Comments on: Can Obama water walk over this one? http://www.eduwonk.com/2008/08/can-obama-water-walk-over-this-one.html Education News, Analysis, and Commentary Mon, 13 Feb 2012 03:45:52 -0500 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.2 hourly 1 By: Melody L. Polson http://www.eduwonk.com/2008/08/can-obama-water-walk-over-this-one.html/comment-page-1#comment-138927 Melody L. Polson Tue, 05 Jan 2010 22:37:33 +0000 http://www.eduwonk.com/?p=3514#comment-138927 The previous responder said many things I agree with- but no one is addressing the primary problem- Students are coming into classrooms in middle schools and high schools expecting the same "integrated curriculum" they experienced in grade school- and to be "walked through" every activity. In middle and high schools, there is neither the time, nor the ability of a teacher to individually assist in the classroom. Students, not the teachers, not the manipulables, not the tech, STUDENTS must invest in their learning. "I don't get it." is the refrain... students will not take the time to actually frame a question. I begin to take it for the code, "I would rather do something else." Recently, or administrative cadre have implemented a "no lower than 50% score" so students who fail can easily bring up their grade. This is no different than the "artificial inflation" of the past-- either way, the admin are looking for ways to make the grades appear to go up, while the students are not producing work that meets requirements. We are "warehousing"- pushing the kids through to the next level with no thought to preparedness or skill, certainly without a sense of responsibility for their own achievement. We grew up, some of us, poor- our parents insisted we do what was required to keep up our studies. Grades mattered. Today, teachers are competing with video madness in the fore of most student's minds, and unless we are willing to turn all learning into a video game, which might stimulate memory but cannot replace individual production of work, the students are going to have to participate in this process of learning. NCLB is a farce. Testing is not the way to determine if children are achieving. Production- performance- is not a test. It does test-- but multiple choice is yet another video game- it is fast, it is cheap (oh- and by the way, the nation has been skunked by these dreadful interim tests. I've met at least six teachers that could have single-handedly written a better test.) Picking which is correct is not the same as CREATING SOMETHING CORRECT. Somewhere, along the way, we lost sight of what education meant- our goal used to be to develop thoughtful, aware, self-critical, adults that would have been participants in the democracy. What happened? Accountability? We don't have accountability- we have data. We have research that demonstrates techniques that work- we resort to work sheets. Worksheets are simple, anybody can do a worksheet- but they cannot necessarily translate the worksheet skill to production. We have buzz words- we have masks for the lie of it. My students can recognize, yes, but they still balk at creating something of their own. It doesn't look professional... it isn't flashy. It certainly isn't fast. Education is a long slog from inability to ability, and proof of ability is in production of something your own- proof of ability is not a multiple choice test. The previous responder said many things I agree with- but no one is addressing the primary problem- Students are coming into classrooms in middle schools and high schools expecting the same “integrated curriculum” they experienced in grade school- and to be “walked through” every activity. In middle and high schools, there is neither the time, nor the ability of a teacher to individually assist in the classroom. Students, not the teachers, not the manipulables, not the tech, STUDENTS must invest in their learning.
“I don’t get it.” is the refrain… students will not take the time to actually frame a question. I begin to take it for the code, “I would rather do something else.”
Recently, or administrative cadre have implemented a “no lower than 50% score” so students who fail can easily bring up their grade. This is no different than the “artificial inflation” of the past– either way, the admin are looking for ways to make the grades appear to go up, while the students are not producing work that meets requirements. We are “warehousing”- pushing the kids through to the next level with no thought to preparedness or skill, certainly without a sense of responsibility for their own achievement.
We grew up, some of us, poor- our parents insisted we do what was required to keep up our studies. Grades mattered.
Today, teachers are competing with video madness in the fore of most student’s minds, and unless we are willing to turn all learning into a video game, which might stimulate memory but cannot replace individual production of work, the students are going to have to participate in this process of learning.
NCLB is a farce.
Testing is not the way to determine if children are achieving. Production- performance- is not a test. It does test– but multiple choice is yet another video game- it is fast, it is cheap (oh- and by the way, the nation has been skunked by these dreadful interim tests. I’ve met at least six teachers that could have single-handedly written a better test.) Picking which is correct is not the same as CREATING SOMETHING CORRECT.
Somewhere, along the way, we lost sight of what education meant- our goal used to be to develop thoughtful, aware, self-critical, adults
that would have been participants in the democracy. What happened?
Accountability? We don’t have accountability- we have data. We have research that demonstrates techniques that work- we resort to work sheets. Worksheets are simple, anybody can do a worksheet- but they cannot necessarily translate the worksheet skill to production.
We have buzz words- we have masks for the lie of it. My students can recognize, yes, but they still balk at creating something of their own. It doesn’t look professional… it isn’t flashy. It certainly isn’t fast.
Education is a long slog from inability to ability, and proof of ability is in production of something your own- proof of ability is not a multiple choice test.

]]> By: john thompson http://www.eduwonk.com/2008/08/can-obama-water-walk-over-this-one.html/comment-page-1#comment-4639 john thompson Thu, 21 Aug 2008 22:01:03 +0000 http://www.eduwonk.com/?p=3514#comment-4639 You present a very good and fair summary. Of course, those civil rights leaders are more than "a little" upset with the unions, and unions need to be doing more than "a bit more to get better teachers into the neediest schools." So I'd like to ask you an educational and a political question. I understand why civil rights leaders and urban superintendants, who may or may not know enough about education to make an informed judgement, believe that "keeping the pedal to the metal on school accountability" is good for poor children. But you seem to imply that keeping the metal to the pedal of NCLB's primitive form of accountability is good for school kids. If so, I sincerely would like to understand why YOU think that. Secondly, remembering that all politics is local, why in the world would a Democrat seeking national office want to commit to the EEP's agenda. After all, all education politics is local, and if you want to make things better for poor schools you have to face local realities. Perhaps the money wasted in Newark could pay for the EEP's agenda in that city. In most schools systems, we don't have nearly enough funding to follow their strategy. The only way that the administrations in many many school systems can attempt to comply with NCLB is to gamble on nonstop test prep, curriculum narraowing, and cheap statistical tricks. Let's just ASSUME for a second that NCLB-type accountability has been good for poor children of color in NYC, D.C., L.A., and Denver. Surely even the most committed of the accountability hawks would acknowledge privately that many poor children of color have been hurt by the destructive policies prompted by the panic caused by NCLB. Even if we assume those urban leaders are correct, why would it be good politics to support policies that help children in some districts and hurt children in others? That, of course, brings us back to the educational issue. Why is it such a good idea to keep the pedal to the metal on accountability policies that help some poor children of color while hurting others? These are sincere questions asked by people who know at least as much about education as the "reformers" and have a much longer record of practical experience in education, and in helping poor children of color. You present a very good and fair summary. Of course, those civil rights leaders are more than “a little” upset with the unions, and unions need to be doing more than “a bit more to get better teachers into the neediest schools.”

So I’d like to ask you an educational and a political question.

I understand why civil rights leaders and urban superintendants, who may or may not know enough about education to make an informed judgement, believe that “keeping the pedal to the metal on school accountability” is good for poor children. But you seem to imply that keeping the metal to the pedal of NCLB’s primitive form of accountability is good for school kids. If so, I sincerely would like to understand why YOU think that.

Secondly, remembering that all politics is local, why in the world would a Democrat seeking national office want to commit to the EEP’s agenda. After all, all education politics is local, and if you want to make things better for poor schools you have to face local realities. Perhaps the money wasted in Newark could pay for the EEP’s agenda in that city. In most schools systems, we don’t have nearly enough funding to follow their strategy. The only way that the administrations in many many school systems can attempt to comply with NCLB is to gamble on nonstop test prep, curriculum narraowing, and cheap statistical tricks.

Let’s just ASSUME for a second that NCLB-type accountability has been good for poor children of color in NYC, D.C., L.A., and Denver. Surely even the most committed of the accountability hawks would acknowledge privately that many poor children of color have been hurt by the destructive policies prompted by the panic caused by NCLB. Even if we assume those urban leaders are correct, why would it be good politics to support policies that help children in some districts and hurt children in others?

That, of course, brings us back to the educational issue. Why is it such a good idea to keep the pedal to the metal on accountability policies that help some poor children of color while hurting others?

These are sincere questions asked by people who know at least as much about education as the “reformers” and have a much longer record of practical experience in education, and in helping poor children of color.

]]>