It also is worth pointing out that some cultures emphasize sports, while others emphasize success in the classroom.

 

If it weren't for sports, things would be even worse. I always hated the excuse kids and parents give for not playing "going to focus on academics". Yeah, I bet there is a whole lot of that going on from 3-5 everyday and on Friday nights.

 

That's one of those feel good reasons..

If it weren't for sports, things would be even worse. I always hated the excuse kids and parents give for not playing "going to focus on academics". Yeah, I bet there is a whole lot of that going on from 3-5 everyday and on Friday nights.

 

That's one of those feel good reasons..

My observation was not intended to diminish the role that sports play in the "total education" of youngsters. Having said that, I've always scratched my head why a volleyball player who signs a letter of intent to a tiny college in Kentucky or Ohio gets 15 seconds on the local TV news and her picture in the paper, but the child of immigrants who's just been accepted to MIT on an academic scholarship gets zero mention. Misplaced priorities, I would argue.

I agree. Same reason you and the rest of us are on a sports message board and not on one's for state testing.

 

Same reason football is on all day sat and Sunday and not academic meets.

Can you explain this a little more? The first sentence seems to contradict the rest of your statement.

What I mean is that if all the federal government did was set goals, then the quality of education would not be impacted. When the federal government controls a school's curriculum by threatening to withhold funding, that is where they inflict damage to the quality of education.

 

Expectations for schools and teachers should be high and school administrators should establish baselines for what students should know at each grade level. However, I don't like to be micromanaged on projects and I don't think that teacher's methods should be micromanaged either.

 

In a nutshell, I believe in pushing government functions and accountability to the lowest possible level, and that includes public education.

Can you explain why immigrants, mostly from Asia dominate academic competitions in math and science in this country, despite the fact that they attend the same schools as native-born Americans in far smaller numbers?

 

 

I can tell you one thing why. Their parents expect more out of them.

Exactly. All else being equal, parental expectations are the key to academic performance.

I will also add that it seems like it is a tight knit family culture where they all support each other.

I agree. I attended a large birthday party for the one-year old daughter of one of my Indian co-workers last night. The 10-year old sister of the birthday girl and her friends sang several songs and emceed much of the party. One of the songs that the girls sang was the Star Spangled Banner and everybody stood, despite the fact that many of the attendees were not American citizens and I was probably the only adult in attendance who was born in this country.

 

Indians have high expectations of their children, and I have had the same impression of Vietnamese, Thai, Chinese, and other Asians in this area. Parents give their children serious responsibility as soon as they are old enough to handle it. (I know that there are always exceptions, but this has been my general impression of Asians in this country.)

 

In fairness to native-born Americans, most of the Asian adults that we see in this country are well educated and are often from relatively affluent families. They are not a representative sample of all Asians.

What I mean is that if all the federal government did was set goals, then the quality of education would not be impacted. When the federal government controls a school's curriculum by threatening to withhold funding, that is where they inflict damage to the quality of education.

 

Expectations for schools and teachers should be high and school administrators should establish baselines for what students should know at each grade level. However, I don't like to be micromanaged on projects and I don't think that teacher's methods should be micromanaged either.

 

In a nutshell, I believe in pushing government functions and accountability to the lowest possible level, and that includes public education.

 

I can agree with a great deal of what you say. There are entirely too many federal requirements placed on schools. However, I do think that there does need to be a minimal accountability for every school in every state - a basic curriculum. However, I'm also a proponent of students meeting minimum standards before moving on to the next grade level.

I can agree with a great deal of what you say. There are entirely too many federal requirements placed on schools. However, I do think that there does need to be a minimal accountability for every school in every state - a basic curriculum. However, I'm also a proponent of students meeting minimum standards before moving on to the next grade level.

I fully agree with you about setting minimum standards - I just believe that states are the appropriate level to set those standards. The federal government should have no power to reward and punish schools for meeting or failing to meet standards set in Washington, DC.

 

I am also opposed to efforts to keep students in high school who have absolutely no interest in getting an education and are disruptive to classes of students who want an education. Graduating illiterate students from high schools who have only remained in school to avoid losing a driver's license serves no purpose, IMO. Graduation rates are not good measures of the quality of a school. They are a reflection of the community.

I fully agree with you about setting minimum standards - I just believe that states are the appropriate level to set those standards. The federal government should have no power to reward and punish schools for meeting or failing to meet standards set in Washington, DC.

 

I am also opposed to efforts to keep students in high school who have absolutely no interest in getting an education and are disruptive to classes of students who want an education. Graduating illiterate students from high schools who have only remained in school to avoid losing a driver's license serves no purpose, IMO. Graduation rates are not good measures of the quality of a school. They are a reflection of the community.

 

This is where you may not understand why we have gotten to where we are. From 1990 to very recently the states did set their own standards. It was a disaster. Standards in states, such as, Maine, Massachusetts, New York, and Minnesota were far more rigorous to those in Mississippi, Alabama, Tennessee, and the worst lowest of them all Texas.

 

In other words when states set Proficiency levels they set them on different sets of standards. To compare state to state was a waste of time. For instance, if 80% of students were Proficient in 3rd grade Reading in Mississippi and 60% of 3rd graders were Proficient in Reading in Massachusetts, the appearance was that Mississippi 3rd graders were achieving better than those in Massachusetts. Nothing could have been further from the truth.

 

The NAEP (National Assessment of Educational Progress) was taken by a set percentage of students in all states to make comparisons from state to state and give us an indication nationally how are students were progressing. The progress made by the states with rigorous standards was far superior to those with less rigorous. This is what drove the National Governors Council to move for a common set of standards.

 

All but five states agreed Texas, Alaska, Virginia, Nebraska and I forget the 5th. Of those only Virginia had rigorous state standards. Texas, Nebraska, and Alaska had very low standards By the way, Kentucky and Ohio state standards were in the middle range, also.

 

Now I am not a proponent of total accountability on national assessments alone. there has to be a variety of variables to measure success. That would be very expensive, though. I understand why they have accountability, though. Many people want to determine if the money is well spent. Although, almost all assessments have cultural biases that make them unfair to many students. But that is another topic for another day.

 

My vocation has afforded me the opportunity to analyze several state assessments and design curriculum and teaching strategies to meet the standards. I am not an expert, but I have experienced the standards across states and the Common Core to understand the issues.

 

You are correct in stating that graduation rate is a very poor measure of true academic achievement of students.

 

http://educationnext.org/few-states-set-worldclass-standards/

Edited June 9, 201412 yr by Bengal Maniac

I believe American Culture has abandoned the extended family culture that is prevalent in many ethnic cultures. 3 generations, or more, living under one roof , IMO, facilitates educational values and family support of education. Deterioration of families through divorce, or, just choosing not to marry, takes the focus off children. I believe healthy family structures , and educational values, to be highly correlated. And there is not one damned thing government can do about it.

This is where you may not understand why we have gotten to where we are. From 1990 to very recently the states did set their own standards. It was a disaster. Standards in states, such as, Maine, Massachusetts, New York, and Minnesota were far more rigorous to those in Mississippi, Alabama, Tennessee, and the worst lowest of them all Texas.

 

In other words when states set Proficiency levels they set them on different sets of standards. To compare state to state was a waste of time. For instance, if 80% of students were Proficient in 3rd grade Reading in Mississippi and 60% of 3rd graders were Proficient in Reading in Massachusetts, the appearance was that Mississippi 3rd graders were achieving better than those in Massachusetts. Nothing could have been further from the truth.

 

The NAEP (National Assessment of Educational Progress) was taken by a set percentage of students in all states to make comparisons from state to state and give us an indication nationally how are students were progressing. The progress made by the states with rigorous standards was far superior to those with less rigorous. This is what drove the National Governors Council to move for a common set of standards.

 

All but five states agreed Texas, Alaska, Virginia, Nebraska and I forget the 5th. Of those only Virginia had rigorous state standards. Texas, Nebraska, and Alaska had very low standards By the way, Kentucky and Ohio state standards were in the middle range, also.

 

Now I am not a proponent of total accountability on national assessments alone. there has to be a variety of variables to measure success. That would be very expensive, though. I understand why they have accountability, though. Many people want to determine if the money is well spent. Although, almost all assessments have cultural biases that make them unfair to many students. But that is another topic for another day.

 

My vocation has afforded me the opportunity to analyze several state assessments and design curriculum and teaching strategies to meet the standards. I am not an expert, but I have experienced the standards across states and the Common Core to understand the issues.

 

You are correct in stating that graduation rate is a very poor measure of true academic achievement of students.

 

Few States Set World-Class Standards - Education Next : Education Next

I am well aware of the games that states have set in the past with standardized tests. The schools in almost every county in Kentucky were deemed to be above average. However, the NEA and federal government have been meddling in local schools for many, many years. State tests were never the problem. The problem was and still is what is being taught in our schools.

 

A person who learns to read and write well and masters math from the basics through algebra, geometry, and trigonometry is capable of learning anything that they desire to learn. Schools should set that goal as the absolute minimum standard for all students who are intellectually capable of achieving that goal - and the overwhelming majority of students are intelligent enough to master those subjects.

 

In addition to the above, I would focus on teaching students to write creatively and to learn basic chemistry, physics, and biology to give them a good set of problem solving skills.

 

Test scores take care of themselves if schools focus on teaching the right skills and making good use of their time and their students' time. Too much time is wasted in public schools dispensing information that some bureaucrat decided needs to be shared.

 

"Standards" do not equal results.

I am well aware of the games that states have set in the past with standardized tests. The schools in almost every county in Kentucky were deemed to be above average. However, the NEA and federal government have been meddling in local schools for many, many years. State tests were never the problem. The problem was and still is what is being taught in our schools.

 

A person who learns to read and write well and masters math from the basics through algebra, geometry, and trigonometry is capable of learning anything that they desire to learn. Schools should set that goal as the absolute minimum standard for all students who are intellectually capable of achieving that goal - and the overwhelming majority of students are intelligent enough to master those subjects.

 

In addition to the above, I would focus on teaching students to write creatively and to learn basic chemistry, physics, and biology to give them a good set of problem solving skills.

 

Test scores take care of themselves if schools focus on teaching the right skills and making good use of their time and their students' time. Too much time is wasted in public schools dispensing information that some bureaucrat decided needs to be shared.

 

"Standards" do not equal results.

 

If you are aware of it then why would you want to put it back in their hands. Test scores do not always take care of themselves. Tests are generally content/vocabulary biased to the middle class. The prerequisite knowledge needed to respond to some questions are experiences many kids in the urban core and isolated rural just do not have because of the experiences they generally do not have.

 

Let me be clear, I am not saying they can't learn, but without those prerequisite skills or experiences, it is an extreme challenge for them to perform well on standardized tests. There should be no excuses and I will not make them, but to base learning on these tests is just extremely misleading and kids have consistently performed along socioeconomic lines. This is why I find it problematic to base school performance on tests. Some think it is morally wrong. I will not go that far, but do think it is well intentioned wrong.

 

Bottom line, kids/adults will and can learn whatever is relevant to them. That is the way to fix our educational system. Relevancy to the vocation they desire or best suited and rigor with that.

 

The basics as I knew them 20 years ago have changed. Schools have not adapted to those. One reason is funding to keep up, followed by teacher competency to teach these different basics (this is not critical of teachers, they are hard working and diligent for the most part) Reading and basic computation are critical, as you stated, but the type of reading (technical needs much more emphasis) and math conceptually. Adults without advanced technology skills are also at an extreme disadvantage for high wage vocations.

 

This is much more complicated and complex than having national standards or giving local control totally.

If you are aware of it then why would you want to put it back in their hands. Test scores do not always take care of themselves. Tests are generally content/vocabulary biased to the middle class. The prerequisite knowledge needed to respond to some questions are experiences many kids in the urban core and isolated rural just do not have because of the experiences they generally do not have.

 

Let me be clear, I am not saying they can't learn, but without those prerequisite skills or experiences, it is an extreme challenge for them to perform well on standardized tests. There should be no excuses and I will not make them, but to base learning on these tests is just extremely misleading and kids have consistently performed along socioeconomic lines. This is why I find it problematic to base school performance on tests. Some think it is morally wrong. I will not go that far, but do think it is well intentioned wrong.

 

Bottom line, kids/adults will and can learn whatever is relevant to them. That is the way to fix our educational system. Relevancy to the vocation they desire or best suited and rigor with that.

 

The basics as I knew them 20 years ago have changed. Schools have not adapted to those. One reason is funding to keep up, followed by teacher competency to teach these different basics (this is not critical of teachers, they are hard working and diligent for the most part) Reading and basic computation are critical, as you stated, but the type of reading (technical needs much more emphasis) and math conceptually. Adults without advanced technology skills are also at an extreme disadvantage for high wage vocations.

 

This is much more complicated and complex than having national standards or giving local control totally.

All these standardized tests do is allow politicians to claim that they are taking action to improve our schools, when nothing could be further from the truth. The basics have not changed - they are no longer being taught effectively. Advanced math has not changed much in the past 100 years and neither has the English language. Those are the fundamental skills that allow anybody who is properly motivated to educate themselves, if necessary. Teaching students to learn and to enjoy solving problems is the only standard that really matters.

 

Learning should be a life long process but building a top-down system that is heavy on administration and and so-called "standards" has taken much of the joy of learning away from students and much of the joy of teaching away from teachers.

All these standardized tests do is allow politicians to claim that they are taking action to improve our schools, when nothing could be further from the truth. The basics have not changed - they are no longer being taught effectively. Advanced math has not changed much in the past 100 years and neither has the English language. Those are the fundamental skills that allow anybody who is properly motivated to educate themselves, if necessary. Teaching students to learn and to enjoy solving problems is the only standard that really matters.

 

Learning should be a life long process but building a top-down system that is heavy on administration and and so-called "standards" has taken much of the joy of learning away from students and much of the joy of teaching away from teachers.

 

We do not disagree that much, but the basics have changed. Math was rarely taught conceptually and reading had little technical basis. We are actually teaching much better than we were 20 years ago.

Is it over-simplifying to say that the task at hand - a difficult one to be sure - is striking a balance between teaching to some meaningful measures of educational achievement/proficiency and relevant/practical subject matter?