Gov. Jindal's Race to the Bottom

Diane Ravitch recently wrote about the state of Louisiana public education and the threats it is facing from Governor Jindal's policies.

http://blogs.edweek.org/edweek/Bridging-Differences/2012/03/bobby_jindal_vs_public_educati.html

Education Inequality

Today I was helping a friend out with a math problem, some algebra, and I hit a thick patch of rust in my brain.  After scratching my head a bit and then working through the problem, I decided to consult with my personal math expert, my dad.  Despite having been taught most of the math he ever learned before 1964, my father has amazingly retained all of that knowledge and is happy to share it with anyone who bothers to ask for help.  So after a quick call home, some description of the exponents in the equations and a little jotting down in my notebook, he had explained everything I in turn hoped to explain to my friend.

After hanging up the phone, I realized that this is one of the big inequalities that exist in our current educational system.  It doesn't matter how much value-added-effectiveness my teachers in school were shown to have by complex and inaccurate algorithms.  It's irrelevant how much test-prep a teacher might have run us through before an important exam.  I and many others, who are fortunate enough to have a parent who can teach and explain the things that are taught in school, learned the concepts we did, and got the grades we did because of the knowledge that our parents were able to share with us.

I had great teachers growing up.  Most of them would probably score very well on the myriad teacher evaluation schemes springing up around America.  Most of them taught a lot of students who, like me, had parents with significant education, and would end up doing well on tests.  But it doesn't matter how great those teachers were because however much time I spent sitting in my 9th grade math class with Mr. Bell, I spent a lot more time learning from my dad.  I learned what math I know from sitting at the kitchen table doing homework with my dad  within shouting distance if I got stuck on a problem I didn't understand.

Obviously, there will always be disparities in how much every child's parents know about a particular subject, and that will always be an advantage that the children of educated parents, who take the time to help them, will have over their peers.  That's fine, there's nothing (sensible) that can be done about that, but it is quite another thing to ignore that fact and judge teachers solely on the successes, or failures, of their students.

From The Answer Sheet

By Kathie Marshall

In May 2005, I wrote an op-ed for one of our Los Angeles newspapers, in which I vented my frustrations about the state of education in my community. Here’s some of what I said:

“I’ve been an educator in the Los Angeles area for more than 30 years in grades two through eight, including general education, second-language learner, gifted, special-education and intervention students. I’ve taught some of the wealthiest families to some of the poorest, in both private and public schools. For the past four years I have been a literacy coach at a middle school in the Los Angeles Unified School District, working with teachers and students to improve instruction and learning. And I have to tell you, many things that have taken place in education over the last decade have me mad!”

Read the rest at The Answer Sheet.

If it swims, quacks and walks like a duck...

USA Today just blew the lid off a systemic irregularity in DC public schools standardized test results.  Their article about the testing irregularities require us to ask, once again, why is everyone in love with Michelle Rhee?  Now that her so called "turnarounds" are becoming more and more questionable, why do policy makers continue to turn to her for ideas?  We don't see Fidelity or JP Morgan Chase asking Bernie Madoff for investing advice.

Thankfully, Diane Ravitch just posted a blog entry on The Daily Beast, that continues to question Rhee's "education celebrity" status.  Let's just hope that more people wise up and realize that evaluating teachers based on which bubbles their students fill in will encourage them to get the right bubbles dark, even if it means doing some erasing.

Why Teacher Evaluations Shouldn't be tied to Student Test Scores

When test scores jump, questions should be asked.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/education/2011-03-28-1Aschooltesting28_CV_N.htm?csp=34news

My response to University of Rochester's Campus Times call for School Vouchers

The original article: http://www.campustimes.org/2011/02/03/school-vouchers-would-increase-freedom/comment-page-1/#comment-185

My response:
Mr. Russell would probably be thrilled to see America’s public schools fall into the dustbin of history. To that end his creative use of statistics is helpful in making his case against the institution that conservatives have been weakening since Reagan came into office.

To mention that federal spending on elementary and secondary education has gone up 260% since the 1970s ignores the following:

1) Prior to 1965 there was virtually no federal spending on education
2) A fair amount of the money spent since 1970 has gone to wealthy districts/schools while skipping over poor/struggling districts
3) Much of the progress that was being made in the 70s was wiped out by Reagan’s gutting of the department of Education

Of course words like “school choice” sound great because who doesn’t like options, but research has shown Charter schools are not a magic bullet. More than half of all Charter schools are worse/no better than public schools.

The problems that our public schools face is that the worst schools are filled with students whose parents lack the political power to ensure proper funding, teachers, facilities, and supplies. By allowing vouchers and the exodus of students that would follow, this problem would only be exacerbated, leaving those most vulnerable in our society with no education.

Instead of hollowing out our public schools with vouchers, funding them with appropriate student weighting (more money for special education, English Language Learners, impoverished/homeless children) would do far more to improve the quality of education in this country.

Spelling mistakes that get me peeved

This has nothing to do with the putrid pundits that infest our airwaves (and cable lines) and much, much more to do with the crumbling state of America's education system.  America's institutions of learning, coupled with an "auto spell-checker" generation are threatening the very fabric of the English language.  I do not claim to have impeccable grammar or perfect spelling but I do expect at least that much from the news organizations that surround us.  

Recently, I have been unable to read an entire daily newspaper without coming across blatant errors ranging from the inability to differentiate between "affect" and "effect", to the misuse of phrases like the one I pointed out in my last post ("worse" and "worst").  If only newspapers still had editors who proof read submissions before sending them to print much of these problems would disappear.  

The fact that a google search for the term "worse case scenario" produces over 200,000 results is a testament to the fact that people do not think about what they write, nor do they re-read what they have written to make sure there aren't these mistakes.  Pause, and think for one moment about what "worse case scenario" literally means.

You got it yet?  Ok, take another 30 seconds and think it over...

Ok, time's up.  It means a "not as good" scenario, or a slightly more bad scenario.  That would be fine if that was what they meant to say, but clearly when flashing enormous graphics across the screen in an effort to terrify the public and stoke fears of Mexicans carrying deadly diseases, the message they were attempting to communicate was the very "baddest" of the bad scenarios....the "worst" possible outcome.

So where does this lack of ability to communicate effectively come from?  Part of it, I believe, comes from the laziness with which people enunciate these days.  If when you say the word "worst" you sort of drop the 't' at the end, soon you will begin to think you are saying "worse".  Now, I'm not saying that everyone should go around saying "ay-fect" and "ee-fect" but certainly the lack of proper enunciation contributes to the lack of proper spelling.  

The real problem is probably our complete and total reliance on the spell checker.  In that sense, Microsoft has become the grand authority on spelling and grammar.  After all, if you don't get a little green or red squiggly under what you write, it must be correct.  Too bad Gates and company were unable to figure out the user's intent in their writing.

As for a solution to this dilemma, I can not think of any actions that will properly affect the media industry to resume editing their work, nor can I think of something that can be done that will have the desired effect on the public and encourage them to enunciate clearly and correctly.  For now, I will continue to announce the most egregious errors here and on any forums available where the offending article is located.  I invite you all to do the same.

Socialism and other scary words Part 1

While the windbags of the right continue to brandy about the "socialist" label on President Obama, they are either too stupid to remember the past or they are deliberately ignoring it. Take for example all the hullabaloo about taxes. President Obama is promoting the idea that we should roll back the tax cuts on the top income earners to what the rates were under Bill Clinton, that big pinko commie socialist. Forget for a moment all you've seen on FoxNews about how Bill Clinton was Lenin and Stalin's love child and look, intelligently and rationally at the fact that his top marginal tax rate was 39.6%. Under Republican presidents Ford and Nixon it was in the 70s. Under President Eisenhower, who it would be pretty hard to call a Socialist, the top marginal rate was in the 90s.

What this goes to show is what a farce it is to actually believe President Obama is a ramming his socialist agenda on America through a "massive" hike in the top marginal rate. President Obama is no more a socialist than Rush Limbaugh is a decent human being. I wish that we could get ourselves a real progressive candidate into the White House one of these days, but unfortunately, there are so many ignorant, uneducated piles of garbage voting these days that still get goosebumps when they hear words like Socialism because they don't realize that Socialism doesn't mean the government spying on your phone calls; kidnapping and torturing people in secret prisons; or even coming between you and your doctor concerning medical matters.

No, those are all things that are happening and have been happening during that oh so capitalist President George W. Bush. Socialism means your kids can finally go see a doctor when they cut their foot on some rusty metal in the trailer park, or you can go and start that business you've always wanted without worrying that your family might get sick. It means you can send your kids to school and they'll get a good education and you won't have to sell your house to afford it. It's time that America got over its irrational fear of the S word and started fearing the real bogeymen like Rush, Sean and all the others who shout about standing up for the little guy that they then proceed to piss all over.

President Obama is not a socialist, but I really wish he was.

Letting the fox run the henhouse

If someone believes that government cannot work, don't put them in charge of running the government.  These "small government" acolytes hold near and dear to themselves the belief that no government can function and that we should privatize nearly every service in this country.  If you elect someone who thinks that the government shouldn't run the schools, expect your schools to fail.  If you elect someone who thinks that we should privatize social security, expect social security to fail.  If someone believes that the  government cannot manage health care, then expect to see more failures in medicare, medicaid and the VA system.

Don't let foxes run the henhouses!