Administration

Educational Habitat and the Quality of Education

December 20, 2010 By admin Leave a Comment

Study after study, survey after survey and test after test show that the quality of student’s surroundings directly equate to how much and how well that student will learn. If a school is falling down around the student, in effect the school district is saying they don’t really care what sort of state the buildings are in, the students will be far behind their age level peers in schools that have better upkeep. Teachers that are scraping the bottom of the barrel for text books and supplies will find students who are either barely attending classes, not attending at all or when they do attend could care less about the subject that is being taught.

Not surprisingly, most of the educational habitats that are negative for both the student and the teacher are occurring more and more in urban areas with high population base and a high poverty rate. Even public schools that have higher donations by student families as well as better funding from the city, county and state in urban areas do quite a bit better that schools that may be located just a few miles away but is suddenly located in the magical bad part of town.

Students can tell when they are being ignored or not cared about and most of those students will respond by not caring about their school or their own academic achievements. Educational habitat means more than just where they go to school, it means the feeling they get when they enter that school or the classroom. If a feeling of apathy surrounds the school, it should not be on the student to break through the torpor. If a school is falling down around a student’s ears it is not something that fools students into thinking the school district cares about them. The apathy is catching and it’s catching quickly.

Filed Under: Administration, Education, Teachers Tagged With: Education, School district, Student, Teacher

Public Vs. Private Schools

December 19, 2010 By admin Leave a Comment

We are in a crisis situation in this country when it comes to education. One test after another shows that we are lagging behind other countries when it comes to education ranking and worse yet is the fact that we do not seem to know how to fix it. No matter what we do, it seems, our schools in inner cities continue to deteriorate while private schools in this country tend to look like cathedrals. There is a reason that private schools in is country always have higher collective test scores than public schools, especially, in urban areas do. That reason is not because they continue to put god in the classroom.

The reason that private schools have developed academic dominance over public schools in inner city areas is because they have the money to devote to top notch education. Students test better in private schools not because people who are better of financially are inherently smarter. Students in better neighborhoods and better schools test better because they have better and more access to tools that will allow them to learn faster and retain more.

Private schools are also able to pay their teachers more, meaning that the really good teachers, unless they are driven by a need to help people are migrating to private schools in order to have a better life for themselves. This means that teachers who cannot get jobs at the better schools are being shunted to the lower quality school districts because those are the only areas willing to hire them. Poorer teachers, poorer school districts and some of the poorest kids in the country all team up to churn out some of the poorest test scores in the world. This of course leads to less federal and state funding, which only exacerbates and continues the problem for years to come.

Filed Under: Administration, Education, Teachers Tagged With: Education, School, School district

The Repercussions of No Child Left Behind

December 18, 2010 By admin Leave a Comment

When one looks at what George W. Bush’s legacy on education is going to be some may say that it won’t be pretty. While he did pass sweeping legislation that changed the way the education in this country is administered, whether the policies he put into place actually helped us or set us back is going to be up for debate for quite some time. Bush’s centerpiece, the No Child Left Behind Act, made sure that schools that were actually improving in their test scores and other measurable areas got a bigger piece of the education funding pie. Those schools that struggled were urged to make changes or face having their pie taken away from them.

No Child Left Behind also had a side effect one would hope the Bush administration and the congressmen who passed NLCB didn’t realize. The tenets of NCLB basically encouraged certain schools to either downright cheat or bend the testing rules. Schools who had underperforming kids would make sure that those kids were seeing tests that were much easier than the rest of their grade level or they would simply avoid those particular children having to take the tests at all. The result were higher school wide and district wide test scores and an influx of cash.

This also meant that schools that were not cheating or bending the rules were actually being punished for being open and honest about the lower scores their students were getting. This meant that schools that honored the very tenets of the bill, that schools who were trying to improve in certain areas but could not because their funding was being cut were seeing even deeper cuts. It is hard to believe that when George W. Bush and his supporters offered this bill up they hoped that school administrators would look for ways around the policies.

Filed Under: Administration, Education, Teachers Tagged With: Education, School, Standardized test

Teaching In the Urban jungle

December 18, 2010 By admin Leave a Comment

The sad fact of trying to educate our country’s youth is that there is a disparate level of what can be taught and learned in the poorest of inner city neighborhoods versus in the affluent areas of the country that host some of the best public and private schools in the country. This difference is not because the rich are somehow automatically smarter than the poor. This is because for whatever reason the federal government has found a way to segregate schools without actually calling it segregation. In every major city in the country the test scores of high school students goes down the closer you get to the center of the city. The other number that goes down the more into the heart of the city you go into is the funding for schools.

Perhaps it is a self fulfilling prophecy. More affluent schools are able to afford the best desks, the best computers the best and newest text books and the newest teachers. Because of this, the students feel more comfortable learning and just going to school and test scores rise. When test scores rise, state and federal funding dollars rise as well. State and federal funding dollars go into making sure the kids in these schools have the best computers and books and desks and the cycle begins again.

Meanwhile inner city schools have to scrape by to make sure every student has a place to sit. The walls are falling down and the teachers are just looking to make it through the day. Is it really any wonder why these schools have some of the worst test scores in the country? And is losing funding the way anyone actually thinks the problem will get solved? Still our country marches on, content in leaving the poorest of the poor behind once again.

Filed Under: Administration, Education, Teachers Tagged With: Education, Student

A Generation Of Children Left Behind?

December 17, 2010 By admin Leave a Comment

Perhaps the biggest debate to hit the United States education system was the passage of the No Child Left Behind Bill. The act, known as NCLB, was designed to improve the educational standing of our students by setting high goals at the state level and testing students. States who wished to continue receiving funding from the federal government were required to participate.

NCLB immediately came under fire. A heated debate between its supporters and those who believed it would do more harm than good ensued. Supporters point to test results that seem to prove that students taught under this system perform better. They also believe that the standards, which were set at the state level, were more ambitious than the standards traditionally set at the local level. In other words, students under NCLB were better prepared and better educated. While the system doesn’t set federal standards, it tests students at regular intervals to access progress and performance.

Opponents of the bill believe it has been a total failure and has forced educators to teach to the test. In other words, teachers focus their education efforts solely on teaching students the material covered in the next standardized test. Other complaints include gaming the system under which administrators reclassify students to produce more favorable statistics and thus generate more federal funding and unrealistic goals.

Because this system is still in place today’s students are effectively caught in the middle. Teachers may feel forced to teach to the test instead of instructing students in real life or inquiry based lessons. Administrators are forced to focus on standardized testing in order to receive adequate funding. Parents have little say in this matter. This environment may very well produce graduates who are ill prepared for either the college world or the work place. Perhaps it is time to leave behind No Child Left Behind.

Filed Under: Administration, Education, Teachers Tagged With: Education, NCLB, Student, Teacher

Let’s Start Building our Education Foundation: Teachers

December 16, 2010 By admin Leave a Comment

Stop and think, just for a minute, about all the factors the experts say impact our education system. No Child Left Behind, standardized tests, funding all play a role in the environment in which we teach our children, but perhaps the biggest factor isn’t what we are teaching them or where, but who is teaching them.

Teacher education should be at the forefront of any discussion about the quality of the education system in the United States. Perhaps it is time to change not only the way we teach our educators but also the way in which we reward them.

Teacher accreditation is fairly standard across the country, although there are a few notable exceptions. There are a few states, most notably Tennessee, who have revolutionized the way the hire and reward teachers. Their system, the value added assessment, has little to do with college credit hours or teaching assistant time and more to do with what an individual teacher can bring to the classroom. In short, a teacher value should be measured in terms of more than their GPA.

What would a change like this mean for our education system at large? Most likely teachers hired under this concept would be more desirable and better educators. Teachers that are more likely to go the extra mile. Teachers who see the point in teaching at an inner city school in a poor neighborhood. Teachers who can see past economic, racial and geographic barriers. Teachers who recognize that teaching children is more important than helping them become productive and socially acceptable adults.

Maybe we simply have too many laws, too many regulations. We have, perhaps, lost sight of the bigger picture. We should be educating our children about real life situations and teaching them the tools they need to navigate the world. We shouldn’t be focusing on standardized tests and federal funding. We need to start building better teachers.

Filed Under: Administration, Education, General, Teachers Tagged With: Education, Teacher

Are We Redefining Accountability?

December 16, 2010 By admin Leave a Comment

The dictionary defines accountability as a willingness or obligation to account for actions or accept responsibility for them. The debate over how to apply this idea to our education system has been growing over the past several decades. Recently, every state in the country has implemented their own accountability and assessment plans in an attempt to improve the quality of education their students receive.

This sounds like a good idea setting measurable goals for our students; unfortunately, this idea hasn’t translated as well as we would like. A recent study shows that American 8th graders are still lagging behind students from 14 other countries in literacy, science and math. The question becomes why?

If each state develops, implements and tests accountability standards, why are our students under performing? Some experts believe that the wide social, racial and economic disparity that exists throughout the country is the culprit. Students from poorer regions and those from urban areas generally under perform. Because the standards are statewide, these disparities are not taken into consideration.

Perhaps the larger question is whether our accountability system should be based on standards at all. The matter is further complicated when we consider funding. A percentage of each state education funding comes from the federal government and is based on students within the region performing well on a set of standardized tests. This has led to an environment where students are taught on a standard basis instead of an outcome basis.

Many of us are confused and disheartened by this issue. Of course we want our children to perform well. We want all of our children to have access to quality education so that we can compete globally.

Instead of changing the definition of accountability as it relates to our education system, maybe it is time to reconsider who should be held accountable and for whaat.

Filed Under: Administration, Education, Teachers Tagged With: Accountability, Education, Education reform, Student

Giving Our Students a Real Choice

December 15, 2010 By admin Leave a Comment

For centuries, parents had little choice as to where their children went to school. Those families without economic means to place their children in private schools had no options. Children were placed in schools solely based on their geographic location. Unfortunately, some parents were left feeling that their children were not receiving the best education they could. One answer to this problem was school of choice.

School of choice offers parents and students the opportunity to pic from a wide variety of programs for education. Examples include open enrolment, charter schools, private schools, deductions and credits for school related expenses, home schooling and vouchers. In theory, none of these options is better than the rest; however, practically speaking, in many instances simply changing to a different public school will offer a student educational opportunities not previously available to them.

It should come as no surprise that, like most educational issues, schools of choice are a hotly contested topic. Supporters of the concept believe that it is beneficial in several ways. First, by allowing parents to choose which public school their children attend, competition will be fostered, leading to better schools. Second, several studies conclude that privately run institutions are more cost effective than traditional options while providing students with a better education.

There is a down side as well, with many opponents believing that only families with substantial financial means or those living in healthy environments can effectively make school of choice work for them. They remind us that public and private schools all rely on the same guidelines and that switching the student body from one format to the other will have little effect.

We all want the best for our children and perhaps allowing us to choose who educates our students is the best. But consider this: wouldn’t our children be better off if we had better options for them?

Filed Under: Administration, Education, General Tagged With: Charter school, Education, Education reform, Private school, School choice, State school

Chartering A School

December 14, 2010 By admin Leave a Comment

Parents, educators, administrators and even students wanted a different educational forum for students. Public educational institutions are often found to be lacking, leaving those involved with the school feeling that their students are not receiving the best education. The answer, in some areas, is charter schools.

Charter schools are public schools. They receive state funding and are not allowed to charge tuition fees to their students. Students opt in to a charter school. In cases were there are more students than available seats in a particular school, a lottery system is often used to award the seats.

What makes charter schools different and more appealing is the fact that they are not held to the same rules and guidelines as other public schools. Instead, their goals are set forth in their charter in the form of measurable goals for which their students, teachers and administrators are held responsible. This often leads to an educational environment that is more strident then other schools and better educates students.

Charter schools are often founded by administrators, teachers or parent groups particularly in economically depressed areas. These areas, such as inner cities, often have public schools that are lacking. Many believe there is a direct correlation between the affluence of a neighborhood and how well its schools serve the community. Charter schools aim to bridge this gap and often do so admirable.

It seems that instead of addressing the growing problem in our public school system, we have turned to alternative educationally methods to provide our students with better opportunities. This should elevate the debate between standard based education and objective based education to a new level. As we move forward, perhaps we should question whether we want to move our children or address the growing problems in our current public system.

Filed Under: Administration, Education, General Tagged With: Education, School choice, State school, Student

Understanding Standards

December 13, 2010 By admin Leave a Comment

We all know what standardized achievement tests are they are the test are students must pass in order for our school to qualify for federal funding under No Child Left Behind. right? That may be true, but standardized achievement tests are used for a variety of other purposes as well. Understanding the purpose behind standardized testing may help take some of the rub out of the current belief that standardized testing has done nothing more than force our schools to teach the test, effectively dumbing down both our curriculum and our students.

Standardized test are use to assess and quantify students in written language, reading and math. In some cases, they may also be used to assess social studies or science. The tests are available to students in a variety of grades, allowing for a students improvement to be tracked over the course of their school career. They can also be used to assess student’s learning disabilities and are used to test students who have taken advanced placement classes.

The test vary from state to state, with each state deciding which format the test should take, what content it should cover and other factors. The tests are analyzed by guidelines created by the company who created the specific test. The raw score is then converted to a more standardized format using tables that take into account the students grade and age. The standardized grading format typically uses the following terms: below average, above average and average.

These scores can be used to determine what a particular students strengths and weaknesses are as well as the school’s ability to educate them. Standardized achievement tests are not intelligence tests and should not be used as such. Schools can use the information to create more effective classes and curriculum. Standardized test should be used as a roadmap, not the final analysis of an institutions ability to educate students.

Filed Under: Administration, Education, General Tagged With: Education, Educational Testing, School, Student