007 3:47 PM | Link to this

At the risk of sounding like a teacher (or a parent), I don’t like your tone, Bridget. I agree with Tony’s point that your post makes it sound as if the system were rigged to make it too easy to make AYP. Ha! NCLB is designed to penalize schools (and bolster public support for vouchers, but I digress). If Kathy Cox is willing to look at something beyond the surface numbers, I say it’s about time. Getting true answers about why some students and schools continue to stuggle requires not just a second look, but perhaps a third, and a fourth, and maybe even a home visit.

By Janine

July 9, 2007 5:42 PM | Link to this

Gosh…here it is 5:30 and only 5 posts!! IMO, we [ and every other group/individual interested in public school education today ] have hacked AYP/NCLB to death!!!the lack of interest is indicative of the resignation , “I GIVE UP”… we are beginning to feel. Aware of the NCLB goal : that *by 2014 [is that right?] every child will be on grade level…regardless of disability or special circumstances *, we all know that the politicians who designed NCLB are not living in the world with the rest of us. ANd Ms. Cox, sadly, is now.. [though I had great hopes for her ]..in bed with them all, regardless of the so -called * differentiated consequences* she is now advocating.

By OldSchool

July 9, 2007 6:36 PM | Link to this

I wonder what would happen to test scores if the GaDOE and local admins just backed off and allowed teachers to teach. They could continue to monitor classrooms by dropping by and/or randomly talking to students. It might take a year or three, but I honestly feel that the majority of teachers in our fair state really do know how to teach and how to engage their students WHEN THEY ARE ALLOWED TO DO SO in their own style.

Or maybe I’m just fed up with being forced to adopt the “method du jour” year after year after year when none have worked as effectively in my CTAE lab as my own adaptive style. (I tailor my approach to the “chemistry” of the individual class, giving individual attention where needed and using peer tutors.)

By Lisa B.

July 9, 2007 6:40 PM | Link to this

Perhaps many regular bloggers are traveling and too busy to rehash NCLB. Hopefully, when the Reauthorization is completed, ESEA will be a little friendlier to public education. Some of the political candidates at least PRETEND they’ve been listening.

By decaturparent

July 9, 2007 6:42 PM | Link to this

Mark my word….. it may not seem like it now, but proposals like differentiated consequences are the beginning of the end of NCLB. I really do believe that there is enough political clout behind dumping NCLB to actually make it happen. Pair that with the fact that it has not improved education one iota, and I would bet that 9 out of 10 (not including Bush, of course) politicians believe it was a mistake.

Here’s the rub, no politician is going to admit that they made a mistake with NCLB. Also no politician is going to flat out repeal NCLB because to do so would cost them money and votes.

The way NCLB will disappear is through several years, possibly up to a decade, of nibbling. The NCLB that exists in the BIG YEAR - 2014 - will not even closely resemble what we have now and will basically just be a meaningless bit of fluffy bureaucratic garbage that still sounds good but has very little real effect on schools.

I will print this post, put it in my desk and dig it up in 2014 just so I can say, “I told you so.”

By fed up

July 9, 2007 6:45 PM | Link to this

What needs a second look is the rampant cheating on the CRCT that went on in Atlanta Public Schools this year. I spoke to an administrator and a teacher who both directly witnessed not only piecemeal cheating, but also encouragement to cheat handed down from the administration.

There’s your scoop, Bridget, now y’all take it and run.

By fed up

July 9, 2007 6:52 PM | Link to this

Hey, oldschool…. just for your files. I am the parent of a couple of kids who end up being “peer tutors” all the time. FYI, they HATE IT and so do their parents. Oh, and also for your files, the kids being tutored don’t like a peer telling them what to do either. It makes them feel stupid.

“Peer tutoring” may make your life easier, but it stinks for everyone else.

If a kid already gets what you are teaching, don’t force them in to classroom servitude… challenge them with something harder and let them actually learn for a change. T-E-A-C-H them!!!!

Do us all a favor and teach the kids yourself, OK? YOU ARE THE T-E-A-C-H-E-R!… unless of course you plan on paying your “peer tutors” the going rate for a parapro.

By OldSchool

July 10, 2007 8:39 AM | Link to this

Ouch! Sorry I riled you, fed up (6:25 p.m.). I should have explained. I used “peer tutor” for lack of a better term. You see, I teach Engineering Drawing which includes…in each of my 4 blocks…traditional board drafting, AutoCAD, and Inventor (solid modeling). I have students in grades 9 through 12 with varying levels of skill, experience, interest, ability and there is only one of me. I instruct in the areas of basic & technical drafting, residential design, civil drafting, 3D solid modeling, in addition to AutoCAD productivity, career and workplace skills, work ethics, and I am also required by the State to have a SkillsUSA section imbedded in my program with all the instruction it entails. I have no parapro although I am fortunate to have members of my Advisory committee volunteer to teach their special areas like surveying, structural steel, and so forth.

My more experienced students may be asked by me or another student for help. Some decline but others are willing. I have very clear rules for our version of “peer tutoring” because I don’t want my students doing the work for someone else. They can have nothing in their hands, can point with their finger, and can explain step by step. Have you ever had a computer problem and when your “peer tutor” came over to help, he or she quickly tapped on the keyboard and voila! problem solved and you had no clue what they did? Well, by having the hands off policy, it forces the helping student to formulate a steps-procedure and clear instructions while the asking student does the work and questions when needed. After going through the steps, the asking student is required to go back through the steps on his/her own with no or very little prompting from the helping student so both know the lesson was learned if not mastered. Both learn. It’s the old “To teach is to learn twice.” There are those students who just will not ask ME for help for whatever reason. (I’m not one of those unapproachable or belittling types. My own daughter would not seek my help but became an excellent drafter…and went into public relations in college!)

Teaching/learning in my class is collaborative, individual, teamwork, solo, interactive, never dull, sometimes tedious, but always challenging. The students who “peer tutor” others learn quite alot themselves and experience a touch of altruism. It’s not a matter of anyone “telling them what to do,” it’s more like any engineering/architectural office where people work together for the good of the group.

I’m sorry your own children hate helping others for whatever reason. There is no servitude in my lab but there is a spirit of cooperation, good humor, community, and there is also a whole lot of learning going on that can’t always be found in a textbook…

…or a vacuum.

By luvs2teach

July 10, 2007 9:47 AM | Link to this

OldSchool - I read fedup’s post last night when it was too late to post - I immediately wanted to come to your defense! Based on your comments and your insight, I would love to be able to have my child in your classroom.

I’m guessing fedup didn’t know that you taught “shop” and had several different thing going on at once - it’s not your traditional lecture-style classroom. My thinking is that these kids are going to be working someday (one hopes anyhow, LOL), and may sometimes be asked to show a new employee how to do something - your version of “peer tutoring” is just good job training, IMO.

Now, in a slight defense of peer-tutoring, it can be a good tool - but just like using a screwdriver to hammer a nail is ineffective, it should never be used to keep the “smart” kids busy.

Sometimes I use peer-teaching in a “carousel” when each child becomes an expert in something (usually a vocabulary word) and we rotate through the class with each child teaching the other their word. It’s fun; the kids like it, and EVERYONE is involved (that to me is the best reason to use it). Occasionally I’ll select a few to see if they want to prepare a power point to present to class, or ask someone if they want to show another how to use a piece of equipment or a computer program, but this is strictly voluntary. Fedup needs to talk with her kids teachers about enrichment or acceleration instead of being used as peer tutors.

On topic, and using the tool analogy, just as a carpenter has more than one tool in the box, a homebuyer will use more than one test to judge a potential new house. You would never buy a house based on the picture in the realty magazine, so using just one measure of a school to determine its failure or success seems ludicrous - even the AJC uses a multitude of factors in rating schools in its school guide. Failing an entire school because the ESOL sub-group didn’t pass in English is akin to passing on a house because it has a minor flaw.

There is a huge difference between a school that fails in one sub-group and a school that fails across the board. Back to my house analogy, the first is a house wiht a minor flaw, the other is one that needs to be condemned.

By thomas

July 10, 2007 9:57 AM | Link to this

The argument against “peer tutoting” is mainly made by supposedly “high performing” students and their parents who object to having to help others not “on their level”. There are times when it is beneficial to have students help each other. In fact many educational theorists claim that students often learn more from interacting with their peers than from the teacher. This is one of the principles behind cooperative learning.

Progressives also claim that cooperative learning also improves students ability to interact and work with others in a positive way. Both peer tutoring and cooperative learning are strategies many teachers (particularly newer ones who have been indoctrinated by the “progressive” colleges of education- you know what I’m talking about- the ones that REFUSE to teach teachers how to teach phonics because its “evil”, “boring”, “drill and kill”) use today.

I understand the complaints of parents who object to their children helping other students. I do not agree however. This is one of the few times I agree with a progressive educational theory (although we know that so many, good in theory, turn to hogwash when teachers are compelled to use only those methods in instruction). There are times when students learn some better when a classmate explains it to them. Many students get tired of hearing the teacher babble on and on. In addition, some students feel embarassed by having the teacher pull them out to work with them on a topic they are struggling with.

This is one reason why we are moving towards inclusion. Although there are times when it is benefical to pull certain students out of a group, many times it benefits students, socially, emotionally, and educationally to try and instruct them with their peers. When you pull kids out, you can make them feel different from everyone else. You end up singling them out. Keeping them as part of the group helps maintain their self-esteem and self confidence.

By OldSchool

July 10, 2007 10:38 AM | Link to this

Thanks for the understanding, luvs2teach. I guess I’ve always used a “workplace style” of instruction because I learn as much from my students as they do from me. In an area as diverse as drafting (architecture, civil, technical, solid modeling, etc) it is impossible for me to be the “Fountain of All Knowledge” and I’m not smug enough to pretend I am. My students know I have my strong and weak areas and they also know “half of all knowledge is knowing WHERE to find it.” We seek answers together.

Textbooks in my lab are not the Holy Grail nor are they perfect. They are good resources as is the internet and my Advisory Committee. But all resources have flaws and shortcomings. Just because it’s in print doesn’t automatically make it correct. They need to know they can question and not just copy from a book. If I teach my students nothing else, I want them to have a basic set of tools that they can ADAPT to new situations. They don’t have to do things exactly my way as long as their methods are safe, productive, and get the job done right (ANSI Standards). Doesn’t a future employer deserve that?

My students can work entirely by themselves and find their own answers or they can seek help as they see fit. Some will never ask or share. That’s okay. I just feel a little sad for folks who jealously guard their knowledge and skills. We can learn so much from each other and if we adapt it to the task at hand, we can be so much more productive…and happy.

By luvs2teach

July 10, 2007 11:09 AM | Link to this

OldSchool - I try to run my science classroom in a very similar way - more like a working laboratory than a lecture hall. I have to lecture sometimes, but I don’t like it :-)

By fed up

July 10, 2007 11:13 AM | Link to this

Old School, you are right, you situation is different… this whole student tutoring thing just struck a nerve with me because it has been abused in my children’s classrooms and I would bet that it is abused in 90% of classrooms that struggle with a large span of abilities.

My kids do not mind helping others at all. They pet sit and babysit for people for free. They help out at a local homeless shelter for women and children at least once a quarter (whenever our church rotation comes up). They are both Scouts and do a ton of service projects related to that - all without complaint. They help around the house (although they aren’t as happy to do that as I would like!!)

They would not mind helping other students in class if it wasn’t abused. Out of 6 projects during the year, my oldest daughter had to pair with an LD/BD kid for five of them. He did nothing at all; she had to do all the work and all he did was annoy her and make her job harder. I asked the teacher about it, and she said that my daughter was very patient with this boy and was helping him learn to organize himself. This was abusive in my mind.

My son reads several years above grade level and spends at least a half hour a day helping LD kids learn to read instead of improving his own reading skills. The rest of the time he sits around bored while the teacher goes over things that he already knows with the rest of the class.

His teacher says that he doesn’t need to work on reading skills because he is above the top DRA measurement for his grade (and has been all year). He is sick and tired of reading easy books with kids in his class who can’t learn to read. After all, he is 7 years-old and is not a trained educator. He always ends up at a table with the difficult and slow kids because He is very well behaved and smart and they need him to help keep the feral kids calm.

Kids should learn how to work with others, but there needs to be a limit. Gifted children need to be able to learn something new every day… they are entitled to the same free and “APPROPRIATE” education that everyone else is entitled to. By the way, for the record, “gifted services” is a scam.

Again, my apologies Old School…. it sounds like your situation is very different from and elementary school classroom. I just saw the work “peer tutor” and snapped!!!!

By luvs2teach

July 10, 2007 11:40 AM | Link to this

FedUp - my daughter was often put in the same situation as your kids - precisely because she was patient and well-behaved.

I started sending her to school with the books she and I selected and I wanted her to read during reading time instead of reading to others. Luckily she had a teacher that understood and was OK with that (if she didn’t understand, then I was prepared to go to the administrator).

As far as the project situation goes, I hope your daughter wasn’t being graded the same as the other boy - cooperative learning should NEVER mean one child does all the work and everyone gets the same grade. Forewarned is forearmed in my opinion, and I suggest you do a little research into cooperative learning and grading policies so you can be prepared to discuss the teacher’s policies on this stuff in the future, so your daughter doesn’t get taken advantage of (it was situations like this that made me want to go into teaching, LOL).

Unfortunately it is a situation like your children’s that taints a good tool like peer-teaching or cooperative learning.

A website I might suggest for you is Hoagies Gifted

It has lots of good information and advocacy tips.

By OldSchool

July 10, 2007 11:44 AM | Link to this

Can’t blame you at all, fed up. I’ve posted quite a bit before and took for granted everyone knew me.

It is so difficult being a “regular” classroom teacher and having inclusion students…especially at my school where I get only a “weekly progress report” form in my box and no direct communication from the SE teachers unless I initiate it. For my money, every student would be better served if SE kids were better matched to the classes they are included in. For example, I had a student who “drew” his heart out but will never be a drafter. I created the most basic work for him to do and even tried him on the computer to no avail. Had it not been for the rest of the class offering their encouragement and help (he NEVER asked anyone) I think both he and I would have thrown up our hands in defeat. He never even mastered just printing his name legibly but to his credit, he tried harder than many of my more capable students.

So how is putting him in my class serving him well? His persistence is commendable but perhaps there is a better fit as far as a career-directed class is concerned.

And as far as your son not being a trained educator, neither am I trained in dealing with special needs students. A sheet of paper with adaptations listed out for his/her particular needs just doesn’t get it. I completely understand your son’s frustration. And kudos to your daughter. I hope in the future they both find teachers who allow them to soar instead of yoking them to those who can’t or won’t.

By Lisa B.

July 10, 2007 1:05 PM | Link to this

It is great to hear how “peer tutoring” can work effectively. Perhaps we should rename the experiences of children such as mine and Fedup’s to “peer babysitting.”

In defense of teachers, most of us have never been trained for inclusion. Without training and support, the situation can quickly become frustrating for all involved. When done well, collaborative learning benefits most students. I’ve had great success with it until I had a group so diverse in ability (preK-12th grade levels)that I was overwhelmed.

I imagine we’ll keep trying evertything until all children make AYP :-)

By thomas

July 10, 2007 1:48 PM | Link to this

I understand your frustration, fed up. Situations like the one you describe happen quite frequently, unfortunately. And quite frankly, all the students in a group usually end up getting the same grade, regardless of the work each individual member put into a project.

To be quite honest, this is one reason why I do not do a lot of group projects. I learned early on about the pitfalls of cooperative grouping and the potpourri classrooms we have now. I would put together “heterogenous” groups in the attempt to have balance between the groups and to make sure all students could “contribute”. It usually turned out that the “good” students were buffers to even out the foolishness, inability, and non work put forth by slackers, knuckleheads, and sloths. Was it fair? No, but h_ll, that’s what you’ve got put up with in the average classroom. Not only so-called “special education” students and “ESOL” students piled in under the name of “inclusion”, but so-called “normal” students who lack the motivation and desire to put forth the appropriate effort in school.

By Tony

July 10, 2007 4:09 PM | Link to this

The US is indeed one of the most well educated nations in the world. The current ruse being perpetuated against has been used for over 100 years. The current reincarnation of the “economic competitiveness” has been used since the turn of the century when industialists wanted workers who would comply with instructions. In the fifties, the cry of warning shifted to the need for more emphasis on math and science. This is very similar to the warning we are hearing this year.

One of the biggest mistakes we will make is falling for the argument that high stakes testing will improve student learning. Instead, the effect will be that the curriculum will be narrower and students will be unable to think. This is when we will become unable to remain competitive!

By Jeff

July 10, 2007 4:26 PM | Link to this

Tony,

Without basic knowledge, one CANNOT think, no matter how much one WISHES to.

An example: Some of the most abstract maths out there, such as Group Theory and Ring Theory, RELY on a person being able to at a MINIMUM add and use integer division/ modulo. I’ve oft said that I could teach Group Theory to a 4th grader, and I mean that - as long as they know addition and basic division.

My point: DEFINETLY at the K-8 level, and in a majority of cases at the 9-12 level, they really do not yet have the proper FOUNDATION to be ALLOWED to think on their own. Now, I feel that the guidance should be lifted as the student gains a better foundation, but it should still be guided. (Note here that I am NOT saying that they should not do independent work, but that their thinking processes should be directed and they should not be allowed to try to develop their own.)

By luvs2teach

July 10, 2007 4:29 PM | Link to this

thomas - your comment about heterogenous grouping for cooperative learning caught my eye - I was taught, in early coop learning seminars, that the best way to group was to have a high, medium, and low ability student in each group (2 mediums in a group of 4, 2 of each in a group of 6, etc).

Recently I read that that format of grouping is ineffective (imagine that!) precisely because of what you and fedup describe.

So, when I have cooperative groups, I now group them either homogenously, and then differentiate the assignment, or I have highs and mediums together, and mediums and lows together. The higher groups can often help themselves, leaving me to assist the groups that need me more. The lows also realize that there is no “smart kid” to do the work, and that they will actually have to produce something (and this was a quote I got from one student, “Hey, how come all the smart kids are in one group - who’s going to do the work?”)

Amazing.

By Tony

July 10, 2007 5:14 PM | Link to this

Jeff - I do not disagree that some kids become ready to move to more advanced concepts before others. Like you express for mathematics, I also contend that with knowledgeable instructors kids can learn advanced science concepts as well.

Where I disagree with current trends in redesigning math instruction in our state is the emphasis of an analytical approach for all students. Another downfall in our approach has been on the use of too many skills in elementary school and middle school. To develop good numeracy, teachers should teach fewer topics in greater depth and assure that students are learning the concepts.

The downside to this is that we hold back students who catch on quickly. It is not “kosher” to let kids advance too quickly because our current grouping systems for schools depend so heavily on age instead of knowledge.

Answers to improve these problems exist but implementation gets bogged down because of politics.

By Lisa B.

July 10, 2007 6:46 PM | Link to this

Luvs, What grade do you teach? When I’ve grouped students with highs and mediums, then mediums and lows, even my 4th graders have said “Hey, we don’t have anybody smart in our group, how will we do this?”

I do think that pressure from NCLB has forced teachers to work extra hard to reach those hard-to-teach kids. I’ve known teachers in the past who let their behavior-problems simply sleep the day away, and expressed gratitude they didn’t have to deal with them. We all know that was unfair to those children. If all teachers had done their best all along, for all the children, we might not be in this situation today. The public lost faith in public education.

By thomas

July 10, 2007 7:28 PM | Link to this

Jeff, you are right about the theory that poor student achievement at the upper grades is due to lack of basic skills. You can’t tell that to an elementary teacher. He or she will call you a liar, a heretic, and tell you that you don’t what you’re talking about.

I used to be an elementary classroom teacher. I found that many students did not acquire the necessary basic skills in reading, writing, and math that they would need in later years. Why, you may ask? It was for several reasons:

1) Many early childhood teachers did not know how to teach, structure their classroom, and initiate the proper delivery system to facilate mastery of these key skills by all students. One prime example- the teaching of reading. If you don’t teach a child phonics, he or she will have no understanding of decoding, proper spelling, and other language fundamentals.

Quite frankly on this point, I AM BEATING A DEAD HORSE. WE, AS TEACHERS, INSIST ON USING METHODS TO TEACH READING TO BEGINNERS THAT HAVE BEEN PROVEN TO FAULTY AND INEEFECTIVE.

2)Teachers in the earliest grades failed to teach with the intensity and focus necessary to produce successful students and learners. Many of these fools insisted on only reading aloud to the students (instead of teaching reading with explicit, direct instruction), then having them draw and color, and play instead engage in rigorous academic endeavors.

3)Some teachers just didn’t care about whether or not their charges actually learned key skills of not. If they did, fine. If not, it was somebody’s else’s fault. It was the parent’s fault for not “working with their child at home.” It was the child’s fault for not paying attention in class or was just “slow” or “dumb”. (I actually had more than one teacher tell me this about her class of students. The reason they could not easily grasp what she was trying to teach because they were “dumb”. Teachers of second, third, and fourth graders told me this. In fact at this one school, four teachers over a two year period denigrated their classes in this manner). Here, in Cobb, the argument is that “how can the child ___? They (or their parents) can’t speak English. (Which is a lie).

4) Elementary teachers in many schools, particularly lower income and working class neighborhoods, are not held accountable. The academic and intellectual requirements are lower in the earlier grades, so the students can somewhat “skate” by if they do not acquire a firm grasp of basic reading, writing, math. If the parents and administration don’t keep tabs on student achievement, some “teachers” take advantage of that and let the students wither. How many first graders do you know go home and say “Mommy, the only thing Mrs. Smith does in school is sit behind her desk and let us draw and play on the computer all day.”?

You see— I have the strong opinions that I express as a result of seeing what really goes on real public elementary schools over a period of just four years. I saw so many children failed by the system. I saw teachers use ineffective instructional methods and poor classroom management, the result of which hurt student learning. I saw MANY, MANY insensitive and uncaring teachers in my travels through education. Many teachers, for whom a teaching position is just a job, a paycheck. I worked with so, so, so many people who were not committed at all to being the best teacher they could be. TEACHERS WHO DID NOT BELIEVE THAT THEY WERE PREPARING YOUNG PEOPLE FOR THE TASKS AND REQUIREMENTS OF TOMORROW. JUST CONCERNED ABOUT THEIR LITTLE TEPID WISHES, THINGS SHE WANTED TODAY IN “HER CLASSROOM.” Gutless, spineless, DUMB QUITE FRANKLY,……………. people (I had to catch myself) who would run from school to school, system to system, if they didn’t get their way or the kind of children they wanted. People who can’t teach a dog to sit, but yet it is somebody else’s fault.

You see, Jeff and others, you cannnot teach a seventh grader about plant and animal cells at seventh grade level if they had 6 years of poor schooling before that. If they are reading on third or fourth grade level, do not know basic math facts and cannot divide, use the index of a reference book to find information on a particular topic, use a ruler to measure solid objects, or how to read a map, etc. how can you, the middle and high school teacher do anything with them?

Your days will be spent trying to keep that 28, 29, 30 “class” (herd) of buffalo from tearing down the walls and ceiling. You will get little done. And you’ll probably get disrespected, cursed, and reviled in the process.

You see, I could write a book on why our students the way they are and what we can do to get this nonsense turned around.

By Lee

July 10, 2007 8:12 PM | Link to this

“differentiated consequences”

What kind of educrat mumbo jumbo is that?

It’s this kind of doublespeak that makes me differentially happy (pi55ed off).

Let me translate for you:

• Kathy Cox has some good buddies whose schools didn’t make AYP and she doesn’t think they should be punished as severely as some of the people she don’t like.

After reading some of these later posts, I’m so glad my youngest is in private school, even though it is making me inversely richer.

By decarturparent

July 10, 2007 8:32 PM | Link to this

Now Lee, do you really think that a school where all disaggregated groups fail the CRCT miserably and repeatedly should be treated the same way as a school like Lakeside where they miss AYP because one typically hard to teach group (say ESL) barely misses the target but all other groups, including SPED not only meet targets but far exceed the state and national averages?

What if the school is one of the top schools in the state, but is having trouble with one group, but serving the remaining 14 groups extremely well? Should the whole school be reorganized? Does it make sense to reorganize what is working? Does it make sense to close a school like that?

In my mind, only those groups that have been failed by a school should be allowed transfers and should receive tutoring paid for by MY tax dollars.

All my kids are in public school which will allow us to send them to a private college when the time comes. After the USDOE gets done with public colleges they won’t be any good either, and college is a whole lot more important than grade school… so I’m investing where the money goes the furthest.

By Lisa B.

July 11, 2007 10:10 AM | Link to this

Thomas,

I agree with your last post completely. There in no accountibility in primary school. Kids get to 3rd grade unable to read at all, and hit a brick wall.

By luvs2teach

July 11, 2007 11:03 AM | Link to this

Lisa - I teach 8th grade.

Sad that by 4th grade the kids already know who the “smart’ kids are…wasn’t the whole point of getting rid of “tracking” so that the kids didn’t know or feel badly about the fact they weren’t as smart as another kid?

By Lisa B.

July 11, 2007 12:01 PM | Link to this

The thing is, some of the low achievers ARE smart. They just decide not to apply themselves and let others do the work. Some of my best students are have regular intelligence, or even a little below average, but work their tails off and do very well. Some of my brightest students have been the most challenging because of their refusal to work.

By jim d

July 11, 2007 12:14 PM | Link to this

Lisa,

I must agree. As a parent of a pretty gifted kid it has been a challange at times to get him to do something he is confident he already knows and see’s no merit in doing again. He has maintained a “test me and I’ll show you” attitude that befuddles many people.

By Lisa B.

July 11, 2007 3:49 PM | Link to this

Jim D., I think most of us are aware that in the frenzy to make AYP, gifted and high achieving kids are pretty much ignored. Most of the resources are concentrated on the lowest achieving groups. As SET often points out, the Brights will be fine anyway. That seems to be the accepted theory in education. I find our current teaching methods excruciatingly boring. Your son, and many other “brights” have concluded that only the TEST matters.

I am changing schools this year, and have a new principal who is committed to bringing focus once again on our high achievers. I am very excited about that. Not that I want to again ignore the low kids. I think it is important to focus on the needs of all the students, hard as that is to do well.

By luvs2teach

July 11, 2007 4:32 PM | Link to this

Lisa and Jim D - I was recently doing research for a paper on gifted kids - did you know that according to the National Association for Gifted Children that 18 - 25% of drop-outs are gifted? The “Brights” aren’t always OK, sad to say. Gifted parents need to become stronger advocates for their kids - just like the SPED parents brought about huge changes, the gifted folks could, too.

In my classes, I talk a lot about practicing “intelligent behaviors” - that sometimes a naturally gifted kid is at a disadvantage because things come so easily, s/he never learns to work hard (I know the perils of this from personal experience, sad to say). Also, I talk about hard work being able to make up for lower intelligence. Like a sermon, it reaches some - luckily for me, I gave up on saving the world a long time ago :-)

By Lisa B.

July 11, 2007 4:59 PM | Link to this

Wow, Luvs, thanks for the statistics. When I think about it, the numbers make sense. Kids tend to leave high school because they see nothing there for them, and we have sure dumbed things down enough to bore gifted kids to tears.

By iron maiden

July 12, 2007 11:38 AM | Link to this

Teaching has become so much more life-draining, and less satisfying, since I started in the 70s. Still it’s painful to hear the disparaging condemnations of Thomas, and others. Perhaps it is true that many in the workplace have given up. After twenty-five years, I did. Luckily, that was a viable, temporary option. I would love to return to the classroom, but not before some “beauracratic reason” is involved, and the public does not assume that I’m NOT DOING my job. We are pitifully shortchanging our teachers AND our students for social experimentation. As SET says, “Brave New World”. I would like to add “SAD” to this pronouncement.

By SET

July 12, 2007 1:10 PM | Link to this

I was just reading the comments about the brights - and the remarks about what I may have said previously.

I thought about my own education - that is the points where I now believe something actually changed due to an actual effort be an educator.

One of the points I should make about the care and training of the “brights” is that just being bright doesn’t mean the student is not in need of assistance to break into a higher level of performance or achievement. Besides, I have gone to school with brights who also had mental & physical problems alongside being bright. I could talk about some of the Jewish families I got to know well in HS and still are in touch with. That’s just my experience in CA. Other ethnics have experience with brights suffering from bi-polar, ADD, or whatever mental problems you all have probably seen.

In the courts we occasionally see brights with borderine personality disorder, bi-polar disorder, drug & sexual disorders that get them in significant trouble also. Some of them have gone to our prisons - but not a significant percentage of the bright population.

Brights need discipline, they need to be taught span of control issues, they need to learn how to accept authority and to wield it. In some cases they need to be made to accept having to study broad subject matters beyond what they are interested in at that point in life. I can go on but educators are probably up on all this. Being bright may improve many of your odds in life but you still need teachers. Brights can run faster but they still have to be taught to walk, pushed into running, and patched up when they fall. You can be bright and lazy, or socially withdrawn.

I don’t want the readers to think I believe brights don’t need schools and don’t need good public schools. They do. They can go farther academically than the other students - but not without a guide of some sort.

Good teachers can make the difference between a good life and a bad one even for some of the bright students. Teachers do things that parents just can’t do. For one thing, teachers are professionals with professional detatchment. For another, teachers come and go as the student moves on and up and moves through different programs, schools and academic levels. Parents are forever but a given teacher arrives when it’s time (for the student to take that class or program) and departs the student’s life when it’s time for the student to move on.

No I don’t think homeschooling is the answer to our problems. It is an alternative that some people may use for some periods of time. In CA I’ve known too many physicians and judges whose parents were cannery workers, miners and autoworkers to think homeschooling in the answer. My own father was a physician but his father was an Iceman in St Louis.

I still believe in good public schools for everyone, brights included. I went to public schools for HS, undergrad (partially) and Grad School. I want the same opportunities for later generations. I see those opportunities diminished greatly in CA - bad primary and secondary schools, expensive undergrad and graduate schools.

By SET

July 12, 2007 1:29 PM | Link to this

typo, 2nd paragraph - “…effort by an educator” sorry!

By Lisa B.

July 12, 2007 1:51 PM | Link to this

SET,

I totally agree with you that the bright kids need attention as well. I’ve been dismayed during recent years with most all of the focus going to the struggling learners. As you pointed out in your post, ALL children, including the smart ones, need guidance and education. Hopefully the educrats in charge will soon realize that as well. Children, no matter how smart, don’t do well raising and educating themselves.

By SET

July 12, 2007 2:11 PM | Link to this

Lisa: Many of my posts are made in between seeing people sentenced to prison sometimes for 25, 50 and 60 years to life at 85%, some as young as age 18.

As you know I’m a lawyer in CA working in a variety of areas, largely criminal cases and state hospital committments. My background includes accounting, banking, finance and business. Odd mix I suppose. I’m a former sub and a child and grandchild of college educators with many relatives in my parents generation who were public secondary school teachers… they are aged and dead now. So my insight on running a school other than my own experience comes from the stories of these older relatives of thier teaching careers in the early to mid 20th Century - mostly in segregated schools.

I have always felt that the brights need teaching also. My day to day rants are due to constant exposure to black and brown uneducated, overgrown adolescents being arraigned and sent to CA state prison on felonies. And it’s not that they didn’t get probation for the first 5 felony cases and the the previous 5 misdemeanor cases. Whites go to prison also, but not as easily and not as frequently!

We all bring something different to the education blog. It’s a collection of the experience and observation of us all. I hope all this adds up to something one day.