Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Why would I choose losers as my basis? Of course I choose winners. The fact is the top 10% here compare well to the top 10% worldwide, however, the rest drop off the map really fast. Yes, they lob off the bottom but that is not the issue. Our 75 percentile student doesn't compare to their 50th percentile student. THERE is the issue. Far more than their top 10% are successful and they're successful because they know their job is to learn and if they don't, they won't get to go to school.
.
I'm really looking forward hearing where you got this 10% number. Would be great if you could share the data.
I'm really looking forward hearing where you got this 10% number. Would be great if you could share the data.
That's something I picked up in my grad studies. Not sure if it was in books I've read but it was discussed quite a bit in classes. Our best compare well. The rest...
The argument is that the top succeed in spite of our system. I'm not sure if I can locate the source for this but I'll take a look. Most articles on the internet, that I've seen, do not break the data down by decade which is how it was discussed in college.
This is as close as I can get. This report looked at the 10% cut scores and the 90% cut scores. Note that while US scores were average, they are above average for the top 10%. They're average for the 90% cut here which means we must be lower somewhere between the 10th and 90th percentiles to account for an average score. Although it won't be by much using this data.
This table shows percent proficiency for the US. This has 9% (not 10%) attaining high proficiency. Close to what I was told in school compared well to the rest of the world's top.
That's something I picked up in my grad studies. Not sure if it was in books I've read but it was discussed quite a bit in classes. Our best compare well. The rest...
The argument is that the top succeed in spite of our system. I'm not sure if I can locate the source for this but I'll take a look. Most articles on the internet, that I've seen, do not break the data down by decade which is how it was discussed in college.
It makes a certain amount of sense that the most driven individuals would be driven by an internal need for success without regards for cultural context.
It makes a certain amount of sense that the most driven individuals would be driven by an internal need for success without regards for cultural context.
I agree. This makes perfect sense to me too. That's why I never bothered to find the data that was discussed in college. And, as a teacher, I know it drops off fast from there.
I find there is a small group of students who are determined to learn and then there's the rest. So I've just never questioned what I was told in school. It fits too well with what I see.
IME, the one thing that makes the most difference BY FAR is the attitude of the student.
Last edited by Ivorytickler; 07-23-2012 at 06:16 PM..
....I find there is a small group of students who are determined to learn and then there's the rest. So I've just never questioned what I was told in school. It fits too well with what I see.
IME, the one thing that makes the most difference BY FAR is the attitude of the student.
This holds true at the secondary level as well. I'd add another group: "appliance ( or mortgage or car payment) group". These are the people who make their career choice solely on how much they will make once they complete. They do just enough to pass the class and graduate so they can start bringing home pay. They do not go beyond what is required to do the job. Remember that next time you have blood drawn or talk to a career counselor and they barely speak let alone look at you....
This holds true at the secondary level as well. I'd add another group: "appliance ( or mortgage or car payment) group". These are the people who make their career choice solely on how much they will make once they complete. They do just enough to pass the class and graduate so they can start bringing home pay. They do not go beyond what is required to do the job. Remember that next time you have blood drawn or talk to a career counselor and they barely speak let alone look at you....
YIKES! This explains a few I've had draw my blood....
When I was in school, the first time, the university was up in arms over a study that concluded that 70% of the education majors had chosen the major for the summers off and 70% of the engineering majors had chosen the major for the paycheck (odd that the percents were the same but they were). They felt both majors should have had a majority choosing the major to change the world.
Apathy is killing us in the global market. There is this idea out there that I am owed a good living and should be rewarded well for just doing the minimum (A's for next to nothing is the start).
Grade inflation at my level is killing us. We're not allowed to actually demand anything of our students for fear we'll hurt their fee-fee's and set hover mom off. Parents demand I give rubrics (I try really hard not to as one of the skills I want my students to learn is self assessment of their work) and then split hairs with me over grading. I get garbage turned in that parents feel met the check marks on the rubric and think deserves an A.
IME, the one thing that makes the most difference BY FAR is the attitude of the student.
For those who are apathetic toward their education, those attitudes come from somewhere. So it makes sense to look at the family and the student's past experiences with education.
If the family doesn't value higher education, then a system set up on the foundation that college is a goal for all students is not set up to serve students for whom college isn't a goal. If the family doesn't participate in the student's education (just showing up to parent-teacher conferences doesn't reach the bar of "participating;" I watch the Superbowl, but that doesn't mean I participate as a football fan during the rest of the season), that student lacks a strong incentive to push themselves.
Or, look at past experiences with education. If the courses are boring or wrong for the ability of the student (too high or too low), then the student is not incentivized to focus on that task. And people apply past experience to future expectations, which in turn they use to how much effort is worth applying to a task.
For those who are apathetic toward their education, those attitudes come from somewhere. So it makes sense to look at the family and the student's past experiences with education.
If the family doesn't value higher education, then a system set up on the foundation that college is a goal for all students is not set up to serve students for whom college isn't a goal. If the family doesn't participate in the student's education (just showing up to parent-teacher conferences doesn't reach the bar of "participating;" I watch the Superbowl, but that doesn't mean I participate as a football fan during the rest of the season), that student lacks a strong incentive to push themselves.
Or, look at past experiences with education. If the courses are boring or wrong for the ability of the student (too high or too low), then the student is not incentivized to focus on that task. And people apply past experience to future expectations, which in turn they use to how much effort is worth applying to a task.
I agree that the attitude comes from somewhere but disagree that parental participation is needed. You can convey the message that education is important without actually participating. In fact, more often than not, I see too much participation on the part of mom and dad and too little on the part of Jr. Why should Jr. bother when he knows mom and dad will make sure it gets done/fixed.
I have dozens of students each year who blame me because they didn't turn their work in on time because I didn't remind them (writing it on the board and putting it on my web page, apparently, do not consitute reminding them). They are used to someone else managing their work load and telling them when things need to be done. I'd guess they learned this from mom and dad.
My parents were not involved with my education. They did not, regularly attend parent teacher conferences. They didn't know when I did or didn't have homework. However, they let me know, on no uncertain terms, that I would not sit down for a month if I brought home a bad grade or they were called to the school because of my behavior. It was my job to get decent grades and behave appropriately and I knew it. (FTR, decent meant better than a C average. My parents didn't care if we got A's or B's but I'm sure they would have been happy with them.)
I, actually, think over involved parents are a bigger issue. If too many parents are over involved then it becomes the norm for the peer group to have over involved parents (who remind you of deadlines and make sure you do your homework). Then you have kids like my dd#1 who does not have a hover mom who try to blame the fact they don't get reminded or have mom make sure it gets done instead of themselves. Dd#2 runs with the upper 5% and that problem doesn't exist there. That's actually something I find interesting. The high fliers do not have hover parents. They take responsibility for their own work and learning. Doing it for your kids doesn't make them like the high fliers. It just makes them dependent on mom to do it for them. What parents need to do is what my parents did. Hold your kids accountable for their own work.
Last edited by Ivorytickler; 07-24-2012 at 02:44 PM..
I agree that the attitude comes from somewhere but disagree that parental participation is needed. You can convey the message that education is important without actually participating. In fact, more often than not, I see too much participation on the part of mom and dad and too little on the part of Jr. Why should Jr. bother when he knows mom and dad will make sure it gets done/fixed.
I have dozens of students each year who blame me because they didn't turn their work in on time because I didn't remind them (writing it on the board and putting it on my web page, apparently, do not consitute reminding them). They are used to someone else managing their work load and telling them when things need to be done. I'd guess they learned this from mom and dad.
My parents were not involved with my education. They did not, regularly attend parent teacher conferences. They didn't know when I did or didn't have homework. However, they let me know, on no uncertain terms, that I would not sit down for a month if I brought home a bad grade or they were called to the school because of my behavior. It was my job to get decent grades and behave appropriately and I knew it. (FTR, decent meant better than a C average. My parents didn't care if we got A's or B's but I'm sure they would have been happy with them.)
I, actually, think over involved parents are a bigger issue. If too many parents are over involved then it becomes the norm for the peer group to have over involved parents (who remind you of deadlines and make sure you do your homework). Then you have kids like my dd#1 who does not have a hover mom who try to blame the fact they don't get reminded or have mom make sure it gets done instead of themselves. Dd#2 runs with the upper 5% and that problem doesn't exist there. That's actually something I find interesting. The high fliers do not have hover parents. They take responsibility for their own work and learning. Doing it for your kids doesn't make them like the high fliers. It just makes them dependent on mom to do it for them.
Fair enough point. When I say a parent's participation is important, I mean in support of the student, not in lieu of the student's own efforts. There's a notable difference between taking interest in the education of a child and doing things in place of the child. It's the difference between asking "How can I help you understand the material?" and "How can I help you finish your work?"
Nonetheless, your argument supports mine: parents are important factors in the attitudes of students.
Also, I avoid anecdotal evidence. It usually proves distorting to the argument to use one data point (i.e., that one individual's experience) as a representation of the whole population.
I agree that the attitude comes from somewhere but disagree that parental participation is needed. You can convey the message that education is important without actually participating. In fact, more often than not, I see too much participation on the part of mom and dad and too little on the part of Jr. Why should Jr. bother when he knows mom and dad will make sure it gets done/fixed.
Being involved does NOT mean doing anything for your children. It means different things at different ages but at no point does it require the parents to do school work for their children. But it does require that parents participate in the child's education.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ivorytickler
I, actually, think over involved parents are a bigger issue. If too many parents are over involved then it becomes the norm for the peer group to have over involved parents (who remind you of deadlines and make sure you do your homework). Then you have kids like my dd#1 who does not have a hover mom who try to blame the fact they don't get reminded or have mom make sure it gets done instead of themselves. Dd#2 runs with the upper 5% and that problem doesn't exist there. That's actually something I find interesting. The high fliers do not have hover parents. They take responsibility for their own work and learning. Doing it for your kids doesn't make them like the high fliers. It just makes them dependent on mom to do it for them.
Why do you equate participating in your child's education as doing things for them? My definition of participating is very different but at no point does it involve doing anything for my kids.
Involved parents in elementary school:
Talk to their kids about school.
Read the teacher's newsletter.
Participate in some school activities
Read to their child (K-2)
Read with their child(3-5)
Make sure there is a time/place set aside for homework
Make sure their kids have what they need for school
Make sure their kids comply with all deadlines
Involved parents in middle school:
Talk to their kids about school.
Pay attention to what their kids are learning
Participate in some school activities
Make sure there is a time/place set aside for homework
Ask their kids what they need for school
Ask their kids about any deadlines
Help their child plan for long term projects without doing the project itself
Involved parents in high school:
Talk to their kids about school
Help their child with course selection
Participate in some school activities
Make sure their child prioritizes homework
Helps their child with long term planning
Talks to their child about college or other post high school plans
Places appropriate limits on their child's social activities
None of these plans require a parent to actually do any work for a child. It requires a parent to participate in the daily life of their child and tells the child that education is a priority.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Of course I choose winners. The fact is the top 10% here compare well to the top 10% worldwide, however, the rest drop off the map really fast. Yes, they lob off the bottom but that is not the issue. Our 75 percentile student doesn't compare to their 50th percentile student. THERE is the issue. Far more than their top 10% are successful and they're successful because they know their job is to learn and if they don't, they won't get to go to school.
