Please sign a petition asking President-elect Barack Obama to appoint Linda Darling-Hammond as Secretary of Education.
Here’s the link to the petition:
http://www.petitiononline.com/…
We in the US are always giving lip service to reforming education and “high standards.” The results of this discussion has been to require states to implement yearly testing, e.g., No Child Left Behind (NCLB). This in turn saw the implementation of yearly standardized multiple choice tests across the country that hold schools hostage to improving their scores on these tests. This has had the effect of teachers having to “teach to the test” – so we have a generation of kids who are bored with school and can’t apply what they have “learned” to the real world – but are terrific when it comes to filling in ovals on a standardized test!
Case in point- the introduction of the 21st Century Skills committee’s report at the Board of Ed’s meeting in Somerville two weeks ago was from Verizion’s regional VP, President of Brigham & Women’s, and Chancellor of UMass Boston all saying – the students coming out of high school can’t think critically, can’t work as a team, can’t solve problems, don’t know how to use technology effectively – all things they need in employees and apparantly spend money on doing remedial training! These “so-called” 21st century skills are, in my opinion, the exact opposite of what NCLB is designed to do. (Those in the testing industry must be chortling behind their camouflage of double-speak of “high standards” as the dollars roll in!)
Darling-Hammond’s views on education reform are refreshing. We need a forward and clear thinker in this important cabinet position.
Darling-Hammond is a Standford University Professor of Education and is currently on Obama’s transition team.
From her award-winning book, The Right to Learn:
“Bureaucratic solutions to problems of practice will always fail because effective teaching is not routine, students are not passive, and questions of practice are not simple, predictable, or standardized. Consequently, instructional decisions cannot be formulated on high then packaged and handed down to teachers.”
An interview from PBS:
http://www.pbs.org/onlyateache…
An editorial she wrote last year in the SF Chronicle:
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/…
Please sign this petition and pass it on to all the folks you know who care about public education !
However, I’m not sure I agree with where this is going. I believe there does have to be a way to test basic knowledge. I’m sorry, but there are certain things students should know before graduating – period. If subjects are taught well to begin with the tests should take care of themselves.
<
p>There’s an experience I always cite when people complain about “teaching to the test”. My AP US History teacher bragged to our class about what a great track record she had predicting what the essay questions would be. She told us that she could guarantee that the major essay question would not be on something after World War II. The major essay that year turned out to be about the civil rights movement of the 1960s and its effect on presidential elections of that decade. We groaned when we saw it and a few cursed the teacher under their breath, but we had the same passing rate as previous years when she had predicted more accurately. If she had taught to the test she might have left out the civil rights movement, but its part of our history so it should be included in the curriculum whether tested or not. It’s OK to get a general idea of which topics might come up on a standardized test, but teachers should not be constantly thinking about it.
You are probably correct about my opinions about standardized, high-stakes testing. I would LOVE to abolish them – since that’s not going to happen any time soon – I would more realistically hope to reform the testing.
<
p>Although I agree with you that a high school diploma should indicate that you have mastered certain skills and have some specific knowledge in one’s brain – I don’t agree that high-stakes standardized testing is the way to assess whether this has been achieved. Having taught college freshman – I can say there are many of them that can not write English sentences, can not produce an X-Y graph or take percentages, and lack basic study skills. I did find this appalling and wondered how they were able to graduate high school let alone matriculate into college.
<
p>The chancellor of UMass Boston – sited these very things in his statements before the 21st Century Skills report was given. So even though we’ve had MCAS all these years – the students are still lacking in some basic skills.
<
p>Unfortunately, teachers all across our state – and indeed the country – are feeling pressured into “teaching to the test” because they have to keep improving those test scores. There are some teachers who despite the pressure, teach using best practises whose students do get good results on these tests – but they are not in the majority.
Follow New York’s example of Regents and non-Regents diplomas, substituting MCAS for Regents. I still would want some very basic standards. A few years ago I joined a group of adults who took a sample MCAS sponsored by Sen. Sue Tucker, after which we discussed what we thought of it. People would say of course I did better because by that time I had a college degree, but I remembered with just a couple of exceptions which HIGH SCHOOL class I had acquired the knowledge/skill necessary to answer the questions. I went to a private high school in New Hampshire that didn’t have a mandated graduation exam so why can’t the public schools likewise meet that quality of education without one?
<
p>I sympathize with your predicament regarding college freshmen, but that is exactly why we need standards. With college costs as high as they are one way to bring down overall costs is to make a bachelors degree attainable in three years rather than four. To do that you need to eliminate core requirements in subjects not connected to the major, but that requires being absolutely confident that the basics were learned in high school. As you point out, we’re not there yet. I substitute teach in the elementary level and it’s amazing how much basic math and grammar that should have been mastered by grade 3 is still being covered in grade 6. My own standards may sound draconian, but for example, as far as I’m concerned if you can’t spit out your single-digit multiplication tables by the end of 4th grade, you don’t pass 4th grade math (and 3rd grade would be even better). I’d like to consider abolishing the grade-level system in favor of an ability-level system, so if you’re a math whiz you might be in a class ahead of the average of your age group while you might be in a lower class for language arts if you struggle with that.
It turns out that Linda Darling-Hammond was Chair of New York State’s Council on Curriculum and Assessment in the early 1990s and was responsible for curriculum and state framework reforms that led to an overhaul of the Regents exams and innovations in school performance assessments.
<
p>I congratulate you on passing the MCAS exams – even as an adult. As you undoubtedly know, many of the elected officials did not do as well.
<
p>I do agree that there should be high-expectations of students as to skills and knowledge they should know to receive a diploma – BUT standardized testing is NOT the way to get there. Having to take these tests EVERY year from 3rd to 8th grade does not accomplish much – expect the ability to pass these tests! The fact remains that much class time is taken with test preparation – and teaching to the test. This does not get us any closer to ensuring our students have those so-called 21st century skills that employers are saying are desirable.
<
p>When I mentioned my annecdote with college freshman, I neglected to say that this was 15 years ago. Having high-stakes standardized testing in place has NOT improved things based on what Chancellor Motley said two weeks ago.
<
p>And while one can hope that public education could measure up to your private school education – we would ALL love to see that – you are basically comparing apples and oranges in terms of funding, incoming abilities of students, and educational philosophies.
<
p>Let’s put someone who has forward-looking views on public education in the top educational position in our country and perhaps we WILL move more towards the educational experience you were lucky to have.
<
p>Go on – sign the petition!
http://www.petitiononline.com/…
We need to get to the point where teaching the material and preparing for tests are not considered two different things. It seems to me that teaching material IS preparing for the test and if it isn’t then somewhere along the line the curriculum itself needs to be revamped. I also want to emphasize that the point is to pass these tests and NOT to get a perfect score. The tests should be wide-ranging enough that if your teacher didn’t get around to covering a particular lesson you might miss a couple of questions, but certainly not fail. Likewise you might answer a couple of questions correctly that your friend in the next room will miss because his teacher didn’t get to THAT lesson. I still think there’s some basic stuff you should just know so you don’t look like a complete idiot when Jay Leno approaches you for one of his “Jaywalking” segments. If you have a better way than testing I’d love to hear it, but for me it’s a very objective, one right answer method which procedurally seems quite easy. I for one made it a point not to take Kaplan or other test prep classes because my philosophy is that the best way to master the test is to simply know the material. Otherwise you give a manipulated picture of what you really know enough to have internalized.
<
p>As for the public/private dichotomy let’s make it work! My high school without its Catholic component and religion class requirement I’m sure could still teach every other subject at the same level it already does. I’m not sure what the overall spending per student difference is, but I suspect it is not higher than in the public schools. I know the public schools need to address all ability levels, but they should be allowed to permit advanced students to reach higher from the earliest grades. I firmly believe that the flip side of leaving no child behind is holding no child back, but programs to address that are often the first to be cut when the budget gets tight.
We already know that just trusting schools to do this all by their lonesome doesn’t work, which is why people insisted on the testing in the first place.
<
p>As between an independent test, and just trusting schools and teachers to self-assess, which is the least bad alternative? Is there some other underutilized method of achieving the same end?
<
p>One of the problems with public education is that, although dollars spent per student is generally quite a bit more than in private, and especially parochial, schools, a small fraction of those students consumes an awful lot of those resources, leaving not much for everyone else.
Test them with tasks that have students demonstrate they can apply what they’ve learned.
<
p>http://jonathan.mueller.facult…
<
p>And you bring up a very good point – a minority of students – those with learning disabilities, do often require higher cost teaching and other services. This comes out of the municipal or town budget. Private schools can pick and choose who they teach.
It can’t just be an exercise in “we’re all special.”
<
p>As for the funding issue, I really think that this is a bug, not a feature, of public schools. When 2 students cripple the education of 20, that is a disaster.
<
p>I’m not sure how to deal with that problem, as throwing ever greater sums of money at it manifestly does not work. At least for disciplinary issues, as opposed to special needs, there was a public school where I grew up (our part of the city had a half dozen or so high schools) to which problem kids could be expelled from the other “regular” schools. This certainly helped maintain quality education at the remainder of the schools. Not sure that this applies to things like towns that must spend tens of thousands of dollars a month transporting a special needs kid to some other place that has the necessary facilities for that kid.
The public schools are left with the money that does not have to be spent on those who flee. I send both of my children to a private school. VERY expensive. Very good traditional education.
<
p>Guess what. I get no tax break. The public school gets to keep the money which would have been spent on my two children and can spend it on those “minority of students” who may need more services.
<
p>I’m tired of being stamped as somehow “selfish” because by taking my children out of public schools I’m somehow diminishing the overall public school experience for others.
One of the consequences of high stakes tests such as MCAS is that subjects such as civics, art, sports, and even literature and history are often considered less than essential. Labs and other hands-on experiences and group projects are put aside in exchange for daily quizzes that promote rote learning. The effectiveness of Kaplan-style courses in elevating the scores of standardized tests is beyond question; however these are no substitute for teaching critical thinking and problem solving.
As a society that says it is committed to public education, we need to give our educators the support and resources they need to do their job effectively. There is no short cut here.
I signed the petition convinced that Darling-Hammond sees the problem from the perspective of a very competent educator.
He reports on the battle within Team Obama the same way I did: reform (Arne Duncan or Joel Klein) or strangled reform (Linda Darling-Hammond).
to mean what YOU want them to mean! It does not mean you are using the words correctly – or even that David Brooks is correct because he is published in the NY Times.
<
p>”Reform” as being used here is about standardized testing, privitization of public schools, and being against unions – none of which has been shown to actually IMPROVE teaching or the education of students in our public school students.
<
p>”Status quo” has been redefined to be the educators who are actually trying to improve the system.
<
p>In actuality, standardized testing IS the current status quo of our educational system.
<
p>As far as I can tell, the major interest of these so-called “reformers” (as you have defined the word) is increasing the profits of the testing industry, while giving lip service to improvement of education. Its a sleight of hand trick.
Fine, let’s step back from debate over what group gets to claim the word “reform.” I do think the mainstream media consistently does describe things as I’m saying — Michelle Rhee is defined by Time Magazine as reformer, etc, etc — but I agree for purposes of a back-and-forth it’s not a great starting point.
<
p>Let’s just simply define the policy issues that Obama’s Sec Ed will affect.
<
p>Today Jon Schnur, an advisor to Obama, spoke to a S. Boston room of perhaps 100 folks in MA K-12 world.
<
p>There are some controversies where Obama has forcefully staked a position.
<
p>This positions only came about after infighting among Obama advisors. Schnur in his remarks simply repeated what Obama’s final resolution of these issues, by citing what he said during the debates. I’m just relaying what Obama’s people are describing.
<
p>1. Pro or con merit pay for success in teaching, including using student gains as measured by standardized tests. Obama supports.
<
p>2. Pro or con standardized tests. Obama supports.
<
p>3. Pro or con NCLB focus on accountability for schools and districts, with the results on tests measured by standardized tests, disaggregation of data by race and class, and consequences including designating some schools as failing, etc. Obama supports.
<
p>Expansion to include additional standardized tests on some version of 21st century skills? Obama supports.
<
p>4. Pro or con expanding access to charter schools. Obama supports. Double the federal funding. Focus specifically on growth of schools with good track record.
<
p>Less controversial things any of the Ed Secs would support, but cost money that may or may not exist….
<
p>1. Expand pre-K
2. College affordability
3. Expand learning time (longer school day, year)
<
p>
Sorry for being obtuse here – but is the point you are making:
<
p> 1) given that these ARE Obama’s definitive positions and that they are indeed carved in stone – that we shouldn’t bother to get a person with a proven track record of improving teaching in schools as in the Sec. of Ed of position? I mean – that its a foregone conclusion that only someone that espouses these exact issues will be chosen – so we shouldn’t waste our time trying to change Obama’s mind?
<
p>Or perhaps
2) that there is no way that Obama would be open-minded enough to consider the evidence that high-stakes standardized testing does not lead to quality education – or indeed, any position that is not one of the stated positions above? SO again, we shouldn’t bother to try to get him to change his mind?
<
p>OR – were you trying to open the discussion to ask what others thought of these positions?