What does the American educational system (K-12) teach well?

[gleem]

I don't think teaches math science and reading well is supported in that study.

 

[Andy Resnick]

Indeed. Meth in rural areas, marijuana in middle/working class areas, and cocaine in the wealthy schools.

Yes, but it's more commonly pills.

 

[symbolipoint]

It's not so much that practice makes perfect, but that perfect practice makes perfect.

Many math courses focus too much on application of mechanical skills without imparting the reasons and thinking behind each step in the problem solving process. I try and short-circuit that approach with a focus on word problems, modeling, mathematical thinking, assessment, and requiring students to plan solutions and justify each step.

A quick check is not whether students get the right answer, but whether they know how to know whether or not it is really the right answer.

A motivated teacher in any system, even if he is not the best at the subject, and if no administrators interfere, can do what you describe. A teacher should be able to extend a lesson any way he wants, if it is designed to help the student learn better. Not about being some genius teacher; but about looking for a way to help student make better sense of a topic or technique or concept.

 

[bhobba]

Speaking as someone who works with public schools, both in the inner-city and suburbs across the full K-12 range, the perception does not match reality. In my personal experience, weapons are not in school. Drugs *are* in schools- especially in the wealthy suburban schools.

That's the situation here in Australia as well. Along with a lot of students not actually wanting to be there. And the response - a common Australian curriculum that all kids must do - just the thing to make students want to go to school. No wonder many teachers get apathetic. They still don't want to implement what the education experts I mentioned previously says is the main issue - teachers engaging students.

Many parents send kids to private schools for that exact reason.

However here is a public school that does the right thing:
https://tc.vic.edu.au/

Thanks
Bill

 

[andrewkirk]

Observing from outside the US (I am Australian) one possibly education-related thing that particularly impresses me about Americans is the fact that most of them (nearly all of them, it seems to me) can speak well in public, whether that be a formal speech, a one-on-one, or a contribution to a group discussion - much more so on average than people from other countries, including my own. They are capable of articulating their feelings and thoughts where people from other countries are often tongue-tied, and have the confidence to do so. This could be partly self-belief and partly practice or training at expressing themselves.

I wonder if there is something in the American education system that contributes to that.

 

[Andy Resnick]

<snip>They still don't want to implement what the education experts I mentioned previously says is the main issue - teachers engaging students.

On the contrary, teachers *love* engaging students. The burnout rate is high when teacher pay is not commensurate with the expended effort.

 

[M5Neo]

Actually it is worse than this. Teachers are strongly discouraged from failing students no matter how bad they are doing.Source: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...uld-love-to-teach-but/?utm_term=.7eafb487852f

Again the quote “They are not allowed to fail" is worth noting. It doesn't matter if it's because they aren't showing up, studying, or turning in work. They are not allowed to fail. I've had friends quit teaching over stuff like this. It's bad.

-Dave K

You are so right.

I would write more, but I don't want to put my job in peril. I will say this, once I got called in the dean's office about failing too many students, and was instructed to basically have the students retake exam questions they didn't do well on I got the message. I take my subject ( math) very seriously, but once I figured out the administration was more concerned about keeping parents happy I grudgingly pass some students(sophomores and seniors) I know should be in the 5th grade.

But coming from foreign country where high school education is not free, I am willing to say America has a very good educational system. The biggest problem is most American students are too distracted and they don't like to study, or think. They believe that everything should be entertainment. What I have noticed since being in America is that all the "reforms" are always targeted at the teachers. In essence it's always the teachers' fault, at least that's what I get. I have yet to hear a politician, or school official scold parents or students for their lack of commitment to education.

 

[bhobba]

On the contrary, teachers *love* engaging students. The burnout rate is high when teacher pay is not commensurate with the expended effort.

Thanks for clarifying. You are correct.

The pay they get does not compensate for what the research says should be done. The burnout is high for teachers that do the right thing and the constant feedback of how they are going. As a computer programmer I earned more than a teacher and my job was a LOT easier.

I am not against teachers unions jumping up and down about changes like constant feedback to teachers that research shows works, what I am against is them dismissing it rather than working towards paying teachers more for what will make their job harder. They should say - yes we need to do this, the research is unambiguous, but should be paid more.

Thanks
Bill

 

[bhobba]

I wonder if there is something in the American education system that contributes to that.

The self confidence thing mentioned previously.

Thanks
Bill

 

[bhobba]

Actually it is worse than this. Teachers are strongly discouraged from failing students no matter how bad they are doing.

When I went through they had zero problems in doing just that, as well as diagnosing the reason why way beyond their competence level.

What happened in my time is if you failed you got shoved in the no-hoper's lot.

I well remember, because I was disengaged from English, I failed it. But because I was engaged did well in math and science. This came to a head in grade 10 when I was asked to write a humorous story. I based it on an award winning story about a giant radio and remember the words I used, straight from the actual story, it had variable capacitors like bread slicers - knowing what a variable capacitor looks like knew it was quite humorous. Well it went down with my English teacher not so well. To cut a long story short they wanted to put me in the no-hoper's lot or go to a special remedial school. My math and science teachers rebelled knowing I was better than this. They even sent me to a guidance counselor who asked me to read a passage from something or another - I did - she said their is definite eye movement then said that's all - it turned out later she was in the group that wanted to send me to a remedial school - amazing. Well my parents were called in and told I was dyslexic or had some other learning difficulty and needed special education - they were shocked - they knew I read all the time - but technical stuff - not literature. I had even taught myself calculus. If I had trouble reading I could not have done that. Finally my parents took me to our family doctor who it just happened was moving on to be a psychiatrist and had just finished his training. He put me through a battery of tests and wrote a letter saying, basically, you have zero idea what you were talking about - Bill is just disengaged from literature and stuff you did in English class. Engage him more.

Well I remember their engagement. We were reading Animal Farm and I was asked for my take on the ending where the horses led the revolt against the pigs. I said maybe the horses will go the same way as the pigs. Well the teacher gave me an open filthy look and dismissed what I said out of hand. My engagement levels dropped to zero.

That was in grade 10 - I failed it in 11 and 12 but couldn't care less. To this day I think English is a pile of the proverbial although I now read a wide range of books - not just technical ones - I particularly like autobiographies. Also equally strangely I liked English at uni where two subjects were compulsory - written communication and oral communication but it was a much more open environment than high school and you were given a lot more freedom in what you read and wrote.

I nearly puked when the current Premier of where I live in Queensland said English will now be a compulsory subject in 11 and 12 because of its vital importance. Based on my experience the teaching quality needs to improve dramatically. But then again my experience was 50 years ago so heaven knows what its like today - hopefully a lot better.

What I don't understand is this idea you can specify what a young adult must study. Templestowe college that I gave a link to previously has a foundation year where you must demonstrate basic competence in English, math, science etc. You are not promoted from that year until you do, even if it takes two or more years - most do it in one. Then you study what you feel like.

They then base university entrance on teachers recommendations and a portfolio of what you have done:
http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/school-dumps-cutthroat-vce-ranking-20160226-gn4gk0.html

You go when you are ready. Its a much more rational approach IMHO.

Thanks
Bill

 

[symbolipoint]

bhobba,
Your experience that you discussed was amazing, and I understand. Mine were not as bad, but I had similar trouble. Expecting all students in high school to do well in English (as if it should even be called that) just does not work for all students. "English" that you study in college suits many students better than what is presented in high school. Beware also, by that time, you are more mature and can handle the ideas you are taught. English and Social Studies are just very different subjects than Mathematics and Sciences.

 

[bhobba]

Expecting all students in high school to do well in English (as if it should even be called that) just does not work for all students.

That's exactly what I felt and still do to some extent.

Now the study of Shakespeare etc etc is a perfectly valid discipline. But what is school preparing you for - not that. You need to read and comprehend local everyday news, the communications of whatever area you decide to go into, and most important of all critical thinking. You don't need Shakespeare, Shelly, Byron etc etc - yet that's what a lot of English as taught in HS is about. I had a long 'discussion' with a manager who was in one of my uni communication classes. He thought that study taught how to write good English. I respectfully disagreed - as far as I was concerned it was a waste of time. Don't get me wrong - if you like that sort of thing by all means study it - but I have to tell you it turned me and a lot of others off - yet you were forced to endure it and from what our Premier said may be forced to endure for longer.

Its downright silly. Why not something like this:
https://www.open.edu.au/courses/sci...ives-on-science-and-technology--mda10006-2017

It looks a lot more applicable than the rot at HS - but its a university subject and what you said is so true - but why wait till uni?

Thanks
Bill

 

[symbolipoint]

Bill, bhobba,

Some students just do not have their equipment fully developed when they are still attending high school. This is a big part of the trouble with teaching and learning of "English" in high school. Not enough exposure of real life. Not enough maturity or neurological development. As I rethink why English & S.S. was worse for some of us than Math&Sci, the key idea that makes the difference is structure. The teachers could not usually give us a clear structuring for Literature and ways of Writing when we had to learn "English" and Social Studies. On the other side of school, Algebra and Trigonometry, and at least some aspects of Science had a firmer structure, and our sci and math teachers showed us and discussed that set of structuring. Tone in a long essay of some long-dead writer? No-go. Analyzing how the Law of Cosines is derived? Good-Go.

But then there were the students who 'understood' that Mathematics is hard, and they had easier time learning English and Social Studies. They often believed the students learning college prep Math or sciences were "smart" people.

 

[bhobba]

But then there were the students who 'understood' that Mathematics is hard, and they had easier time learning English and Social Studies. They often believed the students learning college prep Math or sciences were "smart" people.

Spot on.

I well remember when I started programming and my first job at the Federal Police.

One policeman said you guys must be smart - we all chuckled - one guy muttered - common misconception.

There days we all know this left brain right brain stuff and in most people one side is dominant. I was obviously left brain dominant. I did one of those tests classifying me VERY strongly as one of the rarer personality types INTP:
https://www.16personalities.com/intp-personality

I was almost pre-destined to have these issues.

Of relevance here though is teachers and educators should understand this and have an education system to cater for it.

IMHO they still have a long way to go - but to be fair from what I hear are getting better - slowly.

Thanks
Bill

 

[StatGuy2000]

Spot on.

I well remember when I started programming and my first job at the Federal Police.

One policeman said you guys must be smart - we all chuckled - one guy muttered - common misconception.

There days we all know this left brain right brain stuff and in most people one side is dominant. I was obviously left brain dominant. I did one of those tests classifying me VERY strongly as one of the rarer personality types INTP:
https://www.16personalities.com/intp-personality

I was almost pre-destined to have these issues.

Of relevance here though is teachers and educators should understand this and have an education system to cater for it.

IMHO they still have a long way to go - but to be fair from what I hear are getting better - slowly.

Thanks
Bill

At the further risk of going off-topic, I am skeptical about whether the Myers-Briggs personality type tests discussed above have much statistical validity and reliability. I could go on and on about the issues about these types of psychometric tests, so instead I'll just provide the following Wikipedia article summarizing the criticism.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Myers–Briggs_Type_Indicator#Criticism

As far as the issues you and symbolicpoint had with English classes -- the problem has less to do with learning about literature (or necessarily about structure i.e. there is a "right" or "wrong" way to read/write) rather than poor teaching of said classes.

English should be more than about teaching basic writing skills -- it should also be an opportunity to explore the cultural contributions made in language, and studying of literature is vitally important. The problem is on how to make the material found in literature relevant to students. What I sense is that the teacher you had was incredibly impatient and biased towards "techie" type students, which could well be a sign of the times in Australia or the US at that time.

In my high school experience, two of my best teachers were a math teacher and an English teacher. While my personal inclinations/interests were more towards math and the sciences (and hence had better grades in these), I was also greatly inspired by my English teacher to think more broadly about society, about literature, and about life, and to a large extent, I'd like to think I am the person I am today at least in part due to the influence of my English teacher.

 

[Andy Resnick]

<snip>I am not against teachers unions jumping up and down about changes like constant feedback to teachers that research shows works, what I am against is them dismissing it rather than working towards paying teachers more for what will make their job harder. They should say - yes we need to do this, the research is unambiguous, but should be paid more.

In my experience, teachers welcome *peer evaluations*. That is a very different form of feedback than "test scores". I think the underlying objection to 'constant feedback' is based on what feedback metrics are used to evaluate teacher effectiveness. "Teacher effectiveness" is not a quantifiable property of teaching.

The same discussion applies to other professionals: who watches the watchers?

 

[Andy Resnick]

Now the study of Shakespeare etc etc is a perfectly valid discipline. But what is school preparing you for - not that. You need to read and comprehend local everyday news, the communications of whatever area you decide to go into, and most important of all critical thinking. You don't need Shakespeare, Shelly, Byron etc etc - yet that's what a lot of English as taught in HS is about.

The study of literature is surely a significant part of any language curriculum- poetry vs. prose. All prose makes Jill a dull read.

I asked my 11th grade English teacher why we had to read all those musty boring "Important Literature" texts instead of Steven King or Tom Clancy. His answer was refreshingly honest: "Because you don't need me to understand those books." Don't forget the primary value of a teacher lies within *evaluation* of the student's work. Critical evaluation enables the student to learn and improve, regardless of the discipline.

 

[Andy Resnick]

<snip>

Well I remember their engagement. We were reading Animal Farm and I was asked for my take on the ending where the horses led the revolt against the pigs. I said maybe the horses will go the same way as the pigs. Well the teacher gave me an open filthy look and dismissed what I said out of hand. My engagement levels dropped to zero.<snip>

Thanks for sharing this story- I suspect we all have had a similar experience in school. For me it was in World History class...

Here's the thing- from your perspective, " teacher gave me an open filthy look and dismissed what I said out of hand", something many of my intro physics students could probably say about my reaction to one of their pop-sci questions about warp drives/free energy/etc. From the teacher's perspective (at least in my case), the question is received as foolish/thoughtless and at best a distraction not worth spending precious class time on. Maybe during office hours, but not during class.

I agree, a better reaction could have been "Well Bill, why do you think that?" and expect you to defend your point of view on the spot in front of the whole class. But it's also likely that you would have not appreciated that, either.

So let me ask you, if you could go back to that day, how would have preferred the teacher to respond?

 

[Dr. Courtney]

In my experience, teachers welcome *peer evaluations*. That is a very different form of feedback than "test scores". I think the underlying objection to 'constant feedback' is based on what feedback metrics are used to evaluate teacher effectiveness. "Teacher effectiveness" is not a quantifiable property of teaching.

The same discussion applies to other professionals: who watches the watchers?

At the Air Force Academy, we used some very effective metrics for teacher effectiveness in "core" courses: Pre-Calc, Calc 1,2, and 3, Physics 1 and 2, Intro Engineering Mechanics, and General Chemistry 1 and 2. All these courses had department wide assessments, so earning a given grade in the same course was the same any given semester for all students in the course. These assessments were crafted by more experienced teachers who did a very good job accurately measuring progress in learning objectives.

One basic metric was the grade distribution achieved by a given instructor, which could be easily adjusted for the strength of his incoming students from their performance in earlier courses and earlier assessments (ACT scores and math placement exam for 1 semester courses.) It was well known that morning math classes had more than their share of intercollegiate athletes (to accommodate afternoon practices), and thus tended to be less well-prepared (on average) than afternoon math classes. Yet, putting the best, most experienced teachers (with a heart for athletes) teaching those classes often yielded grade distributions comparable to the afternoon classes packed with STEM majors and other geeks. But an instructor who underperformed after being dealt a good hand (well-prepared students) could be quickly identified and the situation remedied. Of course, Air Force officers who make up the bulk of the instructors are fairly receptive to constructive feedback from the chain of command compared with public school teachers.

A second basic metric was how students earning a given grade in one course performed in downstream courses for which that course was a pre-requisite. "Teaching to the tests" might bump up how an instructor looks in the first metric, but doing that in Calc 1 will disadvantage students who earn a given grade relative to their peers in Calc 2 and Physics. When I re-designed the Pre-Calc course, we achieved much higher downstream success rates in Calc 1 and Physics, as well as much higher 4 year graduation rates for the weakest 5% of incoming students in math.

Of the two approaches, I think the second is more applicable in K-12. If an Algebra 1 teacher passes a bunch of students with As and Bs who are woefully unprepared for Algebra 2 (demonstrated by the grades and test scores in Algebra 2), then that teacher is in need of feedback to improve and prevent recurrences (or termination). The basic idea is that "student success = teacher success." Students who are passed but unprepared to succeed downstream are not successful, and the teacher who passes them routinely is perpetuating fraud.

 

[Andy Resnick]

At the Air Force Academy, we used some very effective metrics for teacher effectiveness in "core" courses:

Applying a metric developed in the context of a homogeneous self-selected group to a broad heterogenous population is questionable.

 

[Dr. Courtney]

Applying a metric developed in the context of a homogeneous self-selected group to a broad heterogenous population is questionable.

There is tremendous diversity among Air Force Academy cadets. Much more than in the high schools (and districts) I have taught at or attended. Your assumption of homogeneity is not just questionable, it is WRONG.

Your assumption of self-selected is somewhat true, as all the cadets chose to be at the Air Force Academy. However, many would not choose to be in Calculus or Physics.

But maybe one of the problems with public schooling is that students do not choose to be there. Teaching is much more likely to be effective if students at least care about being in (and staying in) the school, if not the specific class.

I've also used the second basic metric (how students earning a given grade in one course performed in downstream courses for which that course was a pre-requisite) to analyze data from a number of additional institutions. It may not be a perfect approach, but it is one of the best available options for assessing teaching effectiveness. If students from a given Calc 1 instructor are having a much greater problem passing Calc 2 than students from other instructors, there is a problem. Likewise, nothing like a good Algebra-based Physics class to gauge the effectiveness of the Algebra pre-requisites.

Peer-evaluations can be valuable also. But the ultimate peer evaluation (for applicable courses) should be from the teachers of downstream students judging their competence in pre-requisite material.

 

[Andy Resnick]

There is tremendous diversity among Air Force Academy cadets. Much more than in the high schools (and districts) I have taught at or attended. <snip>

You shouldn't make easily refuted claims. My evidence, taken from USAF's own advertisements:

12,000 applicants each year, we are able to admit just over 1,000 as cadets. As you can see, the best and the brightest compete for the limited number of appointments available. Gender distribution of 77 percent male students and 23 percent female students.
High School Class Rank: the average of recent entering classes is the top three percent.
SAT Mean: Critical Reading/Verbal 642, Math 672
ACT Mean English 30 Reading 30 Mathematics 30 Science Reasoning 30
Physical Preparation
Average for Men/ Average for Women
Basketball Throw 70′/ 42′
Pull-Ups 12/ 3
Shuttle Run 8.4 sec/ 9.5 sec
Modified Sit-Ups (crunches) 81/ 81
Push-Ups 63/ 43
One Mile Run 6:12/ 7:03

None of this is even close to the general student population. Of course it shouldn't! Don't claim that the cadet population is statistically similar to the general student population.

 

[Dr. Courtney]

You shouldn't make easily refuted claims. My evidence, taken from USAF's own advertisements:

12,000 applicants each year, we are able to admit just over 1,000 as cadets. As you can see, the best and the brightest compete for the limited number of appointments available. Gender distribution of 77 percent male students and 23 percent female students.
High School Class Rank: the average of recent entering classes is the top three percent.
SAT Mean: Critical Reading/Verbal 642, Math 672
ACT Mean English 30 Reading 30 Mathematics 30 Science Reasoning 30
Physical Preparation
Average for Men/ Average for Women
Basketball Throw 70′/ 42′
Pull-Ups 12/ 3
Shuttle Run 8.4 sec/ 9.5 sec
Modified Sit-Ups (crunches) 81/ 81
Push-Ups 63/ 43
One Mile Run 6:12/ 7:03

None of this is even close to the general student population. Of course it shouldn't! Don't claim that the cadet population is statistically similar to the general student population.

That was not my claim. My claim was that it is more diverse than the high schools I've worked at. I've seen the full range of ACT scores, not just the mean. I've seen the racial and ethnic diversity first hand. I've seen the diversity of economic backgrounds from the richest driving BMWs mommy and daddy bought them to those who grew up homeless. Diversity is not about the mean, it's about the range that is represented.

There are an awful lot of cadets who scored in the low 20s on the ACT who still need to pass all the courses in the technical core: Calc 1 and 2, Calc-based Physics 1 and 2, 2 semesters of General Chemistry, and 7 semesters of engineering. No University in the US can rival the diversity of the military academies in their Calculus, Physics, Chemistry, and Engineering classes. Few high schools rival it either.

 

[bhobba]

The same discussion applies to other professionals: who watches the watchers?

In programming you have formal code walk-throughs - it's part of your professionalism that you handle it appropriately.

Even though every textbook on the system development life cycle says you do it very few places did. I went from one place that did not do it to a place that did. I totally mucked up the first walk-through I was on - I was too hard on the person that wrote the code. He cut the review short and left - the other person said - Bill be more sensitive in future please. Among professions itself correcting.

As to its effectiveness in teaching, it's backed by impeccable academic research, see the bio I gave on Professor Hattie, again from the Melbourne School of Education. He was the one giving feedback in Revolution School:
http://www.abc.net.au/tv/programs/revolution-school/

When Knox College did it they took on staff to specifically do it:
http://www.abc.net.au/4corners/stories/2012/02/06/3421391.htm

But as the documentary said the teachers union will not allow widespread implementation in public schools.

Thanks
Bill

 

[bhobba]

So let me ask you, if you could go back to that day, how would have preferred the teacher to respond?

What you said - something like why do you say that Bill.

But also let me say I handled the situation totally wrong. Having my now life experience I would have dismissed it - said silly idiot to myself and knuckled down and did some work instead of being disengaged. But gee - I was 14. I also had a similar issue with a certain physics teacher about magnetic fields and light. He stated magnetic fields do not affect light - but I knew of the classic experiment by Faraday where he showed it changed its polarization. I was dismissed with polarized light is not ordinary light. I didn't disengage so it's obvious my maturity in play in English. I didn't like it so disengaged.

No one is disputing the value of studying poetry etc etc - its a valid discipline with benefits to its study - like many disciplines. The issue is forcing those that don't get it to do it. It's simply not necessary for the purposes of producing a literate citizen. It's an argument I think that is likely to divide people. There are some people that believe everyone should be literate in a foreign langue - that too divides people.

But remember under our current system where you have to meet certain entrance requirements that include this controversial stuff to get into tertiary study you are playing with people futures here. I was fortunate in the uni I studied at didn't require English for entrance to a math degree - others do and still do. The same with a foreign language although that is rarer.

Here is the school I went to policy:
https://www.qut.edu.au/study/applyi...tions/assumed-knowledge-and-recommended-study

I happen to agree with it, but again understand its highly debatable.

Just as reference here is the modern version of the degree I did (its changed a bit over the years):
https://www.qut.edu.au/study/courses/bachelor-of-information-technology-bachelor-of-mathematics

I did what would now be the computational science strand and IT was called Computer Science in my day.

There are a number of changes I do not agree with:

1. Professional Communication, oral and written is no longer required. Many hated it (I rather liked it) so they succumbed to pressure and got rid of it.

2. Mathematical Analysis is no longer required. This I VERY much disagree with. Its vital IMHO to study mathematical analysis if you study math. But again many hated it so they got rid of it.

Some would say they are simply being responsive to students - well again its debatable.

Thanks
Bill

 

[bhobba]

At the further risk of going off-topic, I am skeptical about whether the Myers-Briggs personality type tests discussed above have much statistical validity and reliability.

You are not the only one. Even amongst professionals like psychiatrists there is disagreement.

Of zero statistical significance, but still interesting is when I did the test many many moons ago I was struck by how accurate it was. The link I gave about INTP is me very very accurately. Even to the choice of what I loved which was math and science, but especially math (it later morphed into applied math - especially it's application to physics).

Thanks
Bill

 

[Andy Resnick]

<snip>http://www.abc.net.au/tv/programs/revolution-school/

When Knox College did it they took on staff to specifically do it:
http://www.abc.net.au/4corners/stories/2012/02/06/3421391.htm

I'm not sure I fully understand the content in those links (thanks for them, btw), partly because of differences in US and AU systems and partly because I couldn't figure out exactly what was done in Kambrya College.

But, as best I can tell, the analogy in the US are what are called "charter schools". These are a fairly new invention, I work with a few here, and I agree that the good ones address many of the concerns you have mentioned. Even so, there are some legitimate concerns about the role of charter schools in public education:

http://www.aasa.org/SchoolAdministratorArticle.aspx?id=10850

Paradoxically, charter schools have significantly *less* oversight than public schools. The "sponsor", in particular, is given broad leeway to run the school, which can (and has) led to intentional financial mismanagement. But AFAIK, charter schools are not categorically opposed by educators- actual educators, not educational activists.

 

[Andy Resnick]

<snip> The issue is forcing those that don't get it to do it.
<snip>
2. Mathematical Analysis is no longer required. This I VERY much disagree with. Its vital IMHO to study mathematical analysis if you study math. But again many hated it so they got rid of it.

Do you see what you did there? :)

 

[bhobba]

I couldn't figure out exactly what was done in Kambrya College.

The main thing was Professor Hattie sat in on classes and gave feedback to the teachers. Its that simple. Of course it was not the only thing, but it was the main thing. Performance improved dramatically. Remember Professor Hattie is a leading expert on evidence based education - some say the worlds leading expert, so its no surprise what he did worked.

We don't have Charter schools in Australia although I know what they are. Our equivalent would be independent state schools where the government gives you some money and how you spend it is entirely up to you - no oversight from the education department. Interestingly where I live in Queensland all new state schools will be independent and slowly all current schools will be converted.

That is how Kambrya College was able to do what it did - before it is unlikely the education department would have allowed it, but being independent they decide such things.

Is it better? I think it is but who knows for sure.

What I do believe, and I think its true in Australia and the US, is what makes for a good education is well known, Professor Hatttie and others have the research to prove it, but its very stressful on teachers and they simply are not paid enough to do it. They need significant pay rises. Out here we have this thing called Gonsky where they showed there was massive disparity in how schools performed depending on where you lived. They decided the answer was spending more on those schools where performance was poor. Well real spending on schools has increased across the board. If it was just the amount spent that is the issue then performance across the board would have increased. It hasn't. The reason IMHO is they spent it on the wrong things. They should spend it on greater teacher salaries and ensure their effectiveness by similar things to what happened in Kambrya College.

Just my view of course.

Thanks
Bill

 

[bhobba]

Do you see what you did there? :)

Of course .

But notice I said Shakespeare, poetry etc wasn't necessary to be a literate citizen. Forcing unnecessary things is my issue.

I think professional communication is a must for whatever profession you choose and analysis is a must for anyone that wants to call themselves mathematicians. Professional communication was nothing like HS English - it was writing reports, how to do a research paper, how to give a presentation etc etc. When I went out to work I had to do it all the time. Analysis - well that's more debatable - but as a mathematician you must know how to write valid proofs. When you can do things like reverse integral signs etc etc is very important. Physicists often do it with gay abandon but mathematicians - well you can and do run into problems. There is a tricky, but very applicable and important theorem called the Erdos-Feller-Pollard theorem. It's well known as hard to prove. Well I decided to put that to the test and came up with a great proof - except it was wrong - it didn't include one of the conditions of the theorem people often forget - 'and is not supported by any proper additive subgroup of the integers' The reason - I reversed limits without showing in this case it was allowed - it wasn't. That condition is required to allow the exchange of limits and showing that is HARD.

Its my view and of course its highly debatable. Pragmatically if students complain too much they will change even if its a bad change. But what is necessary - now that's a big question isn't it? All very debatable.

Thanks
Bill

 

[bhobba]

The main thing was Professor Hattie sat in on classes and gave feedback to the teachers

I found the following that gives more information:
http://www.abc.net.au/tv/programs/revolution-school/Summary_Survey_And_Research.pdf

The interesting thing is the research shows what everyone thinks improves education like smaller class sizes, better facilities, and even homework have little to do with it.

What is important is:
'He has found that teaching which involves goal-oriented, specific feedback to students, and positive teacher-student interaction, have the most impact on learning growth.'

That is obviously much harder on teachers and they should be compensated for it. IMHO that is the key issue, but virtually nobody seems to want to address it. We now have the hard evidence from a few schools its true, but change is hard and it really seems to be going nowhere. For example the teacher union opposes it - understandably it makes teachers life harder - but if they get paid significantly more in compensation? We don't seem to have any debate about it - it all seems to revolve around smaller class sizes and better facilities. Some politicians support it but they get howled down. I even participated in an online discussion about it as result of a program out here called Q&A where different education views were discussed by a panel. One held my view - the rest towed the usual line of smaller class sizes etc. One HS principle even got up and said if she was given more money she could have smaller class sizes and got massive applause. I pointed out the above but was howled down - why shouldn't poor schools get things like rich schools have like swimming pools etc etc. It seemed mostly class based rot. I pointed out it really makes no difference - but I suspect other things were in play and I was howled down. Sad really.

Thanks
Bill

 

[Auto-Didact]

I have read the thread attentively (up to page 6 at least).
Before I make any specific point in the discussion, I will say I am a young adult who has been to public schools only in the inner city of a large city in western Europe. Public education at the primary and high school level here scores consistently in the top 10 of the world.

There have been some points, some data and a few personal anecdotes. It seems however that the discussion is diverging i.e. isn't converging and making obvious progress towards a possible solution (like many threads tend to do here on PF). The inputs, especially from teachers (whether specifically K12 or not) however is valuable.

I propose we add some structure to the following posts if we are ever to come to some form of convergence wherein priorly made relevant points are kept in consideration appropriately.

Here is a tentative attempt at some ordering, including a partial set of relevant factors:
1) Is the focus of the post directed on the national (Nat) or state (Stat) level?
2) Possible positive and negative factors: cultural(C)/state(S)/institution(I)/teacher(T)/kids(K)/parents(P)/group behavior(G)/subject(Σ)

interests(i)/attitude(a)/effort(e)/goals(g)/appreciation(a)/performance(p)/teaching(t)

eg. Nationally speaking, institutional interests tend to run counter to teachers goal, which may decrease the amount of effort a teacher is willing to put in
==
Nat, i_I ⊥ g_T ⇒ ∨[e_T]

Here's another: perhaps in general, students perform better on subjects presented in a manner aligned to their goals and interests
==
(i,g)_K || t_Σ(T,I) ⇒ ∧[p_K(Σ)]

Whether or not such an admittedly erudite symbolic way of stating premises is adopted, I believe the specific delimiting to certain things in 1) and 2) is helpful in better understanding many issues currently at hand. If it doesn't do anything else, this way of talking at least produces specific hypotheses in a succinct manner which can be grouped, further analysed and/or challenged with data.

 

[Aufbauwerk 2045]

There is at least a partial solution to K-12 teaching for math and science. We could develop better educational software in these areas.

I see so much potential in this area. Suppose someone has ideas for educational software and knows how to implement them in code. It would be valuable to test these ideas in the marketplace. Unfortunately, as long as there are software patents, it seems prudent to never release any software in any form, in this area or any other. The risks involved in publishing software are too great, even post-Alice. No matter how innovative you may be, there are almost certainly software patent land mines. See Richard Stallman's analysis of the problem.

If we want more progress in the use of computers in education, perhaps a good first step would be to petition the new administration to eliminate software patents. This would open the way for independent developers to experiment with various approaches, and get their ideas tested in the marketplace. This would be so much better than leaving everything up to the big corporations.

For some recent developments, see http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2016/12/these-three-2016-cases-gave-new-life-to-software-patents/.

 

[jambaugh]

I'm coming in very late to the discussion and this is a total tangent to current discussion but I'd answer the OP title saying: The US educational system teaches students how to take standardized tests.

Here "teaches" as in "promotes and focus the direction of learning towards". I would assert that any publicly funded system is going to end up teaching toward the tests, or as generally corrupt. The only way to avoid corruption for public funding is to implement objective standards which will then dictate the goals of the participants. This is because the politician is spending someone elses money. That's not just a question of the politician's right or authority but more importantly the disconnection between the continued success of the decision maker (his ability to generate more of that money to spend) and the decisions he makes.

In the private sector the objective standard is the market. The objective is then specific to the individuals financing the education (with their own money) but the long term majority of education will be motivated by long term productivity since that is the source of the means for obtaining private sector education.

The problem I have with objective standards (and thus public education) is that students are not objects. Objective standards are great for factories and water treatment plants but not for education or medicine. (Imagine a doctor forced to get the biometrics of each of his patients into the "normal" range as defined by a standardized test.)

Here we need a system defined more in the way of Whitehead's process terminology. You establish professional standards of competency and promote the self management of your peers. The community is self policing because their livelihood is keyed to their professional reputations both individually and in various levels of association (departments, schools, etc). And that reputation is as defined by the good will of what is ultimately the customers in the private sector setting, the students or their guardians and benefactors paying for the education.

(This is the opinion I've formulated based on my on short stint teaching in the public schools prior to my graduate studies and from my late mother's relating experiences she's observed in her career as a professor of education (with a PhD in Psychology) supervising student teachers in the public schools.)

 

[bhobba]

Here we need a system defined more in the way of Whitehead's process terminology. You establish professional standards of competency and promote the self management of your peers. The community is self policing because their livelihood is keyed to their professional reputations both individually and in various levels of association (departments, schools, etc). And that reputation is as defined by the good will of what is ultimately the customers in the private sector setting, the students or their guardians and benefactors paying for the education.

Its not just a problem in the US - its exactly the same here in Australia.

The research I posted supported exactly that - teachers need constant feedback from their peers. At schools that have tried it (not exactly the same - they have specific teaching positions devoted to giving that feedback plus of course other teachers do it as well) there were dramatic improvements.

One of the problems here is people believe things like class sizes, homework, facilities etc are the main issue. They aren't - their influence is minimal. I don't want to be too hard on these people because I at one time believed it before speaking to teachers and seeing the research.

For me that dispelled many myths. The one that was most surprising was everyone, including me at one time, thinks teachers have it easy - shorter working days, longer holidays etc etc. But actual teachers pointed out they are on a salary and those hours are just the beginning - they work many more than that - especially the conscientious ones. In fact that often led to burnout. That shocked me most of all. I worked as a programmer for many years. Many were ex-teachers escaping the pressure of teaching. I wouldn't have believed it until I heard their stories - some were horrid. One was a teacher who had to teach at a school where the typical aspiration of a female student was get pregnant as quick as possible then collecting a government handout as an unmarried mother. You need community engagement with all the teachers working together to fight that one - yet all you got was mostly apathy.

Thanks
Bill

 

[jambaugh]

Bill, I would disagree with you only on the cause of "burnout". I don't think it is the workload so much as the accompanied frustration load. Either alone is tolerable but together... >Zot!<.

As to the aspiring student just waiting to qualify for assistance, I can confirm such stories first hand. One of my *middle school* students was very pregnant for the first half of the year and dropped out once her checks started coming. But this is I believe an separate issue though related. A core ingredient in a successful education system must be the students and their parents, just as a doctor can do little with an uncooperative patient. The solution to that one I believe is simply to let the consequences fall squarely on the individual making the bad decisions (though they should be warned constantly up to the end).

Rather the focus should be on the education system designed so that if the students are suitably motivated and supported by family, an excellent education [results] as judged by them and their future self defined success as expressed by their willingness to financially support that same system with their own hard earned cash.

[Edit: that last wasn't quite a sentence.]

 

[bhobba]

Bill, I would disagree with you only on the cause of "burnout".

Yes - indeed. Many stories I heard were of utter frustration. The story I related was more in that category than burnout.

I often think you need separate schools for those in that getting pregnant type category - of course not just getting pregnant but attitudes, obviously cultivated by peers and family, that are counter productive to learning and life in general. There the teachers would be supplemented by social workers to somehow try and combat it. Would it work? Worth a try - but I really don't know.

Thanks
Bil

 

[symbolipoint]

Yes - indeed. Many stories I heard were of utter frustration. The story I related was more in that category than burnout.

I often think you need separate schools for those in that getting pregnant type category - of course not just getting pregnant but attitudes, obviously cultivated by peers and family, that are counter productive to learning and life in general. There the teachers would be supplemented by social workers to somehow try and combat it. Would it work? Worth a try - but I really don't know.

Thanks
Bil

Some such schools are established. The students mostly still do not want to be there. Many of the students are there due to dropping out because of academic trouble, legal trouble, and pregnancies. Counselors are sensitive to the students' needs but still a struggle. Many of these schools run Individualized Instruction "labs" and offer grade options of C,B,A, without F's - and satisfactory grades are only given if student completes a course ( and actually earned a minimum grade of C). Other students attend these schools in order to learn English As A Second Language, something which these schools mostly do very well.

 

[Mark44]

interests(i)/attitude(a)/effort(e)/goals(g)/appreciation(a)/performance(p)/teaching(t)

eg. Nationally speaking, institutional interests tend to run counter to teachers goal, which may decrease the amount of effort a teacher is willing to put in
==
Nat, i_I ⊥ g_T ⇒ ∨[e_T]

Here's another: perhaps in general, students perform better on subjects presented in a manner aligned to their goals and interests
==
(i,g)_K || t_Σ(T,I) ⇒ ∧[p_K(Σ)]

IMO, the sentences leading up to these collections of symbols are much clearer, and are, therefor to be preferred.

Whether or not such an admittedly erudite symbolic way of stating premises is adopted

"Erudite" is not the adjective I would use. "Obfuscating" might be a better choice.

, I believe the specific delimiting to certain things in 1) and 2) is helpful in better understanding many issues currently at hand. If it doesn't do anything else, this way of talking at least produces specific hypotheses in a succinct manner which can be grouped, further analysed and/or challenged with data.

 

[Andy Resnick]

I found the following that gives more information:
http://www.abc.net.au/tv/programs/revolution-school/Summary_Survey_And_Research.pdf<snip>

Thanks, but that doesn't contain any information about what actually changed at Kambrya College. I mean to say, I am skeptical that Prof. Hattie toured the classrooms, gave each teacher a single feedback session, and then all problems were fixed. Often, there are significant administrative reforms: elimination of tenure/seniority rules, for example. In order for any meaningful structural change to occur, there must be a self-perpetuating system (ongoing peer evaluations, for example) in place that reinforces the reforms over time- single evaluations are not effective.

One last point- charter schools generally have a much higher teacher turnover rate than district schools, although it's unclear what the effect on student education is.

I think we largely agree on what works in schools.

 

[Andy Resnick]

The US educational system teaches students how to take standardized tests. <snip>

Yes, but the prevalence of poor test scores (leading to state takeover) would indicate the system does this poorly as well :)

I agree that the current metastasis of standardized tests is unfortunate. 5 year old kids have no comprehension of "multiple choice tests", and so the teacher has to spend time explaining how to fill in ovals, only select one oval, etc. and it only gets worse as kids get older: multiple annual standardized tests with practice pre-tests and re-tests for each, meaning a significant fraction of class time is not spent learning but spent 'testing'. The introduction of high stakes testing has led to unethical behavior by teachers and administrators. I could write a long screed about the misguided rationale to develop quantitative metrics for education...

I would like to point out something your post alludes to "Imagine a doctor forced to get the biometrics of each of his patients into the "normal" range as defined by a standardized test.", because there are significant differences between student and patient.

In fact, I have an annual "wellness exam", and if my objective biometrics (blood pressure, BMI, cholesterol, triglycerides, blood glucose, etc) are in the normal range, then my health insurance premium is discounted- I have a significant financial incentive to maintain health. However, if my numbers are outside of the normal range, my doctor is not criticized, I am. My doctor is not penalized, I am. The doctor has no 'fiduciary duty' for my health.

That is the opposite case for education! When students have low test scores, the teachers and schools are criticized and penalized.

 

[Dr. Courtney]

In fact, I have an annual "wellness exam", and if my objective biometrics (blood pressure, BMI, cholesterol, triglycerides, blood glucose, etc) are in the normal range, then my health insurance premium is discounted- I have a significant financial incentive to maintain health. However, if my numbers are outside of the normal range, my doctor is not criticized, I am. My doctor is not penalized, I am. The doctor has no 'fiduciary duty' for my health.

That is the opposite case for education! When students have low test scores, the teachers and schools are criticized and penalized.

A doctor would and should be penalized if he said a patient was healthy when their biometrics were clearly in the unhealthy range.

This is the fraud perpetuated by many teachers today: they pass students when the available metrics of their learning do not demonstrate that they are healthy educationally. We should only penalize teachers for unhealthy metrics of students who they pass.

 

[Buzz Bloom]

What, to your knowledge or experience, do students graduating from the American educational system in general come away knowing best?

Hi @StatGuy2000:
I find this question very difficult to think about.

With different criteria about what the question means, I would answer differently. First, from my observations there is no American system. Different states, and in some states different communities, have different curricula and different top goals.

Second, what criteria is reasonable to use to measure how well the American student body as a whole has learned some subject matter. With respect to math and science, the international tests seem to be reasonably good, but what could be comparable to this with respect to other subjects?

Regards,
Buzz

 

[bhobba]

I agree that the current metastasis of standardized tests is unfortunate. 5 year old kids have no comprehension of "multiple choice tests", and so the teacher has to spend time explaining how to fill in ovals, only select one oval, etc. and it only gets worse as kids get older: multiple annual standardized tests with practice pre-tests and re-tests for each, meaning a significant fraction of class time is not spent learning but spent 'testing'. The introduction of high stakes testing has led to unethical behavior by teachers and administrators. I could write a long screed about the misguided rationale to develop quantitative metrics for education...

Out here its called Naplan testing.

The principle of the following school is on a crusade against it:
http://www.kimberleycollege.org/

My nieces attended there for a while and like Templestowe college I mentioned before is one of those schools on the right track.

Thanks
Bill

 

[John d Marano]

I would like to pose the opposite question: what does the American educational system (K-12) teach well? What, to your knowledge or experience, do students graduating from the American educational system in general come away knowing best?

I had some lousy teachers but many of the good ones taught me to question authority . . .

 

[ChrisVer]

but many of the good ones taught me to question authority . . .

that's not good... authority should not be questioned.

 

[phinds]

that's not good... authority should not be questioned.

I question that.

 

[ChrisVer]

I question that.

question the moderators then...

 

[teacherman]

Hi everyone! One of the things I read and hear about is how poorly the American educational system teach math or science (here I'm discussing about the K-12 system, not post-secondary education).

I would like to pose the opposite question: what does the American educational system (K-12) teach well? What, to your knowledge or experience, do students graduating from the American educational system in general come away knowing best?

Please note: Please keep this discussion about the American educational system as it is now. I do not want to read or hear about how great the schools were in the past -- no nostalgia allowed in this thread! (Nostalgia by its very nature is not an accurate reflection of "the past", whenever that past may be)

Not reading, Doc
At least 20% of all kids (and adults) are dyslexic and our system does not address their needs properly. Please look at this discussion on another Forum:
https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/evidence-of-print-inversion-in-dyslexic-readers-writers.906494/

Teacherman

 

[teacherman]

Football?

I think the question is miscast.

A system doesn't teach much.

Individual teachers teach. Some teach well. Some teach poorly.

The weakness in math and science is the lack of sufficient numbers of good math and science teachers.

If a student gets a few good teachers, supported by good parents, students of ample diligence will learn well. Students who do not learn will not pass.

By definition, a teacher who passes a student who is not proficient in the learning objectives is not a good teacher.

The system mostly teaches that students can get by without really learning much. It teaches students how to game the system, and it teaches those lessons really, really well.

Teachers are told what, when where and how to teach.
If it's not working look at the administration and the educrats at the top.
Teacherman