The Failure of U.S. Public Education (degrees, public school, mathematics)

[EDS_]

Originally Posted by chiociolliscalves

I also teach. This common complaint is a cop-out and a way to evade the larger issues that contribute to the failure of public education.

Too many standardized tests? Sure. Is a high-stakes, standardized test necessary? Of course, and it should be the largest criterion for measuring how a school is doing. What would you replace it with? Graduation rates? Percentage of students going to "college?" Those are a joke. Anyone in the system understands the games that are played with those numbers.

One of the real problems in public education is the general unwillingness to consider the possibility that we - teachers, administrators - are not all that great. Your school is probably like mine. Administrators and teachers alike are liable to comment on "what a great staff we have here." Probably not. Half of us are below average. I live with that fear about everyday I walk through those doors. Our school scores certainly suggest that and those tests that everyone loves to denigrate are pretty accurate in measuring how well our students are learning, or not learning, the things they're supposed to know by this point.

Thank you for stepping into the sunshine/line of fire and posting that set of comments.

IMO public education hamstrings itself via:
1). Belligerent equality over merit thinking seen clearly through seniority mattering far more than performance among teachers.
2). The reflexive fight response from teacher's groups every-single-time accountability measures are brought up. The hysteria over minimum standard - standardized tests being exhibit 1.
3). Same with any notion of competition.
4). Among the college educated we allow legions of people who are bottom 20% types to become teachers.
5). A general acceptance of low expectations.
_________________

And external/near-external things like:
1). Utterly clueless/disengaged parents.
2). Expecting schools to warehouse/educate kids who are more or less non-educatable.
3). School boards and PTA groups lacking proper focus.

[BJW50]

My wife, a retired teacher, says that in the past, the poorly perfoming students dropped out. Now we kiss thier ***es to keep them in school.

[Old Gringo]

Originally Posted by chiociolliscalves

I also teach. This common complaint is a cop-out and a way to evade the larger issues that contribute to the failure of public education.

It's a leading cause of the failure of US education.

Too many standardized tests? Sure. Is a high-stakes, standardized test necessary? Of course, and it should be the largest criterion for measuring how a school is doing. What would you replace it with? Graduation rates? Percentage of students going to "college?" Those are a joke. Anyone in the system understands the games that are played with those numbers.

Every school performs as well as the demographic it serves. That's true today and it was true a century ago. Flushing $billions from the education budget down the corporate rat hole of testing does nothing to change that. The money spent on testing doesn't go to facilities maintenance or learning resources. So buildings deteriorate, teachers leaving aren't replaced, class sizes increase, and learning suffers. But the testing companies continue to profit.

And the test scores do nothing but confirm the obvious: not all kids have the same ability to absorb learning in a one-size-fits-all approach.

But that one-size-fits-all is the cheapest way to herd mass quantities of kids through a system that's being deprived of assets in order to cut taxes to corporations. But it fits many very poorly. Vocational programs are cut back or eliminated, while kids are inappropriately funneled through a supposed "college prep" program that, in reality, simply doesn't fit the needs of a large % of students.

One of the real problems in public education is the general unwillingness to consider the possibility that we - teachers, administrators - are not all that great. Your school is probably like mine. Administrators and teachers alike are liable to comment on "what a great staff we have here." Probably not. Half of us are below average. I live with that fear about everyday I walk through those doors. Our school scores certainly suggest that and those tests that everyone loves to denigrate are pretty accurate in measuring how well our students are learning, or not learning, the things they're supposed to know by this point.

Half of any large group will be below average. So what? That's the reality of life according to simple statistics. Assuming that most American kids should be "above average" is ignorant. Assuming that most American teachers, physicians, computer code writers, or plumbers are "above average" is just as silly.

What this emphasis high stakes testing does is lower the level of instruction provided. Because the only metric that schools are judged on is those test results and "how many passed." If you've been teaching for any length of time, then you know that the tests aren't particularly challenging. The sharp students see them as a joke. The average kids don't struggle with them. Only the floundering students have difficulty passing those tests.

But since campuses, administrators and entire districts are rated by the % of kids who pass an easy test, the entire emphasis has turned to getting the low performing kids to pass, since they're the ones who affect that %.

Catering to the low performers has brought American education to where it stands today. I doubt that many would argue that it's an improvement over what it was a generation ago, before this testing mania took hold.

[Hulsker 1856]

Originally Posted by BJW50

My wife, a retired teacher, says that in the past, the poorly perfoming students dropped out. Now we kiss thier ***es to keep them in school.

In the past, those students would just get a job in the local factory. There they'd earn enough to buy a house and provide for a family.

Well, here's a newsflash: it's a lot harder to achieve that today when you're a high school dropout. Did it never occur to you that there might be a practical reason why, today, more importance was placed on getting a high school education?

[tnff]

Originally Posted by Old Gringo

...But that one-size-fits-all is the cheapest way to herd mass quantities of kids through a system that's being deprived of assets in order to cut taxes to corporations. But it fits many very poorly. ....
....

While I agree the one size fits none mentality hurts education, I don't believe it is being pushed from a cheapest perspective. I think many, perhaps most educators, and many in the public truly believe that everyone can and should go to college. They are unable to accept the fact that a large percentage of people would be far better served by vocational education rather than college. But there is an elitism among many that believe college is better and therefore even suggesting an alternative to college is a put down and discriminatory.

Originally Posted by Old Gringo

….Half of any large group will be below average. So what? That's the reality of life according to simple statistics. Assuming that most American kids should be "above average" is ignorant. Assuming that most American teachers, physicians, computer code writers, or plumbers are "above average" is just as silly.
....

There's a bit of misperception about the meaning of "average." Which is another failing of schools. Most people approach "average" as they were taught in elementary school. However "average" can be heavily skewed by the distribution and outliers. As used by most people it really only applies in a large random normal sample and not to a selected subset. Take for example this statement:

Originally Posted by EDS_

T...4). Among the college educated we allow legions of people who are bottom 20% types to become teachers.
.

It actually contradicts the statement that "half of teachers are below average" and not in a good way. What it's really saying is that among the population of college educated, more than half, perhaps many/most teachers are below average. If EDS' statement is true, or even approximately correct, it's a significant skewing of the population toward the mediocre.

[james777]

Originally Posted by CortezC

Here is the main problem with America's public education system:

YOU ALL SUCK AS PARENTS.

Yes, that's 50% of the problem. The other 50% is the rotten school administrators.

[EDS_]

Originally Posted by tnff

It actually contradicts the statement that "half of teachers are below average" and not in a good way. What it's really saying is that among the population of college educated, more than half, perhaps many/most teachers are below average. If EDS' statement is true, or even approximately correct, it's a significant skewing of the population toward the mediocre.

You know how this works. Half of any cadre is below the mean and half above. So of course half of all teachers are below the average for teachers.

My point is that among the college educated teachers by and large are overrepresented within the bottom half of that cadre.

[nedergras]

Quality of teacher decline is attributed to the unions.

[Tek_Freek]

Originally Posted by Old Gringo

It's a leading cause of the failure of US education.
Every school performs as well as the demographic it serves. That's true today and it was true a century ago. Flushing $billions from the education budget down the corporate rat hole of testing does nothing to change that. The money spent on testing doesn't go to facilities maintenance or learning resources. So buildings deteriorate, teachers leaving aren't replaced, class sizes increase, and learning suffers. But the testing companies continue to profit.

And the test scores do nothing but confirm the obvious: not all kids have the same ability to absorb learning in a one-size-fits-all approach.

But that one-size-fits-all is the cheapest way to herd mass quantities of kids through a system that's being deprived of assets in order to cut taxes to corporations. But it fits many very poorly. Vocational programs are cut back or eliminated, while kids are inappropriately funneled through a supposed "college prep" program that, in reality, simply doesn't fit the needs of a large % of students.
Half of any large group will be below average. So what? That's the reality of life according to simple statistics. Assuming that most American kids should be "above average" is ignorant. Assuming that most American teachers, physicians, computer code writers, or plumbers are "above average" is just as silly.

What this emphasis high stakes testing does is lower the level of instruction provided. Because the only metric that schools are judged on is those test results and "how many passed." If you've been teaching for any length of time, then you know that the tests aren't particularly challenging. The sharp students see them as a joke. The average kids don't struggle with them. Only the floundering students have difficulty passing those tests.

But since campuses, administrators and entire districts are rated by the % of kids who pass an easy test, the entire emphasis has turned to getting the low performing kids to pass, since they're the ones who affect that %.

Catering to the low performers has brought American education to where it stands today. I doubt that many would argue that it's an improvement over what it was a generation ago, before this testing mania took hold.

I'm not an educator. I'm someone who went through the grind as a child. A bored child. For years everything I was taught in schools were things I already knew. They put me on the Advanced Track. So? No difference. I still knew it. Teachers consistently made comments on my report cards to the effect that I was disruptive in class. Disruptive? I was bored! Didn't you notice that I aced all your tests without reading the material or studying?

Now, if I understand how No Child Left Behind works I would not end up in Advanced Track. I'd be stuck in a room where the dumbest kid in school determined what I would be taught.

What think tank group of wizened professionals came up with this brilliant scheme? And how many intelligent students are being harmed by such a constrictive agenda?

It is time for a change. Not only in teaching methods, but in the amount of money put in place to teach our children on a par with other countries.

[nedergras]

Originally Posted by Tek_Freek

I'm not an educator. I'm someone who went through the grind as a child. A bored child. For years everything I was taught in schools were things I already knew. They put me on the Advanced Track. So? No difference. I still knew it. Teachers consistently made comments on my report cards to the effect that I was disruptive in class. Disruptive? I was bored! Didn't you notice that I aced all your tests without reading the material or studying?

Now, if I understand how No Child Left Behind works I would not end up in Advanced Track. I'd be stuck in a room where the dumbest kid in school determined what I would be taught.

What think tank group of wizened professionals came up with this brilliant scheme? And how many intelligent students are being harmed by such a constrictive agenda?

It is time for a change. Not only in teaching methods, but in the amount of money put in place to teach our children on a par with other countries.

More money needs to go to the food quality provided to pupils. District of Columbia spends the most per pupil in the country... on par with Western European countries, yet the result is still lackluster. Given that most of those pupils are from backgrounds of poverty, food would go a long way. Even in average American families, the food palette is deplorable.