I've been ruminating on Lynne Varner's latest column. Despite my quibbles - which are many - with a number of the individual points, I think Varner's thesis is essentially on the mark: Republican legislative candidates are getting hurt quite badly in the suburbs for being perceived as not having a relevant message on education.
I say "perceived" because while some will argue that Republicans have some good ideas on K-12 policy, I don't think one can rationally argue that the independent voters necessary to win in the suburbs actually believe otherwise based on the political dynamics and related results from recent years. Some of that gap comes from the content of past agendas. Some of that comes from flaws in communication. Either way, it is political reality.
Accordingly, let me just say this: If I was a Republican legislative candidate in a suburban district*, I would take Dino Rossi's education agenda, make it my own, elevate it to one of my top two or three issues, and run vigorously on it.
*Footnote: I'm told I was mentioned in at least one letter circulating in the 21st District during the recent PCO selection process to fill the House seat vacated by Democrat Brian Sullivan. Said letter proclaimed a candidate, who will remain unnamed, to be the best choice to defeat me or Renee Radcliff Sinclair in an upcoming race...as if I would be stupid enough to run in a safe Democratic district.
While I am honored by such attention, let me point out that I live in the 1st Legislative District now, just barely. And, I have no interest in running for the Legislature now or in the conceivable future. Some Democrats in the 21st District need to find another bogeyman.
Posted by Eric Earling at January 17, 2008 07:41 PM | Email ThisUnder the democrats, since 1984, it has become a second class afterthought, but they get away with it because nearly all of the spending increases have gone directly to the teacher's unions, while at the same time the Republicans are rightfully characterized as anti-public education. Teacher's pay and benefits are near the top of the list nationally and class sizes near the bottom. It wasn't that way before 1984.
Unfortunately we aren't willing to do what needs done. The R's should be demanding MORE to be spent on Education and LESS elsewhere in the state. The MORE should be spent on class-size reduction in math and reading in the elementary, and not just passed through to the teacher's union.
Posted by: Doug on January 17, 2008 07:38 PMShe talks about how Dems replaced GOP legislators in many Eastide districts in the last election, and gives the impression that everything will be just peachy, now that those evil GOP legislators are gone.
She completely fails to mention that the Dems have controlled both the governor's office and the legislature for the last several years, during which time education has gone nowhere but from bad to worse. Even with the supermajority status the Dems got in last election.
Varner, you doorknob, wake up and smell the coffee.
If the Dems remain in control of education in this state much longer, children will be better off not going to school at all, than undergoing the "education" given in the government schools.
Posted by: ewaggin on January 17, 2008 07:46 PMHow many students are there enrolled K-12?
What does that work out per student?
How much does each teacher make per year? (Avg)
Where does the rest of the money go?
Why not give that money to the parents to use to send their kids to any school they want? (We can work out the problems of accreditation, but assume that's not as big an issue as trying to fix failing schools that are apparently an intractable problem.)
Posted by: steve miller on January 17, 2008 08:48 PMWhy is Public Education Failing?
Posted by: Ragnar Danneskjold on January 17, 2008 09:09 PMAs it exists today, instead of teaching children, it actively saps them of their childish curiosity and desire to learn. They go into the system bright eyed and ready to learn everything, and come out with the attitude that "math just isn't for me", or unable to read or write well. Worst of all, it takes away their ability to learn for themselves. They become reliant on someone else's teaching.
Although there were many disadvantages to the way I was raised, I'm very glad that I was given the opportunity I had and I'll do my best to do the same for my daughter, working to minimize the downsides at the same time.
Posted by: Andrew Brown on January 17, 2008 09:20 PM2. Every population of kids is different and solutions have to be tailored to that population of kids, but the standards should be the same for all children.
3. The issue is competition in education and how best to get a competitive education model. What is happening here is the same thing that has happened to other large public school districts which is people are jumping ship.
4. Varner is correct that one-party rule does not benefit not only the education sector but any other sector or governance area. One-party rule no matter the party ultimately leads to corruption.
5. Unless some dem is willing to do a Nixon goes to China and bucks their base, more money will be poured into public education with fewer tangible results. People have to be willing to look at what works and that is rigorous standards for the basics and for some populations of kids, discipline, longer school terms and a longer school day. There is in fact a model for success in education and that is the Asian Indian model. In this country, educators like Marva Collins and parochial schools have been successful with kids.
5. Part of the success of Asians has not only to do with just plan hard work and valuing education, but with strong family support. Many American children and Americanized fourth and fifth generation children of immigrants lack this support and unfortunately schools have to serve as a safe harbor for many children.
6. Republicans seem to have given up on urban areas like Seattle and much of the urbanized counties. I believe there is a message of support for families that cuts across many different groups, I just don't see that your party has made much of a case.
Posted by: WVH on January 17, 2008 09:24 PMWhat do you mean by this statement:
"Point of clarification. Students are "learners", not "workers". Working comes after you have learned something, not before, else you have chaos!"
Some students have to work at learning, others with fantastic recall may be able to regurgitate dependind upon what is being asked of them.
There are different learning styles and some students overcome obstacles by just plain hard work to become successful. Example, students who are dyslexic and others who may have other learning disabilities.
A persons contribution to society while learning is a future value issue while that persons contribution can be in the present value once they have learned.
Posted by: Fed Up on January 17, 2008 09:53 PMSet the record straight on teacher pay; two years ago the AVERAGE salary was $45,000 Benefits were almost 30%, so just the average salary and benefits today come to $60,000 for 182 days of work (of which most teacher contracts allow for a dozen leave days without loss of pay and in some cases dozens more). Most teacher contracts are LESS than 8 hours, more like 7.5 to 7.75 hours per day. That makes the AVERAGE salary plus benefits of over $42 per hour.
Interestingly, if you took a look at Principal salaries, for the most part they earn LESS per contracted hour than the teachers do. They are paid more but they have more days in their contract.
Posted by: Doug on January 17, 2008 10:02 PMIf less than effective instructional methods are being used (and make no mistake -- that is exactly what is happening in WA especially with elementary reading and K-12 math instruction), then what good is hiring more teachers to teach the same way, for a longer school year?
Posted by: 4trogan on January 17, 2008 10:04 PMIf less than effective instructional methods are being used (and make no mistake -- that is exactly what is happening in WA especially with elementary reading and K-12 math instruction), then what good is hiring more teachers to teach the same way, for a longer school year?
Posted by: 4trogan on January 17, 2008 10:06 PMMy point is we need competition in education and each school has to meet the same set of standards, but they should be free to address the needs of their population of kids. Some kids do not have the family support that they need because families are more fractured. Some kids need longer school days and longer terms to compensate for lack of skills. The emphasize should be on the basics, particularly reading and math. Good reading, writing, and math skills mean that the child will advance though school and graduate and be able to compete for a college or trade school slot. If one looks at the prison population, one often sees illiteracy along with substance abuse. Kids who do not get a good basic education early fall behind and often dropout. The ticking time bomb in this state is the high dropout rate.
Posted by: WVH on January 17, 2008 10:17 PMI think you have valid points here. I was simply trying to make a distinction between workers, i.e. people engaged in securing a wage, and folks who are in the process of learning the skills to secure said wage. That being that one has to be careful about considering students as employees in a model.
Posted by: Fed Up on January 17, 2008 10:29 PM1. Do you support competition in education, like a charter school district where every school is a charter?
2. Rossi is getting his idea from the research that stong principals are a key component in a successful school and giving principals the authority to hire and fire all personnel is one element in making them accountable.
3. Regarding certification, there is no corrolation between the certification of a teacher and the ability to produce measureable learning results in a population of kids. There is corrollation between indepth knowledge of the subject area the teacher is to teach and actual learning.
4. Hess has a competitive certification model which is:
a. graduation from an accredidated college with a rigorous course of study
b. Passing a test in the subject area
c. A rigorous background check. I believe the Tacoma Public Schools is seeking changes in state law for teachers who misbehave to make standards stricter.
Now regarding teaching skills are we at the point that we have should have internships as doctors do or paraprofessionals with a career path? Perhaps even mentoring for a time with a master teacher? Actual teacher training does not necesarily have to be the certification scheme we have now.
5. Is the dropout problem really being reported or are there kids carried on the books as truant but in school or absent without explanation? Isn't the problem that there is:
a. manipulation of numbers by most districts
b. the fact that there are large numbers of kids who drop out
c. the fact that many kids might as well be drop outs because the quality of their education is so poor
I see how you feel about the schools and the poor quality it's giving our kids. Yet as I has said to you so many times. If the Gov can't run the schools right what makes you think health care will be any better or cost even less than it does now?
I know we need some type of reform, but putting the Gov in charge will be our biggest nightmare!
Posted by: Army Medic/Vet on January 18, 2008 07:17 AMJust a side note: It is funny how social economic warfare creeps in even between two fairly affluent school districts. GH played Bellarmine last night in Boys basketball. The GH student cheer/taunt to the Bellarmine students included the taunt of "Daddy's money." Alot of Bellarmine students can afford the $10K plus tuition and have stay home moms. GH student's recognize this.
Posted by: tc on January 18, 2008 07:17 AMI think plenty of people would be willing to hear your solution as to how to make health care both accessible and affordable. What are the details of your plan as to how this could be done?
Posted by: WVH on January 18, 2008 08:26 AMAt present, many lower income groups in American and those families who have been Americanized from immigrant origins often have fractured family structures and while some may understand the need for education, they do not often know how to work the system for their benefit.
One of the biggest issues for children is the voluntary status of single-parenthood. Out-of-wedlock births are increasing for all groups and that produces instability in the lives of children as a variety of "uncles" and "aunts" pass through their lives. The Bellamarine parents may divorce at the same rate as the general public, but the economic advantage those parents have to provide additional resources for their children overwhelms what a young woman alone can provide.
Also, a culture must value education. Bill Cosby attacks hip culture because education achievement is seen by that culture as acting white. Contrast that with the super Asian cultures of India, China, and Japan where education achievement is valued and prized. There has to be a change in the cultural dynamic in this country so that geeks are accorded as much status as jocks. We should be applauding chess champions as much as we applaud hoop stars.
The key ingredients are a culture that values education, strong family support, and a school that has rigorous standards for acquiring basic skills.
Posted by: WVH on January 18, 2008 08:43 AMThis is just it. Schools are allowed to blame parents and kids' socio-economic status for non-achievment, because it is unquestioned by most that learning is a "partnership" -- i.e. parents are partly responsible.
The education of kids, especially the young elementary kids, should be occurring without regard to SES. In other words, operate under a presumption that a kid's home life will NOT be a contributing factor in his education, and that the responsibility will fall solely to the schools. Presume the parents will NOT be firming the kid's phonetic knowledge and math facts, presume that the kid is NOT going to be in a language/content rich environment, etc.
What we have to realize is that often the higher achieving school districts are in affluent areas where it may NOT necessarily be that the quality of the instruction in the schools is better or even good, but rather the ability of the parents with their higher education and income to either afford tutoring (I have read that as many as 75% of Mercer Island SD kids attend tutoring sessions), or teach their kids themselves what is not being taught effectively at school.
A prime example of this is the current state of affairs in math instruction. Folks that know math like the group "Where's the Math" know that good instructional methods exist, but they simply aren't being used.
Now what good does a longer school day, a longer school year, and smaller class size do if schools are going to continue to use the same ineffective teaching methodologies?
The best things Rossi can do to fix education (and they are easy, and cheap) is this:
1) Banish fuzzy math and Whole Language/"Balanced Literacy" reading programs to rapidly increase student achievment.
2) Abandon the high cost WASL in favor of a better, objective test such as the ITBS or the CAT to save the State of Washington and taxpayers a huge bundle of money.
Students, teachers and parents will all be better off. The only losers will be those who stand something to gain financially from continually being on the quest for the Next Big Thing in Education. Reading and math instruction isn't like cancer research, folks. The best ways of teaching them have been around for decades (if not centuries).
Posted by: 4trogan on January 18, 2008 08:54 AMPeople (students) have not changed: 100 years ago, 50 years ago, 30 years ago there were students that didn't speak or read the language, there were students with special needs, there were those that struggled with math or reading or putting together a coherent sentence, yet without an over-paid army of "specialists" they managed to get educations and lead the world through the greatest advances ever in just about every sector of our lives.
Stop deceiving familes that every kid needs college; they don't. Bring back vocational training for those with the yearning for it. Make it ADMIRABLE again. At the very least, give those kids that would rather work with their arms and backs the option rather than the humiliation and the wasted frustration of college.
I wish just one educrat had the courage to base just one school year on the curriculum of our grandparents*, my parents ... or even that of my education.
*Disclaimer: My parents were first generation Americans, my grandparents were born, raised and educated in Austria and Italy. However, when my mother began school here, she did not speak or understand oa word of English. Amazingly, even without specialists, she learned!
Posted by: Ragnar Danneskjold on January 18, 2008 09:13 AMI think we are essentially saying the same thing. What Sylvan Learning Centers and Kumon do for the more affluent is essentially give the child a longer school day and longer school term. The issue is who pays. In more affluent areas the parent pays. The question on a site like this where you get posters who want the public school system totally eliminated is whether the taxpayers think it is in the general good and the taxpayers are willing to pay for additional schooling in the form of a longer day and longer term.
At some point, the requests for additional resources will be turned down by the public. I wonder if there were different models allowed to flourish in a district such as a charter school district where every school is a charter and they were allowed to innovate to meet the needs of their population of kids whether there could be more education achievement at a better cost?
As for teaching methodology, each school is really like a microclimate, in fact each classroon is. One has to find out what works for each population of kids and that why many teachers do not like highstakes tests because they feel they teach to pass the test and often do not address the particular needs of their group of students. The current system will either change or we are headed the way of big cities like DC, Philly, and Chicago where predominately only the poor and recent immigrants populate public schools and that truly would be a disaster.
Posted by: WVH on January 18, 2008 09:15 AMOh nonsense, utter garbage used as an excuse.
Kids are kids, their brains are empty vessels waiting for someone with the courage to fill them. Instead of promoting the value of thinking, schools are concentrating on feelings. If my kid isn't making the grade in whatever, i don't give a fox's fart how he feels about it. I want him to buckle down and master it or FAIL and learn from the failure.
Posted by: Ragnar Danneskjold on January 18, 2008 09:22 AMThat is a true statement. It is not a question of feeling, it is a fact that some kids arrive at school more prepared to learn than others. Some kids arrive at school with behaviors that may be disruptive and prevent them and others from learning. Those specific behaviors have to be addressed. I believe that in Seattle there are well over 60 different languages in the public schools and they represent a variety of different cultures. Some cultures value education, others don't. Still, the education outcome has to be the same for all children. How the teacher or school meets the education outcome objective may vary depending upon their group of kids. For example, some schools may choose to have uniforms to cut down on kids being bullied or harmed for a pair of sneakers. That is an example of one type of difference addressed to a specific population of kids.
Posted by: WVH on January 18, 2008 09:32 AMI wouldn't say they are being hurt directly on education at all, rather, they are being hurt indirectly, by missing a huge opportunity to take down the Democrats, who have utterly failed.
Posted by: pudge on January 18, 2008 09:56 AMWe could run education threads all year on this site and it would be the same old stuff that turns off 60% of the voters of the state - vouchers, private school, public schools are bad, the state's wasting money, etc. That isn't what drives the voters. We could lay out point by point in a very convincing way, what should be done, but it won't move voters.
The message has to be clear, convincing, and has to overtake the WEA message in the state. We should be demanding more money be spent on reducing class sizes, and less money on those ridiculous benefit packages that state employees earn.
When the democrats want $51 million more for education, the Republicans should get on the front page of the news and on the evening TV news saying we propose $200 million more, for the purpose of all-day kindergarten, preschool, and class size reductions K-6 in math and reading. If the Dems are asking for $1 billion more, the R's should say, that's not enough, they continue to pay lip-service to education and are getting away with it because the Dems continue to line the pockets of the teachers' unions instead of lining the brains of our kids.
When there is no reasonable hope of taking back the state house or Senate and the Dems have complete control, the Republicans can go on a political blitzkreig and take over this issue. But first the R's have to realize of all the issues that affect this state's voters, you have to be on the right side of public education or the party fails.
Posted by: Doug on January 18, 2008 10:56 AMWell first of all REMOVE all Gov invoulment. Do you have any idea how much they are in health care system now. Doc's offices now require up to 3 people just to handle gov paper work. Not including what any slick (edwards) lawyer will try to find it you don't cross your T's.
The paper work that just I do takes up a great deal of my time after every medical call that I run.
If you haven't noticed how much the GOV has mess up our schools with all of their crazy rules.
Do you have any idea why we ( all of the us) has so little baby doc's. Gov & lawyers have chased them away.
You bring Doc's & medical people together and the fix will be there, but like most Lib's and yes many Ind's they think the Gov can fix it.
That's a small part of the fix, but this mess started back in the 70's.
Posted by: Army Medic/Vet on January 18, 2008 11:48 AMThe suggestion that simply placing a kid out of his rough environment and into a library will improve his reading sounds great, and appeals to our sense of social justice, but in reality sitting in a library does nothing to help a kid improve his reading skills, much like the idiotic and widely used practice of sustained, silent reading and Reading Buddies. Kids first need to be taught explicit, systematic phonics to master the sound-symbol relationship, and then only after mastering that do we move on to teach them comprehension skills.
If the Republicans want to succeed on Education, don't play the more money game. Instead say "We are all about providing the funds necessary -- let us first make sure they are necessary". They need to attack what is going on within the classroom walls, instead of letting the Liberals take what is going on outside the classroom (SES and family status) to make the debate be about more money to counter the effects of what happens outside of school (the school need to fix/counter the effects poverty, hunger, druggie parents, single moms).
The best way to change the educational system to reach more kids is not to mandate class size or school year length, but rather is to mandate change in the teaching methodologies and curricular choices.
Health insurance companies reimburse for accepted, proven procedures. The public should do the same with their education dollars -- no more guaranteed, never ending supply of funds just so schools can keep experimenting on our kids.
Incidentally -- the U.S. Government funded a 30 year study to find out what the best instructional methods were -- and most people (most notably teachers) have never even heard of it. The study was wide-ranging across racial and socioeconomic groups from all over the country. Two methods stood out from all the rest, but the top spot, a method of teaching called "Direct Instruction" blew the number two away.
You can read about this study; Google it. It is called "Project Follow Through".
http://www.aaeteachers.org/follow.shtml
http://darkwing.uoregon.edu/~adiep/ft/grossen.htm
http://www.jefflindsay.com/EducData.shtml
LOL, great one. Yes I do remember them days.
My typing teacher (Miss Montiel) would turn my hands red (swatting them) from watching my fingers when typing.
I still do it today! 0-:
Posted by: Army Medic/Vet on January 18, 2008 12:39 PMI'm sorry WVH, but your statement about prepared to learn, disruptive kids is just more blabber and hooey... those kids existed when education wasn't failing... God knows, and bless my dear mothers heart, she knew I was one of them!
The problems began when they (LBJ?) nationalized education. When that happened, it was like the commissars in the Politburo: those that cared more about themselves than about the dependants they were charged with educating wormed and finagled their way to power, prestige, publicity and MONEY. In order to KEEP all that they had to continually "offer" something to be relevant and we got "NEW EDUCATION"!
Yahoo and yippee ki aye.
The problem is new doesn't always mean better: polyester vs. cotton; saccharine vs. sugar; pressboard vs. wood.
We know what worked in the past and we clearly see what's NOT working now. Educrat commissars don't want to relinquish their dachas nor do they want to free their dependants that pay for them by allowing freedom of choice.
I don't know that pure school choice is the answer. But I do know that we and our parents were far better educated than our kids are and we've all seen proof that homeschoolers regularly kick the educrat dependant butts into next week. I know that throwing more money and reducing class size benefits the educrats far more than the kids.
Posted by: Ragnar Danneskjold on January 18, 2008 12:59 PMBack in the day or whatever good old days you remember do not exist now. Society has changed for better or worse. You swatter a kid now and attract a lawsuit. Some kids could use a good tap, but you had better not do it.
The culture has changed and there is less family cohesion and transmittal of values like it is not OK to curse your teacher or spit at them. You people need to deal with the reality of what is going on in schools today. Now, least you think the issues are all in inner city schools those that teach in the burbs with affluent parents will tell you the issues are different but just as difficult-how dare you give my kid a "c" because they turned in average or below average work, they will never get into Harvard, Stanford, Duke or ________.
The world has changed whether you realize it or not.
Posted by: WVH on January 18, 2008 01:18 PMWhat are the details of your plan to get government out of health and provide health care that is accessible and affordable? If you have such a plan, you need to promote it.
Posted by: WVH on January 18, 2008 01:21 PMIn the elementary schools if you reduce class sizes in math and reading below 10 (at the same time class sizes remain high in other areas so the cost increase is minimal) you end up with the ability to group the children according to ability. The students learn at a more rapid rate when they are being taught at the level they are rather than a level their peers are. At the elementary level if you had 30 kids in a 3rd grade class, a large portion of those students would be reading or doing math at 1 or 2 grade levels above 3rd grade, many would be below the 3rd grade level. The end result is a dumbing down of the advanced students, and the lower students getting lost.
The research is very clear, get those classes at the elementary level down in math and reading to below 10 and group the kids and you will have fantastic results.
Don't give me any more crap about class-size reduction not mattering, it really does matter if you do it correctly and that is exactly the problem with the Democrats and the teacher's union, they aren't willing to do it right.
The problem with the republicans is that we prefer to bury our heads in the sand.
Posted by: Doug on January 18, 2008 01:25 PMI have no plans, but I've been in medical biz for 20+ years and I've seen what the gov has done to it.
My great grand parents are from Germany and I still have family there. I've seen their health care up front and many like you have no idea what you'll get if you go government run system. Fine if you have a head cold or a broken arm. But it ends right there. O-and you think their ER's are not busy. LOL Your doc that they pic will see up to 30 + people per day. So tell me, your getting good care now.
If you haven't read what is going on in England is already telling smokers & over weight no health care until they quit or lose weight.
So tell me WVH is that fair?
Do you know that the rich in the EU has already set up their OWN care instead...
From what I've read from you only the gov can fix our health system.
If they do. I'll enjoy watching you eat your words as you show up on this blog and complain about the lack of care your getting. And not to worry, the cost will shock you too.
Surely you're not suggesting the public fund education in order to bring class size down to 10!
And you're wrong about ability grouping not being about to occur in bigger class sizes. A skilled teacher can ability group a section of kids while the other kids work on the written portion of the lesson. What you are suggesting is that every classroom be arranged according to ability. Darn near impossible if you take more than one subject into consideration, sheesh.
Posted by: 4trogan on January 18, 2008 02:22 PMKids are kids are kids are kids.
There were kids from "the projects" back then, kids with no daddy's, kids whose parents humilated them with divorce and kids who got government cheese. There were smart asses and punks (although WE called them greasers.)
Parents, while absolutely the best, are not the ONLY transmitter of values. Society can (and should) say it's disgusting to use vile language or that teen pregnancy is a disgrace or that pants are not worn with the crotch at the knees. Even a small society as that within a school can "transmit" those values. You are making excuses. Today's educarats are so worried about not making a kid feel bad they don't let him know what's expected of him that will make him proud of himself. Standards in learning and behaviour have been dumbed down. You expect mindless, needy brats and you treat them as such.
And as much as some kids need a good swat, there are other effective ways to maintain discipline.
Posted by: Ragnar Danneskjold on January 18, 2008 02:38 PMI heard Newt on Medved today and he said that folks with Medicare have less choice (actually no choice/options) than a guy in England with the limits of socialized medicine.
As with education, GET THE GOVERNMENT OUT OF HEALTHCARE.
Fee for service.
Discounts for cash or paperless visits, ie, no insurance paperwork in triplicate.
Docs, hospitals and clinics can advertise and be scrutinized by competition.
I am just saying, the public is not reacting negatively to the GOP message on education, as much as it is NOT reacting to the message. The GOP is not being hurt by their education message, they just aren't being HELPED by it.
We shouldn't talk about money or class sizes. Those are red herrings (yes, they are; don't give me any more crap about them mattering). Focus not on the peripheral, but the actual: declining performance. It is not about money, it is not about class sizes. It is about teachers who don't teach, teachers who want to teach but can't, administrators who don't help those teachers, parents who don't have anything to do with their kids, and curriculum that doesn't actually teach the kids how to think and contextualize and solve problems.
Get rid of bad teachers, get rid of bad administrators, get rid of bad curriculum, and get rid of bad kids (if they are "left behind," that's their parents' fault: we should not allow them to bring down everyone else). Focus the classes on ACTUAL LEARNING.
Of course, to do that, we would have to go right up against the WEA. Sounds good to me. I would love that fight. Point out how they are failing, miserably, to do the job of educating Wasington's children.
The problem with the GOP message has nothing to do with money or class sizes. The problem is that it doesn't focus on actually fixing public schools. That is all most of the voters care about, and they don't care how it gets done, for the most part.
Posted by: pudge on January 18, 2008 03:41 PM"Parents, while absolutely the best, are not the ONLY transmitter of values. Society can (and should) say it's disgusting to use vile language or that teen pregnancy is a disgrace or that pants are not worn with the crotch at the knees. Even a small society as that within a school can "transmit" those values...."
Totally agree with you. As one poster put it, I have ranted plenty about hip hop culture.
The problem is society has changed since back in the day. Kids are more wired through TV, Ipod, text messaging and their idols really have clay feet. Aside from High School Musical one of their little idols is 16 year old Jamie Lynn Spears who just got her self knocked up by her 19 year old boyfriend. Here is how Forbes treated Viamcom the push behind MTV and BET's dilemma:
"....With Jamie Lynn now pregnant, Viacom faces a difficult decision: should it avoid a potential parental backlash by immediately severing ties with Jamie Lynn, or should it stand behind Spears? Viacom issued a supportive statement Wednesday, but did not detail the fate of Zoey 101 or Jamie Lynn's future at Viacom.
"We respect Jamie Lynn's decision to take responsibility in this sensitive and personal situation. We know this is a very difficult time for her and her family, and our primary concern right now is for Jamie Lynn's well-being," Nickelodeon said in a statement obtained by Reuters...."
http://www.forbes.com/2007/12/19/viacom-jamie-spears-face-markets-cx_er_1219markets01.html
So, what should the corporate response be?
"....Get rid of bad teachers, get rid of bad administrators, get rid of bad curriculum, and get rid of bad kids (if they are "left behind," that's their parents' fault: we should not allow them to bring down everyone else). Focus the classes on ACTUAL LEARNING.
Of course, to do that, we would have to go right up against the WEA. Sounds good to me. I would love that fight. Point out how they are failing, miserably, to do the job of educating Wasington's children...."
I think I have the vapors.
Posted by: WVH on January 18, 2008 04:21 PMThat makes TWO of us! :)
The frustrating thing for those of us concerned yet not in the education "business" is that it seems often times educrats create problems so that THEY can find solutions. ... Don't get me started on the manufacture of ADD and its cousin ADHD...
BASIC education (yes, of the good ol' days) worked. It wasn't fancy, it didn't justify the job of a specialist or sub-specialist and most importantly it put the burden where it belonged: on the student.
TEACH (and DEMAND mastery) phonics, math facts, sentence construction (hello, diagramming) history of FACTS, not conjecture and especially opinion. You can't learn to tie your shoes if you can't lace them first.
Fix "schools of education". I heard a statistic (and if I can find it, I will) that most of those in studying education in college today have the lowest test scores to get into college. Oh gee... shouldn't we demand more?
AND, I also heard that should a person who is a specialist in his field want to teach his specialty, licensing rules won't let him. Does ANYONE not think Bill Gates might have something to contribute to a computer class or a marketing class should he want to give his time???
I know, WVH, that I'm thinking simplistically. But it IS simple,and true because it has been done successfully before.
Posted by: Ragnar Danneskjold on January 18, 2008 05:12 PMClass sizes at 10 or less in the elementary level for Math and Reading could be done with minimal funding. Currently, they are looking at class sizes of about 23, a bit less. By scheduling and moving students around, you can actually get 10 kids during math and reading, while other teachers are dealing with 35 kids in P.E., art, and other subjects. However, I would guess adding a little more funding would do a better job of it, assuming the money goes to the specific issue rather than just out in teacher salary increase.
You just have to think outside the box, there is no reason whatsoever that a 4th grade class be a single teacher's class, there is no problem moving kids to other teachers during different subjects. This way you can take advantage of individual teacher's talents (some are good teaching math, other's English, some neither), but first you have to decide that a 4th grade teacher doesn't 'own' their students during the day.
The WEA controls the public perception of education. The GOP cannot run on 'fixing' schools, they have to first show the people that they are the bigger advocate of Public Education and that the WEA is the biggest obstacle, but we can't do that by saying how bad public education is, because in reality it isn't as bad as we think.
And Pudge I am utterly disgusted at your comment to get rid of bad kids so they don't bring down the rest of the kids. The public schools get what they get, if a student is far behind, they can't just get rid of them, it's their job to do what they can to prepare that student to be a productive member of society. Just because you think 'it's the parent's fault' if they get left behind, doesn't mean that it isn't the job of the public school to educate them the best they can. Just get rid of them...disgusting.
You're wrong, the GOP can run on fixing schools pretty easily, if they have a good solid message to back it up, because the WEA has been in charge for years and our schools are much worse. The people don't believe them anymore.
And I could not care less how disgusted you are at my comment, but I will note that you clearly misinterpreted me. I am not talking about kids being behind, I am talking about them being disruptive: kids who won't learn, won't follow rules, and so on. It's not about being behind, it is about parents and children choosing to not participate.
If the parent and child want to make an effort, fine. Great. The public schools should do everything in their power to educate that child. If not, then they do not deserve anything. Get rid of them.
Feel free to be disgusted as you like. It doesn't bother me in the slightest.
Posted by: pudge on January 18, 2008 10:20 PMI'm with you on this school problem.
We now let the trouble makers drag down the class.
My butt, kick them out or like in my day. They got a good wack from the board of ED. And yes I got a few. It didn't take long for me to get the point!
Posted by: Army Medic/Vet on January 19, 2008 08:14 AM1: If competition was enough to fix the schools the city schools would be the best in the nation because of how many different choices are available. Schools are already poaching students and trying for every last FTE they can get; in some settings, it hasn't made a difference.
"But KIPP! And Ron Clark! They're difference-makers!" Sure they are, but they haven't been successful on scale, and that's where we've got to get if we're going to fix the problems.
2: I've read those same reports; the School Research Center out of Seattle Pacific has done a great job the past few years talking about the role of leadership in effective schools.
My personal belief, though, is that leadership is a means to an end. A good leader might have a good school, but a bad leader is almost certainly going to have a bad school. Sadly, there's a lot of bad leaders out there. I'm firmly in the Arthur Levine camp that believes that principal preparation has been lacking.
3: The ASCD would disagree. Further, look at the 20 comments in this very thread about how management matters in the classroom--that's the importance of teacher preparation.
4. To be fair, Rick Hess' biography shows why he believes in alternative routes to certification.
Regarding the alternate models you propose, I like both those ideas. My only concern with the internship model is that you're adding on another low-paid year before teachers can get to the full salary schedule, and I think that's something that would scare away career changers and young comers. I've worked with paras who would make great teachers, so any way that we could get them into the classroom is aces.
5: The problem with dropout numbers is that the states have been left to their own devices to decide what exactly a dropout is, so national comparisons are next to useless. To have a fully operational dropout tracking system we'd need to have a national database, and Washington has unique problems because of the migrants.
My own bit of snark is that there really isn't a consequence for dropping out of school. You'll still have a roof over your head, you'll still get fed, you'll still have stuff. In India if you don't get an education you're going to be on the street begging; here, you're still going to have a pretty damn good quality of life.
Posted by: Ryan on January 19, 2008 10:19 AMConsider 100 first grade kids, who are currently taught by 5 teachers. If the reading block is two hours a day (which in some schools is a low number), to get to the 10:1 ratio you'd need to have 50 of the kids go somewhere else for two hours a shot. 50 kids would require two teachers to cover, plus I'd posit that you'd need 2 more so that kids could switch at the hour break (with your 1st graders, you're going to need to change the setting with regularity). Thus, to get to 10:1, you're talking about needing 4 more teachers for 4 hours a day, and that's not cheap--probably close to $150,000 a year.
A better solution would be to hire one reading teacher ($65,000) and two parapros ($50,000) and having them pull out the kid who need more time. That's how we do it at my school; one teacher takes the advanced kids, and her class gets higher numbers because the gifted kids are your best students for behavior as well, while the other teachers get slightly lower numbers (on down to me; I teach the neediest, and I only have 16 kids for an hour a day.)
Posted by: Ryan on January 19, 2008 10:41 AMIt appears one answer comes all the way from the PRIVATE SECTOR in Rhode Island.
Good on ya RI thinkers and problem solvers!
Posted by: Ragnar Danneskjold on January 19, 2008 11:43 AM1. How are you defining competition? Different choices in a monopoly are not competition. See, this article by Hoxby:
www.educationnext.org W I N T E R 2 0 0 1 / EDUCATION NEXT 69
ILLUSTRATION BY CRAIG FRAZIER
research
THE MOST SCATHING CRITIQUE OF VOUCHER
programs and charter schools is that they may bleed traditional
public schools of their best students and most
active parents, leaving the children who are left behind
even worse off. Moreover, as the students leave, taking
their per-pupil funding with them, the public schools will
find themselves stripped of the human and monetary
resources necessary to answer the call of competition.
"Skimming," the term of art for this hypothetical phenomenon,
may lower overall achievement, as the downward
spiral of the public schools swamps any gains made
by the students who take advantage of school choice.
Market enthusiasts have always argued the very opposite:
that competition will improve
Risingtide
by CAROLINE MINTER HOXBY
Critics of school choice have grossly underestimated the
public school system's ability to respond to competition
70 EDUCATION NEXT / W I N T E R 2 0 0 1 www.educationnext.org
the public schools, just as the entry of
Federal Express and DHL into the package-
delivery market forced the U.S.Postal
Service to lower its costs and offer new
services, such as Express Mail. Few analysts
expected the Postal Service to be able
to compete with its new rivals, yet several
decades later it is a worthy opponent.
Supporters of school choice believe that
public school administrators and teachers
would respond with equal vigor to the
prospect of seeing their students and
funding walk out the front door. Their
professional pride and livelihood in jeopardy,
they would work harder, adopt more
effective curricula, hire more talented
staff, and turn the district office into more
of a support center than a maker and
enforcer of rules...." http://www.hoover.org/publications/ednext/3399061.html
2. Regarding Certification:
a.
Abell Foundation. (2001, December). Teacher certification reconsidered: Stumbling
for quality. Baltimore, MD: The Abell Foundation.
b.
Sanders, T. (2002). Synthesis of reviews of "the value-added achievement gains of
NBPTS-certified teachers in Tennessee: A brief report." Education Consumers
Briefs. Retrieved September 26, 2002 from
http://www.education-consumers.com/briefs/ECS%20review.htm
c.Self, M. L. (1967). The certification of teachers: policies and activities of the national
Commission on teacher education and professional standards from 1946 to 1966. (UMI No. 67-15,938)
3. Regarding principals, the research indicates that strong principals are the key to a successful school:
a. Farkas, S., Johnson, J., & Duffet, A. (2001). Trying to stay ahead of the game:
Superintendents and principals talk about school leadership. New York: Public Agenda.
b.Howley, A., Pendarvis, E., & Gibbs, T. (2002). Attracting principals to the superintendency: Conditions that make a difference to principals. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 10 (43). Retrieved October 24, 2002 from
http://epaa.asu.edu/epaa/v10n43.html
c.
Triant, B. (2001). Autonomy and innovation: How do Massachusetts charter school
Principals use their freedom? Washington DC: The Thomas Fordham Foundation.
Suppose principals were education leaders and managers and they were allowed to manage the total per pupil allocation for their school, hiring all personnel and directing how their school would meet the goal of educating their population of students to the state standard. Fail and they are out. This is what happens in Belgium and Sylvan Learning Centers and Kumon. Regarding internship stipends, the theory is that a strong education leader/manger could do a better job with current resources.
4. There is a consequence for dropping out of school, look at the stats for those in prision and the high rate of substance abuse issues, not to mention the children that are currently in the DSHS foster care system because their parents can't take care of them. I know that Seattle Urban Academy, an alternate school quotes in some of its advertising that some schools in Seattle have a 45% drop-out rate. The question is when do people drop-out, in middle school or high school because that affects stats. In any event, a drop-out rate approaching the 45% level is a ticking time bomb.
Let's look at the drop-out rate in terms of the viability of a culture and maintaining itself. The rate indicates that the culture will be in continous crisis and as we approach the MLK weekend, the dream of judging each individual by the content of their character is farther from reality. A lot of problems in this society begin and end with education.
Doug --Class size, while effective for certain things, is no broad cure for education's woes, and isn't nearly the most effective thing that could be done. Plus, it costs a lot if you are talking hiring certificated teachers. [If you are talking para pros doing the instruction, then why in heck do we need teachers at all?]
If all OTHER things are the same (classroom make-up, teacher training & teaching methodology), then yes, class size would have an impact. Point to consider: Special education resource rooms (the vast majority of which are comprised of kids with NORMAL range IQs) frequently have less than 10 kids being remediated together, and they are most definitely ability grouped. Look at their test scores, graduation rates and (gasp!) their rate of improvement back to grade level. [Go on, I dare you -- Schools don't keep such data]
If classrooms of 10 or less, where the kids are ability grouped and where the very purpose of the classroom is to catch kids up to grade level don't have great outcomes, what makes you think this is the Great Panacea for general education? The kids in resource room are the ones the general ed rooms failed.
We have to look at education as a science of learning, not a place for teachers to express their creativity. In no other "profession" do we put up with this nonsense, and in addition, blame parents and kids' behavior for their failure to learn.
Posted by: 4trogan on January 19, 2008 02:56 PMOh gosh and they prove my point as if on cue:
'Eco-anxiety' gains status as mental-health disorder : "Children can also suffer from anxiety over the planet. Experts suggest getting them involved in a recycling program or planting a garden."
Posted by: Ragnar Danneskjold on January 19, 2008 04:06 PMYou said:
"WVH -- Some of your ideas are okay, but I think you might be reading a little too much Huffington Post regular Gerald Bracey, who would have us believe that despite all indicators pointing to the contrary, the U.S. is doing better than ever at educating its children. "
Point to where I said the US is doing better in educating its children. If this is doing better, let's just all drink the koolaid and end it. A ptential 45% dropout rate in some Seattle schools is simply not acceptable.
Here are two interesting articles on class size:
Crowd control: an international look at the relationship between ...Crowd control: an international look at the relationship between class size and student achievement - Research from Education Next in Reference provided ...
findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0MJG/is_3_3/ai_104835536
Quantity over quality; ever-declining class sizes and teachers ...Education Next, Fall, 2002 by Darius Lakdawalla ... With so much activity surrounding the issue of class size, one would think that the American education ...
findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0MJG/is_3_2/ai_91821097
As for your last comments, good teachers are already doing that. A lot of what is successful in education is matching a teacher with strong knowledge in the subject area and students where that teacher will be able to impact student achievement. A lot of teaching after the acquisition of subject matter expertise relies on the Harvard Business School term "emotional IQ."
Posted by: WVH on January 19, 2008 04:08 PMI only meant to draw a comparison with the weight you seem to give to outside factors on a child's learning, which is something Bracey (who is heavily influenced by the writings of Jonathan Kozol and Alfie Kohn) definitely subscribes to.
I agree with you on school choice, and about the value of a good "basic" education in a child's early years affecting his ability to do well later on. However I do not believe at all in "learning styles", family "support" (other than the ability of the family to fill in the gaps that the schools fail), and the amount a culture "values" education as any more than afterthoughts as factors contributing to what makes education "good" or "bad".
And never, ever will I agree that good content knowledge equates to good teaching. Furthermore, good content knowledge as affecting the ability to teach really only comes in at the middle and high school level. Anyone with good teaching skills who is literate should be able to teach elementary subjects.
The problem is that knowing HOW to teach is a skill that must be learned itself, much like performing surgery or assembling a computer processor. It isn't enough to read about it and discuss it, and expect to waltz into an environment and perform the task well. Ed schools, with few exceptions, teach theory. The actual teaching (any teacher will tell you) is learned on the job, ironically with the help of "mentors" who are themselves products of the very same system. Would you trust your health to your physician or the wiring of your house to your electrician if they were allowed to "practice" their craft with the same type of certification process?
Also, "high content standards" are not enough. Case in point: the WASL. Saying you have high standards does not mean the high standards will be learned. We first have to know how to teach the high standards instead of expecting they will occur because we have formally proclaimed we expect them.
I'll say it again: Any discussion of education must start with the question "What is the best way to teach these children what we want them to learn?" Is it fuzzy math? Is it whole language? Clearly, the answer to at least these two abominable methodologies is a resounding NO -- and those methods should be banished from at the LEAST our K-6 aged children.
Read about the origins of Project Follow Through. Engelmann had 4 year old impoverished minority kids subtracting mixed fractions and reading at a second grade level.
The best thing the state could do with their education dollars is to give the parent of every preschooler a $15 dollar copy of the book "Teach Your Child To Read In 100 Easy Lessons" by Siegfried Engelmann. That alone would be the single-most effective and productive use of our tax dollars to date.
Posted by: 4trogan on January 19, 2008 07:47 PM1. Outside factors such as a child's background and things such as whether the child has been feed in the last couple of days affect the child's ability to learn. For example, it the child hasn't been fed in the past couple of days due to parental incompetence or lack of resources, school breakfast and lunch programs do make a difference. If a parent reads to the child and does things like take the child to the library weekly that makes a difference in outcome. Poverty is not necessarily a determinant of success or failure, poverty culture is. Not all poor people are involved in or accept poverty culture. My sister was a elementary teacher in an inner city school and when she noticed some kids came to school for a couple of weeks without changing clothes, value village out of her pocket came to the rescue. Many teachers do the same. Poverty culture means that you don't wash the one or two sets of clothes you have, being poor means you may have one or two sets of clothes, but like Dr. Charles Stanley's mother (he is the founder of In Touch Ministries) she washed his overalls every night. Poverty culture combined with hip hop culture is a great determinant of success or failure. What Kozol and others are saying is that neither poverty culture or hip hop culture is an excuse, but to overcome those influences and make the child successful, differrent strageties may be necessary.
2. Content knowledge does not guarantee success, but neither does certification guarantee that one is able to teach either. Internships, like doctors, mentoring by master teachers, time as a paraprofessional are some ways to acquire teaching skills. You are right about schools of education.
3. You said:
"I'll say it again: Any discussion of education must start with the question "What is the best way to teach these children what we want them to learn?"
I said:
8. 1. I hope people are supporting the group "Where is the Math" they post here from time to time and they have a web site and newsletter.
2. Every population of kids is different and solutions have to be tailored to that population of kids, but the standards should be the same for all children.
4. You are correct about reading. If every caregiver read to the child and took the child weekly to the library and checked out a minimum of one book to be read that week, we would go along way toward helping kids learn. Andrew Carnagie and his support of branch public libraries was ontrack. Many inner city schools that are successful require kids to read and write reports on what they read. A free public library system is essential. A public library card costs nothing to the child.