Failure, unless it results in death, is always an "opportunity for improvement". If I fail at something, it pisses me off so much that I do anything I can to get better at it. When I played basketball in high school, I missed a game winning free throw (and we lost in overtime). My coach told me it was ok, people don't always make the winning shot, but it didn't keep me from shooting literally thousands of free throws until I was consistently hitting 50 in a row. My free throw percentage increased 15 points (from 70% to 85%) by the end of the season.
Accepting failure is a character flaw, imo.
Well, what I meant was that in the U.K., they are at least banetering around the idea of no longer giving children a failing grade of an F...but rather marking it as "Opportunity to Improve"...
Is it a valid idea? Yes. However, allowing children to feel that they cannot fail is a bad idea. Failure, and acceptance of failure, is unacceptable in our society and truly in the world.
I was asked, more or less point-blank, "What gave you the impression that you're here to teach these kids anything?"God Bless America and the N.E.A.!
Don't you mean "God Bless Bush Jr" ?
Witness the fall of Rome…although I attribute it to giving up responsibility rather than students failing to grasp rudimentary reading, writing and arithmetic.
Although, if more people played Hero maybe we, as a country, would be better at math.
Just sayin'.
Witness the fall of Rome…although I attribute it to giving up responsibility rather than students failing to grasp rudimentary reading, writing and arithmetic.
Although, if more people played Hero maybe we, as a country, would be better at math.
Just sayin'.
Really, I feel it is students failing as well as a lack of responsibility. I also think that the two aspects are probably symptomatic of each other.
And yes, the once Great Republic of the United States of America is on it's way down the spiral.
Hmmm, considering it was the teachers hiding the dumb kids so they wouldn't screw up the test results...
I can vouch for the fact that not ALL of the teachers were hiding the dumb kids....
|
Witness the fall of Rome…although I attribute it to giving up responsibility rather than students failing to grasp rudimentary reading, writing and arithmetic.
Although, if more people played Hero maybe we, as a country, would be better at math.
Just sayin'.
Bread and circuses. People demanding more and more from the government coffers. Hiring outside mercenaries because Romans didn't feel the need to serve their nation. All reasons for the fall of the Roman Empire in addition to your point.
Some of that sounds remarkably familiar...
Did you know that Australia has banned the use of red pens on a students paper?
I've heard rumors of this... something about red implying that the grader is being "judgemental" and it hurts the poor darling's self esteem. Do we have any Aussies involved in this conversation who can confirm or deny this?
Me, I would just have to pull out my vermillion pen... or my crimson one... or my roseate one...
|
|
Hmmm, considering it was the teachers hiding the dumb kids so they wouldn't screw up the test results...I can vouch for the fact that not ALL of the teachers were hiding the dumb kids....
Quite a few were. And, frankly, kids didn't get dumber because of "No Child Left Behind", they got dumber because teachers taught the test instead of teaching their subjects. The test is a cakewalk, frankly, most standardized tests are, and kids could pass them without being taught the test if most teachers could effectively teach their subjects.
Edit: And it doesn't help that a lot of parents have fallen into the "it's the school's responsibility to teach our kids" syndrome. Good education starts at home. Don't trust an elementary teacher who holds an "education" degree, which is, I think, doublespeak for "basket weaving".
Bread and circuses. People demanding more and more from the government coffers. Hiring outside mercenaries because Romans didn't feel the need to serve their nation. All reasons for the fall of the Roman Empire in addition to your point.Some of that sounds remarkably familiar...
You ever make it up to Denver? I'd like to buy you a beer....
Quite a few were. And, frankly, kids didn't get dumber because of "No Child Left Behind", they got dumber because teachers taught the test instead of teaching their subjects. The test is a cakewalk, frankly, most standardized tests are, and kids could pass them without being taught the test if most teachers could effectively teach their subjects.Hmmm, considering it was the teachers hiding the dumb kids so they wouldn't screw up the test results...I can vouch for the fact that not ALL of the teachers were hiding the dumb kids....
I merely vouched for SOME of the teachers out there....and frankly, I feel that the problem is systemic.
|
|
You ever make it up to Denver? I'd like to buy you a beer....
Bread and circuses. People demanding more and more from the government coffers. Hiring outside mercenaries because Romans didn't feel the need to serve their nation. All reasons for the fall of the Roman Empire in addition to your point.Some of that sounds remarkably familiar...
Hmmm. Tempting, they brew some great beer in Colorado (no, Mr. Coors, I'm not looking in your direction).
In my years in public education, it was never the NEA who was holding me back from teaching. It was administrators, from the state to the local school.
Hmmm. Tempting, they brew some great beer in Colorado (no, Mr. Coors, I'm not looking in your direction).
I'm not one for the micro's....
Frankly, what I LOVE is Yuengling Black & Tan from Pennsylvania. Only distributed on the east coast though :(
The stuff tastes so good that even once it hits room temp, it tastes great...which, most beers begin to taste like urea at that point...
|
|
Seriously, I think the problem has crept into the university system. When I went to school, they didn't have "remedial" classes at four year colleges. The assumption was if you're in college, you are capable of doing the work.
Nowadays? The assumption seems to be kids coming out of high school aren't ready for prime time. It doesn't help when Texas schools, for one, dropped the "top 10% automatically get in to a state school" rule, as it was deemed "unfair" to underachievers, apparently.
Quite a few were. And, frankly, kids didn't get dumber because of "No Child Left Behind", they got dumber because teachers taught the test instead of teaching their subjects. The test is a cakewalk, frankly, most standardized tests are, and kids could pass them without being taught the test if most teachers could effectively teach their subjects.
That is definitely true here (in a school discrict that is under some pretty draconian measures because of NCLB). In fact, it is true to the point that many of my students complain about any test that is not couched in terms of mulitple-choice questions because it is all that gets taught anymore...
Oh, and to post in the original spirit of this thread... anyone see definately running around lately?
|
|
In my years in public education, it was never the NEA who was holding me back from teaching. It was administrators, from the state to the local school.
I haven't met an administrator who wasn't a card carrying member. *shrug*
When the NEA fights every effort to create a system of teacher accountability, I have to wonder...
|
|
Quite a few were. And, frankly, kids didn't get dumber because of "No Child Left Behind", they got dumber because teachers taught the test instead of teaching their subjects. The test is a cakewalk, frankly, most standardized tests are, and kids could pass them without being taught the test if most teachers could effectively teach their subjects.That is definitely true here (in a school discrict that is under some pretty draconian measures because of NCLB). In fact, it is true to the point that many of my students complain about any test that is not couched in terms of mulitple-choice questions because it is all that gets taught anymore...
Oh, and to post in the original spirit of this thread... anyone see definately running around lately?
I use Firefox. Saves me from many a misspelled word. ;)
Seriously, I think the problem has crept into the university system. When I went to school, they didn't have "remedial" classes at four year colleges. The assumption was if you're in college, you are capable of doing the work.
Nowadays? The assumption seems to be kids coming out of high school aren't ready for prime time. It doesn't help when Texas schools, for one, dropped the "top 10% automatically get in to a state school" rule, as it was deemed "unfair" to underachievers, apparently.
Unfortunately, My feeling is that we have ENTIRELY too much of a production line from Kindergarten to College.
Come on now...not EVERYONE is ready for college. Not everyone NEEDS to go! And what in the world ever happened to vocational schools?
All reasons for the fall of the Roman Empire in addition to your point.
Romans did not play Hero either!? Dear god!
|
|
Seriously, I think the problem has crept into the university system. When I went to school, they didn't have "remedial" classes at four year colleges. The assumption was if you're in college, you are capable of doing the work.
Nowadays? The assumption seems to be kids coming out of high school aren't ready for prime time. It doesn't help when Texas schools, for one, dropped the "top 10% automatically get in to a state school" rule, as it was deemed "unfair" to underachievers, apparently.
Unfortunately, My feeling is that we have ENTIRELY too much of a production line from Kindergarten to College.
Come on now...not EVERYONE is ready for college. Not everyone NEEDS to go! And what in the world ever happened to vocational schools?
Most vocational schools cost as much, if not more, than Ivy League schools, on a semester by semester basis, and WAY more than public universities.
So, it isn't cost effective, considering most kids who couldn't get into a four year school without the lower standards do not come from moneyed backgrounds. Racking up $50k in student loans for two years of school is a bit prohibitive.
I attribute it to giving up responsibility rather than students failing to grasp rudimentary reading, writing and arithmetic.
I believe you have hit the nail on the head, CourtFool. My students' "locus of responsibility" is entirely outside of themselves. The most common phrase I hear from my students pertaining to their grades is "Why are you giving me a..." or "Why are you failing me" rather than "Why am I failing" or "What can I do to..." I try to get them to realize that I do not give them grades, I merely assign them the grade they have earned, but too often, it falls on deaf ears.
We have reached a point in our society where no one ever seems to be responsible for anything anymore.
|
|
I attribute it to giving up responsibility rather than students failing to grasp rudimentary reading, writing and arithmetic.I believe you have hit the nail on the head, CourtFool. My students' "locus of responsibility" is entirely outside of themselves. The most common phrase I hear from my students pertaining to their grades is "Why are you giving me a..." or "Why are you failing me" rather than "Why am I failing" or "What can I do to..." I try to get them to realize that I do not give them grades, I merely assign them the grade they have earned, but too often, it falls on deaf ears.
We have reached a point in our society where no one ever seems to be responsible for anything anymore.
*Stifles all kinds of politically charged statements and observations sure to annoy people of the Port side of the political spectrum*
When the NEA fights every effort to create a system of teacher accountability, I have to wonder...
I have no objection to being held accounable, sir. However, I strenuously object to being the only one held accountable. Community and parents have as much or more culpability in creating these prize individuals whom we are discussing.
EDIT: In other words, I am more than willing to take my lumps, but I would like it recognized that I am not the only deserving target.
|
|
When the NEA fights every effort to create a system of teacher accountability, I have to wonder...I have no objection to being held accounable, sir. However, I strenuously object to being the only one held accountable. Community and parents have as much or more culpability in creating these prize individuals whom we are discussing.
Oh, I agree wholeheartedly. But "Hey, no one ELSE is being held responsible" smacks of what you observe in the attitudes your students. Makes me wonder where that attitude comes from...
Edit: Saw your edit, and I apologize. :)
|
|
Seriously, I think the problem has crept into the university system. When I went to school, they didn't have "remedial" classes at four year colleges. The assumption was if you're in college, you are capable of doing the work.
Nowadays? The assumption seems to be kids coming out of high school aren't ready for prime time. It doesn't help when Texas schools, for one, dropped the "top 10% automatically get in to a state school" rule, as it was deemed "unfair" to underachievers, apparently.
Unfortunately, My feeling is that we have ENTIRELY too much of a production line from Kindergarten to College.
Come on now...not EVERYONE is ready for college. Not everyone NEEDS to go! And what in the world ever happened to vocational schools?
It's also the case in the UK, so it's not just an American thing.
Also, Derek, to quote someone from a different situation, "Follow the money". If test scores are what gets you funding, you do whatever is necessary to get test scores up. If that means teaching such a minute range that someone with the IQ of a cheese sandwich will get bored with it, that's what you do. If you get funding based on proportion of entrants who get grade C or above (as happens here), teachers will concentrate all their energies on the narrow range of middle C to middle D to make sure no one slips back/as many as possible push up.
This is actually a problem for any for of accountability. As soon as you introduce a measurement to measure progress, everyone will try and cheat that measurement rather than do the job you wanted. In economics, this is called Goodhart's Law. Blaming the teachers, the NEA, even George Bush (and as a godless, pinko, European liberal you know how much it hurts me to say something isn't his fault ;-) ) is pointless. It's human nature that's at fault. although it does cause problems with accountability.
|
|
Also, Derek, to quote someone from a different situation, "Follow the money". If test scores are what gets you funding, you do whatever is necessary to get test scores up. If that means teaching such a minute range that someone with the IQ of a cheese sandwich will get bored with it, that's what you do. If you get funding based on proportion of entrants who get grade C or above (as happens here), teachers will concentrate all their energies on the narrow range of middle C to middle D to make sure no one slips back/as many as possible push up.
This is actually a problem for any for of accountability. As soon as you introduce a measurement to measure progress, everyone will try and cheat that measurement rather than do the job you wanted. In economics, this is called Goodhart's Law. Blaming the teachers, the NEA, even George Bush (and as a godless, pinko, European liberal you know how much it hurts me to say something isn't his fault ;-) ) is pointless. It's human nature that's at fault. although it does cause problems with accountability.
The lack of shame in our society makes accountability nearly impossible. When everyone is so much more concerned with "hurting someone's feelings" and "having a negative impact on their self esteem" than actually calling a spade a spade and telling a kid they "aren't cutting it and need to try harder or fail", we are doing our children a disservice. I'd rather have a somewhat pissed off literate kid than a happy, well adjusted illiterate kid, frankly.
The lack of shame in our society makes accountability nearly impossible. When everyone is so much more concerned with "hurting someone's feelings" and "having a negative impact on their self esteem" than actually calling a spade a spade and telling a kid they "aren't cutting it and need to try harder or fail", we are doing our children a disservice. I'd rather have a somewhat pissed off literate kid than a happy, well adjusted illiterate kid, frankly.
Absolutely.
George Carlin's last special spoke rather insightfully about the downside of the self-esteem movement.
|
Some times a little too badly. I once held a parent teacher conference where I told a student and her parents that she was getting an A-. After their meeting with me, they tracked down my principle and demanded to know what type of teacher I was that there daughter was getting an A-, that she had never gotten such a low grade in her life, and that she was emotionally devestated by the fact that she was getting that grade. I wok at a school for troubled teens and my principle told the parents that maybe the fact that their daughter could not deal with getting an A- was one of the reasons she needed to be in our program.
I think this is in the spirit of this thread:
A head of a school is a principal, so were your moral principles telling you something? :-)
Derek, you mentioned both (a) standardized tests being easy if the teacher can effectively teach the subject, and (b) teacher accountability. Unfortunately, the two often work at cross-purposes. My students consistently had some of the highest Earth Science test scores in the state -- which made me a "bad" teacher, because my ability was being evaluated on the year-to-year improvement in mean test scores, without reference to my initial baseline. Therefore, if my scores were 95%, 97%, 94%, 90%, I was seen to have an overall downward trend, and was officially one of the WORST teachers in the state. Meanwhile, someone with scores 11%, 15%, 18%, 22% would be considered one of the BEST.
RE Self-esteem: we used to define it as "an unjustified vainglory that prohibits personal development and therefore is antithetical to true self-respect."
heh, I could just type anything in this thred and add a LOT of missused, misspelled pharses!
"No Child Left Behind," in practice, means enforced mediocrity: resources are disproportionately poured into kids that are "underachieving"; average students are considered "fine" and receive little attention; and above-average students are forcibly held back to the average -- if anyone starts to perform superior work, some well-meaning ninny tries to make that person into a "mentor" for the underachievers, rather than allowing him or her to excel. Years of this training deeply ingrains an attitude of "it's good enough," because superior work is punished rather than rewarded.
A better model would have been "Each Child Will Sink or Swim" ("and some might even fly").
|
|
Derek, you mentioned both (a) standardized tests being easy if the teacher can effectively teach the subject, and (b) teacher accountability. Unfortunately, the two often work at cross-purposes. My students consistently had some of the highest Earth Science test scores in the state -- which made me a "bad" teacher, because my ability was being evaluated on the year-to-year improvement in mean test scores, without reference to my initial baseline. Therefore, if my scores were 95%, 97%, 94%, 90%, I was seen to have an overall downward trend, and was officially one of the WORST teachers in the state. Meanwhile, someone with scores 11%, 15%, 18%, 22% would be considered one of the BEST.
RE Self-esteem: we used to define it as "an unjustified vainglory that prohibits personal development and therefore is antithetical to true self-respect."
Stupid school administrators notwithstanding, I stand by my statement. The "cross purposes" are created by mindless bureaucrats, doesn't change the fact that if teachers could just teach their subjects effectively (as you seem to have), they wouldn't have to teach the test.
And, Kirth, knowing you in real life, I have absolutely no doubt you would have been my favorite teacher, hands down, had I had you in high school.
|
|
"No Child Left Behind," in practice, means enforced mediocrity: resources are disproportionately poured into kids that are "underachieving"; average students are considered "fine" and receive little attention; and above-average students are forcibly held back to the average -- if anyone starts to perform superior work, some well-meaning ninny tries to make that person into a "mentor" for the underachievers, rather than allowing him or her to excel. Years of this training deeply ingrains an attitude of "it's good enough," because superior work is punished rather than rewarded.
A better model would have been "Each Child Will Sink or Swim" ("and some might even fly").
I agree that the sentiment was genuine, but the execution was very flawed. Pretty much describes the Bush administration to a tee, I think.
The last part describes our method until the '70s, actually.
And, Kirth, knowing you in real life, I have absolutely no doubt you would have been my favorite teacher, hands down, had I had you in high school.
Why, thank you, Derek! That means a lot.
Guys like you always seemed to appreciate my infamous "What Good Is It?" rule. The gist of it was that if a student asked "what good is this?" I had to be able, on the spot, to describe a specific, economically-important process requiring said knowledge. My failure to respond promptly meant that I removed the said item of knowledge/skill set from the unit test -- even if it got me in trouble with the Standards Of Learning committee (ubiquitously referred to by their acronym, of course).
(e.g., Q: "Who cares about convergent plate margins?" A: "Understanding them allows for prediction and mapping of high-risk areas for earthquakes and volcanic activity. Here's a newspaper clipping of what happens when people have insufficient warning." Q: "Why study stratigraphy?" A: "Likely spots for oil traps are found using stratigraphic sections. Cars run on gasoline, which is refined oil. Would you care to walk to school?")
If my math teachers had used that rule, I might be a lot better at differential calculus than I am.
When I was in high school (freshman in college now) I always angered my teachers to no end. I was one of those students who could pass easily and with high grades if he doodled and read unrelated books throughout the entire class. Even AP classes weren't difficult.
So I made a point of seeing how little I could work and still achieve "acceptable" grades. It's the only thing that kept me from going insane; I knew I could easily ace every class I had with no difficulty, the challenge came in seeing if I could fail without intentionally giving the wrong answers on quizzes and tests. The fact that I consistently passed with "acceptable" grades made me hate the system.
I remember my most ironic achievement was writing an essay for AP English, the period before it was due in chemistry, and getting an A+ on it. I didn't even read the thing after I wrote it, I didn't edit, I didn't even really pay much attention to what I was writing.
Kirth, that teaching style would have made me wake up and pay attention.
heh, I could just type anything in this thred and add a LOT of missused, misspelled pharses!
I thought maybe we were "misunderestimating" you!
heh, I could just type anything in this thred and add a LOT of missused, misspelled pharses!I thought maybe we were "misunderestimating" you!
I could agree more! :P
When I was in high school (freshman in college now) I always angered my teachers to no end. I was one of those students who could pass easily and with high grades if he doodled and read unrelated books throughout the entire class. Even AP classes weren't difficult.
So I made a point of seeing how little I could work and still achieve "acceptable" grades. It's the only thing that kept me from going insane; I knew I could easily ace every class I had with no difficulty, the challenge came in seeing if I could fail without intentionally giving the wrong answers on quizzes and tests. The fact that I consistently passed with "acceptable" grades made me hate the system.
I remember my most ironic achievement was writing an essay for AP English, the period before it was due in chemistry, and getting an A+ on it. I didn't even read the thing after I wrote it, I didn't edit, I didn't even really pay much attention to what I was writing.
Kirth, that teaching style would have made me wake up and pay attention.
ROCK ON!!!!
Guys like you always seemed to appreciate my infamous "What Good Is It?" rule.
What good are imaginary numbers?
So I made a point of seeing how little I could work and still achieve "acceptable" grades. It's the only thing that kept me from going insane; I knew I could easily ace every class I had with no difficulty, the challenge came in seeing if I could fail without intentionally giving the wrong answers on quizzes and tests.
That's what angered me the most as a teacher; that, officially, I was not allowed to provide meaningful challenges to students like you. I look back on some of the kids I taught and feel great remorse for what they could have been -- scientists on the par of Galileo, mathematicians to rival Newton, philosphers to outfox Plato -- instead of frustrated, bored, mediocre (and occasionally self-destructive) students.
I remember one year I had grades that were C's...Dad was none too impressed...He took my D&D books (the original blue set) away until I had B's...
This, in my humble opinion, is the kind of thing parents SHOULD be doing today.
What good are imaginary numbers?
Engineers use them....
What good are imaginary numbers?
That was one of my exact questions when I was in high school; I never did receive a reply. Years later, one of my electrical engineering friends said he used them on a daily basis, but when I asked him to elaborate, he launched into a technical discussion that I was sadly unable to follow. I always did suck at field and wave mechanics.
|
|
I remember one year I had grades that were C's...Dad was none too impressed...He took my D&D books (the original blue set) away until I had B's...
This, in my humble opinion, is the kind of thing parents SHOULD be doing today.
Amen, Brother!
On a related note: "Go to your room!" means nothing when kids today have x-boxes, t.v.s, computers, cell phones, and whatnot in their sleeping quarters. Another failing of the modern parent, imo.
Kirth, that teaching style would have made me wake up and pay attention.
The sad thing is that it's really only possibly if we put people who actually know their subject matter into the classrooms. In my case, there was an oil bust going on, and professional geologist positions were hard to come by. Today I'm a consulting hydrogeologist, receiving twice the pay of a teacher with a LOT less stress, and my clients actually appreciate what I do.
If we trained experts as teachers, made the standards for teachers MUCH stricter, and offered industry-competitive salaries, then maybe the U.S. could become an undisputed leader in industry again. We'd also have to get off of our "all children are college-bound" cloud and realize that some people should be allowed to pursue their aptitudes to become expert, well-paid electricians, plumbers, and mechanics.
Instead, we hire education majors to teach trigonometry, stick 40 kids in a class, and pay peanuts.
I remember one year I had grades that were C's...Dad was none too impressed...He took my D&D books (the original blue set) away until I had B's...
This, in my humble opinion, is the kind of thing parents SHOULD be doing today.
That's what happenned to my little cousin! His dad told him the he couldn't play D&D until he got his grades up. He went a whole semester without being able to play with us. Well, knead-less 2 say, he keeps his grades up now.
...and they say that D&D is bad...
That was one of my exact questions when I was in high school; I never did receive a reply.
I guess I have been blessed with a gift at identifying uses of new knowledge. Although, that one still eludes me. I probably would have made a good lawyer.
Oh, and by the way, I never went to college.