Get Schooled

By jim d

November 20, 2008 8:57 AM | Link to this

This is JMHO.

Look for other solutions?

No they need to look the other way.

You have kids here that don’t value an education. They need to be elsewhere, Learning to drive a truck, operate a piece of heavy equipment, or learning a trade. We really do need those people too. Not everyone is going to be a brain surgeon or a lawyer.

By Ernest

November 20, 2008 9:30 AM | Link to this

Not to ‘nit pick’ but I am curious about the data and measures used by the governor to draw that conclusion. Another point of view to consider is that some drop out because ‘trade’ options may not be available at their school. Like JimD said, not everyone wants to go to college immediately after HS. There are many jobs in the country that cannot be outsourced (plumbers, electricians, construction, etc.).

I’d like to see the graduation rates before drawing any conclusions. I’m not sure if there is enough data yet to make any determination.

By Jane

November 20, 2008 10:01 AM | Link to this

Our Graduation Coach does what she can but like the others are saying; everyone isn’t meant for a higher education. I too, would like to get some of the students who don’t value their education out of the school system where they are causing problems and taking up space.

By graduation joke

November 20, 2008 10:13 AM | Link to this

Graduation coaches are a waste of money and resources. The reason Sonny Perdon’t states that they are a good thing is because they were his idea. Waste of time…waste of money.

By Tony

November 20, 2008 10:13 AM | Link to this

Like most politicians, the governor has determined that his strategy (graduation coaches) has brought about the increased graduation rate. He excludes the work that schools, boards of education, principals and teachers have done to motivate students to finish high school. Without accounting for all the possible variables, it is an invalid conclusion to think that graduation coaches have produced these results.

The political rhetoric will only escalate during the next few months as the politicians gear up for a show down regarding the state budget. The governor has just declared by this news story that graduation coaches are worth the continued funding. So what will he cut in the education budget instead?

Perhaps he will cut staff development. This expenditure is the best resource we have when it comes to improving teacher quality. Continued learning is vital to all professions but it is impossible for schools to give teachers the training they want and need when our budget is slashed to the bone.

Perhaps he will pass additional costs on down to the school system. Personnel costs are not fully funded by the state. The graduation coaches’ salaries are a good example. Graduation coaches usually have advanced degrees, but the state only funds the pay of a beginning teacher for each of these posiitions. That means the school system must pick up the additional $20,000 to $30,000 cost for each position. Other costs that get passed down include the increased insurance payment that the school system must pay for each employee, additional retirement costs, and unfunded mandates like duty-free lunch.

Perhaps the governor and his staff will favor increased class sizes. This will help systems save money by loading more students into every classroom. This may be a necessary option because of the budget crisis, but it is clearly not in the best interest of children.

Perhaps there will be salary cuts. This is an item that must be considered during a budget crisis. I’m sure no one will be happy about it. What will be interesting though is how the politicians’ priorities are truly reflected in their budget proposals and discussions. Do they really value teachers?

There will surely be interesting days ahead.

By V for Vendetta

November 20, 2008 10:37 AM | Link to this

“Graduation coach” is just a fancy way to say “getting paid to do nothing.” The kids they “help” shouldn’t be attempting graduate in the first place. They are either discipline problems or mentally incapable of passing the required college prep material and subsequent tests. Why, as JimD said, are they not being taught a useful skill or trade? Why are they not afforded an opportunity to make something of themselves in their own way?

The sooner this misguided “everyone can go to college” attitude goes the way of the Dodo, the better. It just might be the single most detrimental attitude in education today. I can’t believe the educrats haven’t figured that out yet.

By Teacher, Too

November 20, 2008 11:00 AM | Link to this

Good morning, fellow bloggers!

NO NO NO NO NO NO!!!!

Sorry, but this in this difficult economy, grad coaches are not an efficient use of monies. Other than attendance incentives and coordinating the girls’ mentoring program, I am clueless as to what our coach does all day long.

Do away with all the “coaches”- graduation, math, language arts… the kids are better served by having smaller classes than by having a plethora of “coaches”.

I agree with several of the posters. Not all kids are college-bound. We have blogged that into the ground. Why doesn’t anyone ever listen? Do we need to just start printing the blogs and sending them to the gov, our state reps and senators, our Congressmen, the superintendents, the Ga dept of ed?

Done with my rant. Y’all have a great day!

By Ernest

November 20, 2008 11:30 AM | Link to this

While watching ‘Meet the Press’ this past weekend, I heard a profoud statement by Thomas Friedman of the NY Times. To paraphrase, “Fairness is not on the table during these economic times. We will either fail or succeed together.”

Tony made a similar interesting statement above, Perhaps there will be salary cuts. This is an item that must be considered during a budget crisis. When you consider that most of the school systems budget is paid for by local property taxes and that that those revenues are expected to be lower due to a variety of realities, we’ve got some tough decisions to make with regards to our local school systems. If we don’t consider salary cuts, we may have to consider increasing class sizes or layoffs. Another consideration is for citizens to at least discuss the possibility of tax increases. Regardless of which way we go, we have not reached the bottom of this situation yet.

I’d rather see the slot for graduation coaches go towards reducing class sizes, assuming we can afford that position.

By VOICE

November 20, 2008 12:53 PM | Link to this

I think the graduation coach program is one of the best ideas to take place in public education in years. I know that some of you bloggers think you have all the answers, but you don’t seem to know what the questions are. Is this the way to help more kids graduate or should the state look for some other solutions? Regardless of what you think of the program, the dropout rate was reduced when the program was established. I’m amazed at the negative mind set of some, so eager to do away with what may actually be the solution to an education cancer that has gone unchecked until now.

Give the program a chance. Look for budget cuts in other areas, such as a four day school week, or stop sending so many teachers to “training” workshops during school, which requires subs. There are many other strategies which could help with the budget problems, but this program seems to be a solution that works.

By Ummm, Voice?

November 20, 2008 1:24 PM | Link to this

The drop out rate was reduced because in order to make annual yearly progress, we HAD to intervene. I can assure you that one person can not lower the drop out rate by 10% within a school. There isn’t even a job description for the Grad coach. In some schools, he/she is a counselor; in other schools, he/she is an administrator of sorts. There is no “program”. The reason the students are not dropping out is that shcool has become dummied down to accomodate the dummies.

By voice must be a graduation coach

November 20, 2008 1:28 PM | Link to this

I’m thinking that only a graduation coach would say that a graduation coach is worth the funding when there are class sizes in the 30s. Go into the classroom so that your salary can go to the students…all students.

By lyncoln

November 20, 2008 1:48 PM | Link to this

I really don’t know if it’s a useful position or a non-useful position.

However, cutting just the graduation coach from a school is enough to hire maybe one more teacher… that’s not going to do much for reducing class size. I would think that (if the coach actually does produce some sort of positive result) it’s going to be much cheaper and and easier to budget than hiring enough teachers to reduce class size. Or many of the other possible spending elements that might or might not have an effect on the graduation rate.

I think graduation coach is only useful with a lot of direct work from the coach. If the coach waits for the students to come for help, I don’t think it is going to be effective because very few of the students will track down the graduation coach. If the coach actively tracks down students and works to keep them in school, I can see that having a positive effect.

Given tight budget constraints and other restrictions, it’s probably a reasonably priced option for the school system to try. Short of really strong evidence against the position it’ll stick around for a very long time.

By TheBlogger

November 20, 2008 2:32 PM | Link to this

Considering the economy and the education budgets, we must be smart here.

The first thing that should be accounted for is the classroom for the students. This means maintaining small class sizes and keeping a qualified teacher there.

All administration to include graduation coaches are extra and should be first to be “cut.” In addition, all extra personnel such as secretaries, custodians, etc. should also be reduced before touching anything inside the classroom.

However, I will say that the absolute first thing that most school systems should cut is the central office personnel. These central offices are way bloated with wives, brothers, uncles, etc. that people have hired and waste money. This is certainly true in the Atlanta metro school systems.

By Tony

November 20, 2008 2:48 PM | Link to this

Cutting school secretaries and custodians would mean teachers had to take turns answering phones and mopping the floors. I don’t see that happening. Their job is to teach. Besides, secretaries and custodians are some of the lowest paid staff we have. I would have to cut three custodians to fund one teacher.

By VOICE

November 20, 2008 2:54 PM | Link to this

Lyncoln, I think you are on the right track. Some don’t realize that there is a job description for the position and it is a “program”. Regardless, if the numbers continue to improve, it is a very cost effective solution. Many of the negative bloggers complain and criticize, but they offer no solutions. Therein lies part of the problem, the “half-empty” mindset.

Georgia public schools have been victimized by the shallow minded for too long. Something shows promise, but they want it thrown out. There may be other causes of the reduction in dropout rate, but there appears to be a connection here, even if it is coincidental. If the numbers start to decline, then seek other solutions. Meanwhile, we should continue moving in a positive direction.

By Joy in Teaching

November 20, 2008 3:30 PM | Link to this

I teach middle school. The grad coach in our school is a heck of a nice guy who told me once that he has a list that was given to him by someone higher up with about 85 students on it. I’ve seen some of his kids: all very tough nuts to crack.

He is one of those “administrator” types that is always out in the hall, ALWAYS talking to one student or another either in class, in the hall, at the water fountain, or at lunch. His job seems to be one of a parent…someone who encourages, conjoles, and downright nags students about their grades, projects, behavior, etc.

I’m not really sure if the role of a “graduation coach” is needed or not in a middle school. But I do know that this one man has done wonders with a few of his students. He has given them the attention that they aren’t getting from their parents who are having to work extra jobs just to keep food on the table.

By catlady

November 20, 2008 5:00 PM | Link to this

Are Graduation Coaches the answer? Depends. What is the question?

PARENTS are graduation coaches. The school districts should not be paying more people to be parents. I do not believe that the increase, IF there is one, in graduation rates is due soley or even mainly to graduation coaches. I’d like to see the data (how clean is it?) and the methodology before I’d believe this report. Who did the research???? Anyone with a vested interest in the results??? How long have we had the coaches? Just a couple of years, right? This strains credulity, IMHO. Just Go Fish, Georgia!

Do graduation coaches help kids stay in school? Probably. As would ANY caring adult in their lives. This includes the teachers, administrators, janitors, and lunchroom ladies. As do other peers who stay in school. Good grief.

The job of schools is to provide instruction. Not to entertain, not to provide nursing, counseling, or any of the other miriad roles of the family unit.

Our graduation coaches work very hard. They make a difference for some individual kids. But so would having more teachers (smaller class sizes) and getting the disruptive students out of the room.

Ever read the book “How the Poor get to College”? or something like that. The author looks at several people, in a case study sort of methodology, who you would swear would NEVER go to college, but they did. These are very common, ordinary people. What they ALL had in common was they had SOMEONE in their lives who said,’ You CAN do this” and sometimes literally, sometimes figuratively, picked them up and set them at the door to the college. (Jeff, I bet you can relate to this. Read this book.)

Good teachers do that. Good parents do that. You cannot give a graduation coach the assignment of “saving” a couple of hundred at risk kids as the magic potion that will solve their problems. These kids need the adults in their lives to BE adults and provide the nurture and support and encouragement and butt kicking when needed.

My personal opinion is that graduation coaches are ONE way of helping kids. Not the most effective way, and certainly not the Jesus-walking-on-water that the “research” tries to show. Too often the grad coaching positions are used as a reward. In a time when we have to look carefully at expenses, they should be near the top of the list of expendables.

By Tony

November 20, 2008 6:46 PM | Link to this

catlady - to my knowledge there is no true study. The only information used to arrive at this conclusion was increased graduation and the coincidence of graduation coaches. Since grad coaches were Perdue’s idea, they get the credit. As I said, it comes across as political posturing to keep grad coaches in the budget.

In my first post today I did not state an opinion one way or another of my own views of the effect of grad coaches. In my view they have probably helped some kids stay in school to complete the HS diploma. The application of this strategy state-wide with a one-size-fits-all approach is probably misguided. Local systems are better able to make decisions about what kinds of personnel are needed to meet the educational demands of the area.

Are grad coaches effective? This can only be decided school by school.

By Lee

November 20, 2008 8:06 PM | Link to this

Suppose a Doctor treated a patient’s nausea and ignored the cancer rotting away the core. Most would say that he was treating the symptom rather than the cause.

Graduation coaches are just another example of treating the symptom instead of getting to the root of the problem.

Let’s be honest. For the most part, the kids dropping out of high school are not the average and above student. The kids dropping out are most likely sitting there in high school and performing on a 3rd grade level. They can’t do high school level work. They know they can’t do high school level work. And they know that there is really no use in them staying in school any longer.

And the root cause of that problem is that these kids did not master the subject matter in the elementary grades, but yet, the system passed them from grade to grade until one day, they are sitting in high school and can barely comprehend “See spot run.”

So, the long-term solution to high school drop outs is to build a strong academic foundation - and that foundation begins in the early grades.

Oh yeah, what the hell are the regular counselors doing during this time? Isn’t one of their jobs to work with kids to graduate?

By catlady

November 20, 2008 8:56 PM | Link to this

Lee, in the lower grades where we have Reading First which is predicated on the idea that “reading” is calling words fast and that comprehension does not need to be addressed at all until students can “read” over 100 wpm. This is instead of linking text to meaning from the get-go. Kids have YEARS to develop the habit of “not understanding” but being “successful” by RF standards. Course, they hit the CRCT which expects reading with understanding instead of how fast you can “read” and the kids fail the CRCT but it doesn’t matter because we NEVER HOLD THEM BACK ANYWAY.

By GAE protects THEIR interest, not yours

November 20, 2008 9:23 PM | Link to this

Notice how GAE head Jeff Hubbard mobilized the GAE troops to (rightly) protest the decision to stab teachers in the back on COLA’s in retirement? That’s because it protects HIS retirement as well.

Notice this same organization has done NOTHING to address discipline, even though Hubbard knows first hand of the problems as a ClayCo administrator?

Or maybe I should say “second hand” because as an administrator Hubbard doesn’t have to “walk the walk” in the classroom.

Perhaps if Hubbard had to be in a classroom, instead of a union office he and his administrative cronies who run GAE would finally address discipline.

But if teachers want to be played and continue to pay Hubbard’s salary in order to NOT address problems in the classroom, I’m sure Hubbard will continue to enjoy their money and a cushy life outside the classroom while YOU get to deal with the discipline, the paperwork, the retaliation…

By V for Vendetta

November 21, 2008 8:15 AM | Link to this

Though Lee and I frequently disagree, I’m completely with him on this topic. These kids are not your performers, your college bound, your future business professionals. I know I’m generalizing here, but often times these kids are your worthless punks who can’t hack it in high school and therefore should not even be considering college.

VOICE, (who most obviously is a graduation coach), why not look for a REAL solution. The graduation coach program is attempting to FIX a problem that should not be FIXED in this manner. The real fix would be to offer competitive and rigorous technical training and a different direction for those not able to graduate from a traditional high school. You talk big about us not having all the answers, but here I am giving you an answer. The problem is that it would require backing in the form of educrat and monetary support. That’s just not happening in our current (ignorant) political climate where people feel that ALL kids are capable of graduating. (Please!) Until we get over that ridiculous notion, we will continue to pay lip service to the problem in the form of worthless programs like graduation coaches.

Heck, it’s a sweet gig at my school. If I were the graduation coach, I’d have it made!

By Sigh

November 21, 2008 8:45 AM | Link to this

Go away, Trotter!

By VOICE

November 21, 2008 10:27 AM | Link to this

V for Vendetta, finally, a reasonable solution, to offer competitive and rigorous technical training and a different direction for those not able to graduate from a traditional high school. The truth is, I agree with you, especially in middle schools. But, you act as if this the ONLY solution. Are you suggesting that we shouldn’t try anything else?

It seems like you may be just a little jealous of the grad coach at your school. I wonder if you REALLY understand what they do. Just like some teachers, some may be bums, but others are very effective.

On another point, you seem to suggest that it is a “ridiculous notion” to believe that ALL kids are capable of graduating. Well, why not? We know that ALL will not graduate, but they should be capable. After all, it’s not like the curriculum is that difficult. It’s like saying that ALL kids are not capable of completing the first grade. Now that’s a ridiculous notion. Wake up partner! Graduating from a Georgia high school ain’t that hard. But, some kids need that extra support. The grad coach program is not a “fix all” solution, but it is working. Even with your solution, some will still drop out.

And, by the way, I’m not a grad coach.

By Sara

November 21, 2008 10:34 AM | Link to this

By extra support do you mean doing it for them? That seems to be the only way some would ever pass a graduation test.

By V for Vendetta

November 21, 2008 11:08 AM | Link to this

VOICE, actually I DO think that’s a ridiculous assertion. No, not all kids can graduate from high school. To believe such a thing is akin to believing that all kids can be doctors and lawyers and astronauts. Dumb.

I think that a revamp of the system as I mentioned IS the only way to provide a competitive government-run education system. Some European countries have proven that such a system can be effective, but they also recognize that every child is unique; therefore, not all of them are capable of passing high school.

Oh, and ALL kids AREN’T capable of completing the first grade. There are plenty of exceptions to your statement: kids with various disabilities, horrible upbringings, and other educational limitations, just to name a few. The fact that so many pass is indicative of the pathetic standard to which we hold the younger students.

I stand by my statement: Graduation coaches are worthless and are another example of the misguided attempts to fix the system constantly thrust upon us by those who know little to nothing about education.

By VOICE

November 21, 2008 11:12 AM | Link to this

No, Sara. But some folks think that way. I actually had a parapro to sharpen pencils for students. Extra support comes in many forms, but it basically covers the gaps that some kids have in their lives. Just a consistent vote of confidence is all that’s needed in some cases.

And, you are right. Doing it for them seems to be the only way some will pass. But, we can do more to help break the chain of learned helplessness that so many are bound by. Just think about the drag that it places on our society. Some of the other bloggers are always complaining about paying taxes and crime rates, yet they fail to make the connection between kids who are “worthless punks” and future career criminals.

I would rather pay a grad coach to guide and assist 100 kids/year than to pay $20,000/year to keep them in prison after killing, robbing, or raping someone. They won’t reach them all, but 1,000 or more per year statewide is better than what we have been doing.

By VOICE

November 21, 2008 11:34 AM | Link to this

V for Vendetta, it’s strange how you compare graduating from a Georgia high school to becoming a doctor or a lawyer. Bizarre thinking! I don’t see it.

Of course some kids are incapable of completing the first grade as well as graduating from high school. There are exceptions. However, you missed the point. Your all or nothing mind set has blinded you. The point is that completing first grade and/or graduating from a Georgia high school is not an AMAZING feat. Therefore, I think it’s quite REASONABLE to expect that most of our kids should be capable of graduating.

Again, it should be obvious that ALL of them will not make it, but the grad coach program helps by increasing the number of those who do. Add your solution to the mix and the numbers will probably improve even more. But to suggest that it’s ONLY one solution or the other, ALL or NOTHING, is clearly shortsighted.

So, please do stand by your statement. But you should know that you’re standing on quicksand!:)

By V for Vendetta

November 21, 2008 11:58 AM | Link to this

LOL, VOICE,

I admit, the quicksand quip was pretty funny. And no, I don’t think that all kids will become doctors, lawyers, and astronauts. I was simply pointing out that you can’t expect the majority to all perform to the higher standard. You’re right: graduating from high school in GA is no amazing feat. It’s pretty simple, actually. However, to think that out of a large graduating class of, say, 500, the majority should graduate and go to college seems a bit naive. If you look at the bell curve that is no doubt distributed across the graduating class, you’ll find a large drop after about 150 of the top kids. Sure, the middle ground kids shouldn’t be denied access to college, but what about the lower third? The types of kids who go to college and end up dropping out. Have you looked at our COLLEGE drop out rates lately?

The bottom line is this: The position of “graduation coach” seems to be largely superfluous in the context of passing high school. Those that will pass will do so easily and regardless of intervention. Those who struggle might not be cut out for college after all. All the extra help from the coach is doing is delaying that realization until they’re in college and wasting large sums of money.

Besides, as others have pointed out, the real graduation coach should be at home in the form of a parent. The schools are already asked to do enough; they don’t need to be asked to give kids motivation to graduate or assistance accomplishing that. If the kids can’t intrinsically understand the reasons they need to pass high school, forget them. They’re not worth it in the first place.

By HS Teacher

November 21, 2008 7:05 PM | Link to this

V for Vendetta and others who think it’s pointless,

Have you seen a graduation coach at work? Ours is one of the most hard working people in the building - working with teenage mothers, the middle school counselors and teachers, special ed students, and has created a mentoring program where 300 of our upperclassmen spend 40 minutes a week with our freshmen.

It’s not just working with a select few - our coach meets needs the rest of us don’t have time and resources to accomplish. She helps the ones in need by giving them the support they need to be able to stay in school. Not doing the work for them.

More importantly, she’s working with the mentors to establish an environment where the students are the leaders. These upperclassmen help the freshmen get involved in clubs, organize their notebooks, learn how to study, and make good choices. In this environment, she has fewer at-risk students to work with because we’re getting rid of half the problem - the attitude they can’t graduate. The one you seem to be perpetuating as fact.

That’s the reason she’s effective and we should keep them. Are they all like her? Probably not. But those that are like her are necessary to actually solving the problem and changing the environment and attitude of students, teachers, and the community.

By V for Vendetta

November 21, 2008 9:06 PM | Link to this

HS Teacher, I would expect the VAST majority of them are not like that. If yours is that good then you’re lucky to have him/her.

Ours is worthless. I repeat: WORTHLESS.

She has one of my students taking THREE classes of the same subject in one semester in an effort to catch up and graduate on time. Needless to say, the student in question is miserably failing all three. Heck, I would have a hard time keeping my life straight if I were taking three classes of the same subject. I can’t imagine how the poor student feels.

(FYI: I’ve known the student since she was a freshman—sweet girl, but not at all college material. So, as I’ve said before, why are we practically FORCING her to go to college?)

By HS Teacher

November 22, 2008 4:09 PM | Link to this

Well, then I guess I am for reform and a more specific job description based on what will help students. Mine is that great - and the programs she’s put in place are doing amazing things with the students at my school, not just the ones at risk of dropping out.

However, since when is the point of graduation coaches to get students into college? I thought the focus was on graduation - which students CAN do. I think the issue with forcing students to go to college doesn’t have much to do with graduation coaches - that’s more to do with the changing requirements that the coaches, teachers, and counselors (which are the worthless ones at my school) are having to force the students through.

However - I would say that situation is a sad one. She could easily spend one period in the media center working towards the credit recovery for those instead of having to sit through those classes every day. I feel horrible for that poor student.

By This is a Real Job??????????!!!!!!!!!!

November 24, 2008 9:57 AM | Link to this

I’m sorry —- This is an actual JOB?

As an elementary teacher, I don’t have much time to look into what’s going on in the M/HS buildings.

Of course, I read about these Coaches —- However, I thought that these were teachers who were getting paid to coach one or two kids on the side!!! I had NO idea that there were people whose jobs it is to just “coach” for potential graduation!!!

Why can’t we take the salary of the Coach, and divide it amongst willing teachers — and then each teacher would have 1-5 kids to coach???

Why in the world would we give all this money to one person?

And can I ask: What the heck is the school counselor doing? Isn’t this the counselor’s job? Or, like in my school, is the counselor going to say he/she’s too busy “testing” to do anything else, and then walk off??? Why isn’t this the counselor’s job? And if the counselor has been relieved of these duties: I hope they’ve been given some new duties (unlikely)!

By SS teach

November 25, 2008 10:18 PM | Link to this

It is a joke & waste of money in middle school (or mine at least). I can see the rationale in underperforming &/or Title I middle schools, but it is a political stunt to mandate these in all middle schools.

The graduation coach in my school plans monthly “advisement days” that are boring & irrelevant to students….& merely take away from the time we have to actually teach our outlined curriculum. We’ve tried to ask for this “enrichment” to support our standards….but that was not embraced.

Wast of money on a position that in good schools only takes away time teachers have to teach & facilitate learning in the classroom.

By mal

January 24, 2009 9:48 PM | Link to this

Schools should have sessions ALL months of the year. This would reduce the coast of education by 24.6 percent a year. School staff, teachers, and etc. are payed all year round why not teach all year round. Look at the wasted money on school buildings standing empty 25% of the time. All the utilites and upkeep on buiding require 12 month maintenance. The bottom line is keep schools open all year. More students could use less facilites and teachers.

By mal

January 24, 2009 10:04 PM | Link to this

Schools are showing very low test, SAT, and ACT scores. HOW IS IT THAT THERE ARE RECORD NUMBERS OF STUDENTS GRAUDATING FROM GA. COLLEGES EVERY YEAR. Do they get smarter after they leave school and enroll in college. Maybe the college standards have been lowered.