Turning the Titanic: A victory for education reformers in Illinois?

Parent Cafe
101

<p>The problem with education and education reform is that those doing the reforming are doing it from an ideological basis a lot of the time, and not based on things that work. Here are some of the arguments I have heard on this board, and the reality of what they mean:</p>

<p>-“Let the market rule”…I have heard this mantra about a lot of things, and it sounds great, the ‘free market’ produces better, etc. The problem with that is the free market isn’t always efficient, and when it comes to education it may not even be relevent. Why? In the markets, there are winners and losers,and the focus is on winning, which sounds good…but the problem with markets is you have winners and losers, which might be great in business (at least some time, read up when winning becomes a monopoly or a oligopoly). </p>

<p>But in schools, what happens if we open up the floodgates? Let’s say we have voucher programs (more on that in a bit), does this really help the situation? The problem with a voucher situation is that good private schools cost a lot of money, and while parochial schools in inner city areas provide a decent education, if no frills, they have limited resources.</p>

<p>So what happens? Some parents who are better off can take their voucher, and with the voucher they can potentially afford to send their kid to private school, paying the difference out of their own pocket (for those well enough off). In theory, a really well off family could take those vouchers and use it to help send their kids to Choate (in effect giving them a subsidy when they don’t need it). The other problem is along with those vouchers there generally are no rules about admittance, so the private schools pick and choose.</p>

<p>So what happens? The kids who really could use the help can’t get in, because the private schools pick and choose, including parochial schools. So what you end up doing is pulling kids out of public schools who can get out and leave the public schools underfunded and with all the problem kids…which solves nothing. </p>

<p>-Vouchers also haven’t proven themselves out. In DC and in Milwaukee, where voucher programs have been in effect for a while, the kids who end up in parochial schools or other private schools end up with results no better then the public schools (there was a recent write up on milwaukee). So if the vouchers don’t produce better results for the kids we are talking about, what would the point of going there be? </p>

<p>-Vouchers are ideology driven, and the primary pushers are the ultra religious, who want to take their kids out of the public schools because they don’t want them learning about science and such, they want in effect the state to pay for religious education, which on top of first amendment issues, also doesn’t exactly create students who are going to do well on international tests, using a metric people love to throw out. Paying for kids to go to evangelical schools that teach in chemistry class that bonding is ‘god’s hand’ or that dinosaur fossils are ‘god testing us’ or teaching drivel like the dinosaurs were wiped out by the great flood or the earth is 6000 years old isn’t going to create a nation of scientists and engineers and such. </p>

<p>Want proof? The voucher programs that especially conservatives promote have no requirement that kids going to those schools meet standards. When kids go to public schools, they have to take tests to prove where they are, private schools don’t have to do that, and with the voucher proposals I have seen someone could be sending their kid to a Yeshiva where the girls learn cooking and sewing and the boys learn religion and education ends at 13, and that would be fine. </p>

<p>-The other ‘fact’ that the free market types and those comparing the US to other countries leaves out is that all those countries, especially the Asian ones everyone is talking about, have true national education systems, unlike the ridiculous patchwork we have here. We have this ridiculous notion of local control of schools, which is part of the problem we face here, the variation between states and within states is staggering. In NJ, for example, something like 90% of the public school high school graduates go on to higher ed, in many of the lower flung states, those in the bottom runs, it is less then 20%. We have no real national standards (NCLB was a joke, quite frankly, its heart was in the right place, but it didn’t do what needs to be done IMO). Among other things, it means states can cut corners on their education, spend relatively little on it, and still be eligible for federal funding. While spending money doesn’t guarantee a good education, not spending enough is correlated to poor education. Take a look at the poorest performing states in the US, which I believe are Texas, Arkansas, Mississippi and I believe Alabama, and what you find is they also are the states that spend near the bottom.The 3rs are great in some idiots mind who thinks education is a frill, but it doesn’t prepare students either. </p>

<p>No, money doesn’t buy everything, spending in some of the urban districts in NJ, for example, is higher then many of the better performing suburbs, which in part is due to idiotic state mandates and bureacracy. On the other hand, there is a reason why school districts like Scarsdale, NY, Mendham, NJ and the like do well, and it is because they spend a lot of money on their schools (plus they obviously have kids coming from good backgrounds as well). </p>

<p>The countries we are competing with realize education is critical and they would laugh at local control. We keep hearing how China is going to kick our tails (which has problems, but that is another argument), but the same people lauding China completely ignore the fact that in China education is controlled by the central government, no ifs, ands or buts, and decry any attempt to nationalize education policy (anyone notice how the biggest department with a target on its back from some corners is the department of education?).</p>

<p>-As others have pointed out, we are being compared to countries with uniform culture and also relatively low rates of immigration, even today. It should be noted that England, which has a high rate of immigration, tends to score poorly, while countries more homogeneous do better, which mirrors the US.</p>

<p>The point being that as a country reform can only happen if it is done based on results, not ideological posturing. Scapegoating, blaming, coming up with ‘simple solutions’ are all great on paper, but they don’t solve anything either. As Mencken once said, every problem has a simple, straightforward answer, so obvious that it jumps out at you…and is dead wrong.</p>

<p>We need to get real facts and data, not slinging around crap. Yes, there are problems with the teachers unions, a lot of good teachers will tell you that, and things like public workers pay and benefits and such has to be rationalized or brought into the 21st century, and likewise work rules and the rigidity that has become the norm needs to be broken down IMO. </p>

<p>We also need to ask ourselves what we want out of education. Do we want kids coming out who are skilled, creative and innovative, or kids who do gangbusters on standardized tests, can be pretty efficient workers, but rely on other countries to actually create and innovate? (want a classic example? Indonesia and Singapore score highly on those international tests, least the examples I saw, yet neither of them is exactly known for being an innovation hotbed). Likewise, the Asian countries that score great on those tests have economies that rely on the discoveries of others to flourish, basically taking what has been developed elsewhere, which is great in one sense, but what have they gained? I think there is a lot to be learned from other educational approaches, but it is ironic as we in the US are talking about reforming our education system, places like China and Korea are looking to change their schools to be more like western ones, realizing that what makes their kids do great on international tests doesn’t translate into creativity and innovation (yeah, I have seen the Shanghai study, that supposedly shows the kids there are capable of innovative and creative thought, come back to me in 10 or 15 years and see if any of them have broken new ground). </p>

<p>As far as the original concept, about breaking the LIFO cycle, while I agree that it may be a good thing, to get rid of dead wood, we also need to be careful, because school boards and such can also use that to get rid of good teachers who they think are too expensive. Yes, private industry does this all the time, and where has that left us? Do we want a school system where they rely on cheap, young teachers who may or may not be good, or do we want to have people who know what they are doing? In the tech fields, companies for the past 20 years or so have been using labor from places like India, either the H1 visa program or offshoring the jobs, to get cheap labor, and want to know a dirty little secret? For all the money saved, a lot of companies are finding out the cost of doing that is a lot more then they thought, that getting young, cheap labor from places with an excess pool ends up costing them because the people they are hiring don’t know the business, don’t understand it, and it costs them a lot of time and money to make up for that lack of experience. In business that might or might not be okay, but what would inexperience cost us in the schools? There is a lot of dead wood, teachers who gave up, teachers no principal wants to hire who are paid to sit around, and we need an effective rating system, but their needs to be safeguards from beancounters who only see savings.</p>

102

<p>

</p>

<p>You wouldn’t believe where some of that comes from. Some “educators” believe that group work is the only way to learn. There’s many different sytles out there. Also, parents expect this “crap” to be done and it is a complete waste. But the taxpayers demand it and the schools are forced to go along with it. </p>

<p>Again, remember, in public schools you have a board that is responsible for running the schools and those individuals are not required to know anything about education. Try doing that with a business and see how long it lasts…</p>

103

<p>

</p>

<p>Of course, that must be true! After all, the comparative test scores do not lie! And, in this case, they MUST matter. Just as it must be true that this boondoggle of a program has cost taxpayers … over ONE BILLION dollars. </p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Oh yes, a billion here and a billion there, and soon enough we will talk about real money. And, perhaps, we will also realize that the “problems are complex” … complex enough that money removed from one pocket is not really “lost” or “wasted.” Is it too complex to realize that the when a program cost less PER CAPITA, there must be a savings somewhere. </p>

<p>What about this position: </p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Does that echo the little voices that tell us that “voucher schools spend roughly half the amount per student compared to traditional public schools.?”</p>

<p>Here’s another reality. After years of tumultuous battles, the voucher system in Milwaukee was set up to … fail by limiting the program to the poorest and most-at-risk students. And it did not. When it did not fail, the same groups who so desperately wanted to deprive parents the rights to seek a better future for their chidren went back to battle. And never ceased. Along the way, early critics such as John Witte (yes the author of the study) has been forced to turn around … when analyzing the facts by using rigorous study methods, as opposed to cheap political soundbites. </p>

<p>In the end, the only failure of the voucher program is the one of its opponents to kill it. And not for lack of trying! And this for no other reason than clinging to a monopoly of power and money.</p>

<p>PS Oh, here’s just one another of those “lunatics” who happens to believe in nmumbers … Paul E. Peterson:</p>

<p><a href=“http://educationnext.org/graduation-rates-higher-at-milwaukee-voucher-schools/[/url]”>http://educationnext.org/graduation-rates-higher-at-milwaukee-voucher-schools/&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

104

<p>Musicprnt, are you a teacher and a union member?</p>

<p>Do you see my post about the Milwaukee voucher program? Click the link and read the article. The Washington D.C. program did even better.</p>

<p>P.S. Wrote this before I saw Xiggi’s post.</p>

105

<p>musicprnt, you are 100% incorrect about the identity of the primary ‘pushers’ of education reform, which you identify as ‘ultra-religious’ types who dislike science education. That is the give-away that you are unfamiliar with the actual research devoted to various aspects of education reform. There are numerous academic journals devoted to the topic. Statisticians, educators, economists, sociologists, cognitive psychologists and others are busy actually doing research into the topic, all the while battling the paid lobbyists of the teachers’ unions for the attention of state legislators. I don’t think any of them are Jehovah’s Witnesses. </p>

<p>hopscout, where I live, it is definitely not parents who demand the diversions from academic topics in the classroom, and for the most part, it is not school board members, except for a few of those who are former teachers. The curricula are purchased and imposed by central administration without regard to the wishes of parents and school board members. I watch these battles closely. This isn’t speculation.</p>

106

<p>Part of the reason that the voucher schools can educate their students for less is because most of the voucher schools are parochial schools that pay lower salaries and have much worse benefits. People choose to teach in parochial schools for many excellent reasons but I doubt that you can find huge numbers of skilled teachers who are willing to work for those salaries and benefits. The second reason the costs are less is that the voucher schools tend to have lower populations of special needs students. That does not mean that they don’t have any, it is just that most parochial schools are not able to provide services for high needs students. And some parochial schools in Milwaukee don’t take special needs students at all. While I agree that money in schools sometimes seems to go into a black hole, I am not sure that lowering salaries and benefits for teachers is really something that will improve education.</p>

107

<p>I am not a teacher or a union member nor as I posted in my original post do I think that the teacher’s unions are blameless in the mess we have, and I am not in the ‘education business’, I am a senior level tech manager with a lot of analysis experience, and I know the difference between rigorous data backed by research and stuff cherry picked.</p>

<p>For example, the link someone posted used graduation rate as proof of vouchers being more effective (94% graduated versus 75 in the public schools) and that is a classic example. First of all, single statistics used to prove anything are dubious, especially since what does graduating mean? The voucher schools could in fact be doing what the public schools did with these kids, pass them along with social promotion and out the door, the graduation rate alone means little. Test scores, as flawed as they are, are at least a common measure, and according to the studies I saw, voucher students did no better on the standardized tests then students in public school,which in theory means they learned no more.</p>

<p>More importantly, it isn’t an accurate measure because</p>

<p>-The schools the kids went to under the voucher cherry pick students, they can refuse anyone with speciial needs, disabilities, emotional problems and so forth. They don’t have to spend the time and resources on kids who act out, cause trouble, etc.</p>

<p>-The kids who get into the voucher program tend to have parents who care enough to get them in the program (Malcolm Gladwell wrote about this in his book “the tipping point”), that the study of the voucher students reflects a group that is not equivalent to the broader group of students in the public school, who have kids whose parents don’t care, etc. </p>

<p>And what happens long term? Do the kids who graduate from the voucher schools do better then comparable kids from the public school? Do they go on to college prepared for college, or drop out at the same rate public schools do (one incomplete study suggested that the voucher kids aren’t doing much better down the road).</p>

<p>Another factor is that vouchers typically represent aorund 7k, which in terms of private schools limits students to parochial schools. The problem here is that parochial schools tend to give a good basic education (where I grew up in suburban NJ, few people would send their kids to a parochial school, the education level in the public schools, especially in high school, was way, way above what the parochial school offered). If we are talking about global competition, where students are taking high level math and science classes in high school, something parochial schools offer little of, what advantage is there?</p>

<p>Midmo, you missed my point I think. I am aware of the battles over vouchers, experts on both sides, and I hate to tell you but many on both sides are ideological, the ones supporting the current structure often work for teachers unions, and ones supporting them are often based in right wing think tanks promoting the ‘government is bad, private is good’ mantra or promoting the idea that parents have the right to take their money and run. In terms of the ultra religious, if you look at the voucher programs that have been proposed on a national level, one of the most astounding feature is few or none of them have any kind of accountability with them, they basically are written to give the parents the right to take the money and run, and that is the religious right and their allies at work, because they want to be able to teach as they want and have the government pay for it, there is no other answer that makes sense. If vouchers were truly to be about making our education world class, then accountability would be mandatory.</p>

<p>it is ironic, one of the biggest things being promoted in public schools is accountability (rightfully so), there is talk of pay for performance, etc, and getting rid of bad teachers, yet we have voucher programs written that not only don’t mention accountability, in many cases they make it illegal to impose standards, which is ridiculous. </p>

<p>Now I am not saying throw out vouchers, I am saying that selling them as the answer is premature and knee jerk, that’s all. There are all kinds of things being tried, charter schools come to mind, and maybe it will take a combination of things to fix things. I think our reliance on local governments to run schools is shortsighted, as is the funding methods. Public schools are funded by property taxes, which are regressive, and if we are a country then leaving education up to the thousands of districts across the country is not the way to go, it probably needs to be top down. If we are going to compare ourselves to other countries, then we need to look at what they are doing, too. The top scoring countries on those tests have national education systems and national education policy and it indicates they think that education is too important to be left to local school boards or state school boards where the agenda might be detrimental to having educated citizens. </p>

<p>First and foremost, as I wrote in my original post, we have to decide what it is we want out of education. Do we want to ace international tests, so we can go around bragging? Do we want an education system that turns out people able to think and create and promote economic growth? Do we want to put out students with a basic education, or ones entering college already well prepared? Part of the problem is no one has come up with the goals, we hear platititudes, but until you define the goal then how can you come up with a plan to achieve it? We need to figure out the results we want first, then work towards it, not just say “the schools suck”. At that point, then you start looking at methods, we have it brass-ackwards where we are proposing solutions for a problem we haven’t defined. Heck, even private industry knows that, they spend a lot of time developing tactical and strategic plans to achieve goals, and find effective ways to measure if it is working:)</p>

108

<p>

</p>

<p>Well, that might be a good place to start. If I read your statement correctly, you do not consider the report about graduation rate to be rigorous or credible.</p>

<p>Since the program has been analyzed for a long time, perhaps you could help us with pointing us in the direction of the reports you might deem worthy of discussion, and why?</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Is that the case? Is that what happened in Milwaukee?</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Do you happen to have a source where one could read about national level vouchers that have gone to “ultra religious” groups?</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Well, several of those countries have the equivalent of unrestricted vouchers, as there is no difference in enrolling in a government school or a school run by the private sector under the control of the government. </p>

<p>The watered-down version of vouchers that have been introduced in the United States are hardly representative as what could and should be accomplished.</p>

109

<p>“Part of the problem is no one has come up with goals, we hear platitudes, but until you define the goal how can you come up with a plan to achieve it”</p>

<p>How about learning to read, write and perform basic math operations, so you don’t need remedial classes to function in college.</p>

110

<p>post #107… Do you really need that long to say what you have to say? I never read your posts. “Brevity is the soul of wit.”</p>

111

<p>

<a href=“http://graphics.eiu.com/PDF/Cisco_Innovation_Complete.pdf[/url]”>http://graphics.eiu.com/PDF/Cisco_Innovation_Complete.pdf&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

112

<p>

</p>

<p>Poetgrl–that was beneath you. Vague put-down followed by platitude. Sorry–really below usual standards.</p>

113

<p>Having spent four years in a public high school, my conclusion is that taxpayers are not getting their money’s worth. There are many, many areas that need to be reformed. For now, I have a few suggestions:</p>

<p>1. Reevaluate the use of technology
Lots of money is spent on technology in schools, but I have found the returns sorely lacking. Smartboards, netbooks, and other devices are expensive but do not significantly change the way courses are taught. I very cautiously support the increased use of online courses (see #9), but I think many people would be horrified if they saw the way technology is used in schools today. Just look at the recent example of a school district trying to buy iPads for kindergarten kids!</p>

<p>2. Reduce graduation requirements
Most school districts require a broad variety of courses in order to graduate high school. This approach has been a miserable failure. In order to allow students to obtain the credits needed for graduation, high schools offer courses like consumer econ, informal geometry, film as lit, etc. These classes have no rigor whatsoever. Students choose them specifically in order to get credits with as little work as possible. Just ask any teacher who teaches a course like this: do they really think it has academic value?</p>

<p>Reducing graduation requirements will have no effect on high-achieving students who must complete a certain menu of courses in order to gain admission to a college or university. But it will eliminate a huge amount of wasteful and unnecessary spending on courses that have no educational value.</p>

<p>3. Reform standardized testing
I support standardized testing. I think having a benchmark for student progress is essential. However, increased steps must be taken to prevent teachers from cheating. Basing teacher compensation/rehiring on performance gives too much of an incentive for test alteration or other cheating.</p>

<p>4. Protect but don’t enshrine the right to unionize
I don’t want to get into a political discussion not appropriate for CC. However, my instinct is that unions should not be a consideration in education legislation. If teachers choose to organize and make demands of the school district, that is their right. If the school district chooses to ignore those demands and fire teachers who choose to strike, that is its right.</p>

<p>5. Increase class sizes
I will take flak for this. But beyond the primary level - where I don’t support increases - I am not aware of any persuasive evidence that small classes produce results on a large scale. This is a very easy way to reduce costs. Just based on personal experience, I have had very few classes where teachers were overextended with the number of students they teach. Indeed, a larger number could easily be accommodated.</p>

<p>6. Vocational education has value
After years of neglect, vocational training is ‘in’ again. This is a good thing.</p>

<p>7. Reform funding for athletics
I am a huge supporter of sports and physical education. But the value of athletics lies in physical fitness, teamwork, and goal-setting. We are not trying to train NBA stars. As such, facilities do not need to be perfect. Playing basketball on an old-fashioned court is just as valuable as doing so on an expensive, modern court. The same logic applies to some extent to music and the fine arts.</p>

<p>8. Reduce spending on educational supplies
There have been many reports on the appalling nature of the relationship between publishers and textbook adoption committees. Suffice it to say that most “improvements” in textbooks from one version to the next are minimal.</p>

<p>9. Redefine and strengthen curriculum standards
This is the most important point. No matter how hard we try, we will never make every teacher a good teacher for every student. But that doesn’t mean kids can’t get a better education than they do now. I think we must be careful with online courses because their relatively unstructured nature is only a good fit for very motivated students. However, the educational materials used with online courses have a role in the classroom as well. Printed pages may be a better choice than computers, but either way a clear and structured curriculum can be hugely beneficial.</p>

114

<p>Wiki said that turning the T may have contributed to its sinking. If the T had hit the iceberg, the T may have survived, but with a broken nose. </p>

<p>I happen to believe in the, Bear Theory: You only have to out run those who are going to be dinner. No amount of cajoling, pushing, shoving, pulling, vitamins, or money is going to make the slowest, the second slowest. IOW, why bother. Either they get it or they get cooked.</p>

115

<p>

</p>

<p>Garland. There has been an alarming turn towards the op-ed piece as post lately. I find it isn’t really ‘in the spirit’ of a conversation to do an op-ed. Surely, you and I are both capable of an op-ed on the board, but it’s not a conversation at that point.</p>

<p>Sorry, though, if it’s beneath me. I just got annoyed earlier when I logged on. There was an opinion piece on every thread I opened. </p>

<p>But, yeah, sorry mucicprnt, that wasn’t fair of me. I do scan your posts and find them well-informed, if more of a commitment than I’m willing to make on CC. :)</p>

116

<p>Do Milwaukee voucher schools cherrypick students? It is their choice. Each school can decide who they want to enroll. Many schools in the program will not admit special ed students or ELL students. They can refuse to admit students with behavior problems or children whose parents don’t agree to a certain level of involvement. This school year is the first year that the voucher schools have had to participate in the statewide testing program - WKCE. It will likely be the last since that requirement will likely be written out in the next state budget. Public schools have to follow state curriculum requirements, voucher schools do not. There is no academic accountability for voucher schools.</p>

117

<p>Please check out the video (6 minutes) of Jeb Bush, ex-governor of Florida, discussing school choice and using digital learning to disrupt the public education system and to breakdown the barriers of public monopolies.</p>

<p>[Jeb</a> Bush on Disrupting the Educational Status Quo - Reason Magazine](<a href=“http://reason.com/archives/2011/04/20/jeb-bush]Jeb”>http://reason.com/archives/2011/04/20/jeb-bush)</p>

118

<p>

</p>

<p>Is that the case?</p>

<p>Were you not the one who posted blatantly false information about foreign countries not including students from vocational school?</p>

119

<p>Xiggi - voucher schools are private schools. There are no requirements on them. They are free to choose which students they enroll. Some of them DO choose to enroll students with special needs or behavioral problems, but many do not because they don’t have the programs to support them. Go online and get a list of voucher schools in Milwaukee. Contact the schools and ask them if they provide services for special needs students or students who are not English speakers. You will find out that many of them do not. Just because a student has a voucher, doesn’t mean that the school has to accept him or her. Private schools, even voucher schools, get complete say over who they admit and what curriculum they choose to implement. </p>

<p>The following is an anti-voucher article and I know that is has its biases, but it talks about how students with disabilities are essentially shut out of the voucher program.</p>

<p>[Rethinking</a> Schools Online](<a href=“http://www.rethinkingschools.org/special_reports/voucher_report/v_vouc182.shtml]Rethinking”>http://www.rethinkingschools.org/special_reports/voucher_report/v_vouc182.shtml)</p>

<p>This article is less biased, but states that 1.5% of voucher students have special needs compared to 19% in Milwaukee public schools. </p>

<p>[Voucher</a> testing data takes a new twist - JSOnline](<a href=“http://www.jsonline.com/news/education/118886284.html]Voucher”>Voucher testing data takes a new twist)</p>

120

<p>I won’t answer for Xiggi, but I noticed two things. In the first article, everyone on the editorial board and staff are union members. In fact, one staff person describes herself as a long-time anti-imperialist activist. Another writes a book, “Rethinking Columbus” (only part of title) and “Teaching for Justice in an Unjust World”. In the second article, assuming their statistics are accurate (which I don’t), at least you’re getting the same outcomes for half the costs.</p>