S/O of article about dad doing homework.....ACT benchmark scores

[8filltheheart]

In that thread I posted several links about how poorly high school graduates are performing.   I thought I was informed.   I knew the remediation rates were outrageous (anywhere from 28-60% of high school graduates, depending on the study),  but I was just reading one of the links in more depth and did a little more research, and I have to admit I was stunned at the actual stats. 

 

• Students are not testing at college-ready levels on na­tional assessments. Only 25 percent of students who took the ACT met the test’s readiness benchmarks in all four subjects (English, reading, math and science) in 2012. A mere 5 percent of African Americans and 13 percent of Hispanics met the readiness benchmarks in all four subjects.

 

I didn't want these statistics to get buried in that thread, b/c they are so disturbing.

 

Benchmark scores are not high.   They are English 18, Math 22, Reading 22, and Science 23.   

 

In 2011 the test was only taken by 1,666,017 and the total # of graduating srs was  3,234,000. 

 

Think about that.   3,234,000 graduates, only 1,666,017 taking the ACT and of that only 25% TOTAL meet proficiency  (and those are fairly low scores)   And the scores for African Americans and Hispanics is beyond outrageous.   I can't even begin to express my deep regret for all those students who are being failed by our educational system.  

 

I had no idea that the ACT proficiency rates were so low.  

[Spy Car]

I'm no less anguished than you over the test scores (no matter how imperfect test scores are as a matter of measuring education). The proficientcy rates should be much higher.

 

That said, it would be wise for students at public schools, private schools, and home schools who dream of attending an elite university that they will not be competing with the 75% who don't meet some stardard of proficientcy, but rather with the 2% (or less) who are kicking ass.

 

Do not be lulled into a false sense of security. These numbers do not give the complete story.

 

Bill

[8filltheheart]

I'm no less anguished than you over the test scores (no matter how imperfect test scores are as a matter of measuring education). The proficientcy rates should be much higher.

 

That said, it would be wise for students at public and private schools and home schools who dream of attending an elite university that they will not be competing with the 75% who don't meet some stardard of proficientcy, but rather with the 2% (or less) who are kicking ass.

 

Do not be lulled into a false sense of security. These numbers do not give the complete story.

 

Bill

It is all the more distressing bc those scores are low. Research has shown that the science reasoning score is not an actual indicator of anything......which is ironic in that it has the highest benchmark score. 18 in English is LOW. Well, they all are, but that one is extremely low.

[MBM]

Paul Tough discusses some of the reasons students do so poorly and what is being done about it in his book How Children Succeed. Many who do poorly academically score high on the Adverse Childhood Experiences (ACE) test which measures childhood trauma. Numerous childhood traumatic events correlates with early drug use, smoking, alcohol abuse, violence, sex, pregnancy, obesity etc. A child who scores high and somehow manages to care for him- or herself will still have a 360% greater chance of developing ischemic heart disease later in life than someone with a score of 0. Too much early trauma appears to have a long-lasting affect on cells possibly through a brain pathway (neuroscientist Prof. Sapolsky talks about this in the book.) These people also tend to develop more autoimmune disease. Sadly, a significant number of kids score high on these tests and it affects both the wealthy and poor.

 

The schools can do more to improve scores but it's incredibly difficult to help some of these kids without special programs in place. My mom taught at an inner city elementary school in Detroit and ALL of her kids had at least one parent who was incarcerated. They had many difficulties and my mom found working with them to be challenging -- and equally rewarding. She really loved them. Anyway, some of the newer programs are helping the most vulnerable and they aren't even all that expensive or involved.

 

Another good book that explains the problems wealthy kids face is The Price of Privilege by Madeline Levine. Growing up in a materialistic family -- lacking parental closeness, being treated as narcissistic objects and feeling conditionally loved -- leads to difficulties as well.

 

I think the above problems affect academics more than we might think. The problem is complicated, though. (Yes, many schools can do better, too.)

 

[Farrar]

I'm no less anguished than you over the test scores (no matter how imperfect test scores are as a matter of measuring education). The proficientcy rates should be much higher.

 

That said, it would be wise for students at public schools, private schools, and home schools who dream of attending an elite university that they will not be competing with the 75% who don't meet some stardard of proficientcy, but rather with the 2% (or less) who are kicking ass.

 

Do not be lulled into a false sense of security. These numbers do not give the complete story.

 

Bill

 

Oh, absolutely.  Competition at the top is high.  But the story that these numbers (and others like them) tell is that the bottom is so huge. It's just so depressing.

 

And, especially if we're not parents who are aiming to compete for those top schools and spots as a given path for our kids (I sure am not), then hopefully it's easier to see from numbers like these why so many of us feel we can do better than that in terms of reaching proficiency, especially in the long run.

[Lilaclady]

For me, instead of being concerned about the competition for my kids, I am saddened by the generation we as a nation are raising. It doesn't bode well for this nation if a large number of our high school graduates are not meeting basic competences. It is not about who my kids are competing with but about what the country as a whole will be like 25 years from now. What will the literacy rate be? What kind of jobs will these graduates be doing? That's the part that saddens me.

These numbers are horrible.  FWIW, they have been consistent going back to at least 1997, even though the number of ACT takers has dramatically risen:  http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2012/2012026/tables/table_16.asp

[kubiac]

I'm no less anguished than you over the test scores (no matter how imperfect test scores are as a matter of measuring education). The proficientcy rates should be much higher.

 

That said, it would be wise for students at public schools, private schools, and home schools who dream of attending an elite university that they will not be competing with the 75% who don't meet some stardard of proficientcy, but rather with the 2% (or less) who are kicking ass.

 

Do not be lulled into a false sense of security. These numbers do not give the complete story.

 

Bill

 

I wish I could be lulled into a false sense of security. It might feel better than where I am now, which is a state of near-complete distrust of the public school system.

 

As far as I can tell, it's a case of "garbage in, garbage out" with weak methodologies and weak staff regularly disappointing ever-deteriorating student bodies who likely lack intrinsic academic motivation and proper cognitive support in the first place. The crummy system has not visibly improved in 50 years.

 

Standards seem to be outrageously low throughout the system, which makes me want to drop out completely. I do want my kid to be competitive with your "2 percent," but it seems like there is virtually no support for that with "the system." American anti-intellectualism and our communal fetish for a naturalistic childhood preclude a national discussion about creating academically rich environments from PK3 through 12th grade. Anyone who brings it up is caricatured as a grasping helicopter-tiger nouveau riche boor.

 

Even private schools seem like a dead end. On one hand I don't want to bother with the toil and the expense of sucking up to get in and then paying for it, and on the other hand, they seem like havens for rich people who would feel safe socializing primarily with rich people as much as they seem like rigorous academic environments.

 

Oh, and if you really want to be depressed about race and class in America, Google for "kindergarten achievement gap."

[MBM]

After James Heckman won the Nobel Prize in Economics, he began studying why high school dropouts who got their GED ended up being a lot like high school dropouts who didn't get their GED. People think the cognitive skills are important -- they are -- but equally and probably more important are skills like perseverance, impulse control, curiosity, etc. Heckman has been doing a lot of research on which skills and traits are needed to succeed, how they come about, and what types of intervention help those who are vulnerable.

 

Probably the most important thing to do is to help parents and infants develop secure attachment. Those who don't are derailed from normal childhood development, but they can be helped. For mothers who grew up in families that are stuck in patterns of multigenerational dysfunction, once a week psychotherapy for the mother and her infant has proven to help the two become securely attached even if the child suffered maltreatment and showed signs of disorganized attachment in the first year. That is Alicia Lieberman's work which is successful about 60% of the time as compared to 2% for other early interventions. It's not 100% but it's a big improvement.

 

Anyway, this is all in Tough's book if anyone is interested.

 

 

[sodapop]

nm

 

Edited September 25, 2013 by Moderator
Multiple accounts are not permitted

[Spy Car]

I wish I could be lulled into a false sense of security. It might feel better than where I am now, which is a state of near-complete distrust of the public school system.

 

As far as I can tell, it's a case of "garbage in, garbage out" with weak methodologies and weak staff regularly disappointing ever-deteriorating student bodies who likely lack intrinsic academic motivation and proper cognitive support in the first place. The crummy system has not visibly improved in 50 years.

 

Standards seem to be outrageously low throughout the system, which makes me want to drop out completely. I do want my kid to be competitive with your "2 percent," but it seems like there is virtually no support for that with "the system." American anti-intellectualism and our communal fetish for a naturalistic childhood preclude a national discussion about creating academically rich environments from PK3 through 12th grade. Anyone who brings it up is caricatured as a grasping helicopter-tiger nouveau riche boor.

 

Even private schools seem like a dead end. On one hand I don't want to bother with the toil and the expense of sucking up to get in and then paying for it, and on the other hand, they seem like havens for rich people who would feel safe socializing primarily with rich people as much as they seem like rigorous academic environments.

 

Oh, and if you really want to be depressed about race and class in America, Google for "kindergarten achievement gap."

 

So I take it you're not one of those "children can learn everything they need to know by playing in drainage-ditches all day" types? :D

 

Bill

[madteaparty]

Even private schools seem like a dead end. On one hand I don't want to bother with the toil and the expense of sucking up to get in and then paying for it, and on the other hand, they seem like havens for rich people who would feel safe socializing primarily with rich people as much as they seem like rigorous academic environments.

 

 

You've expressed so well the sole reason we homeschool. We lived in NYC, there is no shortage of such schools.

[justasque]

 

In 2011 the test was only taken by 1,666,017 and the total # of graduating srs was  3,234,000. 

Not disagreeing with the general conversation, but had to mention this - 

Generally speaking, most of the college-bound students in my area of the country take the SAT and do not take the ACT.  

This probably doesn't change the big picture much, but it does mean we should be careful when looking at the ACT testing rate and generalizing country-wide.

[kubiac]

So I take it you're not one of those "children can learn everything they need to know by playing in drainage-ditches all day" types? :D

 

Bill

 

Ahem. :)

 

* Kids don't know what they don't know.

* Kids are kids, and they can't possibly be expected to forecast what they might need in the future based on who they are as children. 

* Play is wonderful, but contrary to adult experience, play and work are not antonyms for children. For that matter, learning can be and should be fun throughout the lifespan. Behaving as if school is torture, which must be delayed for as long as is seemly, subtly conveys the message that school/work is fundamentally punitive, while infinite drainage ditches and graham crackers and pinwheel spinning are the ultimate human idyll. Not so. For many people, there is pleasure in purpose.

* The fear of academics in this culture seems, to me, to be a twin to the self-esteem cult. Feeling bad about having to do something or doing something hard or failing at something is not the end of the world, it just feels bad and must be processed and then you get up and go back and do it again, either the same or differently.

* For centuries, literacy and numeracy have been paired with human liberation. Knowledge is power. Oppressed or depressed peoples of every stripe have found that as their society or community enculturates, they gain in power and freedom. Why don't we assume this is also the case for children?

 

Equipping children to define their own personhood can be done in many ways. I personally believe that giving kids the tools that they will use as adults, in addition to granting them the privileges that are primarily or exclusively useful in the lawless paradise of childhood, is a kindness. YMMV.

 

{end rant}

[Paula in MS]

What is really sad to me is the students who are in AP classes who graduate with a hundred average (give or take) who can't make above an 18 on the ACT. Students who do well in school expect to do well on the ACT. It is a huge discouragement to them when they don't. To me, an A average should be for students who have mastered the material. If they have mastered the material, what does the material look like? Shouldn't these students be performing well on college entrance exams? I see this way too often. The even sadder part is that these kids are highly motivated to do well, but they aren't challenged with things that really matter. Their homework assignments and projects consist of things that have very little educational content.

They have, quite frankly, wasted a lot of time. They didn't want to waste time, they wanted to learn. :(

[elegantlion]

In our area the ACT is more widely taken. My college has a low ACT cutoff for acceptance. Aside from the high school conversation, I wonder how many college truly care? My university is a public state college who pretty much takes anyone that breathes and pays. But if your ACT is below 19 you have to take remedial classes or test out of them. I just checked, for this semester alone there are 23 sections of remedial English (22 student max each - not all are full, but close). There are 3 degrees of remedial math with 16 sections each. The motivated student could do all 3 in one semester. The math sections allow 80 people max. 

 

Our school has an additional fee for most classes, usually about $30-$35 total. The remedial classes charge a $75.00 flat rate fee. Rough estimate is they could generate an extra 20k from the English classes alone. And the math classes, lets say the students finished in 2 levels, so 32 sections of 80 students, that an extra $100,000 in the schools pocket. So potentially $120,000. extra in one semester simply from remedial classes. That doesn't account for the extra classes they'll need as the remedial classes don't count towards graduation credit. 

 

Ouch!

[regentrude]

Our school has an additional fee for most classes, usually about $30-$35 total. The remedial classes charge a $75.00 flat rate fee. Rough estimate is they could generate an extra 20k from the English classes alone. And the math classes, lets say the students finished in 2 levels, so 32 sections of 80 students, that an extra $100,000 in the schools pocket. So potentially $120,000. extra in one semester simply from remedial classes. That doesn't account for the extra classes they'll need as the remedial classes don't count towards graduation credit. 

 

But the school also needs to hire instructors to teach those classes. The money they make in those fees is nowhere near enough to employ qualified teachers, so more likely they will have less upper level offerings because they need so much manpower covering the remedial classes.

 

[Dana]

But the school also needs to hire instructors to teach those classes. The money they make in those fees is nowhere near enough to employ qualified teachers, so more likely they will have less upper level offerings because they need so much manpower covering the remedial classes.

 

Do you think they've got FT faculty doing those classes? My bet is a lot of adjuncts for cheap....or graduate students doing the teaching.

[regentrude]

Do you think they've got FT faculty doing those classes? My bet is a lot of adjuncts for cheap....or graduate students doing the teaching.

 

IF they have the budget to hire adjuncts. Big IF, considering the budget cuts at public universities.

 

We have regular classes we could not offer because the university has no money to pay the instructor. The professor who had been teaching the course for years has retired, and the department was not allowed to rehire to fill the position. We had a qualified instructor willing to teach the course, but no money to pay the person, because we needed all extra funds to pay instructors for introductory level courses.

[Catherine]

My friend teaches the students whose Accuplacer scores place them *below* pre-algebra. Her classes are overenrolled every semester with high school graduates. Wow.

[8filltheheart]

The economic fallout has got to be an incredibly high number. Every class the student has to spend in remediation is a cost not only in college tuition, fees/bks, but In lost time in economic productivity. Based on what I read yesterday, the actual number of students that end up dropping out that start in remedial classes is well over 50%. So you have a high percentage of resources going into programs that are not even producing optimal outcomes.

 

Everyone should be concerned. With such low levels of educational success, the economic burden long term is significant.

[elegantlion]

But the school also needs to hire instructors to teach those classes. The money they make in those fees is nowhere near enough to employ qualified teachers, so more likely they will have less upper level offerings because they need so much manpower covering the remedial classes.

 

 

At least in the case of the math class, they are all computer based (they use Aleks). So some of the process is automated.  

 

Yes, I'd be curious how this affects the staffing. 

[LaughingCat]

After James Heckman won the Nobel Prize in Economics, he began studying why high school dropouts who got their GED ended up being a lot like high school dropouts who didn't get their GED. People think the cognitive skills are important -- they are -- but equally and probably more important are skills like perseverance, impulse control, curiosity, etc. Heckman has been doing a lot of research on which skills and traits are needed to succeed, how they come about, and what types of intervention help those who are vulnerable.

 

Probably the most important thing to do is to help parents and infants develop secure attachment. Those who don't are derailed from normal childhood development, but they can be helped. For mothers who grew up in families that are stuck in patterns of multigenerational dysfunction, once a week psychotherapy for the mother and her infant has proven to help the two become securely attached even if the child suffered maltreatment and showed signs of disorganized attachment in the first year. That is Alicia Lieberman's work which is successful about 60% of the time as compared to 2% for other early interventions. It's not 100% but it's a big improvement.

 

Anyway, this is all in Tough's book if anyone is interested.

 

In a book I'm reading they list studies done repeating the famous "marshmallow" test of impulse control that found that the "self control" displayed was strongly affected by whether the child believed it was worthwhile to wait - that they would actually get the 2nd marshmallow.   They then tested this by setting up a scenario where the lab worker previously let the child down - in which case they were more likely to go for the "bird in hand".   

[MBM]

In a book I'm reading they list studies done repeating the famous "marshmallow" test of impulse control that found that the "self control" displayed was strongly affected by whether the child believed it was worthwhile to wait - that they would actually get the 2nd marshmallow.   They then tested this by setting up a scenario where the lab worker previously let the child down - in which case they were more likely to go for the "bird in hand".   

 

I've read that somewhere, too, LaughingCat. Is your book by Po Bronson and Ashley Merryman? Nurture Shock or Top Dog? IIRC, fifteen years after it was conducted, the original Marshmallow Test only analyzed about 1/5 of the kids who participated; the results were incomplete anyway. It was replicated later but the results didn't indicate much because children can change -- which is good! (I would have failed miserably as a tot.)

 

When it comes to skills like impulse control, Richard Davidson is a neuroscientist who has studied and written a lot about what can be done to help nudge brains more favorably. Madison schools in Wisconsin are implementing his ideas and our school district here in Illinois is beginning this year. It's fascinating how quickly our brains begin to change. Davidson's book is The Emotional Life of Your Brain: How Its Unique Pattern Affect the Way You Think, Feel, and Live--And How You Can Change Them. It's one of my favorites.

[JumpyTheFrog]

Maybe there is a new industry for WTM members to start: tutoring remedial college students. It might be cheaper for them to higher private tutors than pay college tuition for non-credit classes.

Do you think they've got FT faculty doing those classes? My bet is a lot of adjuncts for cheap....or graduate students doing the teaching.

 

Exactly.  CC costs something like $500 for a 3 credit class.  So, a remedial math class of 40 students is grossing $20k.  If the college is paying an adjunct $3k to teach it, seems like there's a lot of room for overhead.

[Pen]

I do not know much about the ACT other than seeing test prep books for it in RR catalog or mentions of it in threads here..  What is it?  Who takes it?

 

I do not know if it existed when I was in school.  The big deal then was the SAT, plus subject area boards, and APs.   The  friends I have who have children reaching college stage also seem to speak of SATs, not ACT.

 

?????

[JumpyTheFrog]

I think the ACT vs SAT depends more on region. I'd heard of the ACT but never thought of taking it, even though I took the SAT, at least one SAT subject test, and six AP tests in high school.

[8filltheheart]

here is information on the breakdown of AP scores and a couple of articles discussing grades in classes vs. passing AP scores, and articles about why the push for APs. (This reminded me of the cost for remediation discussion. There is a lot of $$ going into AP testing for a lot of failing scores. For students that do well, it is $$ that could save thousands, but that is only part of the over all picture when considering the percentage of 1st and 2s.)

http://www.totalregistration.net/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=487&Itemid=118

 

http://www.chron.com/news/houston-texas/article/Grier-alarmed-about-grade-inflation-at-HISD-3371558.php

 

http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/maryland/education/bal-ap-test-scores-maryland-schools-have-been-leader-in-advanced-placement-but-results-are-mixed-20130816,0,583144.htmlpage#.UkQcA8u9KSN

 

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704858404576134142048372986.html?mod=dist_smartbrief&mod=WSJ_hp_MIDDLENexttoWhatsNewsThird

 

http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/2012/05/report_more_students_taking_ad.html

 

The average score on all AP exams is slightly below a 3 (a 2.84 in 2011). In 2011, of the more than 3 million AP exams administered, the grades broke down as follows:

5 - 14.4% of test takers

4 - 19.5% of test takers

3 - 23.6% of test takers

2 - 21.1% of test takers

1 - 21.4% of test takers

Although the College Board defines a 2 as "possibly qualified" to receive college credit, almost no college will accept a score of 2. In fact, most selective colleges will not accept a 3 for college credit.

[8filltheheart]

I do not know much about the ACT other than seeing test prep books for it in RR catalog or mentions of it in threads here.. What is it? Who takes it?

 

I do not know if it existed when I was in school. The big deal then was the SAT, plus subject area boards, and APs. The friends I have who have children reaching college stage also seem to speak of SATs, not ACT.

 

?????

The ACT is more of a knowledge based exam whereas the SAT was more of an aptitude, but it is shifting more toward the ACT. The tests are different and some students do better on one test than the other.

[ladydusk]

The ACT is more of a knowledge based exam whereas the SAT was more of an aptitude, but it is shifting more toward the ACT. The tests are different and some students do better on one test than the other.

Certainly my experience 20+ years ago. I got what I considered an embarrassingly mediocre score on the SAT, but my awesome ACT got me into the Honors program. [shrug] I suppose it doesnt really matter anymore.

[Catherine]

here is information on the breakdown of AP scores and a couple of articles discussing grades in classes vs. passing AP scores, and articles about why the push for APs. (This reminded me of the cost for remediation discussion. There is a lot of $$ going into AP testing for a lot of failing scores. For students that do well, it is $$ that could save thousands, but that is only part of the over all picture when considering the percentage of 1st and 2s.)

I'm not sure what I think about the score breakdown. If everyone got 5's, then wouldn't we all think that the AP test wasn't challenging enough?? Grade inflation and all that? If students are truly challenged by the material, and the breakdown of scores suggests that they are, I consider that a good thing. Yes, it's a problem that schools are giving out top grades to students who then go on to score very poorly on the actual AP exam. But one way of looking at grades is that they are a ranking of students in a given school and if you are the best student in a terrible school, should you be punished for the poverty of your surroundings by getting not only a 1 on the AP, but a D in the class? I'm not sure myself what I think of that. Paul Tough's book How Children Succeed cites data that shows that given the right support and guidance, even students with horrible test scores and terrible educational backgrounds can succeed in college. No student who has had a horrible education up until junior year in high school is going to get a 5 on the AP. Offering them a chance to take the most challenging course they are capable of, which is how I imagine their high school AP course is, won't necessarily bring them up to 5 level, but if they don't have the educational background to manage a true AP course, it's not right that they shouldn't get a shot at a more challenging class, even if it's not "true AP".

 

One of the linked articles came from my local paper and I read it when it was published. Our PS district is terrible in many schools, and has some really top, standout magnet schools. And I honestly don't think the blame for the underperforming schools lies completely with the teachers and administrators. They are dealing with a student body that is often traumatized, hungry, and probably has at t least as many dyslexics and otherwise LD kids as any other school. Now could they be doing better? No doubt. But there are plenty of students in well-financed, suburban districts that are truly being shortchanged.

[8filltheheart]

I'm not sure what I think about the score breakdown. If everyone got 5's, then wouldn't we all think that the AP test wasn't challenging enough?? Grade inflation and all that? If students are truly challenged by the material, and the breakdown of scores suggests that they are, I consider that a good thing. Yes, it's a problem that schools are giving out top grades to students who then go on to score very poorly on the actual AP exam. But one way of looking at grades is that they are a ranking of students in a given school and if you are the best student in a terrible school, should you be punished for the poverty of your surroundings by getting not only a 1 on the AP, but a D in the class? I'm not sure myself what I think of that. Paul Tough's book How Children Succeed cites data that shows that given the right support and guidance, even students with horrible test scores and terrible educational backgrounds can succeed in college. No student who has had a horrible education up until junior year in high school is going to get a 5 on the AP. Offering them a chance to take the most challenging course they are capable of, which is how I imagine their high school AP course is, won't necessarily bring them up to 5 level, but if they don't have the educational background to manage a true AP course, it's not right that they shouldn't get a shot at a more challenging class, even if it's not "true AP".

 

One of the linked articles came from my local paper and I read it when it was published. Our PS district is terrible in many schools, and has some really top, standout magnet schools. And I honestly don't think the blame for the underperforming schools lies completely with the teachers and administrators. They are dealing with a student body that is often traumatized, hungry, and probably has at t least as many dyslexics and otherwise LD kids as any other school. Now could they be doing better? No doubt. But there are plenty of students in well-financed, suburban districts that are truly being shortchanged.

I bolded the sentence on horrible test scores and horrible educational backgrounds. I have not read the bk you mention and obviously those 2 scenarios do not condemn all students to failure as adults, however everything I have read about APs and test score has said basically the same thing

 

Research has shown that students who pass AP exams are more likely to graduate from college than students who do not take the advanced courses. Students who post a 1 or 2 on the tests are more inclined to stay in college a second year, but there is no evidence they are more likely to graduate.

I am not blaming anyone, fwiw. I personally don't think any student is well-served by being in a class where they believe they are accomplishing something that they aren't, though. I don't remember where it was that I read it, but one article I read stated that many students that have multiple APs on their transcripts actually ended up in remedial college courses. That should not be happening.

[Chrysalis Academy]

The K gap is sad, but can't be chalked up to the schools.  What is truly appalling is that the gap remains.  If public schools are so great and homeschoolers are kidding ourselves,  why aren't they able to close that gap? Particularly with all the resources poured into remediation.  

 

Now, granted - the local public schools around here is mainly educating the children whose parents can't afford to remove them and put them in private school.  This is why our very affluent area has public schools where the kids are 75% english language learners and economically disadvantaged.  But the schools do not seem to be able to help the kids - the junior high has as lackluster a performance as the elementary school.

 

 

[Catherine]

8FilltheHeart wrote:

 

I am not blaming anyone, fwiw. I personally don't think any student is well-served by being in a class where they believe they are accomplishing something that they aren't, though. I don't remember where it was that I read it, but one article I read stated that many students that have multiple APs on their transcripts actually ended up in remedial college courses. That should not be happening.

 

I'm not suggesting you are blaming anyone-but do you think those students would be better served by getting poor grades too? How does that help them? I'm asking sincerely, because I see the conundrum a teacher might feel in an inner city classroom where she immediately perceives that none of her students are even remotely capable of taking, and passing, an AP US history course. Cancel the class? Fail them all? Reprimand them for their poor preparation? Really, what do you think should really happen in this situation? If it was me, I would challenge them maximally, prepare them as well as I possible could, given that perhaps few could write persuasively at all, many have severe limitations in reading, spelling, grammar. Force as many factoids into them as I could in 7 months. Challenge them more than they ever have been before, and then reward them for their work with D's? I don't think that is fair or realistic. But I would be honestly interested in how you would approach this situation.

[LaughingCat]

I've read that somewhere, too, LaughingCat. Is your book by Po Bronson and Ashley Merryman? Nurture Shock or Top Dog? IIRC, fifteen years after it was conducted, the original Marshmallow Test only analyzed about 1/5 of the kids who participated; the results were incomplete anyway. It was replicated later but the results didn't indicate much because children can change -- which is good! (I would have failed miserably as a tot.)

 

When it comes to skills like impulse control, Richard Davidson is a neuroscientist who has studied and written a lot about what can be done to help nudge brains more favorably. Madison schools in Wisconsin are implementing his ideas and our school district here in Illinois is beginning this year. It's fascinating how quickly our brains begin to change. Davidson's book is The Emotional Life of Your Brain: How Its Unique Pattern Affect the Way You Think, Feel, and Live--And How You Can Change Them. It's one of my favorites.

Ok, this is funny - because what I am reading right now is The Emotional Life of Your Brain and that's where I thought I read it  however, I just returned Top Dogs to the library last weekend and flipped back through it reading bits and pieces before taking it back - so I bet it was actually in there :)

[regentrude]

The K gap is sad, but can't be chalked up to the schools.  What is truly appalling is that the gap remains.  If public schools are so great and homeschoolers are kidding ourselves,  why aren't they able to close that gap? Particularly with all the resources poured into remediation.  

 

If you look at studies like the "Million words gap", it becomes evident that the family environment plays a much greater role than some want us to believe. I honestly do not think that schools can EVER level the playing field, unless the kids were removed from their families and raised in communal identical living situations (something not even the communists attempted!)

Kids from a functional family where parents talk a lot with their children, read to them, use a varied vocabulary, spend free time in a creative, educational way will inevitably have the edge over kids whose families do none of those things. I would also like to point out that this is more a question of culture than of finances and that an education-rich family environment does not necessarily require a lot of money. I know very poor families whose kids benefit from all the advantages of an eduction-minded, involved, intact family; the parents go to great lengths to utilize free resources to create a stimulating environment for their children, and those kids will do well, despite the low family income.

 

In my home country, Germany, the achievement gap between education-minded families and education-estranged (my best translation for the term "bildungsfern") families is persistent, despite a much tighter welfare net that greatly cushions economic inequality and despite the better teacher training and greater academic expectations. Politicians bemoan this fact every year, but nobody has suggested a viable solution. The only proposals are aimed at increasing time in school (which will only level anything by reducing the ability of interested families to provide out-of-school enrichment)

 

Call me cynical, but I do not think the problem can be solved by schools, however fantastic they may be. Unless you don't let the kids spend time at home anymore.

[regentrude]

I'm asking sincerely, because I see the conundrum a teacher might feel in an inner city classroom where she immediately perceives that none of her students are even remotely capable of taking, and passing, an AP US history course. Cancel the class? Fail them all? Reprimand them for their poor preparation? Really, what do you think should really happen in this situation? If it was me, I would challenge them maximally, prepare them as well as I possible could, given that perhaps few could write persuasively at all, many have severe limitations in reading, spelling, grammar. Force as many factoids into them as I could in 7 months. Challenge them more than they ever have been before, and then reward them for their work with D's? I don't think that is fair or realistic. But I would be honestly interested in how you would approach this situation.

 

I think the solution should be not to offer an "AP" course if it is clear that students are not prepared for college level work. My solution would be to ditch the label and teach the most rigorous history course I can get these students to handle without grade inflation.

They should not be lulled into the delusion that what they are doing is "AP, i.e. college level - the school does the kids a disservice by leading them to believe that this is what they are doing. Call it "US History" and adjust the degree of rigor so that the grade distribution is a nice bell shape, with the top students getting an A, the maximum of the distribution being at a high C, and some student failing the course. This will set standards that adequately challenge the top students, gives dedicated students a chance of passing, and does not let the 20% unprepared/unwilling students pass who don't deserve it.

[Chrysalis Academy]

Oh, I agree with you completely, regentrude.  But it seems like we're having this long, multi-thread argument with Bill about whether homeschoolers are kidding themselves about the quality of public schools.  

 

I'm very well informed about the quality of our local public schools, after having kids there for 5 years, sitting on the curriculum committee for 3 years, and spending many hours volunteering in the classroom, and staying informed about local issues in public education.  I'm not kidding myself - I know exactly what my alternatives are, and the relative qualities thereof.  

[Spy Car]

The K gap is sad, but can't be chalked up to the schools.  What is truly appalling is that the gap remains.  If public schools are so great and homeschoolers are kidding ourselves,  why aren't they able to close that gap? Particularly with all the resources poured into remediation.  

 

Now, granted - the local public schools around here is mainly educating the children whose parents can't afford to remove them and put them in private school.  This is why our very affluent area has public schools where the kids are 75% english language learners and economically disadvantaged.  But the schools do not seem to be able to help the kids - the junior high has as lackluster a performance as the elementary school.

Since you are (obviously :D) alluding to comments I've made, please allow be to respond, as I feel they have been misinterpreted.

 

There are huge gaps by Kindergarten. HUGE GAPS. I hate to keep saying it, but our elementary could serve as "the demonstration project" of a school with prosperous and highly-educated families staying in the public school (rather than going private), and supporting the school with both time and money.

 

Children at this school often come into Kindergarten reading at some level of proficiently, are alert, articulate, and well-nourished in every way. It is not difficult to have "success" with such a starting point, but on top of all the other advantage, there are gifted teachers who pour their talents into their life's work, and feel the rewards of reaching children who are easily "reachable." There is also a school community that supports both the teachers and the students, and has high expectations all around.

 

The conditions in many (most) other schools in our vast district can be very different. The gap is real.

 

If you are going to argue that the public schools have not closed the gap, I will nod in agreement. They have not. No argument.

 

No school will ever replace what happens in the home. I think we all know this. A child from a family where education and the exploration of ideas is part of the family culture can be thrown into a "mediocre" school and still come out OK (it might not be the "ideal circumstance" for that child, they maybe cheated in some ways, but conditions in the home matter).

 

I understand why a parent might look at a school and think "there is no way my child is going there." I drive past such schools all the time. Most people do not have the luxury of choice. I understand, and respect, the impulse to home educate. there are advantages to this sort of learning that no school (even good ones) can match. It is why we peruse "home education" ourselves, even if it as so-called "afterschoolers, not "homeschoolers."

 

How to "fix" the problems in underperforming schools (if they can be fixed) is a daunting topic, and one that is multi-factorial in nature. The discussion is beyond the topic of this conversation.

 

What remains is that there are some schools, where circumstances are favorable, where it all comes together. These schools are not "fantasy prep-schools where all students are studying Latin inside ivy-covered gothic buildings," they are just good public schools (with all the limitations public schools have).

 

My suggestion is that serious homeschoolers set as their goal trying to surpass the sort of education that happens in "good public schools," and not to consider doing better than failing schools a "victory." That is setting the bar to low IMO.

 

Doing better than good public schools is an "achievable goal," however it is a lot higher bar than some people seem willing to admit. I see it first-hand. I see the ways (that to my very critical eyes) I think things could be better or more deeply taught at home (and I endeavor to address these areas myself) Sometimes I'm awestruck by what a good classroom teacher, working with bright kids, with lots of support, can do. It is a mix.

 

There are advantages to each model. It is hard to compete with a teacher with an advanced chemistry degree, who has a full lab, if you barely remember chemistry and have nothing but kitchen equipment (and I know people outsource such things for this reason). Schools can not replace what happens in the home. A parent working directly with their child, or helping to create learning environments and opportunities for enrichment can not be underestimated. This makes all the difference in homeschools, and in the homes of public school kids too.

 

What works is having a thriving and rich environment. There are different paths to that goal. Some schools are not thriving and rich environments. Some schools try, but are not enough to totally overcome the chaos of dysfunctional homes. Sometimes things are mediocre all around. But some schools are thriving. I realize it is not a popular thing to say on this forum. I do think some people are kidding themselves about this. And, if they have aspirations for their children to attend a leading University that it is foolish to ignore the reality of the competition for those scare spots. Students in good schools are working hard. It is not quite "the pressure-cooker" some would have you believe, but they are kicking ass. That is reality. And I'm attempting to offer a "reality-check."

 

Bill

[8filltheheart]

I wasn't sure under which thread to include this article. It actually pertains to both (or where the conversation has gone anyway.)

http://chronicle.com/article/Top-Students-Too-Arent/137821/

 

Brief intro:

 

Top Students, Too, Aren't Always Ready for College

 

 

One recent morning over coffee, I was talking with a colleague about a rising source of frustration for him and his fellow faculty members: how unprepared for college-level coursework so many incoming students are, even at our highly selective university.

 

"They have the grades and the test scores to be here," said my colleague, director of undergraduate studies in math at the Johns Hopkins University. "What they don't have is a deep understanding of why the techniques they've been taught work, the actual underlying mathematical relationships. They walk into to my classroom in September and don't have the study habits or proper foundation to do the work."

..............

Evidence suggests that academic talent is quite specifically diminished, not developed, by the school experience. A Fordham Institute study of how young American students testing in the 90th percentile or above fared over time found that roughly 30 to 50 percent of these advanced learners lost ground as they moved from elementary to middle school, or from middle to high school. And the focus on low­-achieving students in public schools has disproportionately left more smart minority and low-income kids behind, creating a well-documented "excellence gap."

 

[8filltheheart]

-but do you think those students would be better served by getting poor grades too? How does that help them? I'm asking sincerely, because I see the conundrum a teacher might feel in an inner city classroom where she immediately perceives that none of her students are even remotely capable of taking, and passing, an AP US history course. Cancel the class? Fail them all? Reprimand them for their poor preparation? Really, what do you think should really happen in this situation? If it was me, I would challenge them maximally, prepare them as well as I possible could, given that perhaps few could write persuasively at all, many have severe limitations in reading, spelling, grammar. Force as many factoids into them as I could in 7 months. Challenge them more than they ever have been before, and then reward them for their work with D's? I don't think that is fair or realistic. But I would be honestly interested in how you would approach this situation.

My response is the same as Regentrude's.

[Arcadia]

In my home country, Germany, the achievement gap between education-minded families and education-estranged (my best translation for the term "bildungsfern") families is persistent, despite a much tighter welfare net that greatly cushions economic inequality and despite the better teacher training and greater academic expectations. Politicians bemoan this fact every year, but nobody has suggested a viable solution. The only proposals are aimed at increasing time in school (which will only level anything by reducing the ability of interested families to provide out-of-school enrichment)

In my home country, elementary school teachers stay back after school to give remedial classes to kids falling behind. There are remedial classes on Saturdays too.   Families who are not as engaged in education don't mind the free after school care and weekend childcare. Education oriented families can easily after school as their kids won't be staying back for remedial.  My dad is a retired teacher and he did the remedial sessions for 1st grade kids onwards. Public school kids could easily improve a lot with daily remedial with a school teacher (teacher's pay takes into account afterschool hours) even with disengaged parents.   For kids in "problem" (gang, drugs peddling related, parent serving jail time) homes, schools  are a safe place to study.

 

ETA:

School ends at around 1:30pm for 1st to 10th grade.  Kids go home for lunch but school canteen stays open for lunch, often until 3pm for the after school kids.  For junior colleges (11-12th grade) teachers typically stay until 5pm, classrooms and school libraries are open for studying and remedial.  School canteens for 1st to 12th grades are open on Saturdays as school bands/choir/ensemble and uniform groups (red cross, girl scouts, girls brigade, national cadet corps) are on Saturdays in schools.

[Soror]

What works is having a thriving and rich environment. There are different paths to that goal. Some schools are not thriving and rich environments. Some schools try, but are not enough to totally overcome the chaos of dysfunctional homes. Sometimes things are mediocre all around. But some schools are thriving. I realize it is not a popular thing to say on this forum. I do think some people are kidding themselves about this. And, if they have aspirations for their children to attend a leading University that it is foolish to ignore the reality of the competition for those scare spots. Students in good schools are working hard. It is not quite "the pressure-cooker" some would have you believe, but they are kicking ass. That is reality. And I'm attempting to offer a "reality-check."

 

Bill

I think that you probably overestimate the number of hs'ers that want to compete for the "top spots." Not all kids are best served by these type of schools, I think actually the majority of students would not be suited to such places. My goal is to teach the children I have, not try and get them into Harvard. I think it is a bit shortsighted to have any particular goal school in mind, especially at the elementary age. The idea totally misses one of big benefits of hs'ing for me, which is to meet my child where they are at and challenge them. If one of children ends up at this level then hopefully I can meet their needs or find resources that do, outsourcing when needed.

 

Right now though we keep moving forward and I try to find the level that challenges my children without overwhelming them. I try to provide a rich environment where learning is life and life is learning. I try to keep improving my skills as a teacher.

 

It seems your attitude is that if hs'ers don't replicate the top 2% of schools then we have no right to school at home. I do see that not all hs'ers do a great job, some don't do even do a good job, but that is no different than public and private schools. Your posts come off more as a way to denigrate hs'ers though than some great public service to the hs community.

[Spy Car]

I think that you probably overestimate the number of hs'ers that want to compete for the "top spots." Not all kids are best served by these type of schools, I think actually the majority of students would not be suited to such places. My goal is to teach the children I have, not try and get them into Harvard. I think it is a bit shortsighted to have any particular goal school in mind, especially at the elementary age. The idea totally misses one of big benefits of hs'ing for me, which is to meet my child where they are at and challenge them. If one of children ends up at this level then hopefully I can meet their needs or find resources that do, outsourcing when needed.

 

Right now though we keep moving forward and I try to find the level that challenges my children without overwhelming them. I try to provide a rich environment where learning is life and life is learning. I try to keep improving my skills as a teacher.

 

It seems your attitude is that if hs'ers don't replicate the top 2% of schools then we have no right to school at home. I do see that not all hs'ers do a great job, some don't do even do a good job, but that is no different than public and private schools. Your posts come off more as a way to denigrate hs'ers though than some great public service to the hs community.

I understand not everyone has aspirations of sending their children to Harvard, or other such things. But this is a forum presumably devoted to "Classical Education" and that (I think) would include at least attempting to prepare student to enter "the great conversation" (no matter where they are bound for secondary education). I realize some children have special needs, or learning disabilities, or may have gifts that are best used in ways other than the world of academia.

 

I have never (ever) said anyone here has "no right to school at home." That is a very unfair thing to suggest. What I do see (clearly) is that some people underestimate what goes on in good schools. Sometimes they overestimate too (like believing the homework is creating "pressure cookers")in every good school.

 

I respect that many people are making sacrifices to do better for their children at home than would be the case if their children went to school. I think I've been consistently clear about that.

 

Bill

[Catherine]

I think the solution should be not to offer an "AP" course if it is clear that students are not prepared for college level work. My solution would be to ditch the label and teach the most rigorous history course I can get these students to handle without grade inflation.

They should not be lulled into the delusion that what they are doing is "AP, i.e. college level - the school does the kids a disservice by leading them to believe that this is what they are doing. Call it "US History" and adjust the degree of rigor so that the grade distribution is a nice bell shape, with the top students getting an A, the maximum of the distribution being at a high C, and some student failing the course. This will set standards that adequately challenge the top students, gives dedicated students a chance of passing, and does not let the 20% unprepared/unwilling students pass who don't deserve it.

 

Yes, I agree-this would be the solution.  And one reason I think classes like the one you describe are less the norm than AP classes filled with students who cannot do college level work is the insane (IMO) push to expand the AP program into every nook and cranny.  But that in turn is driven by the lack of rigor in conventional high school classes, which in turn is a result of underpreparation of students in the earlier grades.  Since AP is the new name for rigor, schools perceive that they have few options when it comes to impressing parents, students, and outsiders that they do provide a good education. I suspect they don't advertise the AP exam performance of their students-only that they offer the course.

 

In my old high school, a smaller rural high school that serves a mostly not-college-bound population of students, they've taken an interesting approach.  When I was a student there, lo those many years ago!, I was allowed to self-prepare to take the AP English lit exam.  Few college students took APs then, at least few compared to now.  Students now are allowed to dual-enroll at a community college starting junior year, which IMO makes more sense than trying to offer multiple APs for a tiny number of prepared and interested students.  

[MBM]

In my old high school, a smaller rural high school that serves a mostly not-college-bound population of students, they've taken an interesting approach.  When I was a student there, lo those many years ago!, I was allowed to self-prepare to take the AP English lit exam.  Few college students took APs then, at least few compared to now.  Students now are allowed to dual-enroll at a community college starting junior year, which IMO makes more sense than trying to offer multiple APs for a tiny number of prepared and interested students.  

 

One of the high schools I attended did this, too. It was a rural, reservation town. Kids were allowed to work independently and self study. I did that for German and Latin. I thought it was a good solution.

[regentrude]

 I was allowed to self-prepare to take the AP English lit exam.  Few college students took APs then, at least few compared to now.  Students now are allowed to dual-enroll at a community college starting junior year, which IMO makes more sense than trying to offer multiple APs for a tiny number of prepared and interested students.  

 

While this seems like a workable solution, I have issues with it for two reasons:

 

1. Self-study is nice, - but even gifted students have a right to be instructed. A public school should instruct all students, not let some to fend for themselves.

 

2. Dual enrollment as a substitute for public school is only acceptable if it is free. I object to forcing the families of strong students to pay college fees just because their public school does not educate the students at that level. I believe that every student should be entitled to a free public education at his level. The families of low performing students do not have to pay for extra services; the ones with high performing students should not either.

[Jenny in Florida]

I think that you probably overestimate the number of hs'ers that want to compete for the "top spots." Not all kids are best served by these type of schools, I think actually the majority of students would not be suited to such places. My goal is to teach the children I have, not try and get them into Harvard. I think it is a bit shortsighted to have any particular goal school in mind, especially at the elementary age. The idea totally misses one of big benefits of hs'ing for me, which is to meet my child where they are at and challenge them. If one of children ends up at this level then hopefully I can meet their needs or find resources that do, outsourcing when needed.

 

Right now though we keep moving forward and I try to find the level that challenges my children without overwhelming them. I try to provide a rich environment where learning is life and life is learning. I try to keep improving my skills as a teacher.

 

It seems your attitude is that if hs'ers don't replicate the top 2% of schools then we have no right to school at home. I do see that not all hs'ers do a great job, some don't do even do a good job, but that is no different than public and private schools. Your posts come off more as a way to denigrate hs'ers though than some great public service to the hs community.

 

Amen.

[MBM]

While this seems like a workable solution, I have issues with it for two reasons:

 

1. Self-study is nice, - but even gifted students have a right to be instructed. A public school should instruct all students, not let some to fend for themselves.

 

 

Sometimes it's the only option, unfortunately, especially in rural areas or areas where people don't want to teach, like reservations. It'd be better to have someone to work directly with the students, though.