(03-30-2014 12:37 PM)Machiavelli Wrote:  In the 90's it was ALL at the state levels. State level initiatives.


and whoever said that your bright kids can breeze through it and your middle to lower levels will struggle hits the nail on the head. We spend 90% of our energy on the average to below average.

That would be the Contract with America.

(03-30-2014 12:37 PM)Machiavelli Wrote:  In the 90's it was ALL at the state levels. State level initiatives.


and whoever said that your bright kids can breeze through it and your middle to lower levels will struggle hits the nail on the head. We spend 90% of our energy on the average to below average.

The biggest crime of all is spending 80% of the time and money on the dumbest kids that walk through the doors. The brightest kids are all but ignored - they'll pass the test anyway. Talk about getting the results you incentivize.

If anyone wonders why the US is lagging educationally compared to other industrialized countries - this is it. Comparably, it's like a football team where the coaches spend all their time with all the worst players while ignoring all the best athletes...........then wondering why they get their a$$ whipped come game time.

I always compare it to the Navy Seals. There it's a source of pride when others quit before you. Can you imagine for a second what the uproar would be if you wanted everybody to pass a requirement of an elite unit? Then grade the drill instructor on how many of the recruits don't ring out????? It's absolutely crazy and back ass wards.

(03-30-2014 11:27 AM)Crebman Wrote:  

(03-30-2014 09:59 AM)QuestionSocratic Wrote:  There is a real conundrum inherent in this issue. To best address Common Core, we need to make a few basic assumptions that I hope that all parties can agree on.

1. Every child should be given the opportunity to obtain a quality education. Note I refer to equality of opportunity not equality of outcome.

2. We are spending a lot of taxpayer money on education and we should have some way of quantitatively evaluating the effectiveness and cost efficiency of funds expended.

3. Individual schools and teachers should be held to high standards for effectiveness and efficiency.

Given these assumptions, the only way we can achieve these goals is by standardized testing. Is this the best solution? Probably not but I don't see another alternative.

On the other hand, maybe we should simply abolish the Dep of Education and distribute the federal funds to the individual school districts via block grants. No this isn't perfect but this is the ideal behind federalism, ie. set the governmental administration as close to the people as possible.

I've got no issues with either 1 or 2. For me, 3 is where the differences of opinion will come in. IMO, holding teachers in an urban school and suburban school, for example, is where the difficulties begin.

Why, obviously the two sets of student populations are very different. Trying to hold the teachers and schools of these two very different student populations to the same standards will always fail. The urban schools will almost always fail to meet the standards and the suburban schools will meet them so easily that the suburban students won't actually be pushed nearly as far academically as they could be. That's one of the inherent problems of "one size fits all" methods of measuring school success or failure.

I don't disagree. But there are methods to account for the student population. I wouldn't suggest that it is necessary for every teacher to get his/her student's above some magical grade. But teachers should be able to demonstrate improvement. There is software available (I think it is from a company set up by former Washington DC school superintendent Michelle Rhee) that can track a student over time and establish an expectation profile for that student while considering all the demographic/economic factors.

I have an anecdote to explain. My daughter is a special education teacher in an inner city school. This year she got a 3rd grader who could not read at all. After 7 months, the boy is now able to read at the 1st grade level. Although the boy can't read at the desired 3rd grade level, he has made progress and this would be recognized in a longitudinal analysis.