*
Discussion Forum
Discussion Forum
Up Next
Video Shorts
Featured Story
Skim-coating with joint compound covers texture, renews old drywall and plaster, and leaves smooth surfaces ready to paint.
Highlights
"I have learned so much thanks to the searchable articles on the FHB website. I can confidently say that I expect to be a life-long subscriber." - M.K.
Replies
*
Agree or disagree......Bush's bill demands more testing, especially a 20% increase in demands that poorer districts meet this increase.....
Discuss......If you care to......Don't forget to factor in those private tutorial companies who will make millions....
*Testing doesn't improve learning; it tells you if you need to.
*I know that, Bush doesn't......
*Back when my mind was still fresh and uncluttered I found I preferred multipleguess type tests. With a relatively quick reading of the material I was able to recognize a correct answer. I may not have learned anything usable but study habits are formed by the type of tests you are given.A more definitive answer would be forthcoming if I knew what the testing involved. Someone who has been involved over a significant period of time with the evolution of incremental testing as well as the big bang at the end of the term could provide that insight.I think more is not necessarily an adequate measure of learning considering that the time for learning is reduced by the time for regurgitation. Spitting out unrelated facts or bits of this and that may be fine for "Who Wants to be a Millionaire" or "Jeopardy".Haven't read the particulars of the bill yet.
*Bush's bill? It's really very bipartisan. Ted Kennedy's as much as W's.-- J.S.
*That doesn't make it any better a bill.....
*In my town's schools, mandated "proficiency" testing has probably hurt learning.It's a fairly good school system (not as good as it thoinks it is, though) with a lot of motivated families.There is tremendous pressure to "teach to the proficiency tests" so that the school will rank high, which leaves too little time for anything else - e.g., additional info that goes beyond the tested material.
*We clearly need a way to assess whether children are learning. But testing is not learning. And more testing leaves less time for learning, compels districts to "prove" they are good by getting good scores on these tests and therefore leaves them little choice but to teach to the test. Which puts school in the bizarre position of appearing to be good while avoiding teaching.But I don't want to talk about it.SHG
*Obviously teachers are over-paid and under worked so this wiil be a good way to show this and put the money to better uses.... More $ for the military and Homeland defense and Enron legal expenses, and finding more dirt on the Clintons, and Tax breaks for the upper class.... Wow did I really say that out loud?
*Test all you want. But until you get another generation that insists their kids do their homework, checks it and gives kids feedback, you are nowhere. Oh, yes - the teachers have to assign homework. Don't give me any crap about the parents needing to know the material - my father was a HS dropout that knew no algebra, but he cared, and my parents' interest starting in kindergarten paid off by HS. By then it was a habit to do the work and learn. I'm trying to figure out where we went astray. It was my parents' generation that managed the industrial and technical miracles of WW-II, and mine put a man on the moon. Where is the pride of local communities for good education? Why does the federal gummint even get involved? If my local school district had to have the feds give them a boot to do better, I'd be embarassed!More money and smaller classes aren't the solution. My HS classes were all over 30 students per class - and had over 75 percent attend college; and this was back in the 50's when everyone didn't go. We were a common, garden variety public school w/ 2000 students in 9-12. Teachers weren't paid squat compared to today. I think it all starts w/ the unskilled mixed labor that produces the tricycle motors that teachers get to teach.Don Reinhard, curmudgeon, first class
*OK, so let's assume for a moment that most people agree that testing does not improve learning. We need to find a more effective way to evaluate the the success of teachers and schools. While most teachers are dedicated professionals, there are some who ought not to be teaching. I know this because my sister-in-law was one such individual. (Fortunately she recently left the profession. I shudder to think of the trail of 7th grade math students she left behind over the years for someone else to mop up. This 7th grade math teacher couldn't even learn how to receive and send email on her computer, in spite of private lessons!) There must be a way to hold teachers accountable without compromising their ability to teach and the students' ability to learn. Any ideas?
*Evaluation (testing) is always needed to determine the extent of learning but holding everyones feet to the same fire will not give equal, accurate results. Some of those students will have bare feet some will have shoes or slippers and some will come prepared with Nomex. A bigger fire (more mandated testing) isn't going to help, either. We are not all equal going in and we will certainly not be equal going out if cookie cutter tests are used on the unprepared.If you have read what teachers have posted on this site you see (and have certainly seen for youself) that the whole lifestyle of our population has changed over the years.No longer do all our children come home from school at a reasonable hour, with a structured, non-competitive demand on their time. Distractions from the real world, some empty bellies, peer pressure, parental apathy or other lack of parental input and control often create or support the inequalities and inadequacies that show up only at testing time.The Feds, either meaning well or maybe more interested in their own pork and positions, are on the bandwagon, leaving less and less room for the people who are actually charged with getting the job done. Oversight here, oversight there, changing programs and methods on an annual schedule, and requiring much more than teaching from the men and women at the front of the class is also taking away from the learning process, forcing a teach-the-test environment which will leave less and less room for real learning. A vicious cycle.
*Question - In the public schools that any of you have been involved with, how "hands on" is the principal? Is he/she mainly an administrative authority, or are they in the classrooms daily? Do they know the names of the kids they pass in the halls? Do they know the kids' parents and what's going on at home? Do they participate in the classes, knowing the strengths and weaknesses of each teacher first hand? Are they more of a "pat on the back, rally the troops" kind of principal?
*I've this line of bull so many times - the test has nothing in it that isn't in the standard curriculum. If the teachers have to "teach the test", it means they aren't covering the curriculum.
*Evaluating a school's (or teacher's) performance by testing students is a joke.Teachers aren't builders. They're remodelers.You spend nine weeks remodeling that three room row-house, and I'll spend nine weeks remodeling that fancy house in Country Club Estates. Our pay will be based on the assesment of the resulting houses. Sound fair?
*I posted the question in order to find out how all of you feel about testing, not whether or not teachers are performing.......We've hashed that one over ad nauseam....Thanks for all of your comments.....
*I'm not in favor of i moretesting, but wouldn't be opposed to i standardizedtesting. If I understand right, and school district can choose which tests they do or don't give to the students? For example: My kids have to do the "Iowa Basics" test. But other school districts do other tests. If we're going to test, wouldn't it be better to just have one test? Wouldn't that make it easier to compare the results?Basically what I'm saying is that if we i musttest, do away with the "Iowa" test and all the others and come up with one standardized test.
*I dunno, but wonder if there's any one test which could measure the various things we want to measure.
*Doing away with the Iowa test or the Florida test, etc., would only open the door for a Federal test. (What else?) Which would open the door for Federal control of the curriculum. Which would open the door for a complete revamping of the bureaucracy. Which would open the door for an overhaul (increase) of taxing requirements. Which would really upset those whose pile of s**t was disturbed. Then the individual state lotteries, which were supposed to be enhance education, would by default become federally controlled. All in the name of education and "It's for the Children".
*They "teach to the test" to be sure of a high score. That's the incentive, high score. As a student if you were told something would NOT be on a test, how much time did you spend on that information?
*Ted,i Teachers aren't builders. They're remodelersThat's a horrible analogy. A child's education is a continuous addition of knowledge. It starts while they are in diapers, and ends when they enter the grave. It is a lifetime of adding information and the formulation of ideas. You can call it what you want, and describe it in any form you wish, but... AFTER each unit of study, there has to be a way for a teacher to know that their students have actually learned the material covered. They can use whatever means that they feel will work, but it is still a form of testing. It may not be a written test, but they will be using some form of testing to see if the students have learned anything before they move on to more information. What they do, and how they do it IF the student has failed to learn is a whole nother matter and discussion. Formal testing, whether written, verbal, or otherwise, is simply a way for everyone ELSE to see if the teacher is doing their job properly. Right or wrong, testing is a fact of the education system. Just a thought...James DuHamel
*Way back when I was in school, we used to take the "Standardized Achievement Tests" every couple of years. Your scores were compared to the national scores. They could do this, becasue EVERY school district took the same test. They did away with this test and came up with more localized testing. Once several testing companies got involved, the tests got more "localized" in order to cover the material as close to the individual district's curriculum as possible. It was all political. Districts and states that weren't doing too well on the tests felt that the tests were biased, and unfair to them. They lobbied long and hard to get the tests more "fair" for their students. Politics has a way of getting into the education system, and really screwing things up. Just a thought...James DuHamel
*I want to know about the national standards concept. Are we opposed to having national standards and control because it becomes a political quagmire, as James and Ralph point out, or are we opposed because we want local controls over the curriculum for educational content reasons? I can buy that national control becomes a boondoggle economically and politically. But is the idea that there is a national standard for what we should be learning a bad idea in and of itself?
*This, and your earlier post, hit on two of the major problems that have to be addressed: assessing achievement too late, and, reverse engineering test results.Ten years ago in our system, the first real tests were the SAT/SATO/PEEB or what-ever university entrance exams were taken, before you found out how little Johnny and little Sally were really doing. By then, it was way too late, not just for Johnny and Sally; but, for their siblings too: the feedback would only benefit the next generation.The next shock was that universities started including basic language arts exams as part of their entrance screening; and, went so far as providing catch-up courses in reading and writing.The only reasonable solution presented, so far, is to test competency at key points along the way where there was a chance to make a mid-course correction. This is seen to benefit both the individual and the system as both improve.
*No takers on the question about school principals? I asked it because I think that testing needs to be not only quantitative, but also qualitative. The principal at our school would absolutely be able to report on the progress of every child in our school wihtout giving them a quantitative exam prior to writing her report. I'm wondering if that it the norm.
*You've got to add some perspective to your question about school pricipal involvement. There's absolutely no way the principal of a school that graduates 1,000-2,000 students per year is going to have a clue about the individuals that stream through the halls every day. How many students at your school?Even at my high school, graduating about 450 students per year, it would have been a daunting task to know or recognize any but the most outstanding or the most troublesome. I would say that the middle 80-90%, or more in a large scool, are never going to register on his screen.That's why we have assistant principles and deans and counselors and aides, as well as teachers, to keep track of the students. The data is distilled to spreadsheet form and that's as far as it goes, IMO, in most schools.
*Testing is totally negative and blatantly discriminates children. Bush and Cheney should have to take a test every year to stay in office. As if they could.I know Ted Kennedy and other good senators are fighting hard to bring desparately needed money into the schools, but Bush and the conservatives have a secret agenda with the testing part. They are definately planning to identify and use the so called failing schools to destroy our public education. Just look at how many conservatives went to private schools. This is so obvious.If there has to be testing, it should be qualitative as Lisa suggested. No right or wrong answers and NO NUMBERS. That leads to statistics which could be used against teachers. They should also be prohibited from using attendance numbers because that is proven to be unfair to minorities. I think the teachers could fill out a form to indicate the best qualities of each student. It would help students much more to reinforce good things like helpfulness and neatness, rather than hound them over math and spelling errors. Kids have enough stress trying to stay alive.
*Trust me ...... Bush is on the right track. I have spent more than 35 years in education ..... most of it in higher education as an admissions director. I have seen the performance of high schools erode .... their product, for all the students they serve, is simply far less than what most of us have every right to expect. Worse yet .... the schools (districts, etc) don't really know how much it costs to educate a student .... I'll bet good builders know exactly what their product costs! Bush has placed an accountability factor that's very real ..... he simply is holding a mirror up to the words so long utilized by the schools which asserts their processes produce top quality students. It's not the students who fail ..... the schools fail ..... they fail the very people who pay for and expect their success. As an educator and a taxpayer ..... I'm glad to see accountability get a forum.
*The situation here, Lisa, is that the Head Teacher is no more than a Chief Accountant/Manager of the annual Government grant.They will definitely know how many pupils they have, because the grant is per capita, but they'd be hard put to it to recognise names -- or even faces.
*Good point, bobl.......Most teachers do teach to a test, but a good and creative teacher expands that teaching toward higher standards......In mathematics in the U.S. we have national standards, state standards, and, in our district, district standards......Our mathematics curriculum is alligned with these standards......High standards equals high student achievement(hopefully)......
*Helen .....You're talking about "testing" which clearly you believe is a "weapon" against teachers. While it is true that some teachers should be gone from the educational process .... that's not the objective of an educational accountability that is needed.... I have seen the results of "No right or no wrong answers" and other scenarios which obviate real performance. Question ... next time you fly on a commercial jet .... would you expect that the pilot had the kind of "learning" and educational process that you suggest??? No right answers ... now wrong answers ...indeed!!!!I've heard your arguments for years!!!!!! The have failed miserably!
*Ralph, I couldn't agree more....."We are not all equal going in and we will certainly not be equal going out if cookie cutter tests are used on the unprepared".......That's what bothers ME most about the new bill......The poor performing schools are and will play catch up......
*Lisa, one of my pet peeves has always been that principals should be educational leaders in any school......This is almost impossible in the larger school systems......We have almost 700 students in my school and our principal usually only sees the disruptive kids or the high performing kids in his daily routine......If they were freed up from so much bureaucracy, this "hands-on" approach could be done.....Principals have become paper pushers and disciplinarians as so much control has been taken out of teacher's hands......
*Well, Hel en Wheels,Did you pull that from a Dave Barry column, or what? Either that or it's suggestions like that that have been foisted on unsuspecting children and parents by politicians pandering to the feel-good crowd, hoping to stay at the public feeding trough. The real world doesn't care how good you feel or how much self-esteem you bring to the work place. If you can't cut the mustard with communication skills and the ability to do more than count on your fingers, just think about how good you will feel when all you are qualified to do is press the buttons with the little pictures on them at a fast food joint. And, if you don't learn, early on, that attendance is quantitative and not racial, then you won't have that job very long either.BTW, nice name and welcome if you are truly a newbie.
*Boss, are you thinking of a national standardized test? That is almost an impossibility......Now, if you're thinking of standardized test per se, that is already in place in every district......Different standardized tests are determined by the state in Ohio.....We have "Proficiency Tests" which will now be called "Achievement Tests".....Same test, different name.......Our kids now have to take 5 tests in one week, one test each day.....Thank God, this is being phased out and only certain tests will be given at different grade levels...The testing business is one of the biggest money makers in our country.......
*Ralph, were you a teacher? ......Good points and it always rankles me when changes are always labeled as "good for the children"......Children are not widgets, they are different little human beings with different learning modalities......I would love to see who would write a "Federal" test........
*James, is this what you're talking about?
*Hi Jim, I have nothing against accountability.......It is imperative to good educational practices......Please explain further how this new testing procedure will ensure greater results......
*Theodora, there are national standards in place, at least in mathematics.....It is not a bad idea, but a national test(different from national standard)seems, to me, an impossibility......
*First rule of management:You can't improve anything unless you can measure it. Standardized test are the only way I can think of to figre out which school districts need help. How else could you do it? How would you know if your approach was working?Peace.-Rob
*With standardised testing of public schools and the publication of an annual 'National League Table' as has been practised here the side effects have been as follows.Where a school has a catchment area that, eg., includes a lot of immigrant familes whose children perhaps speak English as a second language their results in the test are naturally lower.Parents who can will transfer their children to a better performing school, making the job of the first school even harder so their results are even worse.Add a monetary reward or a payment-per-capita system to this and you effectively divert resources away from the schools that need it the most.The test results then become so important that teachers have to teach to the test.You now end up with a system that does almost the opposite of what was intended.
*Bravo.........Everyone wants an educational system that teaches....If more tests are mandated, you(we)end up with a system that is only teaching toward a test.....Which, by the way, has nothing to do with accountability or learning.............A real conundrum, eh?
*Pi -Yes, I was thinking of a national standardized test. Why is that an impossibility? The "Proficiency Test" you mentioned are standard in Ohio, aren't they? I don't understand why you're saying that we can't have one standard test for the whole U.S. Seems like it would be easier to compare the results natiowide that way. > The testing business is one of the biggest money makers in our country.......Why do you say that? Please understand that I'm not picking on you or even disagreeing - I don't know a lot about this, and am curious about it since you brought it up.
*Why?
*Yes, testing discriminates. It points out where the job is getting done and where it isn't. There isn't any point in testing if not to discriminate between those students who are accomplishing what is necessary and those who aren't. Else how do you expect to identify and help them.i No right or wrong answers Some of the stuff which we expect children to learn in school involves right and wrong answers. No, I don't plan to tell a child in a creative writing class that their ideas are wrong. Yes I plan to tell them that their use of language is incorrect, if that is the case, so that they grow up able to communicate clearly and effectively in whatever writing they do. Even more importantly, there are right and wrong answers in science, math, and any number of other disciplines. It is not necessary to devastate some child's soul when pointing out what needs to be corrected.i NO NUMBERSYou mean no numbers in evaluations? Well, I agree that statistics can be manipulated, and are, but numbers are the most objective tools for measurement.Sure it is tough on a kid to be tested, but testing is not tantamount to telling a child he or she is a failure. And one of the lessons kids need to learn in school before they are loosed upon the world is that they will be held accountable for their choices and their efforts, academically as well as in other areas.God forbid we try to teach in schools, we're only supposed to be making them feel good about themselves. Life is hard work. It is reasonable to expect a child to deal with this, and it is a responsibility of our society to expect them to.
*I haven't been in 1st grade since '61. What is being taught now that was not taught then? Maybe if we start at the begining to see where we are going we can see where the map got lost. Money and tests will not fix it all. But maybe I'm wrong. Daniel
*In a previous round on the same topic I pointed out that there is now a large body of opinion, reportedly backed by data, that the principal greatly affects school achievement results over time. When principals from high-achieving schools move, the new school almost always improves, even if it was previously a high-achieving school; conversely, when principals from low-achieving schools moved, they rarely improved the performance of their new school and often depressed it.Of course, knowing this, and being able to develop and implement a policy or practise to exploit it, are two different things.
*Pi,TAAS is a thing of the past. This is the last year it will be given. We change the tests every 5 years. Next test is called the TASK. The state seems to think that the test will be too hard, and that a VAST majority of Texas students taking it will fail. The other groups that monitor and study this stuff thinks it is going to be too easy, and that the students should be able to pass tests WAY advanced of this new one. Time will tell. And no, that is not the type of tests I was refering to. I was talking about NATIONAL Standardized Achievement Tests. They let the district, the state, and the national educational groups see how the students from any given region of the country were doing, as compared to their counterparts nationally. These tests basically let everyone know if the basic educational objectives were being met, and where problems were surfacing. These tests were very basic, and I personally cannot see how they could be considered biased. Either you learn the basics of reading, writing, and arithmatic, or you don't. Politics got involved, and the tests, as they used to be, were eliminated. Just a thought...James DuHamel
*Helen,i Testing is totally negative and blatantly discriminates childrenPlease explain. This makes absolutely no sense to me, but if you would explain, maybe it would.Here's a scenario for ya: Little Johnny made it through high school, graduated, but never took any tests to determine if he actually learned anything or not. Like you, the officials at his school thought that testing was totally negative, and blatantly discrminating, so they eliminated it. Now, upon graduating, little Johnny can't read or write. I'm his dad, and I'm pissed. I want someone to explain to me WHY my son can't read or write. I sent him to school for 12 years in order TO learn. I'm looking for answers, and someone is gonna pay dearly. How would YOU respond to me? I'm asking YOU, because you believe that testing was not necessary, and actually destructive. Maybe YOU have the answer. As a father, I WOULD be suing, so could your ideology and beliefs about this stand up in court? Or would you be paying me a ton of cash?Just a thought...James DuHamel
*Interesting, until we had testing our teachers told us that high-immigrant areas would have lower results: didn't happen. As an aside, in the last 20 years it has been very rare for the top-student in the province not to be an immigrant.The result of a low test result here is additional resources, not less: they're targeting special help to low-performing schools. You can't blame testing for bad management.
*i I think the teachers could fill out a form to indicate the best qualities of each student.Well, I guess that's fine, so long as every teacher in the country used exactly the same yardstick to measure these qualities and that prejudices over race, nationality, height, weight, wealth, employment/maritial status of parents, politics, philosphy, or personality wouldn't affect the outcome.b Thenmaybe grades for helpfulness and neatness would become entry criteria for grad school.Look, as long as you're training every kid to go to university (and since the stopped streaming, that's what's happening), then you have to treat them as though you expect them to make it.
*Gosh, Pi, haven't read the bill, but I have always been for testing in my field (because I knew I would be the or one of the best maybe?) As a student, I think being tested helped me learn some things but I couldn't name one. You learn it will be part of a test, and read about it. Osmosis.Because I'm a good test-taker, I have an edge and so am likely to lean toward them. Still, e.g., there are certain "tests" (like an M.A. to teach at a prestigious Univ.) that accounts for nothing but greed because it was "stolen" (former boss now teaching Tech Writing w/a Master's he got on company funds paying a consultant to write a program for him).Tests also always remind me how much I used to know, but have forgotten!I think tests make sense, and I'm thinking of tech editing. A lot of our job is merely grammar, punctuation, and style. A junior editor could handle that. Someone w/EE or other engineering or s/w h/w background, who could do the basic and specialized should command more $. My company insists on hiring everyone, regardless of their ability, as a Senior. Unreal.
*No I can't -- I think what I'm trying to say is that testing is all very well and I'll concede it is necessary but what does need to be re-visited are the uses to which the results are put.Take the effect of publishing school to school comparisons -- these aren't really of much use when you are ignoring the demographics of the catchment areas because you are not comparing like to like.If you fund these schools on a per capita basis and the result of the comparison is that parents, where they can, take children away from a school you automatically reduce funding to that school.I grew up under the system where there were two obligatory, nation-wide exams in your school career -- at 11 and 15 years old but there wasn't the politicising of the results that there is now.As an aside, in the last 20 years it has been very rare for the top-student in the province not to be an immigrant. was that a public school student? Generally the immigrants in public schools here are disadvantaged because of the low resources given to teaching English as a second language, to the extent they are about 18 months behind -- in fact there has been a suggestion that maths should be taught in the student's mother tongue so that at least this area, which doesn't depend on a knowledge of English, won't suffer.
*That would mean we would also need a national curriculum.....If one would expect every child in every district in the country to be exposed to concepts tested, then someone had better set up a national curriculum that lays out exactly what every child should know.......Sounds daunting to me......No teacher is against assessment; testing is just one assessment....Assessment is the tool by which a child is graded, remediated, etc........We don't need more tests.......We already have them......
*Thanks, James.......Ah, you're talking about tests like the Stanford, Iowa,etc......We haven't given those tests since 1990 when Proficiency tests took over.....Remember the good ol' stainines?I, personally, don't know if a Stanford is a better indicator of achievement than a Proficiency, TASK or whatever they call it.....I just know we don't need more of them and one test is not a indication of a child's acievement/proficiency in any discipline.......
*...Morning, Pi............n...
*Morning, Newf......Still cold?
*Jim,I can see your point. After 25 years teaching high school, we too, have seen our entering product (student) come in with fewer skills and less ability to think, reason, and express oneself. I am not certain it is a fair assenssment to place total blame on the schools. We are a reflection of society. Parent's roles (and feeling of responsibilities) has changed. twenty years ago, if we called home regarding a student we would hear the parent basically saying "this won't happen again and what can Johnny do to improve his grade /situation". Now it is highly likely we hear "Johnny needs this style of learning, why didn't you provide this?" We don't have cooperation, we have fault-finding and making excuses. Lawmakers, trying to enact legislation regarding education, enact laws that just add to the red tape of daily functioning, in the hopes that it will make a difference. Schools are forced legally to perform more functions than ever before, many of them to make up for what the kids lack in society. I could go on and on. I am not looking for excuses why public education should not be held to standards. Rather, I am asking that we take a broader look at how we, as parents/society do not prepare (and maintain) our incoming students to be educated.We want our lids to excell, yet we don't establish regular hours for them, permit them to work many more hours than are reasonable, get them involved in more activities (or the converse, none) that occupy too much time, and don't spend much time with them to help model and foster the proper attitudes/behavior. We, as a society, want all the rewards but do not want to put forth the requisite efforts. No amount of legislation wil replace or accomidate those deficits. These comments are not politically "correct", they would anger the voting constituents, so lawmakers place the blame solely on one group.Testing is only a small part of the "answer" that plagues our schools and society. It is foolish to ignore the other issues, in my opinion.
*Pi,I personally think that too many people got involved in the testing aspect of our schools. Kinda like the old saying "Too many cooks spoil the broth".When I was growing up, these types of achievement tests were VERY good at finding problems. When the problems surfaced, it was up to the local administrations and teachers to work out a viable solution. I remember some of my friends being pulled aside in elementary school and being given EXTRA tutorial type lessons in whatever subject they scored poorly on. Most of the time, it worked. There were very few that were held back a grade. The teachers and administration worked hard to get these students up to their normal levels, and keep them advancing to their next grade level. I think the dedication of the local teachers and administration was a key in this. I personally feel that the less people involved OUTSIDE the actual schoold district in correcting these problems, the better. I do, however, feel that there needs to be some way of determining how well the students are really doing, and a way to find problems early on. And I think that there needs to be some kind of monitoring in place to make sure the districts are actually correcting the problems, instead of passing the blame. Schools are like any business. When you have an employee that is not performing their job to the standards they are required to, you let them go and get someone in there that can. And, like most businesses, finding qualified people is getting harder and harder to do. James DuHamel
*i these aren't really of much use when you are ignoring the i demographics of the catchment areas because you are not comparing i like to like. Ah, what we've started to call the "teacher trap"; it's basically another way of saying "somebody else's fault". That's because they're only looking at where they've been, and not the important part: where they need to go. It is a fair comparison: it compares children at age X in grade Y; and, if the test was engineered correctly, reflects a student's, class's, department's, school's, board's, city's, ... ranking in skills proficiency among their peers, and against an established standard.
*James,I like your analogy of "if an employee isn't doing their job then..."If you run a business, have you recently fired or tried to fire somebody? It is considerably more difficult nowdays than it was before. Why? Because we have an abundance of new laws and statutes protecting the worker, and ensuring due process in all situations.This is a major way how the educational system today differs from that of yesteryear. Enforcing what would seem logical and right, is often a long, arduous , proceedure of repeated warnings, documentation, and general red tape. In older days, you were expected to know the difference between right and wrong. Now , that is not an assumption you can make. Personally, after 25 years of education, I am looking forward to retirement.
*Ah, what we've started to call the "teacher trap"; it's basically another way of saying "somebody else's fault"Nevertheless, the argument has some validity, especially where it concerns primary schooling -- IMO, the most important area.The immigrant/refugee population here tends to concentrate within fairly small areas in the inner cities so that it is common to find a school with a majority of children from non-English speaking backgrounds. If, as it is, the school funding is a per capita, one-size-fits-all then they are naturally disadvantaged in that far more of their resources have to be switched to remedial English.It stands to reason that if a child's understanding of English is poor, then it's general education has to be put on hold until it is proficient enough to understand what it is being taught.I'm no teacher apologist, the two most retrograde steps in education here -- the abolition of the mandatory exam at age 11 and the introduction of the disastrous experiment of teaching children to read and write phonetically, were both teacher-union driven but neither will I accept that all the problems with public education can be laid at the teachers door.To come back to the subject of the thread, from what little teacher training I have done I have learned that an important part of a lesson plan is testing the student's comprehension of what has been taught in that lesson.If this is being done, I see no reason for further tests other than a standard nation-wide test of literacy and numeracy in primary school children before they enter secondary education.BTW, were the top performing immigrant children generally from public or private education? -- do you have a breakdown?
*Ralph, the school I'm talking about is an elementary school with 425 kids, grades K-6. I guess I don't consider "Johnny can't read" to be a problem that originates in high school. Reading competancy and test taking/study skills are in place by 6th grade, or should be. If a child can't read in 6th grade, I don't see how a 7-12th grade teacher can do much about it, unless there are special resources available in the school.When I went in to work in my son's kindergarten yesterday afternoon, the principal was already in there. She was sitting in the back, calling the kids back one by to to have them read a small book to her. There are 3 kindergarten classes, and she routinely does this kind of thing in each one. Before 1st grade she knows every child and they know her. I just have to think that makes each child feel important and also more accountable. You cannot blend in at this school!I guess I don't consider high school counselors to be a viable resource purely from my own experience in high school. Our school had about 2000 kids in it. I was very active in school and had a 3.9 GPA. But I never talked to a counselor until the obligatory senior year appt. was scheduled. He had no idea who I was, nor I who he was. When I told him that I had applied to UC Davis for the following fall, he told me that I'd never get in and even if I did I would flunk out, and then advised me to apply to the local community college. That was it. Fortunately I decided to ignore him, and graduated with honors from UC Davis 4 years later. Know the ironic thing about it? My mom was a teacher at the high school.
*"Helen",I did not say there should be no quantitative testing. I said there should be both quantitative and qualitative testing. By qualitative testing I do not mean assessing personal qualities. I mean testing the degree to which a child can implement the facts that they have stored in their head.
*In order to be able to function in problem solving, we need basic reasoning and thinking skills. Skills can be taught, and tested, or tried and improved.. We need the basic skills of reading, writing and arithmetic as elementary groundwork for more complex aspects of these same skills.Then we can more forward to using skills in combination, or getting understanding, and finally using them as life skills for our work, pleasure, satisfaction, profit, and contentment. I see this concept in my profession of physical therapy, if someone loses a skill, as in stroke or injury, they need to relearn it, or adapt to it as best they can, in order to function. In order to more precisely decide what needs to done for or taught a patient, I do tests and measurements in order to determine which muscles need help, where it hurts and why,balance, strength, brain function, sight, hearing, and so on. This gives me a baseline from which I plan my treatment and implement the rehabilitation of the patient. Same thing is true with testing for knowledge. What is missing? and what therefore needs to be taught.
*Don't you test both for "knowledge" (in your case, the level of skill or ability your patient has) and "understanding" (in your case, what the patient is able to do with that level of skill)? They may never recover the finger they lost, but if they can do everything they need to do, isn't their therapy still considered successful?This is quite relevant to me, as I have two 10 year old sons with ADHD. They will never learn the way that other people learn. They will never test the way other people test. Does that mean there is no option but to consider them failures of the school system? History shows that very often, these are the same people who, in adulthood, think outside the box and end up stretching our knowledge base instead of just operating within it. My uncle flunked out of kindergarten. He had a career as a rocket scientist with JPL. How can we better measure the capabilities of all students, not just those gifted at taking tests? Seems to me that's imperative if we want a true idea of how successful our schools really are.
*Lisa ......I read your comments with great and respectful interest. I suspect that we tend to believe that "testing" focuses only on the "pass" or "fail" syndrome. Rather, I believe we need to focus on the broad aspect of the INFORMATION and data that test results provide. We should never approach testing, in the national context, based upon an individual's performance on any given day but rather focus on the data derived from testing on a very broad basis. Testing is very much like an audit ..... it identifies areas of strength and areas needing improvement. It therefore helps administrators, planning and budget folks, curriculum designers, parents, and all who are concerned with the well being of their schools continually refocus where resources in the schools are best utilized. I've seen this work. Testing is not a silver bullet .... it has obvious limitations ..... testing is like tracks in the snow .. tells one where we have been but does little to do with where we're going. Even good data in the very vest of controlled testing scenarios won't provide good management decisions. Testing results (data) is a little like riding off into the future looking into the rear view mirror! As an administrator in higher ed. for over 3 decades, I appreciated good data .... but I would like to believe I understood the limitations of the data ... always wanted to hear the related qualitative scenarios. Thanks for your opinion.
*I agree, James.......Testing/remediation/accountability go hand in hand......I guess that was my initial response to the bill - not another agency getting involved in education......If testing is used properly, it is for the child and his/her educational strengths/weaknesses....If it is used improperly, it becomes an evaluative tool used to place blame.....Now, if an entire district(such as ours with over 70,000 students) is found to be in an academic emergency, there are many variables that enter into this, not just poor teaching/administration......But, when politicians stick their noses into it, the waters become even more murky....Who suffers most?Funny thing, I just found out today our district is giving the Stanford math and reading tests to all students in K-8 in May!! This is on top of the 5 proficiency tests given in March.....Help!!Yes, tests do find problems...However, I have seen many good students who are terrible test takers due to anxiety.....We are moving toward assessments that can be used along with test data......
*Hi Stan, I've got you beat by 5 years!! I know what you mean.....It is more difficult to fire someone, but, that is also being reformed.....I am a mentor for incoming teachers in our district and these newbies really have to know their stuff and will be evaluated 3 times during their first year by an assesor from the state....Hopefully, this will help eliminate poor or lacking teachers from the profession......
*i There is tremendous pressure to "teach to the proficiency tests" so that the school will rank high, which leaves too little time for anything else - e.g., additional info that goes beyond the tested material. Welcome to my experience in grade school (public school). as a child I liked it, because I did well on those types of tests, but when I got to jr. high (private school) I suddenly discovered I was way, way behind certain areas.
*Pi,I was also using the firing analogy to state how students are "protected" by our current system of rights and proceedures. These proceedural processes often cause the learning process to get off track, or slowed down. Those who often comment on how educational systems do such a poor job remember how it was when THEY were in school, which was often a long time back. MUCH has changed, including students and parent responsibilities. Doing homework has fallen off the priority list for many students. Parents say they want enforcement of rules, daily homework, etc, but are the first to excuse Johhny's actions and question yours. We coddle our kids today in many ways, giving them unrealistic expectations. I could go on, my point being it truely is not a problem that can be simplified as many want it to be. It also has roots in the fabric of our homes, personal values, and society in general. I tire of the nonsense fads promoted in our profession. Most are simply old fads, cleaned up and renamed with the PC nomenclature. We spend a lot of time spinning our wheels on useless stuff that is forced down our throats, yet we, as educators are the first to take the blame. (Today is perhaps not the best day for me to be addressing this!!) Anyway, nice to meet you, sorry for getting on the soapbox for so long.
*Stan, I understand.....I always have to laugh when these newest "educational buzzwords" are foisted on us......How about this -"special education" - "mainstream" - "inclusion" - "least restrictive environment"......Makes my head hurt......Do you teach in an urban or suburban system?.....Many would say this doesn't matter.....Sorry, I misunderstood......
*Stan,In Texas, if you ain't performing, you get fired. Plain and simple. We do not need to even have an excuse, or a reason. You can simply tell an employee that you no longer need their services, and that is the end of it. I've hired and fired many, many people over the years, in various businesses. Simple thing really, IF you follow the rules. I even got sued once - accused of firing a lady for being African American. She couldn't prove anything at all, especially since the lady I hired to replace her was also African American. She got fired because she could not do the job she was hired to do. She lied on her resume and application about her skills, and when her actual skills (or lack of) came to light, she hit the door. Once the judge heard all of the story, especially the part about her lying about her skill level, her complaint fell on deaf ears. Judge dismissed the suit. Teachers here are not protected by the unions. When I was teaching, we would lose at least 10 teachers every year to being fired for incompetence. The three unions that represented our teachers would not take up for them. Not every district does this, but mine sure did, and we knew that our jobs were on the line. Test scores were only a MINOR part of our competency evaluations. Teaching ain't an easy profession, and you really have to love it to stick with it. Just an opinion...James DuHamel
*Lisa,Your two children are a prime example of why WRITTEN testing is not the ONLY testing that should be implemented. As a teacher, I gave all kinds of evaluative type tests to my students. The goal was not to determine if they passed or failed, but to determine if they were comprehending the lesson material, and if not, what areas they needed more help in. I even gave finals in various forms. Each student learns in a different manner, so testing should also be done in different manners. I have seen WAY too many teachers that use a standard written test (year after year) simply to cut down on the time and trouble necessary to make up a test. In other words, they opt for the fastest way to get the test done, and out of the way, as well as the fastest way to get the things graded. That, of course, is a whole nother story in itself.A good teacher can reach ANY student, and teach them. The teachers find out how each student BEST learns, and when teaching that student, focuses on that method. Overcrowding in the classroom makes this difficult, but not impossible. The whole idea of testing is to find out what areas a child needs more work in, and what areas they are strong in. The idea of testing for pass or fail standards is, in my opinion, a different kind of testing. That particular kind of test is simply in place to determine if the child has learned enough to move on to the next level of learning (grade level). The national type tests should ONLY be used to determine the weak areas a child needs help in.Just an opinion...James DuHamel
*Pi,I teach in a suburban system outside of the Detroit area. Our kids are from upper middle class backgrounds (most) and parental expectations high. What disturbs me is the attitude. For instance. At conferences a mother comes up to me without announcing herself, looks at her daughters report card, tosses it in front of me and says "This is NOT acceptable!" I took the card, read the students' name and asked her " I hope you have told that to Mary!, and introduced myself.We are dealing with Block scheduling at our high school--a "latest and greatest" trend in education. This is our 5th or 6th year of it. Many like it , although as math teachers, we (our department) find it to have too many disadvantages regarding student learning. In Michigan we have our school per-pupil funding tied to test scores of the kids on a statewide test. If your scores fall, so does funding. Fortunately we have been evolving into a more socially upscale district and the resultant influx of students who come from parents who posess more education and value learning, has been to our advantage.We have been told to teach to the test. Teach each and every testable criteria on the test. It is sad to see it come to this.
*i At conferences a mother comes up to me without announcing herself, looks at her daughters report card, tosses it in front of me and says "This is NOT acceptable!" I took the card, read the students' name and asked her " I hope you have told that to Mary!, and introduced myself. Good for you, Stan! A comment such as that is really out of place from a parent, esp if you've never met before. How rude.
*"...Teachers here are not protected by the unions. When I was teaching, we would lose at least 10 teachers every year to being fired for incompetence. The three unions that represented our teachers would not take up for them. Not every district does this, but mine sure did, and we knew that our jobs were on the line. Test scores were only a MINOR part of our competency evaluations..."James,I hope you won't mind me playing devils' advocate for a moment. :)If it is that easy to get rid of those Texas teachers who are not performing adequately, and all kids can learn, Texas test scores on standardized tests must be at the top end in the nation, right?I am not familiar with the actual ranking, but I'm relativly confident Texas test scores are not. So why is this the case?This is where my points on parents/attitudes/society all play in. No, it certainly is not used as a scapegoat to deny accepting responsibility for a teachers performance, but it IS a complex problem. (If it WERE simple, it would have been solved long ago, and we wouldn't be having this discussion!)As for all students able to learn, I'm not sure I can completely agree. Being a math teacher (high school) we see students who struggle despite all the best efforts of dedicated, knowledgeable staff. These students are "topped out" mathematically at that level. Often maturity plays a role. A few years from now, some go back and re-enter their math studies and find they can go onward. Some cannot. We are not all capeable of reaching the same levels of performance as the most briliant in our society. (compound miters anyone??)I agree with squential tests as "hurdles", they allow us to catch a student who might slip through to the next level without having acquired the skills. What I don't agree on, is how our politicians and administrators end up using these tests as devices to serve their own purposes.gain, just and opinion,regards,
*Kai,Thanks. Unfortunately, that defensive parental posturing is occuring more and more often as the years go on. Seems as current society we find ourselves drawing lines and taking sides, rather than working together on the major problems.
*Stan,I said that not every district in Texas does this (openly fires incompetent teachers). Mine did, and as far as ranking goes, they (my district) were ranked Exemplary 9 years in a row (2000 school year was the ninth year, 2001 results not yet in). Exemplary means that at least 95% of ALL stuents passed the TAAS tests for all grade levels given. I have seen Texas districts that couldn't pass 40% of the students. They were put on watch, and have been reorganized in some cases (new administrators and new overseers from the state). The unions that represent the teachers are not supportive here unless it is a matter that violates a teacher's rights, or is just plain illegal. They will, however, provide a lawyer for you. I still believe all students can learn. They may reach their learning limits at the advanced stages of a subject, but basic math can be taught to every mainstream student I have ever seen. Trig and Calc may be a different matter. Addition, subtraction, multiplication, and division can be taught, one way or another.Just a thought...James DuHamel
*Testing improves driving.
*By "top performing", I mean THE top performing students, the ones who get their picture in the paper for getting 99.99% in their final year. They only honour those in the public systems. I live in a high-immigrant area, I could take you to entire plazas (aka: shopping malls) where English is a foreign language that are within a 10 minute drive from my home. The schools around here all did comparatively well in last year's proficiency testing. Then again, we have separately funded ESL classes.I truely believe you've got your "mords wixed" with the phonetics, in most countries the disasters were with whole language.
*Maybe I've got the label wrong -- I thought they called it Phonetics.They started by telling us at PT night that there was this new system and we were not on any account to try to help teach our children to read because it would muddle them. They had introduced new characters into the alphabet to replicate different sounds made by the same letters in different words, so cat was to be spelled kat because that was how c sounded before an a ---- or whatever. It was worse for my youngest two because we had taught them the basics pre-school so they had to unlearn. It must have been around 1967 or so -- I only know that the result is an eldest son who has a degree in English and two younger ones who are hardly able to tell the difference between the usages of 'there', 'their' and 'they're'.I jumped up and down on the headmaster about it at a school function some years later, complaining about how bad my youngest's spelling was despite our help and his reply was that they weren't too concerned about spelling, more about how the child expresses itself.As you can tell, it still rankles nearly 25 years later.I found when I lived in Australia that by and large the Asian immigrants were top in the qualifying exams for tertiary education in the public schools.
*Ah, maybe I just misunderstood what you were saying - I thought you were describing the English equivalent to the "pin yhen" system used in Taiwan, which isn't too bad when semi-romanized characters are used, but it's a disaster when they use the new Chinese phonetic symbols - the kids end up memorizing two sets of characters. I recall that there was a free-association spelling experiment in the US (and probably other places) in the 70's where, so long as the letters could make a sound like the word sought, it was okay.
*a free-association spelling experimentYes, that sounds right -- it was teacher union driven here but the problem was that the children left primary education at the age of 11 functionally illiterate and the secondary schools had the problem of dealing with it.The nation-wide exam at age 11 would have caught it of course, had not the teacher unions successfully lobbied for that to be done away with before the experiment started.
*James,thanks for the clairification on all students can learn. Unfortunately some of the criteria on our statewide test involve concepts as high up as trig, so we end up with the mandate that trig must be incorporated into all levels of math. Test makers often need to keep in touch with reality, especially when you start waving funding and accountability with performance on those tests!
*Testing improves GC competence/ethics.
*...Evening, Pi......???...
*Hi Newf, just got home......Teachers at my school had to make a "road trip"......Friday and all!!
*...Road trip???......Do tell..................Thread hijack warning......n...
*Stan, I guess you have parents who are interested in their kids' education......We are lucky if we can get a parent in....Your scenario of a parent throwing a report card down is classic, as though it were your fault it is not acceptable.....We're one of the few professions where blame is placed first on us and some parents feel they can speak to us in any manner they wish.....Block scheduling is done in our school for literacy(another buzzword).....We do team teaching which helps and the kids are grouped flexibly based on their proficiency reading scores.....Yes, it is sad that we have to teach to a test, but when you're evaluated on these scores, most teachers do it......Interesting that your pupil funding is tied to test scores.....This is what bothers me about the current bill......If that becomes the case, our district will lose a big chunk of money!! Cleveland district, according to today's paper, will receive about $8 million under the new federal guidelines.....That doesn't even pay for the supplies......Our funding is tied in with attendance and socio-economic scales, not test scores......Good luck with the rest of your year.......
*I'll highjack just for a moment......Uh, liquid refreshment at the local watering hole!!....The note goes around at dismissal time - "Time for a road trip".......Even the psychologist and two social workers joined us.......
*...Pi ......Too COOL!!!...
*I must be missing something, or mabee its just Friday, but what does G"GC" stand for?Interesting about the ethics part. In Michigan we have had a number (perhaps as many as 10-20) reports of schools violating test ethics. When you tie the funding to it--the stakes are high, and peoples worst traits can emerge!
*General Contractor.
*Testing improves architects, designers, hairdressers, mechanics.
*...And pilots......Pi says we're on the same plane............n...
*Lisa, in my case in gets a little clearer if you think of it as physical abilities-disabilities. If retraining or new learning is required, some of the success of this is dependent on my abilities to teach and on the patient's ability to learn. Even if there is a communication deficit, physical activity can be trained and taught, caught, even enjoyed. One thing I know, if left alone and not taught, loved, handled, talked with, and worried over, a child with a physical "handicap" will not do many things that they would be able to do if taught and given the proper adaptive equipment and environment to help them function. Remember the stories about re-training that polio victims went through, learning to use other muscles in place of ones that were paralyzed by the disease? We have the ability as humans to adjust and adapt and learn to function under all kinds of deficits, to come as close to the norm as we can.I use tests and measurements to help determine what level of function a patient is at physically. Aren't scholastic tests and measurements used to determine what level of academic learning-knowledge-understanding a student is at? This is where private tutoring and voucher schools sneak into my view. If teachers don't have time to remediate children who have not learned certain skills, why not let those who are willing to, do so?
*"a free-association spelling experiment"Ah ha! One system in which my twins could have excelled. LOL!!
*The experiement was a terrible disaster. Because children will always stretch and go beyond the rules, it was incorrectly assumed that taking away the rules would allow to children to expand even more rapidly, particularly if they rarely hit an obstacle (like and audult telling them had made an error): wrong, children like narrow, hard and fast rules, and then they quite naturally try to stretch and test them; the trick has always been to know when to say "no" and when to let them go.
*