Skip to main content

View Diary: Money Balling the Classroom (67 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  that's pretty much the (old) DOE spin (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    JerryNA, ladybug53

    but by grade 8 the number of kids at proficient is stagnant over the last decade. by beating on the teachers and the kids they goosed a lot of 1s to 2s.

    but its not learning.

    and they cut out so much - science, art, libraries, gym, afterschool all suffer under the constant stress

    meanwhile classsizes balloon, even in the lowest grades where its most needed.

    =
    and a direct effect is - 75% of all NYC Public School graduates who go onto CUNY end up in remedial classes.

    If they aren't ready for college, why are they given diplomas? To goose the numbers, I'll bet.

    •  well CUNY kinda is for remedial classes (0+ / 0-)

      I dont imagine they cut science as apparently their international rating in science increased significantly.

      Even if the rest of what you "claim" is true which I doubt. Id be glad to see them cut art, libraries, and gym in the same of better Reading, Math, and Science.

      ps just a FYI if your going to dispute the DOE stats, you may want to provide your own. Because right now your just a random person calming "I know better than than teh govment!! its all a conspiracy!!!!"

      •  that's a pretty snide remark (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        ladybug53

        1 NYC 8th grade Reading from US DOE - from 22% to 25% after a decade of this program

        NYC 8th grade math same story in math.

        NYC DOE was strutting around claiming claim test scores up 40%.

        2. they aren't teaching reading or math. they are just drilling.  and they're cutting science, libraries, art, gym everything.

        did you or your kids go to a school like that? 30 first graders in a room with one teacher, one day of gym per week and for only half the year?

        one or two months a year is wasted on this crap; it really wrecks learning.

        •  No kids (0+ / 0-)

          1) Your sources indicate that NYC went from a 4 point deficit to a 2 point premium, perhaps its smallish. but its an improvement. Improvements mean its better than before. So whatever were doing is a slight improvement from the old status quo.  Room for more improvement? Ya, but its at least moving in the right direction. It also makes sense that it will take much longer for a change in programs to have an effect on older students. If you fall behind you will stay behind.

          2)
          I would rather your story, than a break every half hour to go to recess, than the gym, than home economics, than tech class. than art. And get nothing done that will actually help build employable students in an academic day.

          •  there's no evidence that NCLB works (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            ladybug53, Compost On The Weeds

            or any of the other schemes, either - race to the top, common core. all of them were implemented with undue polticial haste and no controls.

            the trend is up across all the "trial urban districts" but there's no control to test it against - lots of things have changed over the last 15 years - less hard drug use, a slightly better economy for the poor (at least until 2008 but it was stronger at the crucial early development stages.

            It's just untested ideology.

            what is clear:

            1. most middle/upper class kids do a lot better than poor kids.

            They do as well as their peers in europe - there is no NATIONAL crisis.  certainly there are kids not getting enough education in poorer (urban and rural) districts

            2. All this testing is a terrible waste.  What new information do we learn from it?  And the kids get nothing, just test prep and then a week or two of substitutes while the other teachers are off. Nothing really.  But there is a huge cost to gathering the information - a month of every school year is wasted.  NAEP already tells us the score - kids in poor districts are doing not as well as kids in middle/upper class districts.

            3. More money is spent on the kids in wealthier districts, even before COLA-like allowances for increased costs of materials, buildings, etc in urban districts.

            4. Just blaming all the teachers in poor districts is crazy.  I know teachers who have moved from poor districts to wealthy districts.  Their kids' scores go from 1s and 2s (poor and basic) to 3s and 4s (proficient and exceeds).  Did the teachers magically transform when they transferred jobs?

            5. you can't really have critical thinking without a broad range of experience.  you have to see the narrowness of the curriculum.  eighth graders don't know any history, little about art or music.  and you can't think critically all the time - you need balance.

            its good for kids to run around some - they have a lot energy and the learn more when they've burned off the excess.

            •  Your statements are too broad and thus (0+ / 0-)

              guarantee you are wrong.

              For example

              "there's no evidence that NCLB works...."

              Not a big fan of anything Bushy did. But given the sheer scale of the program there is no way your statement is anything more than hyperbole.

              On anything that large there is a near 100% chance that there is at least some supporting evidence AND some contradicting evidence.

              "the trend is up across all the "trial urban districts" but there's no control to test it against - lots of things have changed over the last 15 years - "

              its virtually impossible to generate a 100% certain statistical study on this subject.

              However some places have done a rather ok job at it. NYC your own quoted example is one. Where apparently they have beaten the national average improvement by a meaningful margin.

              1) Yes poor kids do worse. No ones disagreeing with that
              "They do as well as their peers in europe - " No they do not. The one article pushing that, which was posted elsewhere was from someone who looks to be statistically illiterate.

              2)

              http://en.wikipedia.org/...

              Every other profession uses it in some way shape or form. Some people like to push that teaching is "OMG SPEICAL OMG DIFFERANT,"  That idea is....stupid.

              3) Ya? So?

              4) I blame teachers everywhere. Per dollar spent and per economic dollar of the students, U.S. students are under performing .

              There are many reasons social, economic, systematic. The current sub-par quality within academic staff is one of the problems.  Some people treat the staff issue as a sacred cow. You cant do that if you actually want to solve a problem.

              5)Yes balance is needed. By international standards the U.S. education is WAY off balance. You do need history etc. But we spend WAY more time proportionally on that kind of education than our peers

              http://www.obhe.ac.uk/...

              You want to know why China and India are displacing the U.S. as the sole world economic power? Look
              at the graph "STEM degrees as % of all degrees in 2011"

              The world does not need 87% non stem graduates like the U.S.  It needs at least 41% stem graduates like China.

              And people wonder why have the employment rate we do lol.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site