Here is an article summarizing OBama's grant plan for education.
I have a better idea. What if the money was given to the schools that needed it directly? Then they could fix up buildings, hire more staff, buy new books and other aids and possibly catch up with the funding the suburban schools get.
Wait, that wouldn't make sense.
It saddens me that the Democrats are just following along the Republican trail as far as education is concerned. Its not going to help. Not in the long run.
The brilliant thing is this is aimed at "stopping dropping out" but most of the money is headed to high school kids, some to junior high.
That's great, but the seeds of eventual dropping out are usually planted much earlier than even the 6th grade.
Can you tell I've been reading a bit on the issues and inequities of the American Education System lately?
Oh, and notice how I'm not saying "its cause the teachers suck!"
Showing posts with label education. Show all posts
Showing posts with label education. Show all posts
Monday, March 1, 2010
Wednesday, February 24, 2010
So It Begins...
Ahh, the lovely fallout of NCLB begins.
So, the theory is, fire all the teachers, hire back no more than 50% of them. Bring in new teachers (at least 50% of your teachers will be new) and watch test scores....improve? Really? Maybe they will, lots can be done if you drill for the tests, but I honestly can't see it helping improve the 50% dropout rate.
Let me see if I understand this. EVERY teacher is bad enough to deserve to be fired, but up to 50% MIGHT be good enough to hire back? Why does this make no logical sense to me?
Another story says the principal wants to lengthen the school day AND thinks the teachers should offer extra tutoring to the students. Note, this is a "tiny impoverished city" so I could bet the school is underfunded already. I'm doubting the teachers were in for much of a raise for all the time invested.
Now, one COULD say "Oh, to save their jobs they should put in the time for free." Well, that is one way of looking at it.
Obviously it is by someone who knows nothing about the average teacher's workday. Teachers at underfunded schools are frequently required to put in MORE hours for less pay, just because they have less to work on.
I'm betting, and I could be wrong, but I'm betting if the school was funded at say, 90% of the richest public school in Rhode Island the results would be different.
Sure, the drop out rate might be higher than more affluent communities, but I bet they could get it up with more manpower.
In the military, they talk about "boots on the ground." How many people are actually there to do the mission.
Well, that needs to start happening in education. We need more boots on the ground. More aides, more librarians, more teachers, to help these kids.
I'm not saying all these teachers were great. There were probably some who were bad, some who were great, many who were in the middle.
Firing them all is not going to solve the schools problems. Nor is more stringent testing requirements.
I won't even start on how the Education Secretary put his two cents of praise in.
These people are clueless. And they are running the show.
Scary.
So, the theory is, fire all the teachers, hire back no more than 50% of them. Bring in new teachers (at least 50% of your teachers will be new) and watch test scores....improve? Really? Maybe they will, lots can be done if you drill for the tests, but I honestly can't see it helping improve the 50% dropout rate.
Let me see if I understand this. EVERY teacher is bad enough to deserve to be fired, but up to 50% MIGHT be good enough to hire back? Why does this make no logical sense to me?
Another story says the principal wants to lengthen the school day AND thinks the teachers should offer extra tutoring to the students. Note, this is a "tiny impoverished city" so I could bet the school is underfunded already. I'm doubting the teachers were in for much of a raise for all the time invested.
Now, one COULD say "Oh, to save their jobs they should put in the time for free." Well, that is one way of looking at it.
Obviously it is by someone who knows nothing about the average teacher's workday. Teachers at underfunded schools are frequently required to put in MORE hours for less pay, just because they have less to work on.
I'm betting, and I could be wrong, but I'm betting if the school was funded at say, 90% of the richest public school in Rhode Island the results would be different.
Sure, the drop out rate might be higher than more affluent communities, but I bet they could get it up with more manpower.
In the military, they talk about "boots on the ground." How many people are actually there to do the mission.
Well, that needs to start happening in education. We need more boots on the ground. More aides, more librarians, more teachers, to help these kids.
I'm not saying all these teachers were great. There were probably some who were bad, some who were great, many who were in the middle.
Firing them all is not going to solve the schools problems. Nor is more stringent testing requirements.
I won't even start on how the Education Secretary put his two cents of praise in.
These people are clueless. And they are running the show.
Scary.
Tuesday, February 16, 2010
Something to Ponder
I learned today that the Supreme Court ruled that a quality education was not something gaurenteed by the Constitution.
Merely adequate education.
Just consider that.
Its not a right, but the government has mandated higher standards year after year and punish teachers and schools who do not reach artificial benchmarks.
Brilliant. Just brilliant.
Merely adequate education.
Just consider that.
Its not a right, but the government has mandated higher standards year after year and punish teachers and schools who do not reach artificial benchmarks.
Brilliant. Just brilliant.
Thursday, January 10, 2008
Presidential Legacies
Bush is starting his tour of the Middle East with a stop in Israel and Palestine before heading to other nations in the area. Hmm...a president in the last year of his term, trying to make peace between the Israelis and Palestinians. Don't I remember Clinton doing something like this?
Trust me, I'd love peace in the Middle East as much as anyone, but I'm realistic. These hatreds go back THOUSANDS of years, they aren't just going to make nice overnight. Especially with the tit-for-tat of mortar attacks, rocket attacks, helicopter attacks, settlers in captured territory, going ON and ON and ON. So, please, feel free to try Mr. Bush, but don't expect too much.
I find it odd with the way the economic outlook is in the US that Bush is taking the time to do this now. Is he worried about his "legacy" as President? He shouldn't be. He'll rank up there with the best of the bad ones. That is assured. Not even peace in the Middle East will overcome that.
On Bush and the economy, I realize the President gets too much credit for good times and too much blame for the bad, but...how often does he really address where the country is headed economically? He's pretty laissez-faire when it comes to business, which has done great things for the home market. Yes, the companies screwed themselves, but that's why we need a watchdog with TEETH to say, "Hey, they make $50,000 a year and already are heavily in debt, they can't really afford a $300,000 home!"
Or the disaster he's made of the public education system with NCLB. Sure, Congress passed it (foolishly) but it's been Bush's baby since day one. In an assembly plant, where you control the product coming in, you will never, ever reach 100% quality. So why, in a school system, where you have NO control over the "product" (child) coming in, are they expected to have 100% quality (achievement) by 2014. That's so ridiculous you just have to cry!
Instead of punishing struggling schools by taking away money, why not spend more money on real school counselors? Not schedulers, but people who actually counsel students. Emotional issues (frequently brought on by home problems) are a HUGE reason why kids aren't learning. Sure, some of its the teachers, some of its the curriculum, but the best teacher on earth can't reach a kid that just doesn't care or who is so traumatized by their home situation.
Yes, I deviated from my initial point (big surprise), but not really. Bush is in the Middle East attempting to patch things up after really really making a mess of things, even by the standards of the region. But, his legacy will always be tarnished not just by the damage he has done abroad, which is plenty, but the damage done on his watch at home. Is it all his fault? Of course not. I helped vote in a Democratic Congress that has done NOTHING. I blame them too. And no, it hasn't just been because of Republican stonewalling. (How many hours were wasted nailing Alberto Gonzalez? I didn't like the guy, but come on, you have a country to run people!) I guess I would just say to Bush, enjoy your trip, come home, and maybe attempt to do some good in your last year as President.
Trust me, I'd love peace in the Middle East as much as anyone, but I'm realistic. These hatreds go back THOUSANDS of years, they aren't just going to make nice overnight. Especially with the tit-for-tat of mortar attacks, rocket attacks, helicopter attacks, settlers in captured territory, going ON and ON and ON. So, please, feel free to try Mr. Bush, but don't expect too much.
I find it odd with the way the economic outlook is in the US that Bush is taking the time to do this now. Is he worried about his "legacy" as President? He shouldn't be. He'll rank up there with the best of the bad ones. That is assured. Not even peace in the Middle East will overcome that.
On Bush and the economy, I realize the President gets too much credit for good times and too much blame for the bad, but...how often does he really address where the country is headed economically? He's pretty laissez-faire when it comes to business, which has done great things for the home market. Yes, the companies screwed themselves, but that's why we need a watchdog with TEETH to say, "Hey, they make $50,000 a year and already are heavily in debt, they can't really afford a $300,000 home!"
Or the disaster he's made of the public education system with NCLB. Sure, Congress passed it (foolishly) but it's been Bush's baby since day one. In an assembly plant, where you control the product coming in, you will never, ever reach 100% quality. So why, in a school system, where you have NO control over the "product" (child) coming in, are they expected to have 100% quality (achievement) by 2014. That's so ridiculous you just have to cry!
Instead of punishing struggling schools by taking away money, why not spend more money on real school counselors? Not schedulers, but people who actually counsel students. Emotional issues (frequently brought on by home problems) are a HUGE reason why kids aren't learning. Sure, some of its the teachers, some of its the curriculum, but the best teacher on earth can't reach a kid that just doesn't care or who is so traumatized by their home situation.
Yes, I deviated from my initial point (big surprise), but not really. Bush is in the Middle East attempting to patch things up after really really making a mess of things, even by the standards of the region. But, his legacy will always be tarnished not just by the damage he has done abroad, which is plenty, but the damage done on his watch at home. Is it all his fault? Of course not. I helped vote in a Democratic Congress that has done NOTHING. I blame them too. And no, it hasn't just been because of Republican stonewalling. (How many hours were wasted nailing Alberto Gonzalez? I didn't like the guy, but come on, you have a country to run people!) I guess I would just say to Bush, enjoy your trip, come home, and maybe attempt to do some good in your last year as President.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)