OK, when all of the above is taken into consideration, what would be the most productive way to evaluate a school system? Is it an average of test scores? Do we evaluate students who graduated in the past decade? A weighted average of both? Extra points for the most successful of the post-graduates? How do we define "successful"? Do we subtract points because I had to use spellchek to see how many Cs are in success?

It is up to the families in the school district to grade the school imo. If the people are not happy with the education they can vote in new board members. If someone wants to be lazy in class and not care about school, basically, there isn't much the government can do about it. The only chance that student has is if the teachers/advisors or parents try and motivate them. Government funding for a school the kid probably hates going to is not going to motivate him. A brand new fast pc means nothing to that student but quicker loading for games. I think if the government is going to hand out money, it should be an equal amount per student. A school shouldn't get less money for overachieveing and a school shouldn't get more money because they have poor test scores. Of the elementary schools in Ashland, the one that gets the most funding and the best teachers in the district is the one in the worst neighborhood. Yet they still have the worst test scores. So obviously funding means little in improving test scores for students. Improving home life for students is how your improve test scores imo.

Let me say, first I am an educator! My humble opinion is this based upon accouple of things. I will get to that here in just a second.

 

1. I believe that the school system should provide the best rounded education for children.

2. School systems also have to be held in check, (hense test scores)

3. WE all know parental involvement is key.

So how do we hold everything in check:

1. Well we teach something called the core content, which is used to provide the best rounded education for children. Everyone in the state does this. So what is the difference between the schools that "succeed" and those that fail. I can argue that smaller class size helps. As Daddy Cat has pointed out, smaller schools have to make sure they teach all the children or from a percentage standpoint they would fail by the way side, where as a larger district/school can get away with letting a few more children get by.

2. I think that the test scores can be used if everyone is playing on an equal playing field. The state has done a good job of making sure that everyone teaches the same, now comes the next part, all class rooms staying the same size, in other words, how much money are we willing to spend on education.

3. The parents are key, they can be overcome though, with positive and negitive reinforcements not only for the children but the parents themselves, holding their feet to the fire.

 

The best school district two years in the elementary was Middle Fork Elementary School in Magoffin Co. They scored above 120 on the CATS scores. They did not have the latest technology, they have the highest proverty rate in the state over 99% and yet that school succeeded. Why?

 

They had 12 to 1 teacher to student ratio and had over 4000 hours of parent volunteer hours there! However, this school does not exist this year, they consolidated, with another elementary. Which goes back to the point how much are we willing to spend in education?

This may sound cruel but genetics plays a part in it but to me parental involvement is the biggest key. You can have a student who is not the most intelligent but if they have a good work ethic instilled by their parents they can do something with their lives.

 

I agree. I have said many times, "you can be dumb and hard working and do fine in life. You can be smart and lazy and get by fine in life, but if you combine dumb and lazy, you really have a problem.":D

It boils down to some kids require greater tools to be taught, rather it be teaching styles, methods, etc. There is also the minority of students who don't care, they are the ones who answer questions wrong on tests on purpose and sleep all day in class, etc. Not much can be done with these IMO, their parents or guardians have to set them straight, first.

 

If the parents dont care then you are right...there is little we can do. This comes from teaching the "masses". I agree that all students can learn at high levels. I just question what the need to be learning because not all students can learn Physics at a high level. If a student is more suited to digging a ditch, lets teach him to dig a great ditch. Everyone doesnt carry a briefcase to work everyday. Some students will gravitate more toward manual labor, and thats ok. Doing a good day of manual labor isnt something that brings you shame. I was the first to go to college (let alone graduate) from my entire family tree. My family were good workers and I have never been ashamed of them at all but, by the same token, they couldnt help me figure the area of a circle or explain the difference between a participle and a gerund. The point of this long post is there are some students that will not give an effort on the test because it doesnt matter to them or their parents and there are actually a few that cant master the test material regardless of genetics or motivation!!:irked::confused:

I considered bringing private schools into the conversation but if the kid it there for religious instruction I can't argue with that at all.

 

However,if your son/daughter is in a private prep for academic reasons, I'd like your imput.

You should be able to judge a school based on how far a kid "moves" while in that school.

 

We have got to develop a way of testing kids is core areas when they enter and when they leave. If you move a kid a great deal you are successful. If the kid was low to begin with, however, on a standardized test it will still look like you failed.

 

NCLB is designed for all schools to fail. In that way the current adminstration was hoping it could push harder for vouchers, especially for religious based education. It came from Tx. where the hard core conservative christians are still supporting a separate education for their kids.

You should be able to judge a school based on how far a kid "moves" while in that school.

 

We have got to develop a way of testing kids is core areas when they enter and when they leave. If you move a kid a great deal you are successful. If the kid was low to begin with, however, on a standardized test it will still look like you failed.

 

NCLB is designed for all schools to fail. In that way the current adminstration was hoping it could push harder for vouchers, especially for religious based education. It came from Tx. where the hard core conservative christians are still supporting a separate education for their kids.

 

As an educator I agree 100% with finding a way to test kids as they enter and leave each year and that is how the school is judged. I would also like it if CATS was tied into graduation; I bet you would see scores go up across the board in a lot of schools.

I agree, but here is what confuses me. The function of a school is to prepare a student either for college or for life. If that school can graduate students who not only attend but excel in a school such or as Yale, or even a Centre, does that not mean the school is meeting it's requirements regardless of test scores or graduation rates? If the same school has recently boasted the pilot who flew the C130 that brought Jessica Lynch home from Iraq, a Coast Guard member who saved many lives in a daring storm-at-sea rescue, and a National Guardsman who's heroics in saving a life in the post-Katrina chaos earned him the medal of Valor, wouldn't you think the school is doing an adequate job of preparing it's students for life situations?

 

I'm neither defending nor condemning any school system in my comments. I'm merely musing and pondering the question: If a handfull of kids can successfully complete high school with the skills and education needed to excel in either life or college, does that mean the school is doing it's job regardless of scores or rankings?

 

The tide is turning but for awhile it was NOT a popular view that schools were preparing kids for something besides college.

 

We don't have politicians waving a research report about all the great electricians, plumbers, HVAC, railroad engineers, etc, etc, etc that are great and wonderful careers and require a great deal of intelligence.

 

We are more concerned that they have the pythagorem therom memorized.

 

They can't balance a checkbook and we don't require a financial literacy class but they do know have to find the radius of a circle.

 

We get full of ourselves about how smart we are in certain areas while we are dumb ignoramuses in other areas that affect our daily life.

You should be able to judge a school based on how far a kid "moves" while in that school.

 

We have got to develop a way of testing kids is core areas when they enter and when they leave. If you move a kid a great deal you are successful. If the kid was low to begin with, however, on a standardized test it will still look like you failed.

 

NCLB is designed for all schools to fail. In that way the current adminstration was hoping it could push harder for vouchers, especially for religious based education. It came from Tx. where the hard core conservative christians are still supporting a separate education for their kids.

 

Amen!!!!!!

As an educator I agree 100% with finding a way to test kids as they enter and leave each year and that is how the school is judged. I would also like it if CATS was tied into graduation; I bet you would see scores go up across the board in a lot of schools.

 

To that end, I say CATS tests should be the end of a class exam. Part of it is graded at the school, with the school deciding what a passing grade is, and part of it is sent to the state for accountability. This serves 2 purposes:

a. Students are held accountable for the work they do on the test.

b. You take the test at the end of a course, not a couple of years later.

 

I guess you could also say it lets schools decide what is mastery of a particular subject. If a student does not score high enough they must take remediation of re-take the class.

I set tonight and helped my son with his 6th grade math homework. We learned about triangular and rectangular numbers.

 

And I wonder how I have made it through the 43 years of my life not knowing about them before.:sssh:

 

And yet, someone in Frankfort feels it is important for 6th graders to understand this concept.

The tide is turning but for awhile it was NOT a popular view that schools were preparing kids for something besides college.

 

We don't have politicians waving a research report about all the great electricians, plumbers, HVAC, railroad engineers, etc, etc, etc that are great and wonderful careers and require a great deal of intelligence.

 

We are more concerned that they have the pythagorem therom memorized.

 

They can't balance a checkbook and we don't require a financial literacy class but they do know have to find the radius of a circle.

 

We get full of ourselves about how smart we are in certain areas while we are dumb ignoramuses in other areas that affect our daily life.

 

No offense, but I'm glad you didn't teach my kids with that attitude. Higher order thinking skills, including advanced math (and the pythagorean theorem is not advanced math. It is junior high.) is important for everyone.

I set tonight and helped my son with his 6th grade math homework. We learned about triangular and rectangular numbers.

 

And I wonder how I have made it through the 43 years of my life not knowing about them before.:sssh:

 

And yet, someone in Frankfort feels it is important for 6th graders to understand this concept.

 

I would hazard a guess the reason that the United States cannot produced scientist and engineers to our capability, or at least on par with other countries, is due to the fact that we don't value those concepts. By the time these students graduate, they have no choice but to pursue careers that don't involve math.

I am totally and completely depressed by the posts in this entire thread.