Education Reform Thread

[Aksannyi]

NCLB was passed in 2001.

[Zeb]

They started doing shit like that before the 90s. I remember some of it around '87.

[Churchill]

NCLB was the spiritual successor to identical state ran programs on a national level. In Arizona I want to say it was called AIMS testing when I was a kid but it changed pretty often.

Arizona also put a lot of money into basically educating the smartest kids at each school separately, and still does.

[Zetanio]

NCLB was passed in 2001.

The No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (NCLB) is a United States Act of Congress that is a reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, which included Title I, the government's flagship aid program for disadvantaged students.

What changed the landscape was https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Improv...ls_Act_of_1994.

The crux of the change is here.

The most recent and significant alteration to the original Title I was made by its reauthorization under No Child Left Behind (NCLB).[13] In this reauthorization, NCLB required increased accountability from its schools both from the teachers and from the students.[13] Yearly standardized tests were mandated in order to measure how schools were performing against the achievement bars set by Title I.[13] Schools were also responsible for publishing annual report cards that detailed their student achievement data and demographics.[13] Schools were now held accountable not only by punitive measures that would be taken if schools fail to meet Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP), but also corrective actions were taken if states did not have an assessment system approved by Title I.[13] Under NCLB, Schools are also required to plan for “restructuring” if they fail to make AYP for three years after being identified for improvement.[13] More schools took corrective action under NCLB than under IASA.[13] NCLB also required teachers to be highly qualified if hired using Title I funding.[13]

[Aksannyi]

They started doing shit like that before the 90s. I remember some of it around '87.

They had the Iowa Test of Basic Skills, which I took in the 80s-90s, but it didn't decide whether or not you were promoted to the next grade, it was just diagnostic, and treated as such by the teachers and administration. The tests students take now actually make a difference in whether or not the students can progress and are much more important in determining things like school funding and teacher pay.

Basically, not quite the same.

Or, what Zetanio posted, thank you.

[Byrthnoth]

There is if you realize that privilege can widely affect your learning. My students go home to crack-addled parents who don't watch the younger siblings so the kids has to while being so hungry they can't even think.


How are they supposed to do homework/study? It is not their fault their parents are fucked up. But the school had no money to hire what these kids really need (ie cooking healthy and cheap classes), because we have to focus on what is important for the test.

But by teaching them algebra means they will also be ducked up when they grow up and the cycle will continue.

Honesty, after teaching at a rich CEO school and a low income gang heavy school, I can tell you common core is the dumbest shit ever because we have no funding

Schools need money, not tests.

Private schools age teaching their kids just fine without the tests. And they have money. That's where the problem lies.

See, all of these things are irrelevant to the idea of quantifying someone's education and comparing it to the national minimum education standard. The problems you're talking about are caused by the way that the government chooses to respond to the results (penalties). They should be using these tests to identify problem areas and focus efforts there, rather than penalizing "problem districts." An easy solution (for me to say) would be to combine neighboring school districts that get disparate results.

[Zeb]

They had the Iowa Test of Basic Skills, which I took in the 80s-90s, but it didn't decide whether or not you were promoted to the next grade, it was just diagnostic, and treated as such by the teachers and administration. The tests students take now actually make a difference in whether or not the students can progress and are much more important in determining things like school funding and teacher pay.

Basically, not quite the same.

Or, what Zetanio posted, thank you.

Wells, ME. 1987. I (and a couple other kids) went from the highest math class to the lowest going from 5th to 6th grade. I don't remember what the program was called but I remember my parents reading the letter they got about it. Supposedly, it was to help the slow kids. Damned if I know how. The funny thing was, after sleeping through that class they put us back in the same class the next year. The teacher kicked us out on the first day and put us in an actual class though.

[Ksandra]

I think the tests here are done by the state, though I admit I really don't know where the FSA and its predecessor, the FCAT, originate from.

They are adapted from McGraw-Hill and Harcourt tests. Names sound familiar? I am sure you know who they are, and maybe give you an idea of what I am talking about.

FSA (Florida State Assessment), which is new as of last year, requires essays, and I don't know if other state assessments do, as my focus is rather turned toward Florida and little else, since I have no plans to teach outside of Florida, at least for the time being. To me, a writing sample is a much better indicator of whether or not students can make connections, find evidence, and prove comprehension than multiple choice questions are, so that, at least, is moving in the right direction.

Be prepared for a shock:

Grades do not see the writing. Ever. They have someone read it to them so they will not judge the writing and spelling (one reason spelling has gone to shit in schools). They have a rubric they follow to grade it. If you can find somehow to get that rubric (doable), you can get your kids to ace the test no matter how poorly they write.

I just don't like people who hate on Common Core without realizing that there are so many other factors at work that go along with it.

The problem is it is a major root that 1. causes many of the other factors and 2. ignores the rest.

The thing about requiring standards of education in a public school is that you need some way to quantify whether you are meeting those standards.

First off, you can do this without needed a standardized test.

Secondly, why? If pre-test craze education was better than current test craze education, why continue it? If anything the data result is test craze ruined education and therefore should be eliminated.

You are basically saying that you want a lot more kids to have a poor education in order to have data that shows that a lot more kids have a poor education.

When you factor in the disparity in teacher:student ratios between poorer and wealthier areas, learning disabilities, ESL, etc the amount of things you can fairly measure universally fall drastically.

Which is why it is widely an unrealistic expectation. Yet MORE pressure has been put on teachers over time to have them perform, not less. Fix the outside factors first then look at possibly having a test or some shit.

Going back to pre-standardized testing just isn't an option in this country either, so we are sort of stuck with the shit we have.

Why?

And for what it's worth the problem exists at a college level too. Ever tried teaching physics in an auditorium to 200+ students using slides? You want to know what doesn't happen for the entire time you are teaching physics to those 200 students? Anyone learning any physics - that is what doesn't happen.

College is where this becomes the biggest issue. Colleges do not have to follow any common core standardized shit. If you think about it, college back in the day were a better standard than these tests. Because teachers focused on teaching what would make kids pass college. What the fuck does common core have to do with college? I pity professors because we are handing them a bunch of ignorant young adults, over this stupid standard.

Are these Common Core things only affecting public schools or Private as well? Not that I feel the private schools (that aren't the super fucking rich people only ones) are really any better/different cause some of the dumbest people I know went to private schools.

I hate our current education system and I am fearful of entering my children into it when I have them, no idea what the fuck I'm going to do. I want them to have what I had which seemed to be just fine.

Private schools do not have to teach common core or follow common core in any way. Now, back when we were going to school, I would have said private schools would be a waste of money for the average person. Now, I am desperate to work at one again so I can send my kids there. The school I taught at, the kids were no different than when I went to school. Why? Because private schools never had to change their system. It was a system that worked and they kept it (albeit with newer technology added). The 7th graders I taught could write at probably an 11th grade level for my current school. Not because they are any smarter, but because the kids can focus and have the resources they need to succeed, and the teachers aren't wasting time with tests.

Every year those kids take what is called the ERBs, which is basically a fake test just to prepare them for the SATs.

They should be using these tests to identify problem areas and focus efforts there, rather than penalizing "problem districts." An easy solution (for me to say) would be to combine neighboring school districts that get disparate results.

First, good neighborhoods and bad neighborhoods can be separated by one street and so combining neighboring school districts can have a huge issue that has nothing to do with schools. And then you have more country areas where school districts can be miles apart.

And again, even if it were to identify problems, it would still cause schools to define what is important and what isn't. As long as you aren't testing pe and art, more pe and art classes will be cut.

I cannot stress enough that the biggest factor in education is money. Less and less money is being provided to schools, and they are getting progressively worse because of it. Parents and non parents need to be more active writing to their legislatures to stop these tests and give more money to the schools. They do not have the resources (whether it's more teachers, or computers in the classrooms, or what) to teach well. The tests are not going to help them teach well.

[Ksandra]

This is not some conspiracy theory btw, this is well known that these tests have a lot to do with money making:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...ting-policies/

The four corporations that dominate the U.S. standardized testing market spend millions of dollars lobbying state and federal officials — as well as sometimes hiring them — to persuade them to favor policies that include mandated student assessments, helping to fuel a nearly $2 billion annual testing business, a new analysis shows.

The analysis, done by the Center for Media and Democracy, a nonprofit liberal watchdog and advocacy agency based in Wisconsin that tracks corporate influence on public policy, says that four companies — Pearson Education, ETS (Educational Testing Service), Houghton Mifflin Harcourt, and McGraw-Hill— collectively spent more than $20 million lobbying in states and on Capitol Hill from 2009 to 2014.

For those that may not know, these companies are the major suppliers of textbooks. When schools started to loose funding, they kept reusing their textbooks year after year until they would fall apart until they would have to buy a new one.

Getting to reuse textbooks over and over again does poorly for the textbook companies pockets.

How do you solve that problem? Make tests that don't follow those textbooks, so schools have to buy the new ones to follow the standards. Note: state standards are also tied into these textbook companies.

I guarantee that unless something changes, every 4-5 years the common core standards will be "improved" so new textbooks will need to be bought.

This isn't about improving education. This is about money.

[BerenTebogo]

That isn't really new though. The SAT has been around for a long time and the ONLY thing the SAT tests is how well you can take the SAT.

[Ksandra]

That isn't really new though. The SAT has been around for a long time and the ONLY thing the SAT tests is how well you can take the SAT.

Yes but the difference is:

1. You didn't need the SAT to graduate
2. SAT scores don't define the school districts
3. You can't be fired for your kids doing poorly on the SATs
4. SATs happen once on your own time rather than taking up school time.

[Ksandra]

I forgot to mention, more and more parents are opting out of the CT state tests. Rumor has it the companies are lobbying that teachers should be able to be fired if too many of their students opt out.

I mean wtf if that ends up being true.

[BerenTebogo]

Yes but the difference is:

1. You didn't need the SAT to graduate
2. SAT scores don't define the school districts
3. You can't be fired for your kids doing poorly on the SATs
4. SATs happen once on your own time rather than taking up school time.

I'm not saying it isn't a problem, I'm just saying it isn't new.

But what the shit, you can get fired for your kids doing poorly on state tests? Where?

[Ksandra]

But what the shit, you can get fired for your kids doing poorly on state tests? Where?

NCLB was really created to combat the teacher's union. It makes it so if you don't perform, you can be fired. Way they find out if you are performing? How your children do on the tests.

FYI, these tests aren't testing students, they are testing teachers. That's why there is a desperate need to teach to the test.

Example:

http://www.lohud.com/story/news/loca...ance/70798718/

[Ksandra]

also (sorry for the double posting, feeding kids lol) you can still go to college with a shit sat score. People who are great sports players or artists or w/e can still get in on scholarships. The college gets to decide that. Fail the high school exit exam? Don't get a high school diploma, no matter where your talents lie.

[BerenTebogo]

also (sorry for the double posting, feeding kids lol) you can still go to college with a shit sat score. People who are great sports players or artists or w/e can still get in on scholarships. The college gets to decide that. Fail the high school exit exam? Don't get a high school diploma, no matter where your talents lie.

GED says hello.

[Ksandra]

GED says hello.

Sorry, yes you are right, but getting a GED for many is going to be more time consuming than going to college with a low SAT score but with a talent.

[BerenTebogo]

Sorry, yes you are right, but getting a GED for many is going to be more time consuming than going to college with a low SAT score but with a talent.

There is no requirement other than showing up to take a test. If the only problem is that you bombed the standardized high school test because x, y, or z, but were otherwise at least half awake through HS it is a hilariously easy test.

I do appreciate that there are many people for whom it is not an easy test, but it's not like there aren't ways to study for it. There are even free sample tests online.

I get the points you are trying to make, but I don't think there is a single reasonable person here who doubts that schools need more money. There are a number of reasons to say that common core may not be the great evil that some are touting it as.

I genuinely cannot do math the common core way because I was not taught that way and I don't give a shit to learn. That doesn't make it bad by definition though. In some areas of study students absolutely reach a point where you can no longer use logic or any tool other than sheer force of will through rout memorization, but before then, with the basics, it's reasonable to assume there is a better way to teach basic math.

I don't know fuck all about common core gen. ed topics so I can't comment on that, but I do see plenty of people complaining "if I can't do my child's math homework, how can they?!" Like motherfucker you can't do college algebra without seriously thinking about it, shut the fuck up.

[Ksandra]

The problem I see is that students should not be treated as a science experiment that can fuck up a future generation of adults that are supposed to be keeping us future old people alive.

Regarding common core math, I am fine with doing different tricks to help students learn if they need it. (Please excuse my dear aunt sally, pacman less/greater than signs are great examples) But that should be supplementary based on individuals' needs as seen by the teacher actually teaching them. All teachers monitor and alter their lessons based on what they see from their students. I could easily see this method being something used for students who just don't get the other way. Then, yes, if it seems revolutionary in a way that kids are picking up super fast, then it could spread. Don't force an entire country to implement it. It goes back to the idea of taking freedom to teach what works out of the teachers' hands.

[BerenTebogo]

The problem I see is that students should not be treated as a science experiment that can fuck up a future generation of adults that are supposed to be keeping us future old people alive.

Regarding common core math, I am fine with doing different tricks to help students learn if they need it. (Please excuse my dear aunt sally, pacman less/greater than signs are great examples) But that should be supplementary based on individuals' needs as seen by the teacher actually teaching them. All teachers monitor and alter their lessons based on what they see from their students. I could easily see this method being something used for students who just don't get the other way. Then, yes, if it seems revolutionary in a way that kids are picking up super fast, then it could spread. Don't force an entire country to implement it. It goes back to the idea of taking freedom to teach what works out of the teachers' hands.

Sticking with the math example: I know many math teachers as one of the options at my undergrad was math education. Basically a math degree lite. I only know one person in that program who got above B- average in the 4 years I was there for the few higher level courses they were required to take, courses which enhance your understanding of math at a more fundamental level and help you teach it.

I don't trust random Joe math teacher to have any fucking clue what my imaginary kid needs to properly learn math. Sorry, that's the reality of it. And if I was ultra poor and only had access to poverty line education systems? Fuck no.

The reason there is even an experiment happening is because the way we teach basic math doesn't work well. We teach math the same way biology students learn parts of the cell. Think about how wildly incorrect that is. You, me, and everyone else here got by with it - it is still horribly wrong (at least at an arithmetic level). It needs to be changed, and not by selective choice from someone who is most likely not qualified to make said choice.

There is a logic and beauty to math that is being steamrolled over. It's part of the reason why when kids hit algebra and are introduced to imaginary numbers and abstract concepts they fall the fuck apart. Abstract concepts don't always jive with what you've learned as a purely mechanical operation.

There are times to be resistant to change, I genuinely don't think this is one of them.