So in this article she in essence says that Charters, Privatization, Testing, Incentive Pay, etc are NOT WORKING, and that we should focus on what seems to me as the typical Liberal / Public School agenda. She references many facts and makes a convincing case.
Being an ardent NCLB supporter, of course I disagree with her. If we don't have active system monitoring that drives system adjustments, we have no idea where we are relative to the goal and no way to correct the system. It would be like a furnace without a thermostat, which makes no sense.
Now I do agree that NCLB does need some tweaks. Below are some links from our previous discussions on the topic. Some of her improvement points definitely make sense, like more early education and hire/keep only highly qualified Teachers. Though I am sure we would disagree regarding what a qualified Teacher is... She seems to like years and degrees... (ie pro-Union?) And I am not sure how she would implement and pay for her ideas.
It seems she believes that if we give the Educational and Social Services groups more money, they'll take care of the problem. Which I find funny since we tried that for decades before NCLB, and the result was a huge gap and a burning platform that allowed NCLB to get passed. (Note: NCLB was a Ted Kennedy bill (ie Liberal), Bush just signed it... She forgot to mention that.)
So what do you think, was she ever "Conservative"? Is she trying to manipulate the information and us? If so, what is her intent/motive? What are your thoughts regarding the article and the topic?
Whose Children have been Left Behind?
by Diane Ravitch on Parents Across America
Parents Across America
G2A AYP, NCLB, PDCA
G2A No More NCLB?
G2A AYP Pick your corner
G2A AYP - The Top 10 List
G2A Sir, The Class is to Hard
G2A High Stds Reqd
G2A Dead Beat Parents
G2A Teaching to Test?
Diane's Top 12
- Every pregnant woman should have good pre-natal care and nutrition so that her child is born healthy. One of three children born to women who do not get good prenatal care will have disabilities that are preventable. That will cost society far more than providing these women with prenatal care.
- Every child should have the medical attention and nutrition that they need to grow up healthy.
- Every child should have high-quality early childhood education.
- Every school should have experienced teachers who are prepared to help all children learn.
- Every teacher should have at least a masters degree.
- Every principal should be a master teacher, not a recruit from industry, the military, or the sports world.
- Every superintendent should be an experienced educator who understand teaching and learning and the needs of children.
- Every school should have a health clinic.
- Schools should collaborate with parents, the local community, civic leaders, and local business leaders to support the needs of children.
- Every school should have a full and balanced curriculum, with the arts, sciences, history, civics, geography, mathematics, foreign languages, and physical education.
- Every child should have time and space to play.
- We must stop investing in testing, accountability, and consultants and start investing in children.
26 comments:
I am a huge fan of D. Ravitch, who makes a very knowledgeable and persuasive case on what's needed in education. My only new thing to add on this topic is a link to a good MN post column:
To close achievement gap, better start early
Interesting article. Ravitch's conservative bona fides are valid--she was a Bush 1 appointee and served in his administration, and then spent much of the 90s working with conservative education think tanks.
She's the rare breed who worked tireless toward a goal, but then took deep, critical inventory of her positions, realized they weren't successful, and adjusted them accordingly. I admire that.
I don't think she's saying just throw money at education. She has very specific areas that she suggests need to be funded in order to achieve success. Of her bullet points in that article, with which do you disagree? To use your HVAC metaphor, I'd say that NCLB has been fiddling with the thermostat for the past ten years while ignoring the furnace itself.
I've always meant to read her book--this is a good reminder to get it on my library waiting list.
Here are a couple of links that give deeper background into her credentials and ideas:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704869304575109443305343962.html
http://www.npr.org/templates/transcript/transcript.php?storyId=135142895
--Annie
Annie's links:
WSJ Why I changed my Mind
Testing undermines teaching
I added her list with numbers to help this discussion.
1,2,8: I agree in concept, yet this is not an Education issue as much as a Social Services issue. And somewhere here we move from Capitalism closer to Socialism. You know my thoughts regarding enabling free loaders and fraud. (ie welfare or foolish mamas)
3: I agree, we need more of this. Per the Harlem children's zone Pipeline. And yes their pipeline calls for community building and social programs, I just don't think government bureaucrats/Unions can do this effectively.
4-7: Degrees are not the key. A functioning recruiting, performance and compensation management system is how you weed out poor performers and enable excellent performers. This can not happen as long as the Unions/System/Contracts reward degrees and time served.
9: Agreed, however this means the Schools have to be willing to give and not just ask for more. From my perspective, they seem to act like they have the answers and that the "non-educators" just have no clue. (ie collaboration goes both ways)
10&11: I agree though math, writing, reading and science can not be sacrificed for the others. They are just too critical in our modern world and to normal problem solving capability. Every child must meet the selected capability.(ie not all rocket scientists)
12: Kinda sounds like just give them the money with no accountability. You know what I think of that...
I won't bore you with my detailed analysis, and John has hit the high points, but to answer the original questions, yes, this woman may have been at least a "pragmatic" conservative at one time, and she does offer a compelling line of reasoning, but she is still wrong.
The problems are:
--Points 1,2,&3 forget to ask "WHO is responsible for these kids?" Shouldn't we be making an effort to make parents MORE responsible, rather than less?
--Point 4 is simply fallacious, because no one could ever enter the profession!
--This could be solved with the "master teachers" of point 6 teaching younger teachers how to teach, but making the master teachers into administrators costs you a great teacher and gets you a poor administrator, usually. You need a "dual track," where you can get rich being good at teaching.
--Points 5 and 7 make little sense considering the above. Good teachers and good administrators are different, and good teachers are the ones who teach well, period. Find them, develop them and reward them.
--Points 8 thru 12 are just more edu-speak, attempting to cover up the disaster that public education has been.
OK, I'll concede that public schools aren't necessarily worse, in every case, than their alternatives. But it isn't because the alternatives are the problem. If a public school fails a child, there MUST be another choice, because we don't have time to experiment with that child over and over again, hoping we find some "school that values children." NCLB's one great virtue, to me, was that it sought to remove children from failing schools, but that isn't happening. If I were king, I would give every parent a voucher for the full value of their state aid, and let the chips fall from there.
J. Ewing
You have to be kidding me? NCLB is a poor at best system to rate school progress.
It fails to take into account factors such as mobility and poor test takers. Districts have honor students who are eligible for extra help based on MCA scores and we use that to determine funding?
God forbid we should look at graduation, per state requirements and post high school education to determine how well a school is doing.
NCLB was created with a " business" mentality with no regard or knowledge as to what happens in public education.
Steve Pihl
Mr. Pihl is right that NCLB is an imperfect way of rating schools, but far more importantly it DOES require them to be rated. The detailed rating is determined by the states, and so far most state governments have seen fit to make an assessment of education based strictly on academic achievement and measure knowledge based on testing against the academic goals they set. There is nothing that prevents schools from "teaching to the test" or teaching /how/ to take a test.
All of this is as it should be. Schools should be about learning academics. No child SHOULD be left behind because the only school his parents can afford is failing him. No school should fail just because some state or federal benchmark is too "one size fits all" to be meaningful for an individual student. That is why the best "assessment" should be turned over to parents. They alone are in a position to decide if the school their child attends is best serving that particular child's learning needs. And if not, they should have the right and the means to move that child to a school which better serves those needs.
Criticize NCLB, and rightly, for requiring a flawed system of rating schools. Criticize states for imperfect assessment or poor standards, but more so for not DOING something to keep failing schools from failing to educate. At least NCLB lets us recognize the problem.
J. Ewing
John,
On #4-7 you seem to way undervalue
degrees and advanced degrees in education. As 10 years of NCLB have shown teaching all students to achieve high standards is a tremendously difficult challenge.
Having these degrees doesn't guarantee a teacher will be effective, but I think nearly all effective teachers would want to get a master's degree to increase their effectiveness. Also for principals to be effective instructional leaders, capable of evaluating and supporting teachers, they need advanced knowledge of pedagogy and considerable classroom experience.
I would love to take more classes, especially related to teaching English language learners, but any $ going for college in my house is for the education of my kids.
Hi Steve, Welcome.
I have to agree with J. The State of MN set up it's own tests and protocol.
This state by state level methodology is probably one of the systems biggest failings. How do you compare Mississippi against Minnesota when they have different tests, etc. And this is important because it takes State and Local government efforts along with Public School efforts to fix this problem. (ie funding, employment law, policies, etc) The schools can not do it alone. As the list of 12 items indicates.
As for poor test takers, mobility, etc, these can easily be accounted for in the system. Where as using graduation rates and post HS school education are too little too late.
Graduation rates without standardized testing is what got us into this problem in the first place. The districts would just pass the kids through the system whether they learned or not. It was much easier to "leave those dumb or unfortunate kids behind"...
I mean no one was watching anyway.
Also, GR's and post HS are severely lagging indicators. Do you really want to wait 19 years to determine if the school system is failing the child? How are you going to make it up to the students that attended during that time period.
We need as real time of monitoring as we can get. Imagine if your furnace only checked the room temperature once a month? Might get a bit cold or hot in your house.
Annie,
I forgot to comment on your note: "To use your HVAC metaphor, I'd say that NCLB has been fiddling with the thermostat for the past ten years while ignoring the furnace itself."
In my opinion, NCLB is more so about the thermostat and a warning system. My understanding was that the state, local, and public schools were supposed to be tuning the furnace or installing a new one. Unfortunately the States, Locals and Public Schools have spent more time and energy complaining about the thermostat than fixing the furnace.
The Teacher Unions and School Administrators of course being some of the biggest anchors against improvement. Their mantra is give us more money and stop measuring our performance, then everything will be better.
I think I should propose that to my Supervisor. Just pay me more and stop evaluating my work...
I am sure it will go over well.
Laurie,
I have a Masters in Mech Engrg and an MBA, so I truly appreciate the benefits of continuing education. I just want to make sure that people do not mistake Degrees for Capability.
Some people have multiple degrees and are still ineffectual and foolish. I am sure a few see me that way...
But they are not accounted for. (poor test takers and mobility)
For example, a student can enter a school one day prior to MCA test and score 1% in every area. The district has no ability to exclude these students from AYP or reporting. Furthermore, the higher mobility students often tend to be minority ( at least in metro) giving districts with higher diversity a false image of a gap between white and non white students.
Robbinsdale has said this for years but the critics continue to point fingers and refuse to look at data where mobility has been separated out.
I recently heard an administrators from Roosevelt Middle school ( Anoka-Henn) talk about a record number of honor roll students who qualify for Targeted Services because their MCA's were not reflective of their academic success.
I agree for a need and the concept behind NCLB, but as it sits it is not working and the schools with the most diverse populations and higher poverty levels are getting a real short stick which is leaving the most vulnerable children
behind.
Just because teacher's unions and administrators do not approve of the flawed NCLB system, it does not mean they oppose a system to reward based on performance. The measuring tool would need to be complex in order to get an accurate read.
Steve Phil
As for Honor Students being identified as defficient. There are 2 ways this could happen. The test system could be failing these kids (ie poor test takers), or the school curriculum and grading system is failing the kids. (ie too easy of classes, too much of grade based on homework and/or too easy of grading) Are you open to both being possible?
As for mobility, I agree that some local specific schools may be unfairly dinged by this. And the State as a whole may be punished ever so slightly as unlucky kids move in from other states. However, I think most of the mobility is between MN schools, therefore the test is still correct at a state level. (ie ??% of MN kids can not pass the basic skills)
As for Unions/Teachers being willing to reward high performers and deal with incompetence, I must disagree. Per the linked graph, the only way for a Teacher to truly get ahead in the RAS district is through time and degrees. Worse yet, the most incompetent teachers will benefit in the same manner. Teacher Compensation
More disturbing are the rare terribly incompetent teachers that stay employed year after year, after dozens of Parent complaints. You know that teacher, the one your friends with older kids warn you about...
Teacher Evals
Teacher Evals 2
First, a little story. The State of Louisiana once decided that all prospective teachers must first pass a test on the subject they were "qualified" to teach. After 80% of the Education degrees failed the test, they dropped the requirement. A college degree doesn't even guarantee that you know your subject, let alone that you can teach it.
Second, it's sometimes helpful to get back to the basic facts. Schools were failing 5-50% of students when NCLB was enacted, but we didn't measure it. Now, we measure it, and find that 5-50% of students are STILL being "left behind." WHY that is doesn't matter unless that lets us fix it.
NCLB supposedly required schools that failed 3 years in a row had to offer alternatives. It never happened because, well, that doesn't matter either. I don't care about fixing the blame, I just want to fix the problem.
To me, the fact that everyone in the public school system gets paid the same, or even MORE, whether kids learn or not, simply has to be part of the problem, since people respond to incentives. That's a fact. Having your school close would have been an incentive, or losing your raise because the kids you taught didn't fare as well as other teachers' kids did. But that isn't what we do, is it? Again, we've shilly-shallied for ten years and destroyed another generation of kids. When will we try something drastic, like actual accountability?
J. Ewing
I would settle for a simple start that shows good faith. Dismiss immediately that ~3% to 5% of teachers that repeatedly generate a significant number of rational parental complaints. If a dozen parents take the time to show up in the Principal's office, there is something wrong.
And no I am not talking style... I am talking lost assignments, unclear lessons/assignments, class chaos, etc.
Since we're talking about the testing itself, here's a really interesting piece on what we measure when we test and what it accomplishes.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/answer-sheet/post/when-an-adult-took-standardized-tests-forced-on-kids/2011/12/05/gIQApTDuUO_blog.html
--Annie
J. Please look outside your window, because I see some winged swine outside of mine. Specifically, I find myself agreeing with much of the first three paragraphs of your post. ;-)
--Anie.
" I think most of the mobility is between MN schools"
True, but each school and district are judged independently. The results determine money. This is a flawed system.
I have no problem with performance pay if it is done per student, oppose to a class, grade or school. Once again, a teacher in a school with high poverty will not be evaluated the same as a teacher in a school with low mobility.
To say a union wants to keep bad teachers is silly. They protect due process. The administration needs to discipline per the contract with vigor which they do not. If the schools did that, there would be little the union could do ( takes time )
Steve
Wash Post Std Tests
Steve,
Every employer in the state has to follow due process or risk getting sued. What Districts live with due to the Unions is simply wrong.
I have been watching a few teachers in middle school that have been on some kind of probation since my oldest daughter was there. She's now half way through her junior year !!! And the Teachers are still there !!!
More discouraging is that I write this similar comment every year or so and never get a call from the District folks. Of course why would they since they already know who the Teachers are, they just can't do anything about it.
As for mobility issues, let's say kids are moving between N Mpls, Robbinsdale, Osseo, Brooklyn Center and Anoka Hennepin. Assuming that the movement is somewhat random and evenly distributed, it really will make no difference in the test results of any of the schools. They are just trading poor performers or students they have failed. (ie depending on your perspective)
Now if for some reason they were only moving in one direction, then you would have a point. I don't see the schools as being different enough to drive this.
By the way, I agree with you that the measurement system is not perfect and that it could be tweaked. However I think it is close and certainly directionally correct.
I was going to link to the sample tests on the Mn Dept of Education site, but it looks like they are getting a major face lift. I'll try later or make a seperate post of it.
"J. Please look outside your window, because I see some winged swine outside of mine. Specifically, I find myself agreeing with much of the first three paragraphs of your post. ;-) --Annie."
LOL! Welcome to my world, where such things happen all the time. :-)
So I took the little test, and got six of 7 on reading and 7 of 7 in math. What's the problem? Kids are TAUGHT this stuff, or should be, and it should be fresh in their minds. If there was something wrong with the test EVERY kid would fail it, but they don't. The kids that fail it are the kids from schools where less than half graduate, where those who do cannot get into college, and where parents try to escape whenever given an opportunity [scholarship].
What I keep saying is that the failure of some public schools (and to some extent the entire public school model) are so horribly flawed we shouldn't need a test to see it. The problem is we don't DO what any rational person or system would do with that much failure, especially if it were our children involved. You wouldn't take your kids to a dentist that broke teeth rather than fixing them, would you? Or a doctor that never made them better?
I don't care whose children are left behind; none should be. I grant NCLB is an imperfect tool for measuring results. Fine. Get some decent results and we can ease up on all the testing!
J. Ewing
all you education experts should band together and open a charter school to show us incompetent teachers how high achievement for all is done.
I don't think any of you have a clue as to the tremendous difficulty of this task.
Laurie, I've been a teacher and I understand how absolutely difficult it can be. That's why it shouldn't be left to chance, where anybody with an education degree and a union card can be allowed to do it, badly, forever.
I like the idea of pay for performance, and I like the idea of a "dual track" where teachers don't have to be administrators to be paid better. There should be an "apprentice-journeyman-master" levels of teaching, where new teachers are "developed" by those who do it best. And we ought to eliminate those teachers who never get better, not by firing them outright necessarily, but arranging for them to never get a raise. This is what a good performance pay system does; I know.
Then we ought to set about getting rid of all the other obstacles to good teaching, like strict curricula standards dictated by local or state bureaucrats, lots of nanny-state stuff unnecessary to educating, and a financial management system driven by, well, a masterfully complex incompetence that defies comprehension, let alone any redeeming virtue.
J. Ewing
J
I am curious about at what level did you teach and what was the background of your students. I can't imagine that you formed your negative view of public schools by serving in the trenches of k-12 urban schools full of at risk learners (high poverty, ELL, etc)
I think your proposal for different levels of teaching expertise/responsibility is excellent. I believe this is the first idea of yours I have agreed with completely.
Laurie, I suspect there are a lot of things that you and I would agree on if we were to set about fixing the problem rather than fixing the blame for the mess that is our K-12 public school system.
Unfortunately, I have already revealed more personal information that I am comfortable with, but I will say that it is PRECISELY because of such inner-city schools that I hold such a "negative view." More precisely, I am absolutely incensed that we allow our public school system to use words like "at-risk children" at all. It is precisely this "soft bigotry of low expectations" that NCLB was supposed to fix. it hasn't, and it won't be easy but it can be done. It is a great tragedy that it has not.
Our current system of education does not handle at-risk students very well, and generally speaking puts MORE students at risk the longer they are incarcerated in our failed public schools.
J. Ewing
Post a Comment