Haven't had time to empty my inbox is several weeks, so, before I finish reading this thread, I want to point out that Eorl makes a valid point: there were kids in the 40s and 50s who were more interested in sports and music than in science.
This has been true since our forebears left the African savannah.
Watering down science requirements is not the answer but, perhaps, a means to the end of making students more interested in science might include demonstrating the practical application of science in everyday life and allowing kids to take science classes -- or at least one science class -- on a pass/fail basis.
0 Replies
plainoldme
1
Reply
Fri 11 Mar, 2005 10:38 am
Idaho -- It is not just after WWII that "parents wanted everything to be sweetness and light." There is a pattern of retreat from involvement in everything but the more soothing and, some might say, frivolous aspects of life following all wars.
World War II advanced technology. But it also brought about the notion of young women marrying at 18. The second is, in large part, a backlash against the technological boom of WWII, a step toward an imaginary age of peace and plenty.
Last year, I subbed for six weeks in a biology classroom. I acted on my idealisism and photocopied articles from several journals, including Harvard Magazine, National Geographic, Discover and Scientific American, which showed why science is important to everyone. The kids claimed that since I was a substitute, the work didn't count. I resolved that when and if I am a "real" teacher, I will grade work done under the supervision of a substitute double. That'll get the little rotters.
My own children watched Nova by my side for years. They were given subscriptions to magazines appropriate to their age level, from Ranger Rick to Zoo Books and finally to Discover and Scientific American.
Whoever wrote that what is needed is parental involvement hit the nail right on the head. And that proves something else: that American education today hasn't declined. If the kids' parents don't care, it may be because they weren't educated and the kids' grandparents didn't care.
0 Replies
Brandon9000
1
Reply
Fri 11 Mar, 2005 01:36 pm
plainoldme wrote:
..American education today hasn't declined...
I am unaware of teachers in 18th century schools needing to fear being shot by their students.
0 Replies
plainoldme
1
Reply
Mon 14 Mar, 2005 01:40 pm
Brandon -- You seem particularly out of touch and given to flip answers to me.
First of all, standardized testing as envisioned by the bush gang is one of the biggest frauds ever perpetrated on the American public.
These so-called tests are the work of for-profit companies. The original tests were composed by otherwise out of work college grads, kids as green as grass, who simply took text books, opened them to the indexes, looked up certain phrases -- like set theory -- or names -- like Marie Antoinette -- turned to the body of the book and composed questions that, in their limited experience, had something to do with the words in the index. These folks had no teaching experience and had little sophistication in terms of their own learning. They were totally unaccountable, to borrow a phrase.
The fact that for-profit companies are behind this trend ought to make the blood of any thinking person boi.
Second, the tests are expensive to administer. As a sub, making $60 a day, I have worked with the assistant principal, and two other subs, for one week, just to set the tests up. That's three inexpensive people and one very expensive person spending several hours a day for five days.
Then school is suspended for half a day during the course of a week just to administer the tests. The entire faculty participates.
Three days of collating and packing the tests follow. What a waste of money.
Third, here in Arlington, MA, 77% of the class of 2004 was accepted at four year colleges with an additional 10% going to two year schools. That should tell you that more than 87% took the SATs. Now Massachusetts students score above the national average on the SATs and Arlington, ranked 29 among eastern MA high schools by Boston Magazine (if that has any meaning) score above the MA average. Why bother with standardized testing: the school has already been shown to produce a superior product.
Of the kids who needed retesting, and the current group included 20 who were retested in English and about 40 in math, almost none of those kids planned to go to college. Some have intellectual deficiencies and others have character defeciencies. Some come from other countries.
Would you fail the entire school for a handful of kids? And, if most of these students, who have sat next to each other for 10 years, excel, what does that tell you about the few that fail?
Second, I am not against standardized tests used as a personal measure for the student, his family and his teacher, but the folks who currently promote these tests as a means of "reforming" education couldn't pass these tests if they were to take them.
Are you aware that there has been testing in math and in languages for years? When I attended Catholic schools in the midwest from 1953 until 1961, we were given machine corrected tests twice a year, in January and June, across the curriculum. The tests were designed to let our teachers and parents know if we were working at grade level or not. The school wasn't punished.
As for your frivolous remark that teachers in the 18th C didn't have to worry about being shot, consider how few shootings there are in schools and grow up. Get real.
How old are you? What is your educational level? HAve you had children? How old are they?
In other words, do you have any idea what you are talking about?
0 Replies
Brandon9000
1
Reply
Mon 14 Mar, 2005 01:49 pm
plainoldme wrote:
As for your frivolous remark that teachers in the 18th C didn't have to worry about being shot, consider how few shootings there are in schools and grow up. Get real.
It was a seriously intended remark. You said that American education hasn't declined and I pointed out one of the most obvious indicators of decline, a lack of rules and discipline so grave that teachers are afraid that if they impose any rules on their students, they may be in physical danger. It is well known that there are some schools, particularly in the inner city, in which there is a complete lack of order in the classes, and the teachers fear the students. If you insist, I will dredge up references, but this is a well known thing and refutes your allegation that there is no change for the worse in school classes today. Also, I would appreciate it if you would debate the things I say based on their merits or lack thereof and not based on your estimation of their origin.
0 Replies
plainoldme
1
Reply
Tue 15 Mar, 2005 10:30 am
Don't bother: I taught in the inner city of Detroit during the late 60s and early 70s.
Why not address the frivolousness of standardized testing? The incompetancies of the testing companies? What happens when everyone passes the test (hint: the test is invalid!)?
During the late 60s, the left wing students were addressing the matter of improving schools by becoming better educated themselves. Rather than majoring in education, they majored in the subjects they wished to teach. In fact, a common strategy was either the double major as an undergraduate or obtaining two complementary master's degrees.
Were you to spend time in an elementary school today, I think you would be enchanted and pleased by the quality of education offered.
I have repeatedly said (I'm 57) that the education I received was superior to the education my 62 y/o former husband received and that our kids (27, 25, 20) were better educated than we were, especially in science, social studies, math and foreign languages.
And, yes, things are difficult in the inner cities. In Boston, 20% of the kids are ESL and an additional 20% are special needs, but, would some of those kids be special needs if they didn't live in buildings contaminated with lead? What about their diets? Remember when the Black Panthers were addressing the dietary needs of inner city kids with their free breakfast program.
There are problems with kids that have always existed: they remain with us today.
0 Replies
Brandon9000
1
Reply
Tue 15 Mar, 2005 12:35 pm
I believe that standardized testing is, in principle, badly needed. The work of the schools and the teachers must be evaluated in a way which the local teachers and school administrators cannot influence, or else they would be tempted to create tests which show their work in the best possible light. There must be a periodic, objective, external measure of whether the kids are learning, and it must be a test that a school can fail. Schools must have accountability for their work, schools which are incorrigible must be repaired, and the repair will almost always involve some people losing their jobs.
0 Replies
plainoldme
1
Reply
Tue 15 Mar, 2005 01:12 pm
What's wrong with the SAT as a measure, particularly in a system in which 77% of the students go to four-year colleges.
AND, HERE IS WHERE I USE THE EMAIL FORM OF YELLING, BECAUSE YOU CONTINUALLY MISS HOW INFERIOR THOSE STANDARDIZED TESTS ARE.
I HAVE DESCRIBED OVER AND OVER HOW THEY ARE WRITTEN.
THEY PROVE NOTHING!!!!!
Besides, the standardized test is nothing new. I had to take two sets of the things every year, at least from the third grade through the eighth.
Today, the Spanish classes are taking the National Spanish Test. When I was in hs, I took the National Latin and French tests. My kids took the same tests for their own languages in hs.
There is a national math test, which the kids here took last month.
Hasn't it sunk in yet that, perhaps, too much time is invested in such testing?
0 Replies
plainoldme
1
Reply
Tue 15 Mar, 2005 01:13 pm
Now, offer a way to improve education, particularly in the sciences.
Since 29% of the population believes in creationism, it is the science education of the past that, in my father's words, "left something to be desired."
0 Replies
Brandon9000
1
Reply
Tue 15 Mar, 2005 02:44 pm
plainoldme wrote:
What's wrong with the SAT as a measure, particularly in a system in which 77% of the students go to four-year colleges.
They are only taken at or near the end of High School, whereas evaluation is needed at all grades, except possibly the lowest.
plainoldme wrote:
AND, HERE IS WHERE I USE THE EMAIL FORM OF YELLING, BECAUSE YOU CONTINUALLY MISS HOW INFERIOR THOSE STANDARDIZED TESTS ARE.
I HAVE DESCRIBED OVER AND OVER HOW THEY ARE WRITTEN.
THEY PROVE NOTHING!!!!!
If you are saying that it is not possible to formulate a test which measures decently whether students are being educated, I would have to call that just on the face of it false.
0 Replies
rosborne979
1
Reply
Tue 15 Mar, 2005 03:10 pm
plainoldme wrote:
Since 29% of the population believes in creationism, it is the science education of the past that, in my father's words, "left something to be desired."
This may be true, but I'm not convinced that the science education of the present is any better than that of the past. Do we have any indication that the percentage of creationists twenty years from now will be smaller than it is today?
(by the way, with the statements above we are *assuming* that science education is a factor in the number of creationists)
0 Replies
Ray
1
Reply
Tue 15 Mar, 2005 04:21 pm
From my experience many students think that science such as physics and chemistry are hard and the classes are kinda boring since all we do is look at a book and try and solve hypothetical questions by ourselves so that when we're stuck on a question we tend to be frustrated or give up. Speaking as a student from Canada though. I think they should provide more hands-on education with the whole class or something.
0 Replies
fishin
1
Reply
Tue 15 Mar, 2005 04:44 pm
plainoldme wrote:
Why not address the frivolousness of standardized testing? The incompetancies of the testing companies? What happens when everyone passes the test (hint: the test is invalid!)?
This is complete and utter horseshit. The incompetancies of testing companies? How about the incompetancies of teachers that write tests? Your insinuation that a test that everyone passes is also crap. You'd think someone that claims to be an education professional would comprehend the difference between a test designed to differentiate knowledge levels between students from one designed to test student knowledge against a set of minimum criteria.
Quote:
During the late 60s, the left wing students were addressing the matter of improving schools by becoming better educated themselves. Rather than majoring in education, they majored in the subjects they wished to teach. In fact, a common strategy was either the double major as an undergraduate or obtaining two complementary master's degrees.
And ever since then they've been crying and unable to understand how it is that someone with multiple post-grad degerees can't get a job.
Quote:
And, yes, things are difficult in the inner cities. In Boston, 20% of the kids are ESL and an additional 20% are special needs, but, would some of those kids be special needs if they didn't live in buildings contaminated with lead? What about their diets? Remember when the Black Panthers were addressing the dietary needs of inner city kids with their free breakfast program.
And you'll note that the special needs community you refer to is probably the single most supportive community when it come to this NCLB program that you hate so much.
0 Replies
fishin
1
Reply
Tue 15 Mar, 2005 04:48 pm
plainoldme wrote:
What's wrong with the SAT as a measure, particularly in a system in which 77% of the students go to four-year colleges.
The fact that students don't take it until they are in the 11th or 12 grade might be just a minor problem with the SATs.
Quote:
Besides, the standardized test is nothing new. I had to take two sets of the things every year, at least from the third grade through the eighth.
Today, the Spanish classes are taking the National Spanish Test. When I was in hs, I took the National Latin and French tests. My kids took the same tests for their own languages in hs.
There is a national math test, which the kids here took last month.
Hasn't it sunk in yet that, perhaps, too much time is invested in such testing?
lmao. Tests are bad! Tests don't mean anything! "Besides, standardized testing is nothing new..". It's fun to watch you shoot down your own arguments.
0 Replies
plainoldme
1
Reply
Wed 16 Mar, 2005 12:27 pm
If you are saying that it is not possible to formulate a test which measures decently whether students are being educated, I would have to call that just on the face of it false.
You obviously never read on grade level. I wrote nothing of the kind. Try to figure out what I read and report back to me. This is a test and not one composed by a business student.
Have to sign off for the time being. Do try to do as well as these kids here.
0 Replies
plainoldme
1
Reply
Wed 16 Mar, 2005 12:52 pm
Second response to Brandon:
It looks like you have been out of school for awhile and you have no children.
First of all, evaluation is needed most at the lowest levels, particularly in kindergarten (where reading is often taught these days) and in first grade.
Second, many tests on reading ability are presented well after the year is in progress. An elementary school teacher knows by the second week the level of each student. Do you remember being in reading groups in elementary school? At St. Sebastian School in Dearborn Heights, MI, in 1953, the first grade teacher divided her 60 students into 3 groups called Jesus, Mary and Joseph. You knew where you were in the scheme of things. When my own children were in school, they were allowed to name their own groups which were called things like The Golden Unicorns and the Green Pirates. Obviously, a much less hurtful situation.
Third, as far as the SAT coming at the end of the education process, or very near to the end, well, don't you think that a school with the record of Arlington High School ought to be excused from the expense of the MCAS? Ironically, last night, one of our local news stations did a piece on a 21 y/o Downs syndrome girl who is already an award winning chef, who finally passed the MCAS. Her plan was to apply to cooking school . . . at last!
While we give lip service to the notion of people being differently abled, we punish students like this girl, who have one outstanding ability, whose inability to pass the math portion of a standardized test has kept them in limbo for three years.
When I spoke to my daughter, who teaches 7th grade Spanish and French in an upscale central MA community, she told me how irritated she was that two weeks of teaching time would be sacrificed to the MCAS.
Fourth, these tests, you might remember, are designed to punish schools. Would you punish AHS with its solid record because 40 kids need to be retested?
Fifth, what do you think of the sort of testing I experienced at a Catholic elementary school in the 1950s: twice a year; machine scored. The school, btw, was not punished for what the kids didn't know.
0 Replies
plainoldme
1
Reply
Wed 16 Mar, 2005 01:07 pm
rosbourne -- You are not convinced that science education is better than it was. My former husband, who never earned an A in either high school (Florida and Goshen Academy in ME) or college (Clarke in Worcester, MA) earned a PhD in physical chemistry (actually, his concentration was xray chrystallography) at BU.
I took advanced bio in high school and earned As in general science, bio and advanced bio but did less well in chemistry. While I considered majoring in either biology or physical anthropology in college, at the end of four years of high school science (btw, I scored the highest in my class on a standardized bio test my senior year), I was burned out with science but I regularly read Scientific American and Discover and watch Nova out of interest.
My kids had better science teaching here in Winchester, MA, a town that regularly sends students to Harvard and MIT. I am in a position to judge that teaching.
When my ex-husband decided our older son should leave the public school, I was surprised and disappointed by the poverty of science instruction in New England's vaunted boarding schools. While systems in which science teaching is strong, like Winchester, do offer "earth science" in the ninth grade for weaker students, many of the public schools begin kids with biology, move to chemistry and offer physics to juniors with an elective honors or advanced placement science urged for the senior year.
This is not the case in boarding schools until one reaches the "St. Grottlesex" level. The college destinations of these kids is telling. Such schools almost never send kids to MIT, Worcester Polytech, etc. I asked the admissions counselors at two schools how many kids major in science or engineering at schools like Tufts or Brown. They were not only unable to tell me, they said NO PARENT EVER ASKED THE QUESTION. Now, my son was destined for a career in science and the only way for me to know whether he would be trained well in high school was to look at the majors of alumni of these schools. I rejected each of them and finally settled on the Cambridge School of Weston with Lawrence Academy as a second choice. These were schools with outstanding science faculties and great track records.
You ask how many people will believe in Creationism in 20 years. Well, if we keep sending fundamentalists like bush and Mitt Romney, a highly likely candidate to succeed him, how are we ever going to progress?
0 Replies
Brandon9000
1
Reply
Wed 16 Mar, 2005 01:09 pm
plainoldme wrote:
Second response to Brandon:
It looks like you have been out of school for awhile and you have no children.
First of all, evaluation is needed most at the lowest levels, particularly in kindergarten (where reading is often taught these days) and in first grade.
Second, many tests on reading ability are presented well after the year is in progress. An elementary school teacher knows by the second week the level of each student. Do you remember being in reading groups in elementary school? At St. Sebastian School in Dearborn Heights, MI, in 1953, the first grade teacher divided her 60 students into 3 groups called Jesus, Mary and Joseph. You knew where you were in the scheme of things. When my own children were in school, they were allowed to name their own groups which were called things like The Golden Unicorns and the Green Pirates. Obviously, a much less hurtful situation.
Third, as far as the SAT coming at the end of the education process, or very near to the end, well, don't you think that a school with the record of Arlington High School ought to be excused from the expense of the MCAS? Ironically, last night, one of our local news stations did a piece on a 21 y/o Downs syndrome girl who is already an award winning chef, who finally passed the MCAS. Her plan was to apply to cooking school . . . at last!
While we give lip service to the notion of people being differently abled, we punish students like this girl, who have one outstanding ability, whose inability to pass the math portion of a standardized test has kept them in limbo for three years.
When I spoke to my daughter, who teaches 7th grade Spanish and French in an upscale central MA community, she told me how irritated she was that two weeks of teaching time would be sacrificed to the MCAS.
Fourth, these tests, you might remember, are designed to punish schools. Would you punish AHS with its solid record because 40 kids need to be retested?
Fifth, what do you think of the sort of testing I experienced at a Catholic elementary school in the 1950s: twice a year; machine scored. The school, btw, was not punished for what the kids didn't know.
This statement is like an aggregation of debates on separate topics, and I decline to take part in such a messy, disordered discussion. My position is to create tests at the federal level to be given to each American school child once or twice a year to determine whether the child has a level of knowledge roughly commensurate with his grade level. The sole purpose would be to look at the average result for each school and provide assistance to schools whose students score well below the expected level. Any school which consistently scored very low for several years would be subject to some kind of repair process which would often involve firing some employees. An employee who consistently fails to perform and cannot or will not improve should expect to be fired. The nature of the required repair for a given school should be assessed on a case by case basis. The American public education system can never perform adequately if it is exempt from any assessment or consequences for bad performance. There must be an objective process of quality control.
0 Replies
plainoldme
1
Reply
Wed 16 Mar, 2005 01:16 pm
fishin' wrote:
This is complete and utter horseshit. The incompetancies of testing companies? How about the incompetancies of teachers that write tests? Your insinuation that a test that everyone passes is also crap. You'd think someone that claims to be an education professional would comprehend the difference between a test designed to differentiate knowledge levels between students from one designed to test student knowledge against a set of minimum criteria.
First of all, this man is not in education. Second, he seems to disregard that it is no secret that these tests that have sprung up -- education is as fad ridden as medicine -- in the last decade ARE THE PRODUCT OF FOR PROFIT COMPANIES, CREATED BY PEOPLE WHO WANT NOTHING MORE THAN TO LINE THEIR POCKETS. There was a documentary on public television about this a few years back.
And, if every student passes a test, the test may measure nothing. Here, in Massachusetts where there actually was teacher input in the formation of the state test -- MA was the first state in the nation to do this: every other one blindly accepted the tests -- the percentage of successful passes is considered too high and a movement is afoot to make the tests more stringent.
Hmmm. Could it be that many of these outstanding kids are the off spring of Harvard, MIT, BU, BC professors?
Finally, what about the test composers -- those little business students who are just out of college and come to work daily with towels to dry behind their ears, who compose the tests by looking in the indexes of books and . . . I've written this too often to repeat.
