Why should education be a state controlled issue?

[Beaker]

(08-12-2016, 10:32 AM)fredtoast Wrote: Who wants a bunch of people who have the knowledge to give correct answers to questions.

It is much better for them to know "content" and give wrong answers, right?

Problem solving skills, and critical thinking to be able to figure out correct answers are much more important than memorization or definition reciting needed to pass standardized testing. His statement about not teaching to the test is a valid point. Part of the problem with federally mandated standards is the unusually large amount of weight those standards give to the standardized test results as a way to evaluate school/teacher effectiveness. This causes many districts to alter their curriculum and teaching methods with the main focus being that the students do well on those standardized tests. Those tests not only require little critical thinking, they also cover a very narrow range of the subject matter. In short, the standardized tests are a very poor indicator of student performance for many reasons other than the few I just stated. A good teacher teaches way beyond the test, and teaches skills that will serve the student well as they move up in grade level and into life. So yes, it is better for the students to learn skills beyond parroting the correct answers on a standardized test.

[GMDino]

(08-12-2016, 10:47 AM)Beaker Wrote: Problem solving skills, and critical thinking to be able to figure out correct answers are much more important than memorization or definition reciting needed to pass standardized testing. His statement about not teaching to the test is a valid point. Part of the problem with federally mandated standards is the unusually large amount of weight those standards give to the standardized test results as a way to evaluate school/teacher effectiveness. This causes many districts to alter their curriculum and teaching methods with the main focus being that the students do well on those standardized tests. Those tests not only require little critical thinking, they also cover a very narrow range of the subject matter. In short, the standardized tests are a very poor indicator of student performance for many reasons other than the few I just stated. A good teacher teaches way beyond the test, and teaches skills that will serve the student well as they move up in grade level and into life. So yes, it is better for the students to learn skills beyond parroting the correct answers on a standardized test.

Rep.

I went to Catholic schools from 1st thru 12th.  I got great grades and learned a lot.  But I was not prepared for college and having classes where the teacher didn't just feed the info to you for you to give back on a test.

Took me a year to figure out how to study and REALLY learn.

[fredtoast]

(08-12-2016, 10:47 AM)Beaker Wrote: Problem solving skills, and critical thinking to be able to figure out correct answers are much more important than memorization or definition reciting needed to pass standardized testing. His statement about not teaching to the test is a valid point. Part of the problem with federally mandated standards is the unusually large amount of weight those standards give to the standardized test results as a way to evaluate school/teacher effectiveness. This causes many districts to alter their curriculum and teaching methods with the main focus being that the students do well on those standardized tests. Those tests not only require little critical thinking, they also cover a very narrow range of the subject matter. In short, the standardized tests are a very poor indicator of student performance for many reasons other than the few I just stated. A good teacher teaches way beyond the test, and teaches skills that will serve the student well as they move up in grade level and into life. So yes, it is better for the students to learn skills beyond parroting the correct answers on a standardized test.

For whatever reason what teachers were doing was failing.  There have to be some way to judge their progress.  I just don't know a better way.

Perhaps instead of just complaining about tesst teachers should propose some other type of test that meausres "critical thinking".

There have to be some standards that should be met.  Otherwise we have a bunch of teachers producing students that know nothing.  Teachers are no different from any otherr people.  they don't want to admit when they are wrong or not doing their jobs.  We can't just let them say "Yeah, your kid can fails at math, history, and reading comprehension, but I did a great job teaching him 'critical thinking'."

[BmorePat87]

(08-12-2016, 10:32 AM)fredtoast Wrote: Who wants a bunch of people who have the knowledge to give correct answers to questions.

It is much better for them to know "content" and give wrong answers, right?

Because memorizing the specific way that the test defines a vocabulary word won't get you as far in life as being able to critically read nonfictional text or construct an argumentative essay. This is why my midterm and final in US History are centered around analyzing documents related to each unit and answering questions related to them. Each set of documents then has an essay prompt and students choose 2 of the 10 to respond to. I want to measure these skills.

It also perpetuates the notion that standardize testing is the best metric for measuring a student's performance or the growth of a school, something that is completely at odds with what every single teacher learns. Which gets us back to my point about the needs of students varying. This is why teachers are trained to try to focus on differentiated instruction. We know students do not learn the same way. They also do not demonstrate what they know the same way. I try to offer a variety in my exit tickets after a lesson. This could mean choosing between drawing a political cartoon or answering a prompt with a short paragraph. If you think every kid chooses to draw, you'd be wrong. 

[BmorePat87]

(08-12-2016, 11:21 AM)fredtoast Wrote: For whatever reason what teachers were doing was failing.  There have to be some way to judge their progress.  I just don't know a better way.

Perhaps instead of just complaining about tesst teachers should propose some other type of test that meausres "critical thinking".

There have to be some standards that should be met.  Otherwise we have a bunch of teachers producing students that know nothing.  Teachers are no different from any otherr people.  they don't want to admit when they are wrong or not doing their jobs.  We can't just let them say "Yeah, your kid can fails at math, history, and reading comprehension, but I did a great job teaching him 'critical thinking'."

My evaluation process is based off of the Danielson Framework. It measures my instruction and classroom environment via observations and my lesson preparation and professional responsibilities via artifacts that are collected throughout the year. This counts for a percent of my yearend score. In addition to that, I choose two "Student Learning Objectives". These are two skills I want to teach and demonstrate student progress in by the end of the year. One is content based and one is literacy based. I personally use political cartoon analysis and argumentative writing. I then select a rubric (I modify the county rubric and use that) and I give a baseline. Students are graded and then goals are set based on their initial grade. 

http://www.ciu20.org/cms/lib07/PA01916263/Centricity/Domain/13/FFT%20SmartCard.jpg


There is no perfect answer to "how can we measure student and teacher performance" with just one metric. The Kasich mentality that teachers just sit around complaining about things instead of doing is asinine and insulting to a whole profession. It also demonstrates ignorance towards the current state of education. What we do know is that requiring schools to focus on standardize testing is not helping our kids be better learners. It is requiring teachers to focus less on building necessary skills to be successful and focus more on teaching to a test. 

Those standards that should be met are addressed in the Common Core State Standards. This is why we are teaching kids the why of math in addition to the how. It's why the standards for social studies focus on skills like comparing sources, evaluating the validity of sources, using evidence, and critically reading. If your kid comes out of my US History class understanding how to critically read a document but doesn't know what year WWI ended, he is far better prepared for college and life than the kid who can't read a document but knows the order of the Presidents. There's no "Know-Nothing" in my class... we start AFTER the Civil War. 

[fredtoast]

(08-12-2016, 11:55 AM)BmorePat87 Wrote:  The Kasich mentality that teachers just sit around complaining about things instead of doing is asinine and insulting to a whole profession. 

I never said anything like that.

All I said was that the way our education system worked for years was failing and something had to be done to hold teachers and/or school administrators accountable.

Here in Tennessee when they put a program in place to evaluate teachers based on classroom observations the teachers complained about that also.  It sure seems like teachers complain about every attempt to hold them accountable.

I agree that just memorizing facts does not help a  student, but these standardized tests also include reading comprehension.  And I don't care if a student can tell me what year WWII started, but I would hope they would be able to answer a multiple choice question about the issues that led to the conflict.  I am pretty sure those types of questions are included in these tests.

[Beaker]

(08-12-2016, 11:21 AM)fredtoast Wrote: For whatever reason what teachers were doing was failing.  There have to be some way to judge their progress.  I just don't know a better way.

On the first sentence I contend that "failing" has much more to do with than just teachers. That's not to excuse bad teachers, only to say that there are more factors than simply the teachers that go into student success.

On the second sentence, I have put forth ideas in previous education threads that teacher evaluations should also consider a spectrum of factors, not simply standardized test scores. Without going into great detail, things unannounced and announced classroom observations, administrator "interviews" to go over methods and lesson planning, and even things like a panel of parents who could be involved in the evaluation process.

Evaluation based solely upon standardized testing is not fair for teachers since every year you have a different cohort of students come through, and some years the mix of kids is simply better performing than other years, for a myriad of reasons. A teacher getting a bad evaluation based upon a difficult group of kids one year is a little myopic.

[BmorePat87]

(08-12-2016, 12:37 PM)fredtoast Wrote: I never said anything like that.

All I said was that the way our education system worked for years was failing and something had to be done to hold teachers and/or school administrators accountable.

Here in Tennessee when they put a program in place to evaluate teachers based on classroom observations the teachers complained about that also.  It sure seems like teachers complain about every attempt to hold them accountable.

I agree that just memorizing facts does not help a  student, but these standardized tests also include reading comprehension.  And I don't care if a student can tell me what year WWII started, but I would hope they would be able to answer a multiple choice question about the issues that led to the conflict.  I am pretty sure those types of questions are included in these tests.

Your response to me saying you're repeating Kasich's mentality that teachers sit around and complain is to tell me anecdotal evidence about teachers complaining "about every attempt to hold them accountable". 

I can't speak to whether or not Tennessee's program is good and if the teachers have merit in their complaints. I can speak to the fact that education is more than just teachers. You're focusing solely on teachers (with the one reference to administrators too) as the cause for "failing". What about policy makers, students, or parents? Also, how do standardize tests effectively measure a teacher? How would YOU measure a teacher? I taught three regular level American government courses (with ESOL, IEPs, and 504s) and a self contained US History class for students who had both emotional and learning disabilities (we host the regional program in the county for emotional disabilities). Is using their scores on the state assessments to grade me fair if it is the same metric used for the teacher teaching all AP American Government or GT (gifted and Talented) US History?

You started this thread by suggesting that states are failing in education and that the federal government should take over because businesses need to know that a diploma from state A means the same as a diploma from state B. Let's ignore that this is the reason why states voluntarily created the CCSS. How will the federal government stop schools from failing? I asked in my first response what kind of federal control you were suggesting. I still want to know. 

[*PhilHos*]

(08-12-2016, 12:38 PM)Beaker Wrote: On the first sentence I contend that "failing" has much more to do with than just teachers. That's not to excuse bad teachers, only to say that there are more factors than simply the teachers that go into student success.

If anything, I'd wager that poor parental guidance is more of a problem than bad teachers. 

[fredtoast]

(08-12-2016, 01:17 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: You're focusing solely on teachers (with the one reference to administrators too) as the cause for "failing". What about policy makers, students, or parents? 

this is completely false.  I have never focused on the teachers and in fact I have asked what we can do to address the problem of poor parenting.  Standarized tests are not used just to judge teachers.  they are also used to compare different schools systems.

By your knee-jerk reaction is a pertfect example of the problem with many teachers today.  They don't care about looking for answers.  all they care about is protecting themselves from any possible judgement.

(08-12-2016, 01:17 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: How will the federal government stop schools from failing? I asked in my first response what kind of federal control you were suggesting. I still want to know. 

1.  The federal government will have the benefit of looking at what successful states are doing and implementing those practices in the lower performing states.  Right now the states that are failing have no idea what they are doing wrong because all they know is what they are doing.

2.  Equalize funding.  The poorer states generally underperform compared to the more wealthy states, and even within states the better funded schools are generally more successful than the poorer schools.  Money alone does not solve all problems, but the fact is that better funded schools generally do better than poor schools. 

3.  Dilute the influence of local politics.  Too many education issues become political issues on the local level.

[fredtoast]

(08-12-2016, 02:57 PM)PhilHos Wrote: If anything, I'd wager that poor parental guidance is more of a problem than bad teachers. 

I find it hard to believe that parenting skills vary that much from state to state.  I think parnets are pretty much the same across the United States.

[BmorePat87]

(08-12-2016, 03:34 PM)fredtoast Wrote: this is completely false.  I have never focused on the teachers and in fact I have asked what we can do to address the problem of poor parenting.  Standarized tests are not used just to judge teachers.  they are also used to compare different schools systems.

By your knee-jerk reaction is a pertfect example of the problem with many teachers today.  They don't care about looking for answers.  all they care about is protecting themselves from any possible judgement.

In your responses to me, you have focused solely on teachers. You have repeatedly written them off as just complaining and not trying to fix anything. This is your second time responding to this claim by saying you didn't and then subsequently saying that teachers do. I am not looking to protect myself from judgement. I do a great job. I'd like bad teachers to be called out and be held accountable, but that doesn't mean I can't defend my profession. 

Also, responding to someone suggesting that parents are also to blame with "ok, how do you fix that?" doesn't take away from the fact that YOU are only blaming teachers. I assumed someone who is part of a profession that helps others and gets unfair criticism wouldn't shit on another profession that is treated the same, but I guess I was wrong. 

Quote:1.  The federal government will have the benefit of looking at what successful states are doing and implementing those practices in the lower performing states.  Right now the states that are failing have no idea what they are doing wrong because all they know is what they are doing.


2.  Equalize funding.  The poorer states generally underperform compared to the more wealthy states, and even within states the better funded schools are generally more successful than the poorer schools.  Money alone does not solve all problems, but the fact is that better funded schools generally do better than poor schools. 

3.  Dilute the influence of local politics.  Too many education issues become political issues on the local level.

1. I do not think that states with bad schools are just oblivious to the fact that they have bad schools or do not have anyone who is capable of observing what good states are doing. Why would the federal government be more successful at this?

2. We can increase federal funding without taking control of schools away from the states. 

3. Is local politics worse than national politics? Why is Congress more capable of deciding what should be taught than my local school board that is filled with experts on education or children? 

As I stated before, the federal government has had a fetishistic devotion to standardizing testing and charter schools in the last 15 years. Charter schools do not perform any better than public schools. Some are incredible and serve as a place out test out innovative new ways to teach, but, as a whole, they are not any better than a standard public school. Standardize testing reinforces a belief that has been dismissed by experts in education decades ago: that everyone learns the same way. 

This is why I asked about what areas you saw them controlling. Certification? Funding? Curriculum building? I think national certification standards are fine. I'd love to see more funding. Even a federal adoption of standards wouldn't be awful... but the federal government hasn't proven to be more competent than states in the last few decades. When politicians who have no experience in education start forcing what I do in the classroom to match a standardize test, and skill building is set aside, that's where I am not on board. 

You may write this off as me saying the federal government is bad, but I am only going off what they have offered. 

[BmorePat87]

(08-12-2016, 03:35 PM)fredtoast Wrote: I find it hard to believe that parenting skills vary that much from state to state.  I think parnets are pretty much the same across the United States.

Parental involvement and philosophy is heavily influenced by ethnicity, education, and income, all things we know vary from state to state. 

Not to say it dictates it, but it influences it. A single mom who works nights and didn't go to college may be just as a good of a parent, if not better, than the married couple who both went to college and one is always home with the kids. 9 times out of 10, the kids of the latter will outperform the kids of the former. 

My county has more of the latter while the county that borders us to the south has more of the former. That's just once piece of the puzzle. The county to the south has more crowded schools, the average family income is about 35% less, and home values are lower, meaning they are less funded and pay teachers less. As a result, experienced teachers leave to go to my county, often leaving subpar teachers and administrators.

With more poverty and less people around them who went to college, students in the county to the south will be less likely to value education. 

Students, parents, teachers, administrators, funding, they all play a role. Either way you cut it, even if the federal government gets involved, you need locality specific programs to address the locality specific needs of students.