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.
He didn't rip anything apart, he pointed at a few bad apples and used that as an argument to criticize all charter schools.
Even he had to admit that charter schools do better on average. He did make a good argument agains a subsection of charter school, but that also means ordinary charter schools do well.
So the conclusion is not to ban or discourage charter schools, but to ensure that charter schools provide high quality.
Charter schools get to pick which kids they get. Behavior problem? Gone. Attendance problem? Gone. Special needs? Gone. Of course they are going to make AYP and look better than the public schools that educate everyone, regardless of behavior, attendance, special needs, ESL ststus.....
Opponents of NCLB argue the increased testing has created an environment where teachers teach to the exam.
"Just as importantly, there is no evidence that any test score increases represent the broader learning increases that were the true goals of the policy — goals such as critical thinking; the creation of lifelong learners; and more students graduating high school ready for college, career, and civic participation," the National Education Policy Center (NEPC) at the University of Colorado Boulder wrote in a memo in February.
Quote:
In 2002 when NCLB law was written it mandated that, "Each State shall establish a timeline for adequate yearly progress. The timeline shall ensure that not later than 12 years after the end of the 2001-2002 school year, all students ... will meet or exceed the State's proficient level of academic achievements on the State assessments ...", in essence requiring that all states have 100% proficiency by 2014.
The problem with this stipulation is two-fold, according to critics of NCLB.
First, states' proficiency levels and standards were subjective under NCLB. This allowed for a situation where 50 different measures of proficiency among the 50 states could exist.
Critics call this a "race to the bottom."
Quote:
Second, 2014 has come and passed, but universal proficiency has not been achieved. This has forced the federal government to provide waivers to states that allow them relief from complying with NCLB stipulations. As of November 2014, 43 states and the District of Columbia had been granted waivers.
Charter schools get to pick which kids they get. Behavior problem? Gone. Attendance problem? Gone. Special needs? Gone. Of course they are going to make AYP and look better than the public schools that educate everyone, regardless of behavior, attendance, special needs, ESL ststus.....
And why is that a problem? Why is everyone so intent on harming the education of the top students just to feel good about the bottom ones? Because that is what our system does. It holds back the best to the pace of the slowest in the class. How does that help education?
And why is that a problem? Why is everyone so intent on harming the education of the top students just to feel good about the bottom ones? Because that is what our system does. It holds back the best to the pace of the slowest in the class. How does that help education?
Moving out the top students is not a problem. May even help. Bright kids under challenged can be a real PITA.
But if you move out half or all of the kids who are cooperative and desire an education what is left. Suddenly the poor student pool completely dominates the class room. Maintaining order becomes a vitrtually impossible job. 1 or 2 or 3 bad actors in a class of 20 can be contained and dealt with. But 8 or 10? Now the teacher is in trouble and class gegenerates to survival.
And why is that a problem? Why is everyone so intent on harming the education of the top students just to feel good about the bottom ones? Because that is what our system does. It holds back the best to the pace of the slowest in the class. How does that help education?
Exactly. Why sacrifice the education of the majority to deal with the minority who aren't able or willing to behave?
I understand that in many cases, kids act out due to factors beyond their control (poor home life, undiagnosed learning problems, etc), but while this is sad and unfortunate, it's not fair that the children who ARE behaving are forced to deal with it. I'd rather my kids be surrounded by children who want to be there in a school situation than leave them to be influenced poorly by kids who don't care and who aren't able or willing to put forth basic effort.
Charter schools get to pick which kids they get. Behavior problem? Gone. Attendance problem? Gone. Special needs? Gone. Of course they are going to make AYP and look better than the public schools that educate everyone, regardless of behavior, attendance, special needs, ESL ststus.....
A lot of charter schools use lottery, and they are still better than local schools.
Also, when schools in an area is terrible, then it is good to have a school with selective enrollment. Then at least the good students can use their time to learn, and eventually go to college. Forcing them to go to a bad public school is a huge risk, because at best they will be distracted, and at worst they wil be lose their academic interest.
Quote:
Originally Posted by nana053
The problem with your pie chart is that AYP is a terrible way to measure schools.
Only terrible if you don't want kids to learn what they are supposed to. From the sound of it, it sound great, it holds teachers accountable, it ensures that bad schools get closed down, and it is not that affected by grade inflation.
Only terrible if you don't want kids to learn what they are supposed to. From the sound of it, it sound great, it holds teachers accountable, it ensures that bad schools get closed down, and it is not that affected by grade inflation.
Do you really think it is realistic to have 100% of the students at or above level? Do you understand that averages mean that some kids are going to be below and some above?
Moving out the top students is not a problem. May even help. Bright kids under challenged can be a real PITA.
But if you move out half or all of the kids who are cooperative and desire an education what is left. Suddenly the poor student pool completely dominates the class room. Maintaining order becomes a vitrtually impossible job. 1 or 2 or 3 bad actors in a class of 20 can be contained and dealt with. But 8 or 10? Now the teacher is in trouble and class gegenerates to survival.
This is a huge issue. I know a few teachers (who are quite talented given the right resources) who were put into these situations and they simply refused to stay in those environments. One was put into a class where all the troubled kids were dumped. Another just kept getting shifted schools into worse and worse schools because she could "handle it" and they thought she'd be a good fit. Both of them quickly left those situations and moved onto new positions. Teachers simply aren't willing to stay in those sorts of environments when the pay is the same and the stress level is much higher than you'd have in other schools.
With the added pressure and threats of firing if teachers don't make adequate progress with children, there isn't much incentive for the best teachers to stay in the worst schools. I live near an area where "school choice" is big. One district is just awful because there's no concept of having a good neighborhood school. That essentially means you have to send your child to a charter or magnet if you live in that (huge) district. They all have lotteries and the quality, particularly with the charters, can vary dramatically. I know people who finally got their kids off the waitlist for charters only to say that charter wasn't actually very good after all.
Unfortunately not all schools have Gifted programs and at the upper level very few have vocational/technical programs, so if you have children with special interests/needs who can't get into a program, it's a real challenging. Part of the problem is that when you put so much funding into limited access magnet/charter programs, the children who don't have access can be left out in the cold.
Exactly. Why sacrifice the education of the majority to deal with the minority who aren't able or willing to behave?
I understand that in many cases, kids act out due to factors beyond their control (poor home life, undiagnosed learning problems, etc), but while this is sad and unfortunate, it's not fair that the children who ARE behaving are forced to deal with it. I'd rather my kids be surrounded by children who want to be there in a school situation than leave them to be influenced poorly by kids who don't care and who aren't able or willing to put forth basic effort.
Again I ask...so forget those kids? Rather than have a professional, separate classes at times, and a plan to get those at risk kids on track, we should just let them go? That is ridiculous. So many kids don't live up to their potential for quite some time and cutting them loose is just a bad idea. Yes, those kids shouldn't interrupt my kid's education...and in most cases, they are pulled or have an aide if they are that bad. If your system doesn't, then they've been incorrectly defunded.
And why is that a problem? Why is everyone so intent on harming the education of the top students just to feel good about the bottom ones? Because that is what our system does. It holds back the best to the pace of the slowest in the class. How does that help education?
It doesn't which is why you need to do your part as a citizen and insist your schools find a way to deal with that. Cherry picking the good kids into a charter school isn't the answer because your leaving behind other kids...any of whom are good kids to but didn't make the cut for the charter school.
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.
