NY officials to scrap literacy test for teachers because "Blacks and Hispanics couldnt pass".

a reply to: DBCowboy

So, it's not all Obama's fault?

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: Aazadan

Where is the US ranked next to other industrial nations in terms of math, science?

The new math of the 60's is not common core. You can stop selling me a dog turd and calling it candy. I'm not going to buy it.

Bleh, accidently hit refresh and lost my post.

The US doesn't rank among the highest in math (we gained several positions in science this time around though), but we do rank pretty darn high in reading believe it or not. Part of the issue with using PISA to compare nations (and that's what most use to compare) is that not every nation takes the test under the same circumstances. Most of the top 10 for example only give the test to their nations top students while everyone else tests everyone. So comparing for example Shanghai (China tests some cities individually) to the US, we're comparing their top students to our average students.

The test also follows a logarithmic curve. The top 10 positions drop off rapidly, but from about 11 to 45 or so (give or take a couple spots) the drop off is very gradual. There's generally a bigger difference between 7 and 8 as all of 11 to 45. Essentially, each position isn't a fixed distance from any other position. This means that you can actually look at positions such as 13 and 37 and consider them about equal while 10 and 13 can be a big difference.

Something else at issue is that most states in the US aren't brave enough to be tested on their own. In the past two tests, those who have been brave enough have been Florida which scored below third world countries, Connecticut and Massachusetts (tested on both tests) which if their own nations would rank top 10 in the world, and North Dakota which was pretty average.

This actually makes sense, because cities and states have massive input into the US education system. While the feds have some say, it's much less than the locals have in each district. This evens out on the test, but essentially means that we have some states that are failing, and others that are doing really, really well.

And no, the new math of the 60s isn't common core. What predates it was.

I'm going to work out a common core problem for you, maybe you'll understand how it works then. Lets take two numbers 13 and 37 (since I used them above and they're fresh in my mind) and we're going to multiply them. So
13*37

The idea is that you want to round these to the nearest 10's, which involves factoring this problem.
10*30+3*30+10*7+3*7

That's
300+90+70+21

Then you factor again
300+100+60+20+1

Then you start adding terms
400+80+1
480+1
481

It's easy to do in your head and hard to make mistakes unlike the cross multipication system (is that the name of it? I think I got it wrong) you may be familiar with which requires paper and writing out the problem.

A lot of the criticism of the system, has been that it has a lot of steps involved. If you count each factor as one step, then the process I outlined above has 9 steps. Opponents argue that a standard system looking like
_37
x13
-----

Would have fewer steps, which it does. The thing is though, not all steps are created equal. In the other method you're dealing with nice round values. Adding 300, 100, 80, and 1. Something anyone should be able to do without error. In this other method you're dealing with 111 and 370. A harder group to add (and more difficult to get to as well).

The other main argument against it, is that it involves learning to factor before you can multiply. But I don't necessarily agree with that either because it's just breaking numbers out of their place. Seperating the 100's and 10's and combining them. Unlike the "traditional" approach, the CC approach didn't even need a times table.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: DBCowboy

So, it's not all Obama's fault?

Oh Christ.

You actually said that?

Really?

SMH

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: Aazadan

No.

You got no points for the wrong process, wrong answer and no points for the right answer, no process.

Maybe my school was stocked with a bunch of hard ass math teachers.

The way it was for me, again in three different states across 6 different gradeschools (we moved a lot), in all of them was:
No points for the wrong process and the wrong answer
Sometimes a point for the wrong process and the right answer (almost never happened... math just doesn't allow for that to happen)
Partial credit (how much varied by teacher, sometimes even full credit) for the right process and the wrong answer.
Full credit for the right process and the right answer.

a reply to: Phage

I think you'll find the standing of the US in terms of education began slipping when the feds began poking their noses into education directly in the 1960s. You can pretty much match the decline with the increases in federal meddling and their wonderful "infusions" of cash. The more they meddle, the lower the scores went.

Taking the feds out of education, turning it back to the states is a good first step. But the problems created by a system that has evolved into systematic indoctrination are going to take decades to straighten out, maybe generations.

The current system is like a very old structure that has been remodeled and added to in quite haphazard ways. It is almost to the point of no return. The best for all might be to tear it down and start over.

Banning unions in education would be a good step.

Removing minority quotas from education would be another good step. Skin color and gender considerations should not be a part of the hiring or promotion process.

Getting back to smaller, community schools will solve a lot of school violence issues. Whoever thought that warehousing thousands of teens for hours at a time was a grand learning environment?

Just my 2 cents after spending over 40 years in the education system at some level.

a reply to: Aazadan

We need higher standards for the students, not lower ones so more can feel better about themselves.

We need to hold our teachers to higher standards, for the same reason.

Now you can put politics and candy-assed racism excuses into the mix and use that to justify lower scores so you can feel better about yourself.

BUT

No improvement is EVER going to be made unless STANDARDS are raised.

EVER.

a reply to: diggindirt

I think you'll find the standing of the US in terms of education began slipping when the feds began poking their noses into education directly in the 1960s.

You mean in relation to the rest of the world? That could be true. Something they were doing seemed to be working better. But wait a minute, I spent a good part of my elementary (public school) education in the 1960s. So, that's not it.

originally posted by: diggindirt
Taking the feds out of education, turning it back to the states is a good first step. But the problems created by a system that has evolved into systematic indoctrination are going to take decades to straighten out, maybe generations.

But Common Core has nothing to do with the feds. It's a state level initiative that most states have agreed to set up among themselves as a standard for their children. The only federal involvement is the people trying to get the feds involved to do away with it.

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: Aazadan

We need higher standards for the students, not lower ones so more can feel better about themselves.

We need to hold our teachers to higher standards, for the same reason.

Now you can put politics and candy-assed racism excuses into the mix and use that to justify lower scores so you can feel better about yourself.

BUT

No improvement is EVER going to be made unless STANDARDS are raised.

EVER.

But common core is raising the standards.

And for what it's worth, I'm against the lowering of standards for those teachers.

Here's the question though:

What happens when you raise the standards, but you don't have teachers qualified to meet those standards?

a reply to: Aazadan

You fire the teachers who don't meet the standards and hire ones that will.

a reply to: DBCowboy

What if there's no one to hire? Either because they don't exist, or they won't work for what the school budgets are willing to pay?

originally posted by: Aazadan
a reply to: DBCowboy

What if there's no one to hire? Either because they don't exist, or they won't work for what the school budgets are willing to pay?

What if
What if
What if

That sure is a good reason to have low standards and piss poor teachers.

a reply to: DBCowboy

I think teaching should be the highest paid profession in the United States. That way, we would have the best and brightest competing to teach our children.

a reply to: ColdWisdom

In a perfect world, I would agree.
But they certainly should be more highly compensated than they are. Those that are actually qualified, that is.

First of all as most of you are not from NY you really are out of your depth discussing this issue. NY has many problems with it's school system and with the teachers unions. Without knowing some of the other factors most of you are just spitting out your own prejudices or judging by where you live or your past experience's in the field. Not applicable boys & girls. Take it small and do some research into the problems of just NYC schools. Too much influence by the teachers union there and the city politicians cozy on up to them for $$$. They have scrapped many reforms because the union didn't like them. At least in NYC the complaint about unions being out to screw everyone over to benefit their unions is sadly true.Teacher evaluations, nope they are unfair. Removing teachers who had inappropriate relations with students, sit them in the "rubber rooms" until they get to go back. Don't ask me for links because if you are on this site you should be capable of doing the research yourself.

a reply to: gladtobehere

Does this mean that knowledge is racist? If so, how did that happen?

a reply to: hangedman13

Then the Unions are to blame? Why don't the teachers fix it? Or do they know how? Given with what the OP read I don't think they care about actually teaching at all. I don't really see that lack of gathering knowledge as the culprit, but rather the lack of intellect.

a reply to: Phage

In a perfect world, I would agree. But they certainly should be more highly compensated than they are. Those that are actually qualified, that is.

I highly agree with your statement. But in order to find out who is actually qualified is the exact issue that is stopping them.

a reply to: 3daysgone

My first reaction to the article in the OP was, "What?" (And it still is, sort of).
But I'm not sure being an effective teacher requires being an expert. It goes deeper than that. Without knowing what the competency standards actually are...

originally posted by: DBCowboy

originally posted by: Aazadan
a reply to: DBCowboy

What if there's no one to hire? Either because they don't exist, or they won't work for what the school budgets are willing to pay?

What if
What if
What if

That sure is a good reason to have low standards and piss poor teachers.

Standards are increasing on students. They've been lowering on teachers because we have a real teacher shortage in the country. No one wants to go into the profession. They don't want to lose their union, in some states like Kansas Brownback set their compensation to $10/hour. Other states want to reduce pay. When you have student loans to pay off, even if someone really wants to teach, how can they justify that type of financial situation?

Yet, when the subject of teacher pay comes up, we always talk about how much money is thrown at the system already, and use it to deny them. If teachers aren't paid well, how are we ever going to get good ones? This happens to be why our college system is still so successful... being a college professor is a great gig, grade school teachers need a similar level of security in their lives. And then to go along with the money, they need some actual respect for the profession.