wring cited a Dept. of Education study showing that smaller class size has some value. This sort of research is OK, because it’s good for teachers; smaller classes make their jobs easier.
OTOH, in New York, teachers can get increased pay by taking certain additional courses. E.g., my cousin (a French teacher) got to a higher salary level by taking a vacation junket to tour Italy.
Do these courses actually make the teachers better able to instruct their students? If not, that money might be better spent somewhere else. But, it’s safer not to check. That sort of research could lead to taking away an excuse for a raise in teachers’ pay. The Department of Education certainly shouldn’t help students in any way that might harm the teachers. :rolleyes:
On reading december’s last post, it struck me that what we’ve got here is really a separate literary sub-genre with its own canonical form: the “anti-debate”, as it were.
*The Researchers are in cahoots with the NEA *
Belligerent title accusing “experts” and/or government organization of dishonesty and/or incompetence.
*wring cited a Dept. of Education study showing that smaller class size has some value. This sort of research is OK, because it’s good for teachers; smaller classes make their jobs easier. *
Reference to actual data serving merely as inspiration for unsupported assertion that an uncongenial research result or policy is being promoted for self-seeking motives.
*OTOH, in New York, teachers can get increased pay by taking certain additional courses. E.g., my cousin (a French teacher) got to a higher salary level by taking a vacation junket to tour Italy. *
Anecdote about the experience of an individual personally known to december that happens to support his own views.
*Do these courses actually make the teachers better able to instruct their students? If not, that money might be better spent somewhere else. But, it’s safer not to check. That sort of research could lead to taking away an excuse for a raise in teachers’ pay. The Department of Education certainly shouldn’t help students in any way that might harm the teachers. *
Concluding unsupported assertion that reiterates the original accusation, with a few additional sneers at the “experts” or government organization under discussion.
Usually, the “anti-debate” posts provoke a round of exasperated critiques pointing out the logical flaws in the “argument” before settling down to a discussion of the underlying issue that december “anti-debated.” It looks to me as though the issue in this case is the question of professional development for teachers. Does it improve their teaching? How should various professional development initiatives be evaluated? Does the Department of Education reflexively support teacher professional development initiatives, and resist stugying them more closely, because they provide enjoyable opportunities for teachers?
These are interesting questions, certainly deserving of something better than an “anti-debate.” I don’t know a lot about existing insights on professional development for teachers, but I did easily find a CPRE policy brief with a good overview of the issues and links to research. The subject appears to be a pretty complicated one, judging from remarks like the following:
And who are the people who published (and financed) this criticism of the current state of professional development for teachers? Yup, you guessed it, folks (at least, all of you but december guessed it): the U.S. Department of Education.
Red herring. This is an anecdote that provides nothing but a reason to express Limbaugh-like a “shock” at the terrible things going on.
You have provided a single case of one person “beating the system” with no evidence that the rules endorse those actions or whether some administrator-friend simply stamped an approval on the trip without justification. Have you reported this cousin to the appropriate oversight committee for a review of these actions? How do you know that “it’s safer not to check”?
Funny, I don’t recall any of your posts expressing shock and outrage when large agro-businesses misuse laws intended to protect family farms. Selective application of standards, perhaps?
Wow! Uncle december has invented the auntie debate. OK, I admit that I posted opinons without support.
Let’s analze that DOE quote:
Many others call for a reduction in the education courses required to teach in public school. These critics claim that the education courses are useless, and that they actually discourage bright people, with expertise in their fields, from teaching in public schools.
This is not a research study; it’s an excuse for not doing a study.
BTW why is this data lacking? Because,* the DOE hasn’t done studies of value of specific training.*, [sup]just as I said[/sup}
This is a criticism. Hallelujah! But, look what’s missing. [ul][li]There is no study proving the ineffectiveness of local district professional development. There is no discussion of the broader question of the entirety of teacher training.[/ul][/li]
I’m glad to see this ciritcism, Kimstu. However, it doesn’t contradict my statement a lack of research in this area.
<<tomndebb Funny, I don’t recall any of your posts expressing shock and outrage when large agro-businesses misuse laws intended to protect family farms. Selective application of standards, perhaps?>>
Look harder. I have posted my opposition to paying rich farmers in several threads. i am opposed to welfare for the rich, and farm payments are the most colstly example.
So? You presented an example of the potential abuse of a well-intended measure. I noted that I have not seen you complain of similar abuses in other areas. Most price-support rules are written specifically to benefit agri-businesses, which is not the same thing as an agri-business co-opting a rule written for a different purpose.
Basically, we have simply more opinion stuff being pumped out as “debate.” I suspect that most of your opponents would be more appreciative of your style if you posted in IMHO since most of your posts are simply opinion pieces (sometimes yours, sometimes borrowed).
So, tomndebb, you have made an unsubstantiated post about what I have written, and also complained that I make unsubstantiated posts.
Moving on, I now realize that I do not know what you are referring to in this
I agree with your first clause (and I disapprove of the practice.) Can you please expand on what the second clause? What sort of co-opting are you referring to?
The essential problem of DOE research is that it’s upside down, in the following sense. I’m you are manufacturing widgets, you wull hire me as a consultant only if you believe I can help you make better widgets or make them more economically.
However, the DOE is funded, whether or not local school systems want their help. Furthermore the DOE can use their power to induce school systems to use their pet projects. The DOE has the power, while the local school system has the responsibility. That is a recipe for backward progress.
I’m not hoist by anything until you provide evidence that you have ever actually protested the activity I noted instead of pretending you don’t understand what I meant.
As to the rest, it is simply more posturing. You recently claimed that you were (in your posts, in general) trying to make people on the other side get past their preconceived notions and think about the subjects more fully. However, your standard ploy is to make outrageous statements or sweeping generalizations supported by more opinion that invite rebuttal rather than discussion. Until such time as you provide actual discussion points with firm factual background, that allow for a nuanced discussion of your topics, I will have to conclude that you are simply using GD as a depository of all your IMHO thoughts. Even in topics where I can see actual points to be made on each side, your positions are generally so canted over to one side that no true discussion is possible.
Your choice, of course. (I suspect that it is deliberate, but it may not be.)
Sorry I’m late - I was doing some reports (I am a teacher!).
December, it’s fine to start a debate with some well-researched evidence (this does NOT include your typical offering of a right-wing anecdote e.g. ‘I went to London and someone told me Margaret Thatcher was popular’).
Alternatively you are welcome to throw out an idea ‘larger class sizes are better in my opinion because…’ and we can discuss it.
To show you how irritating your threads can be, I want to answer your original point about a home-schooled pupil doing well in a ‘geography memory’ competition somehow proving that amateur educators are more effective than professionals.
My school in the UK has a 220 seat theatre with professional sound and lighting equipment. Our School theatre company has toured several countries, including the US, and presented a play at the Edinburgh Festival.
My school in the UK has an Olympic-size swimming pool, 3 squash courts, 6 tennis courts, 10 soccer-size pitches, a shooting range plus a versatile sports hall. We are the current UK National Champions at rugby and have hosted professional cricket matches with a pitch rated in the top 10 by the English cricket authorities.
My school in the UK has 120 full-time staff and 80 part-time staff. We offer, for example, French, German, Spanish, Russian, Italian and Latin language teaching.
We offer both the English A level and the International Baccalaureate. 98% of our pupils go on to University.
We run a Chamber Orchestra, a Symphony Orchestra, a Big Band and a Jazz Band. We have a full-time Organ teacher with an pipe-organ that cost £250,000 (about $400,000).
We have a full-time chess teacher (me!) and are current National School Chess Champions. Garry Kasparov sends pupils to the School on Scholarships and has visited 3 times.
Perhaps you could name the family that could match that at home (particularly the team sport achievements).
Oh, I don’t think I’d make a general statement like that using only SAT scores to support it.
The curriculum my children have had in high school is FAR more demanding than I had in high school 35 years ago. They’re reading books that I wasn’t even exposed to until college. The topics they’re called on to write about are far more demanding than the ones I had to write about. They’ve had far more thorough foreign language classes than I had. Even the math courses are more challenging.
My College Board scores put me in the 98th percentile of all high school students that year. I firmly believe that, even though my duaghter’s College Boards were several deciles lower than mine, she’s far better educated than I was at her age.
Wow! I’ve been thinking about retiring and going back to school. Would your school accept a 59 year old American as a student?
Clearly a child in your school district who chose to be home-schooled would lose a lot. Question: is the UK also experiencing rapid growth in home schooling? In the US it’s growing at 15% a year, up to 790,000 home-schooled students in 1999. http://www.census.gov/population/www/documentation/twps0053.html#extent At that rate of growth, the number would be over 1 million by now. (Another source says at least 850,000 in 1999 and growing at 11%.)
Many schools in the US are well-funded (although few if any could match your school’s facilities.) So, why are home-schooled students out-performing public and private school students? Why are parents more and more choosing to educate their children at home, despite the commitment and sacrifices needed?
My answer would be that many of the teaching and leadership methods used in US public schools are not very effective. Parents thing they can do better, and, it turns out, they have done better.
This is a significant admission by you. My School is not ranked in the top 20 in the UK, yet it clearly offers more than any homeschooler anywhere in the world.
Now you have made that admission, I expect you to quote irrelevant information, and make unsupported allegations.
And there it is! irrelevant information
My School is better than any homeschooling, yet you try to suggest otherwise.
Next, if something is increasing, what are the reasons and therefore what does it prove?
Of course I don’t expect you to argue this properly…
…and you don’t.
In the richest nation on Earth, how can they be ‘well-funded’ if they can’t match a UK School which is not even in the top 20?
And there it is! unsupported allegations
My School, which is not in the UK top 20, produces better students than any home-based student anywhere.
A reasonable starting point. Unfortunately you have already quoted irrelevant information, and made unsupported allegations.
And there it is! unsupported allegations
And there it is! unsupported allegations
It’s very simple.
My School accepts students from abroad.
My School outdoes any possible homeschooler.
So my conclusion is : Every single homeschooler in the US is depriving their child of a decent education.
glee. we seem to be talking at cross puposes. Let me try to clarify:
This point is relevant to the the OP, although it may not be relevant to your post.
I didn’t mean to.
Because the amount of $ funding is large, by comparison to the past. Also, I would not be surprised if many US schools had better funding than yours, but worse facilities.
Actually there is a great deal of support earlier in this thread.
I have supported these allegations in other threads. I’m quite happy to do so here, if you’d like to pursue it. In fact, glee, it could be illuminating to compare US vs. UK educational methods. If you’re game, I’d be happy to start a thread on that topic.
Actually, glee, we don’t disagree that much. Your bold-faced statement ought to be true, but it isn’t. The OP asked,* Why not?*
December, here’s some unsolicited advice. Print out:
And tape it right across the top of your monitor. You are a smart man, but you are not an effective communicator: you have an incredible knack for phrasing things in such a way as to effectivly rule out any chance of a productive discussion.
My suggestion, which is appropo to this thread, is to start thinking of yourself not as an editorialist or an orator, but as a teacher. Teachers do not make sweepiung statement: they break things into small pieces. They explain every single step of their reasoning ,htey do not just hit the high points and assume that the reader can fill in the gaps. Remember that it is your job to make us believe you, not out job to figure out what you mean. You are the salesman of your idea, and there are plenty of competing businesses that want our reading time.
Furthermore, I think you will find it easier to be more productive if you tackle smaller subjects: I’ve noticed you (and everyone else) do much better on more limited topics. “Is class size important?” is a thread: “What’s wrong with education?” is a forum.
Lastly, you have a habit of using your best peice of evidence as your thesis when it should be your supporting evidence: here you have used “Homeschoolers do better than public school students” as your thesis. It’s a bad theisi–there is no arguement there. I think your real thesis is “Education sucks”. Home schoolers doing better than public schoolers is evidence of this (if you can prove it is true.)
I don’t mean to get on your case: I, myself, just can’t help by anaylize other’s writing, and I think this will help.
No, you keep quoting irrelevant information, and making unsupported allegations.
So what if homeschooling is on the increase?
** My School, not ranked in the top 20 in the UK, offers a vastly better education than any homeschooler.**
This statement is backed up by facts (conspicuously lacking in your posts) and refutes your claim that ‘amateur educators are more effective than professionals’.
I’m sorry, did I miss a cite? :rolleyes:
Is this what you call contributing to a debate?
Oh yes we do.
Well let’s see.
I previously quoted an impressive range of facilities available at my School (staffed by professional educators).
You admitted “Clearly a child in your school district who chose to be home-schooled would lose a lot.”
Are you saying there is a homeschooled pupil in the US who gets comparable treatment?
Perhaps I should elaborate some more.
Here are some School trips we offered last year:
Physics - visit to particle accelerator, Switzerland
Biology - visit to South America to study rain forest
Girls soccer - tour of Italy, including watching Inter Milan
Boys rugby/ girls hockey - tour of South Africa, Australia, New Zealand and Fiji
Do please explain how winning a competition to memorise some geography facts is a superior education to the above.
Feel free to quote the US family that provides a better education.
First of all, I’m talking about the US. It may well be that UK schools are superior to ours. However, in the US, earlier cites show that:
– Home schooled students are doing very well, academically
– More and more parents are choosing to home school, so they evidently believe that home schooling is better for their kids.
I am saying that there are around one million home schooled children in the US whose parents believe that they are getting better treatment than at public schools.
First of all, earlier cites showed home-schooled American children doing very well by a variety of measures. If you go back and read those posts, you’ll see that there are questions about cause and effect, but there is no doubt that the home-schoolers are doing well academically.
Secondly, actions speak louder than words. Parents have chosen to go to the trouble of teaching their kids at home, so they must have concluded that home schooling provides a better education for their kids. They ought to know.
glee, none of my statements apply to the UK. I do not mean to criticize anything at all about your school or your education system.
december: *Parents have chosen to go to the trouble of teaching their kids at home, so they must have concluded that home schooling provides a better education for their kids. They ought to know. *
Remember the point I made earlier, though, to the effect that in cases where homeschooling is not successful, the parents discontinue it. Therefore we would naturally expect that most of the kids who continue to be homeschooled are ones for which homeschooling works well; in other words, there’s a self-selection process going on that improves the apparent success rate of homeschooling. This is one of the reasons that private schools also often outperform public ones: if you have the option of getting rid of the kids for whom your educational system isn’t working, you’re left with just the kids for whom your system is working, which makes your system look good.
Check out homeschooling newsletters and discussion groups, and you’ll see lots of comments from parents about how they’re going to stop homeschooling when the kid gets to middle school because they can’t handle the curriculum, or they homeschooled their daughter very successfully but it didn’t work for their son so he attended the local school instead, and many other such instances of self-selection. Since most actual parents who experiment with homeschooling seem to be reasonable people who just want the best possible education for their kids, rather than ideologues with an anti-ED axe to grind, they are generally quite candid about admitting that sometimes homeschooling works and sometimes it doesn’t.
I didn’t mean to.