Get Schooled

By JustMe

December 13, 2007 1:04 PM | Link to this

With government money comes rules and regulations. If you want the money, you have to follow the rules.

I am sure that parents can continue with that tutoring company if they want to pay out-of-pocket.

By jim d

December 13, 2007 4:35 PM | Link to this

NOPE.But hey they waste millions on redundant testing and no one complains.

By HS Teacher Too

December 13, 2007 4:59 PM | Link to this

Back when I was a fresly-minted college graduate, in grad school working toward a Ph.D., I worked for one of the major national tutoring companies. Looking back (this was prior to NCLB), the company offered some outstanding help: IF you didn’t want homework patches to get your child to pass a class, but truly wanted an all-encompassing analysis of the child’s strengths and weaknesses and wanted to work on remediating the trouble spots. If your goal was simply homework help, they weren’t for you. I have to say, at least this particular location was true to their stated goals. To that end, they were very successful in bringing children up to grade level, but it took (in some cases lots of) TIME, and it took dedication. These were kids who came twice a week for the entire year — no “can’t come for (fill in the blank) excuse” happened.

I’m not sure exactly what these federally-funded programs do by comparison, but the cynic in me will guess that their “job” is to get the kids test-ready to measure up to some NCLB-mandated assessment of grade-level. That would entail more drill-and-kill than it would figuring out the students’ weaknesses and truly working with them to fix the gaps. But that’s an uneducated cynical guess. Let’s say that the centers really do work from the root of the problem up. Then, I think they’d be worth the money if the kids go regularly and really do get some benefit from it.

I am just not convinced that that is what is happening — these centers seemed to pop up overnight because there was funding available and money to be made.

Bridget, are these centers held to any other sort of standards other than the background checks for employees? Are there checks and balances that “accredit” the centers?

By Nikole

December 13, 2007 5:11 PM | Link to this

I have also worked for a national tutoring company and it is worth the money. HS Teacher Too, If you go on the state doe website you can see the criteria for being added to the list, something I may want to do in the future. It is extensive and you have to provide research showing that your practices render results.

By Tony

December 13, 2007 6:14 PM | Link to this

Before I weighed in on this subject I had to take a few deep breaths and collect my thoughts. As a school principal, it was very discouraging to see how supplemental services were implemented. I think there are some providors who do a great job of analyzings students’ weaknesses and developing a plan of “attack”. Sticking with the plan takes dedication and commitment on the part of the child and the family. This is essential to the success of the child and contributes to the gains that arise in the students’ abilities.

The trouble with how Supplemental Educational Services (SES) were implemented was not based on students’ needs. If a school was designated as “Needs Improvement”, students within the school were eligible to apply for SES. The student was then allowed to register with the center of their choice that was part of the approved providers. Students did not have to demonstrate an academic need, however priority was given to those on free/reduced priced lunches.

When I was principal of a school that was designated “Needs Improvement”, the students who really needed the services had no way of accessing the services. Their parents were at work and the kids were stuck with caretakers who did not have transportation. (Our school earned its way out of “Needs Improvement”, by the way.)

The funds used to pay for the SES were taken from the schools through new rules in the Title I funding. If I recall correctly, 20% came off the top of the Title I allotment to cover SES and transportation for school choice.

Criticism soon erupted from political circles that schools were not doing enough to get families to take advantage of SES. We were accused of withholding information or discouraging parents from seeking the assistance. Nothing was said of the limits placed on how much each child was eligible for and how that small amount limited the students’ access to SES.

I think SES was watered down very quickly by the number of “shops” that popped up overnight to get their piece of the pie from Uncle Sam. Unfortunately, the SES providers who offered bona fide learning opportunities for students had to compete with fly-by-night storefronts that gave little growth to student learning.

The key to the succes of SES is in the commitment the family had when they signed up for a program and stuck with it. Unfortunately, politicians and others were looking for quick fixes which are elusive in the realm of education.

By Lisa B.

December 13, 2007 7:55 PM | Link to this

Wow! There is an very long list of SES services for my rural school distict. I am amazed. All this time our poor, disadvantaged students have had to put up with familiar, certified teachers in order to receive extra services. Of course, not one of the SES companies listed is located in our town, or even close by.

By Racebaiter

December 13, 2007 9:12 PM | Link to this

Must have been owned by a white person. If the owner was a minority, the issue would have been overlooked.

By Theresa Brower

December 14, 2007 7:21 AM | Link to this

Can you tell me how you were able to determine that “9.2 million in federal funds went to private tutoring companies working in the program here in Georgia.” I am curious what you source of information was. Thank you

By JustMe

December 14, 2007 7:57 AM | Link to this

jd-

You can’t be serious? You really think that no one complains about excessive testing? Don’t you read these blogs????

By V for Vendetta

December 14, 2007 8:46 AM | Link to this

I don’t see this topic needing much more of a response than this:

There are SOME good tutoring companies/agencies/centers.

There are A LOT of bad ones.

Choose wisely, parents!

By jim d

December 14, 2007 9:50 AM | Link to this

Actually JM while I hear a lot of complaining about the time it takes from studies and real learning, I hear very little complaining about the costs associated with testing redundancy.

So no I’m not kidding. Several years ago a very astute parent pointed out to the GCPS BOE the amount of redundancy between the CRCT and Gwinnett’s Gateway test, only to be publicly ridiculed and told the tests tested for totally different things. That parent did get the last laugh though when the school system dropped half of the test, a little over a year later, citing redundancy between it and the CRCT., the board quoted that parent almost verbatim. When they did make the announcement you’d have thought that parent had written the eulogy.

Sadly they had paid to develop new questions for the Gateway prior to abandoning half of it thus costing taxpayers millions of wasted dollars and no one really complained. Well except for the astute parent whose words fell mostly on deaf ears.

By Bridget Gutierrez

December 14, 2007 9:58 AM | Link to this

Theresa: That information came from the Georgia Department of Education, which oversees the distribution of funds.

By Jeff

December 14, 2007 9:59 AM | Link to this

Two comments here:

1) Just looking at locations listed on the summary information provided on the website Bridget linked to, I noticed that there are only two locations anywhere NEAR SWGA. Valdosta and Byron. Now, I know for a fact that Sylvan has a center in Albany (FYI Lisa, it is across the road from Target, if you didn’t already know.) Still, that puts THREE locations to serve ALL of SWGA… yeah, right! (overdosing on sarcasm there!) Based on my experience, even in T’s system - one of the best in SWGA, maybe even the State - you aint gonna get parents to go much further than Albany, IF they’ll go that far. The people I knew in Randolph couldn’t AFFORD to take their kids to Albany twice a week, even if - by some miracle - they were able to get the time off work!

2) I was once recruited to work for one of these ‘tutoring services’ and I can personally atest to how sleazy many of them are. Fortunately, I realized this after the interview and never again talked to the guy. Fortunately, my own kids will have a mother who was an ES level teacher and is now a HS level English teacher and a dad who as a MS/HS math teacher and could easily have taught Social Studies as well. About the only thing T and I can’t handle so well is HS level science, and even then we’re smart enough to be able to figure most of it out. I truly feel sorry for those kids that DON’T have that kind of advantage.

By Bridget Gutierrez

December 14, 2007 10:43 AM | Link to this

HSTT: I don’t believe there are any accreditation standards that the companies have to meet. Before tutoring firms are admitted to the program, state officials do review the firm’s business information and educational plan, but I think that’s about it.

By WFC

December 14, 2007 10:56 AM | Link to this

Republican administrations are always promoting ways to “privatize” services so that thir cronies can make money. Most of these private tutoring companies are to education as Haliburton is to the war in Iraq… a way to funnel money to well connected “insiders.” We have become a nation of “suckers.”

By V for Vendetta

December 14, 2007 12:09 PM | Link to this

Jeff hit on an important point … .

Education starts in the home. Kids who have parents that are highly educated will ALWAYS have an advantage over kids whose parents are mouth-breathing morons. That’s harsh, but that’s the truth. Unfortunately, the irony of the situation is that most of those parents either don’t care enough to take part in outside tutoring service, or if they do, they end up at places like the aforementioned Fabric of America institution.

Like I said, there are only a few places worth taking your kid, and a lot of places that are flat out terrible.

By JustMe

December 14, 2007 12:29 PM | Link to this

WFC - Amen!!!!!

jd - Teachers are constantly speaking up about test redundancy. We fully realize all of the negative implications - time, money, etc. However, as (I hope) you are aware, the ‘powers that be’ in education very rarely listen to classroom teachers. In DeKalb Co. they have started ‘benchmark’ assessments. These are given EVERY TWO WEEKS (we lose one period of instruction every two weeks to do this!). These required assessments repeat the same questions that are on the unit tests, on the final exam, on the EOCT, and also on the GHSGT. Talk about redundancy!!! And then, of course, the teacher has to take the time to grade these stupid benchmark assessments and fill out the County forms to report the grades. Yes, teachers do understand that the money going towards these redundant tests is taking money away from supplies and other things needed in the classroom. No teacher in DeKalb thinks that these are worthwhile at all - but again, no one listens to the classroom teacher.

By catlady

December 14, 2007 3:14 PM | Link to this

Tutoring Firms: Worth The Cost?

To whom? The taxpayers or the students getting the tutoring?

By Bridget Gutierrez

December 14, 2007 4:28 PM | Link to this

catlady: Either.