Obama names Arne Duncan as education secretary, who almost single-handedly brought down the entire Chicago school system. This didn't bode well from the beginning. All Race to the Top is is an extension of NCLB, another train wreck education policy, if you can call it that.

how the system works, teaching kids. He is associated with business people and bankers and is trying to run schools as a business. All to the benefit of well to do kids and families. Race to the top. More like race to the bottom or most children left behind.. He and Bill Gates and Michelle Rhee and their ilk are ruining education in America. Schools should not be run as a profit/loss program money wise, but as learning wise.

This whole education scam in America is a way for $$$$$ to take over schools and make more $$$$$. Our education system is as big a disgrace as is our health (sick) care system. Charter schools only serve to make a profit, and further the agenda of anti science, anti creation and anti climate ignoramuses.

Chicago is closing schools. Sending children across opposing gang boundaries or into gang held areas that are different to the ones where they actually live. Not that these children are in gangs, they just happen to live where they live. And so violence increases and learning gets even worse.

There are so many things wrong with education it is hard to know where to stop and for that matter, where to start.

really, arne duncan did what ritchie daley and a cadre of chicago business leaders wanted done. and, imho, unpopular as that may be, they did it with the best of intentions.
also mho that the chicago schools is not only not worse in the last 10 years, it has progressed mightily.
the number of charter schools is spit in the ocean compared to the number of new public schools that were built, old public schools that were improved, and parent input that was sought out.

i put 5 kids through the system, and this strum und drang about the system is hype.

the Obama Administration has done with education?

it would reveal the real agenda of the person who posts it.

sound like common sense, at least to this parent. But I guess the money doesn't flow in the right way for those ideas.

and every other law possible - and the bonuses confiscated. ENRONstyle incentive plans = Enronstyle accounting.

They received a substandard education because of the "benefits" of the corporate testing mythology. Thanks America!

...is an indictment of the system.

It's pretty obvious that if you take measures to ensure that people are doing their job and how well they are doing it, a certain number of those who are being evaluated will seek to undermine and corrupt the process and to their advantage. That is a general problem with human nature, and is the reason why we have law enforcement. I don't see why the necessity of enforcing a law is a reason for believing the law is a bad one.

I don't understand what is wrong with evaluating our school system by testing the kids to see how effectively they are being educated. We spend a lot of money on K-12 education and we rely of it for our future and the future well being of our children. Knowing the results just makes common sense.

are not the best way to evaluate a kids knowledge or understanding of a subject.

and pressured teachers end up teaching to the tests. By the way, much of the reading/language arts/math curriculum is outrageously bad.

... if the tests fairly evaluate what we want our children to learn and understand, and doing well on the test genuinely indicates that they have learned and understood the subject matter, what would be wrong with "teaching to the test" ?

They measure the ability to parrot back the "right" answer. And teaching to the test means drilling the students on the likely questions and acceptable answers to those questions.

It leaves no time for discussing questions for which there is no one clear answer. (Like "Why did the US invade Iraq?&quot No time for matters of judgment or opinion. No time for more sophisticated levels of problem-solving -- because tests are set up in such a way that you have to be able to figure out the answer in a minute or two and move on to the next thing.

I don't know why I should have to tell you all this, since it should be obvious. But perhaps you have no children and are long out of school yourself and haven't thought about what teaching to the test really means. If that's the case, I suggest you take some time to inform yourself about the problems it raises.

... such as multiple choice and short answer.

And I don't agree that such tests can not measure understanding. In a well designed test, one must understand the question, understand the several answers and make a judgement as to which of them is the best, if not right. Furthermore, in a well designed test, the wrong answers will contain a contradiction or inaccuracy that requires understanding to detect. It seems to me that a well designed test does require understanding to select the right or best answer and does not simply consist of "parroting".

While it may not be possible to give the "right" answer to the question ""Why did the US invade Iraq?"" it should be possible to test an understanding of the various "right answers" that have been given, an understanding of the cultural differences that surround the issue, and an understanding of the policy alternatives and their consequences.

And scientific knowledge is not as open to "opinion" as is a question involving foreign policy. If you ask a student what the product of photosynthesis is, and he selects "protean" instead of "glucose" he's just guessing and doesn't understand.

Demonstrating a skill, especially a mental skill, also demonstrates understanding. If you can find the right answer to a new math problem you are demonstrating an understanding of math.

And while basic facts may not constitute "understanding", facts are important to being able to use your understanding. And a knowledge of factual material can certainly be tested by even the simplest tests.

The bigger question is, however, if we don't use tests what do we use to measure the performance of our school system and ensure our children are getting the education they deserve? What would you suggest?

Nothing personal, but your posts display a considerable lack of knowledge about what is involved in learning, teaching, and what occurs in a school environment.

Having taught school (as well as earned college degrees), it is fair to say that I have observed numerous instances where students had received very good grades while having little understanding of the material and were limited in their ability to do anything useful with their "learning" (because of the fact that they had little understanding of the course material).

At the same time, there were students who did poorly on tests, but who had excellent understanding of the material.

There were many different reasons why this was the case. However, using a test, that itself may be of poor quality for measuring learning, and many tests that I have seen or taken, fell into the category of being poor at measuring anything, is a fraudulent activity.

Many text books are poorly written, many curriculums are poorly designed, many schools have poorly organized class schedules, many school administrations are headed by incompetents, many teachers work under extremely stressful environments, and in many schools, the students have to deal with a stressful situation in school or at home.

The politicking in education alone is often worse than can be experienced in the business world.

To claim that a standardized test by itself is sufficient to measure a student's learning achievements, and be used to rate a teacher's professional abilities, is beyond ludicrous.

RE: To claim that a standardized test by itself is sufficient to measure a student's learning achievements, and be used to rate a teacher's professional abilities, is beyond ludicrous.

Nobody made that claim. Standardized testing may be necessary, or useful, without being sufficient.

RE: I have observed numerous instances where students had received very good grades while having little understanding of the material...

Grades are not the same as standardized test scores. And your personal observations and judgements, while not invalid, are not a sufficient basis to form a fully informed and considered opinion on the subject. I would, however, be interested in any studies or research reports that confirm and support your observations and judgements.

RE: Using a test, that itself may be of poor quality for measuring learning is a fraudulent activity.

I can only agree. Poor quality tests that don't provide a valid measurement of learning should not be used.

RE: Many text books are poorly written, many curriculums are poorly designed...

No doubt. However, I don't understand what this has to do with standardized testing other than the fact that such testing may point to those schools that are in trouble or identify those factors that are of greater or lesser significance to learning and thus warrant extra attention.

You can't improve what you don't measure.

A teacher I know told me about an experiment one of her education professors did.

He had his class randomly mark a multiple choice test answer sheet without seeing the questions.

The resulting "grades" followed a Bell curve.

On the other hand, I had a programming class in which the professor passed around anonymous copies of a major program that the students were required to write.

There were a dozen students in the class and we were allowed to see everyone's code. Two of us had well-structured, well-documented programs. The others' programs amounted to spaghetti code.

Most of the students' programs ran correctly, and they did well on the quizzes that we took, so the professor gave them good grades. However, he told me later that he didn't think that they should become professional programmers. This class was typical of most, which is why the professor had us look at others' code.

When I joined the ranks of professional programming, I learned first hand that a lot of programmers fit the same category.

Quality of teaching, and quality of learning are NOT measurable by multiple choice tests, and teaching to a test means that little time is left for any useful learning to take place.

High test scores on NCLB or RTTT tests do NOT indicate that any useful learning took place.

The entire exercise is a fraud.

RE: A teacher I know told me about an experiment one of her education professors did. He had his class randomly mark a multiple choice test answer sheet without seeing the questions. The resulting "grades" followed a Bell curve.

Total nonsense. I would like to know who the professor is, what the test was, and where s/he published the remarkable results of his experiment. I don't expect, however, to find out. Because I don't believe this is anything other than a tall tail.

Do you really think that the scores of students randomly marking their SAT answer sheet obtain the same distribution as students who actually try to answer the questions? Really, you are not being the skeptic that I took you to be.


RE: Most of the students' programs ran correctly, and they did well on the quizzes that we took, so the professor gave them good grades.

I wonder why the teacher didn't evaluate and grade the students on their ability to document and structure their code. Sounds like he wasn't doing a complete job.


RE: Quality of teaching, and quality of learning are NOT measurable by multiple choice tests...

There certainly are areas that can't be evaluated by multiple choice tests. I don't think artistic attainment would be a good candidate. I think math ability can be. And I'm not sure what you mean by "quality of learning". You can't get to quality learning unless you've gotten plain old learning first.

not seeing it daily now.....

The only function testing should have is AFTER the process of education takes place. How on earth do you teach anyone by testing them, let alone children...



What are you testing if the process of education, which should never be confused with 'testing', has not even begun?

One thing all this testing has done, aside from failing as far as students are concerned, is to make millions of dollars for the Education Publishing companies, most of them Friends of Bush.

This sytem, NCLB, was invented by BUSINESSMEN in Texas and never had anything at all to do with education. It was not intended to educate, it was intended to privatize the PS system, take the funds and place them in private hands, make a lot of money for Bush's friends in the Education Publishing Busines, and it succeeded in all of that, but there were no EDUCATORS involved in the 'program'.

.
It kills creativity, of both the student and the teacher, it puts so much pressure on them and it changes the focus from learning to just 'passing a test'. Not to mention when everyone is under pressure to pass or lose funding, all anyone, teachers and students, can think of is passing the test. They are not thinking of learning.

The fear of losing funding, makes it very likely that there will be cheating. This situation was totally predictable, and in fact was warned about from the minute NCLB was presented as an educational system, which it was not and is not. Our educational system was hi-jacked by the Bush administration and turned into a business where students are nothing more than a commodity. It is shameful and someone should be held accountable for it.

If tests are well designed and are in line with our national educational goals, and if teachers teach towards the attainment of those goals, and the kids attain them and do well on the tests... what's the problem?

children and if you do a good job, they will do fine on any test. And yes, I have lots of experience in this field. Most of my students were not tested until third grade. By that time, they are far beyond their grade levels in all required subjects, and are knowledgeable in a variety of subjects not required. testing at that point, is just another experience for them. A well rounded education, respecting the child's ability and desire to LEARN, and they do love to learn when they are not being stressed out by a rotten system that even adults would find hard to handle, ensures success.

There are children who have learning disabilities, emotional problems and other issues that make this kind of system even less effective, even damaging, cruel in fact for many students. And it is a known fact the least educated students are those who were taught to the test. It's sort of like Fox Viewers, their sphere of learning is so narrow that yes, they may know how to pass a test, but that's about it.

I would never subject a child to this kind of business program. It is not an educational program. They are being prepared not to think, to simply follow instructions.

Not sure I understand why a public school curriculum should get an exception.

LSAT scores are not the only factor on deciding who gets into law school.

Bar exam scores aren't the only factor on deciding who gets to be a lawyer - gotta graduate law school first, and that school is evaluating students on more than test scores.

...to evaluate knowledge and understanding of a subject? And to report that to the general pubic so we can, in turn, evaluate the performance of our schools and understand how well our children are being educated?

Of course, in a general sense anything that evaluates knowledge and understanding of a subject is a "test" of some sort.

must show they can think.

"The Finns are as surprised as much as anyone else that they have recently emerged as the new rock stars of global education. It surprises them because they do as little measuring and testing as they can get away with. They just don't believe it does much good."

Doing as little as you can get away with means that you are doing some. And I think we should do as little as possible... but no less.

A "portfolio system" is a testing system. If I understand it correctly, I think it is useful. I'm not sure it's a good way of testing the educational system itself, however, which is a very important public goal. Or of testing an individual teacher's performance.

And don't worry: the privatization movement is worldwide, because it is part of the neoliberal agenda to privatize all of the public good.

Do you demand physicists explain their experiments in quantum mechanics before they can perform them?
Do you demand software engineers go over their latest project in precise detail before they can write it?
Do you demand chefs explain in exacting detail how they will be preparing a dish before they can add it to the menu?

We trained these people to be teachers. They are the experts in education. We should use their expertise to improve education instead of insisting that untrained laypeople have the best plan.

We've known high-stakes testing is an awful method to evaluate education for decades - that's why SAT scores haven't been the only factor in getting into college for decades. Yet we're trying to force that on our education system because it's understandable for laypeople and much, much cheaper than what we really need to do.

...to at least one of your questions: Do you demand software engineers go over their latest project in precise detail before they can write it?

The answer is yes. We do. That's called a peer review. And after the software is written, we test the hell out of it. That's called independent verification and validation.

Especially if you are writing flight software for spacecraft that support programs of national importance and would cause national embarrassment if they fail. Our children's education is a priority of national importance, and much more than just an embarrassment if we fail.

I think we need to make a distinction between testing that is aimed at evaluating an individual student and that which is aimed at evaluating the teacher or the educational system itself. Professionals in all fields are used to having their work products and their processes evaluated and critiqued. We don't get defensive about it because that's what keeps our professional standing and our effectiveness high.

Now with education, the "work product" is the child's knowledge and understanding. To evaluate the teacher, to evaluate the process, you have to evaluate the children. The tests required for evaluating a student may be different than those necessary for evaluating the teacher and the system, but both are necessary.

And I've been doing software development for 15 years.

In such reviews, you aren't asked to justify that bubble sort works. Not the implementation - the basic theory underlying the algorithm.

Also, you go pick up random people off the street for such reviews, right? "I know you're a waitress, but today we want you to evaluate this algorithm". Oh wait, the people doing those reviews are trained in the field and have experience.


Again, such activities are done by people who are trained and experienced. They're not done by untrained people. And it doesn't result in untrained people telling you "Instead of writing that in C++, you have write this part in Algol and this part in Javascript."


No, what we need to understand is testing does not work.

You aren't tested at work - your boss doesn't walk up and say "today, you're gonna sit in this conference room with a number 2 pencil and take this test". Instead, you boss evaluates you on what you actually do in your job and how you actually perform your job. That includes far more than any 'test'.


Tests don't evaluate a student's knowledge. Tests evaluate a student's ability to take tests.

If you have any experience in software development, you've come across the utterly incompetent co-worker. The one who creates 5 bugs every time they fix one. They passed all the tests put before them. If tests were actually effective, they'd never have graduated, much less gotten a job doing software development.

Teachers evaluate students using a variety of measurements that go beyond tests. Just like your boss evaluates your performance on more than a bug queue.

You're demanding that kids take tests because you don't know how to evaluate them. How well would it work if someone demanded you program some really dumb way because they don't understand anything about computers?

...peer reviews are conducted by peers, not by random people off the street. But I don't believe, and you don't provide any reason to believe, that the sort of testing that is being used in the class room is being designed by "random people off the street" rather than educators and psychologist who are competent to do so.

And software testing is generally conducted by independent professionals, not those who wrote the software. For obvious reasons.

It is true that tests do evaluate a student's ability to take tests, however, I think it is wrong to assume that a student's knowledge and understanding have nothing to do with their ability to do well on a test. In fact, its just common sense that they are highly correlated. If you are able to get the right answer to a math problem you have never encountered before, and you can do this over and over for a wide variety of such problems, it seems reasonable that you do indeed understand math.

Tests don't work.

Let's say you wanted to evaluate the performance of a few gigabit Ethernet chips. So you write a program to upload a huge chunk of data, boot up some computers with the various chips to test, and measure the time it takes to upload the data.

You didn't measure the performance of those chips.

The speed at which your upload occurred also depended on the operating system's ability to feed data to the chip, which depended on the CPU, the northbridge, the RAM, the hard disk, the SATA bus, the southbridge and so on.

So the result of your test will grade some chips poorly when it's not the Ethernet chip that is the bottleneck - a whole lot of manufacturers plug the Ethernet chip into the PCI bus, and the PCI bus doesn't have the bandwith for full gigabit. Gigabit Ethernet needs to be plugged into something faster, like PCI Express.

It's the same with kids. Any test evaluates far more than the subject area of the test. As such, it's not possible to design a test which effectively evaluates the student in that subject.

The random people off the street are forcing there to be a test. They don't write that test, but that doesn't matter. They're forcing teachers to test because they don't understand teaching. And they falsely believe that tests work.


People are not deterministic.

Kid doesn't get breakfast that morning - Mom lost her job a week ago, and they're out of food. Kid does poorly on the test. You system calls them dumb instead of calling them hungry.

RE: You system calls them dumb instead of calling them hungry

Absolutely not true. A test tells us whether or not a student has learned a particular body of knowledge, it does not tell us why or why not without further investigation and study.

RE: Any test evaluates far more than the subject area of the test.

I don't think that's true. It is true that a student's mastery of a specific subject area is affected by more than just one factor, and a subject-matter test alone can not determine and differentiate the various factors that affected a student's learning. That doesn't mean that it isn't evaluating the student's level of attainment - that means it isn't evaluating the cause of the student's level of attainment. But the cause isn't what it is supposed to evaluate.

RE: As such, it's not possible to design a test which effectively evaluates the student in that subject.

I think that asking kids questions concerning a body of knowledge and evaluating their answers is definitely an effective way to understand how much they have or haven't learned about a particular subject. I can't think of any other way to do it. It may have to be done more than once, it may require establishing the proper testing environment, and it may mean using a creative technique like the "portfolio system". But in the end, what you do and don't know can be determined by others through communication and demonstration.

Do you seriously believe that evaluation of educational attainment isn't at all possible? And if you do believe that it is somehow possible, what technique would be effective and yet not be subject to all of the factors that you have mentioned concerning standardized tests?

Still wrong.

The kid could have utterly mastered the subject - Mom had a job until recently, and they had food until recently. They did poorly because they can't concentrate - their family is in crisis and they're hungry now.

Tests don't work.


So....completely glossed over that Ethernet example, huh?

How 'bout this:

The kid isn't fluent in English. The kid was taught the subject matter in their native language, Korean. The test is in English. You claim that you can still measure their proficiency in the test's subject, because "external factors" such as fluency can be ignored.


Sure. The problem is this is a subject in which you've received no training. You know as much about teaching English as an English teacher knows about programming computers.

Would you defer to an English teacher telling you how to write your next computer program? No? Then why should that English teacher defer to your lack of expertise in teaching?


That English teacher can't think of a way to get data from a database. Does that make it impossible to write an SQL statement?

Nope. It means they have no training in SQL.

Teachers can evaluate students on a wide variety of metrics. Those metrics include tests, but are not limited to tests.

Just like your boss evaluates you on more than lines of code written.


No. And I've explained it to you many times now. So you have just utterly failed your reading comprehension test.

Clearly, we need to yank any degrees you have and fire you from any job that requires doing more than asking "You want fries with that?". Because that's the standard you are applying to children. If your standard made any sense at all, you would have to be held to that standard.

Or just maybe tests don't work.

Good point, thanks. I'm glad we agree on something.

As you know, the history and development of standardize testing goes back to ancient China. As you point out, it's useful. This is nothing new, and it isn't going away.

Nor is a school a factory - although that's what they're being turned into - factories to roll out good little obedient regurgitators. We now have kindergartners and first graders (or so I've read somewhere) who get no recess because it takes too much time away from teaching to the tests - oh, and it costs too much. This is insane from a developmental perspective.

Not to mention that a "product" is an inanimate something for which the ingredients/components/materials can be controlled. You tell me how to design a test to judge teacher performance that somehow controls for the kids who come to school hungry, from homes where they've never seen a book, from environments where they've never gone to a zoo, or a children's museum, or or or, or been sang and talked to, or slept through a night without sirens and maybe gunfire? Or who sit in class all day fearful because they are bullied, or have to go home to an abusive adult? We have a test that can judge how good a teacher is by the performance of that student? I don't think so. Nonetheless, that is what these tests you defend so tenaciously are supposed to do.

As for judging knowledge? Understanding? The problems with using conventional testing for judging that beyond the most basic level have been exhaustively explored over many years and I'm not about to go into them.

No. The real "testing" agenda is not about education. It's about union-busting, money, and excluding the poor and working class from the hallowed halls of academe, where they caused such an uproar when the anti-poverty and student grant programs of the 60's allowed them entry.

RE:The real "testing" agenda is not about education. It's about ... excluding the poor and working class from the hallowed halls of academe.

The best way to exclude the poor and working class from the hallowed halls of academe would be to ignore their progress towards becoming competent at reading, writing and math. And if we don't test to find out how well the education system is or isn't teaching them these subjects how can we do a good job at that and get them into higher education?

Do we just wait until they are 18, and if they can't hack it then, tough luck? Or do we find out along the way how well they are doing and make sure the system is improving and serving their needs? And how would we do that without testing?

Since everyone agrees that the system is not functioning properly, start by re-evaluating the system.

The problem with education in the U.S. is GIGO, Garbage In, Garbage Out.

Redesign the curriculums, write new text books, reorganize the classroom environment and class schedules, reorganize the selection and training of teachers, change the qualification requirements for school administrators, insulate the schools from heavy handed politicking, and take the selection of textbooks and other school materials out of the hands of for-profit publishers and political and religious ideologues.

This is just the beginning.

This was essentially the approach of the Finns. They did an across-the-board reevaluation of everything.

Having earned a teaching certificate from a college of education, I would suggest that "professional educators" be excluded from the redesign process, and also, most school administrators, current school textbook publishers, organizations like the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, and Arne Duncan.

And who did this evaluation? Wouldn't have been "professional educators" would it?

And who eactly is going to

If not "professional educators"?

then you don't understand the way standardized tests in general work, or the way they are being used to manipulate the system for the negative.

I'm not sure where to even begin. How about with this:

Decades before the advent of high-stakes testing in public education, those of us who studied psychological testing, including standardized tests, were aware of these facts:

The single greatest predictor of a standardized test, then and now, is SES: economic and education levels.

The only way standardized test results could possibly be valid for the purposes of evaluating the teacher, rather than the tester, would be to ensure that every single factor affecting results outside the teacher's area of influence was controlled. This is not possible. Therefore, the tests are not a valid measure of teacher effectiveness, but a political tool used against teachers.

This invalid and unethical use of standardized test scores is not good for public education as a whole. It sets up a culture of competition, not collaboration. Competition for what? For the students with higher SES that everyone knows will score better on the test, making the teacher look better. It's also a tool of teacher control. When admins want to silence dissent among the staff regarding harmful "reforms," they simply need to adjust the rosters of the dissenters for the next term or year, miraculously producing lower test scores and therefore lower credibility. And yes, I've seen this done.

What is the best way to provide quality education for every student? A culture of collaboration, where everyone supports each other, or a culture of competition, where someone else's "failure" makes you look better?

It IS a good way to keep eroding the nation's confidence in teachers, and the ability educators have to affect education policy. If your goal is to get rid of teachers' unions and make teaching a technician's position, rather than a profession, then using student test scores to evaluate teachers is helpful. If you want to improve the quality of students' education, try kicking the corporatist privatizers out, and turning the system over to actual educators.

...and I can agree with much of what you say. However, it wouldn't be much of a "forum" if all we did was agree with one another, so I would like to offer you some differing perspectives.

Evaluation of individual teachers based on their students test scores

This is indeed difficult, but statistical techniques exist for "zeroing out" the factors affecting results outside the teacher's area of influence. This very definitely is possible, although it is not always possible, and is not easy. And it would not be a good idea to make it the only evaluation criteria.

Here is a short description from a report that is critical of this technique:

Problems with the use of student test scores to evaluate teachers

The single greatest predictor of a standardized test, then and now, is SES: economic and education levels.

Results on these test do indeed strongly correlate with the socioeconomic status and educational attainment of the student's family. That doesn't mean that they don't measure the educational attainment of the student or the effectiveness of the school system that the student is in. It means that those factors also correlate with socioeconomic status.

If we don't measure and monitor the attainment gap between students of lower and higher socioeconomic status, and look for other such factors such as ethnicity, we are not going to be in a position to understand how well our country serves all of its citizens, and we are going to give those who do not have that purpose a free pass. It would be a great day for the racists in Mississippi to be able to ignore the attainment gap between rich and poor.

What is the best way to provide quality education for every student? A culture of collaboration, where everyone supports each other, or a culture of competition, where someone else's "failure" makes you look better?

Human culture is both collaborative and competitive, and both aspects contribute to our individual and and our collective achievement. However, I don't think that standardized testing of individuals is biased toward one approach or the other. If a collaborative learning environment helps everyone learn more, that would show up on standardized tests, and testing would be able to differentiate that approach as being superior. Of course, it might be that a competitive approach does better, or does better for some but not others. It would be useful to understand these dynamics, but it would require testing, statistical analysis, and careful experimentation to do so.

It IS a good way to keep eroding the nation's confidence in teachers, and the ability educators have to affect education policy.

I agree that standardized testing and other characterizations of our nation's public schools have been used as a political tool to advance ideological agendas that are not in our nation's interest. However, when teachers and those who support public schools express hostility towards objective measurement of their work and statistical evaluation of their techniques they appear to be defensive and seem to have something to hide. Its as if they are saying "nothing to see here, move along, move along." This plays into the hands of their critics and those who are working against public schools.

at this time, there are only 2 very small groups of mathematicians creating VAM formulas for the entire nation?

I met with one of those groups; the one contracted to create a VAM formula for my district.

This is what they said about VAM:

1. Different formulas applied to the same data achieves different results. You can write the formula to get the results you want.

2. Their formulas cannot control for all factors that affect student learning; the factors they CAN write into the VAM are limited.

The fact that SES is the greatest predictor of standardized test results tells us that SES is a greater factor than anything that a teacher does. If this nation really wanted to affect that achievement gap, we'd be eliminating poverty, providing security and continuous adult and parent education. Instead, during my lifetime, the gap has grown wider and wider in response to neoliberal economic policies. Not coincidentally, the current reforms, including the various uses of high-stakes tests, are neoliberal reforms.

Do you really need statistical analysis to understand that teachers working together for the benefit of all benefits more students than teachers threatened by the success of others, forced into competing with, rather than collaborating with, other teachers? What is going to benefit the most students? Teachers gathering to work together, to talk about successes and challenges, to share ideas and strategies, or teachers keeping their strategies and methods to themselves so they can "beat" other teachers' students? You don't get this? Really? Education is not a business, and does not thrive in a business model. Education is a public service. Public service is, or should be, collaborative, not competitive.

The key word in your final paragraph is "objective." There is nothing "objective" about the current use of high-stakes testing.

For the rest, I need to say this: there are so many things that go into a successful lesson, a successful classroom, that cannot be measured objectively. When you are depending upon a "statistical evaluation of their techniques," you are supporting a one-size-fits all evaluation. Students and teachers are people. They are individuals, and not able to be standardized. What works for one teacher doesn't necessarily work for another; what works for some students doesn't work for all. Let me explain:

Student test scores are not a measurement of a teacher's work, but of a student's. As long as there are factors teachers don't control, those scores are not valid measures of teacher performance.

Come up with a fair, accurate way to evaluate us, and we're not hostile. It sounds simple, but it's not. We're not a business, we're not a factory, and we aren't turning out a product. We, and our students, and their families, are people, not products.

We have all kinds of ideas about how to continually create, and recreate, the best, most vibrant, richest system of public education possible. All the nation needs to do is invite us to do so.

Edited to add: The best system of evaluation, the best strategies and practices, can be misused and abused. It's not just the evaluation system, or the teaching methodologies; it's how they are used.

RE: This is what they said about VAM

That's very interesting. If you've got the time or its easy to do, I'd like any links to source material about these two teams and their work. I'm sure their observations are substantially correct. Statistical analysis is not easy to get right. Statistics is exactly the tool that is used when multiple factors stochastically affect an outcome and they need to be differentiated. This is not impossible. But it is difficult.

RE: If this nation really wanted to affect that achievement gap, we'd be eliminating poverty, providing security and continuous adult and parent education.

There is another way to "eliminate" the achievement gap. Stop measuring it. Poof! It's gone! Honestly, if you want to pursue all the great solutions you listed, there has to be an awareness of the problem and its causes. If you don't do the testing, no one will be aware that there is an achievement gap and no one will care.

And then there is the fact that we rely on education as a key means to eliminate poverty. To achieve this goal, we have to find ways to educate children independent of their SES. Or perhaps you don't think that is possible? Reading some of the posts in this thread it seems that there is an underlying assumption that SES is destiny and that there isn't anything that teachers or our educational system can do to overcome that. Personally, I'm not ready to give up on education as a means to eliminate poverty. But there seems to be a large degree of skepticism about that being expressed by those who profess to support public education against its critics.


RE: What is going to benefit the most students? Teachers gathering to work together...

I'm not sure why you think that a teacher whose techniques have been validated by objective testing would be reluctant to share them. Nor why other teachers wouldn't want to know whether "the star" teacher's techniques actually do work or not. I don't even understand how teachers could share "successful" strategies and methods without some sort of understanding and quantification of what constitutes "success". Without testing who is to say whether Jane the disciplinarian or Joe the inspirational teacher is the one to listen to? Whether to use phonetics or see-and-say? Exactly how would "collaboration and sharing" work in the absence of measurable, objective success criteria?


RE: Education is not a business, and does not thrive in a business model.

Exactly. What differentiates a business organization from public service organizations? Business organizations use monetary measures of success in the market place - profit vs. loss, return on investment, etc. Public service organizations use non-monetary, non-market measures of success: Life expectancy, live birth rate, emergency response time, violent crime rates, etc. Like these, standardized testing of student's educational attainment is a non-monetary, non-market measure of the success of our educational system. Use of such criteria is one of the ways that education is differentiated from a monetary, market-based model.


RE: Student test scores are not a measurement of a teacher's work, but of a student's... Come up with a fair, accurate way to evaluate us, and we're not hostile.

It seems to me that to accurately and fairly evaluate a teacher or a school system it is necessary (if not sufficient) to determine what actual affect s/he or it has on a student's knowledge and understanding. And some form of student testing and statistical analysis would be necessary (if not sufficient) to do that. It's even more necessary at the school, the district, and the state levels when you are trying to evaluate the system as a whole, rather than an individual.

There are quite a few critics of public school teachers who claim that the only evaluation technique teachers are open to is "time on the job". And "time on the job" isn't understood by the general public to be a fair and accurate way to evaluate an individual's performance. It is generally understood to be an evasion of evaluation. True or not, when teachers kvetch about standardized testing it plays into the hands of these critics and undermines teacher's standing with the general public.

If teachers don't think standardized testing is a fair and accurate way of evaluating their performance, then they have a professional responsibility to the public they serve to come up with a way that is mutually acceptable. If teachers don't take the initiative, they will eventually, one way or another, have one imposed on them.

If you've got the time or its easy to do, I'd like any links to source material about these two teams and their work.

I could dig through files at work and probably find the name of at least the group working with my district. It's not likely to happen, though. Once I get to work I'm scrambling to get more done than time allows, knowing I'll be there for at least 10 hours, often 11, sometimes beyond that; I'm pretty single-minded and not likely to remember a spring break conversation on DU.

I'm not sure why you think that a teacher whose techniques have been validated by objective testing would be reluctant to share them.

1. "objective testing." We're not against objective testing, but at this time there is no such thing.

2. We aren't reluctant; it's setting us up to compete with each other that creates that reluctance. On our own, we share all the time.

3. There really isn't such a thing as the "star" teacher. There are teachers. Some are weaker, some are stronger, and, in general, every teacher has both strengths and weaknesses. Every teacher has something of value to share, and something that he or she can use help with improving.

4. For us, our students are individuals. It's all about the individual. When we talk about our students, we're sharing concerns, frustrations, and successes about individuals, not a whole group. While we might share something about the whole class..."I did this thing and they loved it!" Those tend to be about a lesson that went well. When we share concerns and frustrations, they are about specific students, and the strategies we share tend to be those that have worked with other individuals in our experience. We aren't referring to a list of interventions that have been statistically quantified, but to those that have been successful for some in the room. To think that any one strategy or method works with every student is nonsensical. To think that teaching, and teachers, can be limited to "either/or" polarized thinking is misleading, to say the least. Disciplinarians can be inspiring, or not. Not every teacher has to be a particular type of person to inspire. As a matter of fact, some students are more inspired by Teacher A, others by Teacher B, and still others by Teacher C. No teacher inspires everyone. Every teacher should be trying to build a positive working relationship with every student. Some students prefer disciplinarians, because the order feels safer to them. Others don't like toeing the line. The bottom line is that students are different. They don't all respond to the same thing the same way, or the same person the same way, which is why we bring experience to the table. We rely on our collective experience, which is different than something statistically quantified. We're trying to find a solution for an individual, who may or may not respond like the statistical norm.

Like these, standardized testing of student's educational attainment is a non-monetary, non-market measure of the success of our educational system.

Standardized tests do not measure the whole of a student's educational attainment. As a matter of fact, they don't measure much of it. They can be useful, when high-stakes are not attached, as a small part of a larger measurement system. The misuse of high-stakes standardized tests has led to LESS learning, as I've already illustrated.


If teachers don't think standardized testing is a fair and accurate way of evaluating their performance, then they have a professional responsibility to the public they serve to come up with a way that is mutually acceptable. If teachers don't take the initiative, they will eventually, one way or another, have one imposed on them.

A professional responsibility to the public? The public doesn't listen. We aren't at the table when those at the top are formulating evaluation policies. Oh, at the local level, we'll be included in meetings about evaluation procedures, but by that time, we are continually reminded that the feds and the state have already dictated what will be, and that we can decide how to comply, but we can't overturn those mandates.

Take the initiative? Who says we haven't? The fact that we don't have a voice with tptb doesn't mean that we haven't been speaking out, that we haven't been working on this all along. Nobody brings our ideas to the table.

In reality, coming up with a fair and accurate way to evaluate teachers' performance has not yet been done. Ideas? Yes. Ideas that work in practice? Not so much. Just a few of the ideas we've debated:

Parent and student surveys: If parents and students are happy with the teacher, that means the teacher is doing a good job, right? A good job at what? Building relationships that lead to successful learning, to creating a working partnership with the family. Those are important things. I guess you can measure it on a survey. But...what are the pitfalls? Disgruntled parents and students can use those surveys, not to give objective information, but as a weapon. Are there reasons why parents or students would be disgruntled with a good teacher? Sure. It happens all the time with some who don't like being held accountable for things like attendance, behavior, or work habits. Can some parents and students who love their teacher skew such surveys with overly positive responses, because the teacher is nice, and they like the classroom, regardless of whether or not students are learning what they should? Of course. Could parents use those surveys to punish or reward teachers based on their perception of a teacher's politics or faith or race? Of course.

Teacher portfolios: Like student portfolios to demonstrate learning in an alternate format, can teachers demonstrate proficiency with a portfolio? In part. A teacher's portfolio could contain things like outstanding lesson plans with notes about results and future modifications; student and parent communications; examples of efforts to differentiate for individual student needs; records of various professional work groups the teacher has led and participated in; evidence of collegial collaboration...of course, the time invested in creating and maintaining such a portfolio is extensive, and no district is likely to add that paid time into a teacher's contract.

Observations: The traditional observation is not effective, to say the least. Right now, across the country, districts are experimenting with numerous, "drop-in" (no advance notice) "mini" observations, which are compiled into a summative evaluation at the end of the year. I've seen this done well. As a matter of fact, I had an admin who did this back in the 90s, and it was my favorite kind of observation. He would just drop in whenever, at least a couple of times a month, sometimes more. He might stay for 2 minutes, 5 minutes, 30 minutes, or an hour. He would participate and interact with students, ask questions about what was going on, write up his notes, and use those notes to write a several-page narrative about what he observed, strengths, weaknesses, and suggestions for improvement. The modern version is a little different. In those minis, there is...you guessed it. A checklist of things to look for. If they are there, you get a positive write-up. If they aren't, not so much. These are focused, not on the actual experience of students in the classroom, but of "objective, quantifiable" behavior on the part of the teacher. Things like whether or not standards are posted on the wall.

Peer observation: this is more useful as professional development than for evaluative purposes.d

There are others. All of them have some merit, and something that keeps it from being the ultimate answer. Here's one I like the best: Long-term data.

For example, my very small K-8 school tracks data after we send students to high school. Compared to the traditional large middle schools, our students have a higher gpa and a higher rate of graduation. Considering that we have the lowest SES and the highest percentage of sped students in our district, that's saying something. My students, despite the low SES and high sped count, by percentage, take more IB and AP classes than those students coming from other schools.

That's some data that has meaning for me, and for my school. The whole point is not to produce scores on a standardized test, but to prepare students for what comes next. Data that we've done that successfully, in the form of gpa, graduation rate, etc.. is valuable. Of course, a lot of what we do has nothing to do with standardized tests, and it's a group effort, so that makes it hard to use for the evaluation of individual teachers.

For individuals, until we have something better, I'd like to see student and parent surveys and observations, and observations of the type I experienced back in the 90s. The goal, for me, is to demonstrate that I'm doing my job. That job is to provide abundant opportunity to learn, and abundant support in the effort to learn. The learning itself is the student's job.

you better believe they are going to be pissed.

Teachers have NO control over student learning, get it? It is up to the student's ability or desire to learn.

It is bullshit to try and run schools like businesses.

...have anything to do with their student's desire to learn? They aren't supposed to be motivational and inspirational?

And who, exactly, is trying to run schools like businesses? What does that even mean?

The tests our kids are taking reveal more about their socioeconomic status and family support than their education. That's a well established fact. No one has designed a test that zeroes in on only what they're being taught in school.

Just think about this for a minute. If we had an accurate means to measure what we're teaching and how much kids are learning, then it would be used in every high dollar private school in the country, like the one Obama's kids attend. But none of those schools administer any standardized tests.

Don't forget that part. And AFT helped them. Sure they could have spoken up years before this testing crap started. But you and I both know that's not very realistic. But please let's give the teachers and their union credit for doing the right thing to help bring this fraud to a halt.

Teachers stonewalled in the beginning. Finally, the investigator broke one down with his never-ending presence.

"For weeks that fall, Mr. Hyde had been stonewalled and lied to by teachers at Venetian Hills including Ms. Parks, who at one point, stood in her classroom doorway and blocked him from entering.

But day after day he returned to question people, and eventually his presence weighed so heavily on Ms. Parks that she said she felt a terrible need to confess her sins. “I wanted to repent,” she recalled in an interview. “I wanted to clear my conscience.”

Ms. Parks told Mr. Hyde that the cheating had been going on at least since 2004 and was overseen by the principal, who wore gloves so as not to leave her fingerprints on the answer sheets."

The cheating had been going on for the better part of a decade. Had the teachers "done the right thing", it would have been exposed as soon as it started in earnest.

I believe the teachers I talked to.

I also don't blame anyone for not speaking up when it first started. They were scared they were going to lose their jobs for reporting the cheating. And I'm sure the ones who participated knew they would go down long before any administrators because that's how the system works.

.. it's ALL the Repubs fault...

Look over there!

Show Duncan and his Minions the Door.

At Sat Mar 30, 2013, 07:52 AM an alert was sent on the following post:

OK. Obama/Duncan/Gates School "Reform" Model: The results Are IN !!! Today's NYT: P. A1
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022588780

REASON FOR ALERT:

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate. (See <a href="http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=aboutus#communitystandards" target="_blank">Community Standards</a>.)

ALERTER'S COMMENTS:

"explain to him ( Obama) what public schools are like in America"

The President of the UNITED STATES doesn't need to be taught how 'things are in America.' That's a birtheresque comment that shouldn't be allowed to stand on DU.

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Sat Mar 30, 2013, 08:10 AM, and the Jury voted 0-6 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: Apparently the President DOES need to be told. I find the post informative.
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: I bet Prosense submitted this alert! Alerted, it is ok to complain about Obama!
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: This looks like legitimate political dissent here. Hiding this would be antidemocratic.
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: No explanation given
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: No explanation given
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: It is an opinion, Worded a bit roughly but it is only the posters opinion, take it or leave it, but leave the post

Thank you very much for participating in our Jury system, and we hope you will be able to participate again in the future.

Now it seems we have categories for things you cannot say.

Our children are suffering and we will not ignore it. The democrats including Obama are allowing the republicans to run the show on education. They are letting it happen, and that is not okay with me. It is not okay with millions of parents in this country. We, parents, will be heard one way or another. If the democrats won't listen to us now, then they will hear us on election day.

happened to meet the measurement.

I taught for a few years and grew up surrounded by neighbors who were all teachers as well as a mother who taught elementary for a forty years. All that "teacher talk" has sunk in, so I have seen things change from the late seventies to now.

Standardized testing would be akin to a scientist using a ruler to test the temperature. Standardized testing tests nothing more than the ability of the student to take the test. The kind of multiple choice, fill in the bubble testing is the LOWEST form of knowledge one would hope a student could achieve. It has no correlation to real-world skills or knowledge and is creating a generation of students who are incapable of any complex thought processes whatsoever.

The problem with teaching to the test is that it has completely taken over all classroom time, so that the school year is quite literally scheduled around testing, and every single form of actual teaching has suffered. I taught Language Arts (what used to be called English) to high school Juniors and Seniors in a very low-income continuation high school. I had created lesson plans around teaching reading and writing, since most of my students could do neither competently. But I was told by the administration that I had to teach to the test. No time for essay writing, no time for reading *books* for Christ's sake! And though I tried to argue that for many of my students--and this is no exaggeration--that this may be the one opportunity in their lives to read an entire short novel (high school and college years are the time when a person shapes his or her views of the world, and I wanted to use the humanizing power of writing to expose my students to new ideas) the answer was, "Nope: teach to the test."

Every single teacher who has ever taught in a classroom will tell you what a travesty standardized testing is. And what all those who support it should see is that it not only does not help measure student learning or achievement in any way, it absolutely hinders that outcome. Education and learning is NOT business and should not be run like one. Testing is a race to the bottom while the overlords milk it for every penny that it's worth. NCLB was about Bush's buddies making $$, and NOTHING to do with education.

RE: Standardized testing tests nothing more than the ability of the student to take the test.

My bet is that a student's ability to take the test has something to do with what s/he has learned.

teaching "effectiveness."

That's why these schemes will never work. Education is not a business.

...and motivate kids to learn? Or that such teachers can't be identified by how well their students do learn? Or that educational attainment can't be measured?

And exactly how does measuring educational attainment make education a business?

A little perspective is needed here.

The article details the problems in the Atlanta school system - most directly the result of the NCLB act. Those problems and the prosecutions are very real, but largely happened before Obama was elected as a result of bush's policies. They are hardly a "general result" of Obama's efforts toward school reform.

The president has been trying to mitigate (or undermine, if you will) the worst parts of NCLB. and in any case what happened in Atlanta has not happened anywhere else. School reform is very difficult to do at the federal level, as most of the money, policy and direction is state and local. Fact-free bile, bitter innuendo and misdirected anger just poison the atmosphere, to little purpose (unless one just likes to be angry, and really doesn't care otherwise)..

paying for test scores, or doubled down on the practice?

The policy in 2009 was that pay could be higher for teachers in difficult to staff schools (where teachers didn't want to work), and that pay could be higher for teachers who improved their students benchmark test scores. As far as I know both of those are still in place, and of course the second one there is the sort of thing that led directly to the OP...

If I am woefully misinformed about any doubling down or a large push for merit pay increases at the federal level since 2009 - feel free to inform me!

http://www.salon.com/2012/05/25/cheating_runs_rampant/

I'm marking this so I can come back and read it later. Thanks for posting the link...

..."School reform is very difficult to do at the federal level, as most of the money, policy and direction is state and local"

This is one of the reasons that standardized testing plays such an important part in implementing national educational policy. Since the federal government cannot simply dictate national standards, and cannot force fair funding within a jurisdiction, they need a tool that will allow them to set national priorities through the measurement of results.

When Mississippi's standardized test scores are at the national level, and when they show no significant difference based on race, I'll be happy to give up on standardized testing.

You love standardized testing.

And in theory, I think many parents and teachers would agree with you in that standardized tests do generate data pertaining to student learning and that national academic standards do provide direction on what content would be taught on a national scale.

However, are we being critical enough of what these standards and testing are focusing on? I don't think so. I think the reason many are fearful of Common Core, for example, is because there are real fears that curricula are being narrowed down to low level skills and a lack of depth of understanding. In essence, are we "dumbing down" the curriculum?

Also, standardized tests reward students, teachers, and schools for their fact-based knowledge. Creativity is generally not measured on these tests, nor is ingenuity. These are facets of thinking that our country has been lauded for internationally for many years. If students aren't going to be recognized for these qualities on standardized tests, will they continue to develop them?

Many of the people I talk to, who are directly involved in our public education system, think we're changing far too much and too quickly and that there isn't enough contemplation and consideration of projected outcomes before reforms are put into place.

Those are just my thoughts.

want NCLB repealed, but Obama gets the green light to not only continue it but expand it. It just doesn't make any sense to me why people don't care about this.

informative for its omissions than for its evidence. The training of the Atlanta school board by the Eli Broad Foundation and the $10.5 million invested the year Beverly Hall came there by the Gates Foundation are conspicuously not mentioned. It's like shooting the deputy but not the sheriff.

I guess the dream of the world's richest man truly being a generous saint is hard for people to give up. The Gates Foundation uses a liberal, benevolent cloak to hide its true agenda. Whether it's education, third world health or agriculture, TGF should be vilified for pushing its corporate greed under the guise of "charity."

but I agree that Bill Gates should keep his money and pay it out to his employees instead of throwing it at and expecting it to do what he wants in areas that are not his expertise, if he truly has an area of expertise. He is a horrible person.

I agree with you.

It's about simple corporate handouts for many. For DLC/Third Way politicians, it's about castrating a traditional Democratic Party constituency (teachers) and replacing them with corporate-types.

And it's sad to see desperate parents being fooled into supporting the very thing that is destroying education. Sad to see Democrats supporting it because they think they are somehow defending the President.

and Bill Gates are major financial supporters of the Democratic Party and along with the Walton family (major funders of the Republican Party) are the biggest vulture philanthropists in the reform movement, although I hear that hedge funds are starting to invest on a large scale too.

from his days ruining junk bond investors for profit and American business through leveraged buyouts. Now he goes after poor kids with online charter schools.

What gets me about Milken is he would never be allowed to teach in any school district in the United States because of his criminal record, but here he is trying to profit off of the taxpayers.

A leopard never changes its spots.

kickbacks. And then they will come on the air and say that due to municipal debts, the reality is is that unions have no choice but to pitch in and help by contributing more to their own healthcare, contributing more to their own retirement, and accepting lower wages.

If you recall Senator Ted Kennedy worked with the GWB administration (and others) to establish NCLB. I sincerely believe Kennedy intended the best outcome and believed this program was one instrument that would help improve the performance of American schools. But as we know under NCLB the federal government imposed another mandate on states without providing a funding mechanism. So the program has suffered both from a lack of funding but also comprehensive evaluation and monitoring.

Unfortunately, to the poster's point, Obama has bought into this program. Whether that is because they believe in it or have chosen other priorities and don't want to pick another fight with Congress is anyone's guess.

I have always maintained that standardized tests do not test knowledge nor aptitude, at least not for children and adolescents. Yet in our society we use them as part of admissions criteria to universities as well as for graduate programs - GRE, GMAT, LSAT, MCAT, etc.

I have no children but as an outsider looking in I see a number of things that concern me...

(1) Teachers are no longer respected and, unfortunately due to the low starting salaries and the conditions in which they must teach, we don't necessarily attract the best and brightest to the profession. That is not to say that we do not have very capable teachers but the profession as a whole is not exactly a magnet

(2) Curricula are no longer focused on delivering a quality "liberal" education of reading, writing, math, science, social studies and the arts. Curricula are often too light on the things students need to be prepared to enter society and too heavy on sports and electives. Electives are fine once a student is performing in the basics at a competent level

(3) Our politically correct society no longer expects students to respect teachers and administrators and to adhere to rules of decorum and behavior. On the one hand we have "no tolerance" policies for a student that might forget an bring a small pen knife to school but absolve them for tardiness, absences, bullying, etc. There is no longer a sense of respect and order in many classrooms. This has been hammered home to me by several of my friends who are teachers and administrators

(4) Parental and societal involvement and focus on achievement and success is lacking. Some parents see schools as babysitters for their children but will not support the schools when there are disciplinary problems. Some parents, understandably, have little to no time to be involved in their children's lives, let alone their education. Parents are working several jobs, coming and going and sometimes lack or don't take time to monitor their children's education, work with them on homework, school projects, etc.

(5) Schools still seem too focused on preparing students for college. Our focus for K-8 should be on establishing competency in the "core" subjects. Those core subjects are necessary for all children, regardless of the career path they may take. If we accomplished that with some degree of consistency, then we need to find ways to help guide and promote children in education that will help prepare them for their specific areas of interest and career choice. In my view we have come to expect universities to finish the job of the K-12 systems in providing that "liberal" education that used to be accomplished in K-8 or at least K-12. We need to begin to build out programs that prepare children for different career paths including trade schools, technical schools, etc.

(6) Family lives have become merry-go-rounds. There are far too many extra-curricular activities, especially sports. I see parents I work with exhausted each morning after having shuttled 2 or 3 children from school to football or dance lessons and back again. There is no quality time, no family meals, no opportunity to find out what's really going on in a child's life. Our "always connected" world means children are too focused on their tablets, computers or smart phones to engage one another in meaningful interaction.

I don't have an answer but these are some of the things I see as problematic and must definitely contribute to the failure of our educational system to meet the needs of our children and, sadly, for us as a nation going forward. I got a high quality PUBLIC education. There were no private schools, even religious, in the small town where I grew up. But the public schools delivered quality. There was order in the classroom. Parents were actively engaged in children's lives. Extra curricular activities were only AFTER homework and home chores were done.

stated the case very well. I also don't have children, but that does not mean that you don't see what and what should not happen in our education system and the the faults they have.

A couple things I would add. One - They don't teach children how to think only to remember. How many years do we have to teach that Columbus sailed the ocean blue in fourteen hundred and ninety two. And Two - They don't teach children how to confront the every day things that happen. Checking and savings accounts, taxes. Taking care of a car. Recognition of health problems in others and themselves. The list goes on and on.

You obviously have thought this through very well and thanks for offering this to us.

point #1, many people have told me that a "true teacher" does not care in the least about money, therefore, we should not pay teachers well. What a crock.

It started before NCLB, at the state level, with the "standards and accountability" movement. I became aware of it around 1992 or so.

Obama has just, instead of HELPING, escalated the use of high-stakes testing to further degrade public education.

Why do you excuse his complicity and even leadership in it now, when his leadership in it now means that despicable goals that were once fended off by Democrats can now be realized, at the expense of our children and our nation's future?

fiscally unsound, or blatantly wrong-head, as was his education policy that was so ripe to be gamed. Consequently virtually all of junior's policies, actions, wars, etc. continued were imo equally illegal, immoral, inhumane, fiscally unsound, or blatantly wrong-headed. Moreover, any holdover of junior's appointments helped only to perpetuate junior's policies and legacy, a good bit of which have now sadly been legitimized.

This madness must STOP.

Oh wait...

desire to prove to the right that he is no socialist..With the kind of hatred that the right spewed at Obama and the state of fear that they drove through fox and hate radio, I think Obama did what he had to do to
alleviate this ridiculous fear.

That being said this is one area where Obama really fucked up and Arne Duncan go fuck himself and his basketballs.

This personally is the only issue which Obama really disappointed me because it deals with kids and especially poor kids. Jesus Christ Barack get your shit together on this issue!! Please

K&R

I am not surprised in the least that GWB's NCLB program has failed miserably. Look it...did GW ever do anything right? He also stood up one time and said everyone should own their own home, encouraging everyone to go out and buy a house. How'd that turn out for him? Or us?

The guy on the left, for example, was Rahm's co-chair for his mayoral campaign and is Juan Rangel, the CEO of UNO.

At a fund-raising dinner for UNO, Rahm Emanuel

In 2012, UNO had a total budget of about $95 million with the vast majority of that financing coming from government sources, including $52 million to run existing schools and $33 million to build the new ones.

Literally.

& Watch 'Em Grab The Corp Money.

EOM

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022597508

Sorry if I shouldn't be posting this here, but I thought it related to the OP.

All In w/Chris Hayes ?@allinwithchris 2m
Next: a scandal involving theft, conspiracy, witness tampering. Who, unfortunately, is at the heart of it? Atlanta's children. #inners