Get Schooled

By Lisa B.

July 25, 2008 12:17 PM | Link to this

I visited the link with statistics on students who don’t pass but are promoted anyway. It says that during the last 2 years, my school promoted 77% of students who failed the CRCT. Well, the problem is, that local policy states students may not be retained twice at the same grade level. We have a bunch of 5th and 8th graders who were retained last year, failed the CRCT again this year, failed it again in summer school, but must be moved to the next grade level anyway. 8th graders have figured out that all they have to do is sit through 8th grade twice and they’ll move on to high school.

Also, some kids pass the CRCT but fail 2 or 3 academic subjects. Their parents are angry when the students are retained, because they passed the CRCT. Students must pass the CRCT AND academic courses.

Thankfully, we made AYP again, even before the AMO was lowered.

By catlady

July 25, 2008 12:44 PM | Link to this

I had predicted my school would not meet AYP. It didn’t. Haven’t figured out how to get to the subgroup data to see why, but I am pretty sure I know.

I WAs surprised that the other schools met, but I have suspicions about that, too, having to do with testing accomodations.

God knows what kind of h3ll this means for next year.

By jim d

July 25, 2008 12:57 PM | Link to this

Gwinnett is Great it is the home of World class education. Problem is that there doesn’t appear to be much of a return on spending $8,156 per student.

By flipper

July 25, 2008 1:25 PM | Link to this

Cox is gonna pay for this one I am sure. The poor woman just needs to figure out that some kids simply cannot do high level math. She also needs to figure out that no, not every kid belongs in college and that there are tons of jobs that do not require a college degree.

I was one of those kids who couldn’t do advanced math. I was an outstanding writer … won a couple of awards in high school ,… but I just didn’t get math. I got into college anyway and have an amazing career and have never once needed advanced math skills… nothing beyond Algebra I.

This new math curriculum is going to kill Georgia schools. Someone needs to wake up and realize that the kids who can do advanced math need to be in advanced math… The kids who can only handle basic math need to stay in lower level courses. Tracking works folks!

By TheBlogger

July 25, 2008 2:18 PM | Link to this

Why is the number of failing schools going up? There are two basic reasons:

By TheBlogger

July 25, 2008 2:24 PM | Link to this

Flipper - The problem with your arguement is that some students do suddenly “get math” once they are exposed to it. I am happy for you and your career, but we have to consider all students needs. Without knowing advanced math, the door is closed to students for careers such as medicine, engineering, etc.

Do you really want to close the doors for a student in 7th grade? Therein lies the problem.

By Tony

July 25, 2008 3:20 PM | Link to this

AYP based solely on the criteria put in place through NCLB and Ga DOE rules will ultimately harm students’ learning. What has already started to happen is a restriction on the curriculum taught in our classes. If it’s not on the test, it’s not allowed.

The overemphasis on one-time tests is harmful to kids. The Georgia tests are not fool proof and do not measure everything kids learn in school They give us an idea of how well kids can answer multiple-choice tests with time limits.

It became very evident this spring that the CRCT is not completely aligned with the curriculum. Middle school social studies showed that. Some of the other tests are a little better, but the emphasis is still upon meeting a minimum standard.

The CRCT does not provide useful diagnostic information about students’ weaknesses, especially in reading. The CRCT does not provide us with useful information on trends because the tests are not statistically linked in a progression or sequence. Yet we continue to buy the BS from the politicians and media about improving student performance.

I agree that we must do more to improve student achievement in mathematics and I believe it is appropriate for the state to have implemented its new k-12 math curriculum. It is much better, more emphasis on true learning, it targets more important concepts, and students can become better equipped for success. I also believe that we must be careful about thinking all students can be equally successful in this new plan. They can’t. All kids learn at different times and in different ways.

Communities must do more to support their schools with high expectations. Values begin at home and extend into other facets of people’s lives. By teaching kids the importance of learning and supporting schools to make sure each child has the best chances, the community is able to set high standards. It must begin there. A school, all by itself, is not capable of changing the culture of a community, especially one with poor values.

There is more to a quality school than AYP results and test scores.

By Janine

July 25, 2008 3:26 PM | Link to this

The Bloigger RE your question:“Do you really want to close the doors for a student in 7th grade?” It seems there is more danger of closing the door on 7th, [8th,9th ]graders with the REQUIREMENT that they take and pass advanced math [and more] in order to progress and graduate….by not at least offering another path to graduation and/or success. Flipper is so right! There are many paths to becoming a successful, contributing citizen .

By thomas

July 25, 2008 3:31 PM | Link to this

I am sick of the moaning and groaning from principals and teachers about AYP. AYP should not be an issue for a professional working at school whose mission is the uplifting of all of its students. AYP is only an issue for people who want to do the bare minimum.

I don’t mean to be offensive. I know there are people on this blog who work at schools that struggle to make AYP. I am sure they do their very best everyday. My comments come from having seen schools where the principal and staff are only concerned about doing just what’s necessary. Their only concern is doing just enough to keep the county off their backs or keeping people at other schools and in the community from talking about them. Excuse me— I meant “making AYP.”

Folks, to make AYP in grades K-8, you have to have at least 59.5% (for math) and 73% (reading) of your 3-8 graders pass the CRCT. We have schools out there where anything goes. There is no accountability. Things never get better. There is no REAL change.

I have heard many times that the classroom teacher is the biggest factor in student achievement. I think it’s the principal. Why? Because the principal, and by extension the central office, set the tone and expectations of a school. The expectations of the school are reflected in the classroom. The principal hires the teachers. The principal is the instructional leader of the school. Or at least should be.

Schools with strong, effective principals usually make AYP. I can understand if your school is filled with immigrants who don’t speak English or the school is a psychoed center made up of EBDs, then I guess you get a break on the AYP lecture. You have a LEGITMATE reason for having some students who may not meet standards. Same goes for drooling vegetables in wheelchairs.

But otherwise if you have a regular school that is on Needs Improvement and can’t seem to make AYP to save the life of little babies, you have a leadership problem, not a teacher problem, not a student problem.

I wish these school boards would fire, not reassign, not transfer, not cover up for stupid, silly, incompetent, useless excuses for a principal. No excuse for this. No excuse.

Ok, my speech has ended now. I can leave the stage now.

By high school teacher

July 25, 2008 3:46 PM | Link to this

Thomas, remember that those magic numbers for passing must be met in each sub-population that the school has, which is why I suspect many more schools did not make AYP. In order for a sub-population to count, there must be 40 students in that sub-population (40 black students, special, ed, economically disadvantaged, etc). I imagine that more and more schools have at least 40 in a population group this year. We didn’t make it this year. Overall, our scores improved from last year, but we also had a sub-population that did not make the bar, so we didn’t make AYP. We penalize our entire school (teachers and students) because of 40 students in a sub-population.

By thomas

July 25, 2008 3:48 PM | Link to this

Tony, you made some valid points. The CRCT certainly does not provide a lot of diagnostic information on individual students. In fact, there are much better tools to get that data. What the CRCT does do is give schools, teachers, and parents an idea as if a student meets a minimum proficiency level. If you have a student scoring 760 or 778 on the reading portion of the CRCT, that is cause for concern.

By flipper

July 25, 2008 5:35 PM | Link to this

The door is not shut on a kid just because they are put at a math level that they can actually reach. And, yes, a child who is not a math whiz in 7th or 8th grade probably has not chance at becoming an engineer… doctor maybe because most of that is science and one can be good at science without being very good in math(with the exception of physics). These kids probably need to take a look at what they are good at and focus on it rather than to keep beating themselves over the head trying to get through advanced math.

BTW, AYP-wise, we were killed at our high school by low income and black kids failing math. Our special ed population actually did better in math that our black population. The difference in scores between white and black kids is staggering. The same difference exists at other schools I looked at. What is going on with black kids and math? I mean, it’s numbers… so no one can say it’s a cultural thing like one can with language arts or social studies. What is the deal?

By GOB

July 25, 2008 5:56 PM | Link to this

The sub-group measures are pretty ridiculous. At my school, 87% of the total students either met or exceeded the math test, and 96% met or exceeded the English portion. However, because the special ed subgroup came up short, our school didnt meet AYP.

Even our sped subgroup had 79.4% meet or exceed the English portion, but we still didnt make AYP.

Something is not right with this whole situation.

By catlady

July 25, 2008 6:15 PM | Link to this

I believe a school in Hall Co missed AYP because of 3 sp ed kids’ scores.

By Ernest

July 25, 2008 6:36 PM | Link to this

I disagree GOB, I think the sub-group measure are important. In fact, it would probably be helpful to disaggregate some even more so that all can have a better understanding of the group(s) that need additional remediation.

I do agree that it is not fair for a school making an ‘83’ to be considered failing. Also as we’ve said before, the subgroup(s) in need of the additional assistance should be the only one(s) eligible for additional services and/or transfers.

BTW, the schools in my children’s feeder pattern all made AYP.

By title1teacher

July 25, 2008 7:04 PM | Link to this

“What is going on with black kids and math? I mean, it’s numbers… so no one can say it’s a cultural thing like one can with language arts or social studies. What is the deal?”

Flipper you just mentioned the 2000 pound elephant in the living room that no one wants to talk about. It was the same reason why my school system did not meet ayp; the black kids just aren’t getting it. And what makes this frustrating is the fact that the majority of teachers at my,HS, school are black and we have very few TAPP teachers. I think this will be my last year teaching. I honestly don’t see things getting any better.

By Lisa B.

July 25, 2008 7:05 PM | Link to this

GOB, if the sped subgroup made gains of 10% or better, the school would receive Safe Harbor status. Our Middle School SPED students have done amazingly well. I think that in the past, we “left behind” many kids who were labeled Special Ed. NCLB spotlights all the subgroups, if there are enough of them to count. The AMO will continue to increase, and making AYP will become more and more difficult. NCLB is not a perfect piece of legislation, but it did draw attention to areas of weakness that needed to be addressed. Obviously, the law needs some tweaking. Parts of it are vastly unfair. At least it got people thinking and talking.

By TheBlogger

July 25, 2008 7:11 PM | Link to this

I’ve worked at a high school that has made AYP every year. The school is 60% black and about 10% of the student population is special ed. And, about 70% are on the reduced lunch program.

Using sub-groups as an excuse is crazy. All students need to be serviced. It really is possible to do it if everyone is committed to it.

What generally happens is that administrators and teachers focus on the masses and leave the sub-groups behind. NCLB was supposed to address just that problem…… not that I like NCLB at all!

flipper I totally disagree. If you don’t start out taking Alg I, you cannot jump to Alg II. Math is sequential in nature. If a 7th grader is identified, as you would like, to be “weak in math” and not allowed to take Alg I until 9th grade (for example), there is no way that student will be able to catch up before graduation. You will have doomed that student if they do want a career that requires that level of math.

Come on, guys. This level of math is really not that hard. I don’t understand at all why any adult would be opposed to it. Why would it be difficult for a 7th grader to learn how to solve for b in the equation a = bc? Do we really expect so little from the younger generation?

By TheBlogger

July 25, 2008 7:15 PM | Link to this

Janine So then, do I understand your position correctly? If a 7th grader wants to become a pro basketball player as a career, he should only be required to take PE to get a high school diploma? Won’t that be a “productive citizen?”

Too bad that he will never grow beyond 5 foot 2 inches. I guess he will be on welfare after all.

By Lisa B.

July 25, 2008 7:26 PM | Link to this

Title: I’ve got to say that in Rural South Georgia, the Black Subgroup is a concern. The students are just as capable, but seem not to understand the link between academic success and workforce success. We don’t have the job opportunities one finds in urban areas. I had a student tell me her mom graduated from high school, but her aunt didn’t. They both clean houses, so what difference did it make? With so little exposure to middle class lifestyles, the students see no gain from studying. I don’t know how to address that.

By title1teacher

July 25, 2008 7:35 PM | Link to this

Blogger

I feel happy for you but your school,care to tell us the name???, is the exception and not the rule. Check out the ayp results. No one is trying to inject race in this. I’m, and flipper, are simply quoting results.

By Lisa B.

July 25, 2008 7:49 PM | Link to this

Blogger, you are right on about math. Often students are “weak” in math, because they missed a particular skill for any number of reasons. It is VERY important to provide all sorts of opportunities for students to shore up weaknesses. Failure and retention do little good, and frequently cause great harm. I believe that given the right atmosphere, the right teaching methods (which vary from child to child) and enough support, most kids are going to learn. For decades, we’ve side-tracked students into low-level course work. There is no job market for low-level students. They master incredibly complex video games, memorize impossible song lyrics, and can do about anything with a cell phone. They aren’t stupid.

Unemployment and underemployment cost society as a whole. Poor people can’t buy things. They don’t pay enough (if any) taxes. We just have to be creative in our approach. Somehow, we have to make our students understand how education is important.

Sorry for the soapbox.

By thomas

July 25, 2008 8:07 PM | Link to this

Whether you are talking about black kids, Latino kids, white kids, or Asian kids, the result is still the same. If you do not develop a child, they will not grow up into anything meaningful.

Many of these “failing” highschoolers were “at risk” middleschoolers and “behind” in elementary school. To say it succinctly, they have been “dumb” for years.

This is why I and many other scholars and educators have been advocating for strong, effective education at the elementary level. It’s hard to blame the high school (WHICH IS WHY I DON’T BELIEVE YOU HAVE EVER HEARD ME SAY ANYTHING CRITICAL ABOUT HIGH SCHOOLS. PERIOD.) when these same students have been behind the eight ball for years.

I have actually tracked students who were firmly “behind” academically in fourth and fifth grade. These kids were identified for learning deficiencies as early as kindergarten. Kids who were in EIP classes in first grade, second grade, third grade, and fourth grade. Some of these kids could barely write. Literally. Handwriting was just atrocious.

I honestly don’t see how the high schools can stand it. It disgusts me at the elementary level. I can only imagine the nightmare it’s like at the middle school level. Musty half grown punks reading at fourth and fifth grade level, barely able to add 54 + 128, yet walking around with an attitude and a foul mouth. Disrespectful to anyone and everything, including the walls and chairs. I can’t even imagine what it’s like with REAL grown men and women.

I was flicking channels one day and came across the educational access channel on cable. They were playing a little segment about Read 180. These people were in a high school, filming musty grown MEN and WOMEN using the Read 180 program. MEN with mustaches, beards, and dreadlocks. How the h_ll can you be a grown man— excuse me, teenager— and be using a program that looked like it had fourth and fifth grade reading passages.

Education is fundamental, people. If you don’t teach ‘em, they end up mean, meancing, and scary looking. They’ll be angry, roaming the streets unemployed, on the corner, selling and using drugs. The women will be popping out b******* babies like tasty bread. This goes for people of all races- black, white, and Hispanic.

If you don’t know anything, you can’t go anywhere. This is why I crusade about quality education and lifting up all people. We have enough zombies roaming the streets of America.

By GOB

July 25, 2008 11:24 PM | Link to this

I certainly see the value in seeing which subgroups are doing well and which arent. My complaint is that is crazy to label the entire school as failing when the the school as a whole did very well (88 in math and 98 in English).

I’d be fine if they reported it out on a subgroup level (ie. special ed math didnt meet AYP, etc.) but to label the whole school doesnt make sense to me. The vast majority of my school did very well, yet they get to read in the paper that they failed. How does that benefit any of the students, parents or teacher?

By TheBlogger

July 26, 2008 3:10 AM | Link to this

title1teacher the school i am referring to is Druid Hills High School. It has made AYP every year. And, you can check out the demographics yourself to see that what I said was mostly on the mark. That school is very unique because it is a mix of artsy type kids from the wealthy Emory area and also of the gang type kids from the poor and rough Clarkston area.

GOB without labeling the whole school as a ‘failure’, what motivation would they have to ever improve or help the subgroups that are failing? Won’t it be easier to just heard them to the back room while you teach the others? Again, it is my understanding that this type of behavior was the whole purpose of NO child left behind.

One year, my school barely made it on the black subgroup. The following year the faculty made a concerted effort to reach out to black students and their parents and encourage tutoring, etc. Most of our faculty meetings were to share tips on how to draw in the interest of black students. It worked.

Another year, we barely made it due to the special ed scores. The next year two more special ed teachers were hired to help with study skills. It worked.

My point is that when a schools sees a deficiency in any area it should be a red flag to pay close attention to it and do whatever is necessary to help those kids.

This is what high schools can do to help. Elementary and middle schools can help by reducing the number of students that fail the CRCT and are moved to the next grade anyway - they will end up being most at risk for high school drop out because they are so far behind.

Remember everyone, that last standardized test, the HSGT, is really a do or die test for that diploma - simply a pass or fail. A student that has never passed any CRCT and has been ‘moved along’ has little chance of ever passing that HSGT. It is very very sad to see when that happens - and I have seen it happen too many times to nice people. You do any student a dis-service when you move a student to the next level when they have failed the CRCT.

By Ernest

July 26, 2008 7:51 AM | Link to this

TheBlogger, I understand your rationale regarding how to label a school however I think being labeled a ‘failing’ school when only one subgroup doesn’t pass is harsh. As I said earlier, if one misses one question on a test with 6, their score is approximately 83%. I also wouldn’t put this school in the same category as one that missed on two or more subgroups. Maybe if the same subgroup failed two or more years but to get that ‘distinction’ after just one year doesn’t seem right.

Many hear on this board would agree that ‘most’ citizens simply look at the pass or fail rating without drilling down to understand why that school received the score. That’s what caused some of the problems DeKalb experienced, a subgroup such as SPED did not make their mark yet everyone in the school had the option to transfer. This resulted in ‘bright flight’ in some cases and negatively impacted the school in other subgroups.

Lastly, I don’t believe you meant to use a ‘broad brush’ but your characterization of ‘some’ of the students from Clarkston was somewhat harsh.

By EducatorX3

July 26, 2008 8:35 AM | Link to this

Random comments and thoughts….

• what about the system where three elementary schools didn’t make AYP based on the scores of a total of 5 special education students? The “exceeded” scores of these schools range from 27-35% in reading; “met + exceeding scores” range from 70-96%. Amazing progress was made in special education but not enough to make AYP. And these schools are failing? All three made the goals for ESL students; all three made the goals for ED (economically disadvanted) students; and all three will be on the NI list. Fair?

• should students be retained if they don’t pass the CRCT? Consider this scenario…fourth grade child scores in the 80% on a norm-referenced test, makes good grades (in a classroom where grades are based on mastery of standards), makes a 797 on the reading portion of the CRCT. Hold the kid back? Of course not!

Another scenario…Student with an IQ of 75. Doesn’t qualify for SPED services. Gets every other possible help - EIP segments, additional reading segments, tutoring, after-school, before-school, yet he fails the reading CRCT with a score of 760. Retain him? What will he gain from it? We can hold him back until he is 14 in the third grade and sitting next to a 9 year girl. Do you really want that?

For those supporting retention based on one measure - the CRCT - you have to think hard on that one. If you truly want schools to do what is right for the student, you have to consider each student on a case-by-case basis. We have retained students - if we (parent, teacher, administrator) determine that this is what is best for the child. But we also place students in the next grade when we determine that is the best placement.

• If we are going to use the results of one test to determine the value of a school and its teachers and, to some degree, the value of the students, then let’s give the test in August and again in May and compare the results. Then we would know the true progress of our students, the effectiveness of the curriculum, and the strengths and weaknesses of the teachers. Instead, we are making school-improvement plans based on Group A improving on the scores of Group B with no consideration of where Group B performed the previous year! (at least according to NCLB! it is not the way SIPs are formulated in all schools.)

• My personal opinion? We could raise test scores by not talking about the test! If we didn’t mention CRCT until a day or so before - teach the babies how to bubble in the sheet, talk to them about the rules - then let them take the test, I believe scores would improve.

Instructional time should be just that - instruction that leads to learning. Test-prep - other than helping them understand the format and the duration of the test - should be teaching the curriculum (notice I didn’t not say just the GPS…there is more to curriculum than a list of standards)

• Finally…It is rather scary to hear the head of the state DOE talk about changing the curriculum to match the test! If the curriculum needs changing - then change it, but the test should be written to match the curriculum, not the other way around.

Someone has to step up to run for superintendent - someone with administrative experience at the school and system level, someone with common sense, someone who understands that just because things are going well in a Fayette County middle school it does not mean that things are going well all over the state.

By WFC

July 26, 2008 8:44 AM | Link to this

NCLB and AYP are massive “shell game” hoaxes. The children of 16-year old unwed mothers are going to be able to compete with the children of two parents with masters degees and money? Not very likely! It’s just politics.

By WFC

July 26, 2008 8:44 AM | Link to this

NCLB and AYP are massive “shell game” hoaxes. The children of 16-year old unwed mothers are going to be able to compete with the children of two parents with masters degees and money? Not very likely! It’s just politics.

By high school teacher

July 26, 2008 10:40 AM | Link to this

GOB, I hear you. Our schools are in the same boat.

Blogger, another reason I have such a hard time with labeling an entire high school as failing is because the test scores used as a measure are tests taken by only 25% of the school population (the junior class). How is it fair to a sophomore, who didn’t even take the test, to attend what is considered a failing school because of what juniors did on the test the year before?

I’m all for disaggregating data to determine where weaknesses lie; I am opposed to labeling an entire school as a failing school because of one test taken by the juniors.

By Lee

July 26, 2008 10:41 AM | Link to this

Lest ye forget, the NCLB and AYP hoaxes are a response to the ‘graduating illiterates’ hoax the schools were perpetuating. Maybe I should add the graduating “Honor graduates who had to take remedial classes in college” hoax as well.

The biggest losers in this mess is the average and above average student. They are languishing with minimal instruction while the education alchemists are attempting to make academic gold out of the borderline retard lead student.

Or, put another way, no matter how hard you try, you will never get a Clydesdale to run in the Kentucky Derby.

By Ernest

July 26, 2008 12:12 PM | Link to this

Lee, you hit on why I actually like the ‘idea’ of a nationally normed test to be used as a diagnostic instrument. If designed and used properly, I want to believe it can help in providing targeted assistance to those that need remediation. It could also serve as a ‘wake-up’ call to those schools and teachers to have honor graduates that are determined moreso by their academic environment.

How does that saying go, Given a choice would you want to go to a school that is best of the worst or worse of the best? Obviously you want to go to the best of the best but unfortunately I don’t believe that choice isn’t available for a majority of our students.

By catlady

July 26, 2008 1:22 PM | Link to this

to the Blogger at 7:11: actually since we have kids who do not KNOW that 56=7x8, it is really hard for them to do even those most simple algebraic problems. or , take x-57=11. Many, many of the kids will come up with x=46.

One thing that would help tremendously would be requiring mastery of skills/facts. I see kids get exhausted making 7 groups of 8 tallymarks and then counting them, before they can go to the next digit of the two digit multiplication problem. and then, they cannot accurately carry the 5 to the tens place!

Then, in the lower grades at least, we have the fact that they cannot read the problem, or, if they can, they cannot figure out what to do with the numbers presented: do we add, subtract? God knows we won’t willingly multiply and division is not even spoken out loud.

By simon

July 26, 2008 1:35 PM | Link to this

My random thoughts, too.

I agree with thomas that math at this level should not be a problem. Students in K-8 fail math CRCT because their teachers just don’t know math, or don’t know how to teach math well to those who are struggling.

flipper there was never a good old days when “tracking” worked. “Tracking” often meant students just simply dropped out and got jobs - and they could get reasonably good jobs.

School curricula should not be based on the practicality - it might be true that most people will not use mathematics beyond Algebra 1 in their daily lives, but most people don’t use much of what you read in HS English, any foreign language, much of western history, etc., etc. Should they study those subjects - ABSOLUTELY.

I don’t understand the issue with sub-groups. Are you suggesting schools should be allowed to write them off? It may be true that the difference between meeting and not meeting AYP is only a few students, but it isn’t those few students who failed school. Schools failed those students.

By high school teacher

July 26, 2008 2:01 PM | Link to this

but it isn’t those few students who failed school. Schools failed those students.

How about adding parents and society in general to that? I’m not saying that schools aren’t at fault, but you can’t blame the schools entirely.

By simon

July 26, 2008 5:23 PM | Link to this

Unless schools are willing to take the full responsibility, they will not get full credit on anything else, either. As far as I am concerned, schools ARE responsible for their students CRCT scores.

By Tony

July 26, 2008 5:32 PM | Link to this

It may be true that the difference between meeting and not meeting AYP is only a few students, but it isn’t those few students who failed school. Schools failed those students. This is about as inaccurate as you can get.

Special education students constitute a subgroup. In our school there are over 80 kids in the group. Guess what! These students were placed in special education for a reason. They could not perform up to par with their counterparts. That’s the whole reason we have special education. AYP rules say that the same rate of passing is required for these students as for regular and gifted students.

Guess what else! Schools work diligently to meet the learning needs of these students, that is what we are equipped for. We are not equipped to be the mommas, daddies, aunts, uncles, brothers, sisters, and other family members for these children who instill values. Without families who expect their children to perform in school, follow rules, do homework, come to school prepared, and all the other stuff that makes students successful, you can not declare the schools failed these children. Their families did.

By TheBlogger

July 26, 2008 5:32 PM | Link to this

Earnest Your idea of “bright flight” in DeKalb Co (or elsewhere) is unfounded. It takes a school on the AYP list at least 2 years before students are eligible to transfer. If it takes school administration more than 2 years to “get it through their head” that they have got to do something to help those students (subgroups, whatever) that failed, maybe that school should be shut down? Or, at least a change in administration is in order. As a parent, if my child’s school didn’t make AYP even one year, I would be going to every PTSA meeting demanding to know what is being done and what I can do to help to ensure that it doesn’t happen a second time.

Educatorx3 Your rational about allowing students that failed the CRCT to be promoted anyway is flawed. While is “sounds good” to say that we will look at each case one by one, that isn’t really what happens - and you know it. After the child has failed the CRCT twice (yes, they get 2 chances and can attend summer school to help with it), the parent and adminstrator basically get together to promote the child anyway - and usually with the descenting opinion of the teacher. The parent doesn’t want their poor child to have the stigma of being left back and the administrator simply wants the schools numbers to look good. The teacher seems to be the only one looking out for the best interest of the child and knows fully well that the child in no way can or should move on to the next level in most cases. However, the teachers opinion, as usual, means squat and the child is promoted.

catlady If your child is in 7th grade and really cannot do the math that you posted, then your child should never have passed the previous grades. If I were you I would go to the previous teachers and become very angry because now your child is in a proverbial hole and it is their fault for not teaching the math and for passing your child anyway. Another thing I would do is find a math tutor for your child, and fast!

By Lee

July 26, 2008 6:34 PM | Link to this

If my taxes weren’t paying for this fiasco, it might be comical.

• If a student cannot do the work, if they come to school unprepared, if they just decide not to do the work, then blame the student and blame the parents for not motivating them.

• If a student does not do the work or cannot do the work, but keeps getting promoted until one day, this student finds himself in high school but yet, can only do third grade level work - BLAME THE SCHOOLS.

Hell, that’s the core problem anyway. Schools were graduating illiterates. That’s the main reason (or should I say, the primary excuse) NCLB was enacted.

Teachers and administrators keep refering to the special ed subgroup as a reason they didn’t make AYP. Well, blame the politicians for passing the hideous Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) for mandating the concept of a free and appropriate public education for all. That’s why my daughter’s first grade class had to endure a special ed student who was still wearing a diaper forcing the teacher to spend about an hour per day dealing with that mess (pardon the graphic pun) instead of providing instruction for the other 21 kids in the classroom.

Do the math. 21 kids lost a total of about 5 weeks worth of instruction during the year because congress thought it would be a grand idea to mainstream (or inclusion, whatever) a special ed kid into regular class.

In the next few weeks, expect the educrates to put their spin on this AYP data. ‘Well, yes, the test scores are bad, but not as bad as last year. We’re showing improvement.’

Yeah, right.

Well Mr. Lee, I’ve good news. The gangrene is still spreading, but it didn’t spread as much as last week.

Yep, makes me feel a whole lot better…

By simon

July 26, 2008 7:12 PM | Link to this

Schools work diligently to meet the learning needs of these students, that is what we are equipped for. We are not equipped to be the mommas, daddies, aunts, uncles, brothers, sisters, and other family members for these children who instill values. Without families who expect their children to perform in school, follow rules, do homework, come to school prepared, and all the other stuff that makes students successful, you can not declare the schools failed these children. Their families did.

It’s always someone else’s fault, isn’t it? If you can only teach those who come prepared, then just admit that you are incompetent in dealing with those students. Diligence is nice, but what we need is competence.

By EducatorX3

July 26, 2008 7:43 PM | Link to this

Blogger…I described what happens in our school. As the administrator, I am well aware of the opportunities that my students have to pass the test. I am also aware of the opportunities they have had during the year. I am aware of the progress they have made, the work they have done, who their teacher was, and what they scored on the ITBS and benchmark assessments. But even with all that, the first thing I do when I get test scores is to call the teacher of any child who did not pass and have a conversation about what is best for that child. We look at the first scores and determine what that student needs in summer school. If they do not pass the second time, I do the same thing. Call the teacher, discuss the options, and plan a meeting with the parents.

So, please be careful painting all administrators with the same brush. I would never do that to teachers - even high school teachers who think they know everything about elementary schools.

Ever see students read or do math in high school? Please say thank you to the teachers who came before you. If you don’t have to help students get on a bus every afternoon - thank an elementary school teacher. Don’t have to teach your students how to use a locker? Go express your gratitude to a middle school teacher. You see, we send you many students who did pass the test - with flying colors.

Remember everyone, that last standardized test, the HSGT, is really a do or die test for that diploma - simply a pass or fail Just for kicks…how many chances do the students get to take this one? Isn’t it 5? Aren’t there remediation classes for those who do not pass?

Do you think it is possible to pass the CRCT and still not pass the GHSGT? It happens all the time. Does that mean high school teachers didn’t teach everything the kids were supposed to know? If a high-schooler doesn’t pass the science portion, is it because the teacher didn’t know the science? OR could it be that the test is flawed? OR maybe the kid had a bad day? OR maybe he/she just didn’t remember something?

Do kids ever take the next level of math after not passing the EOCT in Algegra? Oh my! You mean that one score doesn’t keep them from passing? How is that different from the CRCT?

You think everyone who does not pass the new EOCT for Math I will have to retake the class (be held back) or will they take Math II?

Oh yes…Druid Hills High School is an IB school, has closer to 40% free/reduced lunch, and did not make AYP in 2003. At least that is what the demographics reports say.

Sorry for the rant, but I have spent my day at school working on schedules so that we can better serve the students who did not meet, move the students who met to exceeds, and still give my teachers time to breathe in their 45 minutes of daily planning!

By TheBlogger

July 26, 2008 7:50 PM | Link to this

Simon It’s always someone else’s fault, isn’t it? But isn’t that what you are doing? Schools only see the child a fraction of time throughout the first 18 years of their life. Schools have limited influence on the childs values and morals. IMHO that is the “core” problem here. The parents have not instilled the value of and education and the kid knows they don’t have to do anything in school to pass.

In addition, even when a teacher tries to grade fairly and properly, often some parents rush to the school to the principals office to complain about the teacher.

It isn’t because the parent doesn’t insist the child studies at home. It isn’t because the parent realized that the child watches TV all evening. It isn’t even because the parent never came to parent/teacher conference night or bothered to respond to the progress reports or letters sent home. It is the teachers fault.

So, the parent yells at the principal, the principal yells at the teacher, and the teacher passes the know-nothing kid. The parent is now happy, the kid still doesn’t care, the principal is happy, and the teacher keeps her job. The teacher become dis-enchanted and stops assigning work because she realizes it just doesn’t matter.

Now the students love the teacher and she gets voted “Teacher of the Year!”

The teacher has learned part of a valuable lesson. Pass all students regardless of how little the students learn or how little work they do. Don’t give homework or any work outside of the class. Tolerate badly behaved kids so as not to upset the principal or the parents.

Then the CRCT comes. But, the school failing AYP will never be connected to the “core” problem now, will it?

THEREIN LIES THE PROBLEM!

By TheBlogger

July 26, 2008 8:07 PM | Link to this

EducatorX3 I make no appologies for my comments. Yes, while I teach high school, I have two sisters that teach elementary school in different school systems. What I stated has happened to both of them on a regular basis. Are all administrators the same? Of course not.

Sorry about my error regarding Druid Hills High in 2003. So what? The school didn’t make AYP one year in its history. What is your point? My point is that they are a successful school that makes AYP and has a large proportion of blacks, socio-economically disadvantaged, and special ed students.

Your comparison of the CRCT to the EOCT is comparing apples to oranges. They are different types of tests, they are applied differently, they measure different things, and their impacts are different.

Yes, the HSGT may be taken more than 2 times. So what? The student doesn’t get the diploma until they pass all parts. That is a do-or-die test in my book. No administrator and no parent can insist that the student get a high school diploma if the student fails the HSGT - unlike the CRCT.

There are always a variety of reasons why a student may not do well on a standardized test. This is why students can take the CRCT twice. However, if they fail twice, they simply should NOT be promoted to the next grade, IMHO.

By the way, if you are a school administrator as you elude to, and you know of any teacher not doing their job, I hope that you are making the proper moves to get rid of that teacher.

By EducatorX3

July 26, 2008 8:57 PM | Link to this

Blogger…

Yes, I am an administrator, currently in elementary school. I have had several administrative positions ranging from school to state level.

When you described your school, you said it ALWAYS made AYP. I was just making the point that your statement was not correct. Even very good schools can have years when things don’t go according to plan. Just like an elementary school with a sub-group that puts the school on the NI list when the great majority of the school is being successful.

I want to follow your point on the tests. How are the EOCTs and the CRCT different? They are both criterion-referenced tests designed to assess mastery of the content/standards of a course. How is what they are measuring different? Maybe it is that you are considering the CRCT as the whole rather than the components? I know the results are applied differently (by law), but how is passing a child from Math I to Math II without passing the EOCT any different from passing a child from third grade to 4th grade if they have not passed the math portion of the CRCT?

My point with the graduation test is that multiple opportunities are given for success. But even after multiple failed attempts, some students are allowed to appeal the test, and some students are awarded a diploma. It is rare, but it does happen. I’ve read the results of the SBOE decisions.

In my system - as in all I have worked with - if the decision is made to allow a student to move to the next grade level after not passing a gateway CRCT, there are many supports put in place for that student: second sections of the academic area of weakness, tutoring, mentoring by adults and/or other students - everything that can be done to help the student become successful. I can tell you I do not allow that decision to be made unless we can all agree that it is in the best interest of the child.

And you can bet your last dollar that I will work with a teacher who is not doing what should be done in the classroom. If he/she is willing to work and show improvement, then he/she will have a job. I have had some who needed to teach at different grade levels in order to be successful; I have had some who needed to move on and practice “welcome to Wal-Mart.” Students come first.

By Grammar Police

July 26, 2008 10:16 PM | Link to this

allude — to make reference to

elude — to avoid

Hmm. This goes back a few days to Get Schooled’s conversation about grammar versus typos.

By thomas

July 26, 2008 10:51 PM | Link to this

Ok Blogger, ya got me. I admit I was one who developed easier grade standards over the years. I don’t teach and give grades now. But by the time I left the classroom, I was giving B’s and C’s to illiterate ESOL students who could barely speak English. Why? Because I needed peace of mind and a less stressful working environment. Besides if I didn’t I would hear from an “administrator” who would lecture me on “the grading policy for ELLs” and suggest I “reconsider” my grades for little Jose.

Funny thing, though— it was the native parents who gave me the most hll about grades. Black and white parents who cry, nitpick, and moan over the fact their child got a C or D. This same child would fail every test and couldn’t divide 56 by 7. This same child would fail to turn in 5 homework assignments and 3-4 class assignments in a 4 week period as well. Yet they would raise hll over an F on a progress report. “What can we do to bring up Johnny’s grades in math?” The same thing I had said from the very beginning— do your work and study everyday.

Teachers leave the classroom for a reason. The reason I got into what I do now is because the regular classroom is HORRID. You simply get no help or support from parents, students, or your administrators. What did it for me was having a fourth grade class with 5 SPED, 5 ESOL, and 10 others reading on second grade level. Our work consisted of lots of drawing pictures and making posters. Flip books. I went from doing real teaching, having students participate in science fairs to students drawing a picture of the solar system as the “project.”

I know all about that inclusion thing. I lived through it one year (see above). One year we had a third grade class with a student who had a full time parapro with him. This boy could do nothing. The parapro was simply the babysitter to keep him contained in the classroom. The year I had an “inclusion class”, I had a fourth grader with the intellectual level of a five year old. No joke. She would yell out loud and blurt out in class. Another boy would yell out crazy things, too. That’s in addition to the 3 EBDs I had in the room.

I admit it— I’m an evil old b*******. Everytime I see these “inclusion” classes PACKED AND LOADED DOWN WITH 7,8,9, 10 SPED kids, most of whom will not do any real work, I laugh, snicker, and point. I say to myself “thank God, thank God, thank God I got the h_ll out.” Seriously guys, this stuff is ridiculous.

By TheBlogger

July 26, 2008 10:54 PM | Link to this

EducatorX3 - Yes, you mentioned some differences between CRCT and EOCT. Other differences - the amount of time to take the test (therefore the number of questions on the test) is another. The amount of content on the test is another. Another is that the ECOT has a direct impact on the course grade that goes on a student’s permanent record while failing the CRCT has no impact on a students grade. Another difference is that EOCT is given in the sciences (physical science and biology) while the CRCT has no science (no impact on the score).

Finally, if you want to compare elementary standardized tests to high school, I again point to the do-or-die GHSGT. Also, I point to the number of State standardized tests are more in high school. During 4 years in high school, a student takes (and I approximate) about 10 EOCT and also the GHSGT. How many CRCTs are given in 6 years of elementary? I think it is two?

I question why you insist on comparing? They are different. Apples and oranges.

You seem to be nit-picking at particular statements (Druid Hills HS always makes AYP) as opposed to making an attempt an understand the message within the blog. That is almost as bad as the grammar police. The point about Druid Hills HS, again, is that they are a successful school with large numbers of subgroups such as blacks, socio-economically disadvantaged, and special ed students. And, if they can do it then there is no excuse valid using subgroups as the reason. And, I am sure that there are other successful schools with large number of subgroups.

Lastly, a true story from my sister (teaches elementary). Her class one year was filled with ‘low achievers’ (as she put it). She had taught for over 25 years and is considered a great teacher. That year, the school also got a new principal. The CRCT came and 10 of her students failed - no shock to her. Yes, she had worked very hard to get them to pass, but they did not. The following year when she returned to school, guess what she found? All 10 of those students had been promoted to the next grade. At first she was very pleased. She assummed that they retook the CRCT and had passed. Wrong. They did retake the CRCT and all 10 had failed again - most even worse that the first time. Confused, she went to speak with an Assistant Principal. That Assistant Principal basically told her that it was none of her buisness and to leave. The school soon “celebrated” its low rate of retaining students (repeating a grade). The new principal got his picture in the town newspaper.

My sister transferred schools the following year. She now will be able to retire within a couple of years, but is thrilled with her new school. She said that she may continue beyond her 30 years.

By simon

July 26, 2008 11:18 PM | Link to this

TheBlogger

You are just so great coming up with excuses for schools. If they can’t do their jobs because they see kids only a fraction of their lives, what are they there for? Why do we waste our kids time at schools if they can’t do their jobs? I suppose you are at least admitting your incompetence - I suppose we should get over this illusion that schools are supposed to be there for something. They are no more than just child care co-op’s, subsidized by tax payers’ money.

By Lee

July 26, 2008 11:34 PM | Link to this

Wow. In the immediate posts, we have at least three different educators/administrators admit to passing along students to the next grade who could not do the work.

In case you forgot, there is this little technicality called the Teachers Code of Ethics, which state:

Standard 4: Misrepresentation or Falsification - An educator should exemplify honesty and integrity in the course of professional practice. Unethical conduct includes but is not limited to:

Section 4.3: falsifying, misrepresenting, omitting or erroneously reporting information regarding the evaluation of students and/or personnel;

Which gets to the core of the problem, we cannot trust our public school teachers and administrators to do their jobs.

Maybe what our school districts are going to have to do is to hire compliance auditors to monitor these kids who wind up in middle school and high school that are performing on a third grade level - and then file a complaint with the Professional Standards Commision against the student’s previous teachers and administrators.

Maybe, just maybe, when our educators start seeing their coworkers losing their certification, they will start taking their jobs seriously.

Maybe then, when a principal instructs a teacher to pass along a student, they will file an ethics complaint against the principal.

Maybe then, we can start trusting our professional educators to DO THE DAMN JOB WE HIRED THEM TO DO.

Absolutely amazing.

By EducatorX3

July 27, 2008 12:12 AM | Link to this

OK…Let me go back and see if I can make the connections for you.

You said: I’ve worked at a high school that has made AYP every year. The school is 60% black and about 10% of the student population is special ed. And, about 70% are on the reduced lunch program.

I simply pointed out that what you were saying was not exactly correct. Your school is only about 50% black, only about 40% free/reduced lunch, and had not made AYP every year.

You said: Using sub-groups as an excuse is crazy. All students need to be serviced. It really is possible to do it if everyone is committed to it.

I said that even very good schools (like yours) can have years when things don’t go according to plan. Just like an elementary school with a sub-group that puts the school on the NI list when the great majority of the school is being successful.

You said What generally happens is that administrators and teachers focus on the masses and leave the sub-groups behind.

I disagree with this statement. I don’t believe administrators intentionally leave subgroups behind. I was trying to make the point that sometimes, no matter how hard you work, things just don’t turn out as you want. A school should not be labeled as “needs improvement” when the AYP designation is based on a small percentage of a sub-group. (by the way, Georgia has been accepted into the federal pilot program that pretty much says the same thing.)

As for the comparison of the CRCT and EOCT. You said: Remember everyone, that last standardized test, the HSGT, is really a do or die test for that diploma -simply a pass or fail. I took your comment as saying that students only got ONE chance - therefore the “do or die” statement. I was simply pointing out that high school students have multiple opportunities to take the test.

You A student that has never passed any CRCT and has been ‘moved along’ has little chance of ever passing that HSGT.

I doubt that many students who have NEVER passed any section of the CRCT actually make it to the graduation test.

To support my statements about making decisions on retention based on one test score, I mentioned the EOCT. I know they are counted as part of the course grade - but they alone do not determine the passing or failing of a class (nor should they!) I was making the point that if the EOCT does not determine failure, then why should the CRCT.

And while you may think I am comparing apples and oranges, the DOE apparently does not. The following descriptions come directly from the DOE website:

The CRCT is designed to measure how well students acquire the skills and knowledge described in the Georgia Performance Standards (GPS). The EOCT align with the Georgia curriculum standards and include assessment of specific content knowledge and skills.

The purpose looks similar to me. As for the number? There are 8 EOCT each requiring 2 sessions of 60 minutes. I don’t know how many questions are on each test but I would assume that the number would differ from subject to subject. Then there are 4 sections of the GHSGT plus the writing test. I believe only ELA and Math are used in AYP calculations but I may be wrong.

The CRCT? Grades 1-3 take three sections - ELA, Reading and Math each year. Grades 4 -8 take ELA, Reading, Math, Science and Social Studies each year. The time for the content areas range from 120-150 minutes (each content area is divided into 60-70 minutes sections)

As for nit-picking instead of understanding…no, I got your point. But points have to be supported with facts. Your information was not exactly factual. I don’t disagree with you. There are many schools that are successful with large sub-groups. But you also need to know that there are very successful schools that appear on the “non-AYP” list (one year without making AYP) or the NI list (more than one year without making AYP) due to only a very small number of students. My point? Should a school be labled as “failing” when 690 students made it and only 3 didn’t? It could happen.

I am sorry your sister had a bad experience. I know it happens. Doesn’t make it right. Doesn’t mean it is the norm. But we can only base our opinions and feelings on what we experience. I am glad to hear that she is in a better school now and no longer has to deal with folks who don’t get it.

By simon

July 27, 2008 8:06 AM | Link to this

*am sorry your sister had a bad experience. I know it happens. Doesn’t make it right. Doesn’t mean it is the norm. *

We seem to hear similar stories so often that it is hard to believe such a situation is an exception…

By Ernest

July 27, 2008 12:51 PM | Link to this

TheBlogger, I will yield that it was not limited to ‘bright flight’ however my point was true. I’ve been in ‘casual’ conversations with some from schools that received students that did not make AYP in their home school. It caused a LOT of frustration in some communities such that some ‘suggested’ having an ‘AYP flu’ during testing with hopes of their school not making AYP on the attendance measure. I don’t believe they actually followed through with this but it goes to show the level of frustration some of the receiving schools and communities had with respect to AYP.

By catlady

July 27, 2008 4:19 PM | Link to this

X3, the 3rd grade CRCT has reading, math, science, social studies, and language arts sections.

I believe most of the 1st and 2nd grade test is read to the students. In 3rd grade, all that is read to them is the directions. And THAT is the first gateway grade.

Blogger, I was telling you about fifth graders who I tried to help (as a push in) last year. Teachers in my county have NO POWER to retain a child. Otherwise they would be. Virtually NO TEACHER agrees with sending unprepared students on. Kids who have done nothing, who have failed in their “assisted” grades, have failed the CRCT, are ALL PROMOTED. Also, in my county we are NOT ALLOWED to demand that kids master skills/facts. Which is how you get 5th graders who cannot tell you, without finger counting, what 15-7 is. Our new math coach agrees with this practice, and also told me kids who cannot do the math should not be held back “because of this little thing.” I can teach two digit multiplication all day, and the students can understand the rules of “how to do it”, but when it takes them 7 minutes to draw the talley marks to figure out the 7x8 part of 37x48, they are too exhausted to continute the problem to its eventual end, much less do another problem. And, since they are frequently inaccurate on adding, even if they count tally marks right they still have to carry and add correctly. Our coach and our principal stress that we must “expose” the children to the math concepts, but when old folks like me suggest that we teach to mastery they recoil in horror! How can we not “expose” them to what is on the test; how can we “waste time” drilling in math facts? I say, how can we expect them to answer the question if they cannot do basic memory work? The first answer to our math deficit: don’t send kids out of first who don’t know basic addition and subtraction facts COLD. Don’t send kids out of third who don’t know multiplication/division facts COLD. I can tell you it isn’t magic, and it isn’t exposing and it isn’t curricular maps drawn up by others.

Then, for CRCT success, they need to be able to read the questions. The kids at my school can call the words in the questions out loud pretty well, but cannot tell you what they mean. We are a READING FIRST school! They know their phonics, but have no comprehension. So on the CRCT they just guess, not because they don’t know the answers, but because they cannot really read, to understanding, the questions or answers.

For whatever reason, we have taken away professional decision-making from teachers and we have the current sorry state of affairs, both academically and behavior-wise.

This is merely my opinion, based on going on year 35 of teaching, and nothing more.

By Math Educator

July 27, 2008 4:37 PM | Link to this

*in my county we are NOT ALLOWED to demand that kids master skills/facts. *

How can this be. From the GPS:

M1N3f: Know the single-digit addition facts to 18 and corresponding subtraction facts with understanding and fluency. M3N3b: Know the multiplication facts with understanding and fluency to 10 x 10.

I think premature and sole emphasis on memorization (mastery???) is probably not helpful, but the GPS seems to focus on both understanding AND mastery.

By catlady

July 27, 2008 7:01 PM | Link to this

Math educator: It is a Bill Clinton definition: In our county, “know” does not mean you can just spit out the answer. “Know” means that somehow, given enough time, manipulatives, and teacher adaptation of the materials, you might be able to come up with something in the ballpark. I AM NOT KIDDING!

I would love to hear that it is different in other counties. Our folks in administration seem to think it is not reasonable to expect memorization.

By “mastery”, in this case, I mean being able to execute a calculation quickly, efficiently, accurately, and without help.

It is real hard to cover GPS for 4th or 5th grade when M1N3f has not been met (but the child passed on year after year). We are supposed to remediate it in our needs-based math time, but, let’s face it, some things you just have to drill and study till it is automatic. I don’t think it is unreasonable to expect children who are MI or above in intelligence to have these facts under their belt, so we can move on to more advanced math topics.

Our school is sending to middle school kids who have not met M1N3f.

By Math Educator

July 27, 2008 7:34 PM | Link to this

It is a Bill Clinton definition: In our county, “know” does not mean you can just spit out the answer. “Know” means that somehow, given enough time, manipulatives, and teacher adaptation of the materials, you might be able to come up with something in the ballpark.

I am not commenting on Bill Clinton, but I agree that we aren’t aiming for students “just sit out the answers.” Look at the statement as a whole - “Know … with understanding and fluency.” I think the CRCT (math) has a time limit in part because there is a certain mastery expectation (although practicality is probably the MAJOR reason). There are states where state tests do not have time limit, I believe. Now, I understand that there is no official definition of fluency, but I think it is reasonable to assume a certain degree of automaticity is expected in the GPS.

By TheBlogger

July 27, 2008 8:40 PM | Link to this

EducatorX3 Gee thanks for your quote by quote repeating. You have proven my point. That is the point regarding that you nit pic and fail to understand the overall message trying to be relayed. Thank GOD you are not my administrator! That must be like h@ll!!!! I feel bad for the teachers, students, and parents in your school. I am also sorry that you seem to be unable to hold a steady job since you readily admit to moving around so much (from State level, to various schools, etc.).

At least some others on here that have posted understood what I have been trying to say. It is not helping any child at all to pass them to the next grade level after failing the CRCT (twice!). And, it happens on a regular basis in every elementary school in the State. These kids have proven that they cannot perform on their own grade level and then are passed along and expected to perform on the next grade level?

Can you say, “Set up to fail?”

By catlady

July 27, 2008 10:09 PM | Link to this

The Blogger: our system believes that students repeating leads to them dropping out. Of course, kids who are significantly behind (which would be the kids that would have to repeat) ARE at much more risk of dropping out—they cannot pass their classes if they go on, either. Our system believes that having them repeat MAKES them drop out, rather than seeing that both repeating and dropping out are frequently signs of the same thing: not being ready to do the work required. (Of course, there is more than one reason for dropping out, but I doubt that a high proportion of those doing well in school end up dropping out, no matter what their home situation is. Could use NCES’s NELS 88 data to look at this nationally, I guess.) The data I have seen suggests that kids who are significantly below grade level on skills tend to be the dropouts, although when they leave they may give other reasons, ie, my mama is sick and I got to work, they don’t treat me fairly there, etc.

Our system also believes that repeating “hurts a child’s self-esteem”—as though always being the caboose in the class is not hard on the self-esteem? Watching the other kids get it and move on while you cannot figure out how they did it—that is not harmful to your self-esteem? I have been able to hold back about 16 kids over the years, and every one of their parents has thanked me for it later. And of the ones I wanted to hold back but whose parents would not allow it, several have told me since that they wish they had listened to me.

Finally, our system believes that the reason these kids are doing poorly is because they are not being taught right. Well, I challenge ANY of our CO or local school level administrators (who go to numerous conferences state and nationally; makes them experts, right?) to come in and show us how to do it. I have invited; no one has taken me up on it. Guess they are too busy picking out our next “Savior Program” that will whip us teachers into shape, and provide the magic bullet for the kids.

Our system has one of the highest dropout and student pregnancy rates in Georgia. Who could be surprised about that.

The current state of affairs has a negative effect on the other students in the class as well. That is a large source of the pain I feel.

While we are at it, with the RTI (Tiers) thing. Be prepared for mounds of paperwork, as well as having to justify your existence on this Earth. The way our CO has interpreted it: You got a kid who is struggling in math facts. They are 3 years behind. You work with him in needs-based group, no progress, then you refer him to the SST. You go back and for weeks try what the group is recommending, then report back your lack of progress. Then, the child is assigned an individual teacher (probably you, again, during your planning time which you have had guilted out of you) to work intensively every day on ONE FACT. If, at the end of the month, the child shows progress on that one fact, you declare victory! The child does not need sp ed testing; they have learned the fact/skill. (If the child does not show progress, you change tactics, and keep trying) Then, you go through the same process with another fact/skill. Of course, by now the child does not remember the first skill taught, and half a year has passed. And on, and on. Meanwhile, the rest of the class goes on, and at the end of the year the child may move up a part of a year in skills, but still is years behind.

By TheBlogger

July 27, 2008 10:41 PM | Link to this

catlady You said, “our system believes that students repeating leads to them dropping out.”

Huh? I have been teaching many years and am currently working on PhD in Ed and have never ever heard of that at all. In fact, if a student repeats 3rd grade, they cannot drop out legally, right? The student must be of legal age before they can “drop out.”

I agree with everything else you wrote. But rather than say “the system” you might substitute “the general public.” Don’t you honestly think that those that really understand education really do know what’s going on? They may not admit it.

I have found that most of the public decisions made are ‘for show’ and often do not make logical sense regarding education. The “general public” doesn’t want to hear about how society has degraded and our children don’t get the proper guidance from the parent(s). The “general public” doesn’t want to see that their local school refuses to promote students (it doesn’t matter that those students haven’t worked at all or haven’t learned the content). The “general public” doesn’t want to see a student from their local school walk away in handcuffs even though that student was attacking with a knife.

Surely our kids are pure of heart and honest in their attempt to become educated! Surely every home in America is still the “Leave it to Beaver” type! Surely there are no hungry 9 year olds that are never fed dinner!

Therefore, it must be the teacher’s fault! Make the teacher change their approach. Make the teacher individualize lessons for each of the students in the class. Make the teacher give up their planning period, their lunch break, their mornings, their afternoons and evenings.

It is far easier for America to blame the scape-goat classroom teacher than to look in the mirror.

By simon

July 28, 2008 5:42 AM | Link to this

But rather than say “the system” you might substitute “the general public.” Don’t you honestly think that those that really understand education really do know what’s going on? They may not admit it.

I think there is research showing that retention in earlier grades does increase likelihood of students dropping out eventually. I don’t have any citation, but I’m sure you can look it up.

By EducatorX3

July 28, 2008 6:23 AM | Link to this

Catlady…thanks for correcting me. Didn’t mean to leave out the content areas for third grade! And what an important difference when they go from being read to to having to read the test themselves!

Blogger, I am truly sorry that I have failed to explain myself to you. I understood what you were saying, I just don’t agree with all of it.(that is what a blog is supposed to be about, right?) My main point is that a single test is not always the best way to determine success. Some of the brightest, my successful folks I know are not good test takers - didn’t make a great score on the SAT, didn’t get into a major university, but have been extremely successful in life.

In our school - and system - we don’t automatically pass everyone who didn’t pass the test. Third graders, especially, are reviewed and examined and the committee determines what is best for the child. If they need to be held back, they are. There are exceptions but again, it is considered on case-by-case basis. With fifth graders, we do the same thing. Sometimes we bring in a teacher from the middle school we feed into so we can be sure we are doing what will work for the kid.

As for the research, there is research that says that students who are retained are more likely to drop out when they become eligible. Most of what I have read indicated that the biggest factor (as far as grade/course failures) was failing a course in 9th grade.

I will ignore the personal attack since you know nothing about me, my experience, background, or school.

Have a good day.

By EducatorX3

July 28, 2008 6:37 AM | Link to this

Sorry for the typo…should read MOST successful folks.

By jim d

July 28, 2008 6:55 AM | Link to this

It amazes me that so many administrators here on this blog really do not see any harm in just passing kids through the system.

If in fact that is what the system is set up to do, then I must question the expense of high stakes tests. If a child will be passed on regardless of how they do on these tests why the hell don’t we just ask the childs teacher and use the funds to actually help the kid?

By catlady

July 28, 2008 8:07 AM | Link to this

simon, kids who are retained are more likely to drop out. Yeah. But being retained does not CAUSE the dropping out. Kids with IQs of 80 are more likely to drop out. Kids who have a parent who is a dropout are more likely to drop out. Those things don’t CAUSE the dropping out, but there is a statistical link.

Look at it like this: people who get speeding tickets are more likely to have auto accidents. Does getting speeding tickets CAUSE you to have an accident? No, but there is a statistical link that can be established.

What I would like to see is 1) do the best thing for the child. Don’t continue to put them in a failing situation. 2) Do what is best for the class. Don’t short-circuit the teacher’s time with 3 kids who are in two years over their heads, so that the rest of the class is either dumbed down or not taught what they need to know because the teacher is trying to remediate YEARS of behindedness 3) Give some credence to the idea that the teacher is a professional who knows her/his stuff. Teachers know if a kid can “make it” the next year. Take those who do NOT know the child’s working level out of the equation (principal, CO).4) When a child is two or more years behind, ADMIT THERE IS A SIGNIFICANT PROBLEM and diagose/treat it! Stop worrying about the percentage of kids in sp ed and take care of them (and their classmates). Forget this mind-numbing RTI crap that is a maze with no exit, and is designed to save money by keeping kids out of sp ed. Everything is not “poor instruction” as we are led to believe. If the teachers are giving poor instruction, WHY DID YOU HIRE THEM AND WHY ARE YOU KEEPING THEM? How did you hire so many, year after year? And why are you still principal if you have no better judgement than that?

jim d, you are right. In Georgia, as the AJC has shown, the results mean nothing, so the high stakes test business is just a big financial reward for certain companies, “full of sound and fury, and signifying nothing.”

By WFC

July 28, 2008 9:16 AM | Link to this

The concept of a “failing school” is seriously flawed for a number of reasons:

• Does an employer care if you graduated from a failing school? NO! He cares whether YOU can do the job!

• Does a college care if you graduated from a failing school? NO! It cares whether YOU can do colllege work!

• Want to pass AYP every year? I call it the NORTHVIEW HIGH SCHOOL plan: recruit as many ASIAN students as you can into your district. Discourage African-Ammericans. Make it almost impossible to achieve special education status. Works first time, every time!

By catlady

July 28, 2008 11:03 AM | Link to this

…Kinda quiet without ol’ Jeff here…..

By Tony

July 28, 2008 12:40 PM | Link to this

jim d - if we did what you say - take the teacher’s word - the companies that make so much money from testing would lose out on guaranteed money. How fair would that be?

By jim d

July 29, 2008 7:53 AM | Link to this

And then [there’s this]9http://www.ajc.com/metro/content/metro/stories/2008/07/28/brownhonorstudent.html?imw=Y)