School Grades (Memphis: public school, living in, pool)

[CravingMountains]

Looks like the elementary and middle school that I attended as a child are still doing awful. I won't say anything in too much detail about what the schools were like. Lets just say they were very......diverse .

[floridagirl777]

Originally Posted by DUNNDFRNT

I think it is your logic that is flawed. The poster is talking about schools and how they are graded. It is unfair to grade all schools regardless of their socioeconomic level on the same scale. We are talking about how schools are rated, and in that their educators, you cant say that a teacher who has a classroom full of kids who come from two parent homes, who's parents are involved and place an emphasis in academics, who get good grades is doing a better job than the teacher who has "disadvantaged" children, who's parents are apathetic to academics, or just don't have the time, because they get lower grades or dont perform as well in the FCAT. It is a fallacy. You want to somehow turn this into an "affirmative action" discussion, which is not, this are children not adults, you cant expect a second grader to take personal responsibility for their studies, you have to teach that behavior, and it usually comes from your parents, when they are not around then is an issue. I used to live in Brandon, my daughter went to a school which was very diverse, she was a b student at best, some c's. Once she started school in South Tampa it was night and day, you have a concentration of students who's parents expect them to do well, and are very involved, so its cool to be smart, its cool to do good in school, in that environment my daughter excelled,and I can tell you the teachers weren't that much better than the ones in Brandon.

That is exactly what I meant. Thank you for putting it so succinctly.

[algia]

I think the public education system should abide by the same guidelines in all 50 states. Disadvantaged area or not.

I don't think its unfair at all, because all children going to a public school should graduate with the same knowledge. Unless the idea is for some areas to fail purposely and remain on welfare for generations ahead continuing this ridiculous "class" discrimination.

Why should a kid be taught less just because he lives in crack town? he has the SAME BRAINS are the kids in Cheval!!!!! why treat them differently? that's STUPID!

Originally Posted by floridagirl777

This is just proof that our schools typically reflect the community from which they are drawing. It's sad that a school drawing from a disadvantaged area is graded using the same criteria as a school from a very affluent area. I find that to be very unfair.

[floridagirl777]

Originally Posted by algia

I think the public education system should abide by the same guidelines in all 50 states. Disadvantaged area or not.

I don't think its unfair at all, because all children going to a public school should graduate with the same knowledge. Unless the idea is for some areas to fail purposely and remain on welfare for generations ahead continuing this ridiculous "class" discrimination.

Why should a kid be taught less just because he lives in crack town? he has the SAME BRAINS are the kids in Cheval!!!!! why treat them differently? that's STUPID!

You misunderstood my post. I'm not saying they shouldn't abide by the same guidelines. I'm not saying they should be taught less. I'm saying that the way the schools are ASSESSED is unfair. Schools that do not perform well are penalized under our current system regardless of the students the serve. That is unfair to the teachers because they can't help it if their students are coming from illiterate parents or parents who do NOTHING with their kids at home.

Let me put it another way. Let's say you were a dentist, and you had a patient come in with horrible teeth. You did your best to clean the patient's teeth and instruct them how to brush, floss, eat, etc. Then that patient went home gorged on candy and sugary drinks and didn't floss or brush for and ends up with more cavities. Would it be fair to label you as a crappy dentist based on this patient? Of course not! It's the same with schools.

Teachers who teach in areas where children come from a two parent home, where mom and dad are both literate, intelligent individuals with above average IQ's who read to their children and provide them with the kind of backgrounds needed to succeed in school have a DISTINCT advantage.

Teachers who teach in areas where children come from a crack addicted parent who can't read or write, whose IQ is low, and who doesn't engage their children in any sort of meaningful activities are at a distinct disadvantage.

And while it IS true that every child has a brain, NOT every child has the same COGNITIVE ABILITY. Some kids are simply born with a stronger capacity for academic learning than others. A large chunk of people in this country have average intelligence. Smaller chunks of folks have above average or below average intelligence. Even smaller chunks of people are academically gifted or mentally challenged. Academic IQ is STATIC and cannot change much no matter what sort of environment a child is given.

A teacher with a class full of students with academic IQ's over 100 is going to have better test scores than a teacher with a class full of students with academic IQ's below 100. That's why FCAT is so ridiculous. Not every child is born with an average or above average IQ, and it's silly to assume that every child will perform well academically and score high on every standardized test presented to them. And I personally think we are doing our country a severe disservice by placing so much emphasis on academic performance. What about those kids who are artistically gifted or who have high mechanical intelligence? FCAT doesn't test for those things.

All I meant by my post was that our current system of school grading is unfair because it doesn't take the students' home environment or cognitive ability under consideration.

[DUNNDFRNT]

Originally Posted by algia

I think the public education system should abide by the same guidelines in all 50 states. Disadvantaged area or not.

I don't think its unfair at all, because all children going to a public school should graduate with the same knowledge. Unless the idea is for some areas to fail purposely and remain on welfare for generations ahead continuing this ridiculous "class" discrimination.

Why should a kid be taught less just because he lives in crack town? he has the SAME BRAINS are the kids in Cheval!!!!! why treat them differently? that's STUPID!

Not talking about curricula, just grading schools. The thought is when you grade a school, you are rating their performance, when you don't take into account the socioeconomic's of your student body, then its not a fair comparison. It could be a useful tool if you are judging which schools boundaries you want to move to, but its just that, it belongs in a bulletin board or as a footnote. Kids do have the same brains but they have different circumstances, you cant possibly argue the fact that kids from Cheval have a very different support systems, and set of life problems than a kid from cracktown, which btw is only offensive to hard working people in the lower income areas is also inaccurate this is Florida it would be more like cranktown.

[MortonR]

One of the primary metrics for the school grades is how well the lower 20% of the students in the school have gained over the year. In other words, it's not so much the top end, but how well you are bringing those students at the bottom end up.

This is probably the most difficult part for most schools, and for those in areas where socioeconomics come into play, a significant aspect of the school's performance.

Sadly, the grading system (I believe) is skewed in favor of the schools in areas of higher socioeconomic residents. Their percentage of "lower end" students is much smaller in many cases, and as a result, it is easier to target those students so that they make the required gains.

That being said, you get to a point of diminishing returns, meaning that there will be a point where these schools can't bring those lower end students up far enough to meet their targets, so the once mighty "A" school could easily slip to a "B".

The real travesty of the whole system is that "A" rated schools get bonus monies, where those schools who really need the assistance both financially and otherwise get nothing. The only way you get funds or additional resources in this system is if you get an "F". Get one two years in a row, and the state gives your students vouchers to go elsewhere. Now does that make sense?

Having been at an "A" school for several years, I found the use of monetary rewards demotivating and divisive. Why? Because the funds can be distributed somewhat arbitrarily. Teachers can get it all, or a large portion, while support staff get little or nothing. Granted, the argument can be made that teachers do most of the work, which for the most part is true, but they can't do that work well if their room isn't clean (custodian) or their children aren't fed (lunchroom) or their paperwork and such isn't managed (office staff) or their computers aren't working (technology support.)

Sadly, many a rift has been formed when a faculty votes to take the money themselves and give little or nothing to the support staff. Worse yet, I have seen where faculty has voted against including teachers who taught at the school the previous year (the year the grade was earned) that have transferred to another school.

Bring money into the equation and things get ugly.

Just my $0.02 having been in the thick of it.

RM

[New Horizons]

Originally Posted by floridagirl777

All I meant by my post was that our current system of school grading is unfair because it doesn't take the students' home environment or cognitive ability under consideration.

Cognitive ability? Maybe the chemistry word problems should be more like, "how much baking soda per 50 grams cocaine produces the proper density of crack?" You got to word these problems in a way that they can understand.

[SnowBirdMom]

Originally Posted by floridagirl777

This is just proof that our schools typically reflect the community from which they are drawing. It's sad that a school drawing from a disadvantaged area is graded using the same criteria as a school from a very affluent area. I find that to be very unfair.

Why? We should punish the kids who's parents work hard and are involved in their education by giving kid's who's parents do not special consideration? Life's not fair. It's a school's job to educate, not parent.

[MortonR]

Yes, but there is a direct connection between parental involvement and learning gains. It's not just a socioeconomic issue, but one of parental involvement. And that's not just having Mom be a stay at home and volunteering in the classroom and with the PTA - it's spending time with the child reading and promoting learning in general.

As a rule, those in higher socioeconomic classes will spend time with their children reading and assisting with homework, for example. In disadvantaged areas, the parent(s) often work full time and have fewer resources available to them to assist with educational opportunities. They are often less educated as well, which just adds to the problem.

I worked in a Title 1 school for several years, and saw many struggling parents who realized the value of an education, and insisted that their children make the most of it. These kids worked hard and got as much support as possible from their parent(s). While we had a fairly small pool of parent volunteers, the nights we had conferences nearly every child's parents showed up.

RM

[floridagirl777]

Originally Posted by desert_scene

Cognitive ability? Maybe the chemistry word problems should be more like, "how much baking soda per 50 grams cocaine produces the proper density of crack?" You got to word these problems in a way that they can understand.

Cognitive ability = a person's capacity for learning … their brain's ability to learn. Some children learn quickly and can retain things easily and have high cognitive ability. Others learn more slowly and need a great deal of repetition to retain what they are learning. These children have lower cognitive ability.