Seeing No Progress, Some Schools Drop Laptops - New York Times

Seeing No Progress, Some Schools Drop Laptops - New York Times

LIVERPOOL, N.Y. — The students at Liverpool High have used their school-issued laptops to exchange answers on tests, download pornography and hack into local businesses. When the school tightened its network security, a 10th grader not only found a way around it but also posted step-by-step instructions on the Web for others to follow (which they did).
...
“After seven years, there was literally no evidence it had any impact on student achievement — none,” said Mark Lawson, the school board president here in Liverpool, one of the first districts in New York State to experiment with putting technology directly into students’ hands. “The teachers were telling us when there’s a one-to-one relationship between the student and the laptop, the box gets in the way. It’s a distraction to the educational process.”
...
Yet school officials here and in several other places said laptops had been abused by students, did not fit into lesson plans, and showed little, if any, measurable effect on grades and test scores at a time of increased pressure to meet state standards. Districts have dropped laptop programs after resistance from teachers, logistical and technical problems, and escalating maintenance costs.

I am so underpaid... I could of predicted this several years ago and saved the district half a million dollars for each of the last few years. The people who think up these ideas have obviously never seen a real life teenager at a real life computer... talk about tuning out.

Computers are meant to increase critical thinking skills... yeah right. I will leave you with this last quote from the article.

In the school library, an 11th-grade history class was working on research papers. Many carried laptops in their hands or in backpacks even as their teacher, Tom McCarthy, encouraged them not to overlook books, newspapers and academic journals.

“The art of thinking is being lost,” he said. “Because people can type in a word and find a source and think that’s the be all end all.”

M.I.T. Dean Who Resigned Has a Degree After All

M.I.T. Dean Who Resigned Has a Degree After All - New York Times

In an odd twist to an already strange story, Marilee Jones, the former admissions dean at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology who resigned last week after admitting that she had lied about her academic credentials, turns out to have a bachelor’s degree, but not from the institutions she had named on her résumé.

Instead, M.I.T. officials said, Ms. Jones earned a B.A. in biology at the College of Saint Rose, an independent college in Albany, where she grew up. Officials at the College of Saint Rose confirmed that they had awarded a bachelor’s degree to a Marilee Jones in 1973, when Ms. Jones would have been 21.

Well crap! There goes my theory about non-college graduates being able to succeed at academic jobs. I concede that Ms. Jones is basically an idiot and deserved to be fired.

My Teacher Merit Pay Plan

It seems like every other week there is a new teacher pay reform proposal published, so not wanting to be left out, I figured I would offer my own ideas.

I propose a system roughly modeled on the Air Force promotion system.

Levels: There would be several levels of teachers, and within each level there would be steps based on years of service. Each level of teacher would have added responsibility... for example you might have novice teacher, teacher, teacher mentor, teacher supervisor, and master teacher. Within each level, there would be years of service raises.

Promotion: Promotion between levels would be based on a combination of value added scores (75%) and personnel ratings (25%).

Value Added Rating: The key to the value added scores part of the rating system would be to base it on a 3 year average of scores. This would serve to mitigate the effects of a "good" or "bad" group of students, and also take into account consistency over an extended period of time. I also think that weighting more recent years slightly would reward improving teachers, but a balance would have to be struck.

Personnel Ratings: Since a large part of my program would be to encourage high performing and experienced teachers to mentor newer teachers, I would create a rubric that not only took into account teacher mechanics like control of classroom, organization, use of time, etc..., but that also took into account more subjective measures like mentoring, teamwork, and leadership. To ensure integrity, I would propose that the rating score would have to have concurrence between three separate people, perhaps a master teacher, a department head, and the principal of the school.

Certification and Education: I would include certain advantages to teachers who completed teacher education plans, perhaps awarding them slightly higher pay than teachers who started teaching with just a bachelors degrees, but teachers who started without a degree and proved themselves as competent teachers would catch up to the "certified" teachers within one year. Since most education certification programs only take one year, the only advantage to attending them would be if the program provided the new teachers with applicable skills that improved value added scores. Additional graduate education could also be factored into the personnel rating, but once again, because of the weighting of the value added scores, only programs that "added value" would make the program make sense. Hopefully, this program would cause education schools to reform themselves to emphasize real world skills, instead of concentrating on education fluff.

Tenure: Finally, I would include a high year of tenure program for the basic level of teachers. If after say three or four years, a teacher wasn't able to meet a certain level of performance, they would be let go. Since most studies I have read have said that most improvement happens in the first two years of teaching, this should be enough time to determine who the good teacher would be. Additionally, once promoted to a certain level, teachers would continually have to meet cutoff scores for that level. This would ensure that teachers would have to continually strive to for success.

Goal: The goal of my proposal is to reward good teachers, while at the same time encouraging education schools to reform. Since their would be years of service raises, teachers who peaked out or simply didn't want to take on the extra responsibilities of promotion would still be rewarded for dedication and loyalty to the profession. Because value added scores carry most of the promotion points, education schools would only be able to survive if they could demonstrate that they gave their students a competitive edge, besides for a piece of paper. Reform is on the horizon, I think that my rough outline of a program is a good starting point to design a pay system that rewards high performers and hopefully provides incentives for teachers to excel and to improve.

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.

Good Study, Poor Terminology

ScienceDaily: Kids Learn Words Best By Working Out Meaning:

During the inference trial, Brinster showed the youngsters both familiar and strange objects (for instance, a ball and a plumber's "T" connector). After saying a nonsense word ("blicket," for instance), she would ask them to either point to or grab hold of the "matching" item. Since a ball is a "ball," the children might conclude that the unfamiliar object — the "T" — was the "blicket".

In the direct instruction trial, the child was simply shown an unfamiliar item and heard the nonsense word.

A short while later, Brinster would invite the children to play with typical, familiar toys in the Lab's waiting area. During the relaxed play period, she would bring out a "blicket" or a "dax" that the children had seen during the trial, and ask the youngsters a question.

"For instance, I might say, 'I think one of these is called 'blicket,' but I can't remember which one it is. Can you help me? Do you know which one is the 'blicket?'" Brinster said. "This way, I could ascertain how well they learned the word. Once we analyzed all of our data, it was clear that inference worked best."

The article, based on a study by undergraduate researcher Meredith Brinster at the Johns Hopkins University Laboratory for Child Development, compares the effects of learning by "inference" compared to "direct instruction". I question whether the use of the term "direct instruction" is appropriate, considering that the term "direct instruction" is commonly used to refer to a specific pedagogy.

According to Zig Engelmann, who is the father of "Direct Instruction", instruction must be "logically faultless",

Faultless Communication (Faultless Instruction): A sequence of instruction, frequently involving examples and non-examples in a well-crafted order, which logically leads to an accurate communication of the concept and eliminates the possibility of confusion.

For an example of faultless communication, please see http://psych.athabascau.ca/html/387/OpenModules/Engelmann/theory.shtml

Using the term direct instruction to describe simply giving a positive example as opposed to giving a negative example, overly simplifies the term, especially since true direct instruction would also include logical inference as described in the study.

My concern is that the work could be taken out of context to argue against a curriculum that has proven to be successful at raising the achievement of low SES students.

(I emailed the student, Meredith Brinster, mentioned in the study, to see if I could get a copy of the paper, and to express my concerns about terminology.)

The Common School: A Question of Scale: Class-size Reduction and America's Misplaced Priorities

The Common School: A Question of Scale: Class-size Reduction and America's Misplaced Priorities

Via Eduwonk... new blogger "Dewey", who is reputed to be a minor education wonk, makes the case that class size reduction would have a tiny effect on educational outcomes.

But the really mind-blowing results come when you start comparing a class-size reduction to giving students a teacher with a reasonably good (though not unlikely) combination of teacher credentials (estimated by adding the relevant values in the table above). Clotfelter and Ladd do their own estimates of this sort and come up with a combined effect size of 15% - 20% SD for math (and 8%-12% for reading) of a well- credentialed teacher.

The first time I read this portion of the study I said to myself, "Yeah class size is less important,” but that finding is not particularly novel to anyone who follows this sort of research. But when I decided to actually compare how much less important class size is my jaw dropped. The effect size of teacher credentials is 8 to 10 times that of a major class size reduction in math and 6 to 8 times as big in reading!!!

He figures it would take approximately 150 billion dollars in increased salary costs (if the improvement for reducing students is linear that is), for a net benefit of 1.6% to 4% SD in math instruction. He then goes on to propose several novel ideas about how that money could be better spent for a much more significant educational outcome.

My only observation:

Isn't it possible that reducing class size would actually have a negative effect, instead of a small positive one?

We already have difficulty attracting teachers into teaching, especially in math and science. Doubling the number of teachers would have to entail reducing standards and quality.

Wouldn't the net effect of the lower average teacher quality more than cancel out the small benefits of reduced class size?

Go read the full post and if your statistically savvy, analyze his data and conclusions.

Pretty damn good for his 2nd post though.

Woo hoo, I inspire debate!

Crypticlife, pointed out that my post on "I hate whole language" had inspired a pretty big reaction on the Teachers Applying Whole Language listserve.

If you go to the Search the TAWL Archives page and put in "I hate whole language" into the subject search field, you get 106 responses.

I read a few, but unfortunately the listserve doesn't allow me to read all the messages and one time (and my finger got tired of clicking).

I did come across a few gems of posts though. Several teachers were asking advice on how they could improve their students decoding skills... duh!

I have been researching several scholarly articles in preparation for the upcoming debate on whole language at Edspresso, and consider myself a lot more educated on the issue. The more I read, the more certain I am that early reading instruction should stress phonetic decoding.

My original impression is that whole language puts the cart before the horse. Whole language is based on the premise that reading is natural, and tries to reverse engineer "skilled readers". This reverse engineering though, neglects to take into account the subconscious phonetic decoding that skilled readers are able to do almost instantaneously.

I actually have several articles and papers in pdf format full of markups and notes, but I am trying to decide if I want to put together a wonkish post on whole language fallacies or wait until the debate mentioned above.

Laziness and the desire to get in a "smoking gun" during the debate cause me to want to wait, but showing off my new found knowledge, kind of makes me want to attempt to look intelligent. In the end though, laziness and procrastination wins out.

The Blame Game!

Via Speed of Creativity, I came across this post at Engines for Education about the Seven Evils of Education.

According to George Schank the original six evils of education are:

Parents -- who oppose all change and want school to be like they imagine it was in their day
Publishers – who spend all that money on wrong-headed textbooks and do their best to keep new ideas away
Press – who print minute test score differences as if they are world-shaking events causing everyone to panic
Politicians – who really don’t give a hoot about education and just like to say how accountable everyone is because of their silly tests and standards
And Princeton (twice)
Princeton -- as in any top university that decides on which courses and which tests all students must pass thus making it very difficult to innovate in high school
Princeton— as in the Educational Testing Service and all the other testing companies getting rich on killing our schools

I will ignore these (for now), but even more ridiculous than the first six, is his new evil "P", professors. Yes professors, as in College Professors. You see the reason kids have to take boring unimportant classes like "math" is because Professors are lazy:

Universities dictate curricula to high schools to make professor’s lives easier. If everyone takes physics and calculus and most never use it, well, professors claim it was good for the students anyway when in fact it was only good for making sure professors don't have to teach it in college. As long as professors don’t have to teach the basics it is okay that high school students are forced to study stuff they will never use in their whole lives. We have ruined an entire generation of high school students who don’t like learning and think the subject matter is irrelevant because professors only want to teach the good stuff.

We sacrifice the joy of learning for an entire generation so professors can have an easier time teaching incoming students.

(Calm down Right Wing Prof. No one could possibly take this guy seriously or could they?)

It's the new game show called the Education Blame Game. We started out with students, and then blame the parents... now its those evil evil professors who expect their students to have basic skills when they get to college. The winner of the game is the one who can blame education failure on the most outside factors (besides for the schools of course).

Ironically, George Schank is an ex-professor.

A Brief History of the Frontal Lobotomy

Update: I am pretty flattered right now, the subject of my term paper, Howard Dully himself, commented on my paper. He has a website over here, and has a book due out in September called My Lobotomy. Glance at my paper for a synopsis, it's a great story.

I have a history of publishing my term papers on my blogs. I know its not education related, but just in case you are interested. It should be noted as I did my research, that I noticed a simularity between the history of lobotomies and education. Bonus points if you accurately predict my grade (out of 100).

Rory D. Hester
Psy 201
March 26, 2007

Frontal lobotomies have achieved a unique place in the culture of the United States. The procedure is lampooned in cartoons, mentioned in popular music (Hanzlick), and the term used frequently in common conversation, often as part of a derogatory remark… i.e. “Did you have a lobotomy or what?” My stereotype image of a neurosurgeon is still that of a mad scientist hacking away parts of people’s brains, even though it has been over 40 years since Walter Freeman performed his last lobotomy. This paper will attempt to give a brief history of frontal lobotomies, including its effects on several patients, and take a look at its influence on future neurological surgeries.

The history of the frontal lobotomy can be traced back to a German scientist, Friederich Golz, who performed experiments that involved the removal of the neocortex of dogs in 1890 to calm them down (Sabattini). This inspired at least one physician to experiment with a similar procedure on six schizophrenic patients, but the procedure was criticized by medical authorities.

In 1935, Carlyle Jacobsen and Dr. John Fulton performed similar experiments on chimpanzees, which got the attention of a Portuguese neuropsychiatrist, Dr. Antônio Egas Moniz, at the University of Lisbon Medical School. Moniz, started experimenting with a procedure called a leucotomy, which involved cutting the nerves that connected the prefrontal and the frontal cortex to the thalamus. His results were mixed however and he strongly advocated that the procedure should only be used on completely hopeless patients.

Moniz’s work inspired a young ambitious neurologist, Walter Freeman, to take up where he had left off. Eventually he developed and perfected a procedure called the "ice-pick lobotomy". This procedure was so quick and easy, that it was able to be done on an outpatient basis. Frontal lobotomies could now be performed on a wide scale basis, and public opinion supported it. Over 18,000 frontal lobotomies were performed in this country, with tens of thousands performed overseas between 1939 and 1951.

Unlike other physicians in the past, Freeman was able to convince both the press and his colleges that the new procedure would revolutionize the treatment of mentally ill patients. A study of popular press articles on frontal lobotomies showed the positive effects of lobotomies were mentioned more than possible negative consequences until the mid 1950’s (Diefenbach). They also noted that Freeman’s enthusiasm for the procedure predated studies on the long term effects of the operation. This surely contributed to the sheer volume of procedures performed.

While today, we look back at this period with a sense of embarrassment, it should be remembered that at the time the procedure was accepted by much of the medical establishment. According to a review of the scientific journals of the day, “The neurosurgeons who performed the operations, and the scientists who justified it, all came from the highest ranks” (Pressman 4). The culmination of neurosurgeons seeking legitimization, the simplicity of the procedure, and a large number of state psychiatric hospitals all created the perfect conditions for a culture of “lobotomy” to take over the psychiatric field. Not only did lobotomies have the potential to cure people they were also “aesthetically pleasing and financially rewarding” (Pressman, 194).

In the 1950’s though, the climate began to change. A large scale study, called the Columbia-Greystone project, failed to provide evidence of positive benefits of the procedure. Then in the 1950’s a new class of drugs began to be developed that enabled psychiatrists to manage many of the symptoms that lobotomies had been used to cure (Vertosick). A national debate began to take place about the morality of damaging healthy tissue of vulnerable patients. Lobotomy started to loose its luster, and gradually faded out from the mainstream of neurosurgery, but not before it was performed on a young boy named Howard Dully.

In 1960, Rodney and Lou Dully, Howard’s stepmother, went to see Walter Freedman about their 12 year old son. According to Dr. Freedman’s notes, Lou Dully was at her wits end with Howard, even though other doctors had told her that he was a normal 12 year old boy. With Freedman’s encouragement, Howard’s parents agreed to have him lobotomized in December of 1960. Howard had no memory of the operation, and after he was told of the operation “he took it without a quiver. He sits quietly, grinning most of the time and offering nothing” (My Lobotomy). Apparently though, the operation was not successful enough for his parents and shortly thereafter he was shipped off into mental institution.

Even though you would never notice anything peculiar about Howard Dully, except of course for his size, he always felt that something was missing inside of him. After an exhaustive two year investigation of his procedure, he was finally able to confront his father about the operation. He was also able to meet some other victims of lobotomies, and come to terms with the procedure. As he notes in the All Things Considered story, "I know my lobotomy didn't touch my soul. For the first time I feel no shame. I am, at last, at peace." He was one of the lucky ones though, the procedure did much more damage to many people, including Rose Marie Kennedy, a relative of President John F. Kennedy, who after having the operation at the age of 23 for mood swings and mile mental retardation, was reduced to an infantile state according to her biography at the John F. Kennedy Presidential Library and Museum.

In February 1967, Walter Freeman performed his last lobotomy on Helen Mortenson. She died of a brain hemorrhage, and ended the chapter of Freeman’s lobotomies on demand, though the procedures still has effects on medical ethics and modern neuroscience. A new generation of neurosurgeons is wrestling with the same issues. Today, Harvard Medical School and the Massachusetts General Hospital, perform a procedure called a cingulotomy, which consists of burning dime size holes in the frontal cortex of patients (Eskandar). Even the perception of neurosurgery is that of extreme precision, but the reality is that the brain is an extremely complex organ, and operating on it is similar to repairing a watch with a monkey wrench.

While I support the need for scientists to conduct research and experiments with brain surgery, history tells us that we must be careful. The history of brain research and psychiatry has been riddled with fads, including Freud’s psychotherapy, electroshock therapy, and lobotomies. We have to be careful, that our curiosity about the way the mind works does not blind us into leaping on a large scale onto the next medical fad. The popularity of the Freeman’s lobotomy would be harder to duplicate into days world. The general public is more skeptical of scientists, and the media is much quicker to investigate potential problems with procedures. Though we shake our heads today at what Freeman did in the past, in fifty years, I can’t help but get the feeling that doctors will consider some of our methods almost as crazy. Medicine is best served by the scientific method, but we must remember that unlike other scientific fields, fellow human beings are the guinea pigs.

References

Biography of Rosemary Kennedy. Retrieved March 22, 2007 from John F. Kennedy Presidential Library website:
http://www.jfklibrary.org/Historical+Resources/Biographies+and+Profiles/Biographies/Biography+of+Rosemary+Kennedy.htm

Boeree, C. (2001). A Brief History of the Lobotomy. Retrieved March 22, 2007 from Shippenburg University, George Boeree’s web site: http://webspace.ship.edu/cgboer/lobotomy.html

Diefenbach, G., Diefenbach D., Baumeister, A., West, M. (1999). Portrayal of Lobotomy in the Popular Press: 1935-1960*. Retrieved March 25, 2007 from University of North Carolina at Asheville. Department of Psychology website: http://facstaff.unca.edu/ddiefenb/lobotomy.html

Eskandar, E., Cosgrove, G. (2001). Psychiatric Neurosurgery Overview. Retrieved March 22, 2007 from Harvard University, Massachusetts General Hospital, Department of Neurosurgery website: http://neurosurgery.mgh.harvard.edu/Functional/Psychosurgery2001.htm

Hanzlick, R. (1983). I’d rather have a bottle in front of me (Than a frontal lobotomy). Lyrics retrieved March 22, 2007 from http://everything2.com/index.pl?node=frontal%20lobotomy

Pressman, J. (1998). Last Resort, Psychosurgery and the Limits of Medicine [Electronic version]. Cambridge University Press. New York.

My Lobotomy: Howard Dully’s Journey. (2005). Retrieved March 19, 2007 from National Public Radio website: http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5014080

Sabbatini, R. (1997). The History of Psychosurgery [Electronic version]. Brain and Mind. Retrieved March 22, 2007 from http://www.cerebromente.org.br/n02/historia/lobotomy.htm

Whitaker, R. (2002). Mad In America, Bad Science, Bad Medicine, and the Mistreatment of the Mentally Ill [Electronic Version]. Perseus Publishing. Cambridge, Ma.

Vertosick, F. (1997). Lobotomy's back - controversial procedure is making a comeback [electronic version]. Discover Magazine. Retrieved March, 23 2007 from http://discovermagazine.com/1997/oct/lobotomysback1240

I want my Mommy by Imagination Movers

I love this song... move over Wiggles.

Superintendent God

I guess the NY Times article wasn't enough. Now the Fayetteville Observer is in the act of promoting the miraculous school district of Madison, Wisconsin.

Superintendent Art Rainwater, or God as I call him, has eliminated the achievement gap. No really, it must be true... it was published in a newspaper and everything.

Today, Rainwater said, no statistical achievement gap exists between the 25,000 white and minority students in Madison’s schools.

Of course, God works in mysterious ways. God in his infinite wisdom refuses to tell the secrets of his success, unless of course everyone confesses their sins.

But he won’t consult with educators from other communities until they are ready to confront the issue head on.

“I’m willing to talk,” Rainwater tells people seeking his advice, “when you are willing to stand up and admit the problem, to say our minority children do not perform as well as our white students.”

Only then will Rainwater reveal the methods Madison used to level the academic playing field for minority students.

God did make one mistake. He forgot to have the Wisconsin Department of Education update its data.

link

Of course perhaps I am looking at the wrong achievement gap. God is much wiser than I am.

Update: Corrected the link to the story.

Update #2: Right Wing Professor had a look and came to the same conclusion.

Hard Work and School Choice

I am blushing... first Edspresso and then Sara over at The Quick and the Ed linked to my post on choosing a school for my upcoming move to Anchorage.

Both make the excellent point that getting information on schools is difficult even for tuned in, education savvy, web literate parents like myself.

My research had me downloading data from three different websites, making two excel charts, and at one point comparing six adobe acrobat files side by side.

I had to figure out what a "scale score" is, research Alaska standards, make several phone calls to the schools and one to the math curriculum coordinator at the district, and then sort through all the data.

Even after all this, truthfully I would be hard pressed to tell you which of the six schools I considered was the "best". For every plus I found, there was a negative. Nothing was explained clearly. In the end, I am almost sorry to say that it came down to convenience.

The base schools are walking distance from base housing.

At first I felt a little guilty for choosing the schools on base, but then I realized that choice isn't an end... its a means. Just because it's there, doesn't mean I have to choose it. It serves its purpose right now. Some parents decided that the charter schools were the best option for their kids. Perhaps they lived in wrong neighborhood, perhaps the schools were closer, perhaps their philosophical differences with the neighborhood schools was just to great.

I may of chose neighborhood schools right now, but it's nice to know that the option is open for me if I need it in the future.

For now, public schools were the right choice, but it's nice to know that the charter school option is open for me if I need it at some point in the future.

Now if someone could just come up with an easier way to compare the schools, life would be grand.

Update: I am hiring Lynn Truss as my official blog editor. She rightly points out that I should watch my grammar. Of course she is right, though I suppose I could just blame the education system :)

Whole Language Responses

I have had several responses to my "I hate whole language" post, and I figured that I would respond in a post instead of in the comments.

It is probably no secret that I am a "DI" and phonics advocate, and have a huge small prejudice against whole language based upon my experiences with my four school age kids.

I am sure that D-EdReckoning and Nancy Creech will cover the issue much more in depth when they debate the issue on Edspresso next month, but I did want to address some of the points made by my commenter's.

I suppose one of biggest issues with whole language, is that no one seems to be able to articulate it with any great precision. As near as I can figure out, the one common theme among "whole language" advocates is that whole language teachers play an active part in tailoring their techniques to individual children. They use their expertise and experience to identify and address weaknesses. Many might use phonics as a teaching tool, but its only one of many tools to help the child learn how to read.

Mobility61 asks me this:

What kind of teacher would you want for your child? Would you prefer one who is a critical thinker, with a vast store of knowledge of literacy learning and an ability to use any available resource, who is also a learner that is constantly researching and updating her repertoire; or a teacher who follows a teacher's manual and puts children through a series of lessons prescribed by some publishing company far away? To me that seems like a no-brainer.

Rhetorical questions are often a great way to make a point, but occasionally it backfires. D-Edreckonings post on Zig Englemanns unpublished book on Project Follow Through has a great passage that answers this question.

The senior reading teacher and guru in one of our schools instigated an argument with me about reading—what it was, and how best to teach it. In the best cocktail-party style, we were polite, and the small group surrounding us was intent. The teacher’s premise was that the creativeness of teachers should not be trammeled by a lockstep program, like DI. She was well read, and quoted the literature with flourish. After the discussion went on for possibly ten minutes, one of our first-year teachers from the same school interrupted and ended the argument.

She said, “Angie, you know more about reading than I’ll ever know. You know linguistics, and all those theories I don’t understand. All I know how to do is follow the program. I do what it tells me to do in black type, and I say what it tells me to say in red type. But Angie, my kids read better than your kids, and you know it.

And I guess this sums up my greatest problem with whole language. It relies on teacher expertise, and I quite frankly am skeptical about the expertise of teachers.

Meanwhile, eceteacher comments:

It is the enemies of WL, and some poor teachers who call themselves WL, who've made up all this business about not teaching phonics... now think about it; leaving out phonics would make it Part Language, wouldn't it????

The enemy here is undereducated teachers, ones who don't use all their skills but instead grab hold of one technique (phonics could be the one) and think that will work for everyone. As someone who has taught hundreds of children to read, let me assure you that phonics alone will not bring about literacy, and, worse, it will not help children to love to read.

As I have already mentioned, whole language advocates can't even agree among themselves about what whole language really is. It seems to me that any pedagogy that can't even accurately define itself is by definition already doomed to failure.

It seems a little unfair to us as parents to accept the premise that we should entrust ourselves to teachers who can't even articulate a standard method to teaching. Our schools then become nothing more than a crap-shoot... maybe your kid will end up with a good teacher, maybe they won't. Truth be told, this is exactly the same situation we are in now.

At least the "DI" school can define standards and accurately evaluate their teachers. It may be ugly, but I prefer ugly and effective to beautiful and failing.

I will leave with one final word, if whole language is the answer then "show me the numbers".

I don't get innovation

Article after article, blog after blog says that all we need to do is to hire competent principals and give them the freedom to be innovative. If we just allow innovation, our schools will magically close the achievement gap, raise performance, and send every kid to college.

I don't buy it. After 100 odd years of our current education system, shouldn't we have figured out what works by now? Is some principal going to magically discover that if you paint all the walls "blue" student achievement will increase?

Perhaps I am naive, but just about every education reform that can be imagined has been tried at some point in the past. Whole language, parental classes, tough standards, smaller classes, larger classes, inquiry learning, explicit instruction, longer class days, constructivism, small schools, large schools, unschooling, charter schools, private schools, etc...

What's left to try? What possible innovation is a principal going to come up with?

How about this for an innovative idea... lets discard all our prejudices, preconceived notions, and figure out what works in a conclusive scientific manner.

We could take all the various school models and pedagogy's, randomly assign them to various schools. Enforce their implementation (if you don't fully cooperate, you are fired), measure the results, and implement the winning model.

Once we had established a benchmark, we could establish experimental schools to test further innovations. If the innovation managed to improve on the benchmark, then test the innovation in another school. If the innovation was validated, then it could be methodically implemented, while simultaneously monitoring its effect.

Our country has some of the most productive data driven companies in the world. Our businesses routinely use similar methods to improve their customer service and products. Why can't we use data driven decisions and the scientific method to determine how best to educate our most precious commodities... our children.

I hate whole language

Today, one of my 1st graders homework assignments was to write her spelling words four times each.

Before she writes them, I insist that she reads them to me first, so I know that she can read them, and isn't just memorizing letter combinations.

I point to the first word [say].

"say", she repeats back to me

Great, I think. She has it.

I point to the next word [pay], thinking it should be easy as well.

"near" she says.

I realize that she is going from memory by now, since the word "near" is word number 3 on her list.

"near??? try again" I say, "sound it out this time."

"pppppppp ...... aaaaaaaaa ....... yyyyyyyy(not the vowel sound)... near."

"Skye, the word is not near... sound it out again, and this time put the sounds together"

"OK, daddy. ppppppppp... aaaaaaaaaa... yyyyyyyyyy........ ppppp... aaaaaa... yyyyy... pair."

After a few seconds of this, I start to feel sorry for her, as well as feel a little frustrated, so I decide to help her out a bit.

"'ay', makes an "ay" sound... like in the word 'say'. What sound does an 'a' 'y' make?"

"ay" she yells.

"Excellent!"

I point to the "p" while covering up the "ay".

"pppppp" she says hesitantly.

I point to the "ay"

"ay" she says.

"OK, put them together this time."

She tries again... "pppppp ay... p ay... pay"

"Awesome!" I exclaim, "lets do another one."

I decide to skip the word [near] and point to word #4 [May].

"Number three is near" she says with confidence and a big smile on her cute little face.

Did I mention how much I hate whole language?

This Article is the Schnizzell

D-Ed Reckoning: Schemo gets pwned

D-Ed, performs a smackdown on a NYT article about Madison, Wi schools.

To complicated to explain, except it involves deception, statistics, nation standards, more deception, lying, and deception.

Curious aren't you?

School Choice is Hard Work

I recently got an assignment to Elmendorf AFB, AK in Anchorage. Of course I have already wasted hours researching school choices. Here is what I have come up with so far.

Public School Choices:

There are three elementary schools serving the base: Aurora, Orion and Mt Spurr

Demographically all the schools are about the same. Test scores don't vary much, with Mt Spurr and Aurora having a slight edge, mainly in math. This could be caused by demographics on base. Officers who are college educated live in certain housing areas which are in the Mt Spurr and Aurora areas.

I worry about average growth in scale scores. The same set of students tested in 3rd grade in 2005 and 4th grade in 2006 had a negative 39.4 growth in math at Aurora. I attribute this to their use of "Everyday Math". All three schools had pretty poor scale score growth in for all grade cohorts for reading, writing and math.

You can see their disaggregated numbers here: Aurora, Mt. Spurr, and Orion.

The most positive things about the schools are that they are all within walking distance of the base housing, and because they are on base, we can be assured that they will be responsive to parents and provide a safe environment.

Charter School Options:

There are actually two possible charter school options that we have identified.

Eagle Academy Charter School, which is a really structured school that uses "direct teaching". They use Saxon math which is a big plus, and the Core Knowledge for Social Studies. In ELA they use the Spalding Curriculum. I don't know a lot about the Spalding Curriculum, but from what I can gather they use a scripted curriculum and seem to have similar techniques as Direct Instruction.

I do like that the school uses ability grouping and that students will be instructed in math and reading based on what level they are on, not what grade they are in.

The school is 10 minutes north of base, which isn't to far but does present some problems. There are no buses for charter schools, so we would have to provide our own transportation. This is a big problem since my hours are pretty much set in stone. It would also be somewhat of a logistical nightmare for my fiance Shannon, since she will be a nurse, and probably end up working downtown at one of the two hospitals.

Demographically, Eagle Academy is overwhelmingly white. Their scale score growth is moderately greater than the base schools. The number of students scoring advanced on the reading, writing and math tests are way above the district and state average. I am a little cautious about interpreting this, because the charter school is an upscale suburb and they have only been open since 2005, and the available scores were for that first year. You can see their numbers here. I am also value the diversity that is found in on base public schools.

The other charter school I am looking at is Aquarian Charter school. According to its website it is a "stress-free environment filled with joy, music, theatre, and art to enhance the educational program and boost achievement." I know, it sounds like the typical constructivist pedagogy that public schools try and push, but I decided to check it out anyway. In scale score growth between students, it was the only school I saw that had positive gains for all subjects and all grade cohorts. Now there gains were all tiny, and in absolute scores their proficiency level was about the same as the three base schools.

It also suffers from some of the same transportation issues as Eagle Academy, but it is at least in the same general direction as the hospitals.

Except for possibly Eagle Charter, I really have a tough time seeing the advantages of the charter schools. I also wonder if the small advantage that the schools can provide over the base schools counters the benefits of having a local school in which to easily pop over to, plus local schools will allow my kids to walk home and finish their homework. This will give us a lot less stress in the evenings, and allow us to take advantage of the great skiing and snowboarding that the Anchorage area has to offer.

I suppose my biggest gripe over my experience with charter schools, is how much trouble it is to easily find out how they perform academically. I think the two charter schools are probably great options for some of the students in the really low performing schools (yes Anchorage has ghettos). For the parents who live on Elmendorf AFB, it doesn't seem to make much sense.