S/O PS teacher, early reading, etc.

[Mama Anna]

One reason I homeschool is so that I can be certain that my kids have an academically solid education. I don't want to push them beyond their abilities or desires, but I hate the idea of them sitting in a classroom idle.

 

I've assumed that by following the WTM ideas, making certain they love reading and investigating things, etc., I will be doing at least as good of an education (if not better) than the public schools.

 

I graduated from a rural high school in Ohio in the mid-nineties. My impression of public education wasn't negative at that point, but I've come to feel, upon having children of my own, that I could do at least as well, if not better.

 

So now kids are expected to be reading fluently by the end of K? :001_huh: I was under the impression that drop-out rates and non-reading high-school graduates were increasing. Which picture is accurate? Both, just in different districts? Does one lead to another?

 

I don't want this to turn into a PS-bashing thread. (If it does, Moderators, please delete it.) But can any of you ex-teachers/spouses of teachers answer this question?

 

Thanks!

Mama Anna

[Jenny in GA]

 

So now kids are expected to be reading fluently by the end of K? :001_huh: I was under the impression that drop-out rates and non-reading high-school graduates were increasing. Which picture is accurate? Both, just in different districts? Does one lead to another?

 

Thanks!

Mama Anna

 

Mama Anna, I have wondered the exact same thing many times!!

 

I have heard both:

 

1) School is so much more challenging/they expect so much more than when I was in school

 

2) Schools are producing alarming illiterate and academically incompetent high school graduates like never before

 

Huh?

 

Maybe they're two different groups of people from different types of schools???

 

Jenny

[Jean in Newcastle]

The reason was given in the other thread. Public schools are quite vigorous in grades K - 3. It is in the higher levels that things drop off. I'm not quite sure why. Perhaps because by then the differences between the kids who have been learning all along and those who have not (but have been passed on to the next grade) become very apparent?

[Orthodox6]

I think the greater culprit is the contemporary manic drive for success, with success defined quite narrowly.

 

In order to give "Little Kyootzie" a leg up the ladder roward Yale, parents jangle her ears during naptime with Baby Mozart, clutter her crib with the right mobile and toys, blackmail upscale pre-schools into advancing Kyootzie to the head of the admissions list, camp outside Einstein Academy for two weeks in order to grab a lottery ticket for admission, measure and weigh the child daily lest she gain one ounce over the maximum weight acceptable for gymnastics or modeling (which activities the child loathes, but never mind that, for the camera crew lurks around the corner looking for talent), seek clothing guidance from a brothel-inspired fashionista, so that Kyootzie can compete in "talent" shows, purchase a franchise in Kumon or some SAT-prep chain so that Kyootzie can spend every vacation day of the year cramming for the SAT. . . etc.

 

Of course that absurd paragraph includes more than most parents do. Sadly, though, many children, especially of wealthy parents, do more closely approximate that description.

Edited May 21, 2010 by Orthodox6

[StartingOver]

I am not a teacher. I can tell you how the local schools here in Texas are though. The approach with my nieces and nephews was a feel good approach. They played in K, and learned to sight read, whole math, kid spelling, etc. Those nieces and nephew are now graduating left and right, they were mostly honor students, in gifted and talented classes, Superintendant lists. They are all having to go to community collge, because they just can't do the work. All had poor SAT scores.

 

Now with my grandchildren I am seeing a change, the push is for earlier the better. They are going back to phonics, mastery math - spiral in nature, learning spelling along with reading and writing. But they have done away with naps in K, recess in all grades. Art and music are now after school extra's.

 

This push with NCLB is bad for the kids !!

 

I am a earlier than better mom, but I don't push. I wait for my children to ask, to want to learn. With mine that has ranged greatly in age. I have had readers at 3 year old, and readers at 8 years old. There is always plenty of play, and extra's are critical in my home. I can't imagine making my children sit for full day kindergarten.

[Angel]

My cousin is a ps 2nd grade teacher. She is not allowed to "fail" a student anymore. She can "recommend" that the parents hold little Johnny back because of xyz but she cannot "fail" him. Therefore, little Johnny gets passed through 1st grade because his parents don't see a problem. My cousin gets little Johnny and does all she can for him, but she is trying to recoup ground from 1st grade (where little Johnny should be) and all of 2nd grade plus keep up with all the others in her class which includes a couple more little Johnny's or Susie's. She recommends that little Johnny repeat 2nd grade. Parents don't see a problem, she can't fail him, and the cycle begins all over again for the 3rd grade teacher (and 4th, etc.) Little Johnny never gets where he should be and therefore, due to the parent's denial and the school's policy of "no failures," Johnny does poor his whole school career.

 

I guess I'm saying that all the school system's "early academics" is crap if they have a child who is not ready OR one that needs more work and the parent's refuse to see it.

 

My cousin's little boy was bringing home worksheets for K and doing Dibbles reading testing. Kids are "behind" if they haven't went to preschool. Heck, the school had even taken away the afternoon recess for the 1st graders. What!?!

 

So, from my experience, the schools want the "early academics" but the system has become so screwed up by bureaucracy that they are failing to give the teachers the tools necessary to execute success, therefore, the number of kids falling through the cracks rises.

 

My cousin is an amazing teacher. She does as many extra things with her students as the philosophy of "teaching to the test" allows. She encourages them to do better, challenges those who are ahead, and works hard with those who are struggling. She deals with nasty parents every year. But her hands ARE tied by what she has to teach and the funds available and the school district's rules.

 

She is also a mom, and right now a fellow teacher has her son. The difference between her 2nd graders and her son's 2nd grade class is HUGE! As a parent, she has been frustrated many times by what her son is doing, or the lack of a challenge. So it is SO hit or miss in ps with so many different factors to consider.

[myfunnybunch]

So now kids are expected to be reading fluently by the end of K? :001_huh: I was under the impression that drop-out rates and non-reading high-school graduates were increasing. Which picture is accurate?

 

Both pictures are accurate. In many public school districts, children are expected to be reading by the end of kindergarten. And our high schools are turning out increasing numbers of children who cannot read well.

 

The push to have children reading earlier and earlier is a direct knee-jerk reaction to the reading rates of high school graduates. Over-simplification of the issues and policies formed by people who are not elementary or reading education specialists leads to this kind of thinking: If we teach children to read sooner, they will be more successful readers later.

 

Of course it's not that easy.

 

The idea of "remedial" classes in kindergarten makes me feel sick.

 

Cat

[Dmmetler]

K kids here are supposed to be on a DRA level 2-3 at the end of K and a 16 at the end of 1st.

 

However, in K-2, kids can only be retained at the parent's request.

[angela in ohio]

You'll notice that most of the conversations about public schools involve a lot of "my neighbor said the teacher said," or "my cousin teaches and she said they do this," or "I heard they do this in our town." It is hard to get an accurate view of what is actually going on in the schools if you look at second-hand anecdotes (even first-hand anecdotes will be biased.) I think that is where a lot of the contradictory information comes from. :001_smile:

 

Also, this is a diverse nation with a diverse population. when you say, "All those parents pushing their dc." or "All those parents neglecting their dc." you could be right on both sides. When you talk about schools pushing academics and schools that are failing, they could be a hundred miles from each other, but both would be right. Whatever starts with "schools these days..." is going to be a huge generalization. And so here is mine...

 

The schools are held captive by the teacher colleges, which jump on the latest educational fad about every sixteen seconds. The unions also fight initiatives that would create more work for teachers or threaten their pet ideals, even when those initiatives (methods) are proven to be effective. Then you have administrators, parents, the government... all with a hand in trying to ensure that students are well-educated in their own way. It makes for a mess. The government can't get results up by having administrators fire bad teachers, because you can't do that. They instituted testing regimes many, many years ago to try to break the problem from the top down, but that fails, too, even after they have tried several plans. Good teachers can't teach well because it goes against what 'the plan' is (and the plan comes from teacher colleges who care less about effective educational methods and more about political programming); bad teachers don't do what they're supposed to anyway, but they stay put. Some parents neglect their kids and are a bigger problem than the schools. The media portrays anything but intelligence as desirable (appearance, sexuality, popularity, etc.) There are just so many problems... :confused:

[Mama Anna]

Public schools are quite vigorous in grades K - 3. It is in the higher levels that things drop off.

 

Thanks, Jean! I read that in the other thread, but it doesn't fully make sense to me either.

 

Are these two different school districts? That would seem the simplest explanation. Are there different administrators involved in K-3 than there are 4-12 and some just aren't on the bandwagon yet? Is it a new push, only 4 years old, and it just hasn't reached 4th grade yet? Has an academically pushed K'er made it out of high school yet so we can see the full picture, or are they still somewhere in middle school? Is it all related to the passage of NCLB?

 

Thanks for the other replies, too! I'm just trying to figure stuff out while having only second-hand experience in my local district. (I'd rather not show up at the local principal's office and request an interview.) :D

 

Mama Anna

[Jean in Newcastle]

Thanks, Jean! I read that in the other thread, but it doesn't fully make sense to me either.

 

Are these two different school districts? That would seem the simplest explanation. Are there different administrators involved in K-3 than there are 4-12 and some just aren't on the bandwagon yet? Is it a new push, only 4 years old, and it just hasn't reached 4th grade yet? Has an academically pushed K'er made it out of high school yet so we can see the full picture, or are they still somewhere in middle school? Is it all related to the passage of NCLB?

 

Thanks for the other replies, too! I'm just trying to figure stuff out while having only second-hand experience in my local district. (I'd rather not show up at the local principal's office and request an interview.) :D

 

Mama Anna

 

No, not two different school districts. But there are different administrators. Here there would be a principal and district standards for K - 5th, then another principal and district standards for 6 - 8, then another principal and district standards for 9 - 12. Standards have been getting gradually more rigorous for K - 3 (and maybe up to 5th but it's more noticeable at the lower grades because developmental milestones make a much bigger difference then) around here starting from about 5 years ago.

[Jenny in GA]

Hmmm ... I wonder if this is also like my earlier threads about writing?

 

For example, my friend's mother is a kindergarten aide, and she repeatedly tells my friend that she is concerned, because those kindergarteners are writing in their journal every day -- how come my grandchild isn't doing that??

 

So maybe it's a case of, yes, they start them early, yes, it's impressive-sounding, yes, it's academic -- but what they're doing is the wrong thing.

 

Jenny

[newlifemom]

You'll notice that most of the conversations about public schools involve a lot of "my neighbor said the teacher said," or "my cousin teaches and she said they do this," or "I heard they do this in our town." It is hard to get an accurate view of what is actually going on in the schools if you look at second-hand anecdotes (even first-hand anecdotes will be biased.) I think that is where a lot of the contradictory information comes from. :001_smile:

 

Also, this is a diverse nation with a diverse population. when you say, "All those parents pushing their dc." or "All those parents neglecting their dc." you could be right on both sides. When you talk about schools pushing academics and schools that are failing, they could be a hundred miles from each other, but both would be right. Whatever starts with "schools these days..." is going to be a huge generalization. And so here is mine...

 

The schools are held captive by the teacher colleges, which jump on the latest educational fad about every sixteen seconds. The unions also fight initiatives that would create more work for teachers or threaten their pet ideals, even when those initiatives (methods) are proven to be effective. Then you have administrators, parents, the government... all with a hand in trying to ensure that students are well-educated in their own way. It makes for a mess. The government can't get results up by having administrators fire bad teachers, because you can't do that. They instituted testing regimes many, many years ago to try to break the problem from the top down, but that fails, too, even after they have tried several plans. Good teachers can't teach well because it goes against what 'the plan' is (and the plan comes from teacher colleges who care less about effective educational methods and more about political programming); bad teachers don't do what they're supposed to anyway, but they stay put. Some parents neglect their kids and are a bigger problem than the schools. The media portrays anything but intelligence as desirable (appearance, sexuality, popularity, etc.) There are just so many problems... :confused:

 

As usual Angela, you are the voice of reason and constraint. I wish you would move to the PNW so I could sit at your feet. :D

 

 

To the OP: Dorothy Sayers discusses this problem well [imho] in her essay, "The Lost Tools of Learning." Her premise is that we can read well enough, but we cannot think. Thus we will be taken in by every idea that comes around. [My very bad paraphrase]

 

There is more to literacy than being able to decode words. KWIM?

Edited May 21, 2010 by newlifemom
Yikes! That was some ugly grammar! Sorry.

[Angel]

You'll notice that most of the conversations about public schools involve a lot of or "my cousin teaches and she said they do this,"

 

My cousin is my best friend. I hear more than casual conversation. I hear the nitty gritty, good and bad. She teaches in the school system that she grew up in. I wasn't trying to make this sound like all schools are set up this way, just giving a view into one building that teaches K-2.

 

So it is SO hit or miss in ps with so many different factors to consider.

 

I know that all schools ARE different. Just as all teachers are different. This is why I put this at the end of my post.

 

Don't mean to sound grumpy :D just wanted to clarify a little.

[Murmer]

As a teacher who has worked in 3 different districts and 3 different states it is accurate to say we push harder and kids are falling further behind. The problem is that the expectation in k is very high continuing to at least 3rd grade but a child who is behind in k will get further behind in 1st and even further behind as they go. Teachers don't have the skills, resources or help they need to help these children effectively so they keep doing what they are doing. On top of that we now have nclb, tiered schools, and funding based on test scores so the focus becomes less about helping every child to how can I get the majority to the minimuim requirement. So many teachers are forced to let the lowest go because their score won't change but a cusp kid will. FYI the way the test scores work in ps is 1 and 2 scores are failing and a 3 or 4 is a pass but then extra "points" are given for students who were 2s last year and become 3s this year especially if they are a minority do that is a teachers main focus 2s to 3s and keep 3s at 3s.

[5LittleMonkeys]

My cousin is a ps 2nd grade teacher. She is not allowed to "fail" a student anymore.

 

Has the school system even told her why they can't fail a student?

 

This is why we have K students reading but then graduating with no more than a 6th or 8th grade reading level. Because somewhere along the way they hit a developmental roadblock and aren't given the time they need to get past it. Does this happen at the time when children are moving from the grammar stage of thinking to the logic stage of thinking? Are the school systems not giving the ps kids the tools in logic and abstract thinking that is required to do middle and highschool work? Does anyone know why schools won't hold back students that just aren't ready to move ahead?

 

I "failed" my dd in math at the end of last year because she just wasn't ready to move to the next level of math. Fortunately she was able to progress in all other subjects. I know its unrealistic but it is a shame that ps schools can't be set up to progress students per subject.

[kmacnchs]

As a teacher who has worked in 3 different districts and 3 different states it is accurate to say we push harder and kids are falling further behind. The problem is that the expectation in k is very high continuing to at least 3rd grade but a child who is behind in k will get further behind in 1st and even further behind as they go. Teachers don't have the skills, resources or help they need to help these children effectively so they keep doing what they are doing. On top of that we now have nclb, tiered schools, and funding based on test scores so the focus becomes less about helping every child to how can I get the majority to the minimuim requirement. So many teachers are forced to let the lowest go because their score won't change but a cusp kid will. FYI the way the test scores work in ps is 1 and 2 scores are failing and a 3 or 4 is a pass but then extra "points" are given for students who were 2s last year and become 3s this year especially if they are a minority do that is a teachers main focus 2s to 3s and keep 3s at 3s.

 

:iagree::iagree:NAIL ON THE HEAD RIGHT THERE!!!

 

I was a 5th grade teacher and I was chastised for not teaching to the average students and our principal gave a me a talk about needing to give out "gentlemanly C's" (whatever that means).

 

Believe me, the pressures were the OPPOSITE for our K teachers! (Keeping kids after school, no recess, etc. just so they could "catch up" to the "standard")

[ElizabethB]

I have taught remedial students in each state we've lived, and through my military connections, have taught students from almost every state in the union, I know a lot of people who move a lot!

 

They have a lot of homework and seemingly high expectations, but they are not teaching in a manner that produces consistent good outcomes at the higher levels. They are teaching a lot of sight words at early ages, with a bit of phonics thrown in. It works for some children, but fails many. And, the failures generally show up around 3rd or 4th grade when the books cannot be kept simple enough to guess through and the vocabulary burden gets too high for most students to memorize. This is known as the "4th grade slump, or the 4th grade hump." It did not exist when phonics was well taught.

 

I haven't done as much math tutoring, but I have done some and there seems to be a similar pattern going on--seemingly high expectations, but little teaching for understanding, which impacts results later on when you're building on skills and understanding.

 

Here are two blog posts I wrote on Kitchen Table Math (not my blog, but I post there occasionally) related to the 4th grade slump:

 

http://kitchentablemath.blogspot.com/2009/10/first-use-of-phrase-4th-grade-hump.html

 

http://kitchentablemath.blogspot.com/2009/10/vocabulary-reduction-deliberate-dumbing.html

 

My website has a longer explanation called "Why Johnny Doesn't Like to Read."

[Angel]

Has the school system even told her why they can't fail a student?

 

 

 

Maybe I worded that poorly. She is allowed to fail a student, but failing a student doesn't hold the student back anymore in her school. She can fail a 2nd grader and recommend for that student to repeat 2nd grade. But it is up to the parents whether or not the child repeats. If the child failed 2nd grade and the parents want him/her moved on to 3rd. The school has to move them on to 3rd. This makes her sick because she knows that the child is going to struggle in the next grade and it's not the child's fault that the parents won't see that there is a problem.

 

I am not sure why. She has mentioned a few times the "No Child Left Behind" act as being part of the problem, but as we don't discuss politics with each other at all, I have no idea what she means by it. :D

[angela in ohio]

My cousin is my best friend.

 

Sorry, Angel, I wasn't referring to you specifically, but more to the varied opinions on the thread OP referred to, as well as previous conversations about this topic here. I picked 'cousin' out of the air, having just skimmed the other responses. It is my usual refrain when I complain about anecdotal evidence being used in an argument (even my dc now say, "so and so's cousin's cousin's friend said it, so it must be true." :D)

 

I do stand by the statement that when someone tells us about a situation, though, they give us their perspective.

 

I agree with you that it is hit or miss and that good teachers are frustrated by what is going on, though!

[ElizabethB]

I agree with you that it is hit or miss and that good teachers are frustrated by what is going on, though!

:iagree:

 

And, I know some! Many of them have to hide the way they are teaching, at least until they reach retirement age, sadly enough. I know people who have been forced to make "word walls" so they put phonics words up! Also, people who bring in their own materials so they can teach well, that is sad, too.

[kmacnchs]

:iagree:

 

And, I know some! Many of them have to hide the way they are teaching, at least until they reach retirement age, sadly enough. I know people who have been forced to make "word walls" so they put phonics words up! Also, people who bring in their own materials so they can teach well, that is sad, too.

 

that is sad! but very brave! i have never met any!

[Parrothead]

Both pictures are accurate. In many public school districts, children are expected to be reading by the end of kindergarten. And our high schools are turning out increasing numbers of children who cannot read well.

 

The push to have children reading earlier and earlier is a direct knee-jerk reaction to the reading rates of high school graduates. Over-simplification of the issues and policies formed by people who are not elementary or reading education specialists leads to this kind of thinking: If we teach children to read sooner, they will be more successful readers later.

 

Of course it's not that easy.

 

The idea of "remedial" classes in kindergarten makes me feel sick.

 

Cat

:iagree: And they either can't or won't see the correlation between the two. They have pushed so hard for earlier and earlier They would loose face if They changed Their minds.

[Sahamamama]

So now kids are expected to be reading fluently by the end of K? :001_huh: I was under the impression that drop-out rates and non-reading high-school graduates were increasing. Which picture is accurate? Both, just in different districts? Does one lead to another?

 

 

I think it works like this:

 

Expectation = Ideal (although perhaps this is only ideal for some families/children):

 

 

• Children will enter Kindergarten knowing how to read or ready to learn to read. At the least, they will have been prepared for intensive reading instruction via preschool/at-home instruction that has included basic concepts of print, letter recognition and letter-sound correspondence. They will have been read to often.

 

 

 

• Children will enter Kindergarten well-acquainted with "basic preschool concepts," such as colors, shapes, sizes, textures, animal names & sounds, body parts, positional/directional/time concepts, opposites, counting, number recognition, and the like.

 

 

 

• Children will enter Kindergarten possessing the literacy of the nursery and preschool. They will be able to chant numerous nursery rhymes and sing many preschool songs (e.g., Diddle Diddle Dumpling, Jack and Jill, The Wheels on the Bus, Old MacDonald). They will be very familiar with -- and able to tell -- a canon of traditional folk tales (e.g., The Three Little Pigs, The Three Billy Goats Gruff, Goldilocks & the Three Bears, Jack & the Beanstalk).

 

 

 

• Children will enter Kindergarten in command of a large, rich vocabulary and with well-developed social skills, gained through enriching experiences with caregivers, family, and friends, including play groups, preschool, field trips, camps, and community groups.

 

 

 

• Children will enter Kindergarten physically fit through ample exercise, outdoor play in fresh air, superior nutrition, and sufficient daily rest and sleep.

 

Experience = Real (what teachers & students live out each day)

 

Years ago, I read somewhere that, "Frustration is the distance between your Expectation and your Reality. If you can't handle your current level of Frustration, you have to change either your Reality or your Expectation."

 

I think this may be what happens within the PS system. The expectation of the administration/school board/federal government :confused: is that children will all arrive at school with this ideal preparation for learning. The reality of many PS teachers is that children do not arrive at school -- at any grade level -- prepared by parents/guardians/themselves at home in any of the above-listed ways. Forget teaching a pre-Kindergartener to read. Has anyone read him a book in the last year? In far too many homes, the answer is no. At our local high school, "students" show up with no pen, no pencil, no notebook, nothing. At that level, IMO, that's the kid's problem. Go a dollar store, buy a pack of pens, for crying out loud.

 

But the kids do show up unprepared to learn. How could I, one single teacher, change that reality? How could I impact what does or doesn't happen in the home before my students even show up on the first day of school?

 

In the case of Kindergarten, I think it should be viewed as Rung One on the Ladder of Education -- so it should be placed as low as it needs to be for everyone to be able to grab hold. I say this, and I do believe it, but that's the very reason why we are homeschooling Kindergarten (and probably beyond) -- because my kid is way beyond Rung One, and has said she doesn't want to go backwards! But I still believe that every child should have the opportunity to go through the basic list that I outlined above. That list used to be where students would start in Kindergarten. I could never put my K'er into a class (for a whole year!) that covered those things, because she'd be bored to death with "this is an R." But I still think that list is where K should start. With "this is an R," not with knowing how to read.

[Dmmetler]

The other reason for the drop off is that skills really aren't learned. For example, if in K-2, a majority of your reading selections are little, illustrated books that rely on the Dolch words for that level plus set phonics rules, (Think the Margaret Hillert Books on Starfall) it is entirely possible that a child could be VERY fluent on those books, but have trouble making a jump to text that doesn't follow those rules that they've internalized. Theoretically, they were supposed to be learning new rules all along, but they haven't actually moved on in their understanding from that early level. 3rd grade seems to be a big stopping point for a lot of kids.

 

Similarly, as a math tutor, I see a lot of kids who memorized addition and subtraction, but really haven't ever grasped place value or composition/decomposition well. They may be able to crank through problems using the algorithm they learned in class, but the second the problems go outside their experience, they simply cannot do it.

 

So, while you've pushed down the skills younger and younger, often what has happened is that the skill has been pushed down to the point that kids have memorized with NO understanding. Then, when they have to generalize, they can't. So intense pre-K, K, 1, 2 programs lead to real struggles in 4-6, because not only were many of the kids not ready for the skills when they were taught, but that they missed the chance to learn them when they WERE ready. I guess that's one plus for spiral programs in a public school setting-at least the child might have a prayer of the skills being taught at the right time for that child.

 

 

And the sad thing is that kids who ARE ready and master these skills easily and early tend to get dismissed offhand because, after all, EVERYONE knows early reader "level out by grade 3" (never mind that if a child is reading at grade 3 before they enter school, the only way they could level out is if they learn NOTHING in the next 3 years-which isn't exactly a positive recommendation for a school system!).

[myfunnybunch]

As a teacher who has worked in 3 different districts and 3 different states it is accurate to say we push harder and kids are falling further behind. The problem is that the expectation in k is very high continuing to at least 3rd grade but a child who is behind in k will get further behind in 1st and even further behind as they go.

 

Yes. And now any child not reading by kindergarten is considered behind, and can only get further and further and further behind. It's as though they are doomed before they get themselves fairly started.

 

In the case of Kindergarten, I think it should be viewed as Rung One on the Ladder of Education -- so it should be placed as low as it needs to be for everyone to be able to grab hold.

 

Yes. This.

 

3rd grade seems to be a big stopping point for a lot of kids.

 

Similarly, as a math tutor, I see a lot of kids who memorized addition and subtraction, but really haven't ever grasped place value or composition/decomposition well. They may be able to crank through problems using the algorithm they learned in class, but the second the problems go outside their experience, they simply cannot do it.

 

So, while you've pushed down the skills younger and younger, often what has happened is that the skill has been pushed down to the point that kids have memorized with NO understanding. Then, when they have to generalize, they can't.

 

I remember a lengthy conversation with my 2nd dd's 3rd grade teacher about what happens for children developmentally and academically in third grade. She said it's really the transition year from the concrete rules and instruction emphasized in 2nd grade to the more abstract conceptual rules and instruction in 4th grade. (Think the transition from Grammar to Logic stages.) If children are not developmentally ready for the concepts, they start to fall apart at the stage they're supposed to start using them independently.

 

Cat

[Ali in OR]

I live in an area of very well-educated adults and really a very decent school district. This is particularly true of the elementary program. There are many parents who do push academics very early. My oldest dd is in the public school system, and even though she is in a life skills class, I have seen a lot of evidence that the elementary school she went to does really amazing things.

 

Then the kids hit middle school. I happened to be at a school board meeting where some middle school statistics were shared. One that really caught my attention is that students who were performing in the upper half of the population did not have the expected growth in skills from one year to another. Then hearing about the goals that the entire school system is based on, I think I understand why. What are the schools measured on? What are the metrics they are trying to reach? One that keeps getting mentioned is "closing the achievement gap" between the highest performing kids and the lowest performing kids. To reach this goal, it is really in your best interest if there is no growth for the upper half of students. The district's focus is definitely on bringing up the lower performing students. So I think a big factor is that schools will focus on what they are being measured on.

 

Now my somewhat cynical view is that the entire system is geared to get kids to read and master the basic test skills as early as possible but never go beyond that. Then just keep drilling to that same goal with everyone--get the K'ers reading at a 4th grade level, help those 6th graders who can't yet read at a 4th grade level, extra tutoring for the 9th graders who haven't yet passed the state tests. I think the expectations for K-1 tend to be high (and yes our K'ers journal also) and then those expectations stay pretty flat over the years so that kids who have learned a lot coming out of 5th grade then show no growth at all during their middle school years. But that's okay as long as they pass the state tests.

 

The kids here are doing fine. They'll get into college. They'll be successful in life. But they're not getting the kind of education I want for my dds.

[Rosie_0801]

Perhaps the situation would be improved a bit if creches and pre-schools were to tell parents that it is their job to teach their own kids to read. My neighbour was a secondary school teacher and got a nasty shock when her kiddo was at the end of grade one and still wasn't reading. She was a maths/science teacher, and taught maths and science. She mistakenly assumed she was sending her child to school to learn to read. I ended up teaching her. My mother and I thought she was rather naive, of course you have to teach your own kids to read! However no one had ever told her.

 

I wonder how many other parents don't know they are supposed to be teaching their own kids to read.

 

Rosie

[EmilyK]

My kids have been in public school and I'm friendly with teachers so I'll do a stab at answering.

 

There's a mix of what are considered best teaching practices and NCLB type pressures.

 

The latter leads a pretty strong push to have kids moving at a pretty fast clip during elementary. There are also a lot of studies that show how a kid reads by say 3rd grade is a predictor of later academic success. So there's a lot of worry -- and help -- to have at risk, low SES kids doing well in the early grades. The problem for my younger, nonredshirted son is I thought it made for too much pressure for him to be reading and writing more than he was developmentally able to do. Teachers would say "don't worry, I know you do a lot of reading at home; he just isn't ready to click yet, but we're required to check all these benchmarks". But they genuinely want to provide a good literacy foundation for the kids who have zero books and a lot of stress at home.

 

(My kids were at a school where 40 percent or so of the kids were on free or reduced lunch and there was also a segment of well educated, middle class and up families, but nobody really in the pushy parent category.)

 

The answer of what happens in the later grades for these same populations is complex. This school feeds into a very diverse high school that does a good job and is considered one of the best around here -- but still has a lot of dropouts, poor test scores etc with minority and poor students. Why? I would say the difference is largely parental involvement, home environment etc. Others would say it is because we aren't doing enough in the earlier grades for them, hence the push to cram more learning in the early years and hold teachers and schools more accountable.

 

I tried to make that fairly neutral. Hope I didn't offend.

[Mama Anna]

I think this may be what happens within the PS system. The expectation of the administration/school board/federal government :confused: is that children will all arrive at school with this ideal preparation for learning. The reality of many PS teachers is that children do not arrive at school -- at any grade level -- prepared by parents/guardians/themselves at home in any of the above-listed ways.

 

You explained this so well, Sahamamama! Thank you! Thanks to all of you who helped me understand. Ali in OR, I appreciated your explanation of middle schools, too!

 

I'm so glad I can fellowship with gracious, learned people on this board!! :D

 

Mama Anna

[TravelingChris]

And often there is no help for the older students at all. The class goes over new material, checks homework and then you are dismissed. WHat about kids who have a problem? There is no help. My observation is that they keep raising standards but the basic problems still remain. Now they want all kids to get through our years of math starting with Algebra. Well I know kids getting one on one help who can't make it through four years of math starting with Algebra in high school. How are other kids without a good math foundation and at least some math talent but with a teacher who teaches 150 going to learn? THey aren't. THen you get your rise in drop-outs or push-outs (see a thread a week or two ago about schools telling parents to homeschool their truants).

[Catherine]

I think that what's missing from institutional education that I can provide here at home is flexibility. I can pick and choose books, curriculum, vary the pace, exactly as the child needs. My kids all are dysgraphic, to an extent, and the increased writing demands of elementary school these days were very difficult and burdensome for my son, and he was in elementary 10 years ago. NO WAY could he have kept a journal in K! It would have been worse for him than it was to begin with. While this kind of education works fine for a certain kind of child, the flexibility to meet every child's needs is not there. For kids who are organized, motivated, self-starters, willing writers, naturally attentive, institutional school is easy. For the others, not so much. The lack of flexibility means that large numbers of capable and bright kids are "lost".

[LynnG in Arizona]

I have been sincerely pondering this same question for several months now.

 

I live in Hawaii, where the public schools are almost always at the bottom of the nation. My own daughter spent an entire day at a public high school here and was genuinely shocked at how basic (babyish, almost) most of the classes were.

 

But I speak to the parents who send their children to our neighborhood public school, and they consistently describe a kindergarten where the kids are expected to read quickly and write short paragraphs by the end of the year. Really? :confused: I tend to aim for the more "rigorous" end of the spectrum myself, but is writing short paragraphs by the end of the kindergarten year even developmentally appropriate for the majority of kindergarten-age children?

 

I honestly can't figure out where the disconnect is.

 

Are standards really getting raised that high . . . maybe even too high in the early grades? And the later grades just haven't caught up yet?

 

I am genuinely mystified.

 

And as a military family who has lived all over the country as has many friends living in various states, I hear similar stories on a frequent basis. Admittedly, I am getting second hand reports . . . but these second hand reports are remarkably consistent.

 

No answers, just pondering . . .

[kalanamak]

 

The answer of what happens in the later grades for these same populations is complex. .

 

Very well said, and not at all offensive to me.

 

I meet kids whose parents are all hot that they be in the "tough" schools, but the parents don't read, they don't use proper grammar, they don't display a love of learning. Little Johnny and Jill "study to the test" (a disheartening thing to someone without internal motivation and a grasp of the reason for it all) and then find other outlets for their curious minds. The parent, a decade later, is shocked the kid is in trouble with school, or the law, or with the obstetrician.

[Guest Dulcimeramy]

Perhaps the situation would be improved a bit if creches and pre-schools were to tell parents that it is their job to teach their own kids to read. My neighbour was a secondary school teacher and got a nasty shock when her kiddo was at the end of grade one and still wasn't reading. She was a maths/science teacher, and taught maths and science. She mistakenly assumed she was sending her child to school to learn to read. I ended up teaching her. My mother and I thought she was rather naive, of course you have to teach your own kids to read! However no one had ever told her.

 

I wonder how many other parents don't know they are supposed to be teaching their own kids to read.

 

Rosie

 

My mother thought it was her job to teach me to read. Of course, that was in 1979. I don't know any public school mothers who think it is their job in 2010; haven't known any who thought it since I taught my oldest son to read in 1999.

[MaMa2005]

As a teacher who has worked in 3 different districts and 3 different states it is accurate to say we push harder and kids are falling further behind. The problem is that the expectation in k is very high continuing to at least 3rd grade but a child who is behind in k will get further behind in 1st and even further behind as they go. Teachers don't have the skills, resources or help they need to help these children effectively so they keep doing what they are doing. On top of that we now have nclb, tiered schools, and funding based on test scores so the focus becomes less about helping every child to how can I get the majority to the minimuim requirement. So many teachers are forced to let the lowest go because their score won't change but a cusp kid will. FYI the way the test scores work in ps is 1 and 2 scores are failing and a 3 or 4 is a pass but then extra "points" are given for students who were 2s last year and become 3s this year especially if they are a minority do that is a teachers main focus 2s to 3s and keep 3s at 3s.

 

And then they move onto middle school with so much emotional baggage (hormones raging, etc) that teaching them is like herding cats. The goal is to pass them on so that the high school can teach them to be 'real' students. In our district, you must pass an eighth grader that would turn 16 while in eighth grade because he would then be able to drive i.e. no driving for a middle schooler. Just bizarre reasoning on some of the issues.

 

Once in high school, they aren't taught to be 'real' students. They are taught that the world gives you a gazillion chances to get it 'right' and you're parents will ALWAYS say the teacher is too hard, doesn't like their child, etc.

 

The whole system needs to be revamped.

 

Sorry for the vent. Can you tell it is the end of the school year for my husband who teaches high school and has done so for 27 years? He is beyond angry and frustrated and tired of his hands being tied in every which way possible.

[angela in ohio]

What are the metrics they are trying to reach? One that keeps getting mentioned is "closing the achievement gap" between the highest performing kids and the lowest performing kids. To reach this goal, it is really in your best interest if there is no growth for the upper half of students. The district's focus is definitely on bringing up the lower performing students. So I think a big factor is that schools will focus on what they are being measured on.

 

Now my somewhat cynical view is that the entire system is geared to get kids to read and master the basic test skills as early as possible but never go beyond that. Then just keep drilling to that same goal with everyone--get the K'ers reading at a 4th grade level, help those 6th graders who can't yet read at a 4th grade level, extra tutoring for the 9th graders who haven't yet passed the state tests. I think the expectations for K-1 tend to be high (and yes our K'ers journal also) and then those expectations stay pretty flat over the years so that kids who have learned a lot coming out of 5th grade then show no growth at all during their middle school years. But that's okay as long as they pass the state tests.

 

I agree. The reason some of those parents are pushy in high school is because they will be the only ones pushing their dc for anything better. As long as they are "at minimum," the school will probably not push them. They have other students to worry about more.

 

When I see the test scores putting the U.S. behind other countries, besides the difference in the way we educate special education students and the societal differences and the instructional methods, I think this is one of the biggest factors.

[angela in ohio]

Perhaps the situation would be improved a bit if creches and pre-schools were to tell parents that it is their job to teach their own kids to read. My neighbour was a secondary school teacher and got a nasty shock when her kiddo was at the end of grade one and still wasn't reading. She was a maths/science teacher, and taught maths and science. She mistakenly assumed she was sending her child to school to learn to read. I ended up teaching her. My mother and I thought she was rather naive, of course you have to teach your own kids to read! However no one had ever told her.

 

I wonder how many other parents don't know they are supposed to be teaching their own kids to read.

 

Rosie

 

Yep. It's hard to tell parents that (1.) they are not qualified to teach or parent their own kiddos without your help, and (2.) they should teach them to read and prepare them for academics at home. It sends a bit of a contradictory message. ;)

[Sahamamama]

My mother thought it was her job to teach me to read. Of course, that was in 1979. I don't know any public school mothers who think it is their job in 2010; haven't known any who thought it since I taught my oldest son to read in 1999.

 

:iagree:My mother taught me to read when I was 4-5 years old (back in the early 1970s), and I assume she taught my older sister, too. But years later, someone I know (my sister) ;) gets exasperated with the schools for EVERY little thing her children don't know.

 

 

• Her second grader can't spell the word "many?" It's the school's fault! Off with their heads!
  
• Her fourth grader doesn't know how to spell his middle name? It's the school's fault! Off with their heads!
  
• Her fifth grader doesn't know the months of the year? It's the school's fault! Off with their heads!
  
• Her seventh grader can't write a complete sentence? It's the school's fault! Off with their heads!
  

 

Her regular rant: "It's the school's JOB to teach them! Why do we pay TAXES, if they don't TEACH them anything....?" And I suppose some of the frustration is justified. I also think that many parents assume the local school will keep their children on track educationally, when the fact is that they often don't.

Edited May 24, 2010 by Sahamamama