Get Schooled

By catlady

December 20, 2007 2:59 PM | Link to this

Ya ya ya. PR does not solve our woes.

By fed up

December 20, 2007 3:23 PM | Link to this

So, how long until we can rid ourselves of Kathy Cox?

By Tony

December 20, 2007 4:38 PM | Link to this

It is no secret in this blog that I am a fan of the new math curriculum plan. It takes away the hodge-podge curriculum that was dumbing down our math programs in years past and provides teachers with much clearer standards for students. For this plan to be successful will require teachers to have adequate preparation. This is where we have fallen short time and again.

During Gov. Perdue’s tenure, we have seen the professional learning budget slashed and those cuts have not been restored. It is easy to understand the message: professional learning is not important. Teachers will not be as prepared for this change as they should be.

Some are already claiming the changes will decimate students understanding of mathematics. These predications will come true if school systems do not receive adequate funding for teachers traning sessions. Some fault the curriculum plan. It is easy to raise this fear because change in and of itself is scary.

It will be very important for parents to work together with schools to support high standards. This is an area where our society has become very weak-kneed. For some reason, we have developed the notion that if students are struggling to learn then the work must be too hard. Schools sometimes buckle very quickly under this pressure, yet we should not.

The new curriculum plan will require students to master skills at earlier grade levels. This is very possible. We have been selling our students short for years. Most other countries have completed the equivalent of Algebra I by the end of 7th or 8th grade. Come on parents. We will need your help if we truly want our kids to perform better with mathematics. Expect your child to listen and learn during school. Make sure they complete homework. And, be prepared for a few lower grades along the way. It is time we started expected kids to earn their grades.

Teachers will have to make some adjustments, too. Planning for math lessons will have to go far beyond page numbers and sample problems on the board. The language of mathematics will have to be emphasized. You will have to help students make connections to the real world and not simply assign problems from the book.

Unless we want more of the same mediocre results in mathematics, we will all have to do our parts.

By Sam

December 20, 2007 5:01 PM | Link to this

In her welcoming message, at www.georgiamath.org, Superintendent Cox states:

“In our 21st century economy, a full understanding of mathematics and the ability to think analytically ….”

Stop, right there. “…the ability to think analytically….” That’s the core limitation. The reality? Math learning (“achievement,” if one must) calls for learners to development a systemic thinking ability, an ability to synthesize. Japan is a system of synthetic thinking, capable to engage analytic thinking. Unfortunately, it seems Ga. DOE has copied Japan without distinguishing analytic thinking and synthetic thinking. But that’s not surprising, since Cox seems highly responsive to meeting “our 21st century economy” demands, where in the US “the ability to think analytically” is a prized commodity, and a dominate worldview.

By jim d

December 20, 2007 5:09 PM | Link to this

No offense Tony, but there’s an awful lot of if’s there.

The US led the world in education at one time. What happened? well politicans started screwing with it and it’s been all down hill since. I just don’t see one more political stab at fixin it really being benefical.

I guess we shall see, cause it’s gonna happen. So I truly hope you are proven correct.

By catlady

December 20, 2007 5:15 PM | Link to this

Tony, you make some excellent points, especially about teacher training. However, the devil is in the details. If, for example, a child is in fourth grade and cannot immediately tell you that 10 take away 8 is 2 (not because of use of calculators, but because we do not demand that students master such tiny little skills as this) all the good intentions in the world, all the great GPSs in the world, all the teacher training in the world, amount to nothing. Standards need to be MASTERED or there should be consequences that can be taken to the bank. Get everyone on the same page as far as basic numeracy, and then let teachers teach the skills.

And with our new aversion to sp ed testing ( a la tier program) we have many children who are discalsic (is that a word?) or who are MID who won’t be getting diagnosed, much less helped, and add to that the ESOL children who are getting “served” in their math class and the sp ed kids who are being inclusioned (frequently without support from sp ed) and I think it is headed straight for h3ll. Not to be pessimistic, or anything.

Of course, survival of the fittest, perhaps those who do make it to high school will be ready for the GPS stuff there. At the elementary level, I see a downward spiral. (Why are we in this handbasket, and why is it so hot in here? :)

By Rural Ga. Mom

December 20, 2007 5:42 PM | Link to this

view a rainbow-colored chart Can you say “smoke and mirrors?”

Why must they fluff up the exterior of the new math? Perhaps because the interior is less than “quality?” Could there possibly be a reason why parents are concerned?

One of the expert UGA professors who helped write the new curriculum was asked at a meeting “Will colleges in other states know what Math 2 is, since Geometry, Trig, etc. will not appear on the HS transcripts??” His answer: “Well, they can read a homeschooler’s transcript, can’t they?” What else has not been thought out?

By Tony

December 20, 2007 7:36 PM | Link to this

Jim d - The biggest “if” is the one related to parents supporting higher standards. As Catlady points out, without mastery there is little hope for learning more advanced content.

By mindy

December 20, 2007 10:41 PM | Link to this

In elementary we are being forced to “expose” the students to math concepts. We are being told that mastery or the correct processes of math are unimportant. Our school implemented the INVESTIGATIONS series this year. The benchmark test results for the first and second nine weeks are just horrible. The kids can’t do basic addition, subtraction or multiplication. We are still strickly forbidden to teach computation skills. If highschools need students to be able to function in higher math, they are in for big disappointment. The students in elemenary school now are going to make the ones currently in highschool seem like MIT graduates! How crazy is all this!!!!?

By Attn: Clayton Parents

December 20, 2007 11:32 PM | Link to this

Yet ANOTHER story tonight on the SACS controversy, and still not the FIRST word on Rod Johnson’s wife illegally “double dipping” from Clayton schools? Even with documents from an Open Records request to CONFIRM the story? Has the AJC just thrown ANY pretense of objectivity out of the window on the SACS story?

By Tony

December 20, 2007 11:55 PM | Link to this

mindy - if you are strictly forbidden from teaching computation skills then your school system should be held accountable. I know of no math program, GPS standard, NCTM guideline or sound teaching methodology that excludes the teaching of computation. These skills must be part of a sound math program. However, these skills alone are not sufficient to teach mathematics.

“Expose” is not a substitute for TEACH. Please stand up for what is right about teaching children.

By jim d

December 21, 2007 5:01 AM | Link to this

Tony,

Parents that currently “support” educational trends will continue to do so. but i can say without a doubt that those like myself that often disagree with the “trend” of the day will continue to work with our children in time proven methods to assure they are not left behind.We will continue to teach our children proper methods of doing math. Fortunately there are many computer programs available to us which allow us to do this when we run into trouble with some of the more advanced concepts.

As for the parents that don’t give a damn? Hey no new trend is going to make them care. these are the kids that will be left out.(just as they are now) And why? Hey it’s just the latest trend for book publishers to make a few dollars at the expense of our future.

jmho

By catlady

December 21, 2007 6:59 AM | Link to this

Hey it’s just the latest trend for book publishers to make a few dollars at the expense of our future.

Hey, someone with time and expertise, look and see if these publishers of the new math are the same ones profiting so handsomely (The Halliburton of education) from NCLB, Reading First, etc.

Follow the money…..

By jim d

December 21, 2007 7:23 AM | Link to this

Cat,

No need to look to hard.

McCraw/Hill comes to mind.

Nothing like being life long family friends of the head of state is there?

By jim d

December 21, 2007 7:29 AM | Link to this

Cat,

Really want to do some research?

If you could check Dubya’s blind trust and find out if he’s invested in McCraw/Hill you might learn something.

By Lee

December 21, 2007 7:53 AM | Link to this

I really do need to get me some of those magical mushrooms that Kathy Cox et al have been eating.

If you are preparing a high school student for post-secondary education in one of the Science or Engineering disciplines, then yes, this math curriculum probably makes sense. However, the reality is that most high school graduates will never need anything above Algegra 1 math skills.

Hey Chancellor Davis, when business leaders lament the lack of math skills, what we’re really talking about are high school graduates who can’t do simple mathmatical functions such as addition, subtraction, dividing and multiplying. I’m not really looking for someone who can do math III (Advanced Algebra / Trigonometry) type work right out of high school.

Hell, I’ve got a MBA and a CPA and the only time I have used anything remotely equivalent to Alegebra I in the past 30 years is when I helped my daughters with their homework in middle school.

At the end of the day, this “new math curriculum” is simply repackaging the existing programs into a fancy new container which will yield the same results.

…and we will still have high school students who are performing at a 5th grade level.

Might want to work on that little problem first.

By jim d

December 21, 2007 8:06 AM | Link to this

The other shrub

By jim d

December 21, 2007 8:10 AM | Link to this

Lee,

There is pasture over in Alabama, I believe she may have been visting.

By catlady

December 21, 2007 8:37 AM | Link to this

jim, this is what I was talking about. And yet we follow along in line, eyes on the sheep in front of us, doing what we are told to do. Have you ever been in a scripted reading classroom? Hear the (largely mindless) chants of the students? Hear the dog clickers?

I am sick, almost to death, of the milarkey we are being fed, and the (again) mindless idiots at the state and federal and local level keep buying and putting before us, while the FOBs (Friends of Bush) get fatter and fatter and the cream (them) and the whey (us) grow farther and farther apart. (Sorry about the mixed metaphors). I fear for our nation for many reasons, but the enemy within is the scariest of all.

By WFC

December 21, 2007 8:38 AM | Link to this

My son, a junior at Northview High, has a 93% average in calculus. You bet I’m proud of him. Just proves that everyone simply is not smart enough to excell in math, a subject in which you can’t “fake it” regardless of the endless “new math” programs. NCLB my a$$.

By jim d

December 21, 2007 9:09 AM | Link to this

Cat,

if you think Bush has mucked up education—wait till you see what else just happened under his watch, that should outrage every American.

By Lee

December 21, 2007 9:12 AM | Link to this

Tony says “Most other countries have completed the equivalent of Algebra I by the end of 7th or 8th grade.”

If the social engineers would allow our schools to group by ability and establish performance tracks, I have no doubt that a significant percentage of US students could achieve the same (or better) results.

But no, we throw everybody into the same classroom and hope the alchemy to turn dunces into geniuses works.

You can’t educate iron ore into gold. [Mark Twain]

By jim d

December 21, 2007 9:25 AM | Link to this

Lee,

In the words of a more recent philosopher –(Ron White)

“You just can’t fix stupid”

By Rural Ga. Mom

December 21, 2007 11:36 AM | Link to this

Lee - If the social engineers would allow our schools to group by ability and establish performance tracks, I have no doubt that a significant percentage of US students could achieve the same (or better) results.

EXACTLY!!!! My gifted children are not paid to tutor the special ed kids parked on either side of them in science and social studies. And NOW, that will be the situation in high school math, as all kids will be thrown into the same classes, regardless of their desire to learn. The ironic part is, the school system IS paid for my children who qualified as gifted. Can I get the school to pay my gifted kids (for tutoring) the money the school receives for them?

By Mark

December 21, 2007 11:55 AM | Link to this

Lee and Rural Ga Mom,

I feel bad that your children haven’t been able to get into ability grouped classes. My kids were all served in gifted classes throughout elementary school and their teachers all differentiated for them in their regular class. Once in middle school, they were served by gifted teachers in all of their classes….and their classes were solely made up of gifted students. Now in high school, they are given the option of taking regular college placement courses, honors classes, AP classes or Gifted AP classes. I guess Gwinnett is doing something right!!

And, by the way, two of my daughters were “chosen” to tutor special ed kids during one of their “Connections” periods. Both found it very rewarding and they learned things they could not have learned from any book or lecture.

By Math Mom

December 21, 2007 12:13 PM | Link to this

I saw the change in the DOE website and it looks like an effort to “spin” the program which is now getting pushback from both parents and educators. Similar programs have been shelved in North Carolina, New York, Texas and other states. Why is Georgia climbing on the “reform math” train when everyone else is getting off?

The problem with the curriculum is not just the standards (GPS)- it is the implementation and the textbooks which are driven by the format of the GPS. Critical thinking and analytical skills are essential parts of all mathematics programs but this could have been added to the existing QCC curriculum at a fraction of the cost.

More importantly, the structure of the new GPS require school systems to train massive numbers of teachers and purchase new textbooks. But the only “integrated math” textbooks available for middle and high schools are very poor quality and are of the “reform math” genre like the Connected Math series. Once school systems spend millions on these textbooks, the schools will be stuck with them for years. The schools and teachers will suffer but the consultants and textbook publishers will flourish.

And finally, it is a shame that the DOE has succeeded in forcing a one-size-fits all curriculum on the entire state of GA. It is unfair to both the students who perform at the top of the math range and those who struggle with math. Do all students need solid computation skills? Yes. Do all students need to be prepared to take college calculus? Of course not! Is it any wonder why parents are fleeing public schools in record numbers?

Parents in my school system urged the system to delay any further implementation of the new curriculum until 1) appropriate teacher training can take place, 2) quality textbooks are available, and 3) the program can be piloted or evaluated by independent professionals. The system has elected to proceed with the new program.

A GT professor summed it up at one public meeting when he commented that Georgia Tech has been teaching math in the same way for 25 years and has seen no reason to change the way they teach it.

By jim d

December 21, 2007 12:14 PM | Link to this

Mark,

You were fortunate indeed. I can attest that even in GCPS there are teachers that will take advantage of gifted kids in their classes to provide assistance to kids that are struggling. I found a polite chat with the teacher generally eliminated this problem. And yes it was a problem when my gifted child brought home 4-6 hours worth of homework because he wasn’t given the same time in class as regular students.

BTW, you forgot to mention the I/B program available at most if not all GCPS High Schools.

By Rural Ga. Mom

December 21, 2007 1:06 PM | Link to this

Math Mom- Keep preaching it!

*A GT professor summed it up at one public meeting when he commented that Georgia Tech has been teaching math in the same way for 25 years and has seen no reason to change the way they teach it. * Therein lies the problem. Why wasn’t one of the top engineering schools in the country consulted regarding it’s State-wide new math program? GT is in Kathy Cox’s backyard, for pete’s sake! The UGA school of education is the instigating force behind Kathy Cox’s hairbrained HS math plan. Read Walter Williams’ article at townhall.com yesterday entitled “Academic Slums.” He suggests we abolish all schools of education in colleges.

The proponents of “reform math” tend to be people who never liked math to begin with. One of the UGA writers of the new math curriculum spoke at our middle school and his first comment was: “write on your notecard the first time you remember hating math.” HELLO!, UGA Dept. of Education!, not everyone hates math! Reform math was created by liberal-arts-minded people who do not like math.

Why must Georgia always be behind academically? The new HS math curriculm has sealed our last place position for a few more years.

By Rural Ga. Mom

December 21, 2007 1:20 PM | Link to this

Mark and Lee:

My kids have all learned valuable lessons about life by being placed next to the special ed kids (and have learned to be thankful for their God-given gifts), however, they should not have to be tutors on such a regular basis.

Our system started the new GA. math a year early, so my daughter is repeating geometry and algebra I, this year (9th grade). 30 other kids are doing the same thing, but they have been spread out over more than one classroom. My daughter is sick and tired of the other kids making fun of her good grades. I am sick and tired of the politically correct administration placing her in a differentiated classroom - especially in math! In addition, she is taking an AP, but only 16% of the students in our high school passed the AP last year with a 3,4,or5 on the test (over 200 AP tests were given in our HS). Is AP actually being TAUGHT, or are these merely segregation classes?

We are not in the most rural of counties. I cannot imagine the circumstances in south georgia rural counties.

By Lisa B.

December 21, 2007 2:44 PM | Link to this

The tone of some of the above posts indicate the roll out of GPS is optional. I thought GPS implementation is mandatory. Training has been an issue with the entire GPS roll-out. Redelivery hasn’t done the job as expected, and teachers in all content areas have struggled to learn and use the new standards. As time goes by though, most teachers do well with the new curriculum. Unfortunately, with change some productivity is lost initially. This impacts my 13-year-old son. However, I think the Georgia Performance Standards are a vast improvement over QCC’s, so all this headache is worth what our students will gain. I understand that some school systems have selected poor teaching tools, Liked Connections Math, but that is not the fault of GPS.

By Lisa B.

December 21, 2007 3:11 PM | Link to this

In my last sentence, that should be”like Connections Math.” Sorry for the typo.

Georgia’s math scores are terrible, so evidently the QCC’s didn’t work. SOMETHING had to change. A lot of us have complained about “inclusion” and about dumping all the kids in the same classrooms. I have complained myself. It doesn’t really help the smart kids, but test scores of Special Ed students have increased dramatically in my school system. A lot of it has to do with student motivation, which largely comes from home.

A bigger problem to me, is the goal of 100% profinciency by 2014. That’s really what is driving this movement.

By catlady

December 21, 2007 3:50 PM | Link to this

Those of you talking about gifted, let me clue you in on something that is taking place in one classroom in our school: the teacher (regular elementary ed degree) has been assigned 14 kids for reading class, all sp ed except one, I think, (who should be but we will never get her tested due to the demands of the tier process. By the time the required paperwork is gathered, our psych will say it is too late in the year to test. Then, we will have to start over next year. Plus, we don’t test the Latino kids—we just blame their problems on language instead of being willing to hire bilingual testers who could document that the child is intellectually handicapped, even in Spanish! Ah, but I digress) This teacher is given some help for less than half of the period by a brand-new sp ed (extreme learning curve) teacher, but she and the kids are left to sink the rest of the time. Now, how can DOE say, morally or legally, that these sp ed kids are getting the sp ed services they desperately need since they are being taught by a non sp ed certified teacher most of the period? Of course, we write their IEPs so that 45 minutes is, on paper, all the time they really NEED sp ed help.

On the subject of gifted, they are the only ones at our school who have escaped having their needs “met” (hahahahaha) by push in. I had figured they would be the last—their parents will raise holy h3ll when it happens. Our sp ed parents are thrilled that their kids are in “regular” classes and our ESOL kids’ parents won’t fuss and do anything to call attention to themselves by complaining. Then you have got the average kids, who for sure aren’t getting what they need with all the other stuff going on!

Re: GPS vs QCCs—they are both ways to spell CR_P. No substance, because they presuppose some things that are not true. Maybe printing them on shiny paper, or devoting a web site to them, will make them better.

By mindy

December 21, 2007 4:59 PM | Link to this

quote.. “A lot of us have complained about “inclusion” and about dumping all the kids in the same classrooms. I have complained myself. It doesn’t really help the smart kids, but test scores of Special Ed students have increased dramatically in my school system.”

The low kids are getting and higher and the high kids are getting lower. There ya go! That’s the plan. Slow up the quick ones to insure “No Child is Left Behind” and at the same time, close the “achievement gap”. This is all being done on purpose and by design guys! Don’t you see? It is all very intentional.

By Math Mom

December 21, 2007 6:56 PM | Link to this

Rural Ga Mom: If you ask ten college professors their opinion on the math program, you will get ten different answers. It is the nature of academia. There were a couple Georgia Tech profs on the committee which drafted the high school GPS. But when questioned, they admit that the GPS program will fail unless the high school courses are taught by highly qualified teachers, with appropriate training using high quality text books. Small class sizes and motivated students would also be a plus. You might get the right mix in a few schools, but we all know that it is not going to happen in the majority of schools in the state.

And ask your teachers about the GPS training program. The state is using a “train the trainer” model and we all know how the content gets diluted. Or teachers can watch a video. And remember, the current HS teachers did not learn math in an integrated fashion (unless they went to school in Japan, I guess). They may have taught HS Geometry for 15 years and next August they are expected to teach all 9th graders advanced Algebra, Geometry, Statistics and Probability in a meaningful manner after a few hours of training. And oh yes, the HS students are supposed to work in small groups to solve problems themselves with teachers acting as “facilitators.”

And since it is a “no-no” to segregate students by ability, the teacher will have a wide range of student abilities in one class.

Hey teachers, do you think students learn better when they are lumped together or when they are grouped by ability? Just wondered…

By Rural Ga. Mom

December 21, 2007 8:40 PM | Link to this

Math Mom- I know all about group work and the teachers acting as “facilitators” - my kids have been in reform math since 2nd grade. Everyday Math and especially Connected Math are really big on group work and group grades. It is the whole team concept. In middle school, my kids were grouped in a classroom with only “gifted.” In HS, however, the classes are mixed-ability (very PC), therefore, my daughter is providing the grade for her assigned group (especially since she is one of the kids who had geometry and Alg. 1 in middle school).

Mindy - yes, we are dumbing down the top group, while bringing up the group who essentially has no desire to learn. At our HS school there are parties several times a month (or bowling trips) to convince students that sitting in school and doing nothing to graduate is more fun than dropping out. (never mind that the ones who simply do not care about school are assigned as part of my daughter’s group during the very pc group-work.)

By Lisa B.

December 21, 2007 9:25 PM | Link to this

I totally agree that the way education closes the achievement gap is to “dumb down” the high kids. Why do educators have to close the achievement gap? Research shows that immigrants, irregardless of origin county, close the achievement gap by the second generation. There will be little to no “gap” between children of our current ESOL kids and the children of their white classmates.

Now, we do have an achievement gap that is rooted in culture. Educators can’t fix that one. Laws can’t fix it. The culture has to change. But as was said to me once, “Who says my culture is better?” I think a strong work ethic, achievement, responsibilty and consequences are important, but hey, that’s just my opinion.

By mindy

December 21, 2007 10:30 PM | Link to this

It is not the educators that are pushing the “close the achievement gap” movement. It is the educrats that are doing that. It goes back to the false notion that “at risk” student populations don’t achieve what the suburban middle class students do because of institutionalized racism in the educational system. In other words, the scores in low rent areas are not high because of bad teaching in these schools rather than any of it being blamed on the students and what they put into it. Of course this is hogwash. Nevertheless, we need to close the “achievement gap” to prove that as educators, we are not racist in our efforts and do just as good of a job teaching minorities as whites. That’s what closing the achievement gap is really all about.