article/The Best Schools In The World Do This. Why Don't We?

[MarkT]

http://www.npr.org/sections/ed/2016/08/09/488214332/the-best-schools-in-the-world-do-this-why-dont-we?utm_source=npr_newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_content=20160814&utm_campaign=bestofnpr&utm_term=nprnews

[Mrs Twain]

I would agree with point number three that the schools should have more vocational Ed programs. That would be very useful and beneficial to large numbers of students.

 

The first two points are rather vague. Universal preschool hasn't proved to help in our country. We need "better teachers" is also not helpful--especially when we need to pay them a lot more money for teaching a lot less hours--and oh, by the way they all need to be educated at the top universities in the country. ???

 

How about we need more school choice, including more charter schools and homeschooling? That would increase competition and improve the education system. That would help more than some statement like, "We need better teachers."

[katilac]

Universal preschool hasn't proved to help in our country. 

 

But we don't have universal preschool in America! Far from it - less than half of kids attend, and that includes both public and private programs. In my area, public preschool is available on a limited basis only, to low-income and/or at-risk kids. 

 

We definitely cannot say that it has not been proven to help when we don't even have it. 

[Farrar]

Agreed with 1 and 3. Universal preschool seems to be helping here in my not-a-state, though it's so new and it's not technically universal quite yet (there's full funding for enough slots for all kids, but for various reasons, not quite all kids can access it - too local wonky for this discussion) that I don't think there's been many actual studies done. The whole "college ready" focus is for the birds for many kids. Bring back good voc-ed. I feel like it's finally getting some attention. I think both of those are real goals that are relatively clear, that could potentially be implemented and could happen.

 

Number 2 is a load of randomness. I mean, yes, we need "better" teachers. Yes, other countries do a better job of recruiting, selecting and retaining good teachers. But the primary recommendation there - that teachers should be less isolated and should continue professional development throughout their careers... well, anyone else who has been in a public school classroom knows what that looks like. And what it looks like is a load of crap. Sure, real professional development - I'm totally for that. And real connections and time for professional development and building a better, more professional atmosphere. Sure, great. But these things don't tend to translate at the actual school level beyond time wasting jokes. And more importantly, they don't get to the very problem that they identify in #2 right up front - we don't recruit good teachers from the get go. And changing that means changing teacher pay and raising the profile and respect of teachers generally. It's a dead end, thankless job where you spend a ton of time on bureaucracy that's not the good kind. And it's hard. Like, genuinely hard. And for taking such a job you get to be everyone's whipping boy.

 

 

 

 

[bethben]

Also, look at the size of the countries/ provinces they're looking at. The United States is so much larger with a more diverse population. Just because of the sheer size of our country, it's going to be very difficult to create real change and make it look like the other smaller fairly homogeneous countries.

 

I agree though that if we implemented real school choice, our educational system would improve. Not right away, maybe not even in a generation, but eventually. Parents would demand better schools and the schools that perform badly would eventually disappear. At least in my utopian thinking, that would happen.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Mrs Twain]

Things that make a difference from birth to kindergarten age are talking to your baby in full sentences, using good vocabulary, reading books to your baby, etc. Look at E.D. Hirsch's research.

 

Many people think that if we just had public preschool, all the differences between kids with different home situations could be erased. Public preschool can fix everything! LOL. I sincerely wish it could, but the reality is the way the parents educate the children from birth to five is what primarily impacts how they will do in school when they show up there.

 

What I would like to do is start a program with inner city moms where I work with them to do the kinds of things the upper income moms are doing at home with their babies.

[nature girl]

Things that make a difference from birth to kindergarten age are talking to your baby in full sentences, using good vocabulary, reading books to your baby, etc. Look at E.D. Hirsch's research.

 

Many people think that if we just had public preschool, all the differences between kids with different home situations could be erased. Public preschool can fix everything! LOL. I sincerely wish it could, but the reality is the way the parents educate the children from birth to five is what primarily impacts how they will do in school when they show up there.

 

What I would like to do is start a program with inner city moms where I work with them to do the kinds of things the upper income moms are doing at home with their babies.

 

Yes, but the fact is there are many, many parents who don't have the time to spend one on one with each of their babies/toddlers or...to put it bluntly...are not motivated to do more than meet basic needs. This is where universal preschool can make a world of difference, having the teachers there to read those books and use the complex vocabulary for those 4-8 hours a day. Is it going to be as effective as a parent who can devote that time and energy every day to enriching their children? Maybe not, but it's certainly going to have a huge impact in helping them thrive.

Edited August 15, 2016 by nature girl

[Sandragood1]

Here are some ideas about creating better teachers: http://www.economist.com/news/briefing/21700385-great-teaching-has-long-been-seen-innate-skill-reformers-are-showing-best

[Ms Brooks]

I read somewhere recently that pre-school does not have as great an impact if the family is struggling. Poverty does not necessarily make for a poor schooling outcome if a child comes from a stable home environment. Free food for at least breakfast and lunch might help too.  

 

Good teachers are a must. But why would America's best and brightest go into teaching when it pays so little? Maybe to pay off student loans?

 

What happened to vocational training? We started vocational training in early middle school. Those were the best classes for everyone. Seldom were there behavior issues. Girls took woodshop and boy took home economic. The confidence I gained as a pre teen girl using shop tools was fantastic. 

 

Not everyone is college material, nor do many jobs require a college degree. Something neither presidential candidate is talking about is the future of jobs as our world becomes increasingly automated. Wages for jobs that do not require a college degree cannot support one person let alone a family. America has gone from an export economy to a service economy. Those service jobs do not pay a living wage. 

 

Food for thought--Probably on the left side of the political spectrum,  Watch Creating Freedom: The Lottery of Birth. 

[SKL]

Although I am the first to say the US has room for improvement, there is no truly fair way to compare schools in very different cultures / economies.  Trying to do so will only result in inaccurate conclusions and more unhelpful strategies.

 

Some of the most successful schools in terms of actual in-school learning have practically no budget by US standards.

[Guest]

 

Good teachers are a must. But why would America's best and brightest go into teaching when it pays so little? Maybe to pay off student loans?

 

Well, around here its for the hours. One can easily homeschool one's children, as the union has the staff 'work to clock'. The ex-engineers I know are happy....no more 60+ hour work week, no travel, only 180 work days, and those days arent even 8 hours long and one can take vacation and sick leave on those 180. The health care package and the retirement compensation is outstanding compared to what they were offered as non management engineers. I appreciate their decision to be teachers, as there is no question as to their competency. However, for the majority of students, it doesnt matter, as they refuse to do the work. The taxpayer is basically funding teachers to be study hall proctors to get classwork and homework done. That includes such things as playing an audiobook of whatever the assignment was. My vote is to eliminate compulsory high school attendance. Give them a voucher, and when they are ready to learn, they can use the voucher.ymmv, if you dont live in NY or NJ.

Edited August 15, 2016 by Heigh Ho

[Calizzy]

My concern with the preschool stuff is that it is a slippery slope. I'm American but I live in England. Preschool is free here at 2 for low income, 3 for everyone else. Kindy starts at 4. Sure, in America there are people who don't provide an educational early childhood, but once the state starts doing it twice as many parents become hands-off. "It's not my problem anymore." And then the state provides free lunch for all kids until 2nd grade, then the state comes and checks out your home before you kids first day of class, then every single child in the country has a "named person" who is a government employee responsible for your child's wellbeing- making sure they attend dr. Visits and who is "there to listen" if the kid needs someone to talk to. Pretty much the parent is replaceable. I might sound paranoid but it is baffling to me how invasive the state is here and how no one seems to notice or mind. It is a slippery slope.

[Mabelen]

My concern with the preschool stuff is that it is a slippery slope. I'm American but I live in England. Preschool is free here at 2 for low income, 3 for everyone else. Kindy starts at 4. Sure, in America there are people who don't provide an educational early childhood, but once the state starts doing it twice as many parents become hands-off. "It's not my problem anymore." And then the state provides free lunch for all kids until 2nd grade, then the state comes and checks out your home before you kids first day of class, then every single child in the country has a "named person" who is a government employee responsible for your child's wellbeing- making sure they attend dr. Visits and who is "there to listen" if the kid needs someone to talk to. Pretty much the parent is replaceable. I might sound paranoid but it is baffling to me how invasive the state is here and how's your no one seems to notice or mind. It is a slippery slope.

I think you are indeed being paranoid as the state is definitely not trying to replace parents. In my opinion, the system you just described is a great model to follow, but then again, I loved having a midwife come to my home after my older daughter's birth to check up on me and then pop by when I called when I had an issue with breastfeeding. I obviously appreciate having help available when I need it.

[Mabelen]

I work as a teacher's aid in a dual language immersion classroom. One thing that my school is doing right is to have a spirit of cooperation and a growth mindset. We have classroom observations on a regular schedule, not just by the principal, but by peers. I love how teachers help each other within their grade level team as well as out. I agree that honing your craft is essential and it cannot happen in isolation. It takes a village to raise a child. I believe this is true at home and at school.

[Bluegoat]

I'm really not convinced by the pre-school business.  I don't think the evidence is that it works in a straightforward way.

 

Teachers - yes.  Good teachers are important, which means you need to pay them reasonably, figure out who is really talented and will be dedicated, and make it a satisfying job.

 

But we also know pretty clearly that giving teachers real control of their teaching and classrooms, and not making them into glorified test-crammers is part of that.  Even if you have good people, you will make them bad if you hobble them with that crap.

 

I totally agree that in terms of career prep, there needs to be real attention paid to paths other than the college track.  Even within trades tracks there can be real issues, where people who are very competent at the work are required to jump through school-work hoops that they just aren't suited for.  A lot of it is lack of respect though, a kind of invisible classism that comes with meritocracy.

 

About the more school choice thing - that seems logical, but I am not convinced that empirically, we can argue that very convincingly.  Better education systems worldwide tend to be ones where most people are being educated in the same kinds of schools, funded in similar levels, and the expectation is that every child will have access to a really good quality education and so every school needs to provide it.  They might be controlled more nationally or at lower levels depending on other factors, but that seems to be the common denominator to me - an expectation that the schools are good enough that they are almost the universal choice, regardless of social class or wealth.

[horsellian]

My concern with the preschool stuff is that it is a slippery slope. I'm American but I live in England. Preschool is free here at 2 for low income, 3 for everyone else. Kindy starts at 4.

 

[snip]

 

And then the state provides free lunch for all kids until 2nd grade, then the state comes and checks out your home before you kids first day of class, then every single child in the country has a "named person" who is a government employee responsible for your child's wellbeing- making sure they attend dr. Visits and who is "there to listen" if the kid needs someone to talk to. Pretty much the parent is replaceable. I might sound paranoid but it is baffling to me how invasive the state is here and how no one seems to notice or mind. It is a slippery slope.

This stuff isn't actually true though. The ages and free lunch is, but the state doesn't check your home (many, but not all, schools offer a home visit - which you can refuse without any penalty/black mark - to help the teacher see the child in their normal environment) and the named person rubbish is Scotland, not England, and doesn't fully exist yet. I seem to remember there's currently a legal challenge to it. (Also, Scotland's school system is very different to England's.)

[HS Mom in NC]

Having higher standards for getting into teacher training schools and peer review and critiques are a universally good idea. High standards for teachers should result in high pay in line with other specialized professionals like engineers and architects. Without the higher standards I'm not all that enthusiastic about higher pay.

Making up for bad parenting practices and sub-cultural issues is the biggest issue out there.  Would a certain kind of preschool help?  Maybe, but I think so many people have so bought into the idea that early education can solve most of the problems that it's almost a religion to them.  It's time we did some real science on the matter that thoroughly studies all the various factors and then come to grips with the answers.  If the answer, after intensive scientific scrutiny, is that early education cannot solve it, will they be able to hear the answer? 

Now to address the elephant in the room.  Lots of kids and parents are obnoxious and a pain in the neck to deal with.  Teachers get fed up with that.  They're also fed up with having so little say in curriculum, scheduling, policies, regulations, type of testing, etc.  They have all the responsibility and few of the privileges and money can't always compensate for that.  At least that's what my teacher friends and family are telling me.

[aprilleigh]

Yes, some kids and parents are a pain in the butt - good luck fixing that in a country where everyone is entitled to an education. However, your assumption that engineers are paid well is very funny to me. I've got numerous engineers in my family, including DH, and count loads of them among my friends. Engineers without advanced degrees get paid about as well as teachers, if they're lucky. Once upon a time they may have been able to pull down better pay from the start, but those days have been over for a very long time. It's a rare individual who gets a decent paycheck with only a BS in some area of engineering - obviously the mileage varies with the type of engineering degree.

And I agree with earlier posters who have pointed out that preschool is both not universal in the US (we had to pay for it) and not the answer. Early childhood education is helpful for those kids who need a boost that they won't get at home for whatever reason (and there are a lot of reasons why that can happen, many of which are not the fault of the parents). Even all-day kindergarten is not the answer, and that's far from universal either. The answer is as multi-faceted as the problem, and it's not about more money, better teacher pay, bringing back "specials", parent involvement, more teacher autonomy, better teacher training, more selective teacher training programs, or better research. It's about all of those things. And more.

 

It's also about changing the way we look at education. If the population doesn't value education for its own sake, neither will our kids.

[Tanikit]

I have a problem with universal preschool - it implies that all parents are not looking after their children properly. It goes against everything that homeschoolers homeschool for and it takes very small children away from the mothering they need (admittedly if the mothering is so poor that being with a teacher and 20+ other small children is better for the child, well then is it not the mothers we should be working with?)

 

I find many governmental departments believe that agencies can do a better job than the family and unfortunately in this day and age the family has in many places fallen apart - instead of bashing family's and saying that children are better away from them, wouldn't it be better to try to build up the family unit - we all know that preschool and education itself is affected by the quality of the family that children come from (NOT the money in those families... NOT the education of those families... NOT the quality of the building they live in, but the relationships within that family) Is it not relationships that we should be working on? And if we take the children away we cannot work on the relationship - we know that social services does take children away to protect them - that means that the relationship has broken down so severely that it cannot be fixed... preschool cannot fix family relationship problems and therefore even kids in preschool who are affected by these bad relationships will not get the benefit of the programme.

 

It would be wonderful if preschool could include the mothers and perhaps be used to teach the mothers how to provide and interact with their own children - that way the children would be being educated, looked after and the mothers/parents would be being trained and could be helped and the effect would be more far reaching. I do not know what to say about working mothers... this is another issue that is hard to address and is an individual family issue. Maybe they could have preschool classes on weekends even for these parents?

[Tanaqui]

I have a problem with universal preschool - it implies that all parents are not looking after their children properly.

 

No, it doesn't.

 

It acknowledges the reality that many families have both parents working, and that childcare options are a huge bite out of the family budget - and often subpar as well, with limited resources for the child's developing body and mind.

 

It would be wonderful if preschool could include the mothers and perhaps be used to teach the mothers how to provide and interact with their own children

 

Now this sounds an awful lot like you think certain parents (and why just mothers!?) are not interacting with their own children properly.

 

 

[SKL]

Well here's a thought that just popped into my mind - about preschool vs. helping parents interact better with their preschoolers.  I think that for many parents, there is a respite aspect to preschool (and also grade school).  Having the kids away for half of the day can increase the quality of the time spent together the other half of the day.  If that is the case, then it may not matter so much what happens at preschool, as long as the kids are treated well.  And, if respite for the parents is a benefit, then perhaps it matters what the parents are doing during the preschool hours.  Hopefully something that fulfills them in ways child care does not.

 

I don't think this is true for all parents, but I think it applies to some.  I could see it applying to me.

 

We have free part-time preschool for our most at-risk kids, but what are the parents doing during those hours?  Maybe that deserves more attention.  What are the realistic options for a low-income parent with very limited access to child care?

 

I'm getting way off the OP, but it relates to the fact that what appears to "work" (i.e. correlate with good results) for some populations isn't going to have the same effect on others.  The quality and quantity of preschool are just part of the picture.

[Calizzy]

This stuff isn't actually true though. The ages and free lunch is, but the state doesn't check your home (many, but not all, schools offer a home visit - which you can refuse without any penalty/black mark - to help the teacher see the child in their normal environment) and the named person rubbish is Scotland, not England, and doesn't fully exist yet. I seem to remember there's currently a legal challenge to it. (Also, Scotland's school system is very different to England's.)

 

My child is starting reception this fall and we have no option out of the home visit. There is a legal challenge to the named person scheme, they have been given 40 days to amend it.

[....]

But we don't have universal preschool in America! Far from it - less than half of kids attend, and that includes both public and private programs. In my area, public preschool is available on a limited basis only, to low-income and/or at-risk kids. 

 

We definitely cannot say that it has not been proven to help when we don't even have it. 

 

We're in Texas and the public school Pre-K is only for non-English speaking preschoolers and very low income families.  If you pay for it out of pocket in this area, it's like a car payment.  We just don't have that much room in our budget, so our youngest probably won't go to preschool.  

 

Our 3 oldest kids went to preschool for several years (we're originally from a different state) and we loved it.  I would love for the 5th kid to have that experience - especially since there is such a massive age gap with my kids (he can't really play with the teenagers - Lol).  We homeschool, but I have nothing against preschool.  I thought it was a great experience, even though I also work with my kids at home.

[horsellian]

My child is starting reception this fall and we have no option out of the home visit. 

 

The school may not have given you the option to choose (schools like to make lots of things seem compulsory when they are not) but you are under no obligation to be at home or open the door for a home visit if you don't want to.  My DS is also starting reception this year, and we're not having one.  They can't stop your child attending because you didn't have a home visit (unless it's a private school, when I guess they can do what they like).

[Guest]

 

Now to address the elephant in the room.  Lots of kids and parents are obnoxious and a pain in the neck to deal with.  Teachers get fed up with that.  They're also fed up with having so little say in curriculum, scheduling, policies, regulations, type of testing, etc.  They have all the responsibility and few of the privileges and money can't always compensate for that.  At least that's what my teacher friends and family are telling me.

 

This is what I'm hearing from the teachers I've known- a couple who have left teaching completely in the last three years. It wasn't the pay that drove them out. It was the "everything" else. No voice, controlling admins, and the holy grail of test results. I don't know why anyone would sign up for a job with so much control coming from above- seems like many times the best and the brightest don't work real well in tightly controlled situations with no room for problem solving, so it's no wonder why the bar is so low to try and pull in anyone they can. And then the turn over.....that's a huge issue here. 

[Tanikit]

 

 

No, it doesn't.

 

It acknowledges the reality that many families have both parents working, and that childcare options are a huge bite out of the family budget - and often subpar as well, with limited resources for the child's developing body and mind.

 

 

Now this sounds an awful lot like you think certain parents (and why just mothers!?) are not interacting with their own children properly.

 

 

Tanapui - I was basing my statement on what I feel is being said about mothers/parents - not my own views - in fact my post pointed out that I disagree with this and think the family is the best place for most children. If, however the people pushing for this DO believe that parents are incapable of educating their children and providing a better environment for the children, then maybe they should consider what I wrote above... (so it is not my personal feelings on the matter)

 

I agree - many families do have both parents working - I added that at the bottom. I suppose then it becomes... if both parents are working then preschool becomes the best option - but this was not what w. as stated in the initial discussion.

 

As for why it is just mothers I mentioned - the younger the child the more likely I am to refer to mothers rather than fathers. I do believe that genders are different and that children get different things from different gendered parents. Ideally children need both parents, can survive and even flourish with just one of either sex. And I'll never be a feminist - maybe in many ways I am a traditionalist or perhaps I just don't like labelling even myself - I just have opinions I like to express and questions I like to ask :) - they are my opinions just like everyone else has one on here :) I do not get easily offended either. Why does it bother you that I used the word mothers only?

 

That is an interesting point about what parents are doing while their children are at preschool (if they are not working... if they are working) Should parents need a respite from their children? This is in and of itself an interesting question - I imagine again that it has to do with family dynamic changes since in the past I would imagine one would have had that "respite" by having family members step in to help and also providing the same services for families. I know that I have relied on friends to help and I have babysat for my own friends in order to create the community required, but most of the time my children were with me and there was very little respite and I miss them dreadfully now that my husband wants them in school. Again though - this is problem of relationships and of being able to meet each others needs and relying on government to meet everyone's needs when there is a big enough able-enough community to do this and possibly more successfully than government as it would be more local amongst people who cared more for each other. Idealistic... maybe...

 

I'm a homeschooler at heart and I believe in individualisation which preschool cannot do in a way a mature parent with their child can. There is place for preschool but I wouldn't praise it as much as it seems to be praised in many countries. I think it is an option made to solve another problem - yes, its a solution, but couldn't we rather solve the initial problem.

Edited August 18, 2016 by Tanikit

[Bluegoat]

There is a definate group of people that seems to think that pre-school is a necessary thing, and kids who don't go are missing out - I hear it more and more often.  The same kinds of things people used to wonder about homeschooling, but about 3 and 4 year olds.

[katilac]

  I think it is an option made to solve another problem - yes, its a solution, but couldn't we rather solve the initial problem.

 

Part of the initial problem is persistent poverty, and that's not so easily solved. 

 

Access to quality, affordable child care is another tough one. 

 

Yes, they should be addressed, but you can't ignore all other solutions that might help people in the meantime.