Can You Sue a School for Malpractice?

[coffeefreak]

What?

Don't most states have some sort of standardized tests? Even if a student got an A in a class, if they didn't really learn the material wouldn't this result in a low mark on the standardized test?

 

NO! Standardized tests are a scam. Grades and tests do not at all match up. My sister was teaching remedial math in Mississippi. She was teaching at the Jr High and if the kids did not pass her class, they had to go to the "Alternative school." She had 16 year olds that could not add or subtract. The kids that passed her class always failed the test. When the principal demanded to know how these kids were making As when they scored so low on the test, she very calmly explained that she is a REMEDIAL MATH teacher. She is teaching these kids BASIC SKILLS that they should have learned in elementary school. When they get an A in her class, they are at a 3rd grade level. The standardized test they are given is according to their AGE GRADE. There is no way those kids would even pass the 5th grade ITBS. Unfortunately, that still allows them to graduate. It's not my sister's fault, it's not the student's fault, it's their parents and the school's fault.

 

I agree completely.

 

Is it any wonder that the remedial classes are full? If they're giving A's out to (at best) average work then an A might as well be a C. If the teachers won't mark what's wrong then the students never learn how to do better.

 

It's true. I absolutely agree. I was beyond frustrated with my ranking in HS because I was in all honors and AP courses, which should have theoretically helped me. However, there were plenty of kids who took all regular courses or classes at the Voc-Tech and had a higher ranking than me!:001_huh:

 

And FWIW - I purposely avoided any major that required math because I would have had to take remedial math. I never understood any of the higher maths, but managed to get Bs all through school. My Geometry teacher gave all open-book tests, My Trig and Algebra III teacher allowed us to use our notes and calculators. I never had to learn anything. I sat down for Calculus 100 and almost cried. I changed my major the next day. When I ended up having to take a basic math class because I transferred schools, I was put into Consumer Math, which was the lowest Math class you could take for credit. I still remember this little, sweet Asian lady that spoke very little English saying to me, "It's OK sweetie. I pass you anyway." She gave me a C out of pity.:lol:

[Oak Knoll Mom]

Did anyone see "Weekend Update" on Saturday Night Live this week? Seth Meyers said:

 

This week children in more than 1700 schools in North America sang the song "I want to Play" at the same time while simultaneously over in China, over one billion children were doing math.

 

I think we need to be doing more math and fewer "dance flash mobs" and sing-alongs.

[twoforjoy]

 

But, algebra isn't just for the college-bound. Reading and writing aren't only necessary for professionals. We do ALL students a disservice when we launch them into the world without these basic academic skills. Is my niece unprepared for college? Yes. :( But she's also unprepared for all but the most basic, entry-level jobs.

 

Is she? I do think it's important to recognize that being prepared for college is not--and absolutely should not--be the same as having acquired basic math and literacy skills. The problem, I think, is partly that we have conflated the two. We've decided that "basic competency" now means "able to handle college-level work." I'm not sure that's ever been the case before, and I don't think it should be the case.

 

Placing into a remedial college course doesn't and shouldn't mean that a student lacks basic skills. It simply means that the student is not ready for the kind of advanced academic work they'll be expected to do in college. As an example, students in my introductory composition classes are expected not just to be able to understand the main idea of a text written on a 10th grade level or able to construct an understandable and coherent paragraph (things that I'd consider basic skills--I do not consider a perfect grasp of grammar to be a basic skill, because most adults I know, educated back when phonics was taught exclusively and grammar was taught via drill, don't have anything approaching a perfect grasp of grammar. If anything, my older students struggle more with the mechanics of their writing than my traditional-age students). They are expected to be able to make and support an argument in writing in a clear and logical way, to read advanced texts critically (picking out the main idea, following the line of argument, evaluating the argument), to be able to synthesize and analyze the arguments in various texts in their own writing. And, college-ready students are expected to have a firm grasp of standard English grammar; in fact, the expectation (although this is NOT the case) is that even the students in my remedial classes will have a good grasp of grammar, and so we are generally told NOT to teach grammar in our classes, and to focus on global rather than sentence-level issues. We do review those things, but students are expected to be able to do them in some rudimentary way.

 

I don't think that's unrealistic to expect from a college-bound student. I do think, though, it's unrealistic to expect from every student. Again, the problem is that we've conflated the two. Every student is expected to be college-bound (or almost every student), and we consider them failures because they don't have those skills while at the same time accepting them into college without significantly adjusting the curriculum and expectations, so that instructors are stuck trying to teach higher-level academics to students unprepared for them.

 

But my point is just that college preparatory skills should be a significantly different set of skills that basic skills. I have seen no convincing evidence that most students today are lacking genuinely basic skills in literacy and math, and certainly no evidence that they are somehow more lacking in skills that people two or three generations ago had; I have a lot of first-hand evidence that many students today are lacking college preparatory skills, but are still expected to attend college and are attending college. So we should not be at all shocked that many students need remedial work in college, because trying to prepare every student for college work is an impossible task for high schools and high school teachers. The more students who attend college, the more who will need remediation; I don't know why we'd expect to see anything different, or assume that's an indication that schools are failing to teach basic skills in any widespread way.

Edited May 13, 2011 by twoforjoy

[lionfamily1999]

NO! Standardized tests are a scam. Grades and tests do not at all match up. My sister was teaching remedial math in Mississippi. She was teaching at the Jr High and if the kids did not pass her class, they had to go to the "Alternative school." She had 16 year olds that could not add or subtract. The kids that passed her class always failed the test. When the principal demanded to know how these kids were making As when they scored so low on the test, she very calmly explained that she is a REMEDIAL MATH teacher. She is teaching these kids BASIC SKILLS that they should have learned in elementary school. When they get an A in her class, they are at a 3rd grade level. The standardized test they are given is according to their AGE GRADE. There is no way those kids would even pass the 5th grade ITBS. Unfortunately, that still allows them to graduate. It's not my sister's fault, it's not the student's fault, it's their parents and the school's fault.

 

 

 

It's true. I absolutely agree. I was beyond frustrated with my ranking in HS because I was in all honors and AP courses, which should have theoretically helped me. However, there were plenty of kids who took all regular courses or classes at the Voc-Tech and had a higher ranking than me!:001_huh:

 

And FWIW - I purposely avoided any major that required math because I would have had to take remedial math. I never understood any of the higher maths, but managed to get Bs all through school. My Geometry teacher gave all open-book tests, My Trig and Algebra III teacher allowed us to use our notes and calculators. I never had to learn anything. I sat down for Calculus 100 and almost cried. I changed my major the next day. When I ended up having to take a basic math class because I transferred schools, I was put into Consumer Math, which was the lowest Math class you could take for credit. I still remember this little, sweet Asian lady that spoke very little English saying to me, "It's OK sweetie. I pass you anyway." She gave me a C out of pity.:lol:

I took remedial math :p It was the first time I ever really understood all that math I had done in high school. I HATED math in high school. I did well, I got straight A's and stopped at Algebra II, because I didn't have to go any higher to graduate AP. I never understood what I was doing. I could do it all, on paper, but I never understood how it really worked. I memorized formulas and that was good enough.

 

I was so surprised when I started remedial math for college. It all made sense, there was a reason for everything. Now, I get so excited about math (and it drives the kids nuts) :lol:

 

Okay, I just realized it's too late for me to put thoughts together coherently... iow, I just forgot what I was going to type :p I'll be back in the a.m. when things make sense again ;)

[creekland]

Many of you could be describing our high school. We often graduate students with high GPAs who then can't pass entrance tests into college and have to take remedial classes. They may have gotten As in Calculus at our high school and still need remedial math in the local cc.

 

I was talking with a parent of a senior from last year. She told me her daughter's friends started at 4 year schools (and not top tier schools), but had to drop out and are now taking cc classes. They simply were not well prepared.

 

PA is now testing out a state-wide year end test for various academic classes. Our school just gave Alg 1, Alg 2, Geometry, Bio, and a couple of English tests.

 

Being a math/science person, I can give my opinion of those. Every single one of the math tests was quite fair and a student who knew what they were doing could get 100%. I didn't get to look at all of the Bio test, but I wasn't dismayed by what I saw.

 

Every single teacher I talked with told me our school is going to get killed with these grades and the tests are "too hard." When I looked through the test booklets to check for completeness I saw more blank boxes and question marks than nicely done tests. Even those who wrote nicely weren't always in the right ballpark.

 

And the reason our school volunteered to field test these tests? They want to be certain our results are compared so the tests will be either easier or have a better curve. They also wanted a closer look at what they will be like to adjust courses (THIS latter reason is a GOOD thing for our school. PLEASE teach to the test - it means more will be covered!)

 

In theory, those in 8th grade this year will need to pass mulitple Keystone tests in order to graduate, BUT this is in danger of being stopped due to budget cuts. If it gets cut, education won't change and our school will keep churning out undereducated younguns. If it does change either the kids/curriculum will need to change or our dropout rate is going to skyrocket.

 

Quite often it's not really the teachers who don't know what they are doing. There is real apathy on the part of the kids to retain knowledge. They study (maybe) for the tests, and that's it. In our school's case we also use CPM math - a horrible curriculum that many teachers now see just won't cut it for real life. Our school started making all students take Alg 1 over the equivalent of 2 years and the kids STILL can't do well on a basic Alg 1 test. One teacher complained that the test wanted the kids to do the problem, get the results and apply the results. Um, yeah, isn't that what successful math is all about? This guy is a GREAT teacher (my son has him), but even great teachers need a decent curriculum to teach from. He teaches the book well, but if the book doesn't cover what is needed...

 

I have to be super careful what I say at our school as I work there and could find myself without a job. But, I've been a bit more bold lately and I'm hopeful that people are starting to listen. My oldest two are homeschooled and have done far better than their peers. That helps. My youngest is back in ps for other reasons than academic. It gives me a lot of stress, but he sees the difference and is agreeable to doing a lot more than our ps requires. He took the Bio and Geometry Keystone and most likely did better than his peers (it was incredibly tempting to look and compare, but I had to resist the urge). It was still an eye-opener for him and has encouraged him to work a bit more outside of school. I told him the Keystones are a more accurate test of what colleges will expect you to know.

 

Oh, did I mention that our school doesn't let tests/papers come home? They are kept in portfolios at school. The only way I can see what youngest has done wrong is to go into school and ask. Homework is done at home, but not graded things.

[Catherine]

What evidence can you present that "A movement born in the 1960s and rooted in political correctness if you can believe it, has shifted teaching methodology, disciplinary practices, curriculum content to be more "friendly" to girls and minorities." ? I'm asking seriously.

[Capt_Uhura]

What evidence can you present that "A movement born in the 1960s and rooted in political correctness if you can believe it, has shifted teaching methodology, disciplinary practices, curriculum content to be more "friendly" to girls and minorities." ? I'm asking seriously.

 

I've seen that stated in several education books. Granted, many of them were about the decline in boys' academic fitness. Teaching went to less activity especially in K,1st grade, more sitting at desks, more written work, more written work earlier, books which mainly appeal to girls, no adventure stories, etc. I've not seen anything regarding minorities however.

[Joyofsixreboot]

There are more factors than one at play here. Students are not ability grouped, teachers feeling unfairly judged obviously don't want tests that would lead to results they will be blamed for, teachers are often well versed in classroom management and poorly prepared in content, parents have often abdicated responsibility for their child's learning outside of the stated seeing they show up clean, fed and with homework in hand, and education schools teach future teachers a constructivist style where every child makes their own discoveries rather than memorizing material. Add in a culture that doesn't value education and considers those who do 'odd' or 'geeky' and you've got a recipe for low educational attainment.

[creekland]

There are more factors than one at play here. Students are not ability grouped, teachers feeling unfairly judged obviously don't want tests that would lead to results they will be blamed for, teachers are often well versed in classroom management and poorly prepared in content, parents have often abdicated responsibility for their child's learning outside of the stated seeing they show up clean, fed and with homework in hand, and education schools teach future teachers a constructivist style where every child makes their own discoveries rather than memorizing material. Add in a culture that doesn't value education and considers those who do 'odd' or 'geeky' and you've got a recipe for low educational attainment.

 

That's a really good, concise summary! :iagree:

[beaners]

What evidence can you present that "A movement born in the 1960s and rooted in political correctness if you can believe it, has shifted teaching methodology, disciplinary practices, curriculum content to be more "friendly" to girls and minorities." ? I'm asking seriously.

 

I recently finished reading a book called Losing Our Language by Sandra Stotsky. It covers how multicultural education has changed some aspects of teaching. It lists examples and overall numbers for the change in reading vocabulary from difficult words in the English language to specific vocabulary words in other languages. It also highlights some changes in the types of questions that students could be asked about the literature they read, many of which I felt were inappropriately leading for grammar and young logic stage students. The book also lists examples where teaching strategies have been changed to accommodate students who speak or read other languages instead of helping them learn to use English.

 

I thought it was very interesting, but my opinions on the matter aren't set in stone. Someone who wholeheartedly agrees with all of the ideas in the book would probably love it. It wouldn't be an easy book for an opponent to read with an open mind. I definitely saw some of the highlights of the book put in place when I was a student. (Classroom discussion at a standstill because no one could pronounce the names and objects in the story, for example.) I do still read books to my children about different cultures and with dialect, but I do those out loud. I don't know if it is truly the cause for the poor educational results we see.

 

I have a burning questions myself, about the idea that we are expecting too much from students. How is it that we can't prepare average or above average students to take college courses, but other countries are able to prepare below average students to outperform all of our students on international tests? I'm thinking of the examples where our best students are below the level of the worst students in other countries. I know a lot of it boils down to cultural priorities. I don't think that the actual ability of the students is the limiting factor.

[Haiku]

I haven't read all the replies, and maybe my opinion is not popular, but here's my take:

 

Caveat: I am no fan of schools even though I have a dd in one.

 

I don't think you can entirely blame the schools. I went to a "good" school. It certainly had its problems. I graduated (early) in the top 10 of my class with a 3.96 GPA. I wrote my senior English paper in two days and got an A+, with the comment "Excellent" written on it. I was not challenged.

 

I went to a good state school and did just fine. I graduated summa cum laude.

 

I am NOT trying to brag on myself. Many of my friends did similarly well.

 

My point is ...

 

I think kids and parents bear some of the responsibility. I think that too many kids don't take school seriously. They put in their time, and that's about it. In their spare time, the focus on mind-numbing, inane activities that don't edify or stretch them. And their parents let them. These kids (and probably their parents) see school and the rest of life as separate things. They spend their "down time" zoning on out pop culture. Imho, in dampens the impact of their education.

 

I was a nerd. In my spare time, I read nerdy books, watched nerdy documentaries, and participated in nerdy activities. I was not into pop culture very much. I was into intellectual pursuits. My outside-of-school life not only enhanced but also superceded my school life in terms of intellectual development. I didn't go to school, put in my time, and spend my non-school time trying to make up for having to be in school.

 

Although in general I do think that schools don't challenge kids, I also think that many parents and kids make choices that negatively impact their education. There is a reason why SWB and other proponents of classical education recommend against fluff in the kids' spare time. If you surround yourself with brain candy, it's not surprising that you end up struggling.

 

Tara

[Dana]

I have a burning questions myself, about the idea that we are expecting too much from students. How is it that we can't prepare average or above average students to take college courses, but other countries are able to prepare below average students to outperform all of our students on international tests? I'm thinking of the examples where our best students are below the level of the worst students in other countries. I know a lot of it boils down to cultural priorities. I don't think that the actual ability of the students is the limiting factor.

 

I think it's that in some of the countries not everyone is in school.

You'd want to look at who is being tested and how are the terms being defined.

 

(Note: our test scores are still dismal and we're not holding the students accountable for their work. Stop social promotion. I know some districts here don't assign a grade under a 50.)

[Perry]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Catherine

What evidence can you present that "A movement born in the 1960s and rooted in political correctness if you can believe it, has shifted teaching methodology, disciplinary practices, curriculum content to be more "friendly" to girls and minorities." ? I'm asking seriously.

I recently finished reading a book called Losing Our Language by Sandra Stotsky.

 

I loved this book. I also recommend The Schools We Need and Why We Don't Have Them by E.D. Hirsch, and Left Back: A Century of Failed School Reforms and The Language Police, both by Diane Ravitch.

 

Amazon Review:

The impulse in the 1960s and ‘70s to achieve fairness and a balanced perspective in our nation’s textbooks and standardized exams was undeniably necessary and commendable. Then how could it have gone so terribly wrong? Acclaimed education historian Diane Ravitch answers this question in her informative and alarming book, The Language Police: How Pressure Groups Restrict What Students Learn. Author of 7 books, Ravitch served as the U.S. Assistant Secretary of Education from 1991 to 1993. Her expertise and her 30-year commitment to education lend authority and urgency to this important book, which describes in copious detail how pressure groups from the political right and left have wrested control of the language and content of textbooks and standardized exams, often at the expense of the truth (in the case of history), of literary quality (in the case of literature), and of education in general. Like most people involved in education, Ravitch did not realize "that educational materials are now governed by an intricate set of rules to screen out language and topics that might be considered controversial or offensive." In this clear-eyed critique, she is an unapologetic challenger of the ridiculous and damaging extremes to which bias guidelines and sensitivity training have been taken by the federal government, the states, and textbook publishers.

[RanchGirl]

My sister (N's mom) is not well-educated. She has weak writing skills and only basic math skills. So, yes, I assume she saw the papers. No, nothing seemed amiss to her. She trusted the school. I think, more than anything, she trusted the grades Niece was getting. A solid B average looks pretty awesome, especially to someone who dropped out of high school.

 

My sister fulfilled her end of the contract*. My niece showed up clean, fed and homework in hand. My sister attended the parent-teacher conferences. She trusted the school when they said they'd do the rest.

 

* There is an actual contract parents sign in kindergarten stating that we (parents) agree to do a list of things. Among them are making sure kids show up on time, well-rested, complete homework, etc. So, when I say she fulfilled her end of the contract, I mean that literally.

 

What does the contract say the school's obligation is? Does your sister still have a copy of the contract? If so, then maybe she can sue.

 

Honestly, I can't see ever trusting an institution like that. Call me a control freak, but I need to KNOW my kids are doing well, not just trust that the school says they are. (This is a personal opinion, not a condemnation of your sister. I am considering sending one of my sons to a charter school so I am trying to figure out what is best for him, how will we know it is working, all that stuff)

 

How did your niece do on the ACT or SATs?

[Capt_Uhura]

There are more factors than one at play here. Students are not ability grouped, teachers feeling unfairly judged obviously don't want tests that would lead to results they will be blamed for, teachers are often well versed in classroom management and poorly prepared in content, parents have often abdicated responsibility for their child's learning outside of the stated seeing they show up clean, fed and with homework in hand, and education schools teach future teachers a constructivist style where every child makes their own discoveries rather than memorizing material. Add in a culture that doesn't value education and considers those who do 'odd' or 'geeky' and you've got a recipe for low educational attainment.

 

 

You said that as about as succinctly as possible! :iagree:

[Catherine]

Truer words were never spoken. Schools bear some of the responsibility, but, IMO our culture is at least as much to blame.