Race To the Top: Ask the White House About YOUR Child's Education

The first reason is that the public education system in the United States is struggling to provide a proper education for the nation's children with out of date text books, run down school buildings and inadequate equipment. Provision of a home school education enables the parents to have control over the quality of the educational materials used by their children and the general conditions in which they are educated.

I have read several of the applications submitted by different states for funds. I am surprised that no mention was made of the need for involvement by students in the design of our educational programs. One of the major concerns mentioned in terms of schools nationwide is the gap in test scores between African American students and white students. I think state department of education and the LEA'S must consider the engagement of families in evaluating school plans. The family are stakeholders in the education of their students. The students and their families must be involved at the planning stage and in the evaluating of plans. If our students are to become citizens of the world, they must be involved in critical thinking and writing activities. As educators , we must think scientifically. Studies of motivation and achievement should be utilized in planning programs for our students. We must change the gap among the achievement level of our students.

Thanks for the post

- Lisse

@ ( http://homeintheworld.typepad.com ) Home in the World: International Adoption and Other Travels

Man alive am I upset I missed this discussion. Can we get a re-do? ;)

It’s been over 13 years since I wrote to Arne Duncan about my experiences as a school clerk with the Chicago Public Schools. In my communiqué, I advised him that I had been a public relations specialist for four years at Chicago State University and had been laid off in 1991 .   I joined CPS in 1992  to support my family, but found many misplaced priorities within the system. I wished him well in his new position and hoped he looked at his job with an eye toward change.  I also advised him that the system had several holes in its Magnet School program and needed to step up implementation of a military training academy.  With his help, the academy was established.  I also watched in joyous awe as CPS test scores rose under his tenure.

I viewed Duncan's interview on “Meet the Press” in November 2009 and totally agreed with him in principle. However, the practice is actually a different matter.  I recently expressed my displeasure to Dr. James Simpson, new Superintendent of the Lindbergh School District in St. Louis, who advised faculty, that contrary to media reports, they were not allowed to show President Obama’s speech to the children after it aired.  Teachers were livid at this decision, which was in direct contradiction to the open and inclusive system they had under the previous Superintendent James Sandefort, now retired.  My 16 year-old attends Lindbergh High School under the area’s desegregation program Voluntary Interdistrict Choice Corporation (VICC).  My other two children graduated in 2008 and 2009.

I took issue with Dr. Simpson’s decision and a recent letter he forwarded to parents saying the Lindbergh District did not meet several educational standards because of low scores among certain “subgroups.”  At no time did Dr. Simpson offer any suggestions to parents of these children. Nor did he address any reason why the subgroups brought the scores down.  I did give him several suggestions on what may be causing the low scores and how he may help to solve dilemmas  children  face that impact negatively upon their success (i.e. social, cultural, medical, economical and psychological).   Among my suggestions, were:

·         Divert buses regularly from home to public libraries for one hour for groups to participate in active study sessions.
·         Plan and subsidize state and historically-black college tours for youth at appropriate stages of development.
·         Arrange for children with high absentee rates to be screened for problematic issues such as asthma, allergies and chronic illnesses.  Have nurses provide direction to appropriate agencies to assure that all is well within the home  (i.e. lead detection, home repair, food preparation, dr visits, etc).
·         Meet with public and elected officials to assure that children are afforded opportunities and transportation to participate in after-school activities (band, sports, peer groups, scouting, etc.).  Studies show that children who participate have improved scores.
·         Quickly divert troubled youth into nurturing learning environments and technical schools where they may have specialized assessment of their mental health and educational needs.  Many districts lack the resources for a technical high school.

I hope President Obama  and Arne Duncan make similar ideas their focus.  My question is how can we continue to expect new results with old ways of thinking, teaching and methodologies?  We need new ideas that parents and communities can incorporate, infuse and integrate in our systems and bring equity in education, knowledge and opportunity to America’s children.  Without a change in our national priority, our nation is doomed to Failure.

Victoria Ryan-Bailey

Victoria Ryan-Bailey is a parent, writer and Author of A Rich Christmas , a juvenile book of fiction based on the desegregation of the St. Louis Public Schools during the sixties.  She lives in St. Louis, Mo.

Julee, I agree that parents need to take the helm in creating good citizens. I know many parents don't, and that's extremely frustrating. However, I do remember learning debate skills in high school -- and debate skills are what teach you how to hold meaningful discussions with other people (how do I want to vote? how do I want to parent?). I'm not saying high school should teach you to parent, but it should teach you to debate. It should teach you what a logical argument is and is not. It should teach you to identify a red herring and a slippery slope.

I do remember being taught citizenry in high school -- it was an actual class. I do remember my history teacher explaining that we read history in order not to repeat its mistakes. (My high school did fall down on the applied math -- it certainly wasn't perfect.) These subjects are the foundation of a liberal arts education and the general education classes required by most nontechnical bachelor's degree programs in college. Without exposure to "how to learn" in high school, students are lost when they hit college, even community college. The condition in which some public school students hit college is pathetic. They don't have study skills. They can't construct an argument with a thesis and supporting evidence. They can't express themselves.

In talking to high school students today, I hear debate and philosophy classes are disappearing from the curriculum or being substituted out for work study or kids taking college classes during high school time, something they may or may not be prepared to do if they've been taught only to memorize and not to learn.

Whether or not you can learn is measurable. Memorizing and learning are two different things. I want our kids to be learning how to learn, and teaching to the test does not give them that skill set. It only teaches them to memorize.

The reason I grew frustrated with the high school teacher certification program was that we were told there was no time to teach ANYTHING not in the teacher's manual for a particular subject because of No Child Left Behind and teaching to the test. I want to know how Obama's plan is different. There are only so many hours in the day, and in order for teachers to have time to teach debate and citizenry and history and applied math, something's got to go. What are we doing now that isn't worth it? Because if kids are still falling behind to the tune the media tells us they are, something isn't working. I agree -- our teachers shouldn't be working harder, but they should have the freedom to work smarter and find the teaching methodology that works for their kids.

I also agree that a master's degree doesn't necessarily make you a good teacher, but if an advanced degree and contribution to your subject area qualifies you to teach college, I fail to understand why it doesn't qualify you to teach high school juniors or seniors, many of whom are supplementing their high school curriculum with community college classes in the first place. In a time when highly educated people are losing jobs and seriously considering going into teaching, I'm surprised we set the barrier for entry so high. Why not use mentoring and semester check-ins to see if they've got what it takes instead of uniformly turning them away, at least at the high school level? Are there not creative solutions to these problems?

Rita Arens writes at Surrender Dorothy ( http://surrenderdorothy.typepad.com ) and BlogHer and is the editor of Sleep is for the Weak ( http://tinyurl.com/9pg62e ). She is BlogHer's assignment and syndication editor.

Great questions are coming up here in the comments.  A lot of them address my concerns about the Race to the Top...but a "biggie" remains in my mind--

What kind of emphasis is being placed on the education needs of so-called "Gifted/Talented" students, and how will the Race to the Top directly benefit academically advanced students? (and, is this administration willing to included academically advanced students in their definition for "Special Needs" in a concrete way that would mandate funding?)

I have two children, both tagged in Kindergarten as Gifted.  My son (currently a Kindergartener)  has tested in the 99th percentile of his age since the first academic testing he went through at the age of 4, while in preschool.  The elementary school is stymied by him--they receive no Special Ed funding for him, so they are effectively trying to cram his round-peggedness into a very square hole, and no surprise, are finding that doing so creates more difficulty than it solves.  

They tell me they've NEVER seen a boy as bright (we live in rural SW New Hampshire), and that they are basically taking a trial and error approach to determining how to teach him--a boy who has already taught himself the geography of the world, can freehand-draw and label a US map from memory (and then tell you the capitals, the largest cities, and in some cases, the state birds, mottos, and trees), and has been reading since the age of 2.

As an active and concerned citizen, I'm hopeful about this program, and the goals for our education system.  We need to improve the current public education platform.  But as a mom--I really want to know:  How Exactly will this help MY kids?

~Margaret

Timely too, as I live in an area where a back room deal recently resulted in the approval of an unqualified charter school, costing the sending district around $2.4 million in the next few years and exposing the dark underbelly of politics in education.

1. The Race to the Top program seems to rely heavily on the promotion of charter schools. This would be great if said charters were not sucking resources out of already overburdened schools. We know why charters work - they are small schools with small class sizes that are able to "send back" students who do not get with the program. While it's great that some kids will get the opportunity to experience such an environment, what does that mean for the huge percentage of remaining kids whom charters have left behind?

2. As many others have said, we are entirely too reliant on test scores as a measure of success in education. This is especially problematic when there is no national standard and Massachusetts has one of the toughest tests in the country, while Texas tests only the most basic skills. What can be done to address this gap, and what will be done to encourage more meaningful assessment of what students can do with the information they are supposed to have learned. The late Ted Sizer had a wonderful vision for the American High School that emphasized practical skills as well as achievement in math, science, the arts, and languages. His ideas would be a great place to start.

3. How can we improve the teacher career path - from the way teachers are trained and mentored, through to a more meaningful path to tenure (much more like the way it is handled at the university level), and on to becoming a master teacher who trains others?

- Lisse

@ ( http://homeintheworld.typepad.com ) Home in the World: International Adoption and Other Travels

I don't think the question is how do you teach it, but rather, how do you measure the learning that took place? How does one assess the ability to question?

I am a math teacher, and if you think that you can teach the curriculum as it stands AND include all that you just listed you are welcome to take my job any day. I can barely get through everything I need to as it is (and none of it is without merit) while ensuring that they fully understand it and can apply it to real world situations and demonstrate that learning on a test on which they need to do well or it could cost me my job.

As for assessing a job description, deciding how they want to parent, how to vote and be a good citizen and how to think, care and act - those things are taught by someone else who is equally important, their PARENTS. I am not a parent. I am not responsible for instilling core values into your children. It is enough that I am a babysitter for a select portion of my students, with their parents pulling them out for trips to Disneyland a week at a time and whenever they "don't feel good". Parents teach children the value of school, of learning, the joy of independence and set the example of the citizen they should be when they grow up.

Last thing - just because someone has a master's degree doesn't mean that they are talented teachers. Knowledge does not a good teacher make.

Well said.

A typical answer I have seen that seems to work for challenging kids that are performing well above their peers when there is no gifted program available is to do a "pull out" type of schedule. The teacher and parents work to identify where the student is most gifted (typically in one or two areas, less often across the board especially if you figure in social skills) and pull the student out a few times a week to go and study with another class for that subject area at an appropriate grade level. For instance, if your child is reading at a third grade level in first grade he would go to a third grade class for reading instruction and remain in the first grade class for the rest of the day.

You should check out http://www.hoagiesgifted.org/ for other options when working with a public school that has limited resources for gifted kids.

As for the highly performing charter school, very often charter schools start out all bright and shiny and then when parents finally get their kid in they realize it isn't quite what they thought it was. Charter schools find it much easier to expell kids for whatever reason, and often do not have special education classes thereby potentially increasing their test scores just because they do not have those students figured into the average. If the average public school could leave out the special education and behavior problem student scores their average would easily meet or beat the charter school's test scores.

In short, don't just a school by its scores, they are not always what they appear to be.

Technically, gifted students are classified as "special needs" students and receive the same funding as special needs students such as those with learning disabilities do. It is the school district's choice how they distribute that money. Sadly, NCLB (aka No Child Gets Ahead) has forced schools to face losing funding if they do not show improvement in subgroups such as LD kids.

This is a concern brought up by educators constantly. We are in the race for mediocrity - all students performing at the same "average" level instead of pushing the average-performing kids to excel and the gifted kids to compete against each other for even higher levels of achievement.

I believe very strongly in public schools. For a while, I went back to school with my master's degree in English and enrolled in a program to enable me to teach high school English. It was shocking to me that someone with a master's degree could teach college but not high school. So first off, why is that? Are we keeping talented teachers out of the school systems because of bureaucratic nonsense?

Secondly, in the two years I taught Comp I in an inner city community college, I recognized that these kids had not every had writing skills explained to them in a way they could understand. I taught my kids how the five-paragraph essay (tell them what you're going to tell them, tell them, tell them what you told them) got me out of a loan. They perked up when they heard how basic writing skills could help them negotiate the real world.

These sorts of critical-thinking skills can't be taught to a test. But they are real-world skills. Are kids learning to balance a checkbook in math class? Are they learning how interest rates work? Are they learning about ARMs and 30-year fixed mortgages? Are they learning how to apply geometry to home remodeling? Are they learning how critical reading skills can help them analyze whether or not a job description fits their skill set? Are they learning how to explain to others what they think, what they feel, how they would vote, how they want to parent, how to argue? These are debate skills. They need to be taught. They are not innate.

I fear we are not teaching life lessons. High school and college should be teaching how to LEARN, how to ABSORB, how to FORM OPINIONS, how to QUESTION. Not how to memorize, though to a certain extent, that is helpful. We should be teaching kids how to be good citizens in the ancient Roman image of citizenry. We should be teaching our kids to think and to care and to act.

How do you teach that?

Rita Arens writes at Surrender Dorothy ( http://surrenderdorothy.typepad.com ) and BlogHer and is the editor of Sleep is for the Weak ( http://tinyurl.com/9pg62e ). She is BlogHer's assignment and syndication editor.

Thanks Erin!

What an insightful article. I am a guest teacher (substitute teacher) in my local public school. I really feel for the teachers who try so hard to prepare our kids for today and the world after graduation. Unfortunately the rules/guidelines keep changing on a federal, state and local level regarding what the teachers are supposed to teach. And sometimes teachers have to completely shift gears and specialize in a new educational area because of a mandate from "on high." (This is a major side effect of the No Child Left Behind Act.

My two questions:

How do we keep our talented teachers in the system when the bureaucracy in education seems to take over the school?

Taking into consideration the variety of kids and their learning styles and abilities, does anyone really know what it takes to be successful and how to measure it?   (I am asking this because I am confused by the statement by Higginbottom,  "They are not just fill-in-the bubble tests, but they would be measuring what you need to be successful.")

Thanks again, Erin!

Great piece!

Best,

Chris Olson

Chris--MomathonBlog.com

I agree with most everything I've read so far:

1. Teaching to test is a problem. How do we measure a child's progress without some form of quantifiable data? 

2. Lumping too many responsibilities on teachers (can we start calling teachers, 'teachers,' again?).

Teachers are expected to dispense discipline often on their own terms; which means the teacher has to invent, or use some template that satisfies some arbitrary Department of Education questionnaire, "Have your teachers completed a discipline plan?" or somesuch. There are many examples of the insertion of edu-speak that has nothing to do with a teacher's subject area and everything to do with satisfying local or regional politics. 
Teachers are expected to spend too much time doing work like the above to what, justify their exorbitant salaries? Successfully participating in this kind of paperwork, meeting, and other extracurricular responsibility takes the teacher away from their subject area and, in my experience, does nothing to improve the education of our children.
Teachers don't get paid enough. I hear you say, 'they should be happy to have jobs!' True; however, it's also true that the general public has no appreciation of what it takes to be a teacher. Teachers are paid only for the months they work, the 'time off' they have is unpaid, though the checks are distributed throughout the year. Folks seem to have the idea that teachers get this huge paid vacation.
Mitigating non or extra workload on teachers seems essential, since it's highly unlikely there will be any increase in their salary.

Arts education needs to come back in a big way. Though the Department of Education will probably require double-blind ten-year studies to figure out that there is indeed a correlation between the defunding of arts education and the lowering of student achievement, I'll save you the money and say that in this case there is a causative relationship.

That's all I have to say about this. 

I look at the education issue on two issues, one as a parent and the other as a teacher. I teach at-risk and alternative high school students.  Yes, many of my students have been failed, but it is not always the teacher's fault.  What about the parent who calls the student in absent a couple of days a week just because the student was out parting the night before and is too tired (drunk, hung over, high etc. ) to come to school?  Or what about the student who says I don't need a high school education, because I can go get a job working at X factory or doing this,  and make at least twice as much as you do in a year.  And yes, there are those places that do hire employee's that have never finished high school and they do make at least twice what I am making and that is a starting rate for that company.  I also have many students who have parents working at jobs that don't require a high school education but yet they make more money than what I do. How is this new program going to change the value system of many Americans so that education will once again be valued?

Instead of upgrading the schools, we need to look at improving the value of an education so that all people see the importance of getting a good education.  We need to make all parents responsible for what his or her student does and maybe even hold the students themselves responsible for what happens at school.

I have a student that doesn't belong in my program (he should instead be in the BD classroom, but we can't have that program anymore). He see's no value in an education, nor does anyone else in his home.  His Mom left a few years ago and he rarely sees her.  He spends the school day screwing around and bothering other students.  I have sent him out many times, the principal and I have worked on coming up with a contract for him and his dad has been called in several times.  Nothing that we have done makes any  difference.  Instead he is allowed to continue to disrupt not only my students but others when he is in the hallway.  How is this new program actually going to address these issues? 

Currently, public education is the only choice if you have a child with significant disabilities and you are not independantly wealthy. Like any monopoly this does not lead to uniformly wonderful situations for special needs kids (look at the number of lawsuits in special education currently in progress). This leads to my questions:

What are you going to do to make sure meaningful inclusion is available at every public school - including training for staff and students, funding for aditional staff required and physical improvements of schools
We know (or I hope we can all agree) that inclusive education is a benefit for the special needs student by allowing them access to society and mainstream academics, it is a benefit to "typical students" by allowing them to be supportive as well as teaching them about the diversity of humanity and it is a benefit to schools and classrooms by allowing differentiation - first for the special needs kids, but eventually for all kids. What are you going to do to encourage this "real" inclusion. Can we have blue-ribbon inclusion schools that get nationwide recognition?

We're in a county and state known for great public schools.  But it became clear that our local public school would be no place for PunditGirl -- running out of space, teachers leaving, principal who had no personal goals for the school, 9 kindergarten classrooms and no time for recess.  I could go on.  Not to mention the teach to the test.

As products of public schools, my husband and I were committed to them for our daughter.  But it was clear to us that, given who she was as a child then, that there was a very real possibility she would learn to hate school.  So we enrolled her in a small, independent school where she is thriving.  Most people don't have the ability to do what we did, so:

1. How are we going to re-tool our public schools so we can get rid of the whole teach-to-the-test phenomenon and teach our children how to be critical thinkers?

2. How can we keep the teachers who want to teach this way?  The public school we were supposed to be in had great teachers -- many of whom left when a principal came in who was just counting the days to retirement and didn't want to focus on the children or who they were as learners?

3. How can public schools start to teach our children differently -- i.e, they all learn differently, so shouldn't public schools acknowledge that and figure out how to help all children become the best learners they can be?

Joanne Bamberger

aka PunditMom ( http://www.punditmom.com )

After being told that the neighborhood public school could not keep my child challenged we made the decision to go private. We looked at other publics but at the time they would not guarantee my child a spot each year and could not guarantee that siblings would get in. That since has changed but not in time for us. The private school system is in just as much trouble as the public. They have limited resources and therefore unless you pick the school that is exactly the perfect fit (and that is a crap shoot is you listen to the spin in the admission department) and your child is neither above that groups or below it, they might get a good education. Now with one in public school I find that they do a much better job meeting the needs of all levels but the levels themselves are limited. Teachers teach the same way today that they did when I was in school and yet our kids have so many more resources at their fingertips that are under used or misused. We need to teach our children how to think not just what to think and spit back out onto a piece of paper with bubbles.   

My mother is a great teacher with many years behind her. She has worked hard to teach her 7th graders by actually educating them in language arts as well as preparing them for the test. This often sucks 80+ hours from her weekly. After this last year, she had exceptional test scores from her students -- some of the highest. However, because others in the school did not end up performing as well, the entire schools got graded down and punished. Despite my mother and her students great performance, she lost out, they lost out, and the whole school lost out. It's very demoralizing. To say the least.

How will your program be different from this?

Julie Using My Words ( http://theartfulflower.blogspot.com/ )

So much emphasis has been on raising the standards and achievement of the lowest performing students - and rightly so if we truly want to create equal opportunity- but it seems that school districts and states routinely short change the high performing kids.  There is either an attitude of "parents can supplement outside of school" or that those kids wlll be just fine anyway.  It seems that as we are focused on racing to the top we should be encouraging and challenging the students who can raise the height of that metaphorical summit.  Will the White House put money and standards behind gifted education?

Erin, I am that mom in Texas who yanked her children out of a blue ribbon exceptional school too. A school other parents were fine with, but that, like you experienced, was crushing my child and frankly, not really educating her well. 

Now is race to the top the program that was inspired by that cradle to career program in harlem (the name escapes me but it's had some great news specials about it and I know Pres Obama was entranced by it and admired it. I believe even committed funding to it.)? If so, i have great respect for all I've heard about that program.

But anything is good in theory.

As folks may or may not know, we are facing a terrible educational challenge in Texas ( http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/features/2010/100... ) (that will affect all of you, too) regarding honest education. Social studies, science, language arts, all subjects are under attack by a conservative, right-wing, religious agenda state board of education that seems more inclined to listen to the voice in their own heads versus the voices of citizens.

Here are my questions:

I already know Texas will opt out so long as we continue to have a Republican Governor who frankly admitted he doesn't see the need for Texas to participate in the US, and thus opts out of everything regardless of consequence. Hopefully Bill White will win but covering my bets...

1. This, "...expansion would hopefully include allowing districts to compete and apply for funds instead of the district relying on the state to take part..."

How hopefully?

2. Explain how the progress tracking and testing would be used, specifically, and what would be tied to them? Money? Teacher pay?

3. Would we see a revival of classical education with all subjects covered, including the arts? How?

4. Would we see more practical application and multi-sensory learning versus emphasis on drills, rote, and test prep?

5. Can we count on smaller, less crowded classes?

6. What progress tracking and measurements will be put into place for bullying and at school violence?

7. What protection can we count on from subjective curriculum alterations such as we see in Texas (which affect the rest of the nation because we are the biggest text book consumer at the moment -- California's budget issues cut it out)?

8. What incentives/requirements will promote green/LEED schools for students? Is there a goal of X percent of schools will be LEED by Y date?

9. How will we ensure equal educational opportunities for all minorities, including adequate coverage of minority history and all contributions via lesson? (This goes towards the current action of removing many racial and women minorities from social studies curriculum in Texas.)

10. What is the overarching goal and plan with specific way points to achieve better competitiveness internationally without stifling our current creativity and innovation that make us thought and market leaders? Will this program, for example, incorporate more of the International Baccalaureate degree's principles and mission?

Cutting self off now...but this is a HUGE issue because I believe in providing a great education for my kids but more than that a great educational EXPERIENCE and that's not possible in our public schools as is. Therefore, my family finances hurt awfully as we struggle to pay for that in a private venue.

I'm off to direct my education reform friends over here.

Julie Pippert

Julie Using My Words ( http://theartfulflower.blogspot.com/ )

I'm excited to hear that the White House wants to hear from us - the parents who are more than concerned that because of the No Child Left Behind Act, our kids are, in fact, being left behind.

And the ones who aren't being left behind? are simply being passed onto the next level/grade even when they do not know the material because they're simply not allowed to fail. Not fail in the sense that "we just won't let this kid fail in his academic progress" but fail as in "well, we've done what we can" (which is never enough from what I've seen) "so my job as a teacher is done here and so-and-so can continue on to high school even though he still can't read."

Sounds extreme? The kid who lives across from me has gone to public his entire educational career and now sits as a SOPHOMORE in high and cannot read. CANNOT READ. And this? is America? The teachers, counselors and faculty only remark, "We're simply not allowed to fail him." YOU ALREADY HAVE.

Let's face it: It's not about test scores and better evaluation systems for teachers. Teachers aren't paid enough to care. On top of that, every year hundreds of teachers get pink-slipped and then have to hang in the balance until literally the week before the new school year to find out if they still have a job? And usually, these are the newly educated teachers who have *new* ideas and are more technologically savvy while the elder teachers with their tenure and bad/grumpy attitudes toward children (not to mention lack of computer skills) sit pretty with their jobs.

And don't get me started on the school boards and how the districts are run. If you'd like to free up some money to pay teachers what they deserve, there's a good place to cut the budget. Our local school board has spent more than 5 years and MILLIONS of dollars fighting legal battles amongst THEMSELVES and in hopes to unify a local high school. HA! They can't even keep a president in office and they want to take on more? Excuse me while I furrow my brow and hand-in my charter school applications.

My oldest son is in the same boat as Erin's son. Each October we sit with the new teacher of this school year in a parent/teacher conference and hear them tell us "Your son already knows the curriculum for the year." Our response is always the same, "So what are you going to do about that? How are you going to help him move forward? How do you plan on challenging him?" And they can only tell me "I'm sorry, but we can't cater the lesson plans to him because he's ahead of the class. And GATE testing isn't allowed until the 3rd grade.

Awesome. By the third grade, my already bored 1st grader will have lost his lust for learning, having sat in classrooms for three years already watching the clock and coloring while the other students are hopefully learning to read.

I, too, have just filled out the lottery applications for a new local charter school - who in its mere two years of existence - has out-shined every district-run school in way of test scores and other accolades in our community.

I am frustrated for my kids and I am deeply disappointed in our educational system in the U.S. There is NO EXCUSE for us to be so far behind other countries academically, and yet here we sit, chewing our erasers and crossing our fingers.  

1. The state of TN has a culture of ignorance that creates obstacles to education OUTSIDE of the classroom, but all of TN's reforms are centered on making teachers more accountable for students who make inadequate progress.  What is being done to promote education and tackle issues that exist in the home and community?

2. How are we making schools friendlier to boys who generally suffer from full days spent at desks doing worksheets instead of being allowed to learn actively?

3. How are we encouraging more girls to participate in STEM concentrations?

4. When are we going to stop teaching students to perform on tests and start teaching them the skills to apply knowledge?

5. Why are we using NCLB to punish schools that teach severely disabled students?  Students with IEPs need to be evaluated based on portfolio performance instead of standardized tests.

6. Rewarding teachers based on school performance discourages teachers from teaching at the urban schools where they are most needed.

7. How is the push for charter schools going to be monitored so that it does not leave the special needs population out of new opportunities? Will their curriculum be subject to the standards of public school curriculums or will they be allowed the freedom of interpretation that church schools are given?

We just pulled our child out of his school and put him into a private, Montessori school.  I know every parent thinks their child is bright, but when you have a normally confident child telling you that he "can't do" things he could 6 months ago - like write his name, do simple math and read, there's a problem.  My son wasn't left behind, he was being pulled down. 

I'd like to think this program could help. But can it really change the current "teach to the middle, all kids must fit a mold," mentality?

Lawyer Mama

http://lawyermama.com

http://momocrats.typepad.com

http://dcmetromoms.com 

I left teaching about three years ago after a twenty year career because I was, frankly, being made sick by the idea that the reason we educate children is so that they can be an financial asset in the great American economy someday. I want more for my own children and I wanted more for my students.

I didn't hate NCLB. It arrived with good intentions but without the common sense and funds it needed, but over time it proved too inflexible and not in tune with what teachers know - that kids are not cogs and that a one-size fits all approach that is top down and ignores the needs of the primary stake-holders is not going to work.

So, you claim that states have the option of participating but as cash strapped as they are even if they don't want to participate, they really will have no choice. Is there going to be any money for education that won't have reform strings attached to it?

How can students from different states being compared as a whole when there are no national standards?

And how can subjective measurements be compared?

Are we finally going to base assessment (and there curriculum) on what we know to be fact about child development and learning rather than continue to teach skills too early or too late?

Are teachers going to be treated as professionals in the reform process - stakeholders who have been trained to write curriculum and assessments, or are we going to continue to treat them like foot soldiers who should take orders and perform them without question?

Is it possible that somewhere in reform the idea that public schools were meant to produce literate and informed citizens capable of participation in a democracy will once again be a goal? As opposed to the idea that kids are simply fodder for the economy? A future economy that we have really no idea what it will look like or what children may or may not need. Is teaching children for their own sake and because it is the proper thing to do going to become the reason we bother?

Can reform be achieved if there are massive teacher lay-offs in the next school year or two as it seems there will be? And if not, how will the states find money to retain staff when it is clear that local school districts are as tapped out as they are?

Finally, if the health care reform bill isn't passed - which seems likely now - does the administration have the clout to tackle education reform? If health care went down, isn't it probable that the Republicans will dig their heels in on reform of any kind?