President of the US: Fix the Education System

[ComputerGeek]

Use a voucher system to encourage competition. That way poor people could afford to send their children to a private school where they actually have to work for their money. In a public school there is little incentive to teach children well, all you need is the money. Here in Michigan the teacher's union can pretty much demand as much funding from the government they want simply becuase they're such a large voting block. Once they get the funding they can use it for such idocies like faculty's rec rooms, weight machines, olympic size swimming pools, etc., all of which the taxpayer has to bear the burden of. We are paying for the faculty, administrators not just teachers, to get free benefits that most people can't afford. I think its a disgrace that they're able to pick the pocket of lower middle class or poor people just so they can get free perks. To add insult to injury they make the public pay to access the pools, exersize machines, etc. We've already payed for it once, why should they make us do it again?
Simple solution, vouchers. They will finally have competition and this will force them to use their money and assests to educate people, as well as enable poorer people to have acess to better schools.

Forget vouchers... Public charter schools are a much better, less controversial, and publicly funded way to introduce competition. Michigan has TONS of charter schools that have been started up by universities, and corporations. Many are bad, but many are good too. The voucher debate is around only because religious folks who send their kids to private religious schools want their tax dollars back.

 

[ComputerGeek]

If a school can teach conceptual understanding without teaching basic factual knowledge, then that's a very creative curriculum, for sure.

I did not say that. The problem is that focusing on factual knowledge ONLY does not teach conceptual understanding which is dearly needed by students in order for them to think on higher levels of bloom's taxonomy. I know, you can not teach concepts without facts, but facts are not the end all be all of education. Standardized testing causes teachers to focus on facts and ignore concepts and understanding.

I don't have a problem with saying the large-group standardized tests don't really give a full picture of how well schools are teaching a subject - I just don't believe the tests themselves actually cause schools to make their curriculums worse.

They do because if a school is focused only on scoring well on a facts based test... why would they bother teaching concepts? it will not help them at all.

It is not a question of if this happens, it does happen (mostly in the years of testing, and more often in lower income districts that are struggling with funding)

Instead, the ability to adapt to using standardized tests to measure school achievement has varied a lot. Some schools systems have learned how to circumvent the testing standards, some have stressed spending more time on preparing for the test at the expense of learning something new, some haven't made any sort of significant adjustment at all. Among individual teachers, experienced teachers usually adapt to the standardized tests without much trouble while new teachers react unpredictably. I've seen examples where standardized testing has been implemented badly in some specific cases, but I don't think I've seen a good overall picture of the impact of standardized testing.

(Of course, if a good idea is implemented badly enough, it could wind up being so much trouble that it's easier to scrap the idea than to fix what you did wrong in the implementation - if you completely trash people's confidence in an idea, restoring confidence may be more trouble than it's worth.)

If there's any legitimate criticism of standardized testing, it's that it has only confirmed what people knew in the first place. The economic level of the students attending a school is the most significant factor in the achievement level of a school's students. That makes it hard to hold schools accountable for the students' results.

exactly.

Now, the debate seems though to have turned me into some extremist who thinks there should be no bench mark testing at all. I am simply arguing that a yearly test would destroy the school system because of the inherent negative effects that a standardized test has.

 

[Dawguard]

Forget vouchers... Public charter schools are a much better, less controversial, and publicly funded way to introduce competition. The voucher debate is around only because religious folks who send their kids to private religious schools want their tax dollars back.

Let's deconstruct this one piece at a time. Who cares if vouchers are controversial? Shouldn't we be concerned with what's right rather then what's popular? Next: that is not the only reason the voucher debate is around. Just becuase it might be seen as a stereotype with that impression doesn't make it so. Come on, you're smarter then this, we PF members should be above using stereotypes. I know several people who just want to get a better education then what the public school offers. Most of the private schools aren't religious, and most of the people I know who suport vouchers aren't religious. They simply see that the method of education in the public schools is broken and want to use their money, which they already paid in taxes, for something that will help their children in the future.

 

[ComputerGeek]

Let's deconstruct this one piece at a time. Who cares if vouchers are controversial?

Viability to get passed as a law is directly proportional to popularity.

Next: that is not the only reason the voucher debate is around. Just becuase it might be seen as a stereotype with that impression doesn't make it so. Come on, you're smarter then this, we PF members should be above using stereotypes. I know several people who just want to get a better education then what the public school offers.

your argument is mute because we have Charter schools in michigan (which is my point that vouchers are not needed and thusly are only promoted strongly by those who want to get their tax money back for choosing to send their kids to private non charter schools)

Most of the private schools aren't religious, and most of the people I know who suport vouchers aren't religious. They simply see that the method of education in the public schools is broken and want to use their money, which they already paid in taxes, for something that will help their children in the future.

Most of those people seem unaware of what the charter school system in Michigan is, as do you.

 

[Moonbear]

Okay, here's one example. Illinois requirements, which have just changed to comply with NCLB.
http://www.isbe.state.il.us/certification/html/becoming_teacher.htm

Secondary Grades (9–12)
Teaching assignment: Primary responsibility for teaching content in the core academic
subjects in a secondary setting.
Options to be considered highly qualified
1. Hold a Secondary Certificate (Type 09) and meet one of the following options:
o Pass the Content-Area Test for each area of teaching responsibility
o Have a major or coursework equivalent to a major in each area of
teaching responsibility
o Have a graduate degree or advanced certification (e.g., NBPTS) in each
area of teaching responsibility
2. Hold an Elementary Certificate (Type 03) and meet one of the following options:
o Pass the Elementary/Middle Grades Test and the Content-Area Test in
the area of teaching responsibility (applicable only for grade 9)
o Pass the Elementary/Middle Grades Test and have a major or coursework
equivalent to a major (applicable only for grade 9)
o Have a graduate degree or advanced certification (e.g., NBPTS) in each
area of teaching responsibility (applicable only to grade 9)

3. Hold a Provisional Elementary (applicable only to grade 9), Secondary or Special
K–12 Certificate (as listed above) based on certification in another state or
nation; and pass the required tests for each area of teaching responsibility (see
above) within 9 months of certification

However, when reading that bit about a "major or coursework equivalent to a major," keep in mind that they define coursework equivalent to a major as only 32 credit hours. That might cut it in the humanities, but in the sciences, that's quite a far cry from the 72 credit hours my biology major required, and even falls short of a minor. It also doesn't even specify any minimum grade point average, so someone could have barely passed all their biology courses with low Cs or Ds and it sounds like it would still count. I haven't found any information on what is tested in their content-area tests and what type of score is required for passing.

Okay, I found information on a content area test for NY state, and looked over the sample questions. http://www.nystce.nesinc.com/NY_viewSG_opener.asp I think you could ALL pass that one, well, with the exception of the one question that I think is blatantly wrong (it's one that asks what is the most significant ethical concern regarding transgenic crops, and says the correct answer is the one that is the most commonly expressed concern, about crops producing new substances that may harm people unpredictable ways, but if you know anything about science, it is not a valid concern, thus I wouldn't consider it significant, just popular...there is another real ethical concern in the list about manufacturers producing sterile crops so farmers have to buy seed every year rather than save their own...and that REALLY annoys me to see that right there in the teacher's test, they're propagating a myth that now those teachers will run out and teach all their students). There's also a question on the sample test that has the correct answer indicated, but the explanation of the answer is wrong...it is worded in a way that makes it sound like the pituitary is part of the brain. A test can only be as good as the person writing the test.

Basically, this test tests if you would know high school level biology, but I think a good teacher in a subject very certainly ought to know MORE than what their students know, not just as much, otherwise, how do they explain the reasoning behind the information they present, or clarify something that a student is confused about, or inspire their students to learn more about the subject than just what is required as minimum course content? And, therein lies the problem I see and why I want to get people with more depth of knowledge into the teaching profession at the high school level.

Oh, wait, and it gets better...here's their information on scoring and what constitutes a "pass."

For consistency, test scores for all tests other than the Assessment of Teaching Skills—Performance (ATS–P) (video) are reported using the same scale. The total test score is reported in a range from 100 to 300 and is based on performance on all sections of the test. An examinee’s multiple-choice score and scores on any constructed-response assignments are combined to obtain the total test score. A score of 220 represents the minimum passing score for each test. An examinee with a total test score of 220 or above passes the test. An examinee with a total test score below 220 does not pass the test. For more information about score reporting, visit the NYSTCE Web site.

So, with a range of 100 to 300, you can get a 220 and still pass! I don't know if that really correlates to only getting 50% of the questions right, because they don't seem to want to reveal anything about their scoring beyond that, but that's pretty scary when at least the sample questions were so easy that everyone teaching that subject ought to be able to get them all correct.

So, okay, here's my revised plan based on what I'm uncovering so far.
Beyond taking that test to get certified, I think you should have to retake it periodically to remain certified, with the passing score required being substantially higher. In other words, if someone taking a test for the first time, having never taught that course before, can pass with a 220, certainly I'd expect that after teaching for 5 years, they should have adequately mastered the subject to score more like a 280 (though, this would depend on the actual scoring method...I'd rather see it done as a clear percentage of correct responses rather than some weird, arbitrary scale), and after 10 years, your score should be nearly perfect...let's say you need to get 95% of the answers correct, allowing for a few errors due to time constraints or reading something wrong. But, if you're going to teach a subject, you should have achieved that level of mastery over the material the students are required to learn. How could you challenge your brightest students if you only know as much as they do?

 

[BobG]

Let's deconstruct this one piece at a time. Who cares if vouchers are controversial? Shouldn't we be concerned with what's right rather then what's popular? Next: that is not the only reason the voucher debate is around. Just becuase it might be seen as a stereotype with that impression doesn't make it so. Come on, you're smarter then this, we PF members should be above using stereotypes. I know several people who just want to get a better education then what the public school offers. Most of the private schools aren't religious, and most of the people I know who suport vouchers aren't religious. They simply see that the method of education in the public schools is broken and want to use their money, which they already paid in taxes, for something that will help their children in the future.

In 1997-98, about 22% of private schools were not religiously affiliated schools and they accounted for only 16% of students at private schools. (NCES data) Catholic schools account for 30% of private schools and about half of the students at private schools; other religious schools account for 48% of private schools and about 35% of private schools students.

Another fallacy is the idea that competition improves the quality of a school. Competition doesn't improve the quality of businesses, so why would it improve the quality of a school?

What competition does is to eliminate the vast majority of businesses so that only the strong ones survive - most businesses fail within 6 months. Using the same strategy for schools means that the quality of the public schools that survive will be very good, but there won't be very many left.

There's another fallacy that more money doesn't improve a school system - good management does. That's only half true, but the problem with the argument is that the people who use it are implying that a lack of money will improve management.

A certain floor is needed to have a chance of a good educational system. After that, good management is more important than money. Beyond a certain level, only good management can actually bring improvements in proportion to the amount of extra money being invested. No amount of good management is going to turn no money into a good education system.

 

[Moonbear]

Not as deep as you would think. American primary education is extremely broad, but very shallow (that is part of the problem in US education, and standardized testing)

That's part of the problem I'm trying to solve. The content remains too shallow because the teachers don't have the necessary depth of knowledge themselves. If we encourage people with that depth of knowledge to start teaching, that will naturally allow the bar to be raised of what the students can be taught.

I do think you need to go back to Pengwuino's original post and re-read it, though. He specifically stated this thread is not to be about saying all the things WRONG with education in the US (we have threads on that), but to provide specific, concrete examples of how to fix it. He's not interested in vague generalities or complaints about standardized testing, he's interested in how would you actually implement change. Please keep to that topic.

 

[ComputerGeek]

Okay, here's one example. Illinois requirements, which have just changed to comply with NCLB.
http://www.isbe.state.il.us/certification/html/becoming_teacher.htm


However, when reading that bit about a "major or coursework equivalent to a major," keep in mind that they define coursework equivalent to a major as only 32 credit hours. That might cut it in the humanities, but in the sciences, that's quite a far cry from the 72 credit hours my biology major required, and even falls short of a minor. It also doesn't even specify any minimum grade point average, so someone could have barely passed all their biology courses with low Cs or Ds and it sounds like it would still count. I haven't found any information on what is tested in their content-area tests and what type of score is required for passing...

You said a lot of right things. The quality of the teacher depends on the quality of the education program, just like the quality of a Ph.D. depends on the quality of the school or the quality of a doctor depends on the quality of the school.

The school I entered for education required me to have a 3.0 in both my major and minor (in my case both majors), It also required that we pass the Michigan Basic Skills exam (a joke) with a higher than minimum score and even added on the Praxis 1 exam (an exam not used in michigan because we have the basic skills exam) with a 270 or higher on all parts (My sister-in-law is a teacher in montana and she had to take Praxis 1 for entry into her universities education program, the base passing requirement in only 220) PLUS you needed two letters of recommendation from your professors during your undergrad education.

Not all universities have such requirements to enter the college of education, so, I could see where there is certainly some cause for concern... but in general, NCLB has raised the standards of teacher prep and who can teach a class in high school (which seems to still be needing to get adjusted for more compliance) so, the country is moving in the right direction, but as is always true, everything is not the same, and there are bad states/districts, and good ones.

 

[Moonbear]

Use a voucher system to encourage competition. That way poor people could afford to send their children to a private school where they actually have to work for their money. In a public school there is little incentive to teach children well, all you need is the money. Here in Michigan the teacher's union can pretty much demand as much funding from the government they want simply becuase they're such a large voting block. Once they get the funding they can use it for such idocies like faculty's rec rooms, weight machines, olympic size swimming pools, etc., all of which the taxpayer has to bear the burden of. We are paying for the faculty, administrators not just teachers, to get free benefits that most people can't afford. I think its a disgrace that they're able to pick the pocket of lower middle class or poor people just so they can get free perks. To add insult to injury they make the public pay to access the pools, exersize machines, etc. We've already payed for it once, why should they make us do it again?
Simple solution, vouchers. They will finally have competition and this will force them to use their money and assests to educate people, as well as enable poorer people to have acess to better schools.

Sorry, but I have a big problem with vouchers in that they do not actually inspire competition, but rather weaken the value of the education dollar by dividing resources further rather than consolidating them. I don't see that as a solution, I see it as a way to worsen the problem. What happens to the kid whose parents can't afford the balance of their tuition to private school, or who can't get accepted into that private school, or when the cost of parochial school tuition goes up because parishioners refuse to contribute to the school because too many non-parishioners are attending (very often, proponents of vouchers attempt to compare the cost of parochial school tuition to the actual amount spent on public school education, but fail to acknowledge that parochial schools operate on a somewhat charitable basis with funds coming from the parish in addition to the tuition funds, so the actual cost of education is substantially higher than just the tuition; they also leave out that detail that private schools that are not parochial have much, much higher tuition that vouchers simply won't cover, AND that those private schools aren't going to accept anyone except the very top students), or for those who do not wish to attend a religiously-affiliated school but there's no money left in the public school budget to educate them after all the vouchers have been issued? Vouchers are an ill-thought out plan.

ComputerGeek, as for public charter schools, there is no uniform standard for those and at least for the states I've looked up so far, there are no credentialing requirements at all other than that teachers should have a bachelor's degree, but it says nothing about subject area, competency, educational coursework, etc. I don't see them as any better than any other public school, because they have just as much variability in quality, if not more.

 

[ComputerGeek]

That's part of the problem I'm trying to solve. The content remains too shallow because the teachers don't have the necessary depth of knowledge themselves.

I don't think that is a universal truth. and the biggest reason with a shallow curriculum is the fact that we require so much more breadth.

If teachers had the ability to focus on mastery learning in a class, students would get the depth they need, but there are two issues.

1)standardized testing sets the amount of information students need to pass the test, and that is usually a lot more than is reasonably able to get done when you teach shallow, let alone try to delve deeper.

2)There is an odd culture in many schools that getting to a certain chapter in the book is an accomplishment. If you are focusing on getting depth rather than breadth, you will not get as far with one class as you do with another, and you most certainly will not get to what ever benchmark is set by the curriculum board which bases their decisions on what the standardized testing expects.
[/quote]

I do think you need to go back to Pengwuino's original post and re-read it, though. He specifically stated this thread is not to be about saying all the things WRONG with education in the US (we have threads on that), but to provide specific, concrete examples of how to fix it. He's not interested in vague generalities or complaints about standardized testing, he's interested in how would you actually implement change. Please keep to that topic.

Then no one should debate a solution's feasibility?

 

[ComputerGeek]

ComputerGeek, as for public charter schools, there is no uniform standard for those and at least for the states I've looked up so far, there are no credentialing requirements at all other than that teachers should have a bachelor's degree, but it says nothing about subject area, competency, educational coursework, etc. I don't see them as any better than any other public school, because they have just as much variability in quality, if not more.

I was posting that suggestion based on Dawgard (charter schools are better than vouchers for the solution he seeks). I am not a proponent of their use, but there are quite a few good ones out there, and they are open to everyone for free because they are publicly funded.

 

[Moonbear]

Then no one should debate a solution's feasibility?

That's fine...I wrote that before seeing some of your other later posts which you posted while I was typing. Your initial posts here were not particularly constructive, either with regard to feasibility or with suggesting new ideas. You've since gotten into more depth with subsequent posts, so just ignore that.

 

[edward]

I am getting into this thread a bit late in the game. I do know ,however, that recent test results in Arizona have shown that charter schools are actually lagging behind public schools in standardized testing.

Test results released this week by the state showed that just 36 percent of charter-school sophomores passed math on the Arizona's Instrument to Measure Standards test, compared with 73 percent at traditional schools.

http://www.kvoa.com/Global/story.asp?S=3599464

I have very mixed feelings about putting public money into charter schools and that is what is happening here in AZ. Putting the money into private schools only weakens our public school system.

I don't know just at what point the public schools began to deteriorate. If one thinks back however, our entire: space age ,technological, and computerized society was brought to us primarily by people who attended public schools. What happened??

 

[BobG]

I don't know just at what point the public schools began to deteriorate. If one thinks back however, our entire: space age ,technological, and computerized society was brought to us primarily by people who attended public schools. What happened??

The cold war and the space race provided a clear goal for public education in the 50's and 60's.

The role schools should play in developing social norms and self esteem has taken priority since then. The students graduating from school may not be qualified for much, but at least they'll feel good about themselves - after all, it's not their fault they're poor - it's society's.

I think Microsoft, Boeing, Lockheed Martin and other companies should play more of a role in setting educational standards. After all, the point of education should be to prepare students to go work in places like that - especially since the alternative is to become competitive with foreign manufacturers by accepting comparable pay and benefits as foreign labor.

 

[edward]

I agree BOB.

Another thing that started in the 60's was school consolidation. There are now far fewer schools in this country than in the 60's. On the other hand the schools are large. In the cities they are enormous. Yet I keep reading that the ideal school size 9 thru 12 would be 600 to 900 students.

I have always felt that I was lucky to attend a small school. My only peer pressure was to compete with my friends to see who would make the best test scores. Social norms and self esteem were all included in the small school package.

 

[Astronuc]

I do think there needs to be feedback from the NASA, National Labs, and Industry into the universities, and from universities back to high school, and from high school to lower grades.

Only in my final year of high school did I even meet someone from a university, and then it was less than one hour during a day in which we meet various representatives of universities.

No one ever came to any classroom to discuss what research was being done, or why we might want to study whatever subject, calculus, math, chem, physics, etc.

It's hard, but every now and then I try to get back to university to talk with faculty and students about what I do.

 

[Astronuc]

Throwing more fuel into the fire -

Did Bush Do The Math?
America might not need lots more science students
By Alex Kingsbury

For the past 50 years, the country that invented the nuclear bomb, the telephone, and the light bulb has been worried about its technical prowess. In the early days, the Soviets posed the greatest threat; now the bogeymen of global competition are China and India. President Bush's call in his State of the Union address for more spending on science and math reflects this persistent national anxiety that the country is falling behind. Bush's goal of continuing to "lead the world in human talent and creativity" was well received, but not everyone agrees on the nature of the threat.

There is little doubt that schools could do a better job educating students, especially in math and science. The National Assessment of Educational Progress, aka the nation's report card, found that only 36 percent of fourth graders and 30 percent of eighth graders were proficient in math last year. In 12th-grade tests in 2003, the United States ranked 16th out of 21 countries in science and 19th in math. And those scores matter: A production associate's job in an automobile plant requires basic math skills that nearly half of America's 17-year-olds do not possess. "The problem is not a lack of spending but a lack of focus on math and science and the importance of continued American competitiveness," Rep. Howard McKeon told a congressional hearing last summer.

http://www.usnews.com/usnews/news/articles/060213/13science.htm

Yeah, we need to fix the system! Start by giving qualification tests for political office. Of course, anyone can run for political office.

 

[Gokul43201]

This isn't, strictly speaking, a solution. It's a hypothesis that a solution does not exist within this system. The basis for the hypothesis is the following :

In my university, the two men that drive garbage disposal trucks are paid $70K and $80K a year. Nearly a third of the professors in my dept. (these are people with PhDs and at least 1 post doc each under their belts) are paid less than $80K.

I assume this situation is not some freak of nature and is likely prevalent in many parts of the country. And so...I don't see a strong enough incentive for people to take their education seriously.

Also, for the sake of comparison, if you look at coutries where education is typically strong (China, India), the alternative to getting educated is downright scary (unless you are rich or connected).

 

[usa1981]

This is how I would do the exams that bomba923 discribed.
Give EssayMultipule Choice (50%/50%) Exams in all subjects from 4th to 8th grade.
Give Exams Math and Scienices in grades 9th and 11th grade and in the all other sujects in 10th and 12th.
Highest Level Exams: 89% to 100%
Intermdeate Level Exams:73-88%
Foundation Level Exams: These students would be able to put to practice 66% to 72% of waht they had learned/
Entery Level exams: These students would be able to put into pratice only 45% to 65% of waht they had learned.

 

[Astronuc]

Give EssayMultipule Choice (50%/50%) Exams in all subjects from 4th to 8th grade.

I am not sure Essay/multiple choice would be appropriate for mathematics.

When I was in school, from elementary to HS, we were given arithmetical/mathematical problems to solve. I would discourage multiple choice problems (although we had that in 8th grade science) - there is only one right answer, which beyond simple arithmetic requires an orderly solution technique to the problem. Besides, students need to demonstrate their understanding of various formulae and solution techniques/problem solving.

Most science and engineering problems can be written in terms of what is given (input), the appropriate equation(s), the solution (solving the equations with the appropriate input) technique, and the solution (output).

I think of essays as being more qualitative rather than quantitative. Clearly, scientists and engineers need to be able to communicate effectively, and that not only applies to research and results, but also to scientific and technical policy.

 

[usa1981]

I am not sure Essay/multiple choice would be appropriate for mathematics.

When I was in school, from elementary to HS, we were given arithmetical/mathematical problems to solve. I would discourage multiple choice problems (although we had that in 8th grade science) - there is only one right answer, which beyond simple arithmetic requires an orderly solution technique to the problem. Besides, students need to demonstrate their understanding of various formulae and solution techniques/problem solving.

Most science and engineering problems can be written in terms of what is given (input), the appropriate equation(s), the solution (solving the equations with the appropriate input) technique, and the solution (output).

I think of essays as being more qualitative rather than quantitative. Clearly, scientists and engineers need to be able to communicate effectively, and that not only applies to research and results, but also to scientific and technical policy.

All I ment was that arithmetical/mathematical exams would be written. I also was being general those exams would be given in all subjects. I agree with you onthe math,science and engineering Exams

 

[SOS2008]

I have very mixed feelings about putting public money into charter schools and that is what is happening here in AZ. Putting the money into private schools only weakens our public school system.

I don't know just at what point the public schools began to deteriorate. If one thinks back however, our entire: space age ,technological, and computerized society was brought to us primarily by people who attended public schools. What happened??

I am completely against tax dollars going to private schools, because many are religious, and as a private school can teach what ever they choose such as creationism instead of evolution.

Everyone knows teachers are underpaid, especially at the grade school and high school levels. And now with Bush's "No Child Left Behind" program, these teachers must gain special-ed certification on top of the college degree, etc. But if you look at American performance, it is high until a certain age (around 5th grade?). Maybe it isn't so much a matter of poor teaching, but other social variables we need to address?

 

[Omega_6]

I am completely against tax dollars going to private schools, because many are religious, and as a private school can teach what ever they choose such as creationism instead of evolution.

Everyone knows teachers are underpaid, especially at the grade school and high school levels. And now with Bush's "No Child Left Behind" program, these teachers must gain special-ed certification on top of the college degree, etc. But if you look at American performance, it is high until a certain age (around 5th grade?). Maybe it isn't so much a matter of poor teaching, but other social variables we need to address?

Well many kids (at the high school level) just don't feel like having to compete against others to ensure that they can go to a good college. Learning shouldn't be a competition, and people who are in their teenage years need to experience things other than constantly focusing on school. In today's schools, some of these smart kids who also like to have a good time can not even be saved by their SAT scores anymore. Someone receiving a perfect score while having a GPA around 3.6 is nothing compared to a kid who has a GPA of 4.6 and a considerably lower SAT score. Many kids at this age are not yet ready to commit themselves fully to school and when they finally are they must attend a school they are not interested in. I understand that people who work harder should reap the benefits, but is it really fair to put the weight of their entire future on someone who is only 14 or 15 years old?

 

[usa1981]

I am completely against tax dollars going to private schools, because many are religious, and as a private school can teach what ever they choose such as creationism instead of evolution.

Everyone knows teachers are underpaid, especially at the grade school and high school levels. And now with Bush's "No Child Left Behind" program, these teachers must gain special-ed certification on top of the college degree, etc. But if you look at American performance, it is high until a certain age (around 5th grade?). Maybe it isn't so much a matter of poor teaching, but other social variables we need to address?

And now with Bush's "No Child Left Behind" program, these teachers must gain special-ed certification on top of the college degree, etc. But if you look at American performance, it is high until a certain age (around 5th grade?).

Are you sure about that?

May that is true. Public Schools suck and vouchers are/would be given from goverenment for improved education for their child.

 

[Astronuc]

Education
Report: States Inflate School Graduation Rates
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5498897

All Things Considered, June 20, 2006 · There are serious gaps between the high school graduation rates that states report and the actual number of students who receive a diploma, according to a new report. The study, from the journal Education Week, estimates that in the school year that just ended, 1.2 million students failed to graduate. The report explains that states have a variety of methods for calculating graduation rates, which can cause them to overestimate graduation rates.

States Struggle to Certify 'Qualified' Teachers
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5487440

Morning Edition, June 15, 2006 · The No Child Left Behind education law mandates that by year's end, every state should have ensured that every teacher is "highly qualified." Yet no state has met the federal government's requirements under this provision.

http://www.edweek.org/ew/toc/2006/06/22/index.html?levelId=2300

State Graduation Reports

A special state-focused online supplement to Diplomas Count. Features detailed data on high school graduation rates at the national, state, and district level. The report also examines how states calculate graduation rates, tracks state policies related to high school graduation requirements, and explores ways in which states and districts might improve graduation rates based on research.

 

[edward]

The cold war and the space race provided a clear goal for public education in the 50's and 60's.

The role schools should play in developing social norms and self esteem has taken priority since then. The students graduating from school may not be qualified for much, but at least they'll feel good about themselves - after all, it's not their fault they're poor - it's society's.

I think Microsoft, Boeing, Lockheed Martin and other companies should play more of a role in setting educational standards. After all, the point of education should be to prepare students to go work in places like that - especially since the alternative is to become competitive with foreign manufacturers by accepting comparable pay and benefits as foreign labor.

Students need to be challenged and they need to have aspirations. Neither of those things are happening anymore. This is most likely as you mentioned due to things like the end of the space race and other technical challenges. The big companies do need to be involved.

I think that the "No Child Left Behind" fiasco has left a lot of kids feeling that they must be dumb. They are tested and re-tested so much that the only thing they are learning is how to pass the blasted tests.

Humans seem to have an inherent need to be challenged and inventive. Schools are obviously not providing that incentive.
Without any stimulus to be creative and innovative we seem to get lazy and stagnate. This may even be related to why humans seem to have a tendency to start a war every few years.

I have been posting in the global warming thread and it got me to thinking about this thread. Is there any chance that a new challenge, such as an urgent need to develop new energy sources, could break our young students out of their malaise?? Anyone got any ideas?

I doubt that the federal government will look at a students need to be challenged until we are outsourcing the development of our own weapons.

just a ramble.

 

[0TheSwerve0]

Found http://llr.lls.edu/volumes/v32-issue2/hirji.pdf"about the California's public school system.

 

[Jimmy Snyder]

You are the President of the United States. Fix the education system.

This is the 10th ammendment to the Constitution that I have sworn to uphold.

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.

Therefore, I will see to the education of my own children and call it a day.

 

[Jimmy Snyder]

http://llr.lls.edu/volumes/v32-issue2/hirji.pdf"

amongst?

Text added to satisfy a curious criterion.

 

[Jeff Ford]

The first step is to eliminate grades 1-8. Replace them with a single school where all classes are based on ability instead of age. Things like gym class, lunch and recess can be based on age, to ensure proper socialization, but math, reading, grammar, history and the like should be based on ability. When you master one level you get to move up.

The second step is to stop putting everyone in the same high school. Two schools are needed, one for college bound, and one for future trade workers. For someone who isn't interested in college, many of the required courses are just a place for them to cause a disruption. Get that first year of trade school out of the way early, and help these people into the work force sooner.

 

[Astronuc]

Some High Schools Avoid Valedictorians
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=10693512
by Steve Inskeep

Morning Edition, June 4, 2007 · Some high schools are getting rid of a senior class tradition — naming a valedictorian. They say that lowering competition among students is better for their overall success. Eden Prairie High School in Minnesota will graduate its last valedictorians this year. Next year, exceptional students will receive just an honors diploma.

I was looking for an article on the fact that testing nationwide is not uniform and although test scores may be increasing, the actual knowledge of students (or average students) is not.

 

[ShawnD]

I would stop giving all the money to the sports departments of schools

This. My high school had a swimming pool, a football stadium, a hockey arena, and 2 gymnasiums. Sports are nice and all, but it's just a blatant waste of money when it's lumped together with the budget that was intended for real education. I have 2 zany ideas that I always thought would work.

1). Lower the educational requirements to be a teacher and have a stronger emphasis on experience.
Yes I said lower them. In college, one of the best teachers I had was a guy who didn't even have a bachelor of science. He was a guy who had a 2-year diploma in applied chemistry and something like 10 years of experience in the chemical industry. He really knew his stuff. I don't understand why somebody with a master's degree and no experience would be more qualified than somebody with a 2-year certification and 10 years of experience.

2). Eliminate all sports related junk and use this money to award small cash prizes. I mean like you show up every single day for a month and you get $10. Get the highest test score and you get $10. Yes I'm serious. It would probably cost a lot less than having a stadium, but it would actually encourage people to do good.edit: I won't debate these ideas if anybody quotes them. I'm just throwing them out there. Jon Stossel had a 20/20 special on education in the US and one of the principals interviewed said he awarded small cash prizes for achievements in school. It seems like such a cool idea that I just had to include it in this post.

 

[Smurf]

I don't know about the rest of Canada, but in BC the teacher shortage is artificially created. A bachelor's in education should be enough to get a high school job.

I don't know how I'd do it, but as a general thought I think we should require teachers keep up-to-date on the best teaching techniques, which should be a formal branch of psychology imho.

 

[Cyrus]

This. My high school had a swimming pool, a football stadium, a hockey arena, and 2 gymnasiums. Sports are nice and all, but it's just a blatant waste of money when it's lumped together with the budget that was intended for real education.


I have 2 zany ideas that I always thought would work.

1). Lower the educational requirements to be a teacher and have a stronger emphasis on experience.
Yes I said lower them. In college, one of the best teachers I had was a guy who didn't even have a bachelor of science. He was a guy who had a 2-year diploma in applied chemistry and something like 10 years of experience in the chemical industry. He really knew his stuff. I don't understand why somebody with a master's degree and no experience would be more qualified than somebody with a 2-year certification and 10 years of experience.

2). Eliminate all sports related junk and use this money to award small cash prizes. I mean like you show up every single day for a month and you get $10. Get the highest test score and you get $10. Yes I'm serious. It would probably cost a lot less than having a stadium, but it would actually encourage people to do good.

Lol, wow. I posted that a while ago. Talk about old thread.

 

[ShawnD]

I don't know about the rest of Canada, but in BC the teacher shortage is artificially created. A bachelor's in education should be enough to get a high school job.

I don't know how I'd do it, but as a general thought I think we should require teachers keep up-to-date on the best teaching techniques, which should be a formal branch of psychology imho.

I would go as far as saying most shortages are fake.

Anyway, teachers already get training on a regular basis. It may not be extensive or anything, but they do take courses from time to time. It's no different from engineers and chemists taking courses and attending training for some new equipment, new CAD software, or new analytical techniques.

Maybe I'm over the line when I say this but I tend to think good teachers are just good teachers and bad teachers are bad teachers. No amount of training will turn a bad teacher into a good teacher.