[ ]   [ ]   [ ]                        [ ]      [ ]   [ ]

The Obituary Page - maryte - Mar 29, 2024 - 7:21am
 
Wordle - daily game - islander - Mar 29, 2024 - 6:53am
 
NYTimes Connections - islander - Mar 29, 2024 - 6:51am
 
Photography Forum - Your Own Photos - KurtfromLaQuinta - Mar 29, 2024 - 6:15am
 
March 2024 Photo Theme - Many - KurtfromLaQuinta - Mar 29, 2024 - 6:11am
 
Photos you have taken of your walks or hikes. - KurtfromLaQuinta - Mar 29, 2024 - 6:09am
 
Breaking News - rgio - Mar 29, 2024 - 6:03am
 
Trump - haresfur - Mar 29, 2024 - 5:40am
 
Radio Paradise Comments - Coaxial - Mar 29, 2024 - 4:30am
 
Main Mix Playlist - R567 - Mar 29, 2024 - 4:08am
 
Ukraine - NoEnzLefttoSplit - Mar 28, 2024 - 11:51pm
 
Vinyl Only Spin List - kurtster - Mar 28, 2024 - 9:27pm
 
Derplahoma! - Red_Dragon - Mar 28, 2024 - 5:11pm
 
Uploading Music - macadavy - Mar 28, 2024 - 4:18pm
 
Baseball, anyone? - zevon - Mar 28, 2024 - 4:17pm
 
Oldest Rock song on RP - johkir - Mar 28, 2024 - 4:07pm
 
USA! USA! USA! - R_P - Mar 28, 2024 - 3:28pm
 
Live Music - oldviolin - Mar 28, 2024 - 3:10pm
 
Orbiting Earth - oldviolin - Mar 28, 2024 - 2:19pm
 
YouTube: Music-Videos - oldviolin - Mar 28, 2024 - 2:17pm
 
• • • The Once-a-Day • • •  - oldviolin - Mar 28, 2024 - 2:13pm
 
Lyrics that strike a chord today... - oldviolin - Mar 28, 2024 - 2:06pm
 
Israel - R_P - Mar 28, 2024 - 2:03pm
 
Irony 101 - MrDill - Mar 28, 2024 - 12:21pm
 
RP automation with iOS Shortcuts App - pradler4kant - Mar 28, 2024 - 11:57am
 
Talk Behind Their Backs Forum - VV - Mar 28, 2024 - 11:27am
 
Bug Reports & Feature Requests - Beaker - Mar 28, 2024 - 9:30am
 
NY Times Strands - geoff_morphini - Mar 28, 2024 - 8:37am
 
Business as Usual - black321 - Mar 28, 2024 - 8:09am
 
Outstanding Covers - thisbody - Mar 28, 2024 - 5:51am
 
Today in History - DaveInSaoMiguel - Mar 28, 2024 - 4:28am
 
Little known information...maybe even facts - haresfur - Mar 27, 2024 - 6:21pm
 
RightWingNutZ - R_P - Mar 27, 2024 - 3:48pm
 
Please Don't Post Here - Red_Dragon - Mar 27, 2024 - 11:02am
 
Motivational Office Cliches... - NoEnzLefttoSplit - Mar 26, 2024 - 10:20pm
 
(Big) Media Watch - Red_Dragon - Mar 26, 2024 - 6:18pm
 
Solar / Wind / Geothermal / Efficiency Energy - islander - Mar 26, 2024 - 8:00am
 
Is there any DOG news out there? - Beez - Mar 26, 2024 - 7:24am
 
Food - Steely_D - Mar 26, 2024 - 1:41am
 
Frequent drop outs (The Netherlands) - kingen - Mar 25, 2024 - 2:43pm
 
China - R_P - Mar 25, 2024 - 11:59am
 
Musky Mythology - R_P - Mar 25, 2024 - 11:20am
 
Play history seems to indicate that I"m streaming 24/7, b... - jarro - Mar 25, 2024 - 10:44am
 
April 8th Partial Solar Eclipse - Coaxial - Mar 24, 2024 - 6:22pm
 
New Music - KurtfromLaQuinta - Mar 24, 2024 - 5:07pm
 
Dental Floss Tycoons, and other Montana Myths, Facts, and... - Red_Dragon - Mar 24, 2024 - 12:32pm
 
Basketball - oldviolin - Mar 23, 2024 - 2:50pm
 
What Makes You Laugh? - ScottFromWyoming - Mar 23, 2024 - 1:54pm
 
Joe Biden - kurtster - Mar 23, 2024 - 11:17am
 
Technical Streaming Note for Nerdy RP DIYers - sjagminas1 - Mar 23, 2024 - 10:16am
 
Museum Of Bad Album Covers - Proclivities - Mar 23, 2024 - 8:56am
 
Other Medical Stuff - Antigone - Mar 22, 2024 - 3:06pm
 
Country Up The Bumpkin - oldviolin - Mar 22, 2024 - 11:06am
 
Pernicious Pious Proclivities Particularized Prodigiously - Red_Dragon - Mar 22, 2024 - 9:17am
 
Memorials - Remembering Our Loved Ones - Bill_J - Mar 21, 2024 - 8:54pm
 
Can you afford to retire? - DaveInSaoMiguel - Mar 21, 2024 - 2:15pm
 
Mixtape Culture Club - KurtfromLaQuinta - Mar 21, 2024 - 11:10am
 
What Did You See Today? - KurtfromLaQuinta - Mar 20, 2024 - 5:13pm
 
Annoying stuff. not things that piss you off, just annoyi... - ScottFromWyoming - Mar 20, 2024 - 4:31pm
 
Upcoming concerts or shows you can't wait to see - Antigone - Mar 20, 2024 - 3:10pm
 
Russia - NoEnzLefttoSplit - Mar 20, 2024 - 11:44am
 
2024 Elections! - Lazy8 - Mar 20, 2024 - 7:26am
 
Economix - R_P - Mar 19, 2024 - 4:36pm
 
Name My Band - DaveInSaoMiguel - Mar 19, 2024 - 10:53am
 
Delicacies: a..k.a.. the Gross Food forum - DaveInSaoMiguel - Mar 19, 2024 - 10:12am
 
New Forum Member on "What Makes RP Great" - miamizsun - Mar 19, 2024 - 4:38am
 
Cache stopped working on old Android Phone - Eisenwindel - Mar 19, 2024 - 1:50am
 
Cryptic Posts - Leave Them Guessing - Bill_J - Mar 18, 2024 - 8:23pm
 
Damn Dinosaurs! - oldviolin - Mar 18, 2024 - 8:16pm
 
One Partying State - Wyoming News - geoff_morphini - Mar 18, 2024 - 3:58pm
 
Great guitar faces - skyguy - Mar 18, 2024 - 3:33pm
 
Despots, dictators and war criminals - R_P - Mar 18, 2024 - 12:41pm
 
Media Matters - thisbody - Mar 18, 2024 - 10:03am
 
NASA & other news from space - miamizsun - Mar 18, 2024 - 4:13am
 
MEALTICKET - drinpt - Mar 17, 2024 - 4:13am
 
Index » Regional/Local » Elsewhere » Education Page: Previous  1, 2, 3, 4 ... 19, 20, 21  Next
Post to this Topic
ScottFromWyoming

ScottFromWyoming Avatar

Location: Powell
Gender: Male


Posted: Apr 10, 2018 - 2:48pm

 pigtail wrote:

I know here in CA we supposedly give 1% of lottery sales to public schools.  That was the deal when we voted to legalize the lottery here back in the 80s.  I clearly remember that portion of the bill.  So where is that money?  A shit ton of money is spent on lottery sales daily.  Why must we cut educational programs that are already stretched lean to support school safety?  I remember my kids high school was so damn administrative heavy.  With a population, city wide of 50,000.  Why are there 3 vice principals and 2 principals at their high school?  And these administrators are not starving or even living lean like most teachers.  One of those principals drove a BMV 7 series which is what 75-80K?  There is so much wrong with that. 

 
In theory, the lottery money cannot be used for what would be considered typical funding needs. So in a well-to-do district, the funds might get used to provide equipment or supplies for an elective course. When I was in college, the first year of the lotto, our campus radio station scored some sweet sound equipment. Absolutely nonessential but about a 4-decade upgrade in technology.

In a poorer district, kids get iPads maybe, laptops, when their desks are breaking and the building isn't up to code and/or can't deliver internet to those devices. It's weird.
pigtail

pigtail Avatar

Location: Southern California
Gender: Female


Posted: Apr 10, 2018 - 2:08pm

 Red_Dragon wrote: 
I know here in CA we supposedly give 1% of lottery sales to public schools.  That was the deal when we voted to legalize the lottery here back in the 80s.  I clearly remember that portion of the bill.  So where is that money?  A shit ton of money is spent on lottery sales daily.  Why must we cut educational programs that are already stretched lean to support school safety?  I remember my kids high school was so damn administrative heavy.  With a population, city wide of 50,000.  Why are there 3 vice principals and 2 principals at their high school?  And these administrators are not starving or even living lean like most teachers.  One of those principals drove a BMV 7 series which is what 75-80K?  There is so much wrong with that. 


Red_Dragon

Red_Dragon Avatar

Location: Dumbf*ckistan


Posted: Apr 10, 2018 - 10:25am

After Parkland shooting, U.S. states shift education funds to school safety

Thanks NRA!
R_P

R_P Avatar

Gender: Male


Posted: Feb 15, 2018 - 3:56pm

Please Don’t Get Murdered at School Today
Lazy8

Lazy8 Avatar

Location: The Gallatin Valley of Montana
Gender: Male


Posted: Jun 9, 2017 - 6:36pm

'It was quasi-religious': the great self-esteem con

In the 1980s, Californian politician John Vasconcellos set up a task force to promote high self-esteem as the answer to all social ills. But was his science based on a lie?

In 2014, a heartwarming lettersent to year 6 pupils at Barrowford primary school in Lancashire went viral. Handed out with their Key Stage 2 exam results, it reassured them: “These tests do not always assess all of what it is that make each of you special and unique… They do not know that your friends count on you to be there for them or that your laughter can brighten the dreariest day. They do not know that you write poetry or songs, play sports, wonder about the future, or that sometimes you take care of your little brother or sister.”

At Barrowford, people learned, teachers were discouraged from issuing punishments, defining a child as “naughty” and raising their voices. The school’s guiding philosophy, said headteacher Rachel Tomlinson, was that kids were to be treated with “unconditional positive regard”.

A little more than a year later, Barrowford found itself in the news again. Ofsted had given the school one of its lowest possible ratings, finding the quality of teaching and exam results inadequate. The school, their report said, “emphasised developing pupils’ emotional and social wellbeing more than the attainment of high standards”. Somehow, it seemed, the nurturing of self-esteem had not translated into higher achievement.


maryte

maryte Avatar

Location: Blinding You With Library Science!
Gender: Female


Posted: Jun 1, 2017 - 9:37am

 Lazy8 wrote:
 Proclivities wrote:
It depends on the test and the state or district.  There are many different types of "standardized tests"; they are not all just rote, multiple-choice, bubble-in tests.  However, tests of any sort, are seldom designed to try to "engage kids in learning", nor can they - that is primarily the job of teachers and parents.  Tests are generally designed to determine what students have learned or (more importantly) retained.  Of course, if a student, parent, or teachers determines a weakness from the outcome of a test, then that could encourage or engage them in improving that aspect.  The outcomes of well-designed tests could possibly help 'tailor paths' for students, but still, it's in the hands of states and districts as to how they much can - or want to - spend for tests and specialized or remedial programs.  Still, the majority of tests are rote and mechanical and the administration of them by many districts is often thoughtless and perfunctory.

My midmost just finished his first year teaching full time. In the second half of the year he didn't have a single week that didn't have some kind of state-mandated standardized test.

Which would have been OK with him...if he had gotten to see the results. They won't be available for months after the end of the school year, and they aren't intended to guide classroom instruction. As it was the tests' biggest impact was a reduction in instruction time.

The US isn't the only country in the world to use standardized tests. Europe has been doing it for decades and the stakes are very high with those tests, but the stakes are for the student, not the school. A student's future is largely determined by these tests; you can be guided into a trade school rather than college, or booted out of public education altogether.

There is a lot to be said for this approach. The onus is on the student (and the parents) to learn and prepare, and in some cases teachers are freer to teach. Their outcomes are generally better than ours. I have grave reservations about deciding the path of a life that young (would you want 16 year old you to pick your career, academic or professional?) and like a typical American I value the freedom to reinvent onerself at any time.

Education reform in the US has focused on test scores, and really there isn't another metric that makes any sense. Without metrics there is no way to judge if what you tried worked or not. We have spent endless time and money assessing the problem, but the ensuing reforms have been based on trendy gimmicks rather than the obvious: we need to pay teachers enough to attract people who are good at it, give them authority and autonomy, and let them teach. If we keep looking for magic bullets we will keep failing our children.

Teaching is a very human act. No top-down system is going to change that. Let the humans work.

 
I agree completely.  I realize it's a different world than when I was in school, but I remember standardized tests being used to determine (in conjunction with classroom performance) a student's need for advanced subject classes or remedial ones, which I think has similarities to the European system. I don't know if this was determined to be judgmental and thus detrimental to a child's psyche (expectations too high or too low), but as someone who was part of that system, I found it very useful, as I wasn't stuck in classes where I felt bored.

A different experience to testing for aptitude was when I first came to Texas. I was in 4th grade and attending parochial school (as I had for my first three years in Boston). Within days of my starting school, one of the teachers decided I belonged in the remedial reading class, not based on any test or my performance but because I talked "funny", even though I'd been reading since I was about three years of age. So into the remedial class I go, which was taught by a different teacher.  She (a nun - the other was a lay teacher), who was from Ireland and still had a lovely brogue (the shoe *and* the accent), asked why I was in the remedial class. I was still traumatized by the move to this strange world, compounded by being an introvert, so I could only respond with "I don't know, Sister Brendan. Mrs. Polk said I belonged here."  She just shook her head and said, "Oh no - you belong in the advanced reading class!"  And so I was moved into that class...which was taught by the teacher who equated my Boston accent with a lack of reading skill. As you might imagine, this was episode ended up being seminal in the formation of my opinion of Texas in general.  {#Wink}
aflanigan

aflanigan Avatar

Location: At Sea
Gender: Male


Posted: Jun 1, 2017 - 9:33am

I would second what Lazy8 posted and add to it by citing what Harold "Doc" Howe II, a widely respected educator and policy expert, thought and said about educational standards and testing based on standards.

I can't find the quote, but he was supposedly once asked about national educational standards. His reply was, in essence, they should be brief and very open-ended/general.

Regarding our current system, he had this to say:

"For the state to say, 'Here's all the little things that all the little kids have got to know, and here's the test you give them, and then we'll know whether they're learning anything,' that's baloney, and that's what we have right now,"

 
Proclivities

Proclivities Avatar

Location: Paris of the Piedmont
Gender: Male


Posted: Jun 1, 2017 - 9:19am

 Lazy8 wrote:
 Proclivities wrote:
It depends on the test and the state or district.  There are many different types of "standardized tests"; they are not all just rote, multiple-choice, bubble-in tests.  However, tests of any sort, are seldom designed to try to "engage kids in learning", nor can they - that is primarily the job of teachers and parents.  Tests are generally designed to determine what students have learned or (more importantly) retained.  Of course, if a student, parent, or teachers determines a weakness from the outcome of a test, then that could encourage or engage them in improving that aspect.  The outcomes of well-designed tests could possibly help 'tailor paths' for students, but still, it's in the hands of states and districts as to how they much can - or want to - spend for tests and specialized or remedial programs.  Still, the majority of tests are rote and mechanical and the administration of them by many districts is often thoughtless and perfunctory.

My midmost just finished his first year teaching full time. In the second half of the year he didn't have a single week that didn't have some kind of state-mandated standardized test.

Which would have been OK with him...if he had gotten to see the results. They won't be available for months after the end of the school year, and they aren't intended to guide classroom instruction. As it was the tests' biggest impact was a reduction in instruction time.

The US isn't the only country in the world to use standardized tests. Europe has been doing it for decades and the stakes are very high with those tests, but the stakes are for the student, not the school. A student's future is largely determined by these tests; you can be guided into a trade school rather than college, or booted out of public education altogether.

There is a lot to be said for this approach. The onus is on the student (and the parents) to learn and prepare, and in some cases teachers are freer to teach. Their outcomes are generally better than ours. I have grave reservations about deciding the path of a life that young (would you want 16 year old you to pick your career, academic or professional?) and like a typical American I value the freedom to reinvent onerself at any time.

Education reform in the US has focused on test scores, and really there isn't another metric that makes any sense. Without metrics there is no way to judge if what you tried worked or not. We have spent endless time and money assessing the problem, but the ensuing reforms have been based on trendy gimmicks rather than the obvious: we need to pay teachers enough to attract people who are good at it, give them authority and autonomy, and let them teach. If we keep looking for magic bullets we will keep failing our children.

Teaching is a very human act. No top-down system is going to change that. Let the humans work.

 
Yes, apparently some states have several different salvos of mandated, standardized tests; that seems "distracting" at best.  I agree with your points, particularly with the last two paragraphs. Over they years, I have had several friends who grew up in the UK, and they told me about the different standardized tests they had taken in the 1960s and '70s.  At least two of them were pretty much told that they should go into the trades instead of academics, as determined by their test results.  It wasn't a mark of shame for them, it helped them in many ways - to get into apprenticeships and eventually trades instead of possibly wasting time floundering around in colleges.
Lazy8

Lazy8 Avatar

Location: The Gallatin Valley of Montana
Gender: Male


Posted: Jun 1, 2017 - 9:09am

 Proclivities wrote:
It depends on the test and the state or district.  There are many different types of "standardized tests"; they are not all just rote, multiple-choice, bubble-in tests.  However, tests of any sort, are seldom designed to try to "engage kids in learning", nor can they - that is primarily the job of teachers and parents.  Tests are generally designed to determine what students have learned or (more importantly) retained.  Of course, if a student, parent, or teachers determines a weakness from the outcome of a test, then that could encourage or engage them in improving that aspect.  The outcomes of well-designed tests could possibly help 'tailor paths' for students, but still, it's in the hands of states and districts as to how they much can - or want to - spend for tests and specialized or remedial programs.  Still, the majority of tests are rote and mechanical and the administration of them by many districts is often thoughtless and perfunctory.

My midmost just finished his first year teaching full time. In the second half of the year he didn't have a single week that didn't have some kind of state-mandated standardized test.

Which would have been OK with him...if he had gotten to see the results. They won't be available for months after the end of the school year, and they aren't intended to guide classroom instruction. As it was the tests' biggest impact was a reduction in instruction time.

The US isn't the only country in the world to use standardized tests. Europe has been doing it for decades and the stakes are very high with those tests, but the stakes are for the student, not the school. A student's future is largely determined by these tests; you can be guided into a trade school rather than college, or booted out of public education altogether.

There is a lot to be said for this approach. The onus is on the student (and the parents) to learn and prepare, and in some cases teachers are freer to teach. Their outcomes are generally better than ours. I have grave reservations about deciding the path of a life that young (would you want 16 year old you to pick your career, academic or professional?) and like a typical American I value the freedom to reinvent onerself at any time.

Education reform in the US has focused on test scores, and really there isn't another metric that makes any sense. Without metrics there is no way to judge if what you tried worked or not. We have spent endless time and money assessing the problem, but the ensuing reforms have been based on trendy gimmicks rather than the obvious: we need to pay teachers enough to attract people who are good at it, give them authority and autonomy, and let them teach. If we keep looking for magic bullets we will keep failing our children.

Teaching is a very human act. No top-down system is going to change that. Let the humans work.
Proclivities

Proclivities Avatar

Location: Paris of the Piedmont
Gender: Male


Posted: Jun 1, 2017 - 8:12am

 kcar wrote:
...Standardized tests in my opinion reveal the dysfunction of school systems and their struggle to create uniform levels of success. When such tests intrude too much on the educational calendar and flow of teaching, they become part of the problem. Standardized tests can be a coarse-grained metric for the relative success of a school system but they provide no answers about how to engage kids in learning or how to tailor different educational paths for different types of kids....

 
It depends on the test and the state or district.  There are many different types of "standardized tests"; they are not all just rote, multiple-choice, bubble-in tests.  However, tests of any sort, are seldom designed to try to "engage kids in learning", nor can they - that is primarily the job of teachers and parents.  Tests are generally designed to determine what students have learned or (more importantly) retained.  Of course, if a student, parent, or teachers determines a weakness from the outcome of a test, then that could encourage or engage them in improving that aspect.  The outcomes of well-designed tests could possibly help 'tailor paths' for students, but still, it's in the hands of states and districts as to how they much can - or want to - spend for tests and specialized or remedial programs.  Still, the majority of tests are rote and mechanical and the administration of them by many districts is often thoughtless and perfunctory.


aflanigan

aflanigan Avatar

Location: At Sea
Gender: Male


Posted: Jun 1, 2017 - 7:52am

 kcar wrote:


Standardized tests in my opinion reveal the dysfunction of school systems and their struggle to create uniform levels of success. When such tests intrude too much on the educational calendar and flow of teaching, they become part of the problem. Standardized tests can be a coarse-grained metric for the relative success of a school system but they provide no answers about how to engage kids in learning or how to tailor different educational paths for different types of kids. 
 

They (standardized, fill in the bubble tests) are indeed a useful and potentially powerful tool when properly designed and employed. When misused, as they are now, they warp education rather than improving it.
kcar

kcar Avatar



Posted: May 30, 2017 - 5:46pm

 aflanigan wrote:

I'm enjoying this conversation. I concur that self paced, potentially self guided instruction can work well for some people.

At the end of my career as a Physics student at WPI I was a consultant/monitor in what they called the "IPI" lab (for individually paced instruction). It was basically what you're talking about. Packaged modules on basic Newtonian physics. A student could come and review the material at their convenience, ask me or other consultants questions, and get an exam from us to take and get graded on the spot.

 The problem is, as the article/op ed I linked makes clear (and as anyone who has been paying attention to education reform in K-12 the last few decades could tell you), public education curriculum has increasingly been based on a one size fits all model. Getting schools, particularly struggling ones, to move away from that model is an uphill battle, to put it mildly. In Virginia they call them "pacing guides". Every state has guidelines regarding what students in each grade should be learning each day, each week, each month, etc. It's sort of like a scene from a dystopian novel, such as the scene from A Wrinkle in Time where children bounce balls and skip rope in unison.

Standardization of curriculum and educational method is anathema to genuine educational improvement, and high stakes testing has only reinforced the artificial uniformity and placed meaningful, substantive improvement (i.e. other than test scores rising) further out of reach. Like Howard Gardner's multiple intelligences, for example, education experts know that every child is unique, has different approaches to learning about the world around them, different potentialities, and different schedules for achieving milestones in emotional, intellectual, and spatial intelligence and development. But the ones who realize how difficult improving schools and education for all children is to accomplish are drowned out by pitch men/women pushing the latest educational panacea. 

 

I'm enjoying it too. Hail Woopie Tech! {#Cheers}

Yeah, self-paced instruction doesn't work for everyone. You have to be motivated and have a sense that you're in charge of your education. Again, I think that the more immersive your educational experience—that is, one that lets you be an active, experimenting participant using all your senses—the more you'll learn and the greater your motivation to continue will be. 

I think your most recent post, however, captures the tension that most large school systems face. On one hand, they want to encourage and nurture multiple intelligences and kids with different talents. That means that they try to provide "enrichment" programs and extracurricular activities beyond the core curriculum. That can be expensive and subject to the first budget cuts. Progress in that kind of non-core education likely is harder to capture with standardized tests.

On the other hand, schools have to honor the core curriculum, which traditional education and standardized testing focused on. Apparently there's more and more grade inflation and fewer students prepared for college. I can see why governments and parents want to assess how much and how well kids have learned and how well they're prepared for the future. It's one thing to nurture their talents but they have to meet minimum educational standards by the time they finish high school. 


"Like Howard Gardner's multiple intelligences, for example, education experts know that every child is unique, has different approaches to learning about the world around them, different potentialities, and different schedules for achieving milestones in emotional, intellectual, and spatial intelligence and development."

Again, like the math teacher/author's mastery learning program, that sounds like it would take a lot of time, effort, money and interdisciplinary coordination to implement in a high school. I'm pretty sure it could be done, but one of the first questions that pops into my mind is: how do you make sure that all the different educational pathways you want to offer in a school end up providing roughly similar levels of education, or at least meet minimum educational standards? And how do you sustain excellence in that approach to education over many years?

I think you have to have strong, maintained commitment from teachers, students and parents to learn. Unfortunately, a lot of people think it's OK to just talk the talk and fake your way through. Or you have attitudes like the one prevalent amongst a lot of DC students, where it's not cool to be too smart or strive in education. I think that there is a "yeah, whatever" attitude amongst families whose kids attend DC schools. Yes, there were a lot sub-par teachers and inefficiency in the DC school system before Michelle Rhee stepped in, but I don't think that enough parents showed the kids that education happens outside of school as well as inside of it, and that knowledge of the world around you, beyond your preferences, is self-improving and self-empowering. You can have the best teachers and facilities but if the kids don't have curiosity and respect for learning, you might as well be pushing rope. 

The DC school system is improving. In the 90s, teachers and staff were afraid for their physical safety. There was a sense of resignation amongst teachers that trying to get kids to a minimum standard of knowledge was a hopeless task. Poverty had much to do with those low expectations and levels of achievement. I'm sure people didn't see how a rigorous high school education was going to help kids in the future. I also don't think that large school systems work for K-12  kids: school becomes more about gaming bureaucracies  than reaching every child. 

Standardized tests in my opinion reveal the dysfunction of school systems and their struggle to create uniform levels of success. When such tests intrude too much on the educational calendar and flow of teaching, they become part of the problem. Standardized tests can be a coarse-grained metric for the relative success of a school system but they provide no answers about how to engage kids in learning or how to tailor different educational paths for different types of kids. 


"In Virginia they call them "pacing guides". Every state has guidelines regarding what students in each grade should be learning each day, each week, each month, etc."


I can only imagine those guidelines were thought up by school system administrators trying to cover their asses. It's always amazing that there are so many people telling teachers how to do their jobs, yet so few of those people actually have the guts to stand in front of a class and teach. Teaching high school kids is a hit-or-miss prospect, no matter how engaging the curriculum or effective the teacher. Some kids aren't ready or willing to learn in a high school setting and some are. I think that will always be the case. 


pigtail

pigtail Avatar

Location: Southern California
Gender: Female


Posted: May 30, 2017 - 3:36pm

 aflanigan wrote:

I'm enjoying this conversation. I concur that self paced, potentially self guided instruction can work well for some people.

At the end of my career as a Physics student at WPI I was a consultant/monitor in what they called the "IPI" lab (for individually paced instruction). It was basically what you're talking about. Packaged modules on basic Newtonian physics. A student could come and review the material at their convenience, ask me or other consultants questions, and get an exam from us to take and get graded on the spot.

 The problem is, as the article/op ed I linked makes clear (and as anyone who has been paying attention to education reform in K-12 the last few decades could tell you), public education curriculum has increasingly been based on a one size fits all model. Getting schools, particularly struggling ones, to move away from that model is an uphill battle, to put it mildly. In Virginia they call them "pacing guides". Every state has guidelines regarding what students in each grade should be learning each day, each week, each month, etc. It's sort of like a scene from a dystopian novel, such as the scene from A Wrinkle in Time where children bounce balls and skip rope in unison.

Standardization of curriculum and educational method is anathema to genuine educational improvement, and high stakes testing has only reinforced the artificial uniformity and placed meaningful, substantive improvement (i.e. other than test scores rising) further out of reach. Like Howard Gardner's multiple intelligences, for example, education experts know that every child is unique, has different approaches to learning about the world around them, different potentialities, and different schedules for achieving milestones in emotional, intellectual, and spatial intelligence and development. But the ones who realize how difficult improving schools and education for all children is to accomplish are drowned out by pitch men/women pushing the latest educational panacea. 

 
{#Yes}  Agreed, it just doesn't work.
aflanigan

aflanigan Avatar

Location: At Sea
Gender: Male


Posted: May 30, 2017 - 3:20pm

 kcar wrote:


There are two things about online or computerized learning systems, however, that really work for me (and I think other people too). One, you can learn something without having to deal with another person or class schedules and physical locations. That apparently was a big deal for Salman Khan's nieces. He was tutoring them in math IIRC across the American continent by webcam. When their schedules fell out of sync, he started recording videos for them. The nieces eventually told him they liked the videos more than the live sessions! 
The more in-charge or empowered a person feels of his/her education, the more s/he will learn.

The other thing I like is online/computerized systems allow for smaller chunks of instruction interspersed with small tests providing immediate feedback. Khan Academy does this. This e-book introducing the syntax of JavaScript to beginners has the same approach: 1-2 pages of instruction on a topic, followed by 25 questions on the material just covered. If you get a question right, you move on to the next. Get one wrong and you're immediately shown the right answer before you see the next question. At the end of the 25 questions, the e-book repeats the questions you got wrong and lets you answer them again. 

I don't know if you've ever learned a foreign language, but you pretty much have to embrace the fact that your communication abilities have been reduced to that of a child or stroke victim. You have to put your ego aside. However, most language courses give you very fast feedback: if you're supposed to say "I hit the ball" but instead utter "I hot the bowl", your teacher will correct your errors right away. That's a far cry from sitting in a giant lecture hall listening to a guy drone on about calculus and taking a couple of tests over a semester (oh, and it'll take week to grade them). I believe that the faster the feedback, the more you'll learn. 
 
Immersion in the subject helps. Learning French in France, for instance, or learning auto mechanics by working on a car in a garage or learning football by getting lessons and coaching while playing football are better than listening to lectures in a large classroom. 

"Without smart, savvy, qualified teachers as guides to oversee the process, I am skeptical it will bring the profound change hoped for."

Yes. Absolutely. I'm impressed with all the work that teacher did to get his approach off the ground. His vision of mastery learning sounds like it would take a LOT more  preparation and coordination between teachers in order to work. And yes, there's the risk that educational "entrepreneurs" would just see mastery learning as a money-making scheme via watered-down videos and such. I get the impression that a lot of educational innovations get watered-down or perverted when governments try to scale them up and don't do enough work to maintain quality, rigor and commitment. 

So yes, you need smart, qualified and DEDICATED teachers. Talent is a biggie too: some people are natural born teachers and thus a mix of educator, entertainer, mentor, leader and disciplinarian. Teachers also have to keep kids up to the mark and not let them slack off or slide through a subject. DC schools seem to do that on an incredible scale. School systems also have to let students, teachers and parents know that the kids will have to meet or exceed minimum standards to advance or graduate. New York state has exit exams called Regents exams (no idea how rigorous they are). 

You also need parents who actually walk the walk when it comes to education. Kids can learn a lot outside of the school. Parents' attitudes about and involvement in education rub off on their kids. I think a lot of parents in DC (and yes I live there) think that the school will do all the necessary work to teach their kids or don't have the time to be more involved. People here aren't committed to education as they are in the Boston area where I grew up. The notion that learning a subject empowers and develops you as a person isn't popular here. There's an acceptance of learning enough to get by or fake it. The colleges and universities here, even Georgetown, are meh. 

Mastery learning isn't the magic bullet, but it's a good start. You need to give kids a sense that they can control how they learn. You also have to provide them with structure, high support, high expectations, immersive educational approaches and rapid feedback. 

It would be great if this country respected education enough to pay teachers good money and worked to move beyond lecture-style learning. 


Final thought: standardized tests are largely a way for non-educators and people in government to cover their asses and blame other people. 

 
I'm enjoying this conversation. I concur that self paced, potentially self guided instruction can work well for some people.

At the end of my career as a Physics student at WPI I was a consultant/monitor in what they called the "IPI" lab (for individually paced instruction). It was basically what you're talking about. Packaged modules on basic Newtonian physics. A student could come and review the material at their convenience, ask me or other consultants questions, and get an exam from us to take and get graded on the spot.

 The problem is, as the article/op ed I linked makes clear (and as anyone who has been paying attention to education reform in K-12 the last few decades could tell you), public education curriculum has increasingly been based on a one size fits all model. Getting schools, particularly struggling ones, to move away from that model is an uphill battle, to put it mildly. In Virginia they call them "pacing guides". Every state has guidelines regarding what students in each grade should be learning each day, each week, each month, etc. It's sort of like a scene from a dystopian novel, such as the scene from A Wrinkle in Time where children bounce balls and skip rope in unison.

Standardization of curriculum and educational method is anathema to genuine educational improvement, and high stakes testing has only reinforced the artificial uniformity and placed meaningful, substantive improvement (i.e. other than test scores rising) further out of reach. Like Howard Gardner's multiple intelligences, for example, education experts know that every child is unique, has different approaches to learning about the world around them, different potentialities, and different schedules for achieving milestones in emotional, intellectual, and spatial intelligence and development. But the ones who realize how difficult improving schools and education for all children is to accomplish are drowned out by pitch men/women pushing the latest educational panacea. 


Proclivities

Proclivities Avatar

Location: Paris of the Piedmont
Gender: Male


Posted: May 30, 2017 - 9:08am

 aflanigan wrote:

One of the glaring flaws in the use of high stakes educational testing as we do, as any psychometrician will tell you, is that they are almost always being used these days for two different purposes: To judge student learning, and to judge school quality. It's like using a yardstick to measure the size of an atom, and to measure the distance between planets.
 
Yes, I've met psychometricians and other people in the field (statisticians, teachers, counselors, etc.) who lament that, but they keep trying.  It may seem futile but people have to try - even if it's only little steps.
aflanigan

aflanigan Avatar

Location: At Sea
Gender: Male


Posted: May 30, 2017 - 9:02am

 Proclivities wrote:

Yes, "item writing" is often be done by part-time or temp employees like teachers, etc. but the "subject matter experts" in many states are DOE employees - often psychometricians, as well as those who work for the different testing companies.  You're right that most tests are designed to rank and sort students, specifically multiple-choice "bubble" tests, and little can be validated or specifically measured from multiple-choice responses (though computer-adaptive, multiple choice questions can be more informative).  Many states are working more towards testing with more "constructed response" items, which have more detailed rubrics to measure student responses with than the old Stanford 9 models, and also works towards identifying strengths or weaknesses - obviously, it's all got a long way to go and the arbitrariness of it is pretty disenchanting.  Still, it's up to each state how much they want to invest in testing, some may just buy "off-the-shelf" tests from Pearson or whomever.  I'm not sure how many states or districts actually base graduation from one grade to another solely on results of standardized tests (EOGs, etc.), but it's probably not very common, especially since those scores are generally not available until the end of the following summer.  Ultimately teachers make those decisions with counselors, based on the student's progress and performance during the year.  Schools and districts are generally more worried about test results than most students are.

 
One of the glaring flaws in the use of high stakes educational testing as we do, as any psychometrician will tell you, is that they are almost always being used these days for two different purposes: To judge student learning, and to judge school quality. It's like using a yardstick to measure the size of an atom, and to measure the distance between planets.
Proclivities

Proclivities Avatar

Location: Paris of the Piedmont
Gender: Male


Posted: May 30, 2017 - 8:25am

 aflanigan wrote:

Actually question writing, I'd be willing to bet, is never done by state level officials.

Setting educational standards is done by committees of subject matter experts. They produce broad, shallow standards which the state Dept. of eds sign off on. No one wants their subject to be deemed less important so they load them up with lots of stuff that has little use for the average adult.

Question writing is done by part timers, often teachers, that work as contractors for the testing companies and get paid per question. They spend a weekend making a little extra dough by writing questions based on a fairly rigid framework dictated by the testing companies. The purpose of these questions is the same as it has been since standardized tests like the Stanford 9 were first created: They are designed to rank and sort students along a curve. They throw out questions that either too few or too many students get correct when the items are "test driven", so to speak, to see if they're suitable. These types of multiple choice tests are never validated or shown to be reliable, i.e. the test makers do not establish that the tests actually measure what they claim to measure (mastery of a subject by a particular student, for example). They're basically designed to rank and sort students into "winners" (who get to progress to the next grade) and "losers" (who get summer school, repeat a grade). 

 
Yes, "item writing" is often be done by part-time or temp employees like teachers, etc. but the "subject matter experts" in many states are DOE employees - often psychometricians, as well as those who work for the different testing companies.  You're right that most tests are designed to rank and sort students, specifically multiple-choice "bubble" tests, and little can be validated or specifically measured from multiple-choice responses (though computer-adaptive, multiple choice questions can be more informative).  Many states are working more towards testing with more "constructed response" items, which have more detailed rubrics to measure student responses with than the old Stanford 9 models, and also works towards identifying strengths or weaknesses - obviously, it's all got a long way to go and the arbitrariness of it is pretty disenchanting.  Still, it's up to each state how much they want to invest in testing, some may just buy "off-the-shelf" tests from Pearson or whomever.  I'm not sure how many states or districts actually base graduation from one grade to another solely on results of standardized tests (EOGs, etc.), but it's probably not very common, especially since those scores are generally not available until the end of the following summer.  Ultimately teachers make those decisions with counselors, based on the student's progress and performance during the year.  Schools and districts are generally more worried about test results than most students are.


aflanigan

aflanigan Avatar

Location: At Sea
Gender: Male


Posted: May 30, 2017 - 7:43am

 Proclivities wrote:

In many states, their standardized tests are largely designed and composed by educators and people in government (ie: state Departments of Education), within that state.  Of course, anything can be used to shift blame, especially if it's shifted by an elected official who is taking heat for unsatisfactory performance.

 
Actually question writing, I'd be willing to bet, is never done by state level officials.

Setting educational standards is done by committees of subject matter experts. They produce broad, shallow standards which the state Dept. of eds sign off on. No one wants their subject to be deemed less important so they load them up with lots of stuff that has little use for the average adult.

Question writing is done by part timers, often teachers, that work as contractors for the testing companies and get paid per question. They spend a weekend making a little extra dough by writing questions based on a fairly rigid framework dictated by the testing companies. The purpose of these questions is the same as it has been since standardized tests like the Stanford 9 were first created: They are designed to rank and sort students along a curve. They throw out questions that either too few or too many students get correct when the items are "test driven", so to speak, to see if they're suitable. These types of multiple choice tests are never validated or shown to be reliable, i.e. the test makers do not establish that the tests actually measure what they claim to measure (mastery of a subject by a particular student, for example). They're basically designed to rank and sort students into "winners" (who get to progress to the next grade) and "losers" (who get summer school, repeat a grade). 
Proclivities

Proclivities Avatar

Location: Paris of the Piedmont
Gender: Male


Posted: May 30, 2017 - 6:38am

 kcar wrote:
...Final thought: standardized tests are largely a way for non-educators and people in government to cover their asses and blame other people. 
 
In many states, their standardized tests are largely designed and composed by educators and people in government (ie: state Departments of Education), within that state.  Of course, anything can be used to shift blame, especially if it's shifted by an elected official who is taking heat for unsatisfactory performance.
aflanigan

aflanigan Avatar

Location: At Sea
Gender: Male


Posted: May 30, 2017 - 5:55am

 kcar wrote:



Final thought: standardized tests are largely a way for non-educators and people in government to cover their asses and blame other people. 

 
It's also very lucrative for education corporations such as Pearson, McGraw Hill, etc. that are either owned by or run by friends/relatives of the politicians who have been pushing the high stakes testing reform the past couple of decades, or else find ways to funnel money to their campaigns/lobby them.
Page: Previous  1, 2, 3, 4 ... 19, 20, 21  Next