An Olive Branch

AJW wrote:

"Jay Honeck" wrote
"Frank....H" wrote


We want to be the best test takers in the world!

You know, everyone makes fun of this -- but what other option is there?
How else can you measure the overall success of an educational system
than
by using standardized tests?


snip


No easy answers that's for sure. What I really object to is the emphasis
placed on these standardized tests. It seems they are the sole
determinant and they are too unreliable to be given so much weight.

Okay, so...what other options *are* there? We're talking about millions
of students here -- how can we assess our national educational system
without some sort of standardized testing?

There are no other ways to fairly do it. And, if people are dead-set
against standardized testing, the only other viable alternative is to tell
the Feds to stay out of education altogether, and leave it up to the
states. But then you end up with a national disgrace like the East St.
Louis district... (And hundreds of others like it.)

There are no easy answers. No Child Left Behind is, at least, an attempt
to
fix the system. But it's going to need some significant modifications to
make it work.

For what it's worth, you may remember that piece of paper in your pocket
that grants you the right to fly had as one of its components a written
test. Would you want to flay as a passanger with someone as PIC who could
NOT pass the written? I'm talking about the general case, not some special
case you might use as an example.

The issue of testing, I think, has to do with test design, as opposed to
testing or not testing. A well designed test in fact measures what it's
supposed to, without too many false positives or false negatives. I would
rather have a panel of peer selected experts design a test to determine
how well for example a teacher's class is learning instead of hearing that
teacher's opinion, or even that teacher's supervisor's opinion.


You said it Jay, there are no easy answers. I would add there are no cheap
ones either. AJW uses the analogy of our pilot certificates and the written
portion of obtaining them. He goes on to point out the flaws of
standardized tests. I would expand it however to include the whole process.

So to answer to you question 'what other option is there' might include a
provision to evaluate the students in an additional way so as to augment
the standardized tests. A 'practical' standards test as it were.

Again, I don't advocate eliminating the tests altogether. I'm just very
concerned that there is too much emphasis put on the results of one test.
Especially given what we know about the flaws of such a test. I do believe
the federal government has a role though.

Part of their role should be to set some minimum standards regarding
equipment, class size, etc. A large part of what is wrong with the current
system is that it attempts to equate the results of learning opportunities
afforded a student in a school with plenty of computers and 1:25 teacher
student ratio with one limited to hand me down text books who talks to a
teacher once a week.

It isn't right to punish schools that are deemed to be doing poorly in the
absence of a way to measure whether or not they have the resources required
to meet those standards.


--
Frank....H

Part of their role should be to set some minimum standards regarding
equipment, class size, etc. A large part of what is wrong with the current
system is that it attempts to equate the results of learning opportunities
afforded a student in a school with plenty of computers and 1:25 teacher
student ratio with one limited to hand me down text books who talks to a
teacher once a week.

It isn't right to punish schools that are deemed to be doing poorly in the
absence of a way to measure whether or not they have the resources
required
to meet those standards.

As I understand "No Child Left Behind", the ultimate goal is that the
failing schools are "punished" by being eliminated.

This, as everyone would probably agree, is a good thing. Schools with
hand-me-down textbooks and students who talk with teachers but once a week
really don't qualify as "schools" in today's world. This threat of
elimination mimics the free market system that keeps businesses efficient,
and should (in theory) act to keep the under-performing schools in line, as
the local school districts will have to either respond with more funding, or
close the school.

I'm no expert, but it appears that this radical approach is what it's going
to take to repair many of our long-broken school systems.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

Jay Honeck wrote:

Part of their role should be to set some minimum standards regarding
equipment, class size, etc. A large part of what is wrong with the
current system is that it attempts to equate the results of learning
opportunities afforded a student in a school with plenty of computers and
1:25 teacher student ratio with one limited to hand me down text books
who talks to a teacher once a week.

It isn't right to punish schools that are deemed to be doing poorly in
the absence of a way to measure whether or not they have the resources
required
to meet those standards.

As I understand "No Child Left Behind", the ultimate goal is that the
failing schools are "punished" by being eliminated.

That's the way I understand it too. And as I said, if they meet some minimum
standards to begin with then there is a basis for it.

This, as everyone would probably agree, is a good thing. Schools with
hand-me-down textbooks and students who talk with teachers but once a week
really don't qualify as "schools" in today's world.

I wholeheartidly agree. But they do exist and are included in the test
results.

This threat of
elimination mimics the free market system that keeps businesses efficient,
and should (in theory) act to keep the under-performing schools in line,
as the local school districts will have to either respond with more
funding, or close the school.

Indeed that is the stated theory. Sounds good but under further scrutiny
there are some flaws.

The obvious one is funding. Without minimum standards to judge by we may not
know if additional funds will be effective. What if the local community
doesn't have the funds?

And what happens if we do close the school. If they didn't have enough money
to to make the existing one work where does the money for the replacement
come from? Or is there no replacement?

The biggest drawbacks I see are that there is no provision for identifying
_why_ a school is failing and relying on the vagaries of local funding.


I'm no expert, but it appears that this radical approach is what it's
going to take to repair many of our long-broken school systems.

Repair or eliminate? Some see this initiative as a way to expand the voucher
program and drive more children towards private (religious) schools at
public expense. Given that the provisions seem to make failure an almost
self fulfilling prophecy in some cases and the remedies are underfunded
give credence to that notion.

We all seem to agree that the school system needs help. Bring all schools up
to a minimum level and we can begin to identify what's wrong and how to fix
it.
--
Frank....H

On Wed, 17 Nov 2004 18:02:42 GMT, "Jay Honeck"
wrote:

As I understand "No Child Left Behind", the ultimate goal is that the
failing schools are "punished" by being eliminated.

This, as everyone would probably agree, is a good thing.

Well Jay, I guess I don't agree.

Before you eliminate a school, someone had better make darned sure
that there is another school nearby to take all the kids from the
failed school (school is mandatory, right?). Is there an alternative
school nearby? If so, can it take all these children from the failed
school? If not, what the heck you going to do with all those kids?

Perhaps it would be better to evaluate exactly what's wrong with that
particular school and see if you can fix the problem.

Corky Scott

Corky Scott wrote:


Perhaps it would be better to evaluate exactly what's wrong with that
particular school and see if you can fix the problem.

Which is what in reality is happening. Before, the taxpayers would be
asked to throw fistfuls of money at the school. Now, they're starting
to look at the teachers and the administrators, which is where the
problem has almost always been.

Perhaps it would be better to evaluate exactly what's wrong with that
particular school and see if you can fix the problem.

Which is what in reality is happening. Before, the taxpayers would be
asked to throw fistfuls of money at the school. Now, they're starting to
look at the teachers and the administrators, which is where the problem
has almost always been.

PRECISELY!

For too many years, teachers and administrators at bad schools were allowed
to just shuffle under-performing students along, getting them "out of their
hair" by promoting them.

Now, for the first time, they are being held accountable -- and screaming to
high heaven.

To which, as a parent with two kids in arguably the finest school system in
America, I say "good!"... Sometimes it takes a swift kick in the pants,
financially, to wake people up to a problem.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

Ok, I've been too busy to read the newsgroups but you guys are really nuts! No
Child Left Behind does NOTHING to improve student achievement. The schools
often have little to work with in the first place and I'm not talking $$. I
teach in one of the best schools in one of the best systems in the country. My
school has an upward of 98% pass rate on the science SOL (our standards test)
but some of our kids aren't passing and no matter what I do they won't. Do you
know if you have a borderline mentally retarded student taking science for
learning disabled kids they need to pass the test? Well, if the retarded kids
can pass, how good is the test?

I had one kid (smart, I liked him) who had to go home and do 3 hours of house
work and deal the mom's, boyfriend's 19 year old just released from prison, son
sharing a room with him. The 6 degree night he only walked the dog for half and
hour mom got ****ed, loaded him into the car and tried to have him locked up for
insubordination. Yeah, he was really worried about Newton's laws!

We've got kids who face safety issues everyday and no one worries about that.

No child left behind also mandates rather time consuming tests (6+ hours) for
many students. In my sister's school they tested on kid in a number of sessions
over a number of days to prove he was making progress. This child possesses
only a brain stem, nothing above it. What did that testing accomplish?

No child left behind is a great example of educational policy gone bad. High
stakes testing isn't good for anyone. Standarized tests are fine, but don't
tell kids they are failures over and over and over again when they can't help
that they have an IQ of 72.

Margy

Jay Honeck wrote:

Perhaps it would be better to evaluate exactly what's wrong with that
particular school and see if you can fix the problem.

Which is what in reality is happening. Before, the taxpayers would be
asked to throw fistfuls of money at the school. Now, they're starting to
look at the teachers and the administrators, which is where the problem
has almost always been.

PRECISELY!

For too many years, teachers and administrators at bad schools were allowed
to just shuffle under-performing students along, getting them "out of their
hair" by promoting them.

Now, for the first time, they are being held accountable -- and screaming to
high heaven.

To which, as a parent with two kids in arguably the finest school system in
America, I say "good!"... Sometimes it takes a swift kick in the pants,
financially, to wake people up to a problem.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

No child left behind is a great example of educational policy gone bad.
High
stakes testing isn't good for anyone. Standarized tests are fine, but
don't
tell kids they are failures over and over and over again when they can't
help
that they have an IQ of 72.

It sounds like you've identified an absurd part of No Child Left Behind that
we talked about to some degree (that thread is months old). There is no
justification for requiring a retarded child to pass ANY kind of
standardized test, period.

But that doesn't mean No Child Left Behind is a bad program -- it merely
means it needs to be fine-tuned to not include kids with mental
disabilities.

Bottom line: For the first time schools nation-wide are having to prove that
they are actually educating the children in their care. This seemingly
innocuous requirement has stirred up a firestorm of resentment and
objections, which, IMHO, says volumes about what has really been going on in
our schools.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

On Thu, 16 Dec 2004 16:46:01 -0500, Margy Natalie
wrote:

Ok, I've been too busy to read the newsgroups but you guys are really nuts! No
Child Left Behind does NOTHING to improve student achievement. The schools
often have little to work with in the first place and I'm not talking $$. I
teach in one of the best schools in one of the best systems in the country. My
school has an upward of 98% pass rate on the science SOL (our standards test)
but some of our kids aren't passing and no matter what I do they won't. Do you
know if you have a borderline mentally retarded student taking science for
learning disabled kids they need to pass the test? Well, if the retarded kids
can pass, how good is the test?

This sounds like a modernized version of "outcome based education" and
most of us know how well that worked.

Passing a kid who does not have the capability of doing the work is
not doing them any favors. Passing a kid who won't do the work is not
doing them any favors either.

I feel sorry for the kids in situations that prevent them from doing
their work, but again that is not the schools, or teachers fault and
it is not doing the kind any favors by passing them.

Lowering the qualifications for passing the tests does everyone a
disservice.

Let's face it, If you or I, or any adult doesn't have the capabilities
to do a job we were hired to do, we are fired. If we don't do the
work, regardless of our capabilities we still get fired. What happens
to the kid who is passed through school without the ability to do the
work, or who doesn't do the work? At best they can hope for menial
labor and the odds are they won't do well there either.

Life is harsh. If we don't have the education we can not compete. If
we don't have the capability, we can't compete. There are many who
just do not have the capability to do so and the system has to
accommodate them, but it shouldn't drag the entire educational system
down in the process.

Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com