[quote]kroc30 wrote:
By the way, the average class size you just quoted is different from the one your charter school claims. And don’t trade off class control for actual learning. Class control is only 1 factor. [/quote]
From the FAQ page:
How many students per classroom?
The secondary school may have 28 students per class, however, the student to teacher/staff ratio is currently 15:1
Exactly right. You quoted your average class size about 4 posts up as 28. Your last states the ratio is 15-1 with a max size of 28. Thanks for catching yourself in your own lies.
By the way, if that’s the way you handle your math, then I feel bad for the kids in your classroom. Getting your facts and crap correct is one of the top priorities in a classroom.
[quote]kroc30 wrote:
Exactly right. You quoted your average class size about 4 posts up as 28. Your last states the ratio is 15-1 with a max size of 28. Thanks for catching yourself in your own lies. [/quote]
The student teacher ratio includes teachers who only teach 1 or 2 classes a day like our administrators (yes, they get in the classroom), orchestra teacher, art teacher, and computer guy. Adding those people you get a student to teacher ratio of 15-1. Average class size is still about 28. Hooked on phonics worked for me!!
Sorry, I didn’t know that you didn’t count everyone who sets foot in a classroom, unlike the rest of the nation. Your average class size still isn’t 28.
[quote]kroc30 wrote:
Sorry, I didn’t know that you didn’t count everyone who sets foot in a classroom, unlike the rest of the nation. Your average class size still isn’t 28. [/quote]
You really aren’t that sharp.
We figure student/teacher ratio just like every other school in the world. Take all of your students and divide by everyone who teaches a class. That means if 5 administrators rotate teaching the same 30 kids, they would have a student/teacher ratio of 6 to 1 (even though there are 30 kids in the class). Why is that too complicated for you?
Average class size is the determined by adding up all of the kids in each class and dividing by the total number of classes. You definitely don’t teach math, right? Our average class size has DROPPED to 28. The first couple of years it was right around 30.
american public schools are a joke. i came from a high school in south africa and spent junior and senior years at an American high school (i skipped half a year doing this too actually, cos of the fact that SA school years are jan - dec).
Needless to say I never once had to study for a test both years, maybe glance over some notes. Other than that I came in and breezed thru to a 4.2 GPA graduating, A average that I didn’t even have to break a sweat for.
Back in South Africa, I was 10th in my grade with an 82%, which is an A in that school system, and I had mandatory study times for 3+ hours a day. That and I learnt very little new information at HS here, except maybe US govt and history (and I proceeded to wipe the floor with the American kids in both those classes).
Ren - Very interesting. I didn’t know we were behind South Africa also. In addition - What time period was this??? Was it the same for everybody? I teach Global History and could actually use some of the firsthand info in my room. PM me if you want.
Doogie - Much like your salary, your calculations are also unique. Don’t ever change. Keep that open mind towards other people’s experiences and opinions (and yes, that was sarcasm).
[quote]kroc30 wrote:
Doogie - Much like your salary, your calculations are also unique. Don’t ever change. Keep that open mind towards other people’s experiences and opinions (and yes, that was sarcasm). [/quote]
So, you’ve been unable to point out where in NCLB it makes it easier for parent’s to sue if their kid skips school and is failed.
Now you’re unable to understand the difference in average class size and student/teacher ratio. I weep for your students.
“Student-teacher ratio
This shows the number of students per full-time equivalent (FTE) teacher. A low student-teacher ratio is not the same as a small class size. Some schools have teachers who teach specialized subjects with smaller classes. Other schools hire extra teachers to free up class preparation time for their core teaching staff. Both of these possibilities lower the overall student-teacher ratio but not the average class size.”
[quote]Ren wrote:
Back in South Africa, I was 10th in my grade with an 82%, which is an A in that school system.[/quote]
This is much better than the typical American high school system where 80-85% is the average grade and there is little or no “curving”. In other words, the material is far too easy, or at least there is not much difficult material. In such a system there is little incentive to learn a subject in-depth, since there is little reward for doing so. The goal instead is to make as few mistakes as possible. This punishes brilliant but mistake-prone students.
In my college engineering classes, many of the profs. would try to craft the exams so that the average grade was around 50%, and then curve appropriately. I loved those classes. If I learn the material well, the test average is an 85%, I make one mistake and get a 95%, then big deal. But if the test average is a 50% with a bell-curve-like distribution, I make one mistake and get a 95%, this is an accomplishment.
I’ve actually gotten comments from parents that my tests are too hard and been asked to put more multiple choice (guess) questions on my tests rather then higher end evaluation questions. That way, our NY state standardized tests are better addressed, rather than actually learning and evaluating the material.
[quote]kroc30 wrote:
Ren - Very interesting. I didn’t know we were behind South Africa also. In addition - What time period was this??? Was it the same for everybody? I teach Global History and could actually use some of the firsthand info in my room. PM me if you want.
Doogie - Much like your salary, your calculations are also unique. Don’t ever change. Keep that open mind towards other people’s experiences and opinions (and yes, that was sarcasm). [/quote]
My family and I moved to the States 6 and a half years ago - the summer of '99. As of right now I believe the education system in South Africa is plummeting rapidly. When I left my province was the top scorer as far as graduation rates from high school and grades were concerned. The solution to evening all the provinces out? Bring the top 1 down so everyone else doesn’t look so stupid. So they lower the standards, lower the funding, all sorts of stupid shit.
I am not gonna lie, the American school system disgusts me. You read things like 1/20 American adults can’t read english and you can’t help but ask how ppl can get through a school system getting away with that. The answer is easy. Its shit like multiple choice questions, grade inflation, extra credit till the bloody cows come home. Before I came to the States, the only multiple choice question I ever had was for a 5 question section on a biology test, and it was still damn ridiculous. Essay questions were the order of the day, actually having to remember exactly wot the answer is was required, instead of having a rough idea and letting a multiple choice question jog your memory.
My parents and I were amazed at the huge emphasis that is placed on graduating from high school in this country. To us it seemed like the most obvious, who the hell can’t graduate from high school? Back home its a much greater accomplishment than here, but its gets a lot less fanfare, b/c a high school degree wasn’t gonna get you anywhere in life, you needed to get ur ass to college and start a real education.
(on an interesting note the high school I graduated from in the States is happy to promote its 99% graduation rate, except for the fact that I can name over a dozen people that have dropped out of college already that I know from high school)
[quote]larryb wrote:
Ren wrote:
Back in South Africa, I was 10th in my grade with an 82%, which is an A in that school system.
This is much better than the typical American high school system where 80-85% is the average grade and there is little or no “curving”. In other words, the material is far too easy, or at least there is not much difficult material. In such a system there is little incentive to learn a subject in-depth, since there is little reward for doing so. The goal instead is to make as few mistakes as possible. This punishes brilliant but mistake-prone students.
In my college engineering classes, many of the profs. would try to craft the exams so that the average grade was around 50%, and then curve appropriately. I loved those classes. If I learn the material well, the test average is an 85%, I make one mistake and get a 95%, then big deal. But if the test average is a 50% with a bell-curve-like distribution, I make one mistake and get a 95%, this is an accomplishment.
[/quote]
except in South Africa there were no “curved grades.” You got below 50%, you failed the class, tough shit, enjoy repeating the year (well, depending on wot class it is u failed). Our grading scheme went something like:
80%-100% = A
70%-79% = B
60%-69% = C
50%-59% = D
<50% = FAIL
we had a little extra credit in the odd class, usually by way of extra essay/project but that was generally 5% tops. No curving of grades cos people failed. You got what you got, if you didn’t prepare and bombed a test, well, sucks to be you.
In my personal opinion, you can do all the legislating you want, but by the time the kids get to high school, it’s really almost too late. Nothing can replace involved parents. This is also one of the reasons I support charter schools so much. I’m a recent graduate of the Charter School of Wilmington in Delaware and for the past five years or so our test scores have been so far above the public schools in the rest of the state it actually became a running joke. In Delaware we have a test called the DSTP that all students have to take. I can say with all honesty that I would’ve easily passed this test in the 6th grade. Out of 220ish students in my class, not a single one failed. The average failure rate for the state was something like 30%. Because our school was able to operate with greater freedom the number of AP (courses that can earn you college credit while still in high school) classes was significantly more than any other school. In addition, high-level students were able to take University of Delaware classes at the school, taught by a University of Delaware professor. Because of this, I was able to take Calculus 3 and 4 (Multivariable and Ordinary Differential Equations), while still in high school. I believe I could not have done this elsewhere. Our school competes in national and international level competitions in math, engineering and science and consistantly measures up to the best schools in the world. Yes, most students at this school have involved parents who are economically stable (yet I would certainly not have called our school wealthy), but shouldn’t part of our efforts be directed towards helping our best students achieve everything they can achieve?
The sad thing is, more and more legislation is enacted every year that hurts that school. Apparently the politicians and teachers elsewhere would rather distribute our “smart kids” among the other schools and raise the averages so they look better.
This is probably the most frustrating thing about the American education system. I don’t know how it is elsewhere, but it seems like the goal of the American education system is to keep everybody as close to average as possible, or at least to try to inflate the average as much as possible. Shouldn’t we be trying to help push our best and brightest students to the highest levels they can achieve?
[quote]Ren wrote:
larryb wrote:
Ren wrote:
except in South Africa there were no “curved grades.” You got below 50%, you failed the class, tough shit, enjoy repeating the year (well, depending on wot class it is u failed). Our grading scheme went something like:[/quote]
Unless the tests were all standardized or reused and refined, it is unlikely that the grades were not implicitly curved. My college profs. had no choice but to curve, since there was no fixed mapping from percentages to letter grades. If they were creating new and significantly unique exams each semester, then setting the curve before grading the exams would have been silly.
[quote]jtrinsey wrote:
Shouldn’t we be trying to help push our best and brightest students to the highest levels they can achieve?[/quote]
apparently not. Because a smart kid will make all the other kids feel inferior and they will all grow up to have severe self-esteem and psychological issues that will haunt them to their grave. Same reason fat kids don’t have to do P.T.
Ren - Thanks - Interesting stuff. To this day, even though I’ve been told to cut down, I still assign the most essays out of my colleagues specifically because they require the students to think on a higher level then the multiple guess questions. In New York, where I live and teach, we have the Regents examination - 2 in History, 2 in Science, 2 or 3 in Math, and 1 in English, that supposedly help to summarize the learning a student has done in a 1-3 year span, depending on the subject. In reality, they are a joke. They completely focus on MC questions, and the essays they do assign can usually be completed in 4 paragraphs for full credit, according to the rubric. The administrators are so concerned with the passing #'s that in a way, the teachers wind up teaching to the test, rather than going into the really good details that get someone thinking. Pathetic.
I agree that the school systems today are teaching people to be average at times. Even in a school with a good # of electives or college level courses, it’s hard for the average student to get into them because they have to either deal with the required courses as pre - reqs, or Honors students are given preference in their course selection. I teach an economics course for college credit and the entire 2 classes are made up of 35 kids who are ranked in the top 50 out of approximately 250 students. Others were shut out. I love that my school actually has the course availability to get a child up to 30 college credits if they take all that is available, but they shut out a significant portion of the student population who could actually bring even more to the table.
I teach the little ones (Third Grade) in the South. I went through the alternative certification program down here (have a bachelor’s in Philosophy, and a law degree).
Quite honestly, I see NCLB as legislation to privitize the schools. Yearly testing on standardized tests are highly questionable to determine intellectual development. The AYP (adequate yearly progress) ensures many, many schools will receive a “failing” grade.
The school I currently teach at is a high performing school. We are located in a higher income area (and in the South, that is not saying much.) Previously, I taught at a Tile I school where a certain percentage of the students qualify for free and reduced lunch (based on income.) Shockingly, the test scores of my students rose dramatically when I made the move to my current employment.
We have little to no support for the public school system where I live. Personally, I believe that is the right of the community to decide where the focus of resources and energy is committed. However, I see no reason for federal mandates on the issue. For anyone familiar with eduaction, the need of each community is unique.
From my personal experience, standardized testing convolutes the proecess of educating children. I do not see the reason of administering the same test to students who have completely different needs. Those students at my Title I school needed a different approach than those I currently teach.
If you want the public school system to fail, create systems of standardization that will ensure such failure occurs. There is a TON of money to be made in this field once it becomes privitized. I honestly believe this why NCLB was enacted.
Last year, my students, aggregately, scored higher than the other four teachers at my school (the margin was extremely small, however.) As an educator, their scores give me little insight to their intellectual development. I see that through their performance and creations in the classroom. Multiple choice standardized tests are the weakest form of assessment imaginable.
Interestingly, educators are taught this at the university, but then are judged solely based on the same type of assessments they are told not to administer.
Let the communities decide what they want to do with their educational systems. If they are horrid, many people will not move there (like the South, I am from the Midwest originally.)
If we, as a community, county, state, decide to privitize the educational system, so be it. However, I believe the consequences of such actions would further divide the massive wealth gap in this country. A multitude of unforseen consequences often arise in such situations.
And for the record, I am neither Democrat or Republican, I am in the union (which is one step away from worthless). My only concern, truly, is the development of my students. If I thought NCLB was achieving that concern, I would agree with it. I fail to see the sense of pigeon holing all the children across the entire nation. I certainly don’t do that to my students. I certainly remember what it was like to be treated as a number, and it never improved my education.
[quote]nihil wrote:
I teach the little ones (Third Grade) in the South. I went through the alternative certification program down here (have a bachelor’s in Philosophy, and a law degree).
Quite honestly, I see NCLB as legislation to privitize the schools. Yearly testing on standardized tests are highly questionable to determine intellectual development. The AYP (adequate yearly progress) ensures many, many schools will receive a “failing” grade.
The school I currently teach at is a high performing school. We are located in a higher income area (and in the South, that is not saying much.) Previously, I taught at a Tile I school where a certain percentage of the students qualify for free and reduced lunch (based on income.) Shockingly, the test scores of my students rose dramatically when I made the move to my current employment.
We have little to no support for the public school system where I live. Personally, I believe that is the right of the community to decide where the focus of resources and energy is committed. However, I see no reason for federal mandates on the issue. For anyone familiar with eduaction, the need of each community is unique.
From my personal experience, standardized testing convolutes the proecess of educating children. I do not see the reason of administering the same test to students who have completely different needs. Those students at my Title I school needed a different approach than those I currently teach.
If you want the public school system to fail, create systems of standardization that will ensure such failure occurs. There is a TON of money to be made in this field once it becomes privitized. I honestly believe this why NCLB was enacted.
Last year, my students, aggregately, scored higher than the other four teachers at my school (the margin was extremely small, however.) As an educator, their scores give me little insight to their intellectual development. I see that through their performance and creations in the classroom. Multiple choice standardized tests are the weakest form of assessment imaginable.
Interestingly, educators are taught this at the university, but then are judged solely based on the same type of assessments they are told not to administer.
Let the communities decide what they want to do with their educational systems. If they are horrid, many people will not move there (like the South, I am from the Midwest originally.)
If we, as a community, county, state, decide to privitize the educational system, so be it. However, I believe the consequences of such actions would further divide the massive wealth gap in this country. A multitude of unforseen consequences often arise in such situations.
And for the record, I am neither Democrat or Republican, I am in the union (which is one step away from worthless). My only concern, truly, is the development of my students. If I thought NCLB was achieving that concern, I would agree with it. I fail to see the sense of pigeon holing all the children across the entire nation. I certainly don’t do that to my students. I certainly remember what it was like to be treated as a number, and it never improved my education.[/quote]
Are you self-contained? What subjects get tested in third grade where you are at?
Teaching math, I don’t have any problem with standarized testing. I spend a couple of weeks a year dealing with the test in the classroom. The rest of the year I teach the way I want. I do spend a lot of time in the summer looking over old tests so I’m really prepared when it gets to point where I’m going to address the test. My biggest worry come test time is the ESL kids who have a problem with comprehension.
Why don’t you see charter schools and competition(as opposed to privitization) as the end result of NCLB?
Are you self-contained? What subjects get tested in third grade where you are at?
Teaching math, I don’t have any problem with standarized testing. I spend a couple of weeks a year dealing with the test in the classroom. The rest of the year I teach the way I want. I do spend a lot of time in the summer looking over old tests so I’m really prepared when it gets to point where I’m going to address the test. My biggest worry come test time is the ESL kids who have a problem with comprehension.
Why don’t you see charter schools and competition(as opposed to privitization) as the end result of NCLB?[/quote]
In my communnity we have a wonderful charter school system. I have good friends that teach there. They work extremely hard and those students are fortunate to be there, in my opinion. However, those students are selected from applicants, which does not happen in public schools.
That, I believe is the biggest difference between the charter and regular public schools (and private, as well). Sincerely, if I could hand select the students in my classroom, I would choose all the ADHD children since I develop a good rapport with them (I think being male in the elementary system has a great deal to do with that.)
However, if I was going to continue to teach, I would be penalized for poorer test scores since these children tend to score lower on standardized tests (imagine sitting still three hours after drinking three pots of coffee, this is how these children are during the day.)
Currently, my students are tested in the subjects of Reading, Language Arts (English), and Mathematics. Social Stuies and Science will be counted in another year.
I am self contained. When I started, I thought splitting up the little ones during the day would be beneficial, however now I am unsure. There is something very powerful about the contanity of the classroom day in the hands of competant educator.
As far as I can see, if charter schools receive a higher proportion of funds, all others are negatively effected. Here, most of our charter schools receive federal grants. However, when these run out, the cycle begins again. By this time, the Superintendent leaves and another has to rebuild from scratch.
On a policy level, if you only offer a few seats at the chosen charter schools, and they are allowed to get rid of those problem students, you have already set up an elitist system of public education.
If we, as a nation, decide this is what we want, then we should go forward with this option. However, many, many children will be left far behind. I would completely understand the public’s desire to go there, and there would be a great deal of money to made if such a decision of the masses takes place. I am hesistant.
What is the goal of public education? I think that is the real question. Is it the great equalizer in a system of freedom? Or is it another opportunity for those with the greatest chances to succeed to move forward?
I believe charter schools create wealth divisions within the spending of public money. The public money should be spent throughout the public, in my opinion. If it does not, it is another form of elitism, even if at a small scale.
This certainly isn’t a right/left issue if one thinks deeply. There are differing opinions as to policy. Perhaps charter schools will be the right choice. But will that not further divide the masses? Will further divided masses empower or decrease or country’s strength?
I honsetly see the educators at all schools working hard to improve the value of the education of their students. We certainly aren’t in it for the money.
However, if the schools are opened to the private sector, it will be the new wild west.