Vaught Strikes Again

[scooterbob]

I rarely agree with Scooter on most issues but have to admit that in what he has mentioned above, does happen.

 

But here comes the BUT, it is not the main characteristic of the public schools. While the failures seem to get the most ink, they are not the norm. While we do have problems with some kids making it, for the most part, many, many kids have made it through and living a comfortable life.

 

The comparisons and failures that scooter lists as far as tests is, I submit, mostly a political fabrication to give the politicians something to champion as their cause. How government is failing them as citizens/voters and vote for candidate "fill-in-the-blank" and I will change that.

 

A lot of the tests are over material that is irrelevent to about 99% of our lives. How much does the quadratic formula affect each of your DAILY LIVES? And yet, our scores against the Japanese scores will be lower because our kids cannot recite that formula? I don't really care if my daughter has that memorized when she graduates or not. I am sure that she can live a productive and good life not being able to memorize the formula for finding the circumference of a circle. I know I have.

 

I submit that for the race to know this "advanced" learning, we have lost the ability to be good citizens. Debt is out of control in this country and people do not know good fiscal responsibility. They can tell you about figuring the area of a triangle but can't balance a checkbook or understand the concept of credit cards. Because that is not politically "pretty" to sell to the voters.

 

Although we see debt controlling lives, ruining marriages and being an albatross on this country.

 

The state of KY has now decided that ACT scores will go into figuring how the scores are doing. So we have that test to administer (interesting to see who is going to have to pay for all of these required ACT tests to administer to the free/reduced crowd), the national "No Child Left Behind" tests, the CATS testing. All we do anymore is test, test, test, or prepare for some sort of test so that some politician can get information.

 

While the child's life and helping them make it through life is left in the wake.

 

I agree with much of your post. However, the fact is that the system is not changing but is becoming more and more irrelevent. Much of the problem is that education concepts are developed by those who have never been in the "real world". Their entire existence has been in the "halls of education".

 

As for the testing, too many schools spend a material amount of classroom time teaching the test so as to make the school look "proficient".

 

By the way, I hope you are not carrying your example to include basic algebra. through the years, I have had many college students complain that algebra is useless and that they never use it in "real life". My response is to tell them that they use algebra daily. For instance, at the grocery store, they use algebra to determine what they purchase. Need an example? If a can of beans costs 89 cents is it a better buy that two cans for $1.69? By using algebra we see that 2X = $1.69 and that X = 84.5 cents. Therefore, the two cans for $1.69 is a better buy. Simple? Of course. But still relevant in proving the value of algebra.

 

However, as a taxpayer, I still don't think my tax dollars should buy golf shirts and golf balls.

[ladiesbballcoach]

I agree with much of your post. However, the fact is that the system is not changing but is becoming more and more irrelevent. Much of the problem is that education concepts are developed by those who have never been in the "real world". Their entire existence has been in the "halls of education".

 

As for the testing, too many schools spend a material amount of classroom time teaching the test so as to make the school look "proficient".

 

By the way, I hope you are not carrying your example to include basic algebra. through the years, I have had many college students complain that algebra is useless and that they never use it in "real life". My response is to tell them that they use algebra daily. For instance, at the grocery store, they use algebra to determine what they purchase. Need an example? If a can of beans costs 89 cents is it a better buy that two cans for $1.69? By using algebra we see that 2X = $1.69 and that X = 84.5 cents. Therefore, the two cans for $1.69 is a better buy. Simple? Of course. But still relevant in proving the value of algebra.

 

However, as a taxpayer, I still don't think my tax dollars should buy golf shirts and golf balls.

I agree on the basic algebra and held my comments to the higher level stuff being pushed.

 

My comment on the golf shirts was in result of your "endless supply of funds" that I assumed was for athletics and was inaccurate. I am not sure you have ever defined what your comment of "endless supply of funds" was aimed at in athletics. I would submit that private schools have a MUCH easier time in fundraising for athletics than publics do, especially rural publics.

 

The "teaching the test" is an overblown and worn out complaint. EVERY TEACHER DOES THIS. If I am giving a test on Economics and supply and demand. Do I teach on economics and supply and demand before I give them the test? Of course, I do. Well, I am teaching the test.

 

Or let's say I want my marketing students to prepare a printed ad in our promotion unit. You think I am going to have them do one before they have to do it on the test? Or am I just going to pull the test out one day and tell them "do a printed ad?"

 

In both cases that would be unfair and similar in asking them to take a test with open-response questions or on-demand writing and not tell them how they are going to be graded, what will be looked for in these testing methods, or how to answer them. When we grew up we were told how to answer essay questions.

 

This is a wornout mantra that doesn't refect the true nature of testing.

 

The constant editing and rewriting done for portfolios is nothing but trying to get the students to produce work that is what is considered to be standard writing for the world we live in. Should we not expect them to edit their work and try to improve it? I know I proofread and edit a good number of my posts on here before hitting the submit button. Not much different than what is done in the portfolio process.

 

So, YES, teachers should teach the test. What is tested is what they are supposed to know. What is tested is the thinking process that the state says they need to learn. Both information and the process of thinking that they need, is what is tested and what is needed to know.

[scooterbob]

Preparing students to be tested on a particular area through instruction of the subject as a whole is one matter. Drilling students in preparation for a particular "achievement test", the results of which will financially effect the school and its employees, for the sole purpose of "scoring" well on that particular test is quite another matter. We both know that the latter happens regularly throughout the Commonwealth.

 

If I gave the impression that athletic programs in public schools have unlimiteed funds, it was not intended. The funding on athletics, public or private, usually depends upon the financial abilities of those associated with the school. From personal knowledge, I can clearly conclude that sources of athletic funds are much more available at Russell and Ashland than at Fairview and Greenup County. Also, both Rose Hill and LCA are private schools. However, the sources of revenue for the two are worlds apart.

But, then, that is how life works. Not everyone can, nor should they expect to, drive a Cadillac particularly if they want the "government" to pay for the vehicle.

 

In your example of writing and rewriting until the assignment is acceptable, you raise a question. My experience is that students, and many newer teachers, have a less than competent knowledge of the rules of grammar. I am told that grammar has been "deemphasized". Is that true from your standpoint? I have to admit that I am shocked at how poorly allegedly superior students communicate.

[ladiesbballcoach]

Preparing students to be tested on a particular area through instruction of the subject as a whole is one matter. Drilling students in preparation for a particular "achievement test", the results of which will financially effect the school and its employees, for the sole purpose of "scoring" well on that particular test is quite another matter. We both know that the latter happens regularly throughout the Commonwealth.

 

If I gave the impression that athletic programs in public schools have unlimiteed funds, it was not intended. The funding on athletics, public or private, usually depends upon the financial abilities of those associated with the school. From personal knowledge, I can clearly conclude that sources of athletic funds are much more available at Russell and Ashland than at Fairview and Greenup County. Also, both Rose Hill and LCA are private schools. However, the sources of revenue for the two are worlds apart.

But, then, that is how life works. Not everyone can, nor should they expect to, drive a Cadillac particularly if they want the "government" to pay for the vehicle.

 

In your example of writing and rewriting until the assignment is acceptable, you raise a question. My experience is that students, and many newer teachers, have a less than competent knowledge of the rules of grammar. I am told that grammar has been "deemphasized". Is that true from your standpoint? I have to admit that I am shocked at how poorly allegedly superior students communicate.

 

I made a post in the suspension thread on grammar and I will repeat it here. One of the things that sticks in my craw as a teacher is the deemphasizing of grammar. I have been involved in grading portfolios for the past 12-13 years. I have attended numerous upon numerous hours of training on writing portfolios and considered myself fairly knowledgeable on the matter. We have been trained that if the grammar issues, doesn't get in the way of the message it is not a problem. Can you be distinguished (highest level and not many people reach this level) with grammar problems? NO. Can you be proficient (where EVERY student is supposed to be by 2011.)? There is that possibility.

 

Now diagraming sentences was fun when I was in MS but not sure all that time that I spent doing it has really benefitted me in life.

 

On the tests, I think the public views it wrong. There is a list of standards. The state says all students should know these standards in these fields at this grade level.

 

For example, social studies and economics. 4th grade they may be asked to know the definition of supply and demand. 8th grade they may be asked to know how supply and demand determines price. 11th grade they may be asked to know what outside factors affect supply/demand and the resulting effect on price.

 

So what is being drilled on the tests is what they are expected to know. What is the problem with that. If they learn it through the drilling for tests, than is that not the goal? And if the concern is the practicing of different types of questions, you do realize that the curriculum is being covered when they are drilling on those types of tests. So would you feel better if they learned the curriculum on just multiple choice questions than open response questions?

[scooterbob]

It appears that we are in agreement in regard to the deemphasis on grammar. However, I can guarantee you that employers- particularly in areas where communication is important- are interested in grammar. The "education experts" are wrong on this issue. As a college professor, I inform my students on the first day of class that they better submit writings that are grammatically correct or their grades will suffer severely. I think this is important because I am preparing these students to enter a workplace where you are often judged by your ability to write and speak correctly.

 

I would disagree with you as to the value of being able to diagram a sentence properly. I think it still has an important place in a good education. Unfortunately, most of the students I see have never been exposed to the process. Of course, they also don't know an adverb from an adjective so I guess I expect too much.

 

We are still not on the same page on teaching the test. My concern deals with the practice of preparing students to score as high as possible on state generated examinations for the obvious purpose of making the school look good. That, to me, has little to do with educating the students and a lot to do with CYA.

[110764]

NKY 1984-1987. There are acomodations made, their always have been and always will be. The point is that there should be no money available. It is sactioning another method of obtaining athletes. Of course, I am sure that this money is given to 110 lb kids from low income areas that are "academically" sound. As far as I know, a public school isn't allowed to give any money off their tuition.

 

YES, money is given on a need basis and academnic basis to 110lb kids. I have had nieces abd newphews receive this aid because their divorced mother was working 2 jobs but was still willing to sacrifice and the kids were willing to work EVERYDAY after school at the school. They were NOT athletes. As others have repeatedly pointed out, yet some refuse to accept because it would shoot holes in all their "advantage" arguments, the school has NO say in who gets financial aid. It is handeled by an independent out of state who analysis all the information. Only the school administrator in charge of the program even knows who gets the aid. Scholarship money is strictly based on test scores, and again determined by an independent company. So before people make accusations at least check the facts. They are quite clear on any school website as has been metioned.

[Birdsfan]

It appears that we are in agreement in regard to the deemphasis on grammar. However, I can guarantee you that employers- particularly in areas where communication is important- are interested in grammar.

I agree that Grammar is an important skill for the work-force --especially for "white collar" careers. Even if a kid is aiming toward a trade based career, he needs to be prepared for the possibility he may one day advance into management.

 

On the other hand, I think the way our state is going about the process is completely wrong. They're emphasizing writing skills to such an extent, that it's a detriment to other subjects. Kids must be turned off by the approach, and that can't be conducive to real learning.

 

I learned grammar, the old fashioned way -- in English class. That's probably the best way to teach it. They just have to make sure the kids actually learn it.

 

By the way, I hated diagramming sentences! Maybe that was because I stunk at it.

[scooterbob]

I agree that Grammar is an important skill for the work-force --especially for "white collar" careers. Even if a kid is aiming toward a trade based career, he needs to be prepared for the possibility he may one day advance into management.

 

On the other hand, I think the way our state is going about the process is completely wrong. They're emphasizing writing skills to such an extent, that it's a detriment to other subjects. Kids must be turned off by the approach, and that can't be conducive to real learning.

 

I learned grammar, the old fashioned way -- in English class. That's probably the best way to teach it. They just have to make sure the kids actually learn it.

 

By the way, I hated diagramming sentences! Maybe that was because I stunk at it.

 

You mention the emphasis on writing skills. If grammar isn't getting the attention that it should, what real writing skills are being taught? Proper sentence structure and good grammar are the foundations of good writing and are vital for effective communication. How can good writing skills be taught without these essentials?

 

You are certainly correct that an English teacher properly trained to teach grammar is the person who should be doing so. Let the mathematics teacher teach mathematics and the science teacher teach science. Still, even those other disciplines should demand effective communication skills.

 

I usually get more dissents than agreements on BGP so I guess it is just par for the course for me to say that I really liked to diagram sentences. I loved grammar and did not particularly like literature.

 

Do students still diagram sentences? The students I see in college have no knowledge of it.

[rockmom]

This isn't a public/private post...BUT....

 

Putting it all on the line

Celebrated book examines the art of diagramming

 

The cultural landscape teems with evidence to the contrary: incoherent pop songs and political speeches; mangled memos and magazine articles; the proliferation of remedial English classes at colleges and universities. But even though the linguistic barbarians long ago breached the gates, a few stalwart souls still rally around things like subject-verb agreement and proper past participles.

Several years ago, the publishing world was rocked when Lynne Truss' book, "Eats, Shoots & Leaves: The Zero Tolerance Approach to Punctuation," became a best-seller.

Now an even more unlikely book -- one with a Louisville-area connection -- is being celebrated by folks who care about mysteries like predicate adjectives and subordinate clauses.

 

 

The author of this book learned from a Sr. Bernadette in the Fourth Grade....coincidentally (or not), I learned from Sr. Bernadette in the Fourth grade....

 

And, for the record...I LOVED diagramming sentences, and I absolutely, 100% believe that it is the single best tool for teaching proper grammar and punctuation. A lot of emphasis is put on teaching mathematics and equations to solve problems. The principle applies to writing. If grammar were taught, writing wouldn't need to be taught.

[Birdsfan]

You I usually get more dissents than agreements on BGP so I guess it is just par for the course for me to say that I really liked to diagram sentences. I loved grammar and did not particularly like literature.

 

Do students still diagram sentences? The students I see in college have no knowledge of it.

I was just the opposite. I loved Lit; but grammar drove me nuts. And diagramming just never did it for me. I don't see how mapping words out tells you anything about their usage or meaning in a sentence.

 

I hate making posts like this, as my lack of grammatical refinement probably shows more than ever.

[Birdsfan]

For the record, I have "at least" nine books on Grammar sitting here at my side -- including Eats, Shoots & Leaves. So I'm not anti-grammar. Just not a confident user.

[rockmom]

For the record, I have "at least" eight books on Grammar sitting here at my side -- including Eats, Shoots & Leaves. So I'm not anti-grammar. Just not a confident user.

 

 

You need to read Sister Bernadette's Barking Dog.:thumb:

[scooterbob]

"Mapping out" the words in a sentence is a wonderful way to really understand the "workings" of our language. Of course, you are clearly in the majority with those who didn't enjoy the process.

[Birdsfan]

"Mapping out" the words in a sentence is a wonderful way to really understand the "workings" of our language. Of course, you are clearly in the majority with those who didn't enjoy the process.

How do you feel about repetitive sentence writing? I had teachers in grade school that would send us home with ridiculous amounts of homework. Among the worst of it was repetitive writing of sentences. Seems it was usually ten times each. I can understand the point of rote memorization; but too much is too much. All it served to do was keep me up half the night, and make my hand sore.

[rockmom]

How do you feel about repetitive sentence writing? I had teachers in grade school that would send us home with ridiculous amounts of homework. Among the worst of it was repetitive writing of sentences. Seems it was usually ten times each. I can understand the point of rote memorization; but too much is too much. All it served to do was keep me up half the night, and make my hand sore.

 

Was that a tool to utilize vocabulary words?

 

The only time I had to do the "repetetive sentence writing" was when I was in trouble.

 

For instance:

 

I will not talk in class.

I will not talk in class.

I will not talk in class.

I will not talk in class.

I will not talk in class.

I will not talk in class.

 

 

You get the drill!