FacebookTwitter
Hatrack River Forum   
my profile login | search | faq | forum home

  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» Hatrack River Forum » Active Forums » Books, Films, Food and Culture » So what is wrong with schools? (Page 3)

  This topic comprises 3 pages: 1  2  3   
Author Topic: So what is wrong with schools?
rivka
Member
Member # 4859

 - posted      Profile for rivka   Email rivka         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Originally posted by The Rabbit:
quote:
Originally posted by Sala:
Belle, it amazes me that a graduation exam would be discontinued in this age of test, test, test and accountability and NCLB. Wow, how are they going to get away with that?

It shouldn't. They've been pretty much done away with in one form or another in most states. The exams are still given, but you get some sort of High School Diploma whether you pass or fail.
I'm not a huge fan of the CAHSEE, and some of the court cases are still pending. But so far, it IS still in place.
Posts: 32919 | Registered: Mar 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Glenn Arnold
Member
Member # 3192

 - posted      Profile for Glenn Arnold   Email Glenn Arnold         Edit/Delete Post 
When I was in school, you could graduate with a high school diploma, and you could also get a regents diploma in a variety of specialties. I got regents diplomas in math and science.

It seems to me that the concept of grade inflation and social promotion needs redefining, or just better understanding. Students perform better when they are learning material that is easily mastered. That means that we should present material at the correct level for each student to understand so that every student should be able to average A's and B's. But when teachers (or schools) do that, they are accused of dumbing down education. To do it right, each student should be presented with material that is right for them, which doesn't mean that the curriculum is dumbed down. In a perfect world, every student should get straight A's, but it should be easily understood that an A in math for one student doesn't mean the same as an A in math for another student.

We take a diploma to mean that a student has learned a certain amount of "stuff". Employers don't look over your high school transcript and see that you completed algebra, but not analytical geometry, and make an assessment of your skills based on that information. They want a quick look at your diploma and then just want to be able to assume that means you have certain basic skill set. It would make much more sense to me to eliminate the diploma, and replace it with a transcript. "Here's what I learned," is much more valuable than: "I graduated."

There is a quote: "Education isn't about filling a bucket, it's about lighting a fire." I've seen students who couldn't read, but were enthusiastic learners. I've also seen students who could reel off facts that they'd memorized, but who hated school and did everything they could to undermine their own educations. It seems to me that prescribed curricula, no matter how basic, is just about filling the bucket. Education fails our students because forcing kids to learn some bureaucrat's wish list is guaranteed to put out the fire.

Posts: 3735 | Registered: Mar 2002  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Tstorm
Member
Member # 1871

 - posted      Profile for Tstorm   Email Tstorm         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Belle, it amazes me that a graduation exam would be discontinued in this age of test, test, test and accountability and NCLB. Wow, how are they going to get away with that?
I don't want to answer for Belle and I'm not trying to...but I had to bite on this...

No Child Left Behind is one of the drivers behind, or a direct result of, the perceived 'entitlement' of a high school diploma.

Do you honestly think the people of your state, or this country, would stand for legislation that mandated a high school graduation exit exam, the results of which would be used to determine whether a diploma was awarded or not?

Schools are being held more accountable, all right. They're being held accountable for graduating all their students. That seems to be the legacy of NCLB.

Personally, I've become pretty liberal with my belief that some students should not graduate. I'm perfectly content with the idea that some students will fail to graduate from high school and some (perhaps even more) will fail to graduate from college. I'm not saying that we should remove all accountability from schools, though.

Posts: 1813 | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Belle
Member
Member # 2314

 - posted      Profile for Belle   Email Belle         Edit/Delete Post 
They say they aren't making things easier for the students because they are replacing the grad exam with "end of course exams." The idea being, if a student takes biology in 9th grade, they'll take an end of course exam when they complete biology instead of taking the biology portion of the graduation exam.

What I have not determined yet, is whether that biology exam is standardized across the state or if they are just saying that any student who passes their final exam gets credit for the course and therefore gets a diploma. Having seen some of the final exams that are given, I can easily see how a person could be given a passing score on an "end of course exam" and not truly have learned anything. I've seen some teachers who make their final exams open book.

And Tstorm is exactly right. The NCLB requirements factor graduation rate into the adequate yearly progress rating. If your drop out rate is too high - you don't make AYP. I can almost guarantee this change is directly related to Alabama's high dropout rate - they figure if they make it easier to graduate fewer people will drop out and more schools will make AYP.

Posts: 14428 | Registered: Aug 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
The Rabbit
Member
Member # 671

 - posted      Profile for The Rabbit   Email The Rabbit         Edit/Delete Post 
Samp, Everyone of your examples support my point. Administrators create bad policies in response to unrealistic expectations from the community.

Take your first example, what were the administrators alternatives? He/she could have supported the Math teachers, kept the high failing rate and high drop out rates, but then they would have failed AYP and people would be blaming the administrator the high drop out rates. The administrator would be getting even more pressure from the school board and the legislature to do something about drop out rates and when he/ she couldn't fix the problem without lower the standards, he/she would most likely be replaced by someone who was willing to do that.

Ideally I suppose, the teacher and the administrator would come up with some plan to get more students to turn in the homework. But what tools do they have to accomplish that which they aren't already using? They can't nail the kids feet to the floor and pump math down their throats. Ninety percent of education has to come from the learners not the teachers. It the learners are not willing to do their part, the teacher is left with few if any options.

NCLB simply codified what the community expected from schools without actually providing any ideas about how schools should meet those expectations or providing them with any resources to do it. Its just one in a long line of examples of how the community expectations for schools are completely out of touch with the on the ground reality of teaching and learning.

[ September 12, 2009, 09:11 AM: Message edited by: The Rabbit ]

Posts: 12591 | Registered: Jan 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Sala
Member
Member # 8980

 - posted      Profile for Sala           Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
They say they aren't making things easier for the students because they are replacing the grad exam with "end of course exams." The idea being, if a student takes biology in 9th grade, they'll take an end of course exam when they complete biology instead of taking the biology portion of the graduation exam.
Ahh, now I understand. We also use EOC exams here in Georgia instead of high school graduation exams. I was reading it as there being no exams, not a transfer from one type to another.
Posts: 315 | Registered: Dec 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Samprimary
Member
Member # 8561

 - posted      Profile for Samprimary   Email Samprimary         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Samp, Everyone of your examples support my point. Administrators create bad policies in response to unrealistic expectations from the community.

Take your first example, what were the administrators alternatives? He/she could have supported the Math teachers, kept the high failing rate and high drop out rates, but then they would have failed AYP and people would be blaming the administrator the high drop out rates.

Considering AYP wasn't in effect when this began and that this condition was created by a school's administration trying to avoid accountability to the district's analysis, can't say you're right on this one. The administration was trying to cover up evidence of a dire math education situation in that school, one that wouldn't really be revealed until standardized testing for the state broke the issue.

besides, I wouldn't really consider "a school with a troubled math program should reform that troubled math program" to be an unrealistic expectation from a community, and that's pretty much what it came down to once NCLB was in effect, because now it was no longer sufficient merely to get the kids to cruise through.

Posts: 15421 | Registered: Aug 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Belle
Member
Member # 2314

 - posted      Profile for Belle   Email Belle         Edit/Delete Post 
Well today I talked to a high school teacher who has heard more than I have and her understanding is that the EOC exam is actually the exact same exam they used as the Graduation Exam. The only difference is when it's taken - the Grad exam used to be given in the junior year and all subjects were given together - you'd take biology and reading one day and English and math the next for example. Now, the EOC comes at the conclusion of the course, which actually will work better for those students who take biology in their freshman year. They won't have to wait two years before taking the exam.

Looking at it in that light, it seems to be a logical choice and without any lowering of standards - the students still have to prove mastery of the same material. So if what I heard today is correct, I withdraw any objection to the change. [Smile]

Posts: 14428 | Registered: Aug 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
The Rabbit
Member
Member # 671

 - posted      Profile for The Rabbit   Email The Rabbit         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Looking at it in that light, it seems to be a logical choice and without any lowering of standards - the students still have to prove mastery of the same material. So if what I heard today is correct, I withdraw any objection to the change.
It is better than I originally thought, but it does lower standards in a back handed way. The new procedure, tests what the students have mastered at the conclusion of the course. The old standard, tested what they retained a year later. Retention is an important aspect of mastery and they will no longer be testing that. Retention isn't 100% for anyone. Assuming the passing level is kept at the same point, this is definitely lowering the standard.

Since not all students take the classes at the same time, this procedure is arguable more equitable and possibly justified. But don't fool yourself into think it doesn't lower the standards.

Posts: 12591 | Registered: Jan 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
TheBlueShadow
Member
Member # 9718

 - posted      Profile for TheBlueShadow           Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Originally posted by Belle:
Well today I talked to a high school teacher who has heard more than I have and her understanding is that the EOC exam is actually the exact same exam they used as the Graduation Exam. The only difference is when it's taken - the Grad exam used to be given in the junior year and all subjects were given together - you'd take biology and reading one day and English and math the next for example. Now, the EOC comes at the conclusion of the course, which actually will work better for those students who take biology in their freshman year. They won't have to wait two years before taking the exam.

Looking at it in that light, it seems to be a logical choice and without any lowering of standards - the students still have to prove mastery of the same material. So if what I heard today is correct, I withdraw any objection to the change. [Smile]

I was still in high school when they started the EOC exams in Georgia. It was still in its trial phase; however, so I also got to take the Georgia High School Graduation Test. They were definitely similar to the GHSGT and were treated by the school just as any other standardized test. I don't recall particulars but I'd assume having the test at the end of each course allows for more questions on a single topic.
Posts: 96 | Registered: Sep 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
The Rabbit
Member
Member # 671

 - posted      Profile for The Rabbit   Email The Rabbit         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Considering AYP wasn't in effect when this began and that this condition was created by a school's administration trying to avoid accountability to the district's analysis, can't say you're right on this one.
Irrelevant. High drop out rates were considered a problem long before AYP. You said yourself that this decision to keep the school from looking bad. Looking bad to whom? If it was just the district, why did the district care about high drop out rates? School board pressure? Pressure from the legislature? If you keep following the line, it eventually leads the community, and the fact that most members of the community expect schools to keep kids from dropping out. It still boils down to community expectations.

quote:
The administration was trying to cover up evidence of a dire math education situation in that school, one that wouldn't really be revealed until standardized testing for the state broke the issue.
That isn't consistent with what you said before. You said students were failing because they didn't turn in homework. How is that evidence of a serious problem in math education and why would a school want to cover it up. If students couldn't pass a standardized exam even after completing all work attempting all the work assigned in class, I'd agree it was the math programs fault, but you didn't say that was happen. You said the students were failing because they did not turn in home work. Was this the case or wasn't it?

You can't possibly hold the school responsible for the students not doing homework. Very few people can learn math without doing homework, I can't imagine any reforms that would have made it possible for most people to master math without doing homework. Do you really think it is the schools responsibility to force students to do homework? How can they do that? What tools do they have which they weren't already using? If the community expects that some minimum fraction of kids will pass math and those kids refuse to do the homework required for them to pass, what options do the schools have? They try harder to motivate the kids to do homework and if that fails, they either lower the standard for passing or fall short of the community expectations. The problem lies in the communities refusal to hold the kids and families responsible and placing the full burden on the schools. Its not a simple question of lilly livered administrators.

Policies that allow students to pass without doing the homework may lead to a vicious cycle that results in yet fewer students doing homework, but once again these policies are a symptom of the underlying problem not the cause.

At some point, you have to recognize the responsibility of the student in all this. No one can force kids to learn. If they don't cooperate and do their homework, they aren't going to learn. One of the biggest problems in American education is that we hold schools responsible but not kids. On of the biggest problems was with NCLB (and all similarly motivated programs that preceded it) was that it placed 100% of the responsibility on the schools for something that was not 100% in their control.

Posts: 12591 | Registered: Jan 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
The Rabbit
Member
Member # 671

 - posted      Profile for The Rabbit   Email The Rabbit         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
I don't recall particulars but I'd assume having the test at the end of each course allows for more questions on a single topic.
Not if Belle is correct that the only difference is when the exam is administered. As I said before, this new system is arguably more equitable, but it is also clearly a lower standard since the old procedure required that students be able to retain material if they had mastered it, and the new standard does not.
Posts: 12591 | Registered: Jan 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
DDDaysh
Member
Member # 9499

 - posted      Profile for DDDaysh   Email DDDaysh         Edit/Delete Post 
My favorite was on the TAKS (the Texas graduation exam) that first year. Students had to 'pass' the exam to graduate, but on the math section "passing" was a score of only 42%. Of course, many kids STILL failed, but even the ones that passed may not have known more than half of the material.

Another trick I saw played at the school where I taught - "homeschooling". I had at least 5 who I TAUGHT drop out of school, but at the end of the year the school recorded only two drop outs. How did they get away with this? They convinced the parents to "withdraw" their children and claim they would "homeschool" them. It was BS of course! One of the mothers who did this didn't even LIVE with her child. It was a pure cheat to the system!

Posts: 1321 | Registered: Jun 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Samprimary
Member
Member # 8561

 - posted      Profile for Samprimary   Email Samprimary         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
At some point, you have to recognize the responsibility of the student in all this. No one can force kids to learn.
If you at all think that is either my position or my point, you're just talking past me now.
Posts: 15421 | Registered: Aug 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Belle
Member
Member # 2314

 - posted      Profile for Belle   Email Belle         Edit/Delete Post 
Except, Rabbit, two years after you took biology, the school would re-arrange your schedule for several weeks and allow you to attend a "refresher" course with the biology teacher to get you ready for the grad exam.

One reason the state board said they made this change is to alleviate the interruption of teaching and learning that the grad exam caused. I think it might actually be beneficial. A significant amount of time was dedicated to remediating students who didn't pass the grad exam. Basically, you would make sure they passed by giving them multiple tries and having teachers doing grad exam prep before each try. This might actually save instructional time and be a more accurate measure of what students actually know, rather than what we've spoon fed them through grad exam "prep sessions" which is nothing more than teaching to the test.

I'm actually coming around to the idea that it's probably a good change.

Posts: 14428 | Registered: Aug 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
The Rabbit
Member
Member # 671

 - posted      Profile for The Rabbit   Email The Rabbit         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Originally posted by Samprimary:
quote:
At some point, you have to recognize the responsibility of the student in all this. No one can force kids to learn.
If you at all think that is either my position or my point, you're just talking past me now.
Then please explain yourself better. In the example you gave where the school administration forced teachers to wave the homework requirements in math, what was the school doing wrong in the first place? Why do you see the fact that so many students weren't turning in homework as a failure on the part of the schools math education program? What is it you think the school was trying to cover up? Was the school doing something that made it unnecessarily difficult for the students to complete the homework? Was there something they could have been doing but weren't which would have resulted in more homework being done?

So far what you have told me is that the students were failing because they hadn't completed homework. The administrators were concerned the low pass rates would be blamed on the school system, so they lowered the standards. You accuse the schools of doing this to cover up there inadequate math program but the only problem you've told me with the program was that a huge fraction of the students weren't doing the homework.

Can you see how that looks like you are holding the school responsible for something that should be the students responsibility?

Please tell me what I'm missing.

Posts: 12591 | Registered: Jan 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Samprimary
Member
Member # 8561

 - posted      Profile for Samprimary   Email Samprimary         Edit/Delete Post 
For starters, none of my points are predicated on the idea that I think you can 'force kids to learn.'

These students who were coming into that school were a problem precisely because their earlier schools had sort of 'passed the buck' on their math education. Rather than represent this resulting lack of math performance or participation, the administrators instead opted for an artificially sustained graduation rate. They took a real problem and acted in a way which was for the benefit of the adults alone, not for the benefit of education.

Yes, I recognize the responsibilities of students. I can conversely say that you need to appropriate a fair amount of recognition for responsibility that lies on the schools, when it comes to districts and schools that are ultimately dysfunctional. There are plenty of adults behaving badly in these situations. Many of them are part of the system. Many of them are protected by the system.

Posts: 15421 | Registered: Aug 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
The Rabbit
Member
Member # 671

 - posted      Profile for The Rabbit   Email The Rabbit         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Originally posted by Belle:
Except, Rabbit, two years after you took biology, the school would re-arrange your schedule for several weeks and allow you to attend a "refresher" course with the biology teacher to get you ready for the grad exam.

One reason the state board said they made this change is to alleviate the interruption of teaching and learning that the grad exam caused. I think it might actually be beneficial. A significant amount of time was dedicated to remediating students who didn't pass the grad exam. Basically, you would make sure they passed by giving them multiple tries and having teachers doing grad exam prep before each try. This might actually save instructional time and be a more accurate measure of what students actually know, rather than what we've spoon fed them through grad exam "prep sessions" which is nothing more than teaching to the test.

I'm actually coming around to the idea that it's probably a good change.

I didn't mean to argue that this was overall a bad choice. I can see many advantages to the system, including those you cite. On the whole, I think its probably a better system. But it is a lower standard, even taking into account refresher courses. S

Students who barely pass under the new system, will retain less of what they learned about biology after graduation than they would have under the old system. Retention is an important measure of mastery. The requirement that students remember the material at the end of the class is easier to meet than the requirement that they remember it two or three years later. It is a lower standard.

As for the problems of teaching to the test, this system simply shifts those problems from the refresher courses into the regular courses. It won't eliminate them. Remedial work will still have to be done for students who don't pass the test the first time. Poor students will still require multiple tries to pass the exams and teachers will still be required to prep them before each try. These problems can only be reduced if more students pass on the first try. That may in fact happen under the new system, but only because the standard for passing is effectively lower.

Posts: 12591 | Registered: Jan 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Belle
Member
Member # 2314

 - posted      Profile for Belle   Email Belle         Edit/Delete Post 
Your point about retention is a good one, and you are correct that remediation will still have to occur. No doubt about it.
Posts: 14428 | Registered: Aug 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
The Rabbit
Member
Member # 671

 - posted      Profile for The Rabbit   Email The Rabbit         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Originally posted by Belle:
Your point about retention is a good one, and you are correct that remediation will still have to occur. No doubt about it.

Thanks, and as I said, the new system has many advantages. On the whole I think I would support it. I just think its important to recognize the caveats.
Posts: 12591 | Registered: Jan 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Parkour
Member
Member # 12078

 - posted      Profile for Parkour           Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
The administrators were concerned the low pass rates would be blamed on the school system, so they lowered the standards. You accuse the schools of doing this to cover up there inadequate math program but the only problem you've told me with the program was that a huge fraction of the students weren't doing the homework.
Maybe you should read this sentence again. You name one problem, then say you can only see another one.
Posts: 805 | Registered: Jun 2009  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Tstorm
Member
Member # 1871

 - posted      Profile for Tstorm   Email Tstorm         Edit/Delete Post 
Let me take a crack at this and see if I understand what The Rabbit is saying.

1. Students were not doing the homework.
2. Schools were concerned about the low passing rates being blamed on the schools instead of the students.
3. Schools lowered the standards to pass more students.

Assuming we're just talking about the math department in SamPrimary's post, I think I understand what Rabbit's driving at.

In Sam's example, the district 'managed the problem internally', which (if I'm understanding her position correctly) is a cover-up. In summary, the district lowered the standards for students, to enable more to pass. This does not solve the underlying issue, it merely hides it from public knowledge; hence, the cover-up.

I'm not sure I agree with this, but I trust Sam to let me know if I'm misrepresenting her position. That would not be my intention, here. [Smile]

What other steps could the district have taken? Assuming that "take no action" results in public disclosure of the failing students and condemnation from the public that the school is failing. I'm interested in what other things might have been done. For the sake of the discussion, let's assume that there aren't infinite resources to tap.

Posts: 1813 | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Parkour
Member
Member # 12078

 - posted      Profile for Parkour           Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
In Sam's example, the district 'managed the problem internally', which (if I'm understanding her position correctly) is a cover-up.
And it's exactly what Rabbit *asked* for:

quote:
Sam, I don't know what systems you are looking at or what specific administrative policies you are looking at, but I'd like to know what you think motivates administrators to make these policies. You say its coverup. What exactly are they covering up?
They had a problem they had to deal with, students unwilling or unable to do math work. Instead of dealing with it they instead create new problems (no real academic standards) to cover up the issue so they do not have to put themselves at risk tackling the open issue.
Posts: 805 | Registered: Jun 2009  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
rivka
Member
Member # 4859

 - posted      Profile for rivka   Email rivka         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Originally posted by Glenn Arnold:
When I was in school, you could graduate with a high school diploma, and you could also get a regents diploma in a variety of specialties. I got regents diplomas in math and science.

That's because you (clearly) went to high school in New York State.

While I have some issues with the NY Department of Education, the Regents Exams are one of the things about NY that I think should be used as a model for more states.

Posts: 32919 | Registered: Mar 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Glenn Arnold
Member
Member # 3192

 - posted      Profile for Glenn Arnold   Email Glenn Arnold         Edit/Delete Post 
In NY you can no longer just get a high school diploma. You have to get a diploma issued by the state, and as a result of state testing.
Posts: 3735 | Registered: Mar 2002  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
rivka
Member
Member # 4859

 - posted      Profile for rivka   Email rivka         Edit/Delete Post 
I know. That has been true for quite some time -- 15-20 years, IIRC.
Posts: 32919 | Registered: Mar 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
ken_in_sc
Member
Member # 12072

 - posted      Profile for ken_in_sc           Edit/Delete Post 
Back in the 1970s, as an enlisted Airman, I applied for the Airman’s Education and Commissioning Program. You had to have 60 hours of college credit to qualify and then you had to complete CLEP (College Level Examination Program) tests to prove that you had learned something in those courses. After that, you still had to pass a local board interview and compete with everyone else who had applied. Success meant a full Air Force scholarship to complete your degree and a shot at Officer Training School. After two tries I made it. My point is that testing by itself is not bad. It has to be backed up by actual course work and not just test prep—as seems to be the practice today.
Posts: 8 | Registered: May 2009  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
  This topic comprises 3 pages: 1  2  3   

   Close Topic   Feature Topic   Move Topic   Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
 - Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:


Contact Us | Hatrack River Home Page

Copyright © 2008 Hatrack River Enterprises Inc. All rights reserved.
Reproduction in whole or in part without permission is prohibited.


Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classic™ 6.7.2