• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Zuckerberg throws $100M at Newark public ed

2&2 how many more standardized tests do our kids need to take to be adequately prepared for the global economy?

Also NCLB has been in place for 12 years now. If you have a problem with how our children are being prepared, you need to include it in the discussion.

To BBD's point, we need to gear HS education toward preparing kids to harness their own skills to be their own business not just a cog in the corporate machines that will only be hiring fewer and fewer people going forward.
 
On Point is about the Zuckerberg issue right now.
 
2&2 Slider To Leyritz said:
Using high school graduation rates as a measure of success is like the NCAA using college graduation rates at Cincinatti as a basis for that school's APR - it is completely meaningless. What does it matter if the kid gets a piece of paper if there is no substantive learning behind that piece of paper? So they got passed along from grade to grade and finally spit out at the end because they didn't fuck up. Whoopdeedamndoo. The key question is does our current system prepare our kids to effectively compete in a global economy beyond high school? My answer to that would be no (absent additional eduction). If your answer is yes, then why the need for overhauls? You're talking out of both sides of your mouth. On one hand you say the rhetoric about failing schools is based in minimal fact, and on the other you are proposing rather intense strategies to fix something that you apparently don't think is a problem.
Click to expand...

Seems to me you're moving the goalposts. Now a school system has to turn out 18-year olds prepared to compete in the global economy without more education, and if it doesn't, it's "broken" or "failed" as a whole? As pointed out, no developed country accomplishes that. Even using that absurd goalpost, I would respond by again pointing out that our public schools are world-beating in international tests when the segregated, poorest schools are removed. What better measure of preparation to compete do you have? Also, what evidence do you have that a substantial portion of graduates are getting diplomas without learning anything? Again, you are throwing around accusations and talking points not backed by evidence.

As to the charge of talking out of both sides of my mouth, I disagree. My position from the beginning of this thread has been clear: some individual schools are in trouble, almost always because of the issues caused by urban poverty. The general success of the 90% of Americans who attend public school, and the evidence from graduation rates rising and international test competitiveness, tells me that it is perfectly possible to create a well-run public school that educates kids well, because most of them do. Therefore we should invest in those schools that are struggling so we can make them not-struggling, like the majority of their peers. In doing so, we can and should use proven methods inspired by successful charters like KIPP or even turn the schools over to charter companies and let them run the schools.

Your position appears to be that all or a vast majority of public schools are failing, which is just not true, that it is impossible to fix any school because the whole system is hopeless, and so the rational decision is to just pull all the money out and subsidize private education, which currently makes up less than 10% of all school enrollment in the US. I think this is silly, and more than silly, I think it is a thinly-veiled attempt to get taxpayer dollars flowing into private religious schools that teach the kind of dogma Republicans tend to favor and/or are already populated by the children of wealthy white people. That money will benefit a few select poor children, but it will also be spent to improve the experience of the majority of the students in those schools who can and do pay full tuition.
 
PhDeac said:
2&2 how many more standardized tests do our kids need to take to be adequately prepared for the global economy?

Also NCLB has been in place for 12 years now. If you have a problem with how our children are being prepared, you need to include it in the discussion.

To BBD's point, we need to gear HS education toward preparing kids to harness their own skills to be their own business not just a cog in the corporate machines that will only be hiring fewer and fewer people going forward.
Click to expand...

I think most standardized tests are garbage. I'd probably do one day a year, maybe just one every other year. I think I took a standardized test in 4th grade, one in 8th grade, and then the SATs in high school. I don't see anything wrong with that structure if there is confidence in cirriculum.

Not sure how you want me to include NCLB in the discussion. It blows for the majority of students, and is a big reason for the bloat. But at this point in time, the reasons why we are where we are are somewhat irrelevant. NCLB, cross-town bussing, standardized tests, unions, funding, taxes ... they all play a role in the shitshow. The problem in the present and moving forward, is that it is such a tangled mess of a system that it is virtually impossible to conduct meaningful reform and, as I was mentioning earlier, all of that crap has lead to a complete mistrust of the system and an every-parent-for-themselves mentality.

I agree with your last statement, but the current system does not do that very well at all, and isn't going to do that very well in the foreseeable future. Part of the issue with education reform is that it is similar to the problem the NCAA would face with a players union. There is a finite period of time in which people are really concerned about it when it expressly affects them (12 years / 4 years), but before and after that they really don't give a shit compared to other things. I didn't care about education reform before I had kids, and I probably won't care too much once they are done with school. So it is a revolving door of interested parties, and it is difficult to implement wholesale change when the stakeholders are always changing. Obviously the administrators and teachers are the constant, which is why we have a lot of the problems we have, becuase they are approaching it from a different perspective than the students/parents. Which goes back to my earlier point that I don't think it will ever be truly fixed, and back to the every-parent-for-themselves attittudes that I do not think are going away.
 
The Mangler said:
I agree on the 10 days of testing at the end of the year. I don't see any reason why you couldn't test multiple subject areas on one test. You'd have to have fewer questions in each area which in theory reduces reliability of the test. I have to believe that the test on days 8, 9 and 10 are not particularly reliable so I don't see any real cost in consolidating some test.

In large classrooms I think teachers are frequently mistaken in their impression of where their kids stand along the mastery spectrum. I don't require a standardized test to determine where my students are but there is no reason I can't use the information gathered from it.

No argument from me that each child is different. Differentiation of instruction to meet the various needs children is a good thing; but, lowering expectations for the purpose of "success" is not. Nice use of bootstraps although it has zero applicability here.
Click to expand...

What about the week of testing after each quarter?
 
Testing cannot be set year after year. Otherwise teachers teach to the tests. Students only learn how to memorize to these questions and answers.

The biggest negatives that have happened to our education system over the past twenty is the virtual elimination of art and music programs. There are a myriad of studies showing how having art and music helps math and science abilities dramatically.

They also keep kids interested in school and in school. You never know who will be a late bloomer.
 
Last edited:
The big problem is that we have a decent subset of our children that cannot read or do simple math. It is not because of a lack of art and music. It is because poor neighborhood schools are under resourced, over managed from a federal level and have idiots for teachers.

As I stated earlier. Who cares about creationism when a kid can't read, speak, or do basic math? We need an educational system focused on the basics, and focused on getting local entities the proper resources without near as many strings attached.
 
Wrangor said:
The big problem is that we have a decent subset of our children that cannot read or do simple math. It is not because of a lack of art and music. It is because poor neighborhood schools are under resourced, over managed from a federal level and have idiots for teachers.

As I stated earlier. Who cares about creationism when a kid can't read, speak, or do basic math? We need an educational system focused on the basics, and focused on getting local entities the proper resources without near as many strings attached.
Click to expand...

I don't think federal micromanagement and itiot teachers play as significant a role as other factors.
 
Idiot teachers are a huge issue in Mississippi. Without TFA our public schools would be 4th world instead of 3rd.
 
Pay them more and attract better talent.
 
PhDeac said:
Pay them more and attract better talent.
Click to expand...

I agree...hence my adamance on getting the funds to the local entities instead if being wasted on middle men and national testing.
 
Last edited:
Wrangor said:
I agree...hence my adamance on getting the funds to the local entities instead if being wasted on middle men and national testing.
Click to expand...

There aren't middle men. As 923 showed less than 7% of funding comes from the feds. It's another false boogeyman created by the right.

As to kids not being able to do math and science, there is an abundance of studies that show not having art and music definitely and dramatically impacts this.
 
RJKarl said:
Testing cannot be set year after year. Otherwise teachers teach to the tests. Students only learn how to memorize to these questions and answers.

The biggest negatives that have happened to our education system over the past twenty is the virtual elimination of art and music programs. There are a myriad of studies showing how having art and music helps math and science abilities dramatically.

They also keep kids interested in school and in school. You never know who will be a late bloomer.
Click to expand...


Do the students from countries that outperform the US in math and science take a lot of art and music classes in school?
 
There's a difference between taking none like we do and some like other countries do.
 
RJKarl said:
There's a difference between taking none like we do and some like other countries do.
Click to expand...


Do they take any? I have a hard time imagining South Korean kids in art or music classes at school. They might I'm honestly asking. Does anyone know what sort of Arts programs exist in European, Asian, or other countries from the Americas?

..... ok decided not to be lazy. South Korea definitely has music and art as part of their national curriculum at least until high school.

Finland too.
 
Last edited:
No one is saying we need to get rid of art and music. We certainly need them. It is simply a red herring to point that out as a main reason our math and science scores have dropped.
 
Wrangor said:
No one is saying we need to get rid of art and music. We certainly need them. It is simply a red herring to point that out as a main reason our math and science scores have dropped.
Click to expand...

It's not a red herring. Many studies have shown that eliminating art and music (as many thousands of jurisdictions have) has led to lower scores and more importantly low abilities. To not see the correlation and causation is to be willfully blind.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top