Dear Santa,
I know this is an unusual request from someone far too old to believe, but I truly want to think that you can help. The situation is dire and no one else seems to have the answers. See, Santa, our public school system is vulnerable to collapse if we do nothing to make it brighter. The children you do so much to make cheery this time of year continue to wallow in a school organization stuck in mediocrity. And that is not good enough, especially today.
So many of us educators were so excited last Christmas season when President-elect Barack Obama was waiting in the wings to lead the effort to re-authorize the 2002 No Child Left Behind Act. As you know, NCLB was still leaving too many children behind. It seemed the quarterback appointed and confirmed to lead the new effort on school reform, Arne Duncan, was a very good choice.
Well, Santa, today in California things still are very bleak for our children and their schools. The Assembly, Senate, and Governor cannot agree on how to proceed to get California in a position to apply for up to $700 million dollars in Federal Race To The Top (RTTT) funds. Teachers’ unions are not certain that the Federal reform efforts are in their best interest. Test scores on fill-in-bubble tests are still the coin of the realm.
Public universities that prepare our teachers are facing draconian cuts and fewer individuals aspire to a career in teaching. Many of the programs that support a child in becoming a fully realized human being are being considered for reduction or elimination in many of our districts. Santa you know that all children must have music, visual and performing arts programs, sports, and career technical education opportunities in order to thrive.
Santa, my gift request is going to seem gargantuan, but I fear the time is running out on our country continuing to be a great one unless you can intervene this Christmas. So with the utmost humility and belief in your powers I submit my list, actually its only 1 item:
I want you to redistribute hundreds of billions of tax dollars to nation building at home and not abroad. Santa, like you I care about children in other countries, too. I want them to live in a place free of violence and where all their dreams can be achieved. But I feel it is time to concentrate on rebuilding America and California. Nothing is more important to our rebuilding efforts as a nation and state than our children’s education.
I wish all SJI readers a healthy and peaceful holiday season. May we meet up again in 2010 with lots more to talk about.
I shall withhold my opinion on this piece in order not to impede Chris Patterson and the other education graduate students from having the freedom to discuss this topic that is of such direct relevance to their lives and careers.
I’m keenly anticipating an interesting and lively discussion.
Merry Christmas Joseph. I think your intent is beautiful, but I don’t think Santa can do a thing without the help of we human folk. I’ll keep my paws crossed though because you just never know how powerful Santa can be.
God bless!
Hi John Galt.
I agree with Professor DiSalvo that the education system is in need of repair, but I’m also a believer in reform. I’ve never liked carte blanche funding without accountability. Because of this, I’m still a backer of reforms that would streamline the bureaucratic maze that the educational system has developed over time.
Furthermore, I believe all funds recaptured through any reform efforts should directly benefit students, not the layers of bureaucracy that have bloated the system.
The kids should be the focus of attention, not the educational system as an entity.
Less people talking, greater accountability and a conscious effort to bring people who are willing to steer this bloated juggernaut away from the reef towards safer waters.
How about you Mr. Galt? What would you do?
The waste of time and money due to the bloated administrative staffs and the multiple school districts in Santa Clara County alone is enormous. The California Education Code is over 100k sections. Eliminating the redundancies and bloated district staffs of $150k+ folks pushing paper would go a long way to helping the education budget.
Happy Holidays!! I have been super busy the last two weeks and have not had a chance to post or read the blog. I think I will also ask Santa to rebuild California and America. Who wouldn’t agree on that? I’m so happy that the negativity has cut back this week. It seems we are all talking like adults. We are asking each others opinion instead of pointing fingers. That is the Holiday spirit. I will post next week. I am in a bit of a hurry right now and busy for the rest of the week. HAPPY HOLIDAYS EVERYONE!
> I’m so happy that the negativity has cut back this week. It seems we are all talking like adults.
Well, I’ve been busy this week. I’ve had to spend a lot of time rescuing hopeless global warming quacks from the disasterous collapse of the Copenhagen meetings. I’ve had to put education rescue on the back burner.
But, as a starting point for rescuing the education system, improving results from top to bottom, and RETHINKING the so-called “achievement gap”, let me put on the table a very important question:
“Do teachers’ unions and academic tenure have ANY role whatsoever in a successful, effective, efficient high performance education system, or are teachers’ unions and tenured professors simply parasites who are holding parents and legislators to ransom and feeding off of the legitimate needs of school children for their selfish privileges and economic gain?”
If we don’t address this question up front, then I despair whether ANY solution to the “educucation system funding crisis” is possible. If the price of having a publicly funded education system is feeding the parasites, and the parasites are incontrol of the system, then no amount of “social theorizing” or “open-mindededness” or “goodwill” or belief in “hope and change” are going to make a squat’s worth of difference.
Chris Patterson said, “Less people talking, greater accountability and a conscious effort to bring people who are willing to steer this bloated juggernaut away from the reef towards safer waters.” WELL said! From your lips to God’s ears! If we could only do that on all vital issues affecting our society today I’d be a very happy camper!
Merry Christmas and Happy News Year.
Hey Chris,
The title of this article ought to be the cornerstone of our education policy.
Education IS a gift. We’ve lost sight of that fact.
At considerable expense, we offer each child a tremendous opportunity, and we have nothing to apologize for if some of them fail to take advantage of it.
I’d scrap the whole NCLB philosophy and accept the fact that 70-80% success is pretty damned good and a lot more fair to the taxpayers than busting the budget trying to create separate curricula specifically tailored to the peculiar needs of each individual student. “Only 20% Left Behind” would be a better motto.
Most agree that NCLB is flawed, despite its good intentions. But I disagree with your assertion that we should simply allow the educational chips to fall where they may. These kids who fail to accept the “gift” of education and fall through the cracks, end up costing society much more $$$ down the line. So where would you like efforts placed? Towards educating kids while they still have a chance for success?…or for welfare, prisons and rehab offshoots that yield less positive outcomes than what we risk trying to educate early?
Government is going to make us pay one way or another. I would rather pay for the possibilities of students moving forward, than for hardened convicts with greatly diminished prospects.
I guess the major point I’ve failed to get across, is that just like you, I am interested in having an education system that provides the best possible outcome for the most number of students. I just differ with you (and Joseph, and most of the experts in the education establishment) on what’s the best way to achieve that goal.
I believe that a more hardline system that expects the student to adapt to it, rather than the other way around, will ultimately reward us with an adult population that is better adjusted to the real world, with a lower incidence of deadbeats and criminals.
With respect, let me turn your question around on you. Why would you be an advocate for a system that gives kids such an unrealistic idea of what they can expect in the real world that many of them wind up enemployable or worse? Why would you do that to our kids?
That doesn’t seem like a serious, answerable question to you, does it? And it isn’t a fair question since I know that you are sincere. So you might understand why your question seems unfair to me.
Define “a more hardline system that expects the student to adapt to it”.
And since you haven’t met myself or Professor DiSalvo, how is it you feel comfortable making blanket statements about what we may or may not believe to be true?
“So you’re telling me that reading and considering every word you and Joseph write here isn’t enough?”
Of course it isn’t enough. You don’t know the philosophies of a person by reading a few posts on a blog. You don’t know how strong one’s convictions are by reading brief and at times whimsical texts. You don’t know if one practices what they preach through their actions outside of the blog. There are lots of variables which posters like yourself seem to want to ignore. You don’t even post under your real name for goodness sake! So you gain no points with your “pathological liar” approach.
“Over the years, teachers have designed and refined curricula that have proven to be effective…”
Curricula is ever-changing. Books are replaced every seven years or so. Otherwise we’d be reading books about rockets achieving orbit, rather than a rover’s discoveries on Mars.
Our understanding of best teaching practices have changed as well. The days of repetitive drill and kill exercises, although possibly nostalgic for you, are no longer viewed to be effective. As rea understanding of cognitive development continues to shape
“We should be confident that it’s reasonable to expect most kids who are applying themselves to learn the material as presented. If they don’t- and many won’t- then they fail the class.”
Isn’t this how things are?. If you disagree explain how you feel this is not the case.
————————————————————
You first assert that:
“I am interested in having an education system that provides the best possible outcome for the most number of students”
But then you write:
“Stop worrying so much about the graduation rate.”
“Stop making excuses for race, socioeconomic status, or home situation.”
“All this attention to “closing the achievement gap” seems to me a huge distraction and unnecessary complication of the relatively simple (not easy) job of teaching.”
You seem confused. Please think about what it is you really want to say and come back with a more coherent response.
So you’re telling me that reading and considering every word you and Joseph write here isn’t enough? In order to have any idea what you believe I have to meet you in person? Why? Are you pathological liars when typing but honest when talking? I don’t get it.
I sort of thought that the whole point of these forums was to discuss our ideas and beliefs with one another. If I’m off the mark about what you believe then why not simply explain to me what it is and set me straight? That way the conversation can move forward.
As far as “a more hardline system that expects the student to adapt to it”, I mean this; Over the years, teachers have designed and refined curricula that have proven to be effective. We should be confident that it’s reasonable to expect most kids who are applying themselves to learn the material as presented. If they don’t- and many won’t- then they fail the class. Stop worrying so much about the graduation rate. Stop making excuses for race, socioeconomic status, or home situation. All this attention to “closing the achievement gap” seems to me a huge distraction and unnecessary complication of the relatively simple (not easy) job of teaching.
To end all the various achievement gaps in local schools, the reform program would have to be vigorous.
For example, real reform would carefully avoid teaching by age cohort, by artificial time arrangements, and by relying on the smarter students to lead study teams.
That is, the framework of education today teaches students to value their age cohorts as sources of wisdom & insight (thus, all the peer pressure we hear about). It teaches students that learning & teaching occur in carefully constricted time allotments. And it frequently places undue burdens on some students to teach others which is unfair and unjust to both the smarter students and the others.
In addition, an excellent educational system would teach real skepticism in a rapidly changing age, both about the permanence of the contemporary scene and about the myths & fantasies taught by some ideologically bound teachers. We are saddled with a young public that believes things will continue endlessly in a straight line thus falling into house price bubbles, unemployable majors, and the idea of a free lunch. The safety wrap will be eventually removed from everyone except those seeking to stay within the educational system, and it would be to the credit of the educational establishment if each of its students was similarly educated to succeed in the American nation.
The outright refusal to recognize the multiplicity of achievement gaps is just more evidence of the failure to recognize the severe reforms that are needed to get the students out of giant warehouses and into settings with one teacher for three to five grades in low number settings.
Sounds a little like the one-room country schoolhouse which was rushed to oblivion fifty years ago with no thought for how its replacement would shape students into age cohorts, learning by bell, and lazy team teaching.
I would be ready to celebrate the wonderfulness of teachers when I hear those who educate teachers endorse top-to-bottom reform of the failed system in place.
Gee whiz Chris. The anger. What’s become of your serene, meditative, “Grasshopper” persona?
I gather from your post that you think my remarks are logically inconsistent. OK. I’ll put them another way;
Maybe when we obsess about a 100% success rate, we wind up with a real-world success rate of only 65%. If we’re more realistic, and shoot for 80%, then perhaps we’ll actually achieve our goal of 80%. By setting our idealism aside, we accept the world as it is, and we are more successful overall.
It’s like if Ichiro went to the plate determined to hit a home run every time.
He can’t do it. His strikeouts would skyrocket. His batting average and on base percentage would drop. His humble but incredibly valuable contribution to his team would evaporate. He’d contribute a lot less than he does by being realistic, understanding not only his own limitations, but the physical realities that the laws of physics exert upon him and on the baseball that, if he was a complete egomaniac, he’d try to propel over the fence on every at bat.
I won’t make the mistake again of lumping you in with Joseph (you’ve scolded me enough on that score), but it seems to me that DiSalvo is a complete egomaniac and it’s my gut instinct that his thinking is representative of the thinking that is guiding our education system. What he advocates in these blogs is the equivalent of “swinging for the fences” on every at bat. I think his ideas are harmful and wasteful. Demanding perfection is not only unrealistic- it’s self-serving and it’s counterproductive. It actually costs his team (The People of California) valuable Wins (more educated children), and in the real world he’d be sent to the minor leagues and told to work on his game until he’s figured out how to be a hitter, not just a flailer.
By the way, if I were you, Chris, in future posts I’d be a little less critical of people who judge others based on a few blog comments. Hypocrisy doesn’t look good on most people, and it looks even worse on you.
You write:
“Maybe when we obsess about a 100% success rate, we wind up with a real-world success rate of only 65%. If we’re more realistic, and shoot for 80%, then perhaps we’ll actually achieve our goal of 80%. By setting our idealism aside, we accept the world as it is, and we are more successful overall.”
I agree with some of this. No Child Left Behind unrealistically mandates that all students are to meet federal standards on state tests by 2014. Its ridiculous to expect this, and creates counter-productive pressures on educators to meet the demands of the tests, rather than to educate in a healthy, well-rounded way.
Professor DiSalvo discussed this at length in the classroom and agrees that NCLB is flawed in this regard. So you are wrong in characterizing his position as being one that simply “swings for the fences”. You have not been party to his lectures and actually have been way off base in your interpretations of his blog comments.
I disagree with your comment that we should teach with any targets whether it be 80% or 100%. We should always strive to get as many students that qualify through the system. There should not be any “status quo” numerical percentages targeted. This means educators need to try to reach each and every student as an individual, and try to help them succeed in obtaining an education that will prepare them for that “realistic” world you seem to think only you have a grasp on. Which brings up a point: Any educator worth their salt is well aware how society is changing, and how exiting students will face new difficulties in this less than certain era. So please, enough with the broad stroke statements insinuating that only brilliant old people like yourself have the ability to recognize these societal changes.
As a former student of Professor DiSalvo, I can tell you that his main message for future educators was that the student-teacher relationship is critical, that educators need to bring a passion to their efforts in the classroom, that preparation and sound teaching methodology is crucial if one is to educate successfully, and that the work we will embark upon will be difficult, rewarding and important.
My criticisms towards you and others who have slammed DiSalvo stem from the fact that haven’t been privy to his comments other than here. Its my guess none of you have ever met the man. I have, and listened to him discuss almost all of these topics you bring up. And I can assure you that your slanted depictions of him do not square up with what I heard him speak about in the classroom. You are simply off base and misguided. So to me, you and others like you who rip on DiSalvo without really knowing a whole heck-of-a-lot about him are posting commentary with very little merit. The endless, mean-spirited insinuations you have made against the man are untrue.
“Another fresh new year is here . . .
Another year to live!
To banish worry, doubt, and fear,
To love and laugh and give!
This bright new year is given me
To live each day with zest . . .
To daily grow and try to be
My highest and my best!
I have the opportunity
Once more to right some wrongs,
To pray for peace, to plant a tree,
And sing more joyful songs!”
– William Arthur Ward
I have no reason to doubt that DiSalvo is a fine teacher. And you will probably make a good one too. But your own experience of DiSalvo is in the teacher/student relationship whereas my experience of him is in the elected official/constituent relationship. Just because he’s a good teacher doesn’t automatically make him uniquely qualified as a careful, objective, education policy planner who understands that he has a duty not just to the children of America (and in his case, Mexico, China, Russia, Vietnam, etc.), but to the general public welfare. I apologize for any remarks that have been less than tactful, but it seems to me as if education is yet one more of an endless string of government concerns that we lowly citizens are expected to turn over to the so-called experts, then just keep paying for it and keep our mouths shut. Our measured, thoughtful opinions are summarily dismissed, so we often resort to sarcasm and “mean-spiritedness”.
“The power of accurate observation is often called cynicism by those that don’t have it”
– George Bernard Shaw
> “The power of accurate observation is often called cynicism by those that don’t have it”
– George Bernard Shaw
Thanks. This is a keeper.
“…it seems to me as if education is yet one more of an endless string of government concerns that we lowly citizens are expected to turn over to the so-called experts, then just keep paying for it and keep our mouths shut.”
Hey John,
Thanks for your less combative response. I have a slightly different take on these governmental concerns you speak of. I think these systems become so large that they take on a momentum of their own. Thus to blame an individual, a piece of legislation, or even a particular political party for the endemic problems, ignores the reality that the dysfunction and waste has developed with approval from both (all)sides of the equation.
So the question becomes how do we make the education system functionally sound and effective without the taxpayer feeling they are shoveling money into a furnace without any results. Answers to this issue are elusive NOT because there aren’t smart people with great ideas, but rather because the systems are so large and developed that practical changes require enormous financial and political energy to implement. Legislation that makes it past this gauntlet often loses form, bringing with it unintended consequences. NCLB is a great example. Good intent…some success, some undesired consequences.
Next up is the “Race to the Top Fund”. I think its another example of good intentions with inherent flaws:
___________________________
Through Race to the Top, we are asking States to advance reforms around four specific areas:
* Adopting standards and assessments that prepare students to succeed in college and the workplace and to compete in the global economy;
* Building data systems that measure student growth and success, and inform teachers and principals about how they can improve instruction;
* Recruiting, developing, rewarding, and retaining effective teachers and principals, especially where they are needed most; and
* Turning around our lowest-achieving schools.
Awards in Race to the Top will go to States that are leading the way with ambitious yet achievable plans for implementing coherent, compelling, and comprehensive education reform. Race to the Top winners will help trail-blaze effective reforms and provide examples for States and local school districts throughout the country to follow as they too are hard at work on reforms that can transform our schools for decades to come.
http://www.ed.gov/programs/racetothetop/index.html
I am fascinated with this topic, and would prefer a discussion without rancor. How do we create change using the funding we currently have? changes that won’t bring unintended consequences? and bring change will truly benefit the students?. This shouldn’t be about one educator’s blog, nor finger pointing along party lines.
How do we streamline these systems so that effective change can be made without so much inherent resistance?
That’s what I’m interested in.
Chris,
Thanks for the reply. It’s sure a topic that deserves some time and attention. When I get a little more time I’ll look over the link you provided and probably put some thoughts together.
Here is an interesting blog piece reflecting on how difficult and expensive “Race to the Top” implementation will be.
http://educatedguess.org/blog/?p=855
Political and financial issue, practical time frame problems, discord between educators and the standards authors, and then adopted changes still need to be voted on.
Is this a healthy “check and balance” system? Or is it an out of control series of barriers to change?
Follow up article on Race to the Top legislation passing.
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2010/01/05/MN0D1BE1C9.DTL&tsp=1
Chris, John, et. al.,
Thank you for the eloquent discourse about the critical issues in education that confront us. Nothing less than the health and vibrancy of our democratic society is at stake. We must always remember K-12 education makes up 40% of our state’s budget. And far too often it is a system that breeds mediocrity.
As an elected school board member I take my responsibility to the general welfare of all Santa Clara County’s citizens very seriously as it relates to the education of our children. I pledge to always take “measured, thoughtful opinions” into consideration when weighing all my votes as to policy and budget.
I know I am privileged to serve in this capacity and I hope to do my work “better” in 2010 than I did in my first elected year. I thank all of you who contribute to this blog and I wish you an outstanding new year.
Joseph Di Salvo
“The California Teachers Association is expected to debate its position on a proposed multibillion dollar water bond at the union’s regularly scheduled meeting this weekend in Los Angeles. …some members are worried about any borrowing that might take money from schools, said union spokeswoman Becky Zoglman.”
http://fresnobeehive.com/news/2009/10/powerful_teachers_union_consid.html
So the teachers union is against water?
Why shouldn’t teachers be allowed to specify whether or not their union dues (~1000-2000 a year) be used as part of the teachers union’s political slush fund?
http://www.ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php/California_Teachers_Association
“To ask me, or anyone else who objects to the entire concept of further centralizing the education system, to engage in an honest and sincere discussion of the details of how to go about it, would be to ask us to abandon the ideals that we believe would be of infinitely greater value. And for what? So that we won’t be criticized as being naysayers?”
I understand your position and appreciate the response.
This notion of centralization as a problem is very analogous to what I experienced with Red Cross during the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina. I wanted to volunteer with the direct cleanup in the affected areas so I signed up with Red Cross. I went through several weekends of training that covered working the shelters, operating relief vehicles, writing up claim forms for emergency relief etc…and then waited to be deployed. When the call finally came down, they requested I drive to a hotel in Fresno and spend my days working their phone banks processing the donations that were flooding in. Huh?!!! Not what I had in mind. I declined their offer, went on Craigslist and found a group that was working in the thick of things that would put me to work, while offering food and shelter. There were no forms, no lengthy training sessions, no solicitation for funds etc…They were getting real work done on a shoestring budget, gutting houses, clearing debris, sheltering people and animals. It was one of the greatest experiences my life. They are still at it, going from disaster to disaster: Some good pictures:
http://www.richardsmith.net/biloxi/handson.html
But is it fair for me to say the Red Cross was of little use because it didn’t fit what I was looking for?
An audit showed the The American Red Cross utilized more than 244,000 relief workers for its hurricane response efforts, helped more than 1.4 million families (more than 4 million people) with direct emergency assistance, served more than 68 million meals and snacks, provided more than 3.8 million overnight stays in more than 1,400 shelters, distributed more than 540,000 comfort kits and clean up kits and made almost 597,000 health services contacts and more than 826,000 mental health services contacts.
This is how I look at the Education System. In many ways it is bloated, wasteful, and full of red tape. But you can’t deny the sheer numbers of people/students that move through its “process” with positive results. The question is how do we squeeze more out of the system without increasing wasteful layers requiring additional funding.
“Race to the Top” appears to me to be another attempt at creating a “plan” that ignores this idea that its the overall system that needs better planning.
These are tough questions, without simple answers.
Chris, Joseph, et al.,
A few comments up Chris acknowledged the problem of bureaucracies taking on a momentum of their own and becoming systems that, as a whole, are different from the men and women of which they are comprised. I appreciate that awareness, Chris. I will readily admit that it’s an ideological instinct of mine to see this not just as A problem, but as THE problem. Some believe it’s a problem that can be mitigated with tweaking and skillful “crafting” of legislation. I don’t think so. To me it’s a dealbreaker. I think that it’s almost a fundamental law of nature that for a system to be efficient and effective it must be designed to minimize bureaucracy. The bigger and more complex the organization, the less likely it will be, as a whole, to represent the goals and ideals of the good people within it.
I’ve looked over the Department of Education’s website and reviewed the provisions of the “Race to the Top” legislation. In my opinion, if the goal is to improve the education of the average child, then this strategy is destined to fail. It’s very existence is predicated on the formation of vast new layers of bureaucracy. That means resources, funding, and control shifted away from the school and classroom where they belong and into the offices of remote bureaucrats. Also, with all these federal dollars crying out to be squabbled over, States, school districts, and individual schools will inevitably devote more and more attention to getting some of them, while spending less attention where it belongs- teaching kids- kids that they know far better than do the distant bureacrats.
To ask me, or anyone else who objects to the entire concept of further centralizing the education system, to engage in an honest and sincere discussion of the details of how to go about it, would be to ask us to abandon the ideals that we believe would be of infinitely greater value. And for what? So that we won’t be criticized as being naysayers?
No rancour. No disrespect. I hope I haven’t stepped on any toes.
Joseph, I know you’re doing what you believe is best. I would neither desire nor expect any less than that. As a constituent, I just think it’s important that we all know that our representatives really hear- and consider- our opinions.