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.
The parents nor the students do not run the school. The Principal does. And no, if it were me, if I put you out you will stay out whether you are a student or a teacher. I will follow due process and be rid of you. Good Principals do that. The problem is that many of them just shove problem teachers and students off to some other school. Joe Clark showed us how to run things. If you do what he did, the failures may scream but many other parents will support what you are doing. Most people want the school to be safe, clean and a place where learning takes place.
Principals in my school district (MDCPS) do not have the power to permanently "put out" a student or a teacher. Due process can take years, during which time the student or teacher remains in the school.
I don't agree. Look for instance at grade levels below 6. For the most part, these schools don't operate in a manner which students are taught coarse specific material. They don't usually transfer classes each period. Instead, they are taught all subjects by the same teacher.
These students, though young, still must conform to the minimum test requirements established. Meaning, teachers in these rooms MUST teach to the least skilled student.
...which is EXACTLY why students who are already well beyond the minimum test requirements level SHOULDN'T be in classes with those who are still struggling.
Quote:
They must ensure that everybody must meet the minimum standards... and that is all.
...which is fine. But, NOWHERE in NCLB is there a requirement to hold everyone back to the minimum standard. The question is... why do schools do so?
Quote:
We as a society have never operated this way. This is a concept often encouraged by the left. We as a society should give people (and students) the oppurtunity to reach as high as they wish. NCLB simply has teachers focusing on the students in the worst academic shape... and then we wonder why our education system is falling behind.
Again... that's not a requirement of NCLB. That's how schools are interpreting NCLB, and how they are then choosing to operate. There are a few exceptions, like the Maryland school featured in the above link.
Quote:
The thing that is often forgotten though is that all of this happens only by the sacrifice of the students who WANT to learn as much as possible.
...which doesn't have to happen. Again, it's the school's choice to operate that way.
Quote:
The class should advance in material as long as the majority of students can keep up. If students fall behind, they should be removed from the class and put with students who are on about the same level.
Students who dont care, and their parents, should be put into the class of failures. This does nothing to help schools meet NCLB concepts, but at the end of the day, we have a more well rounded and educated populace. For this reason NCLB should be abolished.
Ability grouping, the generic term for what Rock View is doing, is a controversial practice in public education.
Quote:
Originally Posted by article
"I told the powers that be, 'Just let me do it,' " Roberson recalled
Quote:
Originally Posted by article
"They're really, really precise in the way they monitor students," he said. "So they know exactly where kids are, and they know where they want them to be."
1+1+1 = 3, right?
It's just SO simple to take a controversial system, TELL everyone you're just going to do it, AND have the resources to do it....
This works wonders in this instance for an admittedly SMALL Elementary School with a SMALL student/teacher ratio. You just don't see the logistical nightmare of applying it to a high school with 2500 kids and a 28-1 student/teacher ratio.... Teachers do NOT have time to closely monitor that many kids THAT closely... If you think they should make time or they should have time then you need to hire more teachers OR pay them a good amount more for the longer periods of time they are going to have to spend...
I'm going to stop here, because I appreciate your idealism, but I don't think you quite grasp some of the logistical issues here.
You don't like the Wikipedia summary?? Here is the entire College Board presentation: https://professionals.collegeboard.com/profdownload/pdf/200211_20702.pdf (broken link)
Read it and you will discover that "there have been over 20 different sets of scales used since the SAT exam's inception in 1926." This publication details the history of SAT scoring and the rationale behind the 1995 recentering. After you have read it, you can let us all know if it differs significantly from the Wikipedia summary.
I read it. It does not dispute Rudman's findings that the most precipitous score declines have been among the top quartile and mid-range achievers.
It's just SO simple to take a controversial system, TELL everyone you're just going to do it, AND have the resources to do it....
This works wonders in this instance for an admittedly SMALL Elementary School with a SMALL student/teacher ratio. You just don't see the logistical nightmare of applying it to a high school with 2500 kids and a 28-1 student/teacher ratio.... Teachers do NOT have time to closely monitor that many kids THAT closely... If you think they should make time or they should have time then you need to hire more teachers OR pay them a good amount more for the longer periods of time they are going to have to spend...
I'm going to stop here, because I appreciate your idealism, but I don't think you quite grasp some of the logistical issues here.
what I bolded is the main problem with NCLB....it was never properly funded
Principals in my school district (MDCPS) do not have the power to permanently "put out" a student or a teacher.
They DO have the ability to group students appropriately and target the curriculum to each group's ability/skill level in order to facilitate every student's education. Why do they fail to do so?
They DO have the ability to group students appropriately and target the curriculum to each group's ability/skill level in order to facilitate every student's education. Why do they fail to do so?
That was done years ago..assessment tests at the beginning of the school year. For some reason, unknown to me what the exact reason was, they stopped that and now just group everyone together to learn at the same rate.
Silly and stupid because you have kids that need to be challenged above their grade and others that need extra work to be brought up to their grade.
Stick them all in the same class and the best you can do is teach to a test to get them to the next grade.
You're completely missing the point. Separate the students into different classes according to skill/ability level and adjust the curriculum to target advancement of each class's level.
Sure, just run that one by the PC police and try telling parents their kid is going to be put in the low group and see what happens... It's a rosey world you live in where a principal just dictates what they're going to do at their schools and are set loose to do it.... The real world, sadly, does not work like that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by informedconsent
I don't know why you're stuck on adding more teachers. Use the same number of teachers but assign students to classes according to skill/ability levels and target each class's curriculum to advance achievement.
Because when you make a smaller section of kids in one class, you must make another section larger? You have specialized classes, you need MORE classes. MORE classes equals MORE teachers...
Really not that hard...
Quote:
Originally Posted by informedconsent
Why are you stuck on adding more teachers? Schools need to change what they're doing, how they're assigning students to classes, how they're targeting the curriculum for each class... That doesn't necessarily require more teachers.
Again, you create smaller classes, you must offset them with larger classes. Most schools and classes are already AT capacity. You can't just create an instructor, NOR can you simply create a room to hold your class...
It CAN work... It isn't a panacea for the entire education system unless you are willing to overhaul the entirety of the system (which, let me just tell you now. There is NO political will nor money to do...).
Quote:
Originally Posted by informedconsent
Only if you think having to adjust SAT scores by more than 100 points in the mid-1990's because of persistent, significant achievement declines back then 'better.'
Not sure what your malfunction here is on understanding.... Schools in the mid 90s were worse than they were in the mid 60s.... Mmmkay? I get that.... You seem to be denying that schools today are worse than they were in the mid 90s (ie... They are CONTINUING TO DECLINE!!!)... Not sure why you keep wanting to seemingly deny that...
Quote:
Originally Posted by informedconsent
That's where schools need to stop misinterpreting the NCLB requirements. It's NOT a mandate to dumb everyone down.
The fact that you THINK you know better than those on the front lines shows you haven't BEEN on the front lines....
When MORE resources are used to get underperforming kids up to the standards, LESS resources are used to improve upon the good kids.... Again, not rocket science here.
...which is EXACTLY why students who are already well beyond the minimum test requirements level SHOULDN'T be in classes with those who are still struggling.
...which is fine. But, NOWHERE in NCLB is there a requirement to hold everyone back to the minimum standard. The question is... why do schools do so?
Again... that's not a requirement of NCLB. That's how schools are interpreting NCLB, and how they are then choosing to operate. There are a few exceptions, like the Maryland school featured in the above link.
...which doesn't have to happen. Again, it's the school's choice to operate that way.
There's no reason why can't that be done now.
In the end the school and or the teacher, because of NCLB, will be judged based on the performance of the lowest achieving students. The school I'm most familiar with does regroup classes for reading, at least for grades 4 and 5. This has had good results, but if enough of the lowest students don't make it to proficient then the school will be judged a failure and various restrictions and ramifications will kick in, including the possible closing of the school. It won't matter how well they did with the high achievers or for that matter how well they did with the low achievers.
They DO have the ability to group students appropriately and target the curriculum to each group's ability/skill level in order to facilitate every student's education. Why do they fail to do so?
They absolutely do not. Ability grouping is a thing of the past in the Miami Dade County School System.
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.
