<p>I don’t know if it is inherent to knowledge level that people retain or if it just fundamental, but I can still do SAT level geometry that I learnt 38 years ago. I understand the answer if I do get it wrong.</p>
<p>I don’t remember the least bit of trigonometry, calculus etc.</p>
<p>I remember this stuff because I did it with the kids over the years. My daughter is taking calculus now and sometimes asks me questions about a topic that isn’t explained well. She’s better off asking her brother who tutored this stuff for four years but he’s down in Boston most of the time.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>We may very well look at this from different angles. When considering the middle/high school, BASIC geometry is something that should be learned for retention purposes as well as help students unblock their spatial intelligence. Let’s not kid each other here, the geometry that is taught in middle and early high school is not something one should forget easily. After all, how hard is it to remember basic properties of triangles and other simple figures. Take a look at the SAT, and it would be clear how simplistic THAT geometry is. </p>
<p>One of the problems that face students in the US, is that the system believes that spending a few months on a subject is sufficient to turn into lifelong retention. Again, to revert to a simple example, this is apparent when some BRIGHT student stumble on basic SAT problems that require placing knowledge in context and depart from the rote memorized items to … reasoning and logic. </p>
<p>The same could be said for arithmetic and early algebra. Many students pretend to have forgotten the formulas, when the truth is that they NEVER mastered their applications. They did just enough to satisfy a teacher who probably looked at the answer section of his Teacher’s Manual to grade the students. And those are the students who are ushered into the pre-calc and calculus classes, where they simply repeat the same process of memorizing just enough to earn a pass grade, and being kicked to the next teacher who will lament about the struggles of students. The answer to this issue:</p>
<p>TEACH TO THE TEST and pass the buck. </p>
<p>And, further, this is such a problem because young children show an incredible ability to understand concepts when taught properly and ASKED to demonstrate their ability to interpret the numbers. This, however, takes a form of repetition during a curriculum, and a bit more WORK. All in all, it is not hard to see why other countries achieve a much higher understanding of math than “we” do. It is not because they are inherently smarter, but because their teachers are smart and dedicated enough to EDUCATE them in how to learn. </p>
<p>However, I also agree that some parts of the math curriculum contain useless material. In fact, I strongly believe that calculus should be given a lot less importance while repeating a comprehensive program of basic math should be a lot more useful for the overwhelming majority of students. While Calculus is a necessary requirement in a few programs, it is also quite limited, and represents nothing more than a nuisance for most young adults. </p>
<p>On the other hand, moderate math and writing skills are a necessity. Something our system has yet to “re” discover.</p>
<p>Teachers teach to the test because that is what administrators ask them to. Curriculum control is more and more out of teacher’s hands–it’s being standardized along with the tests. Administrators follow the bottom line–test pass rates and graduation rates. Everything is ordered around those. Students of different skill level are lumped together in one class (everyone but Honors/AP track in our HS.) Teachers are told to “differentiate instruction”–but this is what is meant: they are to discern who would have been on a “lower” track; teach them at that level in the same class with the academic track, expect less, and grade them on what is expected. there are students in the non-Honors track who test at severely developmentally delayed, but any differences in expectation are to be eliminated or hidden.</p>
<p>No one can fail–tests and homework are to be allowed to be done over until passing.<br>
Guess what–the students have found this out. They also know that the state tests test the school, not them. They have no incentive to do well on them–and why should they?</p>
<p>None of this is decided by the teacher in the classroom. They are told to follow the scripts.</p>
<p>And i can see the difference. I’ve taught freshman comp for 25 years. The ability to think critically and be personally responsible for accomplishing their work is waning. The requests for hand-holding, do-overs, etc. are rampant. Plagiarism is, also. </p>
<p>Freshman comp is a huge surprise to students who have done very little writing that is not formulaic (the ubiquitous 5 paragraph, 3 example essay which are utterly different from what is asked of them in college comp.) But teachers don’t invent that out of thin air; they teach it because that’s what the tests want.</p>
<p>Xiggi–the dumbing down of curriculum tracks the rise of standardization. College courses are not looking for standardized abilities. We need to see accomplished, thoughtful critical thinkers–but the changes since NCLB work completely against that–and these changes are top down–from the ED department to administrators and finally to the teachers who are taxed with carrying them out and assigned specific curriculums to do so.</p>
<p>And the effect is truly sobering. I appreciate the “warning” but it was unnecessary–I see it every day.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>One could also say that the dumbing down is a result of the inability of the students to pass the tests without much ado. If the curriculum was dumber than the performance of the student might indicate, most everyone would pass the test, and they would be considered trivial. That is hardly what is happening in the schools. The students, who ultimately will be shepherded and directed towards those “school within a school” that are popular in the schools target the upwardly mobile, do not suffer too much. </p>
<p>The same cannot be said for the larger group of students that are expected to either drop out early, or simply graduate from high school without a bona fide education. </p>
<p>I am also happy to recognize that the teachers who are saddled to correct the problems that have developed over the past decades are not directly responsible. Their leaders are to blamed for their misguided views that brought us where we are, and that is in a system that rewards mediocrity over excellence. </p>
<p>Teachers are as much victims as the students; the difference is that the teachers had a voice that remained silent.</p>
<p>Many did speak out; many continue to. </p>
<p>Many make the point that good tests combined with creative teaching, would result in the outcome you point out. But trivialized tests, combined with administrative follies, lead to these results.</p>
<p>Fair enough!</p>
<p>well… we wrote plenty in my IB program.</p>
<p>Now I write at work, a lot. And I have seen some people that can’t write very well, and they do not last…</p>
<p>This article has certainly hit a nerve. The writing level of middle/high schoolers is appalling. I can’t imagine the horror that college freshman comp teachers face. The problem begins quite early in our district. Once a student passes 4th or 5th grade, little writing is assigned. Basic grammar and syntax is just not taught. </p>
<p>As many posters have observed, the only way to learn is to write. Edit. Rewrite. Rinse, repeat. How do we achieve this? Through small class size. One educator cannot adequately teach and edit 45 essays per class. I also believe that the college board should abolish AP English credit. AP Lit, sure. English, no. Every student should have to take college freshman writing courses, unless they can test out of them.</p>
<p>
Normal for this school, which houses a particular popular and very competitive magnet program; my son took this AP class with this teacher. My son’s main frustration was knowing that the high school spent an entire year on what is supposed to be material for a one-semester college course.</p>
<p>The OP asked for thoughts on this part of the article:
I agree. This high school (the “best” one in my school district) boasts about the number of students who take AP tests, and, at least when my son attended, paid for the tests. Personally, I would like to see data on scores – how many kids are doing well on the AP tests? </p>
<p>I don’t know whether Jay’s methodology for this stupid index has changed, but for years (including my son’s high school years), it was a very simplistic one that took only the number of AP tests taken and students into account; it did not count results at all. The bottom line is that the more AP tests taken, the “better” the school’s ranking in the stupid index. Explosive growth in the number of tests, certainly; more money for the College Board.</p>
<p>This teacher’s high school – my son’s school – is very sensitive about its ranking, and encourages students to take AP tests, the more the better, and certainly didn’t care whether a kid was prepared for it. (Many of the teachers care, but the admin just wanted butts in AP test seats.) Since so many other dealings with the school system had been a hassle, I expected resistance to the idea that my spawn take the AP Psych test when he was in 9th grade though he hadn’t taken the course. (AP Psych is the “easiest” AP exam to self-study for.) HA! No problem! And they paid for the test, too, which initially surprised me but really shouldn’t have.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>The college itself determines what credit and/or placement a given AP test gives at that college. A college which believes that a given AP test is not equivalent to its own course(s) can choose not to give subject credit or placement for that AP test.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Ummm, but isn’t that what AP tests are (theoretically) for, in a form convenient to both students and colleges?</p>
<p>It is a different question as to whether one can accurately determine writing skills from a few hours of test (either AP test or a college’s own placement test), as opposed to giving longer term reading, research, and writing assignments in a course and evaluating them (although that can be wasteful for students who already do that well).</p>
<p>So glad my son did IB diploma. Completely different philosophy.</p>
<p>My kids took a fair number of AP courses, but they were primarily math/sci related - Calc, Bio, Chem, Phy, Comp Sci… None of them had a desire to do courses like Euro Hist or Gov and I was OK with that. While APs aren’t necessarily “college level” courses, the big advantage was there was a curriculum that a teacher couldn’t just ignore and just teach a bit off fluff and say, “I’ve taught you such-and-such, and you’re done”. There was some level of pressure to cover all the topics, and if the teacher fell behind, the student would at least realize this and do some self study.</p>