I had such a bold idea. I think I can revamp the education system doing something that makes sense. Hold a child accountable for mastery. If a child doesn't pass first grade then they need to do it over. If a child doesn't pass first grade then they also need a massive amount of testing to discover if they are learning disabled or have such profound learning differences that they need additional help. If a child doesn't pass first grade the second time, then there need to be profound remedial steps taken. The parents need to be intensely involved at this point. If they are not willing then the child needs to be placed in the care of people who care enough about the child to intervene and assist the child to do better in school.
However, Texas says....
SO, a child can fail first grade. Little Angel repeats the grade but because he has failed it already he can't fail it again. So Angel fails second grade and he repeats it. Because he has already repeated it he can't fail it again. As Angel is ten in third grade he can't fail again in elementary. SO regardless of Angel's performance in third, forth, fifth and sixth grade HE CANNOT BE RETAINED. So Angel is 14 in 7th grade. He fails. He is retained again. He's 15 in 7th grade but because he's already failed it once he can't take it again. So he's 16 in 8th grade and THEY can't FAIL him so he ends up in High School and he's actually never really ever passed a grade of school and he's 17 years old in 9th grade.
Now the high schools are held accountable because they couldn't make that 17 year old 9th grader pass that test....The high schools are held accountable if a student doesn't graduate with his "cohort." SO Angel gets to 9th grade and he's never really ever passed a grade and he's 17 and he can't really read so he is very nearly a grown man and he doesn't want to admit that he is deficient in some way so he gets aggressive and he doesn't want to participate and he wants to tear stuff up because he is disenfranchised and he's almost grown so he has to show out and he takes away from the educational experience of the kids that are going to school to learn.
How about if a child doesn't pass first grade that we test them every which way but loose? If he doesn't pass first grade the second time we send that child to a remediation center that deals with children that unable to learn a first grade curriculum after two years. We don't shove that child into the mainstream to disrupt and detract from the education of the children that DO get it? If we do this on the early end then maybe the rest of the system will take care of itself. If the children that are two years behind are helped on the early end then the rest of the years will benefit.
The ADA requires that students are educated in the least restrictive environment.
If my 14 year old daughter has to be in the same classroom with an 18 year old man who has never honestly passed a grade then SHE is restricted by him.
Kudos on that last paragraph, for certain.
ReplyDelete"Folks" (You know of whom I speak.) don't usually realize (or care) that the learning of the majority of the class is restricted due to lowering the level of instruction to a common denominator; thus, the results go in the opposite direction than intended by those "in the know" (theory being that the challenged students will be pulled up by the stong kids--works some times).
I agree: Test early and test often.
My daughter has an older female student in her 3rd grade class. She is the age of a 5th grader and is maturing physically. I do believe the child feels out of place in the mainstreamed class.
Students have different learning styles. We teachers know that. I have no problem with centers (I will not say "special" centers.) that cater to these babes who are challenged in the mainstreamed, traditional classroom. The key is, yes, find out what is challenging them EARLY!
"Hold a child accountable for mastery."
ReplyDeleteWith that, however, there is a corresponding duty of the educator to actually educate. This has NOTHING to do with the cookie cutter drech with which our public schools commit such high and heinous crimes against children.
"If a child doesn't pass first grade then they need to do it over. If a child doesn't pass first grade then they also need a massive amount of testing..."
Here you demonstrate a key area where the vast majority of people fail. There is NO SUCH THING as a "standard education" because there is NO SUCH THING as a "standard human being". This brand of misguided thought has destroyed a generation of children in their capacity to find the world around them fascinating rather than boring and failing to entertain.
"If a child doesn't pass first grade the second time, then there need to be profound remedial steps taken."
We might start with abolishing such nonsense as grades (years) and grades (scores). They prove NOTHING. They demonstrate NOTHING save perhaps a child's ability to vomit back what has been vomited at it. This is not education; it is ASSAULT.
"The parents need to be intensely involved at this point."
Close. Parents need to be involved AT ALL TIMES. This is THEIR responsibility, not the school's, nor that of anyone else.
"If they are not willing then the child needs to be placed in the care of people who care enough about the child to intervene and assist the child to do better in school. "
Are you suggesting a child be forcibly abducted from its family?
When proper education is occurring, such things NEVER occur. Why is that? Because when a child is being EDUCATED vis-a-vis TRAINED, he sets most of the course because education is about the CHILD'S interests and strengths and not that of third parties.
"Little Angel repeats the grade but because he has failed it already he can't fail it again."
A clear sign of your animosity towards the child, referring sarcastically to him in such a manner. This is shameful. The child's failures in such regards are rarely theirs. It is not the child who fails but the trainers. Note I do not say "educators" because most teachers are nothing remotely like that.
I appreciate your input Publius. I really feel for the children. I'm tired of the high schools taking a hit for a child that should not be there.
ReplyDeleteMy animosity is not toward the child. My animosity is toward a system that would allow a child to get to high school with a third grade mastery of reading. My animosity is toward parents that could care less. My personal children were on free lunch and on reduced lunch after I started teaching. I worked three jobs while I went to school full time that last two years of college while raising kids. I weathered adverse conditions without abdicating responsibility for my children's education.
I've read your blog and agree with most of what you say. However, your interpretation of state law was done away with in 1995.
ReplyDeleteThe two-retention policy that most think is still in place is no more. Maybe if administrators actually read the state policy, there would be no more social promotions, but over-age classrooms could be set up in elementary and middle schools.
"Student Retention
There is no longer any state law limiting the number of student retentions. State law was changed in 1995 to require that student advancement be based on proficiency in the state-mandated curriculum. TEC, §28.021, Student Advancement, states, “A student may be promoted only on the basis of academic achievement or demonstrated proficiency of the subject matter of the course or grade level.” The agency reiterates that the SSI supports grade-level academic achievement in the state-mandated curriculum. Two specific provisions of the SSI grade advancement rules are intended to address the concerns of multiple-year retention—19 TAC §101.2019(a), which provides that a student retained at grade 8 may earn course credit for high school graduation, and 19 TAC §101.2019(b), which allows local policy to provide for the placement of retained students in an age-appropriate learning environment.
While TEC, §28.0211 established statewide grade advancement requirements, districts may establish local standards as long as these standards do not conflict with the state requirements. A student who meets the requirements of SSI grade advancement is still subject to local policy relating to grade advancement.
Students who meet the passing standard on a grade advancement test but are retained due to local policy will be subject to all of the SSI grade advancement requirements during the repeated school year."
This is from page 56 of the Grade Placement Committee Manual for Texas, posted in April 2010.
Our fear of admitting that children are of different intelligence levels and should be educated as such is in my opinion the major flaw in our early educational system (K-12).
ReplyDeleteOur technology has evolved to the point we could have each student learning at their own pace but we insist on teaching at a pace so as to leave no child behind. This bores the intelligent students and unless learning is slowed to the slowest child leaves the slow learners behind. We should begin dividing children into classes of similar intelligence and continue this process as they progress creating middle and high schools of varying intelligence levels with classes in these schools of varying intelligence levels. This would require we admit some children will only progress to become laborers, cooks, janitors ect but what is gained from convincing someone otherwise. Educating children at the jr. high school level and beyond for their eventual future, ie tradesmen or college, would greatly benefit everyone. These tradesman jobs are seen/treated with disdain in our system and children forced to accept these jobs when they leave the halls of education and enter the real world where the coddling stops feel as if they have failed or have been forced to accept a lesser life. I know learning these trades is an option in most places but no one sits students down and tells them early on “you will go to vocational school because you don’t belong in college so what would you like to do”. Educators should be allowed to teach pride/craftsmanship to these students just as we currently push academic accomplishment.
Not everyone will go to college and not everyone should. We should not be educating our children as if this is the case. Nothing is gained by beating algebra or geometry or calculus into a student that has no college prospects and should be learning the math of a carpenter or machinists. Convincing every student they should go to college and it’s their right is why we have adults living with their parents into their 30s expecting to find themselves and young adults who feel like failures working at the trade jobs when these jobs should be as respected and valued as highly as the guy setting in the office designing them (me). If we continue on this no child left behind/everyone is equal/we don’t want to offend anyone track, it won’t matter what the college educated population does if those who have to carry out the actual work of our society are convinced of their entitlement to become one of the planners themselves and taught from a young age being the worker is for someone else and you don’t want to be that guy “you are special”.
Thanks Teachuno. I appreciate the information. The document I looked at was dated 2003-04 but perhaps I didn't read far enough down. I was just horrified. However, in practice I think the promotion issue still exists.
ReplyDelete@Arched, I think that ability level grouping makes sense. We had to EARN the honors designation by performance and work ethic. Otherwise we were put in regular classes. Today all the kids are pushed to take AP classes whether they are remotely qualified to take one.
Thanks