Urgent Advice and Opinions Needed!

Thursday there is a meeting soliciting community opinion and comments on the merging of Sumter School District 2 with Sumter School District 17.

Both school districts are small, so my initial inclination is that a merge would make sense fiscally. Both school districts have a full compliment of advisers, curriculum specialists, and endless other administration types.

Even merged, the school district would only cover about 8,000 students, which isn't terribly large.

While District 17 has the reputation for being the better school district, its reputation rests almost entirely on its demographics, as it has a slightly higher number of white students and a lower number of low income students. The district is by no means a white enclave.

District 2 actually does a better job of educating its students, as I have posted in the past, and when disaggregated data is compared it is way more successful, especially with low income and minority students.

Next year, the two school districts are going to have one of the first intra-district open enrollment programs, and the districts already share a career center.

Since I am moving to Alaska, the point is actually moot for me, but I still want to take the opportunity to educate the public.

Like many other political decisions made in the south, I expect the decision to be influenced by racial politics, divisions between rural and city residents, and plain old fashion turf defense.

References:
schoolmatters.org: District 2 - District 17
School Report Cards: District 2 - District 17

What are your thoughts?

Gap years

I propose that all college students take a mandatory Gap year travelling around the world before starting, or even applying, to colleges.

Think about it, a gap year would not only ensure that Universities got well rounded students, but a certain number of kids who weren't cut out to survive in the real world would be weeded out of precious admittance slots.

Some of you might point out that low income students won't have the same resources to pay for the trips, but if a smart resourceful 18 year old can't find the money to travel, then the probably won't make it in school in anyway.

Hell, if we made the made the gap year requirement three years, colleges wouldn't have to worry about underage drinking either.

Note: This comment was made is entirely tongue in cheek.

Smart teens don't have sex (or kiss much either).

Slightly related to my value of colleges theme, I just read a post on Intercourse and Intelligence by Jason Malloy over at GNXP.

A detailed study from 2000, entitled "Smart teens don't have sex (or kiss much either)", confirms what many of us probably already assume.

Jason comments:

One reason we might guess that smarter people in high school, or in more challenging colleges or majors, delay their sexual debuts is because they are delaying gratification in expectation of future reward. Sexual behavior (or at least the investment needed to procure a partner or sustain one) may compete with time/resources required for other goals, and intelligent people may have more demanding goals.

He also pointed out:

Perhaps more revealing, HS, also showed that intelligence correlates with less sex within marriage for the same age range. While still consistent with pregnancy fears and competing interests, lower sex drive seems like a better fit. In fact another revealing finding from the Counterpoint survey was that while 95% of US men and 70% of women masturbate, this number is only 68% of men and 20% of women at MIT!

So relax all you kids who didn't get into top colleges, elite schools have their price.

Side note: If more intelligent people are having less sex (and I assume less babies), what the hell is driving the Flynn effect?

Update: Pretty weird, but via Darren at Right on the Left Coast, Marginal Revolution quotes Robin Hanson commenting on a study, Reading, Writing, and Sex: The Effect of Losing Virginity on Academic Achievement, by economist Joseph J. Sabia:

My interpretation: Teen boys who want sex out of teen girls have to spend a lot of time in sports, fights, clubs, signaling their attractiveness. Teen girls who want sex just have to say "yes", and the sex itself takes little time, especially given that teenage boys are the partners. :

Well duh. Also note that there was no need to include the phrase "who want sex", since I pretty much assume the overwhelming majority of teen boys want to have sex.

The Be-All End-All College Credential

The Quick and the Ed: The Be-All End-All College Credential

Kevin Carey agrees with my earlier post on the MIT Dean of Admissions scandal.

At the modern university, that distinction doesn't exist--you have to be certified by the institution that taught you. Indeed, since degrees aren't based on any objective, verifiable evidence of learning, that's all they're certifying--that you've been taught. So I wonder if in addition to deterring future resume-fudgers, M.I.T. wasn't exactly comfortable with the idea of employing someone who is living proof that you don't need a university degree to be really good at a complex, challenging, difficult job--particularly one at a university.[emphasis mine]

Wow... I have a whole anti-university theme going today.

The Chronicle: Wired Campus Blog: A MySpace Photo Costs a Student a Teaching Certificate

The Chronicle: Wired Campus Blog: A MySpace Photo Costs a Student a Teaching Certificate

If a school like Millersville University of Pennsylvania, denies students a degree because of pictures like this.

I am in trouble...

Me, my son, and friends at Oktoberfest 1998, Munich, Germany

P.S. before anyone starts castrating castigating me, it was family day at Oktoberfest (yes Oktoberfest has a family day), and my ex-wife was sober and taking the picture.

Another Harvard is Impossible Article

Young, Gifted, and Not Getting Into Harvard - New York Times

Quite frankly, I am getting sick of the whole its impossible to get into Harvard meme, so I was pleasantly surprised when I read this article in the NYT.

The author, a Harvard Alumni, no longer gets depressed after he interviews yet another gifted student who probably won't get in to Harvard, even though the students are way more accomplished that he was when he got in.

As he observes in the story:

I came to understand that my own focus on Harvard was a matter of not sophistication but narrowness. I grew up in an unworldly blue-collar environment. Getting perfect grades and attending an elite college was one of the few ways up I could see.

My four have been raised in an upper-middle-class world. They look around and see lots of avenues to success. My wife’s two brothers struggled as students at mainstream colleges and both have made wonderful full lives, one as a salesman, the other as a builder. Each found his own best path. Each knows excellence.

Though I sometimes regret not giving myself the opportunity to attend a good college after high school, I have lived a pretty decent life. I excel at my job, I have a better house than my parents had, and most of all I have five wonderful kids, but I have also had adventures.

I lived in Europe for 12 years, I have met people from the around the world, ordered beers in more languages than I can count, travelled alone, snowboarded the Alps, sipped beers on the Mediterranean, seen Roman ruins, and countless other adventures that I would of never gotten to experience if I had taken the traditional route of a four year University.

You have to wonder if the one thing that is missing from the resumes of applicants to competitive schools these days is a sense of adventure, and an ability to roll with the punches.

Don't get me wrong, I value education, but if my kids chose to backpack around the world for a few years instead of going to Harvard, I wouldn't be at all disappointed.

The Value of a College Degree

Dean of Admissions at M.I.T. Resigns - New York Times:

Marilee Jones, the dean of admissions at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, became famous for urging stressed-out students competing for elite colleges to calm down and stop trying to be perfect. But today she admitted that she had fabricated her own academic educational credentials, and resigned after nearly three decades at the university.
...

Ms. Jones on various occasions had represented herself as having degrees from Albany Medical College, Union College and Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, but she had no degrees from any of those places, said Phillip L. Clay, the chancellor of M.I.T.

If this was a movie, the whole theme would be how a hardworking woman without a degree managed to rise through the ranks. At the end of the movie, she would make a impassioned speech, everyone would forgive her, and she would keep her job... but this is real life. Despite doing an apparently excellent job, she was forced to resign.

The whole story raises a pretty good question: What is the value of a college degree if someone without it was able to rise so high in a competitive school like MIT?

The story certainly lends credence to the theory that college doesn't actually add much academic value (for a lot of careers, not all) and is nothing more than a way to vet for intelligence and perseverance.

Of course many people will argue that its not an issue of whether she had a degree or not, but an issue of integrity. Do you really believe that she would of even got her foot in the door if she had been honest about having a degree?

If she is smart, she will launch her own consulting company that helps students get into the colleges of her choice. She has already written one book, perhaps now she will write another exposing the dirty little secrets of college admissions.

When Fair Use Isn't Fair

Update: "Tomorrow the hammer's coming down hard over the 'Fair Use' issue..."

Retrospectacle: A Neuroscience Blog: When Fair Use Isn't Fair

Shelly over at Retrospectacle was threatened with legal action when she used one figure and one chart from a scientific paper published in the Journal of Science of Food and Agriculture, with full citation of course.

She took down the offending figure and chart and reproduced the data in excel, but there is principle here. Apparently the Journal didn't like the spin she was putting on the data.

This sets a bad precedent. Education researchers could conceivably ask us bloggers to not use published data to make points against the establishment.

Re: Antioxidants in Berries Increased by Ethanol (but Are Daiquiris Healthy?) by Shelly Bats

http://scienceblogs.com/retrospectacle/2007/04/antioxidants_in_berries_increa.php

The above article contains copyrighted material in the form of a table and graphs taken from a recently published paper in the Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture. If these figures are not removed immediately, lawyers from John Wiley & Sons will contact you with further action.

Go read for yourself.

You may contact the publishers at the following to let them know what you think.

Update: The issue has been resolved... I have removed the contact details.

Balanced >insert subject here<

The next time someone tries to defend or advocate for balanced math instruction or balanced literacy remember this simple mathematical formula.

(good + bad) / 2 = mediocre

or

"The average of good plus bad is mediocre."

Good Education Research

An Interview with Frederick Hess: The Education Research We Need; (And why we don't have it)

According to Frederick Hess, good education research is done by everyone except education schools.

That's a great question. Certainly, there is good evidence that upper-tier economics, political science, sociology, and public policy programs are producing PhDs with quantitative skills and methodological sophistication that dramatically surpass those of earlier generations. This has been the pattern of the social sciences for several decades, and nothing has changed on that score. Whether some programs are emphasizing formal theory or econometric training to the degree that fewer graduates may have an aptitude for or interest in field work is a question some have posed. But I don't know that anyone has any good answers to that.

With regard to doctoral level training in education, I'm in no position to pass judgment on the quality of instruction being offered at the hundreds of institutions offering education doctorates. I can say, however, that the education policy work by young scholars that I find most compelling consistently seems to be produced by young scholars trained in the disciplines. Whether that judgment is a product of my own tastes as a reader, self-selection on the part of doctoral candidates, the quality of preparation, or some other factor, I really can't say.

So, if I am reading this right, if I ever want to make a contribution to educational research, I should get a PHD in something other than education.

Disclaimer: Just in case I ever do want to get into an education graduate school and the admissions people do a google and discover this post, I want to say for the record that I only look down on the other education schools... not yours.

Cross Posted at Kitchen Table Math

Reading First "Scandal" - OIG Report Irony

I am guessing that if you are reading this post you are either an education junkie like myself, or you have a fetish for short bald guys. If it is the latter, then read no further. If however, you are trying to make first of the whole "Reading First" scandal, read on.

I haven't seen the hearings yet, mainly because my fiancee won't let me hog the computer for four hours, but today at work, I read most of the Office of the Inspector General (OIG) reports investigating the RF program.

Having read accounts of the hearings, I was quite surprised when I read the actual reports. This scandal as it's now being called, might blow up in the face of the people protesting the program (whole language mafia).

The OIG, almost subliminally called for the Reading First program to become more stringent that it already is. In the The Department’s Administration of Selected Aspects of the Reading First Program,
FINAL AUDIT REPORT issued February 2007, I found this nugget on page 23.

Since the legislation is scheduled for reauthorization in 2007, Congress has an opportunity to clarify whether reading programs should be funded on the basis of program effectiveness. Congress will also be able to determine what it means for a program to be “based on scientific reading research” and whether this definition is consistent with program effectiveness. Information obtained and deliberated upon, as part of the reauthorization process, should enable Congress to make the legislation more responsive to the needs of children by ensuring that quality programs are funded with Reading First funds.

We suggest that the Department and Congress, during the next reauthorization of the law, clarify whether reading programs need to have scientific evidence of effectiveness in order to be eligible for funding under Reading First.

Right now it is still possible for states to slip in programs that on the surface meet the basic requirements of having explicit and systematic instruction in the five essential components of reading: phonemic awareness, phonics, vocabulary development, reading fluency (including oral reading skills), and reading comprehension strategies.

If Congress added a requirement for scientific evidence of effectiveness to the requirements, many of the weaker programs would not qualify.

Of course, Congressman George Miller, is ignoring this aspect of the report during his grandstanding.

kitchen table math, the sequel: A Whole Saturday Of Whole Language

kitchen table math, the sequel: A Whole Saturday Of Whole Language

Myrtle Hocklemeier volunteered to teach illiterate adults how to read. The organization that she volunteered at had two groups. One taught phonics and the other used whole language. She unfortunately mistakenly signed up for the wrong one.

At least she got to use her Attic Greek.

There was yet another demonstration about how whole language worked and phonics was pointless. In a given normal English paragraph several words were replaced with what was supposed to be nonsense symbols. She told us the meaning of those words and then held up a card with those words on them and asked us to tell her what the word said. The class obliged and parroted back the words and this was then pronounced more proof that whole language worked. Then she did something really sneaky, she held up two cards with words which were not in the passage and that we hadn't seen before. What did they mean? No one could answer. Except, the "nonsense" symbols were Attic Greek and so were the words. Because I have studied Attic Greek I was able to call out the English meaning of one of the cards that no one was supposed to know. (I never imagined that studying this language would pay off in such a delicious way--although trivia. It was a beautiful Myrtle moment.) The trainer ignored my out of turn response and told the class that these words, the meanings to which they couldn't identify, were proof that words can't be learned outside of "the whole context". I didn't come there for a confrontation so I didn't say, "But I learned all those words from vocabulary lists and I learned to read Attic Greek by studying rules of how it's pronounced." Nope. I kept my mouth shut. The white-haired old lady nearly high-fived me.

Go read the whole thing and give her your condolences.

We're not all victims

Rosa Brooks said it, Kevin Drum agrees, and so do I.

We're not all victims

I hate to be callous, but the VT shootings had about as much effect on my life as these murders.

I feel for the families and I can't imagine how they must feel, but its their suffering, not ours.

I will go even further and state that 9/11 didn't effect my life, except of course for longer lines at the airport and that whole going to war thing.

I would much rather read about Alberto Gonzales in the hot seat, and the Reading First hearings.

Michael J. Petrilli on Reading First on National Review Online

Michael J. Petrilli on Reading First on National Review Online: "Hooked on Hysterics"

Sorry I lied in my last post. I got bored of studying and came across this article.

Someone a lot more qualified than me seems to echo several of my last few posts on Reading First

This circus was set in motion on the campaign trail seven years ago. That’s when Governor George W. Bush proposed a heavy-handed federal program, modeled on a similar — and notably successful — one in Texas, that would provide mucho dinero for reading instruction, but only for interventions that were scientifically proven to work.

(I said Reading First was a bribe)

and

Fast-forward to tomorrow’s hearing, featuring the Education Department’s inspector general, who spent much of 2006 producing reports purporting to show that federal officials steered Reading First grants to preferred programs — those with which they had “professional associations.” Not that he presented any evidence of financial shenanigans — merely that a handful of the expert panelists reviewing the state applications were partial to certain reading approaches (specifically, those that work).

Another witness will be Chris Doherty, the former administration official who directed the Reading First program until he was made to walk the plank on behalf of his superiors last fall. His response to these “allegations” might as well be “guilty as charged.” He and his colleagues did exactly what they were expected to do. Federal officials did prevent states from using certain programs, programs not based on scientific research, and advised them how to look for better ones, just as Congress intended. That was the whole point...

As I previously commented:

Some reading programs are good, some are bad.

Good reading programs have experts, bad reading programs have quacks.

Reading First hires experts.

Experts recommend good reading programs.

Schools improve using good reading programs.

Quacks get pissed, accuse experts of profiting.

Michael's main point though is that Democrats that supported Reading First are in a quandary. Pile on a program they supported to make political points, or stand by their convictions and Reading Firsts success.

Me... because I haven't anything else to say.

I am busy studying for a test (Senior NCO Professional Development), so I don't have time to post anything interesting (if I do at all), so here is a picture of me and my sister in Los Angeles, from about two years ago. I don't think I look like an education geek, but I am.

Reading First says In Your Face!

Reading First Paying Off, Education Dept. Says - washingtonpost.com

That's the irony," said John F. Jennings, president of the Center on Education Policy. "The program was poorly -- even unethically -- administered at the federal level, yet it seems to be having a positive effect in schools.

...

A department official said the data show that the number of students in Reading First programs who were proficient on fluency tests increased on average over the past five years by 16 percent for first-graders, 14 percent for second-graders and 15 percent for third-graders. On comprehension tests, it increased 15 percent for first-graders, 6 percent for second-graders and 12 percent for third-graders. The official said the analysis is based on results from 16 states that have the most complete data.

I bet this upsets more than a few people.

Critics said the results were not so impressive, considering how much money has been spent on the program. They said the test scores are meaningless because they are not compared with the performance of other students, who nationwide are doing better in reading.

It would be nice to see these numbers, but I am willing to bet that a lot these other schools were influenced by Reading First.

Its also pretty ironic that the same people who would argue for more money to be poured into education on things like teachers pay, now decide to complain about the money. And just how expensive is the program?

According to the Reading First website, the program helps 1.7 million children. The annual budget for Reading First in 2006 was $1,029,234,000. By my calculation this works out to around $605 per kid per year. Obviously, this is way to much money to spend on low income children to teach them how to read.

The most disturbing thing though, is as far as I can tell, Reading First is nothing more than a bribe to use effective programs. What does it say that states just didn't adopt scientifically based programs by themselves?

Computer Science Takes Steps to Bring Women to the Fold - New York Times

Computer Science Takes Steps to Bring Women to the Fold - New York Times:

Moving emphasis away from programming proficiency was a key to the success of programs Dr. Blum and her colleagues at Carnegie Mellon instituted to draw more women into computer science.

Shouldn't they rename it computer studies instead of computer science.

Next they will take the calculations out of math, oh wait... new math already does that.

TFA vs TTT

My highly scientific study inspired by Teaching in the 408:

Title: Troops for Teachers vs. Teach for America

Hypothesis: Patriotic salty military veterans make better teachers than young idealistic Ivy League graduates.

Method: Google (do I need to say anymore?)

Data:
Survey of TFA school principals by Kane, Parsons & Associates, 2005

Quality of Training

Three out of four principals (75 percent) rated Teach For America corps members' training as better than that of other beginning teachers.

Nearly all principals (95 percent) reported that corps members' training is at least as good as the training of other beginning teachers.

Impact on Student Achievement

Nearly three out of four principals (74 percent) considered the Teach For America teachers more effective than other beginning teachers with whom they've worked.

The majority of principals (63 percent) regarded Teach For America teachers as more effective than the overall teaching faculty, with respect to their impact on student achievement.

Supervisor Perceptions of the Quality of Troops to Teachers Program: Completers and Program Completer Perceptions of their Preparation to Teach: A National Survey

Principals overwhelmingly (over 90%) reported that Troops to Teachers are more effective in classroom instruction and classroom management/student discipline than are traditionally prepared teachers with similar years of teaching experience.
Principals stated (89.5%) that T3s have a positive impact on student achievement to a greater degree than do traditionally prepared teachers with similar years of teaching experience.
T3s strongly agreed or agreed that their preparation program equipped them to use research-based instructional practices associated with increased student achievement and effective classroom management behaviors.
School administrators overwhelmingly "strongly agreed" or "agreed" that Troops to Teachers exhibited research-based instructional behaviors to a greater degree than traditionally prepared teachers with comparable years of teaching experience.

Conclusion: While both groups of students do better than traditionally educated teachers, my hypothesis was confirmed. Extensive analysis shows that salty old veterans kick the ass edge out young college educated idealist in the classroom.

Seriously, I think a formal study would make for interesting reading. There are more military veterans than there are top college graduates who would be willing to make teaching a long term career. The military instills a sense of organization, problem solving skills, discipline, and stresses results. Of course it might just be that military veterans are a little bit older and more experienced.

Regardless, I fully support expanding both programs. Anything that increases the number of decent teachers willing to work in disadvantaged and low SES schools is a good thing.

Both sets of teachers bring a different perspective, and a different set of skills to the classroom. I don't think its a matter of the programs competing with each other, as much as complimenting each other.

*Note: This is an edited repost cleaned up for the Carnival of Education.

Textbook scandal summed up.

Multibillion dollar textbook scandal reaches Congress - USATODAY.com

Some reading programs are good, some are bad.

Good reading programs have experts, bad reading programs have quacks.

Reading First hires experts.

Experts recommend good reading programs.

Schools improve using good reading programs.

Quacks get pissed, accuse experts of profiting.

Scandal ensues.

Probable solution: Hire quacks, recommend bad reading programs, or combination of both.

Probable result: Schools get worse.

Every ones happy in the end. (Except of course for the kids who can't read)

Talk about no win situation.

I've been Immussed!

I sort of wish I was a little bit nicer on my post on TFA vs TTT. Joanne Jacobs picked it up and quoted my "snot nosed" remark. It sort of upset someone called R.J. Ohara, enough so that I think he banned me from his website. I could be wrong, but for some reason my i.p. address is banned from collegiateway.org.

At first I thought that maybe there was an error with the website, but when I visited though an anonymizer, the site works fine. I was also able to visit the site earlier while at work.

If I am banned, it would be bit of overkill though. Perhaps the military is different than civilian life. Good natured banter is pretty common, and using "snot nosed" to refer to younger people isn't exactly rare. Sometimes humor doesn't translate so well over the Internet.

Ironically, I am a big fan of programs like TFA and Ivy League schools. I wish I had buckled down during my high school days. My SAT's were good enough, but my grades pretty much sucked.

I just thought it was interesting that military veterans would do so well compared with the elite that TFA selects, especially since we all know that in the long run Ivy League graduates are going to make a lot more money than old Master Sergeants like myself.

Regardless, even if I am banned... I sort of like the idea of the collegiate way website. It advocates small residential colleges within Universities. I would imagine the small college atmosphere promotes student and teacher engagement and provides a cozy environment to learn in. Go check it out.

Post on the unmentionable

Unlike most people, I have nothing to say on today's events. Unfortunately, I have noticed a trend for copycats after traumatic events. Hopefully this doesn't happen again.

Troops to Teachers vs Teach for America

*Disclaimer: All ribbing was made in jest. I totally respect both the TFA program and Ivy League schools.

My highly scientific study inspired by Teaching in the 408:

Hypothesis: Patriotic salty military veterans make better teachers than snot nosed young idealistic Ivy League graduates.

Method: Google (do I need to say anymore?)

Data:

Survey of TFA school principals by Kane, Parsons & Associates, 2005

Quality of Training

Three out of four principals (75 percent) rated Teach For America corps members' training as better than that of other beginning teachers.

Nearly all principals (95 percent) reported that corps members' training is at least as good as the training of other beginning teachers.

Impact on Student Achievement

Nearly three out of four principals (74 percent) considered the Teach For America teachers more effective than other beginning teachers with whom they've worked.

The majority of principals (63 percent) regarded Teach For America teachers as more effective than the overall teaching faculty, with respect to their impact on student achievement.

Supervisor Perceptions of the Quality of Troops to Teachers Program: Completers and Program Completer Perceptions of their Preparation to Teach: A National Survey

Principals overwhelmingly (over 90%) reported that Troops to Teachers are more effective in classroom instruction and classroom management/student discipline than are traditionally prepared teachers with similar years of teaching experience.

Principals stated (89.5%) that T3s have a positive impact on student achievement to a greater degree than do traditionally prepared teachers with similar years of teaching experience.

T3s strongly agreed or agreed that their preparation program equipped them to use research-based instructional practices associated with increased student achievement and effective classroom management behaviors.

School administrators overwhelmingly "strongly agreed" or "agreed" that Troops to Teachers exhibited research-based instructional behaviors to a greater degree than traditionally prepared teachers with comparable years of teaching experience.

Conclusion: While both groups of students do better than traditionally educated teachers, my hypothesis was confirmed. Extensive analysis shows that salty old veterans kick young college educated punks idealist asses in the classroom.

Notes: I also suspect that Troops to Teachers could beat Teach for America in a street fight.

Seriously, I think a formal study would make for interesting reading. There are more military veterans than their are top tier college graduates who would be willing to make teaching a long term career.

On a related note, the Air Force has long had their own Community College of the Air Force which enables AF recruits to get an associates degree in their technical specialty.

The problem has been that much of the technical credits wouldn't transfer to four year universities requiring us enlisted to take a significant amount of extra classes to get our bachelors degree. Additionally, since us in the military tend to move pretty often (and go fight annoying little wars), we often have to transfer schools. The end result being that some of our previous traditional classes aren't applicable to the programs at the new location. Online programs are an option, but even they don't accept all of our credits.

This summer, the Air University is going to implement an Associates-to-Baccalaureate program in conjunction with several universities. The program would provide us with several degree programs in which 100% of our CCAF associates degree are transferable. This would mean that after earning our Associates degree, we would only have to complete 60 more credits to get our Bachelors degree. The programs will all be fully accredited, and be able to be completed at any location around the world.

It occurred to me that implementation of this program would significantly increased the number of military veterans retiring with Bachelors degrees which would then enable them to go on to get their teaching credentials.

I have already decided to go into education after I retire (duh...), but feel like I am swimming upstream trying to complete my bachelors degree. I have taken classes at over five different schools in the last 10 years, and though I am very careful with the classes I take, I realize several of them won't be needed for my final degree.

I have actually decided to take this summer off school, partly because I am moving to Alaska, but also to see which degrees and which schools are going to be part of this program.

Update: corrections made to prevent making people cry.

What do great middle schools have in common?

Unstuck in the Middle - washingtonpost.com

Jay Matthews picks the best middle schools of the Washington D.C. area.

With few exceptions, the schools are all in well to do neighborhoods with a small percentage of blacks and Hispanics.

Wouldn't it be a more interesting article, if it told us which middle schools in affluent neighborhoods aren't successful.

Of course the school with the highest percentage (99.9%) of blacks was the KIPP DC: Key Academy. They had an awesome 75% algebra completion rate... higher than most of the public affluent schools.

Reading, Writing & Frustration - washingtonpost.com

Reading, Writing & Frustration - washingtonpost.com

I suspect that a large percentage of so called dyslexia could be prevented by sound reading instruction. At the very least it could be diagnosed at an early age.

Back then, Sarah had a fondness for the book Put Me in the Zoo, not great literature but great fun to read when you're starting out on that voyage to literacy. She'd read the tale, about a funny, spotted leopard desperate for a home in the zoo, seemingly effortlessly, over and over again: "I would like to live this way. This is where I want to stay." At least, we thought she was reading it.

We soon discovered, when Sarah turned to other books, that she had been memorizing the words. Basic words such as "ball," "the" and "dog" baffled her. Sometimes she recognized words on one page but had no recall when she saw the words again a page later. At times, she reversed the order of words in sentences or skipped them entirely.

We brought up our concerns with her first-grade teacher. "You need to read to her more" was her response. But we were already reading heavily to Sarah. My husband and I are writers, and reading is a passion. We redoubled our efforts, recording the number of books on a log we kept on the kitchen table. Once a week, she took it to school, where the teacher put congratulatory stickers on it. By the end of the year, she'd hit 460 books.

Surely Sarah would pick up the ball and run with it, we thought. But while the other second-graders in her public school were sailing through The Magic School Bus and Amber Brown-- books with chapters, plots and complex thoughts -- Sarah was stuck with basic readers such as The Snowball.

"I saw a snowball on a hill," it read. "It rolled along and picked up Bill!"

She read haltingly, stumbling over the simplest words. She surprised and baffled us by doing well on spelling tests, until we realized she was once again memorizing. Gradually, it dawned on Sarah, too, that there was a problem.

Well duh...

The article goes on to blame all of her woes on dyslexia, a syndrome that affects "5 to 15 percent of schoolchildren with normal or above-average intelligence."

It seems to me that schools should address the other syndrome that affects far more children. The poor teaching syndrome, characterized by lack of effective reading instruction, a reliance on idealistic but flawed pedagogy, and an abundance of frustrated children and parents.

Welcome back to me and the "whole language" debate

I was in Florida for most of the last week so unfortunately, I missed commenting on the the "whole language" debate. This also explains my lack of posting. Some initial thoughts...

1. It was a debate that wasn't a debate.

2. Nancy seemed to confuse phonics with "DI". Two separate issues.

3. The comments were very educational and some great points were made.

4. Ken was way to nice... and Nancy didn't even approach giving a coherent argument... come on... case studies???

5. It was so cool that my blog got a mention, even if it was by the "enemy".

6. Nancy is more of a "whole language" idealist versus a "whole language" intellectual.

Education Research

TCRecord: Educational Researchby Robert McClintock

Consider now the harm. The vast quantity of educational research produced year in, year out, serves no real need or opportunity in the workaday world of schools, of their management, or of parenting. It does not arise to meet a felt demand from these quarters. It exists because the system of schooling requires many teachers and they require a professional preparation, which occurs primarily in academic institutions. In turn, those academic institutions need a faculty and they assess the ability to conduct and publish research as their primary criterion for deciding who to recruit, promote, and tenure as faculty members. The vast bulk of educational research will have no effect on anything except the process of recruitment, promotion, and tenure in schools of education. It exists for the sole reason that both individual researchers and the institutions that employ them consistently use the research for this purpose. (emphasis mine)

And this is the problem. So much of this bulk of education research is total bullshit. Inevitably, there will be studies to support just about any ideological stance possible. Research can be cherry picked to provide realistic looking justification for just about any reform possible. If a school district wants to implement reform math, they will simply present the local school board with a few studies showing that a particular fluffy textbook or constructivist pedagogy has positive effects.

Of the top of my head, the only successful widespread use of data I can think of is the Reading First program, which was based on analysis of data by the National Reading Panel. Other than that, most studies might as well be written on toilet paper.

Even the largest most expensive and expansive education study ever conducted, Project Follow Through, was ignored and relegated to the dustbin of history. Only us DI "crackpots" seem to have any memory of it.

The What Works Clearinghouse is certainly an important step in helping to sort through all the BS out there, but as we have seen with its recent review of Reading Recovery, it's not infallible.

I hate to say it, but what we need is another Project Follow Through, though this time we pray that the increase in media exposure and the advent of the Internet will prevent the same dishonest ignoring of data that happened in the 70's. It's possible right?

I give up

As you may know, I am quite frustrated with the way our local primary school is teaching my 1st grader how to read (as in, they aren't teaching her).

Two months ago, I went to the school and lobbied to get her in the after school tutoring program, hoping that it would help catch her up.

Tuesday, when I picked her up from tutoring I asked what she had learned. Here is what she told me.

"We learned how to look at pictures to figure out words."

Hopefully, all of her text books in the future have lots and lots of pictures. Does anyone know where I can get a comic book version of Charlotte's Web?

Eduflack on RR, RF, and WWC

Eduflack: Can Reading Recover?

Eduflack clarifies the reasons behinds the What Works Clearinghouse and Reading First programs views on Reading Recovery. He also covers the Reading First scandal.

The short story — these are three distinct programs with three distinct impacts on the improvement of our schools. Let's not lump them all together, in an attempt to use X to disprove Y and Z to call Y into question. These all serve a role, and they all can be a part of student success.

Hat Tip to Russo.