The Public School Kids Are Alright

[GoodSpeak]

Newsweek
November 02, 2009 8:42 PM
US School Kids Are Doing Better Than Ever – But You Never Hear It
by Ashley Merryman

There is a constant drumbeat heard that America's education system is failing the nation's children. Everywhere we turn around, you hear that traditional public schools in shambles; the teachers are failing and so are the kids' scores. (The only saving grace seeming to be charter schools, which operate outside of the traditional model.) School drop-out rates are said to be stratospheric. And if, by some miracle, kids do make it to college, they don't have any real academic prowess when they get there – since we frequently hear about college students having to take remedial courses.

Last week, I was at a conference, participating in a discussion on education reform. One of the panelists – the creator of several highly acclaimed schools – essentially argued that schools are such a mess that we need to throw out the American education system and start over.

Doomsday Talk like that works to galvanize support for his programs, and it's an easy applause line.

But the trouble is that it ignores the fact the millions of kids are thriving in the traditional school system. If we only focus on the disasters, we risk being blind to this success. And the fact is that success – not failure – is actually the American educational norm.

Today, the U.S. Census Bureau announced that there were a record number of students in American colleges and universities in 2008: an incredible 14,955,000 undergraduates were pursuing their degrees. That surpassed the historically high 2007 enrollment, and the Bureau expects that 2009's enrollment is even higher still. Since 2000, the number of undergrads and grad students has skyrocketed, adding more than 3.2 million to college rolls.

As for kids still in elementary and high school – their prospects are also looking brighter, since more kids stay in school these days. According to the US Department of Education, the number of younger adults without a high school diploma or GED is the lowest it's been since 1980.

Now, compare that to when my grandmother was growing up. In 1940, just one-fourth of the population aged 25 and over finished high school, and just four percent of Americans had college degrees.

What today's students are accomplishing when they are in school is also remarkable. More students are studying higher level math and science. 1.5 million high school student took Advanced Placement exams in 2007. That is triple what it was just a decade ago.

The usual skeptical response to the increase in college enrollment is that, although more kids are going to college, they are less prepared when they get there. But what no one noticed is that remedial rates, as high as they might be, are actually lower than they were in the 1980s. In fact, fewer colleges and universities even offer remedial programs than they did in decades past.

But even that doesn't tell the entire story. Because there is another boom in education – at the other end of the spectrum. Kids are beginning school earlier than ever before. According to the Census report, more than 50% of three- and four- year-olds are now in preschool.

So there are more kids beginning their formal education earlier. While in school, they are more prepared, studying more challenging curricula. And they stay in school for more years.

None of this comes across in the stories we hear from school reformers. They rail about the failing schools, the kids who can't read, and those who are so disconnected that they drop-out. So it feels almost paradoxical to learn about surveys that find that most high school students go to school because the subjects are interesting, and they get satisfaction from doing their coursework.

It may be hard to believe, but the vast majority of parents are actually "very satisfied" with their children's schools – from the school's quality overall to their children's specific teachers.

It isn't that US schools are perfect, or that they cannot be improved. They can be. And there are certainly children who have been failed by their schools. For the past decade, I've been tutoring kids going to some of the worst schools in the country, so I am all too familiar with these schools' problems.

However, if the reformers focus exclusively on the disasters, their approach may be working too well. From their point of view, it may seem like it's the only way to get anger, the money and resources they need to save their kids.

But the problem is that we don't get inspired to follow these leaders. We applaud their efforts, but we don't seem to be joining in their campaigns. Instead, we feel that the problems they've shown us are simply too huge, too overwhelming to fix. So we don't change the bad stuff, and we miss out on how many good things are really going on.

Everyone loves a winner – so what would happen if the school reformers focused on the success? What if they focused on the number of kids who didn't bring a weapon to a school or use drugs that day, instead of the number who did? How many of the kids were doing their homework? What would happen if we heard more about the first generation kids going to college than the drop-outs? Would be easier to get people to go help those kids fill out their college applications?

It's a classic case of not seeing the forest for the trees. The answer to saving the forest (or the trees) isn't always to suggest we burn the whole thing down.

[Jeffrey Wozniak]

So Bush's No Child Left Behind worked after all.

[bluenoter]

Goody, your school system probably wants you to teach that the correct spelling is
all right (if you don't already), particularly because you're obliged to do a lot of "teaching to the test."

all right

Usage Note: Despite the appearance of the form alright in works of such well-known writers as Langston Hughes and James Joyce [and, of course, the Who], the single word spelling has never been accepted as standard. This is peculiar, since similar fusions such as already and altogether have never raised any objections. The difference may lie in the fact that already and altogether became single words back in the Middle Ages, whereas alright has only been around for a little more than a century and was called out by language critics as a misspelling. Consequently, one who uses alright, especially in formal writing, runs the risk that readers may view it as an error or as the willful breaking of convention.

---The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition [There are similar usage notes in other dictionaries.]

[Chris D]

This is one time I'll back up Goody. The thread title is an homage to The Who, referenced in your blurb there, bluenoter.

[bluenoter]

Originally Posted by Chris D

This is one time I'll back up Goody. The thread title is an homage to The Who, referenced in your blurb there, bluenoter.

I'm not saying that he shouldn't have used alright here. But I hope he knows, for teaching purposes, that the spelling considered standard is all right.

[Monte Smith]

Alright, alright, alright, alright
Alright, alright, alright, alright
Alright, alright, alright, alright
Alright, alright, alright.

[GoodSpeak]

Originally Posted by Jeffrey Wozniak

So Bush's No Child Left Behind worked after all.

Yeah, that's what did it, Woozzie.


Tests, tests and more tests. Uh-huh. You bet.


Read the article and stop wasting my time.





D-

[GoodSpeak]

Originally Posted by Chris D

This is one time I'll back up Goody. The thread title is an homage to The Who, referenced in your blurb there, bluenoter.

Exactly.

Rita, apparently, is allusion challenged.


And for the record, "alright" is also correct. This an informal setting wherein informal writing is acceptable.**


Rita, OTOH, can take a long walk off a short pier.


To wit:

The form alright as a one-word spelling of the phrase all right in all of its senses probably arose by analogy with such words as already and altogether. Although alright is a common spelling in written dialog and in other types of informal writing, **all right is used in more formal, edited writing.


source: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/alright

[GoodSpeak]

BTW....it's Blue Noter not Bluenoter.


Incorrect spelling.


Waiter?



Check please.

[jesus marion joseph]

I'm not sure what's in the standardized tests they give kids these days, but if they don't have any critical/research writing requirements, then they should, IMHO. As an undergrad I took about half a dozen classes with the same professor, who always had us write precis and book reviews as part of the classes, which I had not done much of prior. The experience was immensely helpful during my first year of law school, in my Legal Methods classes. It was readily apparent who had done critical writing and who hadn't.

[clinthopson]

Our daughter's two sons had been going to Montessori school until last year when the youngest was first grade age. They then enrolled in a local public school which is located in a very affluent section. These kids were bored, they were unchallenged and bored. They had behaviour problems which is very unlike these guys. Every time the parents turned around, the school was having a fund raiser.

Being fed up, the parents enrolled the boys boys in a private, non-religious private school. They calculated the costs and by the time they factored in all the dough they were hit up for in the public school fund raiser, the actual cost wouldn't be that much more.

The boys are very happy at their new school and are again challenged.

[Jeffrey Wozniak]

Are you suggesting that public schools dumb-down the curriculum so that they can pass more kids and bump up their numbers?

[clinthopson]

Probably, the problem our daughter found was n't so much "dumbing down" as dealing with the testing bullshit and that the teaching seemed to be aimed at what was perceived at the "averge" student which means to me that both the smart kids and the dumb kids get short shrift. In our grandsons' classes, when asked, both teachers were usaware that the boys had attended Montessori.

Our feeling was that the teachers were so overburdened with having to prep[are the kids for testing and the other nonsense, they didn't have a chance to get to know the kids, even after a whole school year.

This is in the Newport Beach school system, not exactly a disadvantaged section.

OTOH, our son in Brooklyn and the one in Ellicott City are quite satisfied with the education their kids are receiving.

[Jeffrey Wozniak]

Yes. Making sure the kids learn something does put quite a burden on teachers...

[baksheesh]

Originally Posted by Jeffrey Wozniak

Yes. Making sure the kids learn something does put quite a burden on teachers...

I think Tim's referring to all the unneccessary and at times utterly ridiculous bureaucracy that's grown up around education. Next door in GB they regularly screw things up in this regard. A recent classic was where the outside agency the Gov. had hired to correct exam papers left a shed load of them out in the rain, and they got ruined!
Arf!

[Jeffrey Wozniak]

Indeed. Government bureaucracy is out of hand. As is evident in the 2,000 page health care bill.

However, with public education you have to take the good with the bad. The massive bureaucracy goes along with it.

[baksheesh]

Originally Posted by Jeffrey Wozniak

Indeed. Government bureaucracy is out of hand. As is evident in the 2,000 page health care bill.

However, with public education you have to take the good with the bad. The massive bureaucracy goes along with it.

That's highly debatable surely. I'm thinking of Weber's iron cage in the case of education, 'cos bureaucracy is incapable of recognising the complex and fluid issues at work. However when it comes to the health bill, from what I've seen (and remember I'm writing this in Ireland, where we have a pretty good health system - the government looks out for its citizens, and they don't get charged an arm and a leg to heal that arm or leg) it's virtually essential, 'cos the system as it stands is morally reprehensible. I mean a for profit organization providing health insurance? How's that going to work without screwing the less well off to the wall?

[clinthopson]

Originally Posted by Jeffrey Wozniak

Indeed. Government bureaucracy is out of hand. As is evident in the 2,000 page health care bill.

However, with public education you have to take the good with the bad. The massive bureaucracy goes along with it.

Wozzie, I'm amazed that you would say something positive about government programs.

The size of the health care bill, as if anyone would have the stamina to read it, is full of all kinds of porky and ideological things like Hatch's idiotic inclusion of paying for "prayer healing."

[tippy]

Originally Posted by clinthopson

The size of the health care bill, as if anyone would have the stamina to read it, is full of all kinds of porky and ideological things like Hatch's idiotic inclusion of paying for "prayer healing."

Hey, that could mean an employment opportunity for someone like me in SLC.

[tippy]

The military is saying that 75% of kids are too poorly educated or too fat to defend our country.

[bluenoter]

Originally Posted by tippy

The military is saying that 75% of kids are too poorly educated or too fat to defend our country.

Report: 75% of youths are unfit for military service

[GoodSpeak]

Originally Posted by jesus marion joseph

I'm not sure what's in the standardized tests they give kids these days, but if they don't have any critical/research writing requirements, then they should, IMHO. As an undergrad I took about half a dozen classes with the same professor, who always had us write precis and book reviews as part of the classes, which I had not done much of prior. The experience was immensely helpful during my first year of law school, in my Legal Methods classes. It was readily apparent who had done critical writing and who hadn't.

It is a trivia contest wherein the kids must play "beat the test maker."

The test is full of tricky questions with obscure references to not often used information in, let's say, grammar. Or the responses are all plausible but need to be "mostly" correct. It is designed to make you fail.


It's a joke.

[GoodSpeak]

Originally Posted by Jeffrey Wozniak

Are you suggesting that public schools dumb-down the curriculum so that they can pass more kids and bump up their numbers?

Are you kidding?

The whole program is to get kids to pass the test, Wozzie. Haven't you been following this?

Education in this country has become fodder for Gee Dumbya's test maker dipshits.


These are people who exist to create tests and would lose big time money if the kids actually started passing them. Dig?


It is a trivia contest which purposely tests kids on shit nobody needs to know in order to do well in society. We teachers are forced to teach to the test and thereby give kids a big bunch of bullshit they will never need to use in the real world.

Instead of teaching good writing skill and good communication skill, we are forced to teach useless crap like gerunds, the archaic use of a comma before "and" in a sentence and being able to name an independent clause or a subordinate clause. The test makers could give a shit if the kids actually know how to use these things in a piece of writing. Thinking? Pssh. Fuck that one too. It's all about the numbers and how good it makes the Administrators look. And you wonder why I'm so down on republicans.


NCLB is a big giant joke and an insult to education. The California HS Exit Exam isn't far behind the trivia train.



BWTFDIK, eh?




I'm just a teacher.

Originally Posted by Jeffrey Wozniak

Yes. Making sure the kids learn something does put quite a burden on teachers...

Exactly.


We aren't allowed to do that any more, Wozzie.


We have to make sure the kids pass that goddamned test your conservatives forced on us instead.


What a crock.

[Jeffrey Wozniak]

I wasn't aware of the fact that passing tests to show you've learned something before moving you on to the next level was a conservative plot to keep kids from learning.

I take it you went to college, being a public school teacher and all. Were you forced to pass tests, or did they just move you through the system because they liked you and didn't want to hurt your feelings?

[GoodSpeak]

Originally Posted by Jeffrey Wozniak

I wasn't aware of the fact that passing tests to show you've learned something before moving you on to the next level was a conservative plot to keep kids from learning.

I take it you went to college, being a public school teacher and all. Were you forced to pass tests, or did they just move you through the system because they liked you and didn't want to hurt your feelings?

Keeping kids from learning....is that what you read here? Outside of the fact you clearly do not know what you are talking about, it is painfully obvious you aren't catching on to the concept here, Wozzie.

The HS diploma shows kids have learned something as did the three degrees and two credentials I hold. A trivia test only proves they can play beat the test maker. An exit exam I have no trouble with it's the pointless information it requires of kids to pass it. Leaning...so you call trivia learning? Really?

And if you must know, my "test" is in the form of bi-yearly evaluations, performance quotas and required professional development. What more do you want....blood?

The conservative "plot" as you put it, is in the agenda the far right has openly promoted: Privatization of public schools and the voucher. To accomplish that and "convince" people public education is failing, they need to make public educators look bad with arbitrary numbers crunching and Average Yearly Increases in scores on these tests. How, one might posit, can any school ever achieve 100% accuracy 100% of the time? No business can claim that. If a school is at 80-90% they would be considered a failing school. It's bullshit.

Add to that the fact when a question is answered correctly "too many times", the test makers throw it out and replace it with something arbitrarily harder. That is what has turned this test into a trivia contest, Wozzie. Educators have beaten them at their own game by preparing more kids to pass the test. So they have placed more and more obscure or archaic crap in the tests to help kids fail.


So, if we do well again this year, you can bet the ranch the test makers will randomly hit us with more of the same trivial bullshit.

[GoodSpeak]

And if you are leading toward blaming this all on Obama....you are engaging in duplicity.



Shoot straight once, Wozzie.



Quit being such a hater.

[Jeffrey Wozniak]

Can you provide some examples of what you consider to be the "trivial bullshit" the kids need to know to pass?

[bluenoter]

Originally Posted by Jeffrey Wozniak

Can you provide some examples of what you consider to be the "trivial bullshit" the kids need to know to pass?

I think he did---

Originally Posted by GoodSpeak

Instead of teaching good writing skill and good communication skill, we are forced to teach useless crap like gerunds, the archaic use of a comma before "and" in a sentence and being able to name an independent clause or a subordinate clause.

[Jeffrey Wozniak]

I'm curious as to when that became trivial bullshit.

Has Ebonics taken over the public school system?

[Gary Sisco]

What Goodie objects to is called teaching the English language.