Should the U.S. K-12 System Model After Colleges?

Parents Forum
1

<p>*There is widespread agreement that America has the best universities in the world. Foreign students enroll by the hundreds of thousands, and American college professors dominate the Nobel Prize lists. </p>

<p>But virtually no one says we have the best K-12 education in the world. To the contrary, many lament the poor showing of American students on international tests. What makes American universities so much better than our primary and secondary schools? </p>

<p>While many factors are at work, much of the explanation can be summarized in two words: "privatization" and "markets." About a third of four-year college students attend private institutions, and the proportion is growing. By contrast, only one-eighth of K-12 kids attend private schools. *</p>

<p>(Please click the link below to read the rest of the article.)</p>

<p><a href="http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,168107,00.html%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,168107,00.html&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

2

<p>I used to be a fan of removing certification requirements in order to let well educated people become teachers. There is no question in my mind that many of these requirements are pretensions and illusions at creating a higher standard. Having said that, I would point out that unlike college students who have reached a certain (adult) level of emotional and cognitive development, most k-12 students have not.
Accordingly teachers of these grade levels need to be trained not only in the subject area but in developmental psych and educational law and techiques of teaching, beyond what a gifted mathematician or lawyer might instinctively have.</p>

<p>Another difference between k-12 teachers and college professors at the schools that are the envy of the world...is salary and work load. Accordingly, very few of the applicants to the Ivys have teaching on their mind. Why should they, talent is not rewarded in teaching...it is often embattled against the administrative zealots who put standardized teaching and test results over actual education. The best teachers I have seen, have been those who figured away around standards to bring the welfare and education of the individual children to the top of their agenda.</p>

<p>Some argue that the problem is Teachers and their unions. That we can't reward talent because the unions get in the way. If this was true, then in public schools where there are no unions we should expect greatness. Let us look at summer school in the State of Hawaii, where teachers are not represented by a union. Instead of seeing rewards for good teaching, we see administrators reluctant to let teachers take bathroom or lunch breaks (summer school teachers are not covered by regular labor laws in Hawaii, which require regular breaks every few hours, because they are viewed as professionals. There are no sick days, or vacation days. How do they treat gifted and dedicated teachers...they pay them the same as the highschool graduates that sometimes teach summer school. Before Unions, teachers were often told what churches to attend, what party to belong to, and how much to donate to both. This is within my lifetime, not a century ago.</p>

<p>I would also argue that the problem with schools and school districts seems to be their cookie cutter approach, which I compare to having every resturant serve the same microwave meals each night. Maybe some students would benefit from a two room school house approach for elementary school, while others would benefit from having larger schools. The smaller school with two teachers responsible for six grades could create the security that children need, when they can't find it elsewhere. Some kids don't need that, their families have made them very secure and they can handle a larger school; while another group of students might thrive in a public boarding school. Even temporary boarding facilities to help kids stay in school while their families go through difficult times would have helped some students I know.</p>

<p>Other countries out score us on a number of k-12 type tests...they also provide health care to those students, we don't. Not all of the problems revealed by tests are problems that schools should be the primary source of relief.</p>

3

<p>One of the biggest differences between college and k-12 teaching is motivation and discipline. College profs do not have to deal with unruly students, and most do not bother taking attendance. Nor do college profs have to worry about the home life of some of their students, whether they have had breakfast or have money for lunch.
I also think, however, that one major flaw in k-12 education, compared to other countries I am somewhat familiar with is the weak middle school curriculum that makes too much of students developmental issues (as if non-American students did not go through the exact same developmental process!) and the late introduction of specialists into the classroom. It was somewhat by chance that S2, beginning in 7th grade, had a math teacher who actually was a math specialist. S1's 7/8 grade teacher had been a music specialist before taking on the duties of teaching math.
It has been shown by Li Pingma that one major difference in Chinese and American teachers of math is not advanced degrees but specialization. The Chinese teachers had a 9th grade level education before entering Teachers Colleges, but all they did, from the earliest grades onward was teaching math. This allows them to develop real pedagogical expertise. They are also given more time to do lesson plans, coordinate with colleagues and obtain professional development.
I had different specialists beginning in 6th grade for math, French literature, history/geography, chemistry; biology; physics, English and Latin. It was not disorienting. Except for lab science, teachers came to our room; we did not change classroom for every subject.</p>

4

<p>Marite is correct as usual, in those special public schools run by the Department of Defense where the base comander can take care of business if a student continues to be a problem...scores soar.</p>

5

<p>Discipline and motivation is a problem with our K-12 children. The children of CC parents are not normally in that category, so for many it is hard to understand. As a teacher of above-average students, the qustion I am asked more than anything else is "What do I have to do to pass?" Not what do I have to do for an "A?" And when I tell them that it is their grade, that they need to do the best they can, they don't get that what I want is the best effort of each child. Instead, they want to know how many lines, how many verbs - etc. Many of my students do just enough to get by, and the student who strives for excellence and goes above and beyond just for the joy of learning or the sense of a job well done is a very small percentage indeed. And my school is to a very small percentage diverse - these are primarily white, middle class kids. The teachers who challenge, make kids work, etc., get the flack from parents - they are making the children work too hard! It is the rare parent who appreciates this. Now, before you say that you were never like that, remember, I am NOT talking about CC parents, who generally want the teacher who challenges the kids. One of the best teachers I ever knew had a Ph.D. in government, taught AP government, had all 4's and 5's from the kids she taught that took the test for years, was in tears numerous times each year, as parents battered her because Johnny did not get an "A." She was unreasonable, too hard, etc. This attitude of wanting Johnny to get an A for doing nothing is quite prevalent. Just ask other teachers. We have come to realize that the public is paying lip service to quality in education. I have a reputation as a demanding teacher, and maintain discipline in my classroom. As the only Honors teacher of my level, my numbers of Honors students has consistently dwindled, from 5 sections to only 2, because of rumors about how "hard" I am. And when the schools do attempt to uphold discipline, believe me, more times than not the parents threaten a lawsuit, and bring in the lawyers, taking precious time away from the classroom or administrators dealing with other things in the school. And as for testing results, remember, many of those other countries do NOT test every single child, including special education, low IQ, etc., but we do. We will NEVER equal the results from other countries for that reason. This is not to say that we can't do a better job in some areas. But realize that because so many baby boomer parents have had to struggle and work hard to get where they are now, when they had children, many, not all, gave their kids what they didn't have, and have tried to make things easier for them. There are now a bunch of kids out there that think it should be handed to them. This is a societal attitude that needs to change before we can do anything to improve the schools - I realize that not all do as well as ours does. And the elementary and middle schools need to stop worrying so much about a kid's self-esteem, in giving grades, etc., so kids don't get a false sense of what excellence is. And you are right, in an effort to deal with their developmental issues, we have lost the need to show them what life is really like, and perhaps to deal with it - to show them that hard work does pay. I remember being in and ARD (Sp. ed. meeting) called by the parents because their child "couldn" spell, and I was making her work too hard. She was acing all quizzes and tests. Instead of praising her for working hard, I was told I was making her work too hard to get the writing correct, and I was told I could no longer do that. So, the next quiz, I got such gibberish that I couldn't even tell what the word was - I brought up the fact that if I were to be a chemist, I would have to work harder, since that is something that is my weakness, but to no avail. With hard work, she could do it, instead was told she didn't have to. Last year, I referred a young lady who wore a t-shirt with anaked girl on it. I had to attend a parental meeting, etc., and was told I was "picking on their child." As long as parents think their children should be allowed to do anything they want, discipline problems will not go away. Believe me, this is repeated over and over in every public school in the country. How can I get away with doing the least and get the best grade? Little thought to how much the child has actually learned, etc. In other countries, the quality of education is tantamount, and the challenging teachers are applauded. The attitude of a large portion of our society is the opposite.</p>

6

<p>Through my experience with many different foriegn students (through AFS) there is a common theme. The vast majority of other countries track the kids, some as early as Middle School. In the U.S. we are so worried about every individuals rights that we miss seeing what is good for the group and more specifically the top 1/3 of our population. Working in High and Middle schools for 20 years now, I can only imagine what could be accomlished if ALL of the kids in a particular school were college-bound. Yes we can group them through accelerated classes, etc., but that is not nearly as powerful on the educational climate of the school as would having different high schools for different tracks. Three tracks: 1) college bound 2) vocational 3) basic skills.</p>

7

<p>The problem with total ability tracking is that students do not excel across the board or are mediocre across the board. My S, in 9th grade, performed at 9th grade level, albeit excellently, in the humanities and social sciences, at college level at math and sciences, and was, to put it charitably, mediocre in arts, and had zero knowledge of music (despite the fact that his ears were semi-permanently connected to his MP3player, or do I mean because of that?). There are some weaknesses in the American k-12 structure, but the ability to mix and match is valuable.</p>

8

<p>I'm not quite so sure it would be a good idea. I think that kind of teaching favors one kind of student- and while that's a very prevalent cc student, at my school at least, they are not the majority. I strongly believe that all pre-college students should be taught to, not just those who excel. What about students not planning on college, or on a technical college? I, for one, think that at the k-12 level it is more important to have a system where a lot of people are learning than one where if you fall behind, you're doomed.</p>

9

<p>Wow, what a great discussion! May I chime in? Celebrian, the major problem with tracking, and the reason why it was eventually dropped, was for the very civil rights issues that you bring up. Unfortunately, too many students of color, males, and children who did not speak up in class, were labelled as less able, and thus doomed to the lowest track. </p>

<p>However, as Evita stated, we educate everyone. Last year I had a student with a 56 IQ placed in my regular education classroom. The sad truth was that if I spent the time trying to teach this child, as I did at the beginning of the year, I would spend all of my time with her to the exclusion of the other 24 second graders in my class. It took from August until December to get her tested and then pulled out of my class (she stayed for lunch, specials, and art) for the services she needed. I had to perform educational triage and help the ones who could be helped. This is what happens, probably not as dramatically, when you have huge gaps in ability in a classroom. </p>

<p>I agree that all students should be taught to, and the most efficient way to do this is when they are tracked into homogeneous ability groups. That doesn't mean dumping the lower achieving students into large classes with the worst, least experienced teachers, as was often the case in the past. It does mean that you have a class this is grouped closely around the skills that will be taught so the the more able are not held back by those who need more time to grasp a concept, more basic skills instruction to be prepared for a topic, and more remediation if they do not get it the first few times. </p>

<p>It is interesting that you argue that every student should be taught to, yet you say that the one method that is best for high achieving students should be disregarded. </p>

<p>The nice thing about homogeneous grouping within disciplines, Marite, is that it does accommodate the individual strengths and weaknesses of students. You are right that tracking, in general, might be too restrictive or might tend to push students too hard in one subject, but it is my experience that it is much better to err on the side of being too challenging than not challenging enough.</p>

<p>Mr. B., as a former consumer of the DoDDs schools and one who had to turn down a job last year, let me just say that they do an awesome job! You are right, if kids disrupt the educational atmosphere, the sponsorship is yanked and they go home to Aunt Sally or whoever else is willing to take them since the Active Duty member will stay at the duty station. Good incentive for acting appropriately. This actually happened to the girl who lived across the street from us overseas.</p>

10

<p>Tracking sounds ideal, but there are too many biases and inequality for the system to work. That is what makes the United States so different from other countries: we have a range of cultures, ethnicities and incomes. And we have to teach all children without alienating any of them.</p>

11

<p>And the kids in military school also know that they don't need dad or mom's commanding officer being called about their behavior, then calling the parent. As to overseas, yes they do track. There are many kids who have no interest or ability in being scholars - why can't we teach them a trade? And not worry about whether or not they received an A in Shakespeare or quantum physics? WE used to do this here, with technical high schools - the kids got English, math, etc., but had more hours in trades. You wouldn't believe how many discipline problems would go away if the kids were doing what they were happy doing. That is not to say that they would be devoid of math classes, etc., but do they really need calculus? Geometry, yes, as any carpenter or builder will tell you. I, too remember a time, many years ago, before special ed programs when the only mentally retarded child in the district (small, rural community) was placed in my Geek Mythology mini course! She couldn't read at kindergarten level, let alone anything else. No one knew what to do with her, so she just floated through - I sent her to the library (elementary) and is she could tell me one thing in the book, she passed. So, we have come a long way in providing services, but today the greasy wheel grinds very slowly. And many teachers are loathe to "label" a child - the parents can become very irate and threaten to sue, etc. We can only recommend testing, etc. And then leave it in the hands of the sp.ed. dept. and parents. My D, who as a typical CC student, took German I and II her jr and sr year (second foreign language), and she thought it was the easiest class she had ever taken! There are no honors classes until Level III, so she was placed with all levels. She thought the class went very slowly, and told her college prof that, and she never had to study, etc., yet kids were failing, and struggling. Disservice to her? Absolutely. Disservice to the kids who thought the class went too fast for them? Absolutely. The teacher apologized to her that the class was so slow, but what else could he do? There were 32 kids in the class, and he already had 5 preparations, as the only German teacher in building, he taught all levels. Just working with my D would have taken all his time and ignored the rest, because she could move along so quickly. He did what he could, by giving her some extra things to do, but it was like having a separate class with only one student. Tracking would have solved that situation, but it would mean more teachers, and budgets are tight. The largest line item any district has is teachers' salaries and benefits. And now, the latest move in education is doing away with honors, and going to all pre-ap so every student will be taught at that level in all classes. There is a belief that if the kids at an early age are taught higher level thinking skills that they will be as successful as the top 10% of students are currently. Here we go, again. Not only no tracking, but everyone is top 10%!!!!!!!!!!</p>

12

<p>There are some other differences about DOD schools, correct me if I am wrong...but to be a student in a DOD school at least one parent is employed, and there is some health care coverage for the students.</p>

<p>Tracking.. I would suggest one way to use tracking would be to adjust class size and meeting schedule around tracking, while maintaining the same standards. Kids with greater needs should be in smaller classes with extended class time to allow remediation(<15). Students who are better prepared, have decent study habits can be in larger classes(<30). Anybody else care to comment on residential public schools.</p>

13

<p>The only residential public school here in Fairbanks is the Fairbanks Youth Facility. We have Mt. Edgecumbe in Southeast, and it is a very contentious subject here in Alaska. It used to be that every child who needed schooling was sent to live at Mr. Edgecumbe. Then, with the advent of the oil money, villages successfully campaigned for schools in the villages. Now any village with a student can have a school, teachers, and all of the attendant services, like plane flights to neighboring villages (remember, this is Alaska, stuff is far.) Students got to stay home with their families, but the unintended consequence was that students do not meet and marry others from far-flung places and do not get out of the village. Since the village schools have been instituted, the feeling of hopelessness has grown in the villages (since the economies are very limited) and teen suicide rates have skyrocketed. Mt. Edgecumbe is still open and is seeing a resurgence in popularity.</p>

<p>Probably not what you were thinking of, but the only public residentials that I can think of.</p>

14

<p>
[quote]
You are right that tracking, in general, might be too restrictive or might tend to push students too hard in one subject, but it is my experience that it is much better to err on the side of being too challenging than not challenging enough.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>I support ability grouping without total tracking, .e., dividing students into college-bound, vocational, remedial. This means providing different levels of math, science, etc.. to different students. My S experienced what it meant to have heterogeneous classes in 9th & 1oth grades, no honors classes, and only APs. It shortchanged absolutely everybody. The advanced students were shortchanged by the slow pace of heterogeneous classes, while the struggling students struggled to keep pace with the rest of the class; the lack of honors shortchanged students who wanted more challenging classes but did not contemplate further studies in some fields and therefore did not want to take APs. The situation has now been remedied with the re-introduction of honors classes as well as more support for struggling students. Advanced students can take APs or college courses. As I said, not everyone shines in every subject or performs badly in all classes. This is precisely why I would not like the kind of general tracking that would result in some students being prepared for college and others not.</p>

<p>Mr.B: I think our district has incorporated some of your ideas about extended periods for students needing more support.</p>