<p>Actually, that would be a couple of hours wasted. Martin is an academic powerhouse who unfortunately can alternate intellectual brilliance with a healthy dosis of --misguided-- political preaching. In this case, he allowed the EPI leftist shop that masquerades as a research organization to cloud his judgement and spread the typical union gospel. This argument about the different class composition of cohort tested is pure drivel, unless one truly believes that the wealthiest country on earth is swimming in abject poverty. The same drivel applies to the typical union excuses about the pool of students used in the tests being different abroad as they might only include selected students while the poor US is more inclusive. </p>
<p>And yes, the following argument is pure drivel: " Look at these rankings and use your critical thinking skills. In the US, we test every kid, that’s not the case in many of these other countries. " Check the methodology of the OECD reports for the current description. Not the BS spread by our education leaders.</p>
<p>Xiggi, you read the complete report? Now I feel guilty for posting the link… :(</p>
<p>I would argue that it’s to our current “education leaders” benefit to push the education panic over our international ranking. It helps secure funding and support for initiatives such as common core. (Teacher Unions love the panic, except when it’s being used to push standardized testing…).</p>
<p>Bringing this thread back our old buddy Arne’s comments about “White suburban moms”, why did he take a swing at this group? The common core initiatives, had until recently received a lot of support from the “Right” (who loves standardized testing, Jeb Bush for example), and the “left” (who love big government initiatives).</p>
<p>However, it’s implementation has been horrible (almost Obamacare bad…), causing resistance to pop up from the “Right”(who hate big Gov), “Left”(teacher unions, etc.) and parents (the “moms”). I would propose Arne’s attack on suburban moms (who are viewed as “right”) is an effort to gain support those on the left that view these “moms” as entitled individuals that don’t understand the complexities of education (Unlike our wonderful “education leaders”). It was his way to attack parents who don’t agree with common core. These parents who happen to be anywhere from right to left on the political spectrum, but it’s easier for Arne to paint them as “right” by calling them “White” and “Suburban”.</p>
<p>Gator, I did read the report when it came out, and I am very familiar with the theme discussed. To be clear, when I used the term “education leaders” it contained quite a bit of sarcasm as I was referring to the group of usual suspect that are dismissing any report that highlights the failures of our education system, or actively support outfits such as the mercenary EPI. In simple words, the service providers and their unions have always preferred to blame the students, their parents, the supposed lack of financila resources, and a plethora of related elements, and refused to admit that the “system” is failing to educate all students and this despite one of the highest resources per capita in the world, and a very decent starting position when children enter elementary school.</p>
<p>In 1983, we were dubbed a Nation At Risk, and we have continued to slip away. While other countries have made positive changes (read Finland) we rely on excuses and explanations to dismiss the alarms and continue of our path of mediocrity. Other countries, including some that leave us in the dust in those international comparative tests, consistently recognize that they could do BETTER and continue to work on it. What “we” do is refusing to recognize that the foundation of our system is shaky, and that drastic changes are needed, starting with a complete revolution of the manner we recruit, train, and monitor our educators.</p>
<p>The only caveat I have is that the quality educators I know all agree with you, they are not OK with the status quo and making excuses. I believe this is actually the overwhelming majority of educators.</p>
<p>So Xiggi - Do you like the Teach for America model to “recruit, train and monitor our educators”? Sending someone with five weeks of teacher training into a high poverty classroom to teach? Would you like your kids to be in that classroom? I certainly wouldn’t want mine in that classroom. Unless people are willing to divert the huge amounts of money being funneled into testing, and everything that goes along with testing, into teacher salaries we really aren’t going to have oodles of spectacular people going into teaching–especially when the profession is being destroyed by testing.</p>
<p>Common Core is a way to make money for investors, pure and simple. It is not here to help our students. We know testing doesn’t work because we’ve had NCLB for over a decade and that has dumbed down our education so “everyone” can pass the tests (which never happened). </p>
<p>I have no problem with trying something that has worked in a different country once it is scaled up but I don’t want my kids experimented on and I consider NCLB and RTTT and CCSS experiments.</p>
<p>Teach for america does nothing to solve the problems facing inner city schools. The students do not need inexperienced teachers that will be gone after a year or two. A band aide IMO that helps keep the status quo.</p>
<p>MSNDIS, I am not sure why you would assume that I like the TFA based on what I wrote. Do you think that TFA represents something close to the Finnish model of teacher’s selection , education, or training model? On the heels of celebrating JFK role in pushing young people to serve, one can applaud the fact that some 60,000 applicants wanted to spend time educating the young. However, the model will never be more than a crutch and a bit of a gimmick that looks good on one resume and is a springboard to a job when the economy returns. </p>
<p>The real change that is needed is more profound than TFA and based on attracting graduates from top schools who master content in selected specialties, with pedagogy being a specialty for K6.</p>
<p>From the article:
As recently as 25 years ago, Finnish students were below the international average in mathematics and science. There also were large learning differences between schools, with urban or affluent students typically outperforming their rural or low-income peers. Today, as the most recent PISA study proves, Finland is one of the few nations that have accomplished both a high quality of learning and equity in learning at the same time. The best school systems are the most equitable — students do well regardless of their socio-economic background. Finally, Finland should interest US educators because Finns have employed very distinct ideas and policies in reforming education, many the exact opposite of what’s being tried in the United States.
and:
Finnish children never take a standardized test. Nor are there standardized tests used to compare teachers or schools to each other. Teachers, students, and parents are all involved in assessing and also deciding how well schools, teachers, or students do what they are supposed to do. Politicians and administrators are informed about how well the education system works by using sample-based learning tests which place no pressure on schools, and by research targeted to understand better how schools work.
and:
What could the United States learn from the Finns? First, reconsider those policies that advocate choice and competition as the key drivers of educational improvement. None of the best-performing education systems relies primarily on them. Indeed, the Finnish experience shows that consistent focus on equity and cooperation — not choice and competition — can lead to an education system where all children learn well. Paying teachers based on students’ test scores or converting public schools into private ones (through charters or other means) are ideas that have no place in the Finnish repertoire for educational improvement.</p>
<p>Second, provide teachers with government-paid university education and more professional support in their work, and make teaching a respected profession. As long as teachers are not trusted in their work and are not respected as professionals, young talent in the United States is unlikely to seek teaching as a lifelong career.</p>
<p>etc. </p>
<p>Limewine, I agree with your posts. Poverty and the dysfunction of families are a huge issue for student achievement. Why didn’t the child show up to school, or turn in the homework? Well, she had to stay home to take care of the younger kid home with the flu because Mom had to go to work (they need the day’s pay, and Mom would be fired if she asks for the day off). Etc.<br>
Btw, I teach in Limewine’s district.</p>
<p>Soprano, you either missed the point about the CORE of the Finnish revolution or … deliberately ignored it to focus on ancillary and self-serving ones. </p>
<p>Anyone remotely familiar with Finland and Pasi’s presentation knows that THIS were the bases of the policy changes in Finland:</p>
<br>
<br>
<p>**All teachers are required to have higher academic degrees that guarantee both high-level pedagogical skills and subject knowledge. **</p>
<p>Parents and authorities regard teachers with the same confidence they do medical doctors. Indeed, Finns trust public schools more than any other public institution, except the police. The fact that teachers in Finland work as autonomous professionals and play a key role in curriculum planning and assessing student learning attracts some of the most able and talented young Finns into teaching careers.</p>
<p>Finally, with the fourth PISA study again showing that the US education system is lagging those in many other countries, Americans should admit that there is much to learn from these systems. <<<<<</p>
<p>Finland changed their system by improving the base, namely by putting qualified teachers in front of pupils. They recognized that early development is important in the primary years, but that teachers who are generalists with limited content mastery are not the best option for core materials. </p>
<p>By the way, students in Finland do NOT rely on massive amounts of homework and parental help. Yes, those typical crutches --and sources of hollow excuses-- that the US “educator” truly depends on as the education provided within the walls of a school is massively lacking.</p>
<p>Or maybe not, as it does not fit your agenda. There are many other similar articles, and I’ve probably read most of them. In any case, my point is simply that Finland never started out to improve their schools, they merely wanted to make them equal. Also, there is no competition, there are no private schools. No one blamed the teachers (or the students, or the parents, for that matter.)
In any case, in my experience, the biggest factor for change is the principal. Good leadership at the school level makes the most difference.<br>
I and most of my colleagues have masters degrees in our subjects. But we are old. Younger teachers won’t be able to afford to do that, especially with the enormous amount of BS busywork now required to get a teaching credential in many states.</p>
<p>I don’t think most Americans are willing to follow Finland’s example, so I don’t know why anyone brings it up. Free college for teachers? Most folks won’t even stand for free health insurance! </p>
<p>Certainly a good principal can make a huge difference. Our principal used to practice multiplication tables with kids, she take off her high heeled shoes and power suits and put on jeans and work with kids who barely spoke English in the Learning Garden. She really wanted every kid to succeed and especially those who had less support at home.</p>
<p>Well, I applaud you for having read most similar articles. All I did was spent a few years researching the changes in the foreign education systems. If you label learning about positive changes and hoping to see some implemented in our country an agenda, I will gladly plead guilty. Now, let us drop the sarcasm.</p>
<p>Sadly enough, it seems that the built-in self preservation in our system remains a deterrent to even agree on basic facts. In this case, the history of Finland is as clear as Singapore’s and other countries that had the courage to address their basic problems. Or the courage to recognize that the best options come in various favors. Finland is only ONE model. Other countries have shown different successes.</p>
<p>Interestingly enough, teachers who happen to have earned master’s degrees and a vast experience in the subject they teach should SUPPORT an agenda that requires a higher bar to the entry to the profession and continuous evaluation of proficiency for teachers and tries to curb the current focus on non-sensical pedagogy and the constant recruiting from the lowest denominator of our college graduates. </p>
<p>My agenda is simple. I want better schools for the generations to come. I could not care less if they are private or public, as all schools are and should be a public service. Is yours any different?</p>
<p>I doubt if Finland, even when it had fairly low academically performing schools, had the violence, drugs, guns, disrespect and fear that are part of many inner city US schools. A teacher will like the challenge of teaching underprivileged kids who want to learn, but not to risk physical harm or death in the process.</p>
<p>Sopranomom - Thanks for teaching! My kids have had some great public school teachers and I also did (we even had some of the same teachers). I definitely understand the pressure teachers are under these days and I opted my youngest out of testing while I could (she had to pass the high school tests to graduate) in order to make a statement against the testing. I’m keeping my fingers crossed that this will be the year that a massive number of parents opt their kids out and it results in test data becoming unreliable. I would love for teachers to be able to actually teach again :).</p>
<p>H and I spend marathon sessions with our child on nights and weekends, teaching and re-teaching what she should be learning IN school. Other parents no doubt do the same, and way too many parents in our district pay big bucks for constant tutoring. Even though our district has some very academically successful students, I can pretty much guarantee you that the majority of those kids were taught a significant portion of the material outside of school.</p>
<p>Our district is wealthy and pays teachers well, so IMO throwing more money at the problem will not help. Better qualified teachers are needed. They simply don’t know their subject matter well, and their pedagogy isn’t all that hot either. You can see a big difference between the older ones and the younger as far as level of professionalism, and it can’t all be chalked up to just those years of experience. The younger ones are the sort that announce on back to school night that they became teachers because education was the easiest major at their university. We’re supposed to respect that?</p>
<p>^^^Ran into a friend whose daughter is at the same university as my engineering son. Her daughter is in education. When asked how her daughter was doing, the mom told me that the daughter said her classes were easier than high school and she had a lot of time for her social activities. My bright engineering son spends hours each night doing homework and he would never categorize his classes as “easy”. Talking to a teacher niece about the ACT, she shared her score. It was lower than the “average” state score which surprised me. (I expected teachers to need higher ACTs). Talking to other people, it sounds like my niece’s score is pretty normal for the newer elementary teachers. It is sad and scary what type of student this major is attracting.</p>
<p>^ I’m an education major and to exempt out of a certain test, you need either a combined SAT score of 1000 or a 43 ACT score. The VAST majority of people in my classes don’t have either.</p>
<p>Just the opposite. Future teachers have some of the lowest standardized test scores of all pre-college testers. (CB released reports of test scores by intended major/career.)</p>