I disagree to some extent. You are right that parents should DEMAND good education but lets remember that many parents until recently (with testing) were not aware how bad their schools are. Many others have no political power and cannot afford to move. So to blame parents is to blame the “victim”. Lets look at the system and see why it does not work and fix that. If you want to blame someone start with morons like Teddy K who vote for the unions and against everything else. Get mad at rules that force schools to keep violent or disruptive kids at the expense of the rest. Blame schools so badly run that there are no standards at all – but please don’t try to just dump all the blame on parents.

The victim is the student not getting educated. The parent, as advocate, needs to be the squeaky wheel. It is my job to make sure MY kids are getting the best education possible. If that means forcing my kids into the class with the best teacher or taking a second job to pay for a private school or home schooling them (which I don't strongly recommend) then that's what needs to be done.

There are a fair amount of parents who simply can't be bothered. In my old neighborhood one mother was amazed that our son could read* going into kindergarten. My wife and I spent a lot of time working on this with him. The neighbor's attitude was that there was no sense in her doing that with her child it was "the school's job." I'd guess that 1 in 4 parents cares at all about school. That's a guess not a declaration of scientific fact.

It is possible to be in a sub-par school district with inadequate funding. It is possible to have your child excel in that environment - but you have make noise, you have to work for it or you have to move your kid out of there.


*I know I sound like one of those parents but my son is scary smart and we have test scores to back that up

Regarding "Throwing money at Education": Last year New Mexico (my state) had a big financial surplus. I asked my state reps to apply it to NM Education, which is not too stellar, and not split it up into "special interest" parts as windfalls for them.

I got a nice reply from my state rep, outlining her problems with as she said "giving even more money to ducation", since that was just giving it to a grid-locked system. She then went through a convincing proof, to me at least, that indeed grid-lock was the case in NM.

Surprise, surprise, it's (she said) all politics here (and apparently is similar in all states), roughly being:

1. The state populace actually wants easy degrees, i.e. watered down education curricula and it's delivery. So, the "dumbing of America" is OK so long as "I get a degree to show the world." is the consensus.

2. The state education board wants to keep their turf and budget and won't let go of the curriculum definition! (Parents? Students? Legislators? What do they know? We have the job and we are the experts!!)

3. The same goes for teacher's degrees and their certifications, and she said all teacher related "unions and their related lobbying groups" had pretty well stopped the legislature from breaking the present in-place "education system food chain" here in NM.

4. The actual practicing teacher's, though there are some unbelievably good ones that are working at an apparently great personal sacrifice of dedication, also want no change to their present jobs by:

a. Having new better qualified teachers coming in to compete for salary upgrades.
b. Having new material to master and possibly be accountable for.
c. Having apparently "fat cat and easy street" jobs and easy budgets possibly upset (admilistrators and non-teaching staff objecting most strongly, but working teachers also objected.)
d. Not having the University level "teachers of teachers" be such huge and major "it's my turf" controllers of the "pedagogical basis" of NM teaching requirements. And, that "pedagical body of knowledge" did not hold up well as a "credible science/discipline". But, they would not "loosen up that stranglehold" for open review.

5. In my own disciplines of sci/math/tech/etc., I found the curriculum to be quite faulty! So I got into it from that point (for which I posted a query under the science and tech forum, to hopefully help me out some, that is slow but ongoing).

As a slight aside, I would like to extend BaphometsAdvocate's yesterday suggestion that it is a parent responsibility to get better education. I think it's an "all citizenry" responsibility, because we must all deal with these graduates of this our "education system" as a part of our "Public Commons". We do heavily rely on the "quality" of our fellow citizens therein.

Anyway, the end result was that the extra money got split up and did not go to education here. And, I got upset and started tilting the windmills.

I absolutely blame American parents 110%- every other institution, whether it be a teachers union or a school board, has to work around parents that regard thier schools as big baby-sitting service that is free, and they shouldn't be bothered with the school system, and it makes them angry if THEY have to put any effort into the system "must be those liberal teaching unions that is harming my students chance at edumacation"

That "Moron Senator Ted K" happens to be a lot smarter than most folks on this board, and has done more for this country than anyone on this board- so you might lighten up there Francis (an old line from "stripes")

Lek- your dealings with the NM school system (my girlfriend is from Los Cruces) is again a symptom of parent abdication and abnormally low pay for professionals with a four year degree.

The silly-low pay that NM teachers have compared with other four year degreed professionals pretty much requires sub-par poeple in the profession- you can't have it both ways- you can't have silly-low pay for a job and expect top notch well trained pros to enter it- and then follow the mouth breathing brain dead community leaders that want to make cuts to school teachers salaries, require more training of them, and complain when thier kids can't read-

Nope- every single parent in America is to blame- and once again, until we fix that, anything we do is just dust in the wind.

Please describe your culpability in this blame. I'm working my lower rear extremity off every day with my kids and volunteering my limited free time to help people (not just kids) be smarter. I feel blameless in this.

I strongly disagree. The only reason we are having this conversation is that idiots like Teddy K, who votes always with the teachers unions that pay him, insures that the worst public schools have NO competition. It is unlike most other services in this country where if you don’t get good service you just go to another store, place etc. To blame the victims and say THEY are the reason that education is poor is ridiculous and I am sure it happens to no effect. Victims of bad schools in the inner cities complain all the time and get SQUAT esp. form morons like Teddy K who votes down alternatives every time.

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/loca...arshall11m.html

I started this topic, and after reading responses, I wish to add my own:

Yes, education is now badly broke. I see it at the four massively fundamental and killing levels of:

1. It has no common goal or purpose that we all agree to, even if only in "poetic" or "visionary" terms.

2. It is presently a thoroughly "politicised" and "beauracratized" system wherein none of us consumers of education, who are outside of its various self-serving and interlocking rice bowels, know what we are getting, or how much we actually are paying for it, even such as it is.

3. The future "productivity" (and therefore general health and welfare) of a population and resource limited world will ultimately depend entirely upon human capital. And the best of that capital is in science, math, engineering and technology. Yet, we do not yet teach any of these at levels anywhere near that required/desired.

4. It's a "we the people problem" that we don't demand adequately. The meek will indeed inherit the earth, cuz soon both we it and we will be worth nothing at all.

and/or

I'm not going to claim that I have answers to the education problems faced by the public school systems, but I'm fairly sure that the only financial crisis faced by most districts is one of their own making... The public system where I'm at is the 3rd worst in the state. It has a 4-year graduation rate of under 50% and is being investigated for having fudged those numbers to make them better. It has all the woes associated with an urban system - declining tax base, a large percentage of students from poor families and so forth...

And yet, from figures given by the state department of education, the district gets $12,960/student each year...
One of the suburban schools ranks in the top third of the state's schools, and spends $7000/student each year. There are several very good private schools, Roman Catholic, Protestant and not-religious that also rank up in the top third of the state. One of them has tuition that is just under what the public district spends, but the others spend a mere fraction of that per student. Why are they able to achieve more for less money?

Well, the one big difference is that these schools overwhelmingly have middle-class or upper-middle-class students. And especially the private ones have parents who care about the education of their kids. Also, the private schools can set policies that allow teachers to maintain a learning environment in their classrooms. And I'm quite sure there are other good reasons as well.

But, in all of this, money isn't the issue. I firmly feel that public school districts and school bureaucrats who cry for more money are simply typical government types who are trying to get more money from the hard pressed taxpayer. They are suffering from a financial problem of their own making.

You have hit the nail on the head here bob. Numerous studies have shown that ‘money” is NOT the issue – it is what we “get” for our money. And in general the answer is that it varies greatly.

As Lek says correctly – “2. It is presently a thoroughly "politicised" and "beauracratized" system wherein none of us consumers of education, who are outside of its various self-serving and interlocking rice bowels, know what we are getting, or how much we actually are paying for it, even such as it is.”

The other key factor you mentioned are rules that many cities have to prevent schools from getting rid of poor/violent students.

So IMO it’s not just the difference in the “students” but in the management of the school system and the quality of the personnel. Also we have seen improvement in systems faced with NCLB cuts for poor performance. What IMO is really needed is a full voucher system that would in effect allow education to be as competitive as any other “goods or services” in our economy.

Sadly with the Dems in control and idiots like Teddy Kennedy tied strongly to the Unions there is littler chance for this to happen. In fact you can expect NCLB to be attacked and potentially dismantled by the left. We will hear the old tired mantra – “all we need is more money”. The same nonsense we have heard from the same folks for decades.

The grim reality is you may have to move to get a better education theses days.

2. If you see it as broke too, what's your fix suggestion(s)?
[/quote]


Conceptually it's easy to fix our public education system. Spend more money on it. Resources solve any problem. Get the resources by raising taxes on the top 1% (not cutting taxes like the madman Bush did).

But you have to have the commitment to have the best education system in the world, and of course conservatives actually dislike public education. Conservative politics requires a relatively uneducated and uninformed electorate (which is why stats show that the higher one's education, the less likely one is to vote GOP).

In particular, the resources should be used to build many small schools, with highly paid teachers who are allowed to TEACH, not just test. School size is everything; and not worrying about testing is everything. Teaching is a long process -- Bush and the conservative marketeers instituted a competitive model of learnign, which is poor rubbish.

Read "Insult to Intelligence" by David Smith: it shows the way and rebuts the ridiculous "teach to test" model that the marketeers have adopted.

Did you miss the part (above) about money not being the main determinant in educational performance? And believe it or not management plays a part in education as well as “good teachers”. Good teachers cannot teach if they are saddled by violent and disruptive students they cannot expel – as is the case in too many inner city schools.

And as far as testing you seem to be knocking NCLB which IMO has done more for education than anything any Dem has ever proposed. YES we need testing to verify that students actually learn. Testing has been a part of teaching since day one – so the fact that liberal now dislike it is solely based on the NCLB criteria that uses an independent test and hold schools, and teachers accountable. WOW what a concept – accountability. And as we have seen in the testing many, many schools are very poor and can no longer hide it. From there we improve results.

The government only pays for 12% of education costs by the way – so your ol saw of tax tax tax the 1% to pay for everything is as bogus as ever.

Public education is PUBLIC education and so must educate everyone. That's why comparisons with private schools is invidious, though ironically, public schools excel over parochial schools in many areas, as studies show.

But of course you've missed the issue. The issue is money. Spend enough money and you can handle the problem of disruptive students very simply: many small schools with small classes rather than a few large schools. Discipline problems vanish in the context of small schools.

But it costs money, and of course you're against raising taxes to make a superior public education system, so you and the market fundamentalists cook up the argument that money isn't the issue. It's funny how money is always the issue with CEO salaries and outsourcing, but magically doesn't applies to public schools.

As to teaching to test, it is a complete failure and has resulted in demoralizing teachers (which was the point) and leading to cheating as schools compete for their lifes rather than teach. The model of competition as applied to 6 year old pupils is so absurd that it hardly requires rebuttal, except to point out that the teach to test model was devised by NASA scientitists who were asked, since you put a man on the moon, tell us how to teach kids successfully. We all know how successful NASA is, and we all know its expertise in heuristics.

Ted, money is never the problem, when it goes to the public. There are always alternative methods. Blame the parents, blame the teachers, blame the students, blame the lunchlady. The best statistic that determines a child's education is student-teacher ratio. To lower that ratio you will need more teachers, in order to hire more teachers you will need more MONEY. A teacher has a better opportunity to control a classroom that has 15 students as oppose to 30 students. Then you will need money to pay these teachers and that costs money. Resources cost money too, like books or computers or healthy food. But your argument seems to suggest that if the child shows up and is motivated they will be able to overcome the violence or the low paid disgruntled teachers. You want to improve education you need to increase the number of teachers and their pay.

It's funny how their is always justification to increase the pay and resources of police officers so they can catch the "Bad Guys" but there is never adequate justification to fund an institution that is directly related to reducing crime.

Poverty and Crime are linked as is Poverty and Education. If you increase Education you reduce Poverty, if you reduce Poverty you reduce Crime. But the problem isn't money, right? Right!

Again money has been shown to be not a driver. Schools that spend less money per student regularly do better than schools that spend more but are poorly run and saddled with bad kids. Smaller classes is not the answer either. Nice but not necessary. I am a baby boomer and when I was in schools classes reached 50+ in some cases and yet when a 70 year old English teacher was running a class students did not DARE make a sound. Compare to today when regardless of the size of the class some students often do whatever the hell they want including threaten or assault teachers AND they stay in the school.



Cities and town fund education. You don’t “make” a superior education system with money. And by the way we HAVE doubled several times the money we spend with little result . AND we have fewer pupils per teacher.

There is a common perception that the way to improve our failing public schools is to spend more money on them. According to many public school administrators, the amount we spend per pupil is an excellent way to affect student performance. Yet a review of the data over the past 80 years shows that this is not necessarily the case. In fact, increases in per-pupil expenditures in the past have often not been matched by increased student performance. In short, the evidence suggests that we cannot simply buy better schools.

Spending per student has increased markedly over time. According to the U.S. Department of Education, in the 1919–20 school year, expenditures per pupil (in constant 2000–2001 dollars) were $367. By 1960, real expenditures had more than quintupled. In the 2000–2001 school year, per-pupil expenditures were approximately $7,000—nearly 20 times as high as in the 1919–20 school year.
http://www.hoover.org/publications/digest/4495906.html



Do you have kids? I do and they take the tests with no problem. You might be interested to know that many teachers find the test results instructive. It is in no way a failure.



Barnaby This is not the case as I have shown above. What we need is well managed schools with good teachers who are accountable (and test verified) to teaching our children. Bad, disruptive and violent students need to be expelled quickly and not left in the school to ruin the education experience for the majority. Until we are willing to do this we will have a mediocre system.

Yep, I got four. Not only that I'm married to a teacher. And I know many teachers. They are all demoralized by the teach to test nonsense, which I must conclude was the purpose of the program.

The idea that 8 year olds need to be tested constantly is such a bizarre model of heuristics, that it boggles the mind. The idea that all 8 year olds should be on the same level is even more bizarre.

None of the teach to test ideology comes out of any educational theory or study -- it is, as I pointed out, a program that was (bizarrely enough) set up by NASA, who was asked to contruct a program on the premise that teaching a child is like sending a man to the moon, and can be broken down into steps, but on a flow chart, and "taught' by a teacher (mouthpiece) is sections, by rote. It has backing in any theory or study, but if you think it does, produce the studies.

We'll all sit here and wait.

The fact you are married to a teacher says a lot. No one likes to have anyone look over their shoulder but with the abysmal education system we have in this country we have no choice. And I for one have no problem to “teach to the test” – because it is crystal clear that millions of kids in this country are getting a BAD education and if we have to resort to a “standard” for what needs to be learned in a subject and then “test” to verify it was taught I am all for it. And my kids take the MCAS every other year so I have no clue what you mean by “constant testing”. Obviously regular testing is done far more often.

1. Do you believe the US education system is broke, with your comments if you can please?

If education isn’t broken, it could use some improvement.

2. If you see it as broke too, what's your fix suggestion(s)?

I’m sick of hearing all this crap about throwing money at problems. You don’t fix problems without spending money.

Fort Worth Independent School District just finished a bond program approved by voters in 1999. Here are the results:



Fort Worth ISD is probably in need of a new bond program. Population is increasing, including many from across the border. Bill Gates and Thomas Friedman want better science education. Advances in science and technology are rapid. Continuous updating of science labs cost money. We are no longer talking about a lab table with water, a sink and gas for Bunsen Burners or instruments tol cut up a frog.

Do you think $453.3 million is excessive? Compare that to the cost of Jerry Jones new stadium for our “beloved” Dallas Cowboys.



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

I am not fond of Wiki articles, but the projected cost is the same as was reported in a now archived Fort Worth Star Telegram article.

Priorities anyone?

Here’s what I suggest to improve education.

1. Adequate funding. This may be more of a problem in a cheapskate and proud of it state like Texas than elsewhere.

2. Less emphasis on, but not necessarily elimination of testing. In short, stop teaching to the damned test.

3. In the high school where I worked until 1999, we had a mentoring program. Adults from the school and community would take a small group of students weekly. The mentoring sessions were designed to identify problems and find solutions.

4. Create an alliance between the business community and the schools. In Fort Worth, the Chamber of Commerce sponsors such a program called Adopt-a-School.

5. Quit griping about the public schools and see what you can do to help. Get your kids under control, even if it ignores Dr. Spock and means going back to the old way of busting their precious butts occasionally. Teachers should not have to administer a penal colony in addition to their other duties.

6. Forget about the voucher thing. It “ain’t gonna” happen. Even if vouchers were approved it would only transfer the problems of public education to private schools.

I'm out of gas. Someone turn off the Bunsen Burner.

What I want you to be educated (well) in, is an implied sleeper issue that hasn't much been addressed here. I take it for granted that what I want for your education, I will demand of my own, by simple reciprocity.

For me, what I want for your/our education is the shared basics for US citizenship. These include the "old" 3R's, but also more. And they all must be at a level adequate to:

A. understand and appropriately act regarding the US Const., the laws of the nation and of our localities,

B. serve on juries, serve in the militia (word purposely chosen instead of the military) very well,

C. come to the aid of my fellow citizens, or be "essentially deputized" by "peace officers", ie cops, militia, etc.

D. vote with responsibility (implies an a ability to seek and know responsibility and integrity) with principles I have and can defend,

E. be able to perform as a fully functioning member of a combat fire team (should I be in the military),

F. know and understand the process of science, because of the huge amount of our time and $$'s that go there,

G. have integrity, guts (true grit), and "no fear of activism of my choice" (purposely chosen "vaguish" words to avoid "mindless allegiance to authority"),

These tell me what should be taught, in what order and to what depth, and their "value". But, before I give my answers, I'd like to hear from ya'll.

As a current student in the U.S. high school system, I'm not going to take the expected answer of me being a "rebellious teen" and say school shouldn't be mandatory, because, as much as we would like to say it, I know that school is a necessary thing in todays global economy. I won't go as far as to say the education system is broken, but it needs some "touch-ups" and some restructuring.
Here is a list of some of my concerns/suggestions:
The high school system, which is when real electives and personal choices start taking place, needs to have a more flexible system of classes. I don't mean having whenever you want to, you show up. No. I mean they need to make more options available to the people who are taking the classes. They have the "electives", which although you choose one, they're mandatory. Now what's elective in that? Students should be able to fit their classes around their interests, such as a way which can benefit the individual person, rather than training the students to go work in factories (sit straight, hands crossed in front, and you will do what you're told). An example of this is, if someone knows they want to be a historian, or history teacher, they should be able to choose classes like: Political Sciences, Government, AP Euro, World Language, English, AP U.S. History. This schedule would benefit the individual person in what they plan on doing, and if a person doesn't know, should have many options to pick and choose classes, seeing what they have an interest in. The whole system of you must have x amount of credits in Science, English, History, Foreign Language, Math, and P.E. is so rigid it produces many students all going through the same exact classes, producing lack in diversity of the students. This credit system may fit to some people, but for others, I know for a fact they would like to take the classes that appeal to them, in addition to maybe some basic required classes.
This applies to the suggestion above, but more classes with more diverse topics available should be opened. This may cost more money, but in the long run it will benefit the U.S. economy by having a person readily trained for a job in high school, as that is the purpose.
There are too many holidays, plain and simple. I'm not complaining though

I tend to agree but remember even if you want to be a “historian” you still need basic math, science etc. skills to be a good citizen. Thus the range of course requirements. Most schools cannot afford to have the flexibility you are looking for and most students have not made up their minds on career this early – to take advantage of it. This is exactly what you get in college if you know what you want to major in.

That said, in my day, there were options for less academic training in the “business” or “trade” paths in high school. Much of this has been lost in recent decades as folks push to have everyone go to college. An unrealistic goal at best.

For once I tend to agree with Ted. A historian needs to know math. How many Indians did Andrew Jackson massacre. A historian needs some sence of science to understand Benjamin Franklin's, Thomas Edison's or George Washington Carver's inventions. I believe in core curriculum plus as many electives as possible.

Note: By core curriculum I mean language arts, math, science and social studies. Almost everything is tied together. You cannot understand math, science, social studies or electives if you can't read.

Yeah I agree with that, and I'm pretty sure I touched on that we need the core curriculum PLUS more flexibility in electives. Of course you have to have the basics, but I'm a sophomore and we doing basically the same things in english we were in seventh grade. Math and science are a part of a core education I am saying. Have that core education plus more options, and there would be much more productivity from graduates. And the whole college thing... that really needs to cool down there is such a thing as too much.

edited to add:
In addition to the mandatory Health class for all freshmen, I think either in the junior or senior year there should be a mandatory year-long class on the Constitution, Bill of Rights, and what freedoms/privileges we have under the U.S system. I know of too many people who are too ignorant to learn or plainly do not know their rights. IMO, this class would help increase freedom and political activity of normal people, along with protecting people who do not know their rights and otherwise might have people take advantage of this. But hey, who listens to a 15-year-old?

Bof pointed out the prickly problem with any program of education reform that might have a prayer of success.

Were Americans, no one knows better than us that nothing is free. A quality education least of all.

California just did an extensive review on improving its education system.

The funny thing is that they felt money was not the biggest problem.

It's funny because even as a secondary factor the money necessary to implement reforms is estimated at...


CALIFORNIA School study calls for cash, local control

The Full Study can be referenced below:
Institute for Research on Education Policy & Practice

To say nothing of Supreme Court Cases all over the country decrying funding failures.

If we as a nation aren't willing to spend the cash the schools will continue to fail.

I agree and lets add a good economics course since many have no clue how capitalism works – and a comparison to failed systems such as Socialism would be even better. The problem is there are not enough hours in the day. This is one of the reasons (among many) we have one of the worst educational systems in the industrial world. The teachers Unions (big donators to politicians like Teddy K) have defined the school year, by contract. Good luck changing that.

My son is a sophomore now as well. He is good at math/science and is in the “advanced” sections for both – which is also important to have in every school for all subjects. Who wants to be good at a subject and bored at the same time!

Yes. Actually there is that many hours in a day. As a junior and senior you need only five classes, so they could change that to five classes plus the mandatory Economics class (say junior year) and Government Awareness (senior year). That way it would fit in the regular 6-period day, and teachers couldn't go picketing and wearing buttons saying "teacher without a contract".

And I'm in the same position as your son, advanced in the subjects you like, then when you get in there your just so bored. Oh well. That's one thing about education that will never change

What I meant to say was my son is in an “advanced” section for math/science. In some cases he is actually in the Junior class for that subject – so he is not bored. Does your school have this? And ya school is not going to be fun much of the time - but hey you will never ever get the “time off” you get now once you are out of school!

And if there are the hours in the day then it could work if they have teachers qualified to teach the subjects.

We have a version of that, I guess. It's hard to compare with.
The only class I'm in with juniors is spanish, but I'm taking AP classes which are equivalent to college-level curriculum. That definitely keeps me busy
The teachers would definitely be the problem in this- I'm sure we could find teachers but why would we want to give up even more money for our future?

Consider yourself lucky you have the “advanced” classes. This is only now coming back into favor after decades of being out of favor with liberal “we are all the same” philosophy.

Count on Dems to try and scuttle NCLB (no child left behind) because their Teachers Unions buddies hate it.

I'm sure they'll try to stop it. It just makes the teachers work harder and put more time into their profession, and why wouldn't the Dems try to get even more votes. It's sad how even our future generation's future is controlled and fought over by politics.

Yes it is great to negotiate a nice (teachers) contract but not so nice to have a standard to teach to and having the kids tested to verify that the teachers are successful.

That said much of the problem is the “system” that allows violent kids to stay in school, threaten teachers, and disrupt education. Until this idiodic practice ends our education system will be second rate at best.

Sadly, I know of several of these kids (California has some drama ), and even more kids that have threatened and/or beaten up fellow students. Most the time its on racial charges too.
Now that we have agreed these students that are allowed to stay in the program are a major problem, what is your plan of action to fix it?
I say we should (a little outlandish) establish more schools for the violent kids and troublemakers, with regular curriculum, and maybe police on campus to keep fights from happening. Sure confrontations will always break out, but at least its away from the well behaved.

Ted,
Quite honestly, it is clear that you are not entirely informed about NCLB. It is a miserable failure, indeed. Most teachers, including the unions that "represent" them, don't have a problem with standardized testing. The problem with NCLB is the absolutely idiotic methodology behind the testing. Here is the scenario:
Teacher A has a class of students in academic year 2006. In that class are two special education students who have speech/language impairment. In most of the testing "strands" the class scores approximately 85% mastery. Five of the students in the class score high on the "Test of Cognitive Skills" and can be considered for advanced curriculum. The next year (2007) Teacher A has a class consisting of six special education students, two of which are autistic. There is no additional support in the classroom. The class, as a whole, scores approximately 40% lower on all of the academic strands(from day 1 of the school year) as the previous class that year. None score higher than average on the "Test of Cognitive Skills".

According to NCLB Teacher A will be labeled as a failing teacher when the students from the 2007 class take their state test because it is compared only to the tests from last years class! The teacher's success is not assessed based upon the PROGRESS of the students as they go into their next academic year but upon a comparison of one class to the other. And those pinheads who authored NCLB thought that was actually a sensible policy!

BTW, this situation is an actuality...it is my fiancee's present situation in an upper class school here in CT.


Teachers actually like using the tests to find the strengths and weaknesses of their students. "Data Driven Teaching" is now the hallmark of education and the rallying cry of every staff meeting across the country.
The problem is that the data is becoming more important than either the child or the teacher. As districts become pressured to perform on standardized tests they develop a myopic view of education. Principals become data tyrants in order to keep their jobs. Bad choices are made. Teaching positions are cut in order to pay for test preparation software, workbooks and professional development seminars. Special education has become nothing more than book-keeping as the special ed teachers are burdened with massive caseloads and no time to service the needs (and legal rights) of the students they once taught.

More money is being spent on hit-or-miss programs, educational consultants and testing than should be.
Schools are desperate to "make the grade" and school systems are woefully short-sighted on finding solutions. This is what you get when you drop the hammer on people: quick fixes, desperation management, chaos.

Now let me rant:

Education is certainly different than it used to be. We have different learning/teaching models, a much more diverse population with different needs and a more "distracted" student population.
However, good teaching is still exactly the same as it used to be and it happens just as regularly.

The real issue with schools is that they are nothing but a symptom of a changing society.
Schools in generations past didn't have to deal with severely disturbed students sitting in every classroom, non-native speakers from dozens of countries in the classroom, a population with a rapidly decreasing attention span, etc....

Ted, your comparisons to the classrooms of old are idealistic. I agree with much of what you say but you are very shortsighted if you think that we can simply "go back to the old ways". Schools have different clients now. Parents are no longer raising their children to respect authority outside themselves...we have become a distrustful populace. Some parents aren't even raising their children, believing that they will be socialized when they get to school. We have lost the innocence of the American Family and, like you, I mourn it. But to blame schools for not fixing the outcomes of bad parenting...I cannot agree with you. The list of parental failings is too long to list here but let me offer a few examples:

Failing to provide a consistent, structured environment for children. (In many families children make as many important decisions as do the parents. This creates children who fail to adapt when they enter the structured environment of the academic and working world)

Failing to teach a child his/her limited role in society. (In their attempt to empower their children right out of the gate, parents have raised "winners" who have never won and "achievers" who have done nothing. This false sense of self-worth has created a couple generations of people who believe they should "get what they want" simply because they want it.)

We have as many bad teachers as we have bad business people and politicians...and yet, strangely, there is hardly a peep over the restructuring of the corporate environment or (God Forbid) Capitol Hill.
Teacher competency is not the real issue here. Having a coherent vision for our youth and sharing it with all parents would go much further toward raising test scores than anything you can do to/for/with teachers.

The fact remains that of all the comprehensive studies of education systems all over the nation few if any recognize the discipline issue as a major cause of failure.

I'm all for ensuring a safe learning environment for our students, but let's not get distracted.

It's all well and good to come up with cost-free solutions to the questions no one asked.

...but here in the real world reform costs money and without sufficient funds our education system is dead in the water.

Then we need to move the kids to a different class or change the rating criteria. The program is good and sorely needed.




This IS a problem and part of it is the classification itself – but NCLB is not causing it. Schools need to provide a decent education to the average child, and the advanced children as well – and they have been doing a *** NOTICE: THIS WORD IS AGAINST THE RULES. FAILURE TO REMOVE IT WILL RESULT IN A STRIKE. *** poor job for DECADES. Times up for excuses. Either perform or give us our money and we can get private education. Schools damn well should want to “"make the grade”. That is the job and when they fail parents need to know and the “test” tells us that.



Nonsense. I am a baby boomer and sat in rooms with 50 kids taught by a 70 year old English teacher. And not a person made a sound while she was speaking. Violent or disruptive students were bounced. If you failed Math, Science or English you were kept back until 19 and then booted for good. But in the late 60s idiots decided we should “keep” these kids in school and worse we should “socially promote” them. This is not the teacher’s fault this is a stupid policy error. Now we need to see results. Maybe with that in mind those who said “just keep em all” will reconsider and we will have a better school system for it.




I blame the whole structure and it will not change unless we see just how bad it is (test) and decide to change it. IMO we should just boot the bad kids. The school teacher is not a baby sitter – let the parents have him/her at home for a year and see if the additude changes.



Bad business people run business poorly and the result is they go out of business. Part of the problem with education is no competition. The students are required to show up at the poor schools – I am not required to buy from, or eat at the poor store or restaurant. Bad politicians are not reelected

IMO education policies need to change and NCLB and the tests tell parents where the problems are. Working with school administrators they need to come up with solutions – the days of “Schools have different clients now. Parents are no longer raising their children to respect authority outside themselves” being the excuse for some of the worst education in the world needs to be OVER. Or we are doomed as a nation. And it is NOT money. It is rules and management.

That's another assumption that falls apart under cross-examination.

The fact is that we don't have enough room in the schools now. When parents abandon failing schools, where are they to go.

Vouchers offer a chance for a few, but that majority is left out.

We can't keep shuffling our kids, fix the problems where they are.

I have been partial to busing as a stop-gap measure and I think it could work better than vouchers but I recognize that neither busing nor vouchers can be a full solution.

Massachusetts has had the book thrown at it over school funding... hard.

So I think its pretty much impossible to reasonably assert money isn't a key issue.

Can we say Hancock v. Driscoll?

Link (PDF)

In fact we've have this whole discussion before so I'll just link to my post from then as it debunks that whole concept of "money isn't the issue" thats been flying around this thread.
Link

Numerous studies show no correlation between school funding and outcomes (see below). Up to a point of course.

Bad management and ludicrous rules that keep poor, disruptive, violent kids in schools are the problem.


Vouchers can work – the state and Federal government need to fund them NCLB does some of this.

Bussing never worked and never will.

Mass. has good and bad schools. They will not improve bad schools without a push. NCLB and the MCAS are doing just that.


And MONEY is not the point sir:


Spending per student has increased markedly over time. According to the U.S. Department of Education, in the 1919–20 school year, expenditures per pupil (in constant 2000–2001 dollars) were $367. By 1960, real expenditures had more than quintupled. In the 2000–2001 school year, per-pupil expenditures were approximately $7,000—nearly 20 times as high as in the 1919–20 school year

Where have the resources gone and what are the results? Special education is often cited as a primary contributor to increased per-pupil costs. Although special education has grown rapidly in recent years (approximately 13 percent of students are now designated as special-education students) and per-pupil expenditures for special education are more than twice the cost of regular education, such growth still does not account for the bulk of school spending. Cost data on special education are difficult to track, but according to recent estimates, special-education student expenditures accounted for less than 20 percent of expenditure growth between 1980 and 1990.

Three additional factors have contributed to increased expenditures: (1) falling pupil-teacher ratios (i.e., more teachers); (2) rising teacher salaries; and (3) growth in expenditures for things other than instructional salaries.

Recent studies reinforce the disconnect between spending and achievement. For example, the American Legislative Exchange Council’s (ALEC) “Report Card on American Education, a State-by-State Analysis 1976– 2000” concluded that “it is clear after studying the data and results that the policies of the past have failed to meet the educational needs of our country’s children. If we continue to spend more money on the existing educational system in an attempt to buy our way to better student achievement, we will condemn another generation of students to mediocrity.” The ALEC study showed no correlation between conventional measures of educational inputs (such as expenditures per pupil and teacher salaries) and educational outputs (such as scores on standardized tests). Simply stated, increased funding does not translate into improved achievement.

http://www.hoover.org/publications/digest/4495906.html


And another study:
The 65 percent spending shows no correlation to student achievement. Last year, the state legislature modeled its new school funding formula on 100 of the state's top performing school districts. More than 80 percent of those school districts currently do not meet the 65 percent spending benchmark proposed in the plan. Furthermore, of the 112 districts that currently meet the plan, some only meet provisional accreditation from the state. The school district that is currently in top compliance, spending 76.23 percent of its funds the way First Class Education defines “classroom expenses,” is a district of 41 elementary students and scored a 36 out of 54 on its Annual Performance Report from the state, meeting only the minimum requirements for accreditation

http://csd.fesdev.org/vnews/display.v/ART/4588598e1b523

As a guy finishing up his senior year of high school, I hope I can add maybe some insight or at least a different perspective into this matter.

Is our education system broken?

Yes and no? I think it really depends a lot on the teacher. Everywhere you go you hear people talking about the need for more money to be pumped into our public schools, and other matters of economy. I'm sure this can help at least a bit, but in the end it comes down to the teacher.

I'm sure that the thought running through many of your minds is that more money = more incentive for more highly qualified teachers to seek employment. Again, I don't wish to deny this statement's validity, but it's not the ultimate deciding factor. I know first-year teachers making dirt-for-wages that are some of the best teachers around, if only because they're enthusiastic about what they're doing. At the other end of the spectrum are the teachers who have reached tenure, and are raking in 80K a year, but don't teach jack.

From a student's perspective, this can be very frustrating. Dealing with a "bad apple," if you will, is a lot like being George Clooney in Syriana. That is to say, it sucks. So, if fixing a teacher's method of instruction is essential to our educational system's vitality, how do we go about doing so? A lot of people would say, "Impose more standards on the curriculum." To that, I say "Pshhh."

A teacher can follow a standardized curriculum down to the letter and not teach his or her students a thing. So, our school has started doing two main things. Both are systems of teacher evaluation. The difference between the two is that one is conducted by the administration, and the other is conducted by students. This two-pronged approach allows for the district to make sure that:

a) Teachers are covering the necessary material

and

Students are enjoying their class(es)

We haven't had the program in effect for terribly long, so I can't really vouch for its success with statistics, but I do think it's a good idea, and I hope that my opinion can be of service to you in your debate

(edited because my "b)" came out looking like a smiley face

Could not agree more. And beyond the teacher it’s the principle and the rest of the people you never meet that manage the school and its teachers.




I hear you but at the end of the day you need to do your best to learn the subject. And as I have said above – one of the primary reasons for standardized testing is to identify schools and teachers that are not successful at getting a subject taught. – and fixing it. It is not just “following a standardized curriculum” – it is getting it across.