Devos rethinking education, SWB rethinking school

[ElizabethB]

I read SWBs recent book Rethinking School. Interestingly, Betsy DeVos’s recent remarks have some similar thoughts about rethinking education.

https://www.ed.gov/news/speeches/prepared-remarks-us-education-secretary-betsy-devos-american-enterprise-institute

What do you guys think?

Here is the most interesting quote from DeVos’s remarks:
 

Which leads to my final point: if America's students are to be prepared, we must rethink school.

What I propose is not another top-down, federal government policy that promises to be a silver bullet. No. We need a paradigm shift, a fundamental reorientation... a rethink.

"Rethink" means we question everything to ensure nothing limits a student from pursuing his or her passion, and achieving his or her potential. So each student is prepared at every turn for what comes next.

It's past time to ask some of the questions that often get labeled as "non-negotiable" or just don't get asked at all:

Why do we group students by age?
Why do schools close for the summer?
Why must the school day start with the rise of the sun?
Why are schools assigned by your address?
Why do students have to go to a school building in the first place?
Why is choice only available to those who can buy their way out? Or buy their way in?
Why can't a student learn at his or her own pace?
Why isn't technology more widely embraced in schools?
Why do we limit what a student can learn based upon the faculty and facilities available?

 

 

Edited January 17, 2018 by ElizabethB

[Carrie12345]

My thoughts don't fit board rules.

[ElizabethB]

My thoughts don't fit board rules.

Can’t we discuss the ideas without becoming political?

[Amy in NH]

I agree.

[Monica_in_Switzerland]

One of my issues with any kind of huge school reform is that no one EVER is going to agree on what education is for.  

 

Is education about self-fulfillment or is it about social stability?  And those are just two of the ten thousand reasons people might give for education.  This comes down to a family-by-family philosophy (as it should) that simply cannot be applied over large groups.  

 

And that's as far as I can go without getting political either.  :-D  

 

ETA:  I don't think I connected the dots very well, so to add:

 

DeVoe's comments clearly show she views education from a fulfillment/passion/potential lens.  The questions she asked align with that.  

 

While that's certainly a pretty picture, I view education from a stability perspective.  The number one goal I have for my kids is that they be able to ensure their stability/make themselves indispensable in the future world that is looking more and more unstable compared to the world I grew up in.  I would ask and want probably vastly different things from a school system than DeVos is seeking.  

 

Ok, I'll stop there.  :-) 

 

 

Edited January 17, 2018 by Monica_in_Switzerland

[ElizabethB]

One of my issues with any kind of huge school reform is that no one EVER is going to agree on what education is for.  

 

Is education about self-fulfillment or is it about social stability?  And those are just two of the ten thousand reasons people might give for education.  This comes down to a family-by-family philosophy (as it should) that simply cannot be applied over large groups.  

 

And that's as far as I can go without getting political either.  :-D  

 

If you read her full remarks, she says that exact same thing and says local parents should be able to have that input.

[kewb]

My thoughts don't fit board rules.

Mine, either.

[Monica_in_Switzerland]

If you read her full remarks, she says that exact same thing and says local parents should be able to have that input.

 

I slightly amended by post upthread while you were also posting, doesn't affect your comment though, as I have not read her full remarks.  

[ElizabethB]

Here are a few DeVos quotes about local control:
 

Throughout both initiatives, the result was a further damaged classroom dynamic between teacher and student, as the focus shifted from comprehension to test-passing. This sadly has taken root, with the American Federation of Teachers recently finding that 60 percent of its teachers reported having moderate to no influence over the content and skills taught in their own classrooms.

Let that sink in. Most teachers feel they have little – if any -- say in their own classrooms.

That statistic should shock even the most ardent sycophant of "the system." It's yet another reason why we should shift power over classrooms from Washington back to teachers who know their students well.

 

 

Ideally, parent and teacher work together to help a child discover his or her potential and pursue his or her passions. When we seek to empower teachers, we must empower parents as well. Parents are too often powerless in deciding what's best for their child. The state mandates where to send their child. It mandates what their child learns and how he or she learns it. In the same way, educators are constrained by state mandates. District mandates. Building mandates... all kinds of other mandates! Educators don't need Washington mandating their teaching on top of everything else.

 

 

Edited January 17, 2018 by ElizabethB

[poppy]

Why do we group students by age?

My dyslexic daughter reads 2 grades below. You would put her behind?

 

 

Why do schools close for the summer?

I agree!

 

 

Why must the school day start with the rise of the sun?

So kids can get home in time to play.

 

 

Why are schools assigned by your address?

Ask the people of Boston who threw riots when assigned schools.

 

 

Why do students have to go to a school building in the first place?

Homeschooling is awesome! Support a living wage so more parents have that option!

 

 

Why is choice only available to those who can buy their way out? Or buy their way in?

Translation: vouchers for private / charter schools is much better for shareholders.

 

 

Why can't a student learn at his or her own pace?

They do.  That's how kids work. 

 

 

Why isn't technology more widely embraced in schools?

*Eyeroll* my kid was using ipads in kindergarten, what does she want, a plug in his head?

 

 

Why do we limit what a student can learn based upon the faculty and facilities available?

Fight for better funding Ms. DeVos.

Edited January 17, 2018 by poppy

[Monica_in_Switzerland]

Well, I agree with local control.  

 

When I see some of the numbers she's talking about, I wonder what would have happened if they had simply divided those sums by the number of teachers in the US and upped the salaries by that amount, removed teacher's unions, and made teaching a competitive career.  

 

I read the article and I liked a lot of what DeVos had to say, but... I can't help but feel like it's just a bunch of words.  There is nothing actionable there.  

 

The truth is, this IS political and philosophical.  

 

Most schools who perform well on PISAs have classrooms that look -shockingly!- just like US classrooms.  The students go in, the students sit and are expected to behave, they are organized by age group, take summers off, and they are presented with a loosely common curriculum.  There are a few differences: age for starting, standardized testing, teacher freedom/salary/education.  

 

But education does not occur in a vacuum.  What is the home life of high-scoring PISA children?  Are mothers generally at home or at work?  Are children exposed to rich, engaging environments form birth to school age (we KNOW this plays a huge role, and no amount of school reform or funding will fix those first 4 years of life), and on and on and on.  Maybe the failure of the school system is related more to the collapse of US social structure and is a SYMPTOM, not the cause.

 

Ok, now I'm really stopping, it's bedtime here.  

[bolt.]

What's the negative with teachers having only "moderate" levels of control over content and skills that they need to teach? (I think most teachers wouldn't expect more than moderate control of those things, would they?)

Edited January 17, 2018 by bolt.

[HomeAgain]

I don't trust either person to come up with the answers.

 

I hate to say this, but I read Rethinking School and I found it messy, muddled, and floundering with a lack of concrete advice for parents.  What advice there was tended to be shoddy (like voting against homework because a 10 hour day is too long for children, but advocating afterschooling, or "encouraging" parents to teach their child to read before school when not all children are ready), and the passion that drove WTM was completely missing.  It is a book in my house with a dozen highlighter tabs in it because of objections and contradictions.

 

I trust DeVos less.

 

 

Let's bring other people, other ideas into the conversation before attempting to hold one at a national level.

[AppleGreen]

I actually think she brings up some good points, BUT I definitely take issue with the question about technology. I subbed in a 3rd grade class last week, those kids spend PLENTY of time with tech. And I don't think it is just a case of having a sub, so things are different. They were on their devices a lot. 

 

My current 6th grader gave school a go the last three months or so of last year and spent an incredible amount of time on the 1:1 device issued by the school. It was obscene. And, it did not lead to quality teaching or better learning. My child decided to come home this year because school would not help "meet my academic goals". (edited to clarify, not *my* goals, but my child's goals. My child was definitely underwhelmed by school)

 

I have thoughts on the other questions raised, but that was the big one that jumped out to me. 

 

 

 

edited to clarify

Edited January 17, 2018 by AppleGreen

[Alessandra]

My thoughts don't fit board rules.

This.

[kiana]

What's the negative with teachers having only "moderate" levels of control over content and skills that they need to teach? (I think most teachers wouldn't expect more than moderate control of those things, would they?)

 

Kids who move; a lot of kids move schools frequently, and children who are already disadvantaged are most likely to do so. When the coverage is very different year to year in a sequential subject, and especially when one state/school is grades ahead of another, it causes issues -- similar to indiscriminate curriculum hopping.

 

I do think there should be a lot more freedom in *how* to teach, and I have no issues with complete local control in subjects like elementary school social studies/science as long as they're not omitting them entirely. 

Edited January 17, 2018 by kiana

[gardenmom5]

   The questions she asked align with that.  

 

so ask your own, or what are your own ideas that would improve b&m schools.

 

dh  got his ideas for his area of business to both parties.  *both parties* National leaders (who make the national news) who he was able to get his ideas in their their hands -   liked his ideas.  (do I think anything will happen - we'll  see.  unfortunately, too many would rather demagogue than work together.)

 

Here are a few DeVos quotes about local control:

 

Throughout both initiatives, the result was a further damaged classroom dynamic between teacher and student, as the focus shifted from comprehension to test-passing. This sadly has taken root, with the American Federation of Teachers recently finding that 60 percent of its teachers reported having moderate to no influence over the content and skills taught in their own classrooms.

 

Let that sink in. Most teachers feel they have little – if any -- say in their own classrooms.

 

That statistic should shock even the most ardent sycophant of "the system." It's yet another reason why we should shift power over classrooms from Washington back to teachers who know their students well....

 

Ideally, parent and teacher work together to help a child discover his or her potential and pursue his or her passions. When we seek to empower teachers, we must empower parents as well. Parents are too often powerless in deciding what's best for their child. The state mandates where to send their child. It mandates what their child learns and how he or she learns it. In the same way, educators are constrained by state mandates. District mandates. Building mandates... all kinds of other mandates! Educators don't need Washington mandating their teaching on top of everything else.

 

I have friends who've worked as teachers, and just couldn't take it any more.

one did remedial reading with middle schoolers.  she was make good progress with her students.  their attitudes were improving, they were building skills, and it was showing in other classes.   then the school board found out what she was doing and "You can't do that.  stop it right now."   the methods they demanded simply didn't work, but those were the only methods allowed.

[TravelingChris]

I am completely against the way technology is being used in schools.  Forcing kindergartners who do not read and often do not know numbers to log into computers is insanity and that is what I saw.  And it is stupid technology and just a way to save on textbook costs.  It does not help the students get better, particularly not the kids who are less intelligent or have a number of different disabilities,   In fact, my area is having an everybody code day at the library because coding or any actual technology is not being taught.  (I am in fact interested in going because they say everyone of any age is welcome and it is for complete beginners on up-- I did a little programming a very long time ago but think it would be cool to learn and relate to youngest in a new way).

 

As to age based- I think it is stupid.  Both for kids ahead and kids behind.  I was volunteer tutoring a child who only learned to read in fifth grade because of me and never could learn any math even though I tried all year and of course, his teachers had tried too.  He was about to go to middle school and would be completely lost.  He obviously had a disability but a friend of mine who was a special ed teacher in the school system said that they cannot label Latino children disabled and get them help.  It is outrageous.  My daughter was also tutoring and she had a Latina girl who was quite smart but also dyslexic, according to my dd who is herself dyslexic.  Both of these kids spoke English fine and the fact that they could not receive any extra help or services is outrageous.  I am sad I can't volunteer anymore because the kids just gave me too many illnesses and after a bad case of pneumonia, I had to stop.

[ElizabethB]

Mine, either.

 

She has a lot of interesting ideas in her speech, and so does SWB in her book.  If you don't like any of them, discuss your own ideas for making education better/things to try.

 

If you actually read her speech, she talks about the failure of both the left and right's ideas with federally mandated principles and talks about a bunch of out of the box ideas and seems to be trying to spark a discussion about out of the box ideas and increased local control and ideas for that.

[poppy]

She has a lot of interesting ideas in her speech, and so does SWB in her book.  If you don't like any of them, discuss your own ideas for making education better/things to try.

 

If you actually read her speech, she talks about the failure of both the left and right's ideas with federally mandated principles and talks about a bunch of out of the box ideas and seems to be trying to spark a discussion about out of the box ideas and increased local control and ideas for that.

No Child Left Behind was a disaster for education, I think.  Treating schools like a business. 

[RootAnn]

Why do we group students by age?

My dyslexic daughter reads 2 grades below. You would put her behind?

 

I think she's talking about grouping kids by ability by skill area (reading, writing, math being different groupings). I'm not necessarily in favor, but I think this is what she means.

 

Why do schools close for the summer?

I agree!

 

So the kids can swim & go to summer camp or work jobs or whatever - a break. I don't see the need for year-round school, but my summer brain-drain is real.

 

Why must the school day start with the rise of the sun?

So kids can get home in time to play.

 

How about letting them play at the beginning of the day? Just a thought.

 

Why can't a student learn at his or her own pace?

They do.  That's how kids work. 

 

Actually, many are left behind when the class keeps going when they haven't gotten the idea yet. Others are slowed down when they already get the idea the first time & have to wait for the majority of the class to get it.

 

Why isn't technology more widely embraced in schools?

*Eyeroll* my kid was using ipads in kindergarten, what does she want, a plug in his head?

 

I agree that there is already *too much* tech in schools.

[ktgrok]

If you read her full remarks, she says that exact same thing and says local parents should be able to have that input.

That sounds good but she also thinks that the money should be at the local level. And I have a problem with that. Whenever I hear things should be controlled at the local level I hear someone saying that they shouldn't have to teach about racism. Or about Nazis. Or about Martin Luther King Junior. Or that they want their money to stay in their neighborhood and those poor schools are just out of luck. There really needs to be some general oversight or we lose cohesion as a society. We need kids in this country to have some basic working knowledge of our history and the history of the world. We need them to have some basic standards in how they communicate in English. And we need to fund those schools. Not based on how poor or rich the general neighborhood is but on what the schools need in order to properly educate the students. None of that is a local thing.

Edited January 17, 2018 by ktgrok

[Alessandra]

I havent read all the posts, but re technology, did anyone mention the DeVos stake in Neurocore, a tech-based 'brain training' enterprise?

 

Just saying. One of many articles:

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2017/05/26/betsy-devos-neurocore/?utm_term=.cb52bc6f3b9f

[Kanin]

 

 

 

I have friends who've worked as teachers, and just couldn't take it any more.

one did remedial reading with middle schoolers.  she was make good progress with her students.  their attitudes were improving, they were building skills, and it was showing in other classes.   then the school board found out what she was doing and "You can't do that.  stop it right now."   the methods they demanded simply didn't work, but those were the only methods allowed.

 

UGH, that is my nightmare! I want to teach in a public school rather than private (someday)... but this terrifies me.

[RootAnn]

Whenever I hear things should be controlled at the local level I hear someone saying that they shouldn't have to teach about racism. Or about Nazis. Or about Martin Luther King Junior. ... There really needs to be some general oversight or we lose cohesion as a society. We need kids in this country to have some basic working knowledge of our history and the history of the world. We need them to have some basic standards in how they communicate in English.

You do understand that this is one of the arguments against homeschooling? How homeschoolers don't have set curriculum or, in many states, minimum requirements for test scores (which theoretically would check knowledge of some topics and communication ability)?

 

I'm a bit surprised to see this argument from a homeschooler. LOL.

[ktgrok]

You do understand that this is one of the arguments against homeschooling? How homeschoolers don't have set curriculum or, in many states, minimum requirements for test scores (which theoretically would check knowledge of some topics and communication ability)?

 

I'm a bit surprised to see this argument from a homeschooler. LOL.

 

If I'm paying for it, I want accountability. I don't pay for your kids' homeschool curricula :)

[kiana]

You do understand that this is one of the arguments against homeschooling? How homeschoolers don't have set curriculum or, in many states, minimum requirements for test scores (which theoretically would check knowledge of some topics and communication ability)?

 

I'm a bit surprised to see this argument from a homeschooler. LOL.

 

I'm not so worried about what one person is going to choose to teach. There are groups that perturb me with what they recommend, but I don't think that laws about what to teach would really help. But there is a big difference between that and what a school should be able to choose to teach (or especially not teach) to other people's kids. This applies especially to the public school, which by default collects all of the children with the least invested parents and the least knowledgeable parents (as well as many others, of course). 

[Corraleno]

Why do we group students by age?

Why do schools close for the summer?

Why must the school day start with the rise of the sun?

Why are schools assigned by your address?

Why do students have to go to a school building in the first place?

Why is choice only available to those who can buy their way out? Or buy their way in?

Why can't a student learn at his or her own pace?

Why isn't technology more widely embraced in schools?

Why do we limit what a student can learn based upon the faculty and facilities available?

 

There's nothing wrong with those questions, if they are genuine questions intended to spark debate and generate suggestions. The fact that I disagree with the PS answer to all but one of those questions (technology) is why I homeschool. But DeVos is being entirely disingenuous here, because those questions are specifically designed to push her agenda by making taxpayer funding of private schools, including religious schools, and for-profit (often online) charters, seem like the perfect "answer" to all of those "questions."

 

Other questions we might want to ask include:

 

Why should taxpayers fund for-profit businesses?

Why should tax money be used to pay tuition at private and religious schools?

Why should schools that use state & federal money be exempt from state & federal oversight?

Why should we expand for-profit charters, when educational outcomes are often worse than public schools?

[KathyBC]

Why should tax money be used to pay tuition at private and religious schools?

 

Public-private partnerships can be effective. If private schools did not receive funding, many families would be back to public schooling, entirely on the taxpayers' dime. With partnerships taxpayers are paying only a portion, and the results are better (self-selection, I know, but still).

[Frances]

Public-private partnerships can be effective. If private schools did not receive funding, many families would be back to public schooling, entirely on the taxpayers' dime. With partnerships taxpayers are paying only a portion, and the results are better (self-selection, I know, but still).

But they can also be used as a way to cut funding for public schools who by law must serve all students, unlike private schools who get to select who they will educate. So you can end up with a situation where primarily the students with the highest needs are left in public school with inadequate funding.

[Mergath]

That sounds good but she also thinks that the money should be at the local level. And I have a problem with that. Whenever I hear things should be controlled at the local level I hear someone saying that they shouldn't have to teach about racism. Or about Nazis. Or about Martin Luther King Junior. Or that they want their money to stay in their neighborhood and those poor schools are just out of luck. There really needs to be some general oversight or we lose cohesion as a society. We need kids in this country to have some basic working knowledge of our history and the history of the world. We need them to have some basic standards in how they communicate in English. And we need to fund those schools. Not based on how poor or rich the general neighborhood is but on what the schools need in order to properly educate the students. None of that is a local thing.

 

:iagree:  And teachers having total control over what they teach and how they teach it is great when you have fantastic, engaged teachers. But with some of the teachers I had as a kid, that would have been a nightmare. 

 

[Mergath]

You do understand that this is one of the arguments against homeschooling? How homeschoolers don't have set curriculum or, in many states, minimum requirements for test scores (which theoretically would check knowledge of some topics and communication ability)?

 

I'm a bit surprised to see this argument from a homeschooler. LOL.

 

Not all homeschoolers are in favor of zero oversight and regulation.

 

[Corraleno]

But they can also be used as a way to cut funding for public schools who by law must serve all students, unlike private schools who get to select who they will educate. So you can end up with a situation where primarily the students with the highest needs are left in public school with inadequate funding.

Exactly. To me, arguing that the solution to problems with public education is for taxpayers to pay tuition for kids in private school is like saying the solution to poor bus service is for taxpayers to pay part of the cost of private car purchases. It would be a great deal for private schools and car dealerships, and a great deal for people who could afford the other half of the tuition and car payments, but it would suck for those who ended up stuck with an even crappier public school system and worse bus service.

[Carrie12345]

Exactly. To me, arguing that the solution to problems with public education is for taxpayers to pay tuition for kids in private school is like saying the solution to poor bus service is for taxpayers to pay part of the cost of private car purchases. It would be a great deal for private schools and car dealerships, and a great deal for people who could afford the other half of the tuition and car payments, but it would suck for those who ended up stuck with an even crappier public school system and worse bus service.

 

This is definitely one of the better analogies I've seen. Maybe it's because I live in an area with poor public transportation and a crummy school, lol.

 

On both fronts, the majority of people in my area make it work. From the people who buy expensive vehicles, to the ones crossing their fingers that their 15yo car will make it from point A to point B, to the ones who have cobbled their schedule around a long and inconvenient bus route, the percentage who truly can't get around is relatively low.  The actual NEED isn't equal.  Giving each family $X toward transportation would be incredibly wasteful.  Some don't need any of it to continue having their top of the line ride. Many don't need that much to fix or upgrade a vehicle.  For some, it wouldn't help at all because they have no way to make up the difference. Or they're not allowed to drive. Or they're actually unable to drive.

(Financially, the same argument can be and does get made when it comes to improving public transportation. The cost would be out of control on a per-use basis.)

 

While I'm all-in on trying to reform the school system, I think pipe dreams are dangerous. Looking at my own local school doesn't make for a fair assessment.   Even with issues so big I never want to see my kids go there, there are schools and families much worse off.  A partial payment to anything isn't going to help those students. Hoping for innovative, creative, effective teachers to show up out of thin air and stick around long term so that the awful and/or jaded ones sift out naturally isn't going to help those students. Pretending that all those administrators are going to see the light and get on board isn't going to help those students.  Expecting parents in poverty, with no frame of reference for academic engagement, stressed and harried at best, with legal, physical, or mental issues (on top of financial) at worst, to suddenly become empowered isn't going to help those kids.

 

In a hypothetical reformation, I would much prefer to prioritize the children who are losing the most.  Would I love to see my own kids, or even my grandkids, have better options than currently exist?  Absolutely.  But I think it's insane to talk about putting frosting on their gourmet cupcakes when a very real, very large population is trying to exist on crumbs.  Come back to me once they're all fed.

[bethben]

I’m reading this book: https://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/0385495242/ref=mp_s_a_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1516284377&sr=8-1&pi=AC_SX236_SY340_QL65&keywords=the+schools+we+need+and+why+we+don%27t+have+them&dpPl=1&dpID=51j%2BlxSVNAL&ref=plSrch

 

A lot of the arguments about school reform I’m reading in this book.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[KathyBC]

Well, the way I envision it would only affect those families who would otherwise not be able to afford private school, thus freeing up resources for those in need, not decreasing them. I'm pretty fuzzy on how that would work though. :D

[scholastica]

Education doesn’t happen in a vacuum. There are societal problems due to generational poverty and inequality in general, not to mention the dysfunction in many families, that are at the heart of the problem. Generally, parents who are equipped to get their kids a good education do so. Parents who can’t for whatever reason, don’t. So many things play into educational success and failure, school is only a small part of the problem.

[shawthorne44]

:iagree:  And teachers having total control over what they teach and how they teach it is great when you have fantastic, engaged teachers. But with some of the teachers I had as a kid, that would have been a nightmare. 

 

 

Also, then the unpleasant topics aren't taught.  For example, I had zero, ZERO grammar instruction after non/verbs/adjectives/adverbs in early elementary until a half-year of diagramming Junior Year of High School.   Lived in the same house from third grade until college.  

I would add to the great teacher requirement a one-room-school requirement.  

Edited January 18, 2018 by shawthorne44

[Bluegoat]

I don't think people who advocate for teachers to have input into their teaching are generally suggesting no curriculum or outcomes.  Systems where teachers have a lot of autonomy still seem to have those things.

[kiana]

I don't think people who advocate for teachers to have input into their teaching are generally suggesting no curriculum or outcomes.  Systems where teachers have a lot of autonomy still seem to have those things.

 

I don't think most people are advocating this, but I think that was one of the points of the speech; that curriculum should all be decided locally, not even at a state level. 

 

It's hard to say even on the nth reading, because it was so full of platitudes and so empty of nuts and bolts. But one of the specific quotes:

 

But state lawmakers should also resist the urge to centrally plan education. “Leave it to the states†may be a compelling campaign-season slogan, but state capitols aren’t exactly close to every family either. That’s why states should empower teachers and parents and provide the same flexibility ESSA allows states.

 

 

And this, I think, is what people are objecting to. 

 

I am thrilled by the idea of giving teachers more freedom over how to teach; how to structure their day; what learning aids they use. 

 

I am excited by the idea of giving schools and teachers freedom to choose from multiple curricula, that have similar scopes but different sequences within the year, different emphases, potentially allowing teachers to differentiate by giving one child who loves math something like beast academy (which would have him working ahead; but that's no problem as long as the grade basics are already learned) and another child who just wants to get it over with something like saxon. 

 

But I don't at all like the idea of scrapping any sort of coherent year-based sequence in skill-based subjects completely. 

 

I don't think that end of year tests are necessarily bad, but I think the tests themselves are bad and the curricula are designed by the same people who write the tests, so of course you will have superior results when they write the tests aimed at their own curriculum. This is a marketing tool and is repulsive. But I think teaching towards a well-structured test with a good free response section and qualified people to grade it wouldn't be at all bad, especially if it were done every 2-3 years instead; comprehensive review is an excellent teaching tool. 

 

Also, pearson is evil. 

[Reefgazer]

If funds and ideas were localized, you would have/be able to vote for accountability through your elected representatives and school board members.  If it's not your locality, it makes sense you wouldn't have the right to vote or have a say in other localities.  Getting the federal government out of education entirely solves your problem of no accountability for the dollars that you put in.

If I'm paying for it, I want accountability. I don't pay for your kids' homeschool curricula :)

 

Edited January 19, 2018 by reefgazer

[Bluegoat]

I often feel rather torn about the question of what level of governance should control schools.  I can formulate very good arguments for pretty much all of them.

[Mergath]

If funds and ideas were localized, you would have/be able to vote for accountability through your elected representatives and school board members. If it's not your locality, it makes sense you wouldn't have the right to vote or have a say in other localities. Getting the federal government out of education entirely solves your problem of no accountability for the dollars that you put in.

That doesn't solve the problem of the local government not being accountable to anyone, though. Yes, they need to get reelected, but I don't think the majority of voters in a given district should have complete autonomy over the education of the children in that district. Here, for example, we have a huge percentage of very conservative retired people who would likely vote in officials who would shut the schools down to save money. Nice for the wealthy retirees and their bank accounts, not so great for the students.

[kiana]

I often feel rather torn about the question of what level of governance should control schools.  I can formulate very good arguments for pretty much all of them.

 

Which is a pretty sure sign that any "magic bullet" is going to fail, heh. 

[AppleGreen]

The Prize: Who's In Charge of America's Schools?  recently popped up somewhere on the internet recently. I am looking forward to reading it, especially in the context of this thread.

[ktgrok]

If funds and ideas were localized, you would have/be able to vote for accountability through your elected representatives and school board members.  If it's not your locality, it makes sense you wouldn't have the right to vote or have a say in other localities.  Getting the federal government out of education entirely solves your problem of no accountability for the dollars that you put in.

 

But, I don't want funds to be local even more. No way should kids that had the bad luck to be born into a poor town get less funding for their education than kids lucky enough to be born 2 miles down the road in the nice suburb.