Dentists beware, your next

[SilverMallard]

John, OK. I now understand the background better of your situation. I agree that the PE system failed your son. I've seen it many times. I did not intend to imply any differently. But my own siblings facing somewhat similar situations eventually pulled the kids and home schooled them when the public ed system failed to comply with the IEPs. In our family, we believe the ULTIMATE responsibility for the training of a child lies with the parents. And if the systems fail them, they must pick up the slack themselves. That is NOT to suggest that things SHOULD be this way. It's an UNFORTUNATE and UNACCEPTABLE reality that they had to pull their kids out of schools and teach them at home themselves.

BUT...you're trying to toss the baby out with the bathwater just because the world isn't perfect. Of course all kids don't learn the same way, teachers don't all teach exactly the same way, etc. Duh! Standardized testing and evaluation regimes take these variables into account. We don't fire a teacher as incompetent because ONE student fails the test! We fire them when TOO MANY fail OVER TIME. If you understood statistical analysis, this would be obvious to you. The larger the sample, the less impact of the variables. It's a law of nature...basic mathematics...something I was taught in about the 6th grade, and taught over and over again all the way through grad school.

But you MUST have an objective standard against which to measure. If you don't, you're just whistling Dixie.

Teachers and schools CHEAT? Is that what you're saying?

Well, again I say DUH! Cheating is also mitigated by larger sampling and standardization. But it does continue to skew results to some extent. Shame on teachers and administrators for cheating! I guess we should test ALL students, huh? That means MORE testing...not less, as you have been advocating.

[troutchaser]

If the U.S. relied on the sorting, pigeon-holing tests similar to our german cousins, I would be a neon sign repairman, according to the results I received in 8th grade.

Our public educational system allowed me to pursue the educational course I wanted, rather than what a test recommended. I now hold a graduate degree in business, I've successfully run an entrepeneurial venture, I've worked as a financial analyst, and I'm currently in the software industry.

Imagine the undiscovered talents and unfulfilled dreams that would lie forever dormant if we assigned our youth to vocations recommended solely by test results.

[WebFreeman]

Amen, trout chase.

And now, presenting my soap box speech of the week:

I teach Eng 101 at OTC in Springfield. I can tell you there is a big difference in the students I get from bigger schools compared to smaller schools. I've had students from so small, rural districts who've graduated from high school w/o ever having to write a paper.

My point is, w/o writing a dissertation, is that there is not equality between school districts. There are a lot of variables that go into that.

One being funding to attract the best-trained teachers. (Not all small districts are poorly funded, but a lot are.)

Part of it is the socio-economic background of the parents/community. Students whose parents are educated (meaning college degress, etc.) are more likely to place the value of being prepared for and going to college than those who didn't.

There are, of course, exceptions to all these. Take, for example, Hope, Arkansas, the birthplace of both former Gov./President Clinton and former Gov./Presidential candidate Mike Huckabee. Rural town, poor state, Clinton’s poor background, (can’t find anything og how Huckabee grew up.) Whether you liked Clinton or not, we was a smart guy: Georgetown, Oxford, Rhodes Scholar, etc. Huckabee educated in Ark: Ouachita Baptist, seminary in Ft. Worth. Should we all move to Hope and hope our children grow up to be Gov. and possibly President? I don’t think so. So what’s special about Hope? Extra fluoride in the water? Magic? How about luck?

Even over time, I don’t think standardized tests measure much of anything. Tests change (which makes them not that standardized), demographics change, curriculum changes, school/district leadership changes. Standardized tests hold some value, but as Jorob pointed out, there are a lot things that need to be covered that aren’t always. Would I rather have a EMT that can score well on a test or knows how to treat a blocked airway or stabilize a patient in shock or deal w/ a hysterical or belligerent family member. Testing doesn’t always reflect both.

Last analogy: I have 2 sections this semester. Both sections have different needs and are at different levels. In the fall, I’ll have 3 sections, 2 in the morning and 1 in the evening. I can tell you those sections, especially the difference between the morning and evening sections, will be as different as night and day (no pun intended). I will teach those sections differently. Assign different readings in different order. Assign homework in different ways at different points in the semester. In the end, those 3 sections will write the same 5 papers. I will get them to that point on 3 fairly distinct paths. Would they all score the same on standardized tests? Probably not. Will they all be able to write more effectively and be prepared for future classes? If they do the work.

Thee problem w/ No Child Left Behind is not the intent of the program, it’s that it’s an unfunded mandate. Meet these goals or else, but we’re not going to give you the resources to do it. I live in Republic and one of the reasons we moved here was because we liked the school system. However, our average class size is 3-5 students higher than surrounding communities. Thankfully, we passed the funding for a new high school that will help w/ that before my daughters even get to jr. high. The same election, a lot of other schools passed similar issues as has Nixa, Ozark and Willard in recent years. Lebanon didn’t that same election a few weeks ago. What is that going to do to their test scores when they have 30 students to a room and mobile homes for extra space? You can’t put all the blame on teachers.

[SilverMallard]

If the U.S. relied on the sorting, pigeon-holing tests similar to our german cousins, I would be a neon sign repairman, according to the results I received in 8th grade.

Our public educational system allowed me to pursue the educational course I wanted, rather than what a test recommended. I now hold a graduate degree in business, I've successfully run an entrepeneurial venture, I've worked as a financial analyst, and I'm currently in the software industry.

Imagine the undiscovered talents and unfulfilled dreams that would lie forever dormant if we assigned our youth to vocations recommended solely by test results.

Being as I am married to a product of the German system of public education, I think I can address this. It has positives and negatives. And both of you guys have nailed the major ones.

The system is good at guiding kids toward their strengths and working on their identified weaknesses. They do NOT ignore the weaknesses. They ensure a satisfactory mastery of those areas for independent adult function in their society. They DO give kids incentives to pursue their identified strengths. And that does mean some relative disincentives should they choose to pursue areas in which they do not show strong aptitude. And it does mean certain coursework choices are limited for the kids with lower academic aptitudes.

What their system does NOT do is push EVERYONE toward the lowest common denominator or coddle mediocrity like ours does!

Interestingly, it was taxidermist who advocated the German model. Yet he opposes standardized performance testing, which is the foundation of the German educational system. NOBODY there gets a high school diploma without passing a rigorous standardized graduation examination. Schools and teachers with too many kids failing that and other intermediate exams along the way get FIXED...PDQ! It is comical to a German to think that they will not be judged by a standardized, objective performance test and strict minimum performance guidelines in everything they do but sleeping! And they have a very strong social premium places on excellence in all aspects of life. And they do not fear competition and merit-based rewards. They understand from a very early age that such is the nature of life.

On the other hand, if you want to own a photography studio (for example) in Germany, what you study in secondary school and how you perform on the exams will play a key role in several ways. First, it will determine whether or not you can get into a photography school. Second, your performance in that school will determine what kind of job you can get afterwards...working in the photography industry as an EMPLOYEE. Third, you will need to return to school after a few years (minimum) of job experience in the industry to get a Masters in photography. These programs only admit the BEST and BRIGHTEST performers from school and job with the strongest recommendations from outstanding employers/supervisors playing the tie-breaking role in many cases. Once you have that Masters in Photography...which includes the equivalent of a BS in Business Administration...the gov't MIGHT give you a license to operate your own photography studio. MAYBE! And they may tell you that you have to relocate to a different part of Germany where there are not enough photography studios if you want the license.

Now, if you do well all along the way and showed aptitude for this work, then the gov't pays for EVERYTHING. If you choose something for which you do NOT show strong aptitude and/or for which the gov't doesn't think there is a need, but you can get into the schools, then you have to pay for it yourself.

In the end, they have a strongly monitored public education system that doesn't coddle poor performers and significantly rewards the top achievers/competitors. The needs of the economy and society are balanced against the aptitudes of the students in a well-reasoned and coordinated way to produce the workers and professionals that are needed AND to give kids the best possible shot at being economically successful. Everyone is still free to choose what they want to do, but the gov't only pays for it if it makes SENSE.

My wife had two choices coming out of high school: hospitality/travel industry management training or commercial art and design. These were the vocational programs the gov't would pay for if she wanted to pursue either. She chose commercial art and design. That was a 3-year program. The Masters was another 2 after a minimum of 2 years work experience in the field. You cannot open so much as a printed Tshirt shop in Germany without that Masters! But that degree also qualifies you to run ANY sort of printmaking operation up to a global enterprise level advertising firm. She can build her own cameras and printing presses, or run Hallmark...and everything in between. You can't even find anyone at Kodak or Hallmark who can do that. But every Master Printmaker in Germany...every printed Tshirt shop owner...can. So you end up with an economy full of businesses run by competent professionals who can do every job under their authority and a bunch of highly skilled workers. You don't end up going to a Goodyear tire store to buy new tires and have the place tear up 4 new tires and one of your rims trying to put them on your car because they don't KNOW HOW! That's because the German gov't won't issue a business license to a guy with a degree in music appreciation and 3 years of work experience at a candy store for a tire shop. But we will!

On one hand, it is nice to be able to try whatever we want to and can afford for a career or business idea. On the other hand, it really sucks to constantly have to deal with a bunch of under-trained, uneducated dilitantes messing stuff up and taking our money without doing a good job every time we want to purchase a good or service. If a German school teacher is teaching History, they actually have a degree in...get this...HISTORY. If they teach math, they have a degree in MATH. And if very many of their students don't pass their standardized exams, they won't be teaching for long. Teachers in Germany are HIGHLY respected professionals who make a very good living. Their opinions carry a LOT of weight even outside the classroom. And when very mediocre German public school students move to the US, they COAST through our public education system with straight A's and bored to tears. I've seen it happen SEVERAL times.

As a sharp contrast let me tell you a little story about my wife's interaction with Arkansas public education...

She's a REALTOR now, as many of you know. Well, she was showing property one day to the guy who runs the entire continuing education program for Arkansas public school teachers. He's "the guy" responsible for teaching the teachers. They were looking at some maps, and in the course of the discussion, the guy could not find the state of Washington on a map of the US that had the state outlines on it, but no names. Nor did he know what the capital city of Missouri was or where it was located.

[Thom]

If you think standardized testing the answer let me give you two examples of two young men I know very well. Both took standardized testing and were evaluated by two different counselors in a highly rated school district graduating from classes of 600 students. The oldest of the two decided he wanted to go to University of Illinois and his counselor tried to discourage him from it. I told him go for it. He graduated with a BS in math and computer science and is now earning nearly a six figure income. The other boy did poorly in his standarized testing and another counselor who admimistered the testing advised him not to go to college but seek out a trade he enjoyed. He enrolled in SIU Edwardsville and graduated with honors. He was accepted with only 9 of over 100 appliciants to the University of Indiana's masters program and later taught there. He now works as lead designer for a very successful company in St. Louis. I said I knew the two boys well...they are my sons.

Standardised testing sucks and so do most counselers. Most teachers agree.

[troutchaser]

I'd like to share one aspect of standardized student testing that is absolutely positive.

My daughter is a 3rd grade student in Springfield's Public School system. She is in a looping class, meaning they study with the same teacher for two years. There is a 4th grade class they study with, as well. 4th grade students who have a weakness in math, for example, will study with students from the 3rd grade in small 4-5 member groups. On the other hand, if a 3rd grader excels in, say, reading, they would study with a group of 4th graders at that same aptitude. Either way, the student is put with peers who are at the same level of progression in any given subject. This solves two major issues for the school system. First, students rarely get bored from a lack of challenging work. Second, children who need extra assistance in learning can receive it, since there are two teachers working on the same subject together. The results have been astounding. I sat with these two teachers for a long time discussing the past results of this pedagogy. There measureable results speak for themselves. They aren't able to use MAP (standardized) tests to measure, due to the anonymous nature of the tests, but they do use the district approved measurables. I believe one of the issues may not be in the tests themselves, but in the methods used to teach children.

One of the most revealing and disheartening results these teachers could quantify (via survey, this is a post-graduate research project for both teachers) is the direct correlation between the level of parental involvement and the students' performance. Children with parents who include themselves in the teaching process through homework tutoring, class involvement and teacher-parent communication consistently score higher and excel in basic subjects faster than their peers.

Bottom line: students who are challenged properly in all subjects, as opposed to being taught at the level of the lowest performing student in the classroom, will perform significantly better on quantifiable, results-oriented testing.

Odd how the most obvious solutions are sometimes the most difficult to implement.

[Thom]

I like hearing good things about teachers and schools. I believe that a large number of the teachers do a great job.

My youngest daughter just graduated after quiting a well paying job and returning to college in order to get a teaching degree. When she began submiting resumes and they contacted her teacher advisors she immediately began to receive offfers. She is really excited about teaching and has taken leading edge courses in education graduating with honors while manageing with her husband a family. She will be in the classroom because she loves the profession not just to make a living.

I am hoping that politicians will leave the teaching to professionals and not ruin that enthusiam. I hear good competent teachers that have been in the classroom with happy parents and students complain about meddling in education by polotics. We are past the days of the three R's. It is gone forever. Not that the three R's are not necessary but we must go beyond that and rely on those who have been trained to make decisions not poloticians

The school system that my daughter will probally be in has an password protected online link for the parents as well as ongoing opportunities for the parents to interface with student progress and teachers as do most schools in the Kearny system. Comments, interactions and suggestions from parents are welcomed and utilized.

[SilverMallard]

In my experience, guidance counselors are usually burned out or incompetent teachers. Administrators are personally ambitious teachers who really don't like hanging around with kids that much, but prefer bossing around other teachers. And school systems today have boatloads of both compared to what they had when I was in secondary school. It is these folks who run our schools. When folks infer or argue that school administrators and counselors are not "teachers," they are really out in left field. You cannot find a public school admin or counselor who does not have the same education credentials and then some as the classroom teachers, and they have some classroom experience. That makes them all teachers in my book. The Executive Chef might not be in the kitchen working over a hot stove, but he's still a chef.

You folks can argue about this until the cows come home. But there isn't a successful large organization on the planet that doesn't have standardized performance monitoring against an objective standard.

And American public school teachers are the laughing stock of the global education community.

My wife and I once walked into a room where our sister-in-law was doing "homework" in her last Masters in Education class. She was using 3-ruled paper and a jumbo pencil to print the alphabet. My wife asked her what she was doing. She said that this was her assignment for class. My wife looked at her very funny and asked quite seriously, "Didn't you master that skill already in the first grade?"

This SIL is a VERY successful teacher a few years later. She commands top dollar at a very "respected" school district. And she gets rave performance reviews. Her students out-perform the average by quite a bit.

But my wife and I recently had to sit her and her husband down and explain to them how to teach their 13 year old son how to organize his homework assignments so that he would not lose/forget them.

I'm sorry, but we have NO respect for American school teachers' competency and training. And we DEMAND that these people paid with tax dollars to prepare tomorrow's good citizens are routinely TESTED and MONITORED to ensure that they are meeting at least some sort of gross minimum standard.

All you have to do is hire a few recent high school graduates to flip burgers or change oil at Jiffy Lube to figure out that our public education system is failing miserably.

[troutchaser]

I'm sorry, but we have NO respect for American school teachers' competency and training. And we DEMAND that these people paid with tax dollars to prepare tomorrow's good citizens are routinely TESTED and MONITORED to ensure that they are meeting at least some sort of gross minimum standard.

But are you willing to pony up the $$$ to attract higher caliber individuals? Unfortunately, in a capitalist society, teaching is one of the bottom rungs on the ladder of financial "success".

Improvement will not come through testing and monitoring as much as through better teachers. Better teachers will not come until they have better financial incentives. And that won't happen until we're willing to pay them what they're worth.

Unfortunately, the bulk of our country's population is aging past the point of direct involvement and/or reaping the results of our education system. The result is that the tax base for our public schools is unwilling, in most cases, to fund these schools.

I guess what I'm saying is you get what you pay for.

[Thom]

SM I knew your wrath would come down on me and others here for their opinion.

You have a neat box to put everyone in don't you?

I personally know many teachers who are very competent, I have a best friend who is a dedicated administrator and BTW was offered a much higher paying job as a lobbist in Jeff city with the reigning party. He loves education. It is his calling and passion. He was an excellent teacher. I seldom sit down in Hardee's with him that a parent or former student doesn't come up to him and have a friendly conversation.

I sometimes wonder what perfect box you fit in.

Your statements are personally insulting to many of my friends who work hard and long as teachers and are totally committed to their profession.

I know at least one teacher who personally tutors some of the underpriviledge childeren in here class on her own nickel and others who go the extra mile to buy supplies from their own income in order to bring a higher level of learning to their classroom. I will agrue until the cows come in on this one. Yes there is a lot of incompetence out there as there is in any profession. Just don't lump all of them into one neat box.