How to Help Poor Kids Learn?

NPR Supreme Court Could be Headed to a Major Unraveling of Public School Funding

A FB Friend posted the above link with the comment. "The attempt to theocratize America continues." And the first commenter wrote. "So sick of religious zealots stealing from the public to fund their indoctrination centers. People want to segregate their children from poor people let them pay to do that."

Then I added the following and we were off to the races... "As for segregating their children, millions of very Liberal people do that daily by "moving to better neighborhood", enrolling in a magnet / charter school, open enrolling to a different district, etc. Why should Christians who pay a LOT of these taxes be forced to pay even more to attend a school that is aligned with their beliefs? Especially since many of the public schools have been forced to become so sterile / no religion / fewer parties / events? Why again should all of our tax payer dollars only go to support a near monopolistic system that refuses to measure, change and improve?

Well I never did get very much for answers, but the original poster did take the time to write a lot regarding his perspective... And I am curious what you think?

In 1991 I was a college graduate. Stung by the poor job outlook in 1991, I looked into going to work for the Federal Government. They had a program called the Outstanding Scholar program for college grads who met certain criteria, and it put you on a fast track to move up the first few paygrades in federal employment. Shortly after graduation, I was offered a position supporting the CFO for the US Department of Education (ED) In Washington, DC. At the time, I was a young moderate to conservative Republican who thought I knew everything (as is typical for the age) and I was excited to work in and around all the action in DC.  

About that same time, Governor Lamar Alexander, of Tennessee, was appointed Education Secretary by then president George H.W. Bush. After a history of conservatives bashing ED and wanting to shut it down (think William Bennett), Bush and Alexander believed that education is a priority and that the Federal Government did have a role in influencing education to make it competitive with the rest of the world.  

Around that same time, ED adopted "America 2000", a set of education goals developed in a joint, bipartisan effort including the President and all of the nation's governors. It included six education goals. I do recall a couple of them: All students start school ready to learn, and a graduation rate of 90%. These were goals that the Government wanted to help the nation accomplish by the year 2000. We were all very excited about these goals, and the bipartisan way in which they came to be. And state and local schools would get funding from the Federal Government tied to adopting America 2000 and putting together plans to meet the goals. It seemed like a win-win proposition for everyone.  

In 1992, Bill Clinton won the presidency and appointed Richard Riley as the Education secretary. I didn't know what to expect because I had really only known Republican administrations in my lifetime at that point, and I did not vote for Bill Clint on in 1992, nor did I vote for Mike Dukakis in 1988. As it turned out, it was a lot of the same. Bill Clinton had been one of the governors who had developed the national education goals, so they repackaged America 2000 and called it Goals 2000. They were largely the same with some changes.  

Over the next several years I got the opportunity to interact with some of the education gurus who came in to help promote the national education agenda, including Diane Ravitch (who was so well respected she was appointed under both administrations), who was appointed by Secretary Riley to serve as a member of the National Assessment Governing Board, which supervises the National Assessment of Educational Progress. She was also an early proponent of "No Child Left Behind", which was the repackaging of America 2000 and Goals 2000 by the new George W. Bush Administration in 2002.  

What happened from there, however, is really where problems began to develop. School districts became so focused on achieving the benchmarks dictated by the goals, in order to get the Federal money, that it changed teaching. I had left the Federal Government by then and had moved into working for Federal contractors in various roles. But I knew A LOT of teachers and I was married to one. They made up the vast majority of our social circle and many, many family members and extended family members as well. The joy and passion of teaching became harder for them to find. What they had been educated and trained to do, to inspire students to learn, became less important than meeting test score targets. There was pressure to not fail students who were poor performers because of graduation targets. Teachers, talented and passionate about education and learning and seeing their students succeed (not about pay), began to leave teaching.  

Charter schools started to become a big thing, utilizing public education money to, in essence, create private schools where they could admit only the top performers and keep out poor performers. Then they started showing better test results (shocking). So they gained more traction.  

Now what do we have? Schools still failing, still too may children being left behind. National standards that have bastardized and corrupted real education, the politicizing of education funds by far right interests who believe in this farce of "liberal indoctrination" (I can assure you that if it's not tied to the national education standards, it's not being taught).  

And, if you take the time to read any of Diane Ravitch's retrospective (she has written and blogged a lot on this subject) on the national goals and standardized testing she helped create and promote, you will see that she now regrets it. She regrets what it has become, and regrets school choice, too. All things she promoted and was considered instrumental in starting at the federal level. She recognizes now that the best predictor of poor school performance is poverty. She now focuses her efforts on addressing poverty and racial segregation.  

The attacks on teachers, teacher unions, etc. that you have bought into John, are all done for political gain. The real "fix" is all about having schools where all children have the same opportunity to learn, regardless of their socioeconomic status or their race. The national standards have failed to address those fundamental causes of poor achievement. Attacking teacher unions doesn't address those either.  

Addressing the causes of poverty and racial inequality are likely going to gain the best traction toward improving educational achievement. If you want to really "Give to attain", John, then work toward influencing people to take up the cause of poverty and racial disparity in our country. Vote for the candidates who have plans to do this. Look for constructive solutions instead of looking to blame those who are in the trenches fighting the good fight every day. Vote for politicians and support organizations who are most committed to addressing poverty and racial inequality.

 

Here were my initial thoughts in response:

As for brief immediate answers... You now have stepped into the chicken vs egg problem because correlation does not mean causation... Poverty in and of itself does not cause failure in school, therefore giving people more money will not necessarily yield better results... It is the things that cause poverty that often drive poor academic results. Un / undereducated parent(s), irresponsible / neglectful parent(s), single parent, high crime neighborhoods, cultures that do not value education, addicted parent(s), racism, etc.  

I know many low income folk who's kids did great in school, but that was because they had 2 parents who were serious about their child learning. (much like my friends in China and South Korea)  

The US Education system was created to lift people out of poverty. To say that we must eliminate poverty to make it work is very counter-intuitive and counter-productive.  

As for "the teachers are stressed" because their kids must learn... Halleulia !!! I am stressed because I must deliver everyday or my bosses will give me the boot. That does not mean that I hold it against my bosses that performance is why I am paid each month. It is nice to enjoy one's job, but it is also healthy to be pushed to learn and perform even better!!! Don't the kids deserve to learn each day and to be ready at 18 to be independent capable citizens?

In summary, the folks commenting in opposition to me believed the answer to closing the achievement gap was to go back to 1990, stop the testing, give the Publics Schools ever more money, get rid of the public charters and stay out their education system. In fact, I was in essence berated for even weighing in on the topic since I am not a teacher.  Here was the list from one of them.

 

If you want to build a better education system in this country. 

• pay teachers better and support them 100% 
• hire people that actually have experience in education that make policy for education. 
• treat every school equal, and give every student the same opportunities.
• poor people vote to. Stop making policy that rewards the rich families.

To that my response and questions were.  In MN we do not treat every school equally. The schools that get the most money by far are the schools with the most challenging student demographics. It may still not be enough but it exceeds $20,000 per student. And they still have the worst academic results.

1. So how much should we raise that amount to?
2. How much will the achievement increase?
3. What should happen if the money is spent and things do not change substantially?
4. Do we just keep increasing the funding or do we promote competition?

Thoughts on this chaotic long piece?


Here are some of the many links from these and other parts of the exchange.

Politico History of NCLB
NEA's Response to Race to the Top
G2A Blame vs Contributions
G2A Why are Poor People Poor?
MW Definition of Teach
BTA Economists Ate My School
G2A How to Win the War on Poverty
G2A AYP, NCLB, PDCA
MinnPost MPLS Data Teacher Equity by School
Wiki Public Employee Union History
VOX SCOTUS on School Funding
CSM SCOTUS on School Funding
Diana Ravitch Blog
Forbes Texas vs California

How to Win the War on Poverty?

I have been asked what should be done to Win this War.  Here are some ideas, I have numbered them for reference purposes only. They not in order of preference:

1. Weaken or eliminate the Public Employee Unions. Their primary purpose is to ensure the senior employees make the most money, receive the best positions and are secure in their employment.  These goals are NOT aligned with cost effectively getting the most help to the people who need it. Pay for performance, not years and degrees.
2. Set hard knowledge attainment and/or poverty reduction targets that the bureaucracy managers must hit, and replace them if they don't. No more of these employment contracts where Superintendents get huge buy out clauses when they fail.  Pay for performance, not degrees.
3. Make Long Acting Reversible Contraception and the Morning After Pill free and readily available for all. NO baby should be born unless the Baby Maker(s) are 100% wanting the child and feel prepared to care for it. (ie committed to being responsible capable Parents)
4. If a proven irresponsible Baby Maker who is on welfare (ie Angel Adams) gets pregnant. She should be forced to abort or give the Baby up for adoption. And if this happens more than once, her tubes should be tied.
5. The welfare payments and service should be set up to make recipients work, learn, mature and improve their self sufficiency.
6. The male Baby Makers must bear the consequences of their behavior.  The female Baby Maker must name the Father so the State can ensure the required child support is paid.  The cost may be higher than the money received, but the "free loading Baby Daddy" behavior  must be dissuaded.
7. The State must ensure that Baby Makers and the Babies receive training, care, etc until they become a functional family. (ie Parents and Kids)  This includes mandatory Parenting classes, Early Childhood Education, Inexpensive quality childcare, etc. Many of the Baby Makers are in this position because their role models were Baby Makers (ie not Parents).  Someone has to train them what it means to be a Parent.

There is a start...  Now you Liberals and Conservatives can argue for your adult concepts while the unlucky kids continue to suffer...

What are Children Entitled to in a Parent(s)?

I have to vent about the MinnPost Moderators again.  They published Ian's snarky "Judge not... Lest you be judged" comment. However they would not accept any of my 6 variations of "Ian, What do you think children are entitled to in a parent(s)? (ie level of emotional stability, responsibility, knowledge, maturity, financial stability, independence, role model, etc)  My first concern is the children, not the adults that interact with them."

11 Facts About Child Abuse
More Statistics
G2A How to Win the War on Poverty

The good news is that they did allow me to respond with Paul's latest far Left comment...  You know the one's where he blames the Conservatives and businesses for all the ills of our poor citizens.

"The controllable reasons poor people are poor seem pretty predictable:

• low achievement in the area of education or skills
• unwilling to do high hour, dirty or high travel jobs that are unpopular but sometimes pay more
• pursuing their passion in a poor paying field (ie arts, charity, etc)
• unwilling to relocate from their community
• spend too much and or have too many children
• addicted to smoking, alcohol, drugs, gambling, etc

Now how again does giving these people tax dollars help them escape poverty in the long term? 

Now I whole heartedly agree that society needs to care for those who are or become physically or mentally disabled.  And we need to provide a safety trampoline to help people up from temporary problems. 

However the idea that "work requirements" are in some way inhumane seems silly to me.
And please remember that low paying jobs are low paying is because there is too much supply and too little demand...  That is why I support deport illegal workers and stopping their entry until the lower wage jobs pay more. :-)" G2A

Dangers of Early School Enrollment

Continuing from G2A EITC regarding my view on How to Win the War on Poverty

"Unfortunately focusing on only this one. "5.The welfare payments and service should be set up to make recipients work, learn, mature and improve their self sufficiency."Leaves a lot of kids hungry, homeless and poor...That's why excellent sex education, free birth control and even early term abortions are so important. Unfortunately those are three things that are not allowed in the Bible Belt...Well that and that they prefer to spend little on their early childhood education, K-12, and Higher Ed." G2A

"You need to see this-- not all of your solutions pass the test:Harvard Study Shows the Dangers of Early School Enrollment"  Jerry

I agree with the Harvard results.  Sending children into an academic setting before their brain development is where it needs to be to accomplish that curriculum can be frustrating and detrimental to the child. So we agree:

Age and child appropriate curriculum, methods and expectations are critical.

However this in no way means that sending children to pre-school is a bad thing.  It just means that those programs need to focus on age and child appropriate activities.  Some academic focus, but  mostly they focus on physical, social, problem solving, emotional, behavioral and other things that will help them develop well and learn effectively when they do enter kindergarten.

RDale Early Childhood Education
MN DOE Early Childhood Indicators of Progress by Topic
MN DOE School Readiness

Please remember that I am more concerned about the millions of unlucky kids in America who enter kindergarten without these basic capabilities.  Which leads to them staying academically behind their luckier peers who were ready to start learning on day 1...

Now I have known Parents who want to push their children faster than their child's physical, social, cognitive, emotional, etc current capabilities...  That is a totally different issue.