Dentists beware, your next

[Rusty]

NCLB (No Cavity Left Behind)

My dentist is great! He sends me reminders so I don't forget checkups. He uses the latest techniques based on research. He never hurts me, and I've

got all my teeth. When I ran into him the other day, I was eager to see if he'd heard about the new state program. I knew he'd think it was great.

"Did you hear about the new state program to measure effectiveness of dentists with their young patients?" I said.

"No," he said. He didn't seem too thrilled. "How will they do that?"

"It's quite simple," I said. "They will just count the number of cavities each patient has at age 10, 14, and 18 and average that to determine a dentist's rating. Dentists will be rated as excellent, good, average, below average, and unsatisfactory. That way parents will know which are the best dentists. The plan will also encourage the less effective dentists to get better," I said. "Poor dentists who don't improve could lose their licenses to practice."

"That's terrible," he said.

"What? That's not a good attitude," I said. "Don't you think we should try to improve children's dental health in this state?"

"Sure I do," he said, "but that's not a fair way to determine who is practicing good dentistry."

"Why not?" I said. "It makes perfect sense to me."

"Well, it's so obvious," he said. "Don't you see that dentists don't all work with the same clientele, and that much depends on things we can't

control l? For example, I work in a rural area with a high percentage of patients from deprived homes, while some of my colleagues work in upper

middle-class neighborhoods. Many of the parents I work with don't bring their children to see me until there is some kind of problem, and I don't

get to do much preventive work. Also, many of the parents I serve let their kids eat way too much candy from an early age, unlike more educated

parents who understand the relationship between sugar and decay. To top it all off, so many of my clients have well water, which is untreated and has

no fluoride in it. Do you have any idea how much difference early use of fluoride can make?"

"It sounds like you're making excuses," I said. "I can't believe that you, my dentist, would be so defensive. After all, you do a great job, and you

needn't fear a little accountability."

"I am not being defensive!" he said. "My best patients are as good as anyone's, my work is as good as anyone's, but my average cavity count is

going to be higher than a lot of other dentists because I chose to work where I am needed most."

"Don't get touchy," I said.

"Touchy?" he said. His face had turned red, and from the way he was clenching and unclenching his jaws, I was afraid he was going to damage

his teeth. "Try furious! In a system like this, I will end up being rated average, below average, or worse. The few educated patients I have who

see these ratings may believe this so-called rating is an actual measure of my ability and proficiency as a dentist. They may leave me, and I'll be left

with only the most needy patients. And my cavity average score will get even worse. On top of that, how will I attract good dental hygienists and

other excellent dentists to my practice if it is labeled below average?"

"I think you are overreacting," I said. "'Complaining, excuse-making and stonewalling won't improve dental health'... I am quoting from a leading

member of t he DOC," I noted.

"What's the DOC?" he asked.

"It's the Dental Oversight Committee," I said, "a group made up of mostly lay persons to make sure dentistry in this state gets improved"

"Spare me," he said, "I can't believe this. Reasonable people won't buy it," he said hopefully.

The program sounded reasonable to me, so I asked, "How else would you measure good dentistry?"

"Come watch me work," he said. "Observe my processes."

"That's too complicated, expensive and time- consuming," I said. "Cavities are the bottom line, and you can't argue with the bottom line. It's an

absolute measure."

"That's what I'm afraid my parents and prospective patients will think. This can't be happening," he said despairingly.

"Now, now," I said, "don't despair. The state will help you some."

"How?" he asked.

"If you receive a poor rating, they'll send a dentist who is rated excellent to help straighten you out," I said brightly.

"You mean," he said, "they'll send a dentist with a wealthy clientele to show me how to work on severe juvenile dental problems with which I have

probably had much more experience? BIG HELP!"

"There you go again," I said. "You aren't acting professionally at all."

"You don't get it," he said. "Doing this would be like grading schools and teachers on an average score made on a test of children's progress with no

regard to influences outside the school, the home, the community served and stuff like that. Why would they do something so unfair to dentists? No

one would ever think of doing that to schools."

I just shook my head sadly, but he had brightened. "I'm going to write my representatives and senators," he said. "I'll use the school analogy.

Surely they will see the point."

He walked off with that look of hope mixed with fear and suppressed anger that I, a teacher, see in the mirror so often lately.

If you don't understand why educators resent the federal NO CHILD LEFT BEHIND ACT, this may help. If you do understand, you'll enjoy this

analogy. Be a friend to a teacher and pass this on.

[MrsDucky]

AMEN! What really is amazing is that, even though they can determine that a district is "failing" it is illegal to judge an individual teacher's performance based on the state test. Which makes sense, considering the state only requires testing every 4 years. Which teacher could they blame? So, the elementary teachers, whose students still like them and school, tell their students that it's good for the teachers if the students do well. That does motivate them. However, as they become middle school students, who don't like anyone including themselves on certain days, they figure the converse MUST be true, and if they do poorly, then it's bad for the teachers. So, some of the students purposely mess it up, because they don't like the teacher on that day. Then they wonder why their permanent record shows they are "Below Basic" in a subject that they really like! I spent many hours (yes, I'm exaggerating!) explaining to my 7th and 8th graders that if they do poorly, it only hurts them and the district. I still get paid, I still teach, and it is illegal to say whether I'm a "good" or "bad" teacher based on their scores. They seemed to decide their permanent records meant more to them than proving that I was a "bad" teacher. Good for them!

[SilverMallard]

This dentist = teacher analogy is weak and full of holes. Taneyville...one of the poorest school districts in the state...has one of the highest aggregate scores on standardized performance tests. Well water has no impact on education. All those kids in Taneyville are on well water, too. Public education is free. Dentists cost money. That's why the less affluent do not take their kids to the dentist as often as they should or until there's a problem. But they send the kids to school EVERY day because it is free daycare, the kids get fed for free, and this lets mom and dad both go to work to try and pay the bills...or lay around and smoke crack or make meth. And wealthy kids or poor kids in the same school get the same education. At least they are supposed to. And if they don't, that too is the fault and problem of teachers and administrators.

Teachers don't like standardized performance testing because it is OBJECTIVE and EFFECTIVE at identifying bad teachers over time. It is effective at identifying under-performing schools and districts over time. And today's teachers simply do not believe that they should be held accountable for their students' educations.

[taxidermist]

I hate the no child left behind Bull crap. My sone is one of the kids that needed individual attention in school. He had an Individual Education plan, but none of the schools knew what the heck it was. So they passed him along. Now as an adult at age 23 he has trouble keeping a job, he just does not understand time or how money functions.

We have had him to a large clinic in Kansas "Menniger" in Topeka they help write th IEP, bUt its was useless in Arkansas.

One bad thng about the testing is they can findout what the weakness are but failed to find the strong point.

Another clinic we took him to had additional testing for the price of $10,000. that could tell his strong points and again write an individual education plan. Well I just did not and still don't have the 10 grand for testing.

So now I have a 23 year old son living at home, who cannot hold a job, he is slow moving and nothing you can do will increase the speed at which he works. Believe me I have tried, my folks have tried and his ex-wife tried, he is not lazy, he will work its just that his fast speed is about my slow speed and I ain't to fast these days.

Yep, in school he was not left behind but in life he is stranded on the highway of life!!

Had America's school been designed better each child would be tested and these children would have their education geared to three God given Strengths each person has. There are 27 talents that humans can be born with. Each person has three (according to the shrinks at Kansas State in Manhatten) These three strengths should be what each student is educated in.

Germany had this going on for many years, they split the kids off into industrial, academic and artistic areas about what our seveth grade would be.

No child left behind is not fair to the child!!! It began under Bill Clinton and was just enforced under bush.

[taxidermist]

Silver Mallard you are wrong.

Standardized testing does not test the teachers ability to communicate to the students.

All schools would have to be taught at the standard to even begin the equalisation. All schools simply don't teach at a national standard.

Also all students are not equal,,, and money does not have anything to do with the abilities of students to learn, nor their willing to learn.

Finally it does fall on the school to enforce some sort of standard.

My wife is a teacher, Earth Sciences, Bio, and students endanger of not graduating.

The endangered students are hampered much by their own willingness to complete the work assigned and the fact here in the last semester there are tons of activities for the students to do.

Only in your perfect world does Standardized testing work. It lacks the perfect students, the perfect teachers, the perfect school system.

[SilverMallard]

1. No Child Left Behind is a GW Bush initiative. Teachers LOVED Clinton! But they immediately started griping about GW the first time he said the words, "No child left behind."

2. Your son, at 23, graduated from high school about the time GW took office. So it isn't the fault of No Child Left Behind! He never experienced it.

3. Did I understand right that your wife is a teacher? And your son is developmentally disabled? And you had an IEP, but are blaming the public education system for his disability? I'm sorry, but are you suggesting that your wife failed to comrehend the IEP also...or that she couldn't communicate that effectively and educate other teachers your son dealt with to understand his needs and their legal obligation to meet them? Did you ever stop to think that perhaps your son's disability is what limits him, and not a failed education system? There are people in wheelchairs out there who will NEVER walk. That's not the fault of shoddy doctors and hospitals in 99.9% of such cases. It's just the nature of their affliction. I know that's tough to accept when it is YOUR kid we're talking about. But I am disabled and I have dealt with learning disabled nieces and nephews with parents who are teachers, psychologists, and lawyers all of my life. I'm well aware of what IEP's are and how they work. I'm also familiar with the unfortunate public education system in AR...as well as the public ed systems in MO and TX. I do not doubt most teachers blew your son off. That is why my nieces and nephews were eventually home-schooled by their parents...and now ALL have college educations, careers, etc. One is even a school teacher now.

But all of this is exactly why we NEED objective, standardized performance monitoring of teachers and schools.

[mcp633]

Silver Mallard,

You are one hundred percent correct. Standardized testing is the only true way to gauge the ability of a given teacher, school, or school district to educate our youth. The stats tracked over time will, of course, point to the weak link in our public education system. Whether it be the teacher or the district.

The problem is, even when the weak link is identified, there is absolutely nothing that can be done with a poor educator. They hide behind their power hungry teacher unions that will protect them from scrutiny at all cost. Unions are the problem with public education! If public districts and private schools were allowed to compete for tax dollars through a voucher system, you'd see how fast bad teachers were dismissed and replaced with competent people. Unfortunately the NEA and others hold too much sway with the state legislatures.

Nobody can deny that a large number of public education institutions are failing to properly educate our children. Are there outside influences on those kids that cause them to perform poorly? Sure! I won't deny that. However, there are great teachers out there. I know pleanty of good ones, and the posts from the teachers on this board prove that they are passionate about what they do, and that's outstanding. I just wish all of your peers felt the same as you do! I'm the son of a public school educator of 25+ years, and I know for a fact that she would tell you the same thing. There are bad eggs in every profession, unfortunately the education unions like to protect theirs.

[jOrOb]

Gentlemen,

Standardized testing does not guage a teachers performance in the least. All it guages is whether or not a school system can develop it's teaching curriculums to fit the testing standard.

Standardized testing has served as a teaching script ever since it's inception. It is basic logic...give me a test at the end, and I will base my lessons on ensuring the students can pass that test. So that is what school systems do, focus on the standardized tests. Forget about robust education, or developmenet of skills and abliities, just get em past that test.

I teach EMT courses at the local community college. There is a significant testing process at the end for certification purposes. I am constantly struggling to balance the real world knowledge that these kids need with the textbook definitions required to pass the test. I know instructors that simply get em by the test, and their scores are high. They have good pass rates. But their EMT's leave school lacking some basic knowledge.

I guess the point is that standardized testing is only as good as the standard. That is playing to the lowest common denominator, and it sells short about 85% of all students.

jOrOb

[SilverMallard]

Sure, let's have EMT's who don't have to take a test to get certified! LOL

No testing just means there is no standard. And that's just ridiculous.

And teachers being able to get a certain % of their students to pass standardized tests OVER A PERIOD OF TIME that is significant enough to dilute the potency of many variables most certainly does help to identify problem teachers AND under-peforming schools.

We tried the no standard approach for decades. Once upon a time...when teachers knew their subject matter and taught the 3R's by wrote in a classical education model...we got good results. But since the U of Chicago based communist education revolution in the 1960s, this "no standard" model of zero accountability has gotten us CRAP. And THAT is why we now need objective performance monitoring standards.

If teachers and schools were doing their JOBS, we wouldn't be having this discussion.

[taxidermist]

Silver Mallard, again you are wrong.

My son has attended US Government schools, in Germany and Kansas, Public schools in Kansas, and Arkansas. None of which understand how to use an IEP.

Matter of fact I filed a complaint against one in the Kansas public schools and they lost some funding.

My wife and I married last Sept. and she is not the mother of my son. So her being a teacher had Zero to do with the education of my son.

Clinton started the program it was not called no child left behind, Bush just put a name to it.

The schools failed to teach my son, yes it is the schools fault. IEP outline what the child should be doing, but what happens is they pass the child along and don't take the time to teach the slower kids what it takes to get along in life. This is why I say at about age 12 or so the students need to be divided into groups, there are students who are academic and those who learn by doing. The learn by doing students can be educated jobs skills.

Teacher testing only works if all teachers are taught the samethings, evaluations are again subjective.

Testing does not either, why? Because students don't have the same learning abilities, same ability to remember the same information. Everyone learns at a different rate, everyone sorts the same information differently, everyone is not the perfect clone. So this makes testing invalid!!!

Learning even in lower life forms are different from animal to animal, one horse will learn at a different rate than the next, same for dogs and cats.

Certainly humans all learn at different rates and humans cannot all remember the samethings or learn the samethings or everyone would be a Doctor or plumbers.

I do know that schools will teach the kids what the test will be, they also sort out what kids will take the test!! I see that happening right now is several different schools.

For testing to be prove anything you would have to pull kids at random out of class and the test be a random and unannounced. But that is not the way the testing is done.

These test are announced well in advance and students are sorted out who will take the test and who will not.

Standardised testing in a standardised world in nothing less than a pipe dream. It certainly does not test the teachers ability to teach, it only test the teachers knowledge of a given subject!!

Everyone on this board knows that they have had teachers that made learning some subjects easier, they also know they had favorite subjects in school and did well in some and not so well in others. Some people are better at academics and others learn by doing, i.e. mechanical minded....

Testing does nothing to prove that one school is better than the next or even students for that matter.

John