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.
Yes it is true CCSD could do better by its bright. But that is actually not the issue with CCSD.
The real problem and the thing impacting CCSD performance is the lower half or third.
The very bright almost always beat the system. See Clark and Atech and such.
But the low end destroys the system.
Need best and brightest working the hard end of the spectrum. And the only way is likely to bribe them. Big bonuses for success in bad schools. Make it 50% or more and even our 08grad would volunteer.
Yes it is true CCSD could do better by its bright. But that is actually not the issue with CCSD.
The real problem and the thing impacting CCSD performance is the lower half or third.
The very bright almost always beat the system. See Clark and Atech and such.
But the low end destroys the system.
Need best and brightest working the hard end of the spectrum. And the only way is likely to bribe them. Big bonuses for success in bad schools. Make it 50% or more and even our 08grad would volunteer.
You want to throw more money at people who don't care at all about their education? Kansas City tried this already. They burned through $2 billion ($40,000/student), increasing teacher salaries to attract the best teachers, building all new schools with the best facilities in the nation. And test scores didn't change one bit.
Our legislature already tried to entice teachers to move to low performing schools. AB 434 allocated $2.5 million in bonus money for teachers to transfer from non-Title I schools to Title I schools. Why didn't it work? Well first off, less than 20% of our schools are non-Title I. Even if we took all the teachers from the top performing schools and sent them to our Title I schools, we wouldn't even fix half of the problem. In addition, most who teach at those highly rated schools aren't effective teachers, as student test scores show little growth year-over-year.
In addition, the bonus was a whopping $5,000. That's not going to entice anyone to move from West Tech to Cheyenne HS. This is exactly the problem. The problems in education are so gargantuan that we would need to almost double our funding to have any meaningful impact. When I hear Sisolak promising to "fund our schools" on TV, I don't think he has any clue how bad it actually is, he's just trying to score political points like Trump was when he was promising to deport the illegal immigrants.
To fix education, you need to look at what schools who are out-performing their demographics are doing. Places like Hyde Park MS, who match wealthier suburbs even though they have 3x as many free/reduced lunch price recipients. They're not doing well because they have better teachers instructing their bottom half of the school who is only there because it's free and they're required to be there. They do well because they offer high level accelerated programs that effectively educate the brightest in the school, and separating these students from those who don't care.
When families of neighboring schools hear that "Hyde Park has a great accelerated program", then all of the sudden the involved parents start putting in requests to enroll their child there instead of their neighboring school, and you start getting more proficient students to enroll. This is the same model we used in California to bring our school up from the 24th percentile to the 51st percentile. We continued to offer middle school Geometry when every other school was getting rid of it in favor of Common Core. When parents heard of our accelerated program, our transfer requests went up.
You have to fix the top of these schools before you can do anything about the bottom half that treats education as free daycare.
You're all missing one important thing when mentioning these test scores.
The useless garbage on the tests.
who gives a damn about the test? Idiots, that's who. Finland doesn't even give tests until their kids are 16. They have the best education system in the world. The main reason they even give tests at all is because colleges want test scores.
I don't want teachers that are more effective at teaching my kids garbage so that they get higher test scores.
I want teachers that more effectively teach my kids useful skills they will use all their life.
I'm one person. If I taught my kids everything I know, they'd be deficient because I have a limited range of knowledge.
Schools have dozens of teachers with dozens of skill sets. Schools should be about finding what kids are good at and then focusing on making them the best they can be. Schools should focus on making useful, functional adults instead of useless parrots.
My kids are excellent at artistic things. I SUCK at artistic things. I can't make them better. School can.
Stop worrying about some damn test. Worry about making our kids the best they can be. Knowing about ancient Mesopotamia is NOT beneficial to anyone. Knowing how to sportsball real goodly is not beneficial to anyone and is actually detrimental to the kids involved. Brain damage and such. Knowing how to cheer goodly as frig at the sportsballers is not beneficial to anyone. It's great at making females sexual objects though.
There's something out there for 90% of people. Schools can figure out what that something is and make the kids great at it.
I've had an idea for a documentary for a while. I want to take a couple groups of high school kids and have one learn a trade, accounting, welding, mechanics, business administration, etc, in a college class. Have the other groups learn difference ways. See which one does better by having real employers evaluate them blindly. I'm willing to bet that the class room kids do the worst.
My idea is vastly more complex than this, but this is a forum, don't want to spell it all out, but I think you get the gist of it.
I'm hoping I can secure funding for it in the near future. If anyone knows someone, let me know.
You want to throw more money at people who don't care at all about their education? Kansas City tried this already. They burned through $2 billion ($40,000/student), increasing teacher salaries to attract the best teachers, building all new schools with the best facilities in the nation. And test scores didn't change one bit.
Our legislature already tried to entice teachers to move to low performing schools. AB 434 allocated $2.5 million in bonus money for teachers to transfer from non-Title I schools to Title I schools. Why didn't it work? Well first off, less than 20% of our schools are non-Title I. Even if we took all the teachers from the top performing schools and sent them to our Title I schools, we wouldn't even fix half of the problem. In addition, most who teach at those highly rated schools aren't effective teachers, as student test scores show little growth year-over-year.
In addition, the bonus was a whopping $5,000. That's not going to entice anyone to move from West Tech to Cheyenne HS. This is exactly the problem. The problems in education are so gargantuan that we would need to almost double our funding to have any meaningful impact. When I hear Sisolak promising to "fund our schools" on TV, I don't think he has any clue how bad it actually is, he's just trying to score political points like Trump was when he was promising to deport the illegal immigrants.
To fix education, you need to look at what schools who are out-performing their demographics are doing. Places like Hyde Park MS, who match wealthier suburbs even though they have 3x as many free/reduced lunch price recipients. They're not doing well because they have better teachers instructing their bottom half of the school who is only there because it's free and they're required to be there. They do well because they offer high level accelerated programs that effectively educate the brightest in the school, and separating these students from those who don't care.
When families of neighboring schools hear that "Hyde Park has a great accelerated program", then all of the sudden the involved parents start putting in requests to enroll their child there instead of their neighboring school, and you start getting more proficient students to enroll. This is the same model we used in California to bring our school up from the 24th percentile to the 51st percentile. We continued to offer middle school Geometry when every other school was getting rid of it in favor of Common Core. When parents heard of our accelerated program, our transfer requests went up.
You have to fix the top of these schools before you can do anything about the bottom half that treats education as free daycare.
The message of Kansas City has very little to do with using money to advance education. It was in fact a zany attempt to integrate a black majority school system. It actually made no significant attempt to increase the quality of teachers or principals. It just paid its existing staff higher salaries.
Hyde Park and the Clark Magnet are not examples of how to improve the school district performance. They are simply cream separators...they draw the children with high academic skills and good parents. The real need is to deal with schools that have greater than 50% turnover and little if any parental support.
The problem is the free daycare schools. And Hyde Park is not a solution to that.
The tests are necessary. Without them know one has any idea what, if anything, the kids are learning.
The tests need to be structured that if they kids can pass the tests, they can perform the necessary skills to the level they need to in order to function in society.
Quote:
Originally Posted by EA
You're all missing one important thing when mentioning these test scores.
The useless garbage on the tests.
who gives a damn about the test? Idiots, that's who. Finland doesn't even give tests until their kids are 16. They have the best education system in the world. The main reason they even give tests at all is because colleges want test scores.
I don't want teachers that are more effective at teaching my kids garbage so that they get higher test scores.
I want teachers that more effectively teach my kids useful skills they will use all their life.
I'm one person. If I taught my kids everything I know, they'd be deficient because I have a limited range of knowledge.
Schools have dozens of teachers with dozens of skill sets. Schools should be about finding what kids are good at and then focusing on making them the best they can be. Schools should focus on making useful, functional adults instead of useless parrots.
My kids are excellent at artistic things. I SUCK at artistic things. I can't make them better. School can.
Stop worrying about some damn test. Worry about making our kids the best they can be. Knowing about ancient Mesopotamia is NOT beneficial to anyone. Knowing how to sportsball real goodly is not beneficial to anyone and is actually detrimental to the kids involved. Brain damage and such. Knowing how to cheer goodly as frig at the sportsballers is not beneficial to anyone. It's great at making females sexual objects though.
There's something out there for 90% of people. Schools can figure out what that something is and make the kids great at it.
I've had an idea for a documentary for a while. I want to take a couple groups of high school kids and have one learn a trade, accounting, welding, mechanics, business administration, etc, in a college class. Have the other groups learn difference ways. See which one does better by having real employers evaluate them blindly. I'm willing to bet that the class room kids do the worst.
My idea is vastly more complex than this, but this is a forum, don't want to spell it all out, but I think you get the gist of it.
I'm hoping I can secure funding for it in the near future. If anyone knows someone, let me know.
The tests are necessary. Without them know one has any idea what, if anything, the kids are learning.
The tests need to be structured that if they kids can pass the tests, they can perform the necessary skills to the level they need to in order to function in society.
The tests are necessary. Without them know one has any idea what, if anything, the kids are learning.
The tests need to be structured that if they kids can pass the tests, they can perform the necessary skills to the level they need to in order to function in society.
Yes, tests are necessary. Tests that are "taught to" so everyone can pass are not only not necessary they are teaching the wrong things to students, and are detrimental to our society.
It seems like the tests are geared more to keep them moving up to the next grade than gaining useful knowledge.
Easier for the teachers I suppose. Not that I blame them.
As far as schooling goes, hey, it's Vegas. As long as they can balance a tray of drinks and count money, they're golden.
Typical opinion from an out of towner who thinks all of Las Vegas is The Strip.
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.
Wrong Issue
