Stanford study: California's broken schools or Mr. Jobs' vindication

Parents Forum
1

<p>Source:
<a href="http://news-service.stanford.edu/news/2007/march21/facts-032107.html%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://news-service.stanford.edu/news/2007/march21/facts-032107.html&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>
[quote]
Stanford researchers, led by education Associate Professor Susanna Loeb, have headed an unprecedented investigation into California's troubled K-12 education system. Their findings reveal that millions of students will be able to attain the state's high achievement standards only if what they describe as California's irrational, complex and restrictive school finance and governance system is overhauled from the bottom up. </p>

<p>"The conclusion of the report is that California is in real trouble," Loeb said. "The students aren't performing well relative to other states; they're not learning what they need to learn to be successful later on in the labor market. That's bad for individuals, but it's also bad for the state as a whole, especially a state like California that relies on innovation." </p>

<p>The state education system's structural problems are so deep-seated that tinkering around the edges with incremental reforms is unlikely to have any effect, Loeb said. Instead, a wholesale commitment to sweeping change is needed. </p>

<p>But even if a better-functioning financial system is adopted, researchers estimate the state's education budget would have to jump to $60 billion in 2004 dollars?significantly more than the $43 billion spent that year. Even that would only cover the cost of raising test scores to state-mandated levels in half of California schools. </p>

<p>"Even if we do put more money into the system?it probably will take more money to make the changes that we want?they'll only be effective if we use the resources well," Loeb said. </p>

<p>*The difficulty administrators face in firing poor teachers came up time and again in the research. "The one thing that they wanted more than anything else was more flexibility to dismiss teachers who weren't effective," Loeb said. "This came up so much that it was really difficult to ignore." *

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Mr. Jobs might not be that wrong after all ... See <a href="http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/showthread.php?t=302005%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/showthread.php?t=302005&lt;/a> :D</p>

2

<p>I attend a decent college prep school and I was surprised to find out after taking the California High School Exit Exam that many students in the state fail and need to take it again. And that test was dead easy. Really concerning.</p>

3

<p>^^ A high percentage of the kids failing the exit exam are ESL students. The school system isn't to blame for the failure of many of these kids to pass the exam. It's designed so the average 8th grader can pass it and most can. If one wants to lay blame for failure to pass the exit exam it should fall squarely on the shoulders of the parents of the kids and the kids themselves. Note - I'm generalizing.</p>

4

<p>^ yeah...isn't it a shame that many of us don't want to take ANY responsibility for educating us/our children, we all want some one else to be totally responsible for that.</p>

5

<p>It's hard to fix things when there is no competition. Public schools are in effect monopolies. If the money actually followed the child to be used where the parents decided, the schools would have to make changes in order to compete for that money.
All that being said, I think if you take the kids that the private schools would not admit out of the equation (along with other state and federal non funded mandates), I think you might find that "things are closer than they appear"
I have always maintained that if public schools were a business, they would be out of business.
I homeshooled my oldest son through 9th grade before "sending him off" to a public school. I remained very involved with his teachers and the school and he is now deciding between a top 30 LAC and a top 30 National University.</p>

6

<p>"I remained very involved with his teachers and the school"</p>

<p>you said the magic words.</p>

7

<p>
[quote]
many of us don't want to take ANY responsibility for educating us/our children, we all want some one else to be totally responsible for that.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Isn't public education, and the entire liberal system, based on the principle of offering a service to citizens who could not do it by themselves, or at least not so well? Shouldn't the REAL yardstick of the success by public schools -or better said the lack thereof- of educating people who do not have an extensive family support? </p>

<p>The United States offer a leading education through elementary school, but after that the system goes downhill all the way to high school, where our country barely beats out developingnations. It is obvious that this mirrors the direct involvement of parents in their children education. From the moment, the parents become unable to complement or substitute for the failing education, the wheels start to fall off. </p>

<p>Inasmuch as parents and students have a responsibility, it is hardly acceptable to blame the "customers" as opposed to blame the "service providers." Parents and students should indeed be partners in the education system, but that is hardly possible in the United States, especially in a system where the payer is relegated to the status of a mere nuisance.</p>

<p>A complete overhaul is indeed needed.</p>

8

<p>Xiggi:</p>

<p>You have an exaggerated notion of what schools can do. Teachers cannot teach if some students are disruptive; they cannot reach students if these do not speak English; they cannot get the students to focus on learning if the students are hungry.</p>

<p>I talked to the mother of a young woman who's taught for five years in a NYC inner school. Graduate of a top college, MA in education. After five years, she's burnt out. She's burnt out by constant disciplinary problems; by red tape from on high. She's quitting the profession. So the school she's been teaching at will lose a dedicated and experienced teacher. A very very common occurence.</p>

9

<p>Marite, isn't the amount of excuses about what schools cannot do that is truly exaggerated? </p>

<p>The problems you mention do exist, but they are not as universal as some wants us to believe. There are schools that have found ways to perform well enough to overcome many of the limitations you listed; others that spend much more are failing. </p>

<p>The only thing worse than a monopoly is one that is failing.</p>

10

<p>So are you blaming schools or teachers? You highlighted teachers. This is what I responded to.<br>
To say that there are extraordinary schools that can achieve a lot more than others is like saying there are extraordinary individuals. One ought to focus on what average schools can do with the students they get. And the student population in CA today is not the same one as in the 1960s when CA's educational system was the envy of the rest of the country.</p>

11

<p>Xiggi:</p>

<p>IMO a significant amount of the problems being seen in California are due to the huge influx of illegals by people with a low educational level, who place little emphasis on the importance of education, and who refuse to learn English and thereby typically have no idea what their kids are doing in school much less actually help them. This in turn, means the schools must have more classes aimed at the low performers which brings down the level of the entire class and consumes money and resources. Until this illegal immigration problem is addressed more substantially, the problems will only get worse.</p>

<p>I agree that improvements need to take place as well - especially in counter-acting the hugely influential Teacher Union and making it easier to get rid of poor performing teachers and making it easier to more substantially reward the high-performers. </p>

<p>Regardless of the system and the school, I'd say it's the student's family that has the greatest influence on the students performance. As long as parents effectively delegate all education to the school, are uninvolved in the process, place little value on education, and don't bother to learn the language even though they chose to move here, the problem will continue.</p>

12

<p>
[quote]
So are you blaming schools or teachers? You highlighted teachers. This is what I responded to.
To say that there are extraordinary schools that can achieve a lot more than others is like saying there are extraordinary individuals.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Marite, I highlighted the section ("The one thing that they wanted more than anything else was more flexibility to dismiss teachers who weren't effective," Loeb said. "This came up so much that it was really difficult to ignore.") because it represented an addendum to the lengthy discussion about the words of S. Jobs. </p>

<p>As far as blaming the teachers, I believe that I have posted my opinion many times on this issue: I consider BOTH the teachers AND the students to be hostages and victims of a feudalistic system that has been allowed to spin out of control in a downward pattern. </p>

<p>My reaction to the "let's blame the parents for failing to take responsibilities" is probably similar to an over-generalized "let's blame all the teachers": it is simply unfair and rather unproductive. The reality is that there ARE parents who do fail their responsibilities, and so are teachers who fail to be effective. Why not at least try to correctly identify and measure the extent and depth of the problems, and then find solutions. It so happens that some are easier to identify! </p>

<p>As far as the schools, I should have been a bit more clear in that I was addressing the difference among schools operating in similar socio-economic conditions. Unfortunately, the successful examples rarely get a lot of press and are not emulated often enough.</p>

13

<p>Being able to dismiss teachers was a small aspect of this report, which for the most part avoided making specific recommendations and put the focus on research-backed conclusions about the problems. </p>

<p>Funding was the main problem -- not just how much, but how it's distributed. There are schools that serve the same populations that get vastly different amounts of money, and there are schools that serve populations that have a lot of parental and community resources that get more than schools dealing with much needier kids. The report found no rhyme or reason to the way funding formulas have developed.</p>

<p>Another major conclusion: administrators are drowning in state requirements, or "regulationitis", that take so much time and paper work that prinicipals do not have time to do what they should be doing, overseeing curriculum and classrooms.</p>

<p>In terms of teaching, besides the ability to fire ineffective teachers more easily, the report called for rewarding effective teachers -- not just based on a few points up or down the testing scale. This is probably the most difficult issue, judging what makes a most effective teacher.</p>

<p>In my view, the real value of this report is that it restarts the discussion based on evidence, and gets away from the issue of who is most to blame: parents, teachers, administrators, or kids. Sure, some parents do a poor job, but we all pay for it when kids drop out of school or don't have the skills to get jobs that support families. So, let's work on doing something about it.</p>

14

<p>"Isn't public education, and the entire liberal system, based on the principle of offering a service to citizens who could not do it by themselves, or at least not so well? Shouldn't the REAL yardstick of the success by public schools -or better said the lack thereof- of educating people who do not have an extensive family support?"</p>

<p>No!
And that's one of the major points I made on other threads pertaining to CA education, including the earlier 'Steve Jobs' one.</p>

<p>No, not at all, xiggi. Public schools in this country assumed at their inception (& were modeled on the basis of) 2 things: an overwhelmingly English-speaking population, and family support. That is much of the problem. ucla_dad is exactly correct, and he would know, as he lives in the heart of it: most of the severely challenged in our public schools (the schools performing poorly, the students not passing the pathetic CAHSEE) are ESL and ELL learners. Period. This is the immense elephant in the room too un-PC to discuss among CA power-brokers.</p>

<p>Just last Friday I once again ran into the same problem I've been dealing with over & over in schools: the majority population of many of them are Hispanic. The minority population (usually varies between 1 and 8 in one classroom) is African-American. My fifth-grader left his site school because it was one such school. The learning was proceeding painfully slowly. Why? Because most of the class understood very little English, and (surprise!), the texts are written in English. (Hmmm.) This is <em>March</em>. My student has been at the school since September. They're studying early US History and are STILL ON NATIVE AMERICANS. (That would be early Native Americans. It's not a course, no, in Native Americans.) I laughed with the parents & suggested that an entire course on Native Americans would be suitable for a college course, esp. graduate level. Obviously, the teacher had covered very little of the curriculum, because the students were not understanding the vocabulary. Period. He is one of the 6 or 7 black students in the class. He is not being taught. The Latinos are being taught. So now at least I'm teaching him.</p>

<p>Early immigrants were able to transition to our public schools because of rigorous self-study and no options but immersion, and because of a high level of motivation that assumed the necessity of assimilating within an overwhelmingly English-speaking population, & conducting business in English. That is no longer the assumption of immigrants who come here, particularly from south of the border. Depending on the region of settlement, they may be conducting business comfortably in Spanish, conversing with a wide community in Spanish, etc.</p>

<p>And xiggi, I do not see the overwhelming emphasis on the report you cite as being the teacher pay issue. (I completely agree with sac.) The structural & governance issues were highlighted, issues which I similarly profiled on earlier threads regarding CA education. The major issue is the system. Great teachers, however paid, cannot function effectively within the current system without a radical change in assumptions, expectations, requirements, & priorities.</p>

<p>I also want people to understand just how radically the public school population has changed. (the demographics) My new student whom I mentioned above (new to me) lives in a community which was overwhelmingly (almost 100%) black about 10 yrs. ago, and had been similarly so for many, many years before that, too.</p>

15

<p>
[quote]
The major issue is the system. Great teachers, however paid, cannot function effectively within the current system without a radical change in assumptions, expectations, requirements, & priorities.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Yes, that's what I was trying to argue, but epiphany said it more fully and better.</p>

16

<p>You parents will not be surprised (given what I just posted) that the competition for CA <em>private</em> schools, of almost any kind, is insane, but particularly for the rigorous secular privates. On placement test days, these schools have an overflow crowd of students. There doesn't begin to be the available privates to accommodate demand among the more educated families. The great publics are not sufficient in number (or dispersed enough in location) to satisfy that, either. It is just getting worse every year. I honestly don't know what I would do if I didn't have one in college & one in h.s. right now. I have a friend whose D did not get into either private elem. on their list, & the child is a gem, & brilliant. (Results were last week.) Not enough of a development admit, probably, and there is usually at the most one opening per class at every private per year; sometimes only 2 or 3 openings for the entire school. This may not be unusual compared to other regions or states, but the difference is, most other States have more to choose from in publics than CA now does.</p>

<p>If I had a child I was trying to place in a private, I would probably have to leave the State.</p>

17

<p>
[quote]
ucla_dad is exactly correct, and he would know, as he lives in the heart of it: most of the severely challenged in our public schools (the schools performing poorly, the students not passing the pathetic CAHSEE) are ESL and ELL learners. Period. This is the immense elephant in the room too un-PC to discuss among CA power-brokers.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Epiphany, I do not want to start a lengthy debate about the impact of the illegal immigration on school performance--at least not on CC. However, allow me to add that I also happen to live in an area that has been fundamentally affected by the emigration from Mexico and ... other southern countries. For what it is worth, this topic of discussion does not lend itself easily to quick assessments and simplistic soundbites, especially when it comes to issues such "not valuing education" or "refusing to learn English." One typical misconception is considering the illegal immigrants as being part of a homogeneous group, not to mention the substantial number of legal citizens of hispanic origin. </p>

<p>In addition, may I politely suggest to take one quick look at the public reports of the CAHSEE and check the statistics that define the passing rates of Hispanics (assumed to include most illegals and ESL/ELL) and compare the numbers to the same statistics for African-American students. </p>

<p>While the absolute numbers might support the notion that "most" students not passing the test are ESL, using percentages might indicate that the true problems transcends racial distributions. </p>

<p>As far as using "highlights" of the quoted article, I posted the original source as a workable link that included my "highlight" .... verbatim!</p>

<p>Oh, and for what it is worth, I also happen to agree with ... "The major issue is the system." And that is the system that you seemingly described as "a system that assumed at [its] inception (& modeled on the basis of) 2 things: an overwhelmingly English-speaking population, and family support" </p>

<p>That is why change is needed.</p>

18

<p>
[quote]
While the absolute numbers might support the notion that "most" students not passing the test are ESL, using percentages might indicate that the true problems transcends racial distributions.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>I read Epiphany's anecdote about the African-American kid in a class full of Hispanics as suggesting that even non-ESL students are held back educationally if their classes are dominated by ESL students and the teachers perforce have to teach to the majority.</p>

19

<p><a href="http://www.cde.ca.gov/nr/ne/yr06/yr06rel29.asp%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.cde.ca.gov/nr/ne/yr06/yr06rel29.asp&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>This link shows the passing rate, including that of ELL. ELL is a big problem, but not the only problem.</p>

20

<p>xiggi, I see nowhere where I used simplistic soundbites. Nowhere. Remember that I am looking at this with insider, intimate, & current information -- not as a casual observer, knee-jerk reactionary, or with 20-second local TV news "stories" as my source. I never once said the word "illegal." Please. I <em>proctor</em> these tests and I know my population. I'm required to & paid to.</p>

<p>It's neither here nor there whether one or all Hispanics in the public schools are illegal. The material question is whether, or how much, they are both required to learn English (in school) and motivated to learn English out of school. In my local area, neither factor is very strong. The third factor is the home environment, but clearly a motivated student can learn as long as supported. Previous immigrant families from earlier generations motivated their children to learn the language, while often the parents themselves -- busy & lacking time & resources -- stayed only partial fluent until death. But the parents and the children knew the score. They never assumed they would be a significant enough population for the younger generation to survive without Engl-speaking & writing skills. The assumption was that success & upward mobility for the younger generation was predicated on assimilation, including adoption of the host language.</p>

<p>Again, I never mentioned "illegal" immigrants, nor did I claim they were "homogeneous." You are either making incorrect assumptions about me, or you are confusing me with another poster. Homogeneous or heterogeneous is immaterial, btw. If you don't speak the language & aren't interested in learning it (because no one's told you that you need to, or you perceive that you don't need to), you will be severely impacted in your <em>English</em>-based U.S. education. Russians who come here permanently, if they are not yet fluent, assume that they should become fluent, & thus do so. They know that their numbers do not dominate.</p>

<p>The point of my statements was not to compare black with Hispanic CAHSEE results. If you want to investigate that, that's your business. Those most vocal against the CAHSEE, however, are in fact the Hispanics, not blacks. They are vocal because they do not have the language skills. They are not fluent. I teach them. Please don't tell me that most of them are fluent. </p>

<p>My statements were about the marginalization of black students within historically black schools & neighborhoods, now overwhelmed with classes conducted for Spanish-speaking students. This is not a rarity in my area. It is the trend, and has been so for quite some time.</p>