I do not “blame the teachers”. I do not support school privatization

[johnaries]

I am not anti-union.

However, I do believe that “the children are our future” and I do believe that our current educational system has failed our children, and by extension the rest of us.

There is no “one size fits all” easy solution. There is no easy solution for individual schools. But, the status quo is failing and has to be changed. No one knows how to “fix” the problem, and although we have many options for change we don’t know which change will be effective until we actually try it and it either succeeds or fails.

The only guaranteed failure is to do “nothing”.

There have been many options that have been listed that we could try. There is no doubt that a major part of the problem is that schools are under-funded. But the under-lying problems can not be fixed or improved simply by “throwing money at the problem”. If we, the people, are going to spend more money, we want to know that we will get something back for our investment. We want to spend our money intelligently, not randomly.

Makes sense, right? But here’s what I don’t understand:

After being presented with a long list of areas, some people on the web look way down on the list and see the suggestion:

“Improve teacher evaluation”

Even though it is only one item on a long list, some people have said - loudly - “Oh, Blame Teachers First! It’s all the Teacher’s fault!”

No.

As I said, it is only one item on a long list. And many of these people contradict themselves as they also attack other items on the "list".

But, teachers are extremely important in the educational process. I can name several teachers that were very inspirational and “changed my life”. I’m sure each of you can do the same. Those teachers deserve special recognition (including pay raises), and I think other teachers could probably learn from them. Conversely, I can also name a few teachers that, simply, shouldn’t have been allowed to teach.

Personally, I get a monthly evaluation at work on my job performance, as well as an additional semi-annual review and an annual review. My annual raise depends directly on my annual review. A large part of my annual review is based on my “effectiveness”. These reviews are not designed just to tell me whether or not I should be “blamed”, but to help me become more effective in doing my job.

Why would we not want the same for the most important job of all, our Teachers?

I can understand arguing the mechanisms of establishing teacher evaluations, but it should be tied to effectiveness which means overall student improvement. Sure, there are bad and good students. But OVERALL those good and bad students will cancel each other out when you consider OVERALL progress and improvement.

Therefore, I totally reject the whole meme of “Blame teachers first!” It simply ain’t true.

As for unions - I support unions and teacher protections as long as they don’t get in the way of the ultimate goal - TEACHING. Some of them do an excellent job, some don’t.

As far as Charter Schools, I see them as an excellent laboratory. Many of them will fail. No big deal, other public schools are already failing. Some of them will find winning formulas that can be used and adapted in other schools.

It’s easy to find individual charter schools that have failed. It’s even easier to find “regular’ public schools that have failed. What we should focus on are the schools that have succeeded - and WHY they succeeded and if that winning formula can be adapted to other schools.

Improving our school system is not an easy task. I, myself, welcome any ideas or techniques that can improve our public educational system. I also totally reject those who seek to maintain the current failing status quo.

I support Progress.

[bluestateguy]

1. I object to evaluating teachers based on standardized tests

Tests were never designed to do that. I would actually encourage teachers unions to be a part of that evaluative process, along with administrators, parents and other educational professionals from outside of the school.


I support charter schools too, but they should not be allowed to cherry pick the best students and leave everyone else behind. Private schools already do that. Charter schools operate with tax dollars so that should not be allowed,

[johnaries]

9. I agree that evaluations should not be based on standardized

tests alone. However, what other standards should we use? What do teachers use to evaluate students? Primarily, tests. So, I think that tests should be included, but other standards should be evaluated as well. What standards? That is a difficult question, and one that needs to be studied carefully. The TN teacher's union came up with a pretty good compromise with Gov. Bredesen. Only time will tell how effective it is.

But we shouldn't preclude evaluations entirely because of debate over the best method to perform evaluations.

[dionysus]

16. i agree. there has to be common sense evaluation, but basing on standardized test scores isn't it.

[johnaries]

33. I think standardized testing can be PART of it, if done correctly. But

definitely there should be other measures that are used where we can compare apples to apples. What those measures should be and how they should be applied is a serious discussion we should be having.

[Dappleganger]

2. "As far as Charter Schools, I see them as an excellent laboratory."

"Many of them will fail. No big deal, other public schools are already failing."

Yes, it IS a big deal because when charter schools or public schools fail, STUDENTS are failing.

Those are children, not guinea pigs. It isn't fair to pull money from public schools which may clearly need help in order to create an educational experiment involving our children. Our public schools need some fixing in certain cities and states; let's not unfairly punish those children in failing schools by keeping money from them which could drastically improve their living conditions and educational process.

I am speaking as a parent with a vested interest in how all of this turns out, but it is dismaying to see so many people who are anxious to throw good taxpayers' money at dubious programs with little to no oversight and shorting regular public schools at the same time. I find that disturbing and anti-American.

[johnaries]

11. OK, I stand corrected. It IS a big deal

because it IS actual children. However, if a child is getting a lower education in a sharter school than they would a local school, the parents can pull them out and put them back in the local school. At least the parents had an option to try that they wouldn't have otherwise - even if it is a bit of a gamble.

[Hannah Bell]

44. education issues aside, it's a big deal because getting a kid into another school

involves finding another school & solving transportation, childcare & other issues, not to mention that disrupting a kid's routine, teachers, circle of friends, school surrounding & school routines etc. every year isn't really conducive to any sense of stability & security that's a prerequisite for learning.

oh, & charters are *replacing* the "neighborhood" school in lots of cases (intentionally so), so the parents don't always have the easy option you think they do.

[johnaries]

55. actually it's much more difficult solving all those "logistical" issues

to get the child into a charter school in the first place.

And, frankly,I haven't come across intances of charter school school students WANTING to go back to local schools, so it's pretty much a moot point anyway, isn't it?

[Edweird]

3. Of course you're not "anti union"

:eyes:

[stray cat]

4. No more than unions are anti-children (and I don't stoop to that assumption))

[Name removed]

6. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Edweird]

10. "I'm not a racist / homophobe / bigot / whatever BUT....."

[johnaries]

14. I resent your implications.

I support Teacher's unions as long as they are not "anti-student". Would you support a union at the expense of a child's education? Many of them have the right focus. I will not support a union that protects teachers at the expense of children. That DOES NOT mean that I do not support other unions. I most certainly do.

Don't jump to conclusions.

[Hello_Kitty]

20. Please provide some valid examples of teachers unions being "anti-student" eom

[johnaries]

26. Please tell me how I am "anti-union". nt

[Hello_Kitty]

36. You first.

Waiting...

[johnaries]

39. Why "me first"? Because you can't point to anything I said that

would make me "anti-union"? I'm not playing your little game.

And I never said that any union was "anti-child", I said that most unions performed very well as far as keeping the proper focus but that I would not support any union that DID act "anti-child". I was merely clarifying the conditions of my support, not making any claims.

Hello, Kitty. :hi:

[Hello_Kitty]

40. So basically you don't have any examples.

You pushed anti-union talking points based on nothing.

[johnaries]

56. as I said, I am not anti-union.

and I am not pushing "anti-union talking points"

do you have something you want to add to this conversation? Or do you just like the sound of your voice?

[Hannah Bell]

46. um, because about 99% of charters are non-union?

[Edweird]

23. I resent anti-union hogwash being advocated on a Dem board.

So I guess that makes about even.

[johnaries]

30. No. You have not shown anything I have said to be "anti-union".

I said I was not. You implied that I was, but didnt' present anything to back it up except some weak-assed icon of rolling eyes. Would you care to back up your statement of "anti-union hogwash"? You can't. Because I have ALWAYS supported unions. The idea that supporting teacher evaluations is "anti-union" is pure hogwash.

[Edweird]

35. I saw your "'I'm not anti-union" disclaimer. "I'm not ____ BUT..."

[johnaries]

38. Well, I can see where that would be confusing. I've done that myself

and I have seen people say "I'm not a racist BUT" followed by a very racist statement.

The problem is that many people have rushed to paint many of these ideas as "anti-union" when they certainly are not. Therefore, any serious discussion is stopped by the accusation of "you're anti-union!"

I apologize for the confusion. :hi:

[Smarmie Doofus]

41. So... this is just a hypothetical?

>>>>>Would you support a union at the expense of a child's education? Many of them have the right focus. I will not support a union that protects teachers at the expense of children.>>>>

It doesn't... at least in your opinion... really exist?

OK... I'll play. Hypothetically, NO I would not support a union if it were protecting teachers " at the expense of the students."

But the truth of the matter is teachers unions are *good* for kids. Unionized teachers that are backed by collective bargaining contracts and tenure are in a position to ADVOCATE for kids; those without protections are NOT.

What do I mean by advocacy: example: asking the principal at a staff meeting why there is no money in the budget for textbooks but there is $$$ for frivolous hiring of connected "consultants" to "advise" and make "recommendations."

No rookie or unprotected teacher will do the above. You can see why, yes?

This sort of stuff comes up all the time in the real life of a public school. OTOH, unions "protecting teachers at the expense of students" while an attractive concept to some is a rarity in real life. Yes.... a union is bound to represent *any* teacher that is subject to a disciplinary hearing to ensure that his/her contractual rights are respected. That's how *any * union works. At that point the school system presents the evidence that the teacher is in need of discipline. If the evidence is compelling the teacher is disciplined.

If the teacher is being hassled ( this OFTEN happens) for political reasons ( say, for instance, they opened up their big mouth at a staff meeting and asked why the school wasn't spending budgeted money on substitutes and instead doubling up classes and diverting the $$ to places unknown; another real life circumstance that happens all the time) or unfairly singled out for other reasons.... the dearth of evidence of teacher misfeasance at the hearing will be ( hopefully) apparent at that point and the teacher will return to the classroom.

Please don't buy at face value unfair and misleading characterizations of teachers and their unions. You write like someone who is fully capable of employing advanced critical thinking skills. Ask yourself who or what might have a vested interest in promoting public misconceptions about teachers and their unions and factor whatever answer you come up with into your thinking.

[johnaries]

57. Again, you are operating under the assumption that I am against

unions.

The TN examples I have given have shown that Teachers Unions CAN and SHOULD play an important part in deciding the best strategy for teaching students.

You have fallen into the assumption that I am "anti-union" when I am NOT. That is the fallacy that I am trying to combat.

I. AM. Not. Anti. Union.

Thank you for your analysis, but I don't believe that Unions today are "anti-student". I think they have the capacity, and I think that some schoold boards have the potential of being both anti-union and anti-student.

I want to see progress. Some people try to paint progress as "anti-union" for no valid reason. THAT is my point.

"Progress" does NOT equal "anti-union".

[Hannah Bell]

45. putting words together doesn't mean they make sense

[readmoreoften]

54. Oh good god thank you. We've moved into total jibberish.

[johnaries]

58. as this post exemplifies, so well.

[johnaries]

12. Are you implying that I am? On what are you baseing that?

Can you read my mind? Or do you think that ANYONE who supports expanding horizons beyond the status quo is automatically "anti-union"?

[Edweird]

22. I don't need to 'read your mind', what I need to know is in your post.

If the 'status quo' is union representation, anyone who "supports horizons beyond the status quo" is anti-union. While I have an issue with a few individual teachers here on DU that don't 'get' the fact that they have more in common with a union carpenter than a member of the 'ruling class', I support their union 100%. Go spread your anti labor garbage elsewhere.

[johnaries]

31. Obviously, you misunderstood my post. The "status quo" has NOTHING

to do with the unions, but the dismal drop-out rates and the appalling status of our graduates as compared to the rest of the world.

I'm sorry you misunderstood, perhaps I didn't communicate my position well enough. Although I don't how I could have communicated it better.

[Whisp]

64. same old, let's not actually talk about the subject but

make someone a pinata so you don't have to talk about the subject.

how many times does someone have to say they are not anti-union and you still insist that somehow they are.

just distraction from an important subject some here don't really want to talk about in a civil manner.

there is more time spent here on Teachers unions and the protection of them (which they should be protected but I'll be called anti-union as well for this) than on talk about how to improve the educational experience for children.

you talk about yourselves more than the kids, that is very telling.

[senseandsensibility]

71. delete

eom

[femmocrat]

5. There are so many variables in evaluating student progress.

Linking teachers' pay to student test scores is asinine. Who will want to teach the lowest-performing students, knowing that their livelihood depends upon how well those children can be programmed to fill in the correct bubbles on a standardized test?

It's insane and anyone advocating evaluating or paying teachers in this manner has no comprehension of today's student population or their challenges.

[vi5]

8. Exactly....

Democrats supporting this (even leaving out the union aspect of it) as a benchmark for teacher success are just as incomprehensible to me as Democrats supporting tax increases for the wealthy, corporate malfeasance, and war.

[johnaries]

13. NOT linking it to "test scores", but linking it to "progress". This is a

false meme that many have pushed that simply is not true. The evaluation process is not simply "tied to test scores". I agree, that WOULD be asinine.

No one is advocating that.

[vi5]

15. So what's progress?

I my kid feels better about his or herself at the end of the year and has better self esteem because a teacher took the time to build them up and make them feel worthwhile and let them know that even though they struggle with something academically, if they try and do their best that they have made a worthwhile pursuit? How exactly do we measure that progress? Who measures it. Because if my kid at the end of the year has accomplished that I'd feel they had a successful teacher even if their grades remained the same.

What about a kid whose grades and scores are the same at the end of the year as they were when they started, but they discovered through some teacher a great author who they love and whose work opened up whole new worlds for my kid and inspired them to do something great and write as a hobby? How exactly does that progress get measured? Who measures it? Because if that happened to my kid in a given year I'd feel they had a successful teacher.

What a bout a kid whose grades and scores are the same at the end of the year as they were when they started but who was inspired by a teacher to take up a cause or a charity that meant something to them. What if this teacher took the time to given them information about that and mentor them on that? How exactly does that progress get measured? Who measures it?

Who measures any of this? Who determines whether what this teach did makes them good or not? That's the problem with all of this.

[johnaries]

19. Grades are based on "current" expectations. You expect tests

to get harder.

This can also get into another argument. Which is better in grading - grading on a Bell Curve of all students or against some "expectation of what the student should know" that the teacher plucked out of thin air?

As for measuring progress, I agree that standardized testing is only part of it, and so does everyone pushing for teaching evaluations. Measuring progress via testing si simple - give them a set of questions at the beginning of the year and then the same questions at the end of the year and compare the two.

However, as many have noted, this does lead to "teaching to the test". Therefore, all advocates for teacher evaluations recognize that other benchmarks are needed. The question is, what benchmarks and how should they be measured?" As i mentioned in my other post that you may or may not have read yet, TN teacher's unions reached a compromise with Gov Bredesen with 50% of evaluation based on supervisor "opinion", and 50% based on student progress. Of that latter 50%, 50% is based on tests. So, only 25% of the total evaluation is based on the student tests themselves.

Although I do have some concerns on how those "other" student evaluations will be measured, I applaud the TN Educator's Association (union) for holding out against the Gov who wanted the entire student evaluation (50% of total teacher evaluation) based on the tests.

Surprise! I support the teacher's union position! See, I told you I wasn't anti-union!

[Hannah Bell]

47. insane, precisely. the same kind of insanity, from the same class of folks who recently

crashed the economy.

they don't give a damn about any children but their own.

[johnaries]

59. On the contrary, I would want an honest evaluation of

where my student stands in relation to the rest of the country, and what my best options are.

As for the "same class of folks who crashed the economy" statement, how does that relate to the current subject or make any sense whatsoever? this would simply appear to be an appeal to "emotional" stimuli and is not at all relevent to the actual subject.

[Joe Fields]

48. Linking teacher pay to student scores is NOT asinine.

And anyone who says so is just covering for teachers.

[vi5]

7. So in your job, when you get evaluations.......

and presumably raises or maybe even bonuses or any other incentives based on that.....if every person performs equally well then do they all get the same raise/bonus/incentive? Because that sure as heck doesn't happen in any company or job I've been in. There are so many "exceeds" to go around and the rest have to be either "good", "meets" or "needs improvement". What happens then is that everyone knows that it's political. The "exceeds" go to people who play politics or do other intangibles that are not written down and not everyone can do or acheive.

Sure, if every teacher's kids score equally as well then every one of those teachers gets the same raise or merit bonus, then fine. But we know that's not going to be the case. So then who decides which subjective areas are going to earn teachers those merit pay?

Again, in every company I've been in at a certain point everyone knows that the game is rigged for certain people to always get their "exceeds" and the merit increase that goes along with that because there are only so many to go around. Then everyone else does the minimum that they need to get the "good" and leaves it at that. Does that sound like a recipe for success for our kids?

Also, this entire "OMG OUR SCHOOLS ARE FAILING!!!" hankie to the forehead dabbing leaves out a major component: Parents. What are parents responsibilities? And no I don't (always) blame parents, but the fact is that without parental involvement, no teacher for a few hours a day is going to be able to work miracles. And every kid has different needs and different situations and it's impossible to gauge them all and hold teachers accountable for in a 9 month period, 1) getting to know the kids 2) getting to know their backgrounds and home situations 3) gauging what their individual academic needs are and 4) improving each and every one of them. Most teachers I know try but it's a herculean task and one that is not entirely within their control.

And I don't buy your "I support unions and teacher protections" line one bit.

[johnaries]

17. First of all, why don't you "buy" my support of unions and teacher

protections? I clearly stated that I believed that outstanding teachers should be paid accordingly and be afforded the recognition they deserve. Frankly, I don't beleive the average teacher is paid enough - I would like to see all teacher's salaries raised. Although the best teachers I have known were motivated by "passion" rather than compensation, I think the low salaries they receive are abominable. I think many potentially good teachers choose other careers simply because they cannot make a living wage on a teacher's salary.

I also agree with you that parent participation is key. Many Charter Schools that don't otherwise "cherry-pick" (a common falacy) students will dismiss a student based on parent participation. That is an incentive to get parents involved. Beyond that, I really don't know how to encourage parents to get more involved. That is a big issue and one that we should discuss and focus more on, I agree.

As far as evaluations are concerned, yes, sometimes they are "rigged". That is why choosing a valid method of evaluation is so important. No, they shouldn't be tied to test scores alone, and no one is suggesting that. In TN, as I remembered it the agreed evaluation process is 50% supervisor evalution and 50% student PROGRESS. So the impact of the teacher is measured not simply by the student's test scores, but by the progress the student's have made as compared to other teachers based on a mix of test score and "other" evaluation methods.

Therefore, Student's progress is only 50% of the total evaluation. That progress is only partially based on standardized tests. The standardized tests are considered NOT on the raw score, but on the IMPROVEMENT on the raw score as compared to the previous year. This improvement is then considered on a Bell Curve against the students of other teachers.

As you can see, the process is MUCH more different than some have tried to present it.

[vi5]

18. PROGRESS

Again, see my post above. Who determines what PROGRESS is? Do I get to determine if my kid made PROGRESS? Or does the principal or superintendent who may be more concerned about test scores to get more funding, etc.?

You're still looking at it through the lens of testing. Yes you say you want to look at the improvement rather than simply the score itself but it's still looking at standardized testings. Do teachers get graded on a curve if more than half of their kids have parents who have to work 3 jobs to pay the bills and can't put in the same amount of time as a well off family with a stay at home mom? Who gets to factor in that stuff?

If we want all our kids to succeeed, then we can't make teaching a competition where only some of them can win because that is going to engender worse behavior than tenure ever could.. I want my kid to have the best teacher that does right by them and their needs whether that is going to show on a standardized test either as a raw score or improvement or whatever.

[johnaries]

25. No, please go back and read my post and my example of TN.

And I am not advocating a "competition" - simply saying that exceptional teachers should be recogonized: both those that are exceptionally good and those that are exceptionally bad.

When my ward was in school, I would very much have liked to have had that information.

[Hello_Kitty]

21. Iicking kids out based on parental participation IS a form of cherry picking

Public schools will never get to do that.

[johnaries]

27. I granted that. It was the other accusations of "cherry-picking"

that I maintained as false.

[WinkyDink]

24. How is the System failing? Our Grad schools graduate both more Engineers and more Literature Ph.D's

than there are jobs. Where are the jobs for Architecture majors? For Library Science majors? Etc.

"60 Minutes" tonight: Laid-off Silicon Valley employees working now in Walmart. Is that what a presumably high-scorer on a Standardized Test is offered now?

We have PLENTY of high school students---graduates and drop-outs---for Minimum Wage jobs, the Military, etc. The factories are GONE where these students heretofore would have worked and earned good wages.

So who is kidding whom, with the current "Test Scores" and "Charter Schools" mania? NOBODY in the Wealthy Class (read: Gates) wants our schools to "produce" thinkers, philosophers, creators, poets, builders. They want WORKER DRONES and WAR FODDER.

I HAVE YET TO READ WHAT CURRICULAR AND TEACHING METHODOLOGY CHANGES GATES AND DUNCAN WANT. I've read of disciplinary changes for one charter school franchise.
And "franchise" is the correct term, because NCLB, charter schools, standardized tests (many types aren't free!), were and are all designed to make money for investors (Cf., "IGNITE!")

What do you know of your state's or school district's Standardized Testing program? Have you ever seen one of these tests that can pose a threat to a student's graduation? Have you ever asked how in the blazes a school can get 100% superior scores by some state-imposed deadline? Have you ever asked how these scores compare to the PSAT's or SAT's?

Don't forget: The term "failed" is based on state tests (e.g., PA's PSSA) that have not themselves been thoroughly analyzed (I don't mean statistical analyses of student scores; I mean a look at the ACTUAL QUESTIONS) outside the highly-compensated administrators in State Depts of Education.

And then think about how a school can be called a "failure" and taken over if those scores don't show continual improvement, unto 100%.

[JVS]

28. Good point. Our economic system is failing us, there are plenty of educated people

[johnaries]

37. Although your rant was very interesting, it mostly addressed the

sad state of our economy - NOT the educational system.

Ignoring "test scores" or how they are evaluated, let's just look at the graduation rate:

The percent of students earning a standard diploma in four years shifted from 69.2 percent in 2006 to 68.8 percent in 2007, according to an analysis of the most recent data in “Diplomas Count 2010.”

Less than 70% graduation rate, and FALLING! How is that not "failing"?

Also, there's this report:

http://www.all4ed.org/files/IntlComp_FactSheet.pdf

Quick summary -

In 2003, the United States ranked 15th of 29 OECD countries in reading literacy, and with a score of 495, came in near the OECD average of 500

The United States ranks 21st of 30 OECD countries in scientific literacy, and the U.S. score of 489 fell below the OECD average of 500 (OECD 2007b). One quarter (24.4 percent) of U.S. fifteen-year-olds do not reach the baseline level of science achievement. This is the level at which students begin to demonstrate the science competencies that will enable them to use science and technology in life situations (OECD 2007b).

The United States ranks 25th of 30 OECD countries in mathematics literacy, and the average score of 474 fell well below the OECD average of 498.

In 2003, the U.S. ranked 24th of 29 OECD countries in problem solving, and the average score of 477 fell well below the OECD average of 500

Yeah, we're doing just GREAT. Closing your eyes and pretending a problem doesn't exist won't make it go away.

[WinkyDink]

63. Let's just say tomorrow it was 100%. Then what?

[LiberalFighter]

29. Teachers in general are not the problem.

Despite the fact that Charter schools limit enrollment of students. Students that are likely to succeed, don't have handicap problems, or are not troublemakers. They for the most part do not do as well as public schools. It's much easier to graduate good students when the students want to learn and the parents have an interest the future of their children.

Charter schools don't even use all of the money allotted for each student for school expenses. Charter schools don't even provide the same level of participation and opportunities that public schools offer.

[johnaries]

34. I agree! That's my point, no one is saying that they are!

There are both good things and bad things about Charter Schools. Charter Schools are not the answer. But I think we can learn things from Charter schools that are allowed to attempt things that other schools can't because of the restrictions placed on them by the local school boards. Hopefully, we can apply the things we learn from Charter Schools to other schools.

There is no single fix. We have to try many different things if we want to improve our schools.

[CBR]

32. K&R nt

[ibegurpard]

42. yes, you do

if you support charter schools you are supporting school privatization.

[Hannah Bell]

43. Where is this "long list" you speak of? Because the major "reforms" i've heard of =

1. more testing for students
2. merit pay for teachers tied to evaluations based on student tests
3. bringing young, poorly trained non-union teachers into poor school districts
4. loosely regulated charter schools

none will bring "progress". all are targeted at removing teachers & dissolving teachers' unions. none have anything to do with a better education for students.

we already know how to do "better education". that would be something like the children of the rich get.

[Name removed]

49. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[ibegurpard]

50. no, what's getting tiresome is your relentless privatization pimping

[Hannah Bell]

51. thanks. i didn't even want to respond to the nasty kind of person who thinks

that accusing someone of being a waitress or of being unemployed constitutes a devastating psychological attack. really tells you where that person is coming from.

nasty, & anti-worker to boot.

[johnaries]

60. I'm SO glad you asked! And I am SO glad you illustrated my point

with your obviously redacted, biased list.

This all started with the Race To The Top contest. Please compare your "list" to the ACTUAL list:

State applications for funding will be scored on selection criteria worth a total of 500 points. In order of weight, the criteria are:

Great Teachers and Leaders (138 total points)

Improving teacher and principal effectiveness based on performance (58 points)
Ensuring equitable distribution of effective teachers and principals (25 points)
Providing high-quality pathways for aspiring teachers and principals (21 points)
Providing effective support to teachers and principals (20 points)
Improving the effectiveness of teacher and principal preparation programs (14 points)

State Success Factors (125 total points)

Articulating State's education reform agenda and LEAs' participation in it (65 points)
Building strong statewide capacity to implement, scale up, and sustain proposed plans (30 points)
Demonstrating significant progress in raising achievement and closing gaps (30 points)

Standards and Assessments (70 total points)

Developing and adopting common standards (from the Common Core State Standards Initiative) (40 points)
Supporting the transition to enhanced standards and high-quality assessments (20 points)
Developing and implementing common, high-quality assessments (10 points)

General Selection Criteria (55 total points)

Ensuring successful conditions for high-performing charters and other innovative schools (40 points)
Making education funding a priority (10 points)
Demonstrating other significant reform conditions (5 points)

Turning Around the Lowest-Achieving Schools (50 total points)

Turning around the lowest-achieving schools (40 points)
Intervening in the lowest-achieving schools and LEAs (10 points)

Data Systems to Support Instruction (47 total points)

Fully implementing a statewide longitudinal data system (24 points)
Using data to improve instruction (18 points)
Accessing and using State data (5 points)

In addition to the 485 possible points from the criteria above, the prioritization of STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math) education is worth another fifteen points for a possible total of 500.

The REAL list seems to be quite a bit different from the list you presented, doesn't it?

I just want people to be informed and know the truth.

[AdHocSolver]

61. Your list is made up of a bunch of meaningless and arbitrary generalities.

I wasn't going to post in this thread, but this list is just too much.

The problems with education in the U.S. are not the fault of the teachers, and not the fault of the teacher unions.

The public educational system was designed decades ago to train large numbers of children, especially immigrant children, to man the factories and offices of the corporations.

Schools were supposed to operate like assembly lines to serve the needs of the corporations.

The way the schools function, the arbitrary partitioning of knowledge into specialties, the textbooks used, the training of teachers by professors of education who would rebel against the system if they had a clue about what constituted good pedagogy, the politicization of education by numerous hacks with axes to grind, and the purposeful underfunding of public education are all issues that are purposely ignored. Instead, the teachers and their unions are singled out to distract the public from the real issues about why children are not being educated.

In addition, no real solutions are offered to fix education in the U.S. because the powers that be don't want the children of the masses to be educated. With all the good jobs being outsourced to low wage countries, the powers that be want to blame the public for not having jobs because they did poorly in school, which in turn was the fault of "bad" teachers and their "bad" unions.

Of course, the reason jobs are disappearing is because of corporate cartel trade agreements like NAFTA, the WTO, the IMF, and their ilk. A well-educated population (especially one versed in real economics) would have little problem figuring that out. So ensuring that the public is poorly educated serves many goals for the powers that be.

[maryf]

52. I am a teacher, I get evaluated and observed, no problem there...

but evaluating a teacher based on test results or on peer review (very scary), is something else...the educational system is broke but much can be blamed on society as a whole, thanks for not placing it all on teachers...but any reform that affects our working conditions needs to have our imput...our job is the kid's learning, conditions that limit that are what the unions are for...

[johnaries]

53. Oh, I strongly agree! And that is, in fact, what has happened

in large part in TN.

But there are some who want to stifle conversation. When we need as much input from as many different sources as possible, there are some who want to cut off all possible conversation and paint it as either "teacher-bashing" or "anti-union".

I simply want a serious conversation, without biased static. But that seems unlikely. *sigh*

[WinkyDink]

65. Well, using the terms "rant" and "biased" kind of belie your stated "want."

[Whisp]

62. In this cacaphony of misinformation on reform', there is one item that needs more attention

Now please correct me if I am wrong, but as I understand this the measurements of success are to be changed from NCLB and the competition each child is up against, is him or herself - if they improve, they have achieved the goal. They do not compete on the levels that NCLB has.

To me this makes good sense. I don't hear much of this on the board tho, there is no dialogue on this most important aspect. If you have more information or if I have misunderstood the meaning, please let me know.

thanks for this OP, johnaries. Might be a chance to actually learn things. :)




http://articles.latimes.com/2010/feb/04/opinion/la-ed-race4-2010feb04
""For years we've railed against the provision in the No Child Left Behind Act that credits schools solely for how many students test as "proficient," one of five levels of achievement. From the bottom, those are: far below basic, below basic, basic, proficient and advanced. A school might bring the majority of its students from the lowest level to basic and still be categorized as failing. Conversely, it might target a small number of students who are slightly below proficient, bring them up a notch and be called a success. The system has encouraged schools to ignore their most troubled students, as well as already proficient students who could reach advanced.

California is asking for permission to instead measure how much each student's achievement improves year to year. This could serve as a model for revising No Child Left Behind, which is a goal of the Obama administration. The U.S. Department of Education should approve the request."":hi:

[gulliver]

66. I liked what Adele Diamond had to say on NPR a couple of days ago

Wikipedia sums it up.

"In dozens of recent talks and on the NPR show, Speaking of Faith with Krista Tippet, Adele Diamond points out there is a reason dance, play, storytelling, art, and music have been part of human life for tens of thousands of years and are found ubiquitously in every culture, that perhaps we have discarded the wisdoms of past generations too lightly. She has suggested that the dearth of these in many North American children’s experience today may be one reason children’s executive functions are worse now than in the past."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adele_Diamond

Another key point Dr. Diamond made was that the more of the person you involve in the learning, the more they learn. So it is critical to engage emotions and to let the child learn by doing rather than just listening passively. She also endorsed memorization.

My kids always ask the obvious question "Why do I need to learn Algebra when I will never use it?" Most adults chuckle at this, but they shouldn't. When you learn Algebra, you are engaging in much more than just learning the rules of Algebra. Your brain is developing general purpose skills that, although they happen to support Algebra, also make you "smarter" at just about everything else. You might as well ask "Why do I have to lift these dumbbells if I want to play football? Shouldn't I just study football?"

[NJmaverick]

67. This is a sound post, that I can agree with

[JuniperLea]

68. Very well thought out OP! Thanks!

Thanks for the voice of reason in this issue.

[End Of The Road]

69. You were remarkably brave to post this.

I found your post logical and open-minded about the issue.

But to post anything here that is not 100% against charter schools (even though you may be 100% pro-teachers) will get you bashed as much as if you said you opposed gay marriage.

Best not to do it.

[ieoeja]

70. Obviously our schools failed. That's why we were never the world's leader in innovations.

Oh, wait....

Well, we're not going to be for long. Because our students now score only about average on worldwide standardized tests. Back when they first came up with those tests, and we were dominating the world in innovation, we used to score right in the middle instead.

Oh, wait....


You know, maybe there wasn't a damn thing wrong with our education. Maybe we were teaching our kids to learn rather than just teaching them knowledge.

In the 1950s Brazilian high schoolers were getting the same test scores as American college students in physics. When one noted physicist wrote a new test for both groups, the Americans scored just about as well while the Brazilian's failed miserably. They were taught exactly what they needed to know to pass the standard tests and nothing more. They could not apply the knowledge they had.


John Adams first rose to prominence challenging the views of a newly appointed (by King George III) judge who claimed, "the public schools are failing." Decades later, after everyone involved was safe in their graves, private correspondence was made public in which the judge discussed the need to shut down the public schools because they were actually succeeding too well. And educated people were less willing to follow the will of "their betters".

What we see today is a repeat of that. They want us dumbed down. So they set out to convince us that education was failing. It is not. But they have gotten a lot better at the propaganda.