So I decided to start the education and school vent/discussion thread mentioned in Confessions. DD is sick today so we are having a "lazy butt" day of cartoons and iphone games so I'm not exactly overwhelmed with work at the moment.
To start things off I will post a little more information on the revision of NCLB that was mentioned in the other thread. It seemed there wasn't much understanding of what has happened with that. Here is an excerpt of Pres. Obama's speech on the subject.
This is why, in my State of the Union address this year, I said that Congress should reform the No Child Left Behind law based on the principles that have guided Race to the Top.
And I want to say the goals behind No Child Left Behind were admirable, and President Bush deserves credit for that. Higher standards are the right goal. Accountability is the right goal. Closing the achievement gap is the right goal. And we’ve got to stay focused on those goals. But experience has taught us that, in it’s implementation, No Child Left Behind had some serious flaws that are hurting our children instead of helping them. Teachers too often are being forced to teach to the test. Subjects like history and science have been squeezed out. And in order to avoid having their schools labeled as failures, some states, perversely, have actually had to lower their standards in a race to the bottom instead of a Race to the Top. They don't want to get penalized? Let’s make sure that the standards are so low that we’re not going to be seen failing to meet them. That makes no sense.
And these problems have been obvious to parents and educators all over the country for years now. Despite the good intentions of some -- two of them are sitting right here, Tom and George -- Congress has not been able to fix these flaws so far. I’ve urged Congress for a while now, let’s get a bipartisan effort, let’s fix this. Congress hasn’t been able to do it. So I will. Our kids only get one shot at a decent education. They cannot afford to wait any longer. So, given that Congress cannot act, I am acting. (Applause.)
So starting today, we’ll be giving states more flexibility to meet high standards. Keep in mind, the change we’re making is not lowering standards; we’re saying we’re going to give you more flexibility to meet high standards. We’re going to let states, schools and teachers come up with innovative ways to give our children the skills they need to compete for the jobs of the future. Because what works in Rhode Island may not be the same thing that works in Tennessee -– but every student should have the same opportunity to learn and grow, no matter what state they live in.
Let me repeat: This does not mean that states will be able to lower their standards or escape accountability. In fact, the way we’ve structured this, if states want more flexibility, they’re going to have to set higher standards, more honest standards, that prove they’re serious about meeting them.
Anyway, as soon as I sit down to post this DD is hollering about something in the other room. So, off I go.
Good judgement comes from experience, and most of that comes from bad judgement. -From a bumper sticker I saw once
Thanks, Tracy. I'm interested in talking about education. Not only how we can reverse the effects of NCLB, but what we as parents can do to support and help our children academically.
I'll be honest, I'm really lucky. My DD is in 1st, but is advanced. She's very good in math and has skipped two grade levels in it (she goes to another class for math). But overall, she "gets" school and loves it. So we try to find ways to enhance that. Since she's loving math, we also do lots of Math workbooks (from the bookstore) home to do when she's bored or we need her to sit down (and shut up! lol). One of her favorite things is to go on the computer and do Khan Academy math. If you don't know Khan, check it out. It has sets of problems that get progressively harder, and videos and hints to help when problems arise.
DH love it and DD thinks of it as computer play time. There's no stress involved and we don't "make" her do it, we just offer it when we think the time suits. She's also advanced in reading, but we haven't found anything that is fun and progressive for her other than reading chapter books. There must be something cool out there, right?
Arrena Ruth 08.07.05 Julian Mitchell 08.01.08 America is the only country to go from barbarism to decadence without civilization in between ~ Oscar Wilde
Thanks for posting that Tracy. I did not even know he said all that, and I teach. I agree with everything he said. NCLB perhaps began with it's heart in the right place, but was poorly thought out and causes students and teachers so much stress with it's impossible standards. I hope that the changes will actually help get us back on the right track. I have kids that make amazing progress every year (like not even knowing their name at the start of school, but reading simple words by the end), but they get no credit for all the progress they make because it doesn't fit what someone thinks they should know.
I have been very interested to read what parents around the country think about homework and the structure of the school day.
I have been looking at schedule information for the school DD is going to next year as a kindergartener. The kindergarten program seems really innovative, and even first grade looks okay, but after that they pretty much spend the whole day doing math and reading. Hours and hours of math! I would have been miserable in a school like that, and it has me really worried. I don't think they start having any social studies time until 5th or 6th grade. Craziness.
Eve Eleanor arrived June 5, 2007
Graham Alexander arrived February 27, 2010
I find our education system very interesting and often disheartening.
My kids aren't in school yet, so I only go by what friends and family experience, along with having a whole family of educators.
For my kids, I want there to be fun at school. I want recess and social time and seasonal activities that tie to education. I want fun science experiments starting in kinder and art and music and PE. I want them to learn about the world beyond a location on a map and the capital cities. I there to be parental involvement and good communication. I want the teachers to enjoy their jobs and be able to go home to their lives after school. I want them to be paid fairly for the work that they do and I want them to work hard for the salary they are paid.
But I also understand that we have a massive gap in education throughout this country. How do we reach the children that come into kinder never having had a book read to them, not knowing their letters or numbers or how to write their names. How do we help the kids that go home to an empty house with parents who don't or can't understand new math or proper grammar? I think NCLB was the first program to really try and address this gap and I give them credit for the idea, but boy did the implementation of it suck.
Interesting article. I do hate the comparisons to other countries, though, because I don't at all understand how we fall so far behind these other countries when most of us parents are here (or in the other thread or even in conversations I've had IRL) lamenting about how we feel our kids are given to much work, not having enough fun, learning to read at such an early age, learning "algebra" in 1st grade, learning to count money in 1st grade, etc. WHAT are they teaching these kids in these other countries and when are they teaching it to them that we are falling so far behind? I just cannot comprehend it. I just recently read an article titled "Occupy the Classroom" that basically said what we're missing the mark on in this country is early education. It doesn't relate that to other countries, but it speaks to the fact that many children do not have access to it. This was something President Obama campaigned on and then it was dropped. I would like to see it brought to the table again. Perhaps, public school should start at pre-k and not K? If you read the comments in the article I linked, a poster from Germany says kindergarten starts at age 3 there and it's all about socialization. She then goes on to say that Finland does not introduce reading until age 7! So, if we are teaching our kids to read at age 5 in this country, where is the disconnect? I just don't get it.
Boiler - DS1 has fun -- he has PE 2x a week, music 2x a week, art once per week, a visit to the computer lab and library once a week each, recess every day. They also have done two field trips, one fun (pumpkin patch with hay ride) and one educational (butterfly garden). But they are expecting a lot more from each child (and therefore the family) and teach at a much faster pace than what I remember.
I do believe we could make some improvements in school and therefore improve education somewhat, but it's all about family involvement. This is something that the law nor the school system can do anything about. I have to help my first grader read the instructions for his 2-3 homework items each night (they're not written at a first grade level) and I help him do the extra reading and math projects he has signed up to do (it is suggested that parents help).
How can we expect children without the family support to keep up with everything they ask of us now? How can they put that on the teachers?
I didn't even know he gave a speech on education recently. I'll be real interested to see exactly what is this new "flexibility".
Interesting article. I do hate the comparisons to other countries, though, because I don't at all understand how we fall so far behind these other countries when most of us parents are here (or in the other thread or even in conversations I've had IRL) lamenting about how we feel our kids are given to much work, not having enough fun, learning to read at such an early age, learning "algebra" in 1st grade, learning to count money in 1st grade, etc. WHAT are they teaching these kids in these other countries and when are they teaching it to them that we are falling so far behind? I just cannot comprehend it. I just recently read an article titled "Occupy the Classroom" that basically said what we're missing the mark on in this country is early education. It doesn't relate that to other countries, but it speaks to the fact that many children do not have access to it. This was something President Obama campaigned on and then it was dropped. I would like to see it brought to the table again. Perhaps, public school should start at pre-k and not K? If you read the comments in the article I linked, a poster from Germany says kindergarten starts at age 3 there and it's all about socialization. She then goes on to say that Finland does not introduce reading until age 7! So, if we are teaching our kids to read at age 5 in this country, where is the disconnect? I just don't get it.
Because children truly need social skills to be able to learn well. I used to teach in the inner city, and many of those children do not know how to conduct themselves in a classroom and get along with other children. If the children do not attend to a lesson because they are goofing off because they have not learned how to control their bodies and focus their minds then they won't be able to learn. Part of what allows children to learn well is the active play they get when they are toddlers and preschoolers. Children are actively learning from their parents and caregivers at those early ages and learning many social behaviors to help them succeed in school even if they are not being taught truly academic lessons. Children in impoverished environments do not get that same type of active, play and engagement in home from their caregivers so they are lacking in the social, language, cognitive skill preset that is necessary to academic success. They spend way too much time in front of the television or being taken care of older siblings who shouldn't be expected to parent and provide a stimulating environment for a younger sibling.
Children do not need to read at an early age to have success in later life. Two of the smartest people I know in life didn't learn reading until first grade. The push to read at an early age comes at price because many children are not developed enough with their brain and eyes to learn that early. So when they don't learn in Kindy they end up feeling badly about themselves which in turn will end up influencing their ability to read bc they have a negative view on reading. Whereas, if children from impoverished enviroments were first introduced with reading through storytelling and playing, they would view reading in a positive light which give them more motivation to read on their own at a later age when they have a greater chance of success.
I don't think you can compare the parents on CC to the general population. We've done polls time and again that show we're significantly more educated than average and our incomes also tend to be above avg. That would lead me to the conclusion that we're in better funded districts/schools and that our children are not the average performers.
I agree 100% with that article. I think if we reached disadvantage kids earlier, tried to close the gap as best we can earlier, it would relieve some of the pressure later on to focus so much on testing. But our schools also need more funding to do any of this and that's a whole different topic.
I don't think you can compare the parents on CC to the general population. We've done polls time and again that show we're significantly more educated than average and our incomes also tend to be above avg. That would lead me to the conclusion that we're in better funded districts/schools and that our children are not the average performers.
I agree 100% with that article. I think if we reached disadvantage kids earlier, tried to close the gap as best we can earlier, it would relieve some of the pressure later on to focus so much on testing. But our schools also need more funding to do any of this and that's a whole different topic.
There is a longitudinal, study done in Hawaii (from what I remember) that showed a program from infancy had a significant improvement on child's IQ, education level, number of future children compared to the children in a Headstart program and children with no preschool program. Headstart and no preschool had no difference in long term impact. In addition, the program greatly reduced the number of children the mothers had because they learned how to be engaged parents, and realized it is hard work having children and realized it was smarter to have fewer children. The mothers in the program received parental training, had someone come in the home to help them improve their home life, and had a daycare during the day for the babies and toddlers and preschoolers. There is evidence to show what works, and it's ignored by the policy makers becuase it would be too much money. I believe it would save our country money in the long run.
Education and school discussion, venting welcome!
Originally Posted by boilermaker
