The Observation Deck

No flogging????

Danggit - flogging was always my favorite part

****

I do see your point Joan - I just had my microsope on high power for this discussion. I also beleivethat the reality for this - just as for so many other things that are discussed here - is that there are no easy 'sound-bite' answers, and no answers will satisfy everyone.

So we discuss in the hopes that we can make the best possible decision, armed with the best posssible data, that we can.

Peace,
~Charyn

Joan, I totally agree that there isn't any dungeon with kids who failed their Math portion of the proficiency test (though come to think of it, that might not be a bad idea!!). I do agree that most kids come out of it unscathed and undamaged for their future adult lives. That was never my point, though. The stakes are high and the supercede what local citizens think of their schools. We support our school district, that is true. Some rankings put us as the "worst," though I was checking out site that ranked elementary schools based on passing the 4th grade proficiency tests. 2 Lakewood schools ranked 58 and 60 (Grant and Lincoln). This isn't bad when there are only 6 more Cuyahoga County schools above them on the list and only 2 in the top 20...and none of those are West Side schools! I guess numbers are what one makes of them... Does this mean we have the BEST West Side elementary schools based on the proficiency test?? Even if we think Lakewood City Schools are the best thing since sliced bread (and so far, I do...my first grader is doing great and loving it and we love her teacher), proficiency testing and specifically the NCLB could lead us to a time where we have to give up loving Lakewood City Schools and now show the love for State of Ohio run schools or, if the Republicans get their way (not to be too political), a Private Company running our schools. That is pretty high stakes, don't you think?

But the other stakes of using proficiency tests don't have to do with just how bad kids feel about them (and yes, you can still do summer school if you fail math tests...that hasn't changed at all as far as I know...you still have to get passing grades in the class, too). The stakes are also that we are putting out kids that lack critical thinking skills or even real world skills needed in both domestic life and the job market. We have tested ourselves out of the top spots for students of the world in science and math, creating a culture best ready for the Service Job Industry that is becoming the only kind of job one can get in this country. As long as we continue to take a narrow-focused view of testing, the students will become less and less generalized in their abilities to succeed.

Yes, I can hear Joan now saying, "but my kids are turning out fine" and yes, many kids will and will continue to do so regardless of how our schools are structured. But the overall result is that not all of the kids graduating are your kids. There is now a disturbing trend in the US where we are (I shudder to say) going backwards in education. It is almost the mark of Cain to be smart and have a degree. People talk about "east coast intellectuals" as if they were some evil aberration. We have active political debates about what is science?! People can be "too smart for their own good" and mediocrity is seen as success. These aren't all to be laid on the lap of proficiency testing but proficiency testing is a symptom of a larger problem in education. We have severe distrust of teachers, "smart people," science, and public school systems who are apparently out to "gouge" their citizens for more money and cushy jobs.

Sorry to ramble. As Charyn pointed out, it is easy to get into the microscopic view of proficiency testing and think only about the smaller examples. And for me, maybe I worry about the larger ramifications of it too much. It isn't the apocolypse. If only that were the case we might do something more about it. But like all large problems in the US, it is a slow and creeping change towards decline. But it is a steady decline and I feel we need to do some course changing soon.

Phil Florian wrote: NCLB could lead us to a time where we have to give up loving Lakewood City Schools and now show the love for State of Ohio run schools or, if the Republicans get their way (not to be too political), a Private Company running our schools. That is pretty high stakes, don't you think?

High stakes and highly unlikely. The state of Ohio has no policy that includes state or private takeover of schools, and if they did, where are the personnel or management that can "take over" Cleveland, Cincinnati, Columbus, Dayton, Youngstown, and Canton PLUS Lakewood, Brunswick, and all the other "at-risk" schools? Cleveland alone would be a big animal for any company to swallow. The prospect is unrealistic, which is why I believe Dr. Estrop is engaging in fear-mongering.

Phil Florian wrote:The stakes are also that we are putting out kids that lack critical thinking skills or even real world skills needed in both domestic life and the job market.

But here's the point I'm trying to make. What's the difference between teaching to a test that statewide educators have developed and one that Mrs. Smith came up with on her own? Every one of us can remember the torment of having to remember a specific teacher's "pet" priorities (Smoot Hawley? Pelopenesian wars?) Every teacher has always "taught to a test" and as such, discouraged in some way "critical thinking." The problem was that one teacher in Cleveland thought one set of skills/facts was important, while a teacher in Lima may have focused on something completely different. As you moved up the ladder, you were at the mercy of what your earlier teachers did. State proficiency testing tends to smooth that out.

And as I said before, kids are done with most standardized testing by their sophomore year in HS. The next 3 yrs can, and to a large degree, ARE about critical thinking and higher concepts, but the basics have to be mastered first. Many LHS classes are taught at a pretty high level, for students who wish to engage. We're not turning out factoid-repeating automatons.

Joan Roberts wrote:And as I said before, kids are done with most standardized testing by their sophomore year in HS. The next 3 yrs can, and to a large degree, ARE about critical thinking and higher concepts, but the basics have to be mastered first. Many LHS classes are taught at a pretty high level, for students who wish to engage. We're not turning out factoid-repeating automatons.

Joan:

That is an astue observation. The other reality is that the test students are asked to take is on 8th grade material. I cannot understand why people think it is to hard for 12th graders to pass an 8th grade test.

Perhaps the real problem is that the students are lazy.

See

http://news.yahoo.com/s/usatoday/200603 ... thestudent

Drop Out rate.

I don't know the formula of course but does it need to be much harder than this:

9th graders in the school system
minus those who move away or go to a non-district school in grade years 10, 11, 12
total of graduates
total of drop-outs

Add into this new students in grades 11, 12, if you wish.

The focus on the percentage of 9th graders who end up graduating, defined as those 9th graders who remain residents through the graduation year, seems straightforward.

The state of Ohio has no policy that includes state or private takeover of schools, and if they did, where are the personnel or management that can "take over" Cleveland, Cincinnati, Columbus, Dayton, Youngstown, and Canton PLUS Lakewood, Brunswick, and all the other "at-risk" schools? Cleveland alone would be a big animal for any company to swallow.

This goes to the core of NCLB, of course. Of course a state can't take over school districts so fast and so many...which leads us to what Bush has made a core principle of his plan: School choice. If a student can't choose a school in their district that meets their needs and the state is apparently unable to take over all the schools that need taking over then it is high time we started moving some of this money to private schools. This has always been his aim (he hasn't denied it) and the clearly punitive system of NCLB (which takes away money and punishes districts for "failing" and fails to provide plans and incentives to help districts improve) makes this a clear path that we are heading down. Maybe it will take 7 years but it is a path nonetheless. As a parent who will still have 2 kids in the school system in this future, I am of course concerned.

I am not opposed to school choice, either. We did Catholic school one year for our daughter and then moved to Public this year and haven't looked back.

But here's the point I'm trying to make. What's the difference between teaching to a test that statewide educators have developed and one that Mrs. Smith came up with on her own? Every one of us can remember the torment of having to remember a specific teacher's "pet" priorities (Smoot Hawley? Pelopenesian wars?) Every teacher has always "taught to a test"

This isn't about standards that are being tested...it is about the single method of testing. I don't disagree with standards to some degree. But success in school should be more than one's ability to pass a proficiency test which uses multiple choice and small writing samples as their basis. And these tests are checked necessary by professional educators. From what I have read (and this may be untrue) these writing samples are graded by people who make just a bit over minimum wage...hardly what an education professional would expect or be paid.

It is the method I have a hard time with and its focus is a problem to me. A teacher who has a curriculum approved by their district or state will find a way to teach this material. They test along the way to see how their kids are doing. When in school learning about education we talked a lot about not only teaching kids facts but working towards more critical thinking that comes from a deeper understanding of the material.

I doubt there is a person on here that at one point or another studied for a test using the "cram" method. This method allowed us to get as much info in our brains as possible to regurgitate it the next day. We passed or failed based on our ability to remember facts, arcane or relevant (Peloponnesian War vs. American Civil War, if you will...). Test methodology like proficiency tests encourage this style of learning and nothing more. You either know it or you don't and there are no clues as to why you might not.

What is harder to study for but more important to good education is when a teacher asks a student to take two bits of information and use this to come up with a third bit of informatation that wasn't directly taught in the classroom. Come up with conclusions and comparisons that are unique and enlightening. This is also harder to "standardize" but arguably the most important part of education. Sure, kids technically may stop taking tests in 9th grade and have three more years to study using different techniques but, like foreign language in the US, we screw up by assuming that the later years are best for this style of education. Our kids should be doing critical thinking of this sort in Elementary school, not just as Seniors. Just like foreign languages should be taught at an age when their brains are primed for this information. They are also primed to create good critical thinking skills, too.

Standardized tests can't test this. A teacher more free to truly evaluate his students using multiple methods has a better chance of getting to the root of what each child needs to succeed. Sure, some might be simple regurgitation: When was the Peloponnesian War? A more important question for later is why is that war important? What can we discuss about this that makes this war relevant to today? But we aren't encouraging that at all and the more standardized and multiple choice-ized (a word I freely termed! ) the more we lose some of the real education that has been lacking since proficiency tests became the end-all method of checking a student's process.

I agree that it wasn't what was intended when they first came out. They were merely meant to be a sign post that indicated some areas that needed improvement. NCLB simply raised the stakes of this to new levels that is more and more concerning to me and some other parents. Obviously not all of them and I don't think we ever will really convince one another but it is good to hear why some aren't worried about it. Maybe you are correct and there is nothing truly to worry about. I can sincerely hope that is the case because it is clear that NCLB is here to stay, like it or not.

Thanks for the frank discussion so far! Very refreshing!

It's important to remember that NCLB was a bipartisan program. It was passed during the brief period where DEMOCRATS controlled the Senate.
As such, each party anticipated a different remedy for failing schools. Yes, Republicans wanted to loosen control of public schools and teachers unions. But democrats had an ulterior motive, too. They figured low urban perforrmance would be a rationale for more federal funding to PUBLIC schools.
Let's put it simply: the solution proposed is going to depend on the party in power, in Columbus and in Washington. If Democrats take over, you'll hear less about school choice and more about funding. Make that of it what you will.
Either way, NCLB will be revised in a major way, IMHO. The core principal (100 percent reading and math proficiency) is unrealistic.

To the point of teachers teaching to the test - see the recent news about the well-respected teacher in Parma that gave each of her students a copy of the proficiency exam to study & learn (with answers) prior to the test.

All of the children are considered by the state to have cheated on the test and all scores will be removed - causing a large drop in the rate of that school & district.

The interviewd school representative stated that she was a good teacher that made a bad decision. Gee....... Ya think?



Peace,
~Charyn

[quote=Bill Call]
The other reality is that the test students are asked to take is on 8th grade material. I cannot understand why people think it is to hard for 12th graders to pass an 8th grade test.

Perhaps the real problem is that the students are lazy.

[/quote]

Bill,
perhaps just as important: why is it people are complaing that 12th graders are made to take an 8th grade test? Perhaps it's not just the students that are lazy, but the people against it are as well.
Joe

Joan I agree that both parties have had a stake in the NCLB Act. I don't have a problem with asking for money for public schools, either, so you see my bias pretty clearly. I want the best for my daughter and the kids around her so a bit more here and there isn't a problem.

I think your point about both parties having a stake in this goes back to my original point: Why leave this to politicians to fix? I think we need to have better local leadership that gets people involved at a local level to work on improving schools. I don't know if we agree on that aspect of it but I honestly don't trust either party with education solutions. I can't think of many things that Democrats or Republicans have done in recent years that I can get excited about in any way. There are just too many special interests that appeal to both sides of the aisle that are making the decisions by greasing palms.

It is also hard to get people involved. A nice gent held a gathering at the library a few years ago to talk about Proficiency Tests. It was a great group of people but it totalled about 6 or 7 folks getting together to discuss this. We had test samples to read through and someone representing both the Pro and Con arguments. Only a handful of people showed up! I guess we get what we deserve with our politicians.

I think Parents need a Special Interest Group.