O.T. Education(Parents please respond!)

[GrantDawg]

Originally posted by albionmoonlight

4.) Do NOT use the tests to determine which schools get more or less money. Its perverse to "reward" bad schools, but it also does not make sense to throw more money at the schools that are doing fine.

I have a problem with this practice, too. Is the best way to improve a failing school to REDUCE the money it is getting?

What I think is seriously needed is to get more money out of the administration and in the classroom.

[Anrhydeddu]

JW, good to see you again my old friend. If you come around here more, maybe I wouldn't get as many old man cracks.

Regarding this issue, I am agreeing with Cam philosophically and JW on a more personal and local level.

My little boy goes to public school and just like any business, we see good performance and bad performance. There absolutely needs to be a choice for any and all parents to give their child the best education possible within their area and means. Also, I fully believe in that bad performance (teachers) needs to be held accountable and just like with my job, if I don't measure up, I get canned. I see the union being a barrier to those two beliefs. It is perceived they rather protect their members, not concerning with performance (which is my beef in general with unions) and two, that they are not willing to support vouchers and school choice/competition is determental to many children and their families.

[Butter]

Originally posted by Anrhydeddu
Also, I fully believe in that bad performance (teachers) needs to be held accountable and just like with my job, if I don't measure up, I get canned.

It is perceived they rather protect their members, not concerning with performance (which is my beef in general with unions)....

I agree that unions tend to protect members regardless of how abysmal their work performance is, but hardly feel that is a damning case against unions. The good they do on behalf of the group largely outweighs the bad in most cases.

[revrew]

I am in complete agreement with Cam on the nation-wide, systemic effect the N.E.A. has on public education. On the local level, if the NEA's legal and financial backing enables teachers to resolve unsatisfactory working conditions, great!

But the NEA's (which, I've been told, is the nation's largest political lobbying group) political activity is shameful. The actual good of the children has been sacrificed for the advancement of the public school system (now, perhaps the NEA thinks a great public school system IS best for the the children. In which case, it would be inappropriate of me to criticize their character. Just because you're wrong doesn't mean you have poor character). The NEA has been a massive political lobbyist against school vouchers, private school cooperation, parental choice, and homeschooling. Any of these intiatives have benefits many families could capitalize on for their childrens' good, but the NEA has opposed them categorically. Why? Either the NEA thinks only public education is feasible (which I contend is either mistaken or socialist--either way, wrong) or the financial benefit of their members outweighs their resolve for the childrens' greater good.
Since I'm not a member, I can't say which.

On the local level, I agree that parental involvement is the key to successful education. And not just academic education, but moral, social, and functional education as well. If parents abdicate their responsibilty to their children (either giving it away to schools, religious institutions, their childrens' peers, or television), all society suffers.

Therefore, I suggest the answers lie not within the teachers and local schools. Solutions will come only when 1. political machinations are put aside to allow involved parents to make the best choices for their children, 2. Social influences convince parents to care more for their children than themselves. and 3. Our religions and faiths can turn their redemptive and restorative powers toward enabling people to become the kind of parents God intended.

(BTW, I feel it is only fair, for the purposes of discussion to disclose that my wife and I homeschool our 8 children. I don't want to start a discussion on homeschooling, but felt it only fair to let you know where I'm coming from.)

[Easy Mac]

WHat happened to the days where if you want the best for your family, you pay for it. Why should I have to help fund your kids enrollment in private schools? Damn, if you want your kids to do well, do something about. I shouldn't have to foot the bill for their well-being, be a parent for christs sake.

[panerd]

Once again I will preface by stating that I am not a member of the NEA. However, let me take this accountablity issue head-on with a true story. Several years ago a friend of mine who teaches in a low-income rural district was sent by her principal to my school to discuss with our teachers on how she could raise her school's test scores. (We are a relaitvily high income school) So we discussed all of these different stratagies for why our kids score so well. Last year, my friend got a job at a middle school in the second richest school district in the state of Missouri. To make a long story short my school just got done visiting her to find out what we can do to raise our test scores to their level!

This is what everyone wants to use to hold teachers accountable, test scores. So how did my friend go from being a poor teacher who needed help to a great teacher that could help everyone else? She went to a school that has a higher SES. If I quit my job in my high performing school district and go work for the Public Schools of St. Louis do I all of a sudden become half the teacher I once was? Of course not, but my test scores will be cut in half! The problem that most teachers have with government accountablity and school vouchers is that they are all based on test scores. Who cares if my kids can actually apply any of the math they learn in sixth grade? If they shade in the correct bubbles everything is great. But if they do poorly on one assessment the whole world has gone to shit.

So the NEA opposes a lot of the programs you all have discussed for this very reason. Would you rather I teach your kids something useful that they will use later in life (which is what I strive to do) or do you want me teaching to the test? Unfortunatly all of the recent proposals to better education are just forcing a lot of teachers to teach to a test so their school looks good and is approopriatly funded.

Please feel free to respond as I am willing to debate this till I am blue in the face. Are there shitty teachers the NEA defends? Absolutely! Does the NEA take politcal stands that I don't agree with? You bet! That is why I am not a member. But to paint a picture that unions are the cancer destroying public education is a huge stretch. It is the politicians who think that everything in life has to be subjectivly measured by some sort of tool. And I think most of us on this board see that this just isn't true.

[ColtCrazy]

I think there's been a educational thread like this some time way in the past.

Anyway, since I'm a teacher, guess I should respond.

There's a multitude of problems with education, so we'll start with:

1. teachers. There are idiot teachers in this world. I've worked with some. I know some. Thankfully, I've seen some retire. The joke is those that can't, teach. Well, it should be "those that can't, could teach" There are a lot of qualified teachers out there, but there are those that just collect paychecks as well. There needs to be more rigorous requirements for teachers. I don't mean more lesson plans and busy work papers. They throw enough of those at you at college. I mean actual testing. Are these teachers smart enough to teach 5th grade math? You'd be surprised. I know I'm a rarity when I say this, but teachers should be tested. That would help out a lot.

2. Parents. I have good kids. 9 times out of 10, they have parents that care. The same rule applies to those that are bad. Sure, there's always a great kid making it against the odds and a spoiled brat with parents that have all the resources in the world, but parents need to be educated to understand the value of an education. They also need basic parenting skills. I had a parent tell me this year "I can't make them do their homework, they just run out to play" Uh....you are an ADULT. They are 9. Yes, you can make them do their homework.

3. Funding. Sadly, this one is the least likely to be fixed. Bush's No Child Left Behind Act puts some tougher, and more frequent, testing in place. However, schools don't have the money for remediation programs for struggling students. It's all a catch 22. We want better teachers, yet there's no money in many state budgets for even simple wage increases. In our state, many districts will either have no raise, not even a 1-2% cost of living increase, or will RIF several teachers in the district.

There are good public schools out there. Even good public schools outside of rich districts. But they face problems, many of which could get worse before they get better.

[panerd]

Originally posted by CamEdwards

How dare parents think they can meddle in their kid's school simply because they're taxpayers.

I still stick by my little gem. I don't think it is your right to meddle in every aspect of my job just becuase I am paid by your tax money. You sound like a very supportive parent who is very involved in their child's education. Most of the kids parents who I teach are like you. I care very mocuh about my job and about my students and I think we would get along very well. However, my problem is with the parents who allow their kids to take no responsibilites whatsoever and then come after the teachers and schools when their kids don't perform well. So maybe I didn't word my original post as well as I should, but my point is the same. Just because I work for the state doesn't give every person the right to meddle in every part of my job. Public education is starting to become like a restaurant where the customer is always right. And I am sorry, but sometimes the customer is just plain wrong.

[revrew]

As a homeschooler, right now I pay for your children to go to school...(okay, not yours. But I'm payin' taxes to send Iowa's children to public school.) The idea that we all pay for everybody's children, but parents don't have the choice on where the children go to school is no more just. In fact, it costs around $5,000 a year to public school a student. If even half of that money was given in a voucher, it would SAVE the tax payers money ($2500 to be exact) AND many parents would be able to choose alternative schooling.

[revrew]

panerd,

I'll rip on the NEA till I'm blue in the face as well. But not over the issue of testing you bring up. The problems with teacher testing are manifold and you make a good point.

My beef with the NEA is over countering parental choice in education and their war against homeschooling.

[CamEdwards]

Originally posted by panerd
I still stick by my little gem. I don't think it is your right to meddle in every aspect of my job just becuase I am paid by your tax money. You sound like a very supportive parent who is very involved in their child's education. Most of the kids parents who I teach are like you. I care very mocuh about my job and about my students and I think we would get along very well. However, my problem is with the parents who allow their kids to take no responsibilites whatsoever and then come after the teachers and schools when their kids don't perform well. So maybe I didn't word my original post as well as I should, but my point is the same. Just because I work for the state doesn't give every person the right to meddle in every part of my job. Public education is starting to become like a restaurant where the customer is always right. And I am sorry, but sometimes the customer is just plain wrong.

Panerd, I'll refer you to the new topic I started (poor noop's topic was getting threadjacked with all this union talk)... but I have to say, if a teacher ever told me that "Just because I work for the state doesn't give you the right to meddle in every part of my job." I'd report his/her ass to the school board in a heartbeat. It's not the fact that I'm a taxpayer... it's the fact that it's my kid you're teaching.

Oh! An aside to Easy Mac... you're already paying to send my kids to school. Why wouldn't you want that money to be better spent?

[Butter]

Originally posted by revrew
As a homeschooler, right now I pay for your children to go to school...(okay, not yours. But I'm payin' taxes to send Iowa's children to public school.) The idea that we all pay for everybody's children, but parents don't have the choice on where the children go to school is no more just. In fact, it costs around $5,000 a year to public school a student. If even half of that money was given in a voucher, it would SAVE the tax payers money ($2500 to be exact) AND many parents would be able to choose alternative schooling.

It's your CHOICE to home school. Bugs you so much that you're not getting anything to show for your tax money, send your kids to public school. And it's my belief that tax money should not go to private schools, period. If you want to send your kid to a private school, go ahead. But don't ask the large majority to pay for it.

[ColtCrazy]

Sending them to a new school, as I've said in another thread, is just moving the problem around. The private school will become more crowded, unable to respond to the new demand. Private schools are not better because they have better teachers, that's not even close. Private schools rank higher academically because of the rules they can enforce that public schools can't, not to mention they cater to a higher income base, for the most part.

[revrew]

Butter, it doesn't bug me much at all. You're right, I chose to homeschool, regardless of what happens with the money.

My point was simply in contrast to EasyMacs, that everyone is paying for this government program, whether we use it or not. Griping that a person is paying taxes to send someone else to private school is no less just or fair than all those (the childless included) who currently pay to send kids to public school.

If the tax money goes to educating the children, why does it matter what building they are educated in?

The "large majority" -- i.e. singles, children, seniors, those whose children are grown, the childless -- are already paying to send the minority's children to school.

[panerd]

Originally posted by revrew
Butter, it doesn't bug me much at all. You're right, I chose to homeschool, regardless of what happens with the money.

My point was simply in contrast to EasyMacs, that everyone is paying for this government program, whether we use it or not. Griping that a person is paying taxes to send someone else to private school is no less just or fair than all those (the childless included) who currently pay to send kids to public school.

If the tax money goes to educating the children, why does it matter what building they are educated in?

The "large majority" -- i.e. singles, children, seniors, those whose children are grown, the childless -- are already paying to send the minority's children to school.

I tend to agree with most of what are you posting on this topic, so I hope you won't take this too personally. (Contrary to the teacher unions, I have no problems with homeschooling at all. I worry about them getting a one-sided education on certain topics and the absense of socializing with other children. But I can't blame your intnetion)

However, can't your same arguement be misapplied to other state and federal government programs like roads and law enforcement. i.e. "Why is my road unpaved? Shouldn't the government give every single person the best roads possible?"

[Franklinnoble]

Huked on fonix wurked for me.

[Anrhydeddu]

Originally posted by revrew
panerd,

I'll rip on the NEA till I'm blue in the face as well. But not over the issue of testing you bring up. The problems with teacher testing are manifold and you make a good point.

My beef with the NEA is over countering parental choice in education and their war against homeschooling.

I agree totally. I don't have a solution for accountability because test scores and standards should only be a small part, not the main criteria. I just don't understand how they can be against homeschooling when you take a look at a majority of the results of homeschooled kids. Can it be they really don't care about good results, regardless how they come about?

[albionmoonlight]

Choice is good, but only if parents can afford to send their students to the schools to which they choose to send them.

I would like a system where charter schools/home schools/alternative schools/vouchers are encouraged. Then, the schools are tested and the results are made public WITHOUT additional consequence.

Let's say then that you had schools spring up with different foci. Some are art intensive; some are math academies; some teach multiple languages; some incorporate one week per month of public service into the curriculum; some incorporate physical/athletic development into academic education; some are what we think of as "normal" schools. The list is as endless as the imagination and dedication of creative people can make it.

Test scores would be a way for parents to evaluate the schools. (I might be willing to send my kid to the "math academy," but not if those kids are not learning ANY language skills.) But a school that is, say, a music school will not feel pressure to teach to the math test. They are offering a product to the parents and, as long as the parents are happy with it, that is enough.

In this way, I support vouchers because they would allow more choice (some of the schools could have a religious focus). But, as I said before, vouchers would have to be a REAL choice. They could not just be a way for upper and middle class people to get a tuition break on private schools. They would have to be incorporated with an expensive transportation system so that the bottom of the SES scale could take full advantage of the system.

Studies have shown that part of the problem with low achieving kids is low expectations. Quick example--teacher has honors class: He designs creative and challenging hands-on assignments designed to push the kids to their limits. The kids, not surprisingly, stay interested--reinforcing the idea that they are smart kids. Teacher has "low track" students--he designs boring rote memorization lesson plan on the theory that they may as well learn something. The kids get bored and do not do well--reinforcing the idea that they are "low track" kids.

A choice plan will mix students and allow all students--no matter what their SES--to find a school that is right for them.

Of course, some students will not have parents that care even enough to take advantage of free public information and free public transportation and/or vouchers to find the best place for their kid. I don't know of any constitutional way of helping those kids.

[Anrhydeddu]

Charter Schools, imo, is by far the best solution. A public school with very high standards. I had my son enrolled in a great one but his disability (ADHD) prevented him from continuing with that, unfortunately.

[CamEdwards]

What's really funny is that the NEA's main problem with charter schools is their lack of accountability.

And if it's impossible to judge the ability of teachers... someone better tell the NEA to stop naming "Teachers of the Year".

[EagleFan]

I have to disagree with panerd to an extent on parents not meddling in teachers jobs. While there is a line that should be drawn in the sand, there has to be some accountability since you are teaching their kids.

Where I went to school we had one teacher removed because of parents meddling. He was someone who had no business being in teaching as it was. We ran the classroom and not him. At the time we hated seeing him go but now looking back I know it was the best thing for us.

There are extremes that can't be taken though. A friend's sister is a teacher and she gave a student detention for flipping her off in class and telling her to 'suck his d#$%' when she called on him to answer a question (she teaches third grade which makes this even more depressing). His mother storms into the class as he is about to take his detention, grabs his arm and tells the teacher to 'f$#@ off' because he is not staying for detention. That kind of meddling has no place.

[AZSpeechCoach]

Lack of accountability, or the fact that they keep embezzling money and shutting down (AZ's problem).

Public school isn't for every student. I was a Catholic school product until college. Frankly, I like the freedom of curriculum that my teachers had. The educations at alternative institutions are fabulous. However, public schools are held to the singular high-stakes test. Private, charter, and home-schools are not. It is easy to look good when you don't have the stench of failure hanging over you.

Remember, just because the national office plays the tune, doesn't mean that the local dances. Just because Hoffa was in charge of the Teamsters doesn't mean that every Teamster was in the mob. Just because NEA "meddles" doesn't mean that the local office is "anti-education."

What a coherent discussion...how long has it been since the last one of these around here?

Kevin

[Easy Mac]

Originally posted by CamEdwards
Oh! An aside to Easy Mac... you're already paying to send my kids to school. Why wouldn't you want that money to be better spent?

b/c they're your kids Cam


Private schools aren't better than public schools. I know that in South Carolina (at least it was the law) you didn't have to be certified to teach in Private schools, I think you could teach for up to 3 years in one. I know this because my sister taught Latin at one of the better private schools in the state for 2 years without being certified as a teacher.

As to parents meddling: I'll use my sister as an example again. She's had to change her number 3 times this year from so many parents calling and complaining about their children's grades, she even received threats. She received threats even after she told parents the reason their children were failing is because they failed the tests and did not do their homework? Eventually its up to the parents to stop complaining about the teaching and actually help your children. I commend Cam on this, but note that not all parents are as kind as you. Most will bitch and complain when their children do poorly, but will not do anything when the children do well. What incentive is there to teach well when all that happens is you get bitched at by idiotic people, without them even thanking you for providing a service for their children.

Moving kids around won't solve anything, it will just shift the problems. It will destroy the already failing schools, which are failing due to lack of funding, and weaken the stronger schools, as they struggle to handle the influx of more students.

Once again using SC as an example, they actually take money away from the poorer performing schools and give it to the better performing schools. How can schools improve without money? I think there needs to be a complete overhaul of the system one way or another, because the way things are handled now are rediculous.

[CamEdwards]

Originally posted by AZSpeechCoach

Remember, just because the national office plays the tune, doesn't mean that the local dances. Just because Hoffa was in charge of the Teamsters doesn't mean that every Teamster was in the mob. Just because NEA "meddles" doesn't mean that the local office is "anti-education."

What a coherent discussion...how long has it been since the last one of these around here?

Kevin

Kevin, you're still paying for the band. It's estimated that only 20% of union dues are ever used for legitimate union purposes.

I don't know about Arizona, but here are some stats for Oklahoma. Teachers pay $400 a year. Out of that, a whopping $4.29 is paid to cover insurance premiums. That's right, less than five bucks a year. That leaves you with $395.71. 20% of that is $79.14 for legitimate union purposes. Where does the other $316.57 go?

[JW]

Originally posted by Anrhydeddu
JW, good to see you again my old friend. If you come around here more, maybe I wouldn't get as many old man cracks.

Regarding this issue, I am agreeing with Cam philosophically and JW on a more personal and local level.

I lurk, but most of the threads don't interest me. Too old for most of them. That's not a criticism of content, just a fact.

Regarding the NEA and education unions, I think several have pinned it down. At the national level the NEA is extremely liberal, has a definite agenda, and has damaged public education imo. At the local level, most young teachers join local NEA chapters for the insurance and liability protection, againt their employees and lawsuit-happy parents.

Imagine you break up a fight between 200-lb Bubba and 100-lb Leroy just in time to keep Bubba from killing Leroy. In the process of the wrestling match w/Bubba, he cracks his head on the pavement. Guess who gets sued by BOTH parents? Bubba's parents sue because you used 'excessive force.' Leroy's sue because you didn't use enough force quickly enough to protect Leroy from emotional trauma. Both parents sue you, the school, and everyone else they can. Both parents COLLECT in our legal system. That is pretty much the way it is today, and , btw, why some NEA chapters advise teachers to never, never, never use physical force to stop a fight, to just stand there and repeatedly tell the participants to stop.

So teachers need protection against suit happy parents and stupid or malicious administrators. Most don't even know what the NEA stands for nationally and don't care.

In addition to the teacher unions, teacher professional organizations have also damaged education. The National Council of Teachers of English says we should no longer teach basic grammar to kids; just teach them writing, and they will learn grammar. The National Council of Teachers of Math says memorization of math facts and tables is bad. Check out 'fuzzy math' or 'rainforest math' for info on what they think. Basically they believe creativity in solving problems is more important than accuracy. (So, do you want the guy building your house to be creative or accurate?) Now,creativity is good, but in math accuracy should come in first place.

As some have said, lots of blame all around. Most teachers, however, just keep plugging away and trying to help kids. As a retired Army officer who has now been teaching 10 years, I quickly gained a tremendous respect for what teachers have to endure in today's society.

[Flame Eater]

Copied from another topic:

"I think the difference in education over the last few decades is parental envolvement. Whether it is through broken homes, both parents working, etc., etc. the level of parental envolvment is lower today than it was.

Talking with my kids' teachers, it is very aparent to the teachers which parents participate in their kids' educations and supplement the school work at home. Some kids go home to intellectual blackholes; my kids come home to me. We discuss the homework, we read books, we talk about math and science.

Before you click to the next thread let me say: we do not use flash cards with our kids, I did not try to teach them to read at age 2, I do not push my kids until they cry. My wife and I are both college graduates. We own and operate our own business. We both work 60-70 hours per week. Wow...How do we do it all? Where do we find the time? WE JUST DO! When we're dead-assed tired we still have time for homework and reading a story.

Raising your kids is the most important thing you will ever do! Don't fuck it up. Take the time to make your kids into good little people! If YOU do it right, you won't have to worry about the schools fucking it up."

Yes. Parenting is the toughest job you'll ever love.

[panerd]

Originally posted by JW

In addition to the teacher unions, teacher professional organizations have also damaged education. The National Council of Teachers of English says we should no longer teach basic grammar to kids; just teach them writing, and they will learn grammar. The National Council of Teachers of Math says memorization of math facts and tables is bad. Check out 'fuzzy math' or 'rainforest math' for info on what they think. Basically they believe creativity in solving problems is more important than accuracy. (So, do you want the guy building your house to be creative or accurate?) Now,creativity is good, but in math accuracy should come in first place.
.

This is so inaccurate to the point that it is almost slanderous. You are completely off-base and wrong about both organizations and should not quote either as fact but as your own wrong personal opinion.

I suggest you read up at this website ( http://www.nctm.org/about/position_statements/) as you are way out of line about a very positive and useful group. To explain the NCTM I will use your analogy. The NCTM wants the guy to be able to build your house and understand the math he is using, not just do a string of computational problems that are asked on standardized tests.

[JW]

Originally posted by panerd
This is so inaccurate to the point that it is almost slanderous. You are completely off-base and wrong about both organizations and should not quote either as fact but as your own wrong personal opinion.

I suggest you read up at this website ( http://www.nctm.org/about/position_statements/) as you are way out of line about a very positive and useful group. To explain the NCTM I will use your analogy. The NCTM wants the guy to be able to build your house and understand the math he is using, not just do a string of computational problems that are asked on standardized tests.

I actually happen to know a bit about the debate over the NCTM standards and the debate over NCTM support of 'fuzzy math.' And there are two sides to this story, the NCTM side, and the opposing side. I am not off base. I am on the opposing side. I know, for example, that in 2000, in light of growing criticism of the NCTM constructivist math standards, the NCTM retreated somewhat from 'fuzzy math' and its opposition to memorization of basic math facts. However, the more liberal NCTM interpretations remain in vogue in some places, and the debate continues in many places regarding fuzzy math. The link takes you to just one discussion of the concern over 'fuzzy math' and the NCTM.

http://www.math.nyu.edu/mfdd/braams/...cf-030104.html

And here is one more indication of the depth of the debate, an actual debate between well qualified NCTM proponents and opponents, just to note that there are two positions on the issue of NCTM math standards, not just one position.

http://www.heartland.org/archives/ed...ay02/fuzzy.htm

[panerd]

Originally posted by JW
I actually happen to know a bit about the debate over the NCTM standards and the debate over NCTM support of 'fuzzy math.' And there are two sides to this story, the NCTM side, and the opposing side. I am not off base. I am on the opposing side. I know, for example, that in 2000, in light of growing criticism of the NCTM constructivist math standards, the NCTM retreated somewhat from 'fuzzy math' and its opposition to memorization of basic math facts. However, the more liberal NCTM interpretations remain in vogue in some places, and the debate continues in many places regarding fuzzy math. The link takes you to just one discussion of the concern over 'fuzzy math' and the NCTM.

http://www.math.nyu.edu/mfdd/braams/...cf-030104.html

And here is one more indication of the depth of the debate, an actual debate between well qualified NCTM proponents and opponents, just to note that there are two positions on the issue of NCTM math standards, not just one position.

http://www.heartland.org/archives/ed...ay02/fuzzy.htm

Being a math teacher, I would have to ask what the value is in getting an exact answer to "I just checked out a library book that is 1,344 pages long. The book is due in three weeks. How many pages will I need to read a day to finish the book in time?" I believe, as the NCTM does, that it is a meaningless exercise that would not occur in everyday life. So I would teach my kids to

A. Estimate about how much they would need to read a week and a day.

B. Maybe use a calculator to find the exact answer. (Like we all use when balancing our checkbooks and doing other mundane routine math)

C. Every once in a while, have them find the exact answer.

If I am buying carpet that is $1.09 a square foot and I have 621 square feet of carpet I would know I going to spend about $600-$700 on the carpet. I could find the answer by hand, but would probably use a calculator. There is no inherent value in doing hunderds of these problems to teach rules, when my kids can fundametly figure out where the decimal should go in their answer. More reading...

http://www.nctm.org/news/speaksout/spksoutbasic.pdf

[CamEdwards]

Well, there's no doubt the NCTM isn't impressed with the old way of doing math. It's not the computational problems that are asked on standard tests that NCTM apparently has a problem with, it's the practice of actually learning and memorizing mathmatical processes.

For instance, they recommend integrating calculators at all levels of education, which means as soon as kids start learning math, they're using calculators. I sucked at math, but if I could have used a calculator, I certainly would have gotten better grades.

The only problem is, what happens when kids don't learn to carry the one, etc. It doesn't take 12 years to learn how to use a calculator.

BTW, it's not just his opinion. There are numerous organizations run by qualified people who are upset about the NCTM.

As far as English goes, I have a problem with an organization that refers to Ebonics as " “Black English Vernacular,”and “African American Language,” while referring to standard English as the "Language of Wider Communication." The NCTE believes "It is not an obstacle to learning. The obstacle lies in negative attitudes towards the language, lack of information about the language, inefficient techniques for teaching language and literacy skills, and an unwillingness to adapt teaching styles to the needs of Ebonics speakers." Yeah. Adapt your teaching style to the needs of Ebonics speakers. Otherwise known as the dumbing down of America.


I took a look at some of their other position papers. On assessing reading and writing skills: Assessments must recognize and reflect the intellectually and socially complex nature of reading and writing and the important roles of school, home, and society in literacy development.
I didn't realize reading was so socially complex.

I also combed that site looking for any references to grammar. This is all I found:Students should recognize that precision in punctuation, capitalization, spelling, and other elements of manuscript form is a part of the total effectiveness of writing.

In doing a search on the website for the term "proper grammar", I came across the following quotes in articles published by the organization.

conversations about grammar would probably benefit from that word being barred from discussion altogether, which would force people to define exactly what they mean and what they think should be added, deleted, or changed in English classes.

Shhhhh. Don't talk about grammar and maybe it will go away.

And check out this article bemoaning the fact that we pay too much attention to Proper Written English (PWE):
"For many children and adults in our society, PWE is a foreign language with incomprehensible rules. People compare their own language to PWE and and find themselves and their language lacking. They are unsure of their own English. (An unpublished survey of students at my university asked students to report on the languages they spoke and wrote. A surprising result was that many native English-speaking students expressed the belief they spoke and wrote English poorly)... If PWE is not learned by the time a person enters college, remediation is often required."

The article then makes the argument that we should press for less acceptance of Proper Written English in favor of the more relaxed Standard Written English. But beware, teachers!!!
But here's a word of caution. Advocating a change to our grammar standards from PWE to SWE is a professional risk for teachers because the naive critics will rain down accusations ranging from dumbing down the curriculum, to racism and classism, to contributing to the demise of North American culture."

Guilty. I think it's dumbing down the curriculum to accept the following sentence as grammatically correct: Me and him went to the dance.

Nope. Can't do it.

So I took your advice panerd. It's taken me almost an hour to write this post because I visited the websites of both organizations. I've come to the conclusion that they are both organizations full of ridiculous ideas. Sorry.

Great. And we wonder why l33t speak has become so popular. It's just part of the total effectiveness.

Thanks for the info JW. Keep up the good work in the classroom.

[panerd]

Originally posted by CamEdwards
Well, there's no doubt the NCTM isn't impressed with the old way of doing math. It's not the computational problems that are asked on standard tests that NCTM apparently has a problem with, it's the practice of actually learning and memorizing mathmatical processes.

For instance, they recommend integrating calculators at all levels of education, which means as soon as kids start learning math, they're using calculators. I sucked at math, but if I could have used a calculator, I certainly would have gotten better grades.

The only problem is, what happens when kids don't learn to carry the one, etc. It doesn't take 12 years to learn how to use a calculator.

BTW, it's not just his opinion. There are numerous organizations run by qualified people who are upset about the NCTM.

So I took your advice panerd. It's taken me almost an hour to write this post because I visited the websites of both organizations. I've come to the conclusion that they are both organizations full of ridiculous ideas. Sorry.

Great. And we wonder why l33t speak has become so popular. It's just part of the total effectiveness.

Thanks for the info JW. Keep up the good work in the classroom.

I won't touch the English part, as I know nothing about. I took major issue with the fact that he says the NCTM's opinion on math tables and facts is "bad" This just isn't true.

As far as the old processes of learning math, you are right the NCTM feels the lecture and watch your math teacher do 100 problems method is not good. I agree, what is the point in memorizing a bunch of rules, just because that's what they did the 1950's? There is no understanding when math is taught this way. I will agree that some teachers take this to the extreme and practice no computation and have all "real-world" learning activities. But those are poor teachers, and they most definitly are not following what the NCTM advises.

[JW]

Cam, you missed one of the current NCTE buzzwords, the 'privileging' of standard English over other versions of English, as in, "We must not privilege standard English over other equally viable forms of Engish in common use in the United States." That wasn't a quote from any particular paper, but a paraphrasing of things I've read in the NCTE journal.

[JW]

Originally posted by panerd
I won't touch the English part, as I know nothing about. I took major issue with the fact that he says the NCTM's opinion on math tables and facts is "bad" This just isn't true.

As far as the old processes of learning math, you are right the NCTM feels the lecture and watch your math teacher do 100 problems method is not good. I agree, what is the point in memorizing a bunch of rules, just because that's what they did the 1950's? There is no understanding when math is taught this way. I will agree that some teachers take this to the extreme and practice no computation and have all "real-world" learning activities. But those are poor teachers, and they most definitly are not following what the NCTM advises.

On your first point, I will just say I am not a math expert. I teach English and social studies, but I did take a little higher math in college and, oddly, in the Army. Both my brothers, however, have advanced math degrees and have either taught math or are currently teaching math in high school or college classrooms. (For fun, we have in the past had contests to see who could come the closest to the square root of a four+ digit number in 10 seconds or less. We talk math a lot.) Both would disagree with you. LIkewise, as I've pointed out in my links, many math experts disagree with your positions, and there is a real controversy in the math community on these issues. As for me, I researched the controversy in 2000, when the NCTM made its strategic retreat on fuzzy math and memorization, for an education column I write. I do know a little about it, from an outsider's viewpoint.

As to your second point, I would agree most math teachers I know try to take a reasonable view that entails giving students skills they need for real life while teaching problemsolving skills. But I might relate the story of my own daughter, who was never required to memorize even addition or subtraction tables in elementary school. I required it instead to ensure she could do those computations in her head instead of on her fingers or knuckles or using other tricks the teacher taught. Having her memorize those tables did not seem to traumatize her or stifle her creativity.

[CamEdwards]

Originally posted by panerd
There is no inherent value in doing hunderds of these problems to teach rules, when my kids can fundametly figure out where the decimal should go in their answer. More reading...

http://www.nctm.org/news/speaksout/spksoutbasic.pdf

I say this in the nicest way possible...

Thank God you're not an English teacher. You're praciticing the NCTE's position paper on spelling and you don't even know it.

Again, if I were being taught math today, I'd be pulling down A's and B's. I just wouldn't be learning as much.

To say that the way math was taught in the 1950's is outdated is silly. The students of the 1950's paved the way for the computer revolution. I'm thinking they probably didn't get so smart by learning how to estimate.

By the way, and this is a serious question... can you get a wrong answer when you're asked to estimate something?

[CamEdwards]

Dola: my son is 12 and wouldn't know the multiplication tables if we hadn't taught him ourselves.

[panerd]

Originally posted by CamEdwards
I say this in the nicest way possible...

Thank God you're not an English teacher. You're praciticing the NCTE's position paper on spelling and you don't even know it.

Again, if I were being taught math today, I'd be pulling down A's and B's. I just wouldn't be learning as much.

To say that the way math was taught in the 1950's is outdated is silly. The students of the 1950's paved the way for the computer revolution. I'm thinking they probably didn't get so smart by learning how to estimate.

By the way, and this is a serious question... can you get a wrong answer when you're asked to estimate something?

Fair points. I choose not to edit spelling or grammers on message boards, but probably should pay closer attention if I am broadcasting that I am a teacher.

My point about estimation is simple. 245.62 divided by 21.3 should require no rules. A kid should know the answer is around 10 and then either do long division or use a calculator. Learning 4 different sets of "rules" for decimals is a collosal waste of time in my opinion.

I would just like to say that I have enjoyed debating with you today and am not as staunch a supporter of the NEA as you give me credit for. I do have some strong beliefs about teaching math though. And I have worked with a lot of teachers who just work 10 problems in front of the kids and then assign 10 problems like the ones they did. I feel those kids are being robbed of an education and sadly I feel that is why a lot of kids don't understand math. There are extremes both ways teaching math. And teachers who don't find some middle ground are doing a great diservice to their kids. Your enthusiasm for your children's education is commendableand I just wish all of my parents could see both sides of the issues. Have a good night, I will probably return in the morning for more "warfare"

(No time to spell check)

[CamEdwards]

well, I thank you as well. I'm going to be debating this for three hours tomorrow morning, and you've certainly helped prepare me.

BTW, JW... I sent you a PM.

[panerd]

Originally posted by JW


As to your second point, I would agree most math teachers I know try to take a reasonable view that entails giving students skills they need for real life while teaching problemsolving skills. But I might relate the story of my own daughter, who was never required to memorize even addition or subtraction tables in elementary school. I required it instead to ensure she could do those computations in her head instead of on her fingers or knuckles or using other tricks the teacher taught. Having her memorize those tables did not seem to traumatize her or stifle her creativity.

Enjoyed debating. Have to hit the sack, but please respond and I will return in the morning. You seem to know what your daughter needs to know to have a good education. I would just like to close by saying that the NCTM is closer to what you have said, then you may think. A teacher who teaches all tricks and no substance may think they are practicing the NCTM's ideals, but they are far from them. I think I do a pretty good job teaching math to sixth graders. (How many sixth grade teachers do you know that have a master's degree in mathematics?) But I am always open to other's viewpoints. (and debating them)

[JW]

Originally posted by CamEdwards


By the way, and this is a serious question... can you get a wrong answer when you're asked to estimate something?

YES. My daughter this year had some estimation problems counted wrong because she gave fairly precise answers on a take-home exercise. The paper didn't tell how to estimate for the problems, i.e., nearest one, ten, or whatever. So she solved the problems exactly and was told the next day she was supposed to estimate 'somehow.' I decided to ignore the thing. She makes A's in math.

[JW]

Originally posted by panerd
Enjoyed debating. Have to hit the sack, but please respond and I will return in the morning. You seem to know what your daughter needs to know to have a good education. I would just like to close by saying that the NCTM is closer to what you have said, then you may think. A teacher who teaches all tricks and no substance may think they are practicing the NCTM's ideals, but they are far from them. I think I do a pretty good job teaching math to sixth graders. (How many sixth grade teachers do you know that have a master's degree in mathematics?) But I am always open to other's viewpoints. (and debating them)

I appreciate your views and must note again that the NCTM did a major retreat in 2000 from its former position on 'fuzzy math,' memorization, and constructivism to a more reasonable position. That more reasonable position is the position you are relating. At the time, however, many people did not believe the NCTM leadership to be sincere. I would suspect your students have a good command of math. The problem comes I believe with less knowledgeable teachers who try to teach a math program that doesn't give students the basic knowledge they need. In closing, here is one teacher's account of trying to teach fuzzy math in New York City. It also contains a critique of another teaching fad that can do much good but also much harm if not used properly and judiciously, and that is now all the vogue in Louisiana, cooperative learning. You will probably appreciate the story more than I do.

http://www.city-journal.org/html/eon_3_7_03mc.html

[CamEdwards]

Originally posted by JW
YES. My daughter this year had some estimation problems counted wrong because she gave fairly precise answers on a take-home exercise. The paper didn't tell how to estimate for the problems, i.e., nearest one, ten, or whatever. So she solved the problems exactly and was told the next day she was supposed to estimate 'somehow.' I decided to ignore the thing. She makes A's in math.

you have GOT to be shitting me.

[JW]

Originally posted by CamEdwards
you have GOT to be shitting me.

It was problems like estimate 10% of 93. She moved the decimal, as taught, and put 9.3 She was told she should have written 9. Various problems like that. Or 11% of 800. Etc. Again, she was given no parameters, just told to estimate.

As for your message, the answer is not that I am aware of. Gotta go.

[BishopMVP]

Originally posted by CamEdwards
I think it's dumbing down the curriculum to accept the following sentence as grammatically correct: Me and him went to the dance.

Nope. Can't do it.

More irony

[dawgfan]

Originally posted by panerd
My point about estimation is simple. 245.62 divided by 21.3 should require no rules. A kid should know the answer is around 10 and then either do long division or use a calculator. Learning 4 different sets of "rules" for decimals is a collosal waste of time in my opinion.

I'm curious - the issue I can see many people having about "estimated" math answers is how precise is acceptable? For example, if I were asked to estimate the answer to the above question I would say 11 or 12, the closest whole numbers to the actual answer.

As far as methodology, I'm curious to know how many different ways you teach particular math concepts. As a former psychology major, I know that studies have shown that we all don't learn things the same way equally well - some do better than others with certain techniques or methods.

[cuervo72]

Originally posted by panerd
Being a math teacher, I would have to ask what the value is in getting an exact answer to "I just checked out a library book that is 1,344 pages long. The book is due in three weeks. How many pages will I need to read a day to finish the book in time?" I believe, as the NCTM does, that it is a meaningless exercise that would not occur in everyday life. So I would teach my kids to

A. Estimate about how much they would need to read a week and a day.

B. Maybe use a calculator to find the exact answer. (Like we all use when balancing our checkbooks and doing other mundane routine math)

C. Every once in a while, have them find the exact answer.

If I am buying carpet that is $1.09 a square foot and I have 621 square feet of carpet I would know I going to spend about $600-$700 on the carpet. I could find the answer by hand, but would probably use a calculator. There is no inherent value in doing hunderds of these problems to teach rules, when my kids can fundametly figure out where the decimal should go in their answer. More reading...

http://www.nctm.org/news/speaksout/spksoutbasic.pdf

Hmm, estimating answers would have served me well on my chemical engineering and physics exams (I'm sure they use "estimations" in working out specifics in building chemical plants, medical instrumentation, etc.). Isn't there also a benefit in teaching kids how to convert a text-based problem into a mathematical equation, and how to use various conversion factors? And why not prepare some of the kids for things that might not occur in everyday life (though I'm sure there are some applications for the tools applied in solving a.) - some of them will have to be dealing with those issues.

[cuervo72]

Originally posted by panerd
Fair points. I choose not to edit spelling or grammers on message boards, but probably should pay closer attention if I am broadcasting that I am a teacher.

My point about estimation is simple. 245.62 divided by 21.3 should require no rules. A kid should know the answer is around 10 and then either do long division or use a calculator. Learning 4 different sets of "rules" for decimals is a collosal waste of time in my opinion.

Hmm, lets see. My garden area in my front yard is 245 sq ft, and each bag of mulch covers 21 sq ft. Guess I'll buy 10 bags of mulch.

*hours later*

Sh*t! Not enough mulch! Guess I'd better take another hour out of my day going back to Home Depot for the...um, how many more bags do I need?

[revrew]

Originally posted by dawgfan
As far as methodology, I'm curious to know how many different ways you teach particular math concepts. As a former psychology major, I know that studies have shown that we all don't learn things the same way equally well - some do better than others with certain techniques or methods.

I can jump in a bit here, since the homeschooling community, like the professional education community, is compelled to research various methodologies and curriculum to determine what is best for the students.

I've found a book by Cynthia Tobias (can't remember title) on learning styles incredibly helpful. It breaks down learners into three types -- visual, auditory, or kinesthetic. The lecture format of instruction works well for visual learners, and decent for auditory learners, thus I (a visual) and my wife (auditory) did well in school. The kinesthetic, unfortunatley, need different approaches to excel.

Example: My second daughter is highly kinesthetic (meaning: by touch, feel, or experience). When we were teaching her to read, no matter how many times we showed, explained, and drilled her on the letter "t" for example, she could not process its name or the sound it made. She invariable forgot 5 minutes later. So one day, we made the alphabet out of felt and put the fuzzy "t" in her hand so she could feel and trace its shape with her finger. "Oh!" she exclaimed, "it's like a cross!" She never forgot the "t" again, and quickly excelled in reading.

In math, another example is the Math-U-See program developed by Steven Demme. Instead of compelling students to begin learning mutiplication by memorizing tables or "3 bags with 4 apples in each" approach, Math-U-See demonstrates with video and blocks that multiplication is really just calculating the area of a rectangle. 3x4 is visualized and kinethsitized by building a rectangle 3 units by 4 units and calculating the area. It moves the concept of multiplication from the abstract to the concrete.

Other curriculum, like Miquon, which my son uses, makes use of blocks called cuisinare rods that make the concepts concrete. In time, given the fundamental knowledge of HOW the math works, and WHY it works, any math facts or tables that aren't yet memorized are much easier memorized, because the facts aren't dull, abstract concepts, but rather represent meaningful, applicable calculations.

[Noop]

Cam you are right I was threadjacked but its ok I like reading about things like this. Thanks for noticing



noop

[Butter]

Originally posted by CamEdwards
Dola: my son is 12 and wouldn't know the multiplication tables if we hadn't taught him ourselves.

About 2 years into my marriage, I started to notice that my wife couldn't do quick math in her head. She was never a math wiz in school, but c'mon, 12 times 11? She explained to me that she never learned the multiplication tables in school.

I really couldn't believe that. What the hell do you do all day in math class if not learn how to multiply even the simplest 2 numbers? Still can't believe it.