If Fenty Loses ...

[Anonymous]

Ok- have any of you sat throught these tests in kindergarten? They are not these horrible pencil paper tests. They are a breakdown of skills needed for basic numeracy and reading administered mostly verbally. While a lot of teachers in DC object to them, not so many do nationaly. The real question comes up in understanding what the data is telling you in DC because too often DCPS has not done a good job helping teachers use the data.

My son's preschool every 3 months figures out how many letters he has aquired, how high he can count, and how high he can identify his numbers are they testing him to boredom? No, he loves school asked to go back the whole week after it ended. Not all tests are the same.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Don't care about curriculum

That's why so many of your children are bored to death in DCPS.

Sure, they'd be much more excited when you hand out a reading assignment from Baudelaire to a bunch of 3rd graders who can't puzzle out "cat", "hat", or "bat". You have to teach a child to walk before you can teach a man to fish.

[Anonymous]

While a lot of teachers in DC object to them, not so many do nationaly.

Trying to think of what the main difference is between DCPS and public schools nationally. Hmm. Oh, right: DC public schools are a criminal disgrace...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Sure, they'd be much more excited when you hand out a reading assignment from Baudelaire to a bunch of 3rd graders who can't puzzle out "cat", "hat", or "bat". You have to teach a child to walk before you can teach a man to fish.

This is the old "learning to read, reading to learn" saw that says you can only teach skills and not content in the early grades. Do you have any research or experience to back this up?

[Anonymous]

I'll try to put this as simply as possible. At the end of the day, you can teach skills, or you can teach skills *and* content. But the non-negotiable part is the skill. Currently DCPS--and this isn't open to question--IS NOT SUCCESSFULLY TEACHING EITHER SKILLS OR CONTENT.

This isn't just scholasticism. We're not arguing about how many angels can dance on the head of a pin. Whether something is theoretically possible or not. Once DCPS educators can actually start succeeding in teaching half of their charges to read, *then* they get to share all their nuanced insight into advanced pedagogical methods.

Back in the days when medical interventions by doctors produced exactly the same outcomes as no intervention at all, doctors were rightly held in some skepticism. That's currently where public school teachers are right now.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'll try to put this as simply as possible. At the end of the day, you can teach skills, or you can teach skills *and* content. But the non-negotiable part is the skill. Currently DCPS--and this isn't open to question--IS NOT SUCCESSFULLY TEACHING EITHER SKILLS OR CONTENT.

This isn't just scholasticism. We're not arguing about how many angels can dance on the head of a pin. Whether something is theoretically possible or not. Once DCPS educators can actually start succeeding in teaching half of their charges to read, *then* they get to share all their nuanced insight into advanced pedagogical methods.

Back in the days when medical interventions by doctors produced exactly the same outcomes as no intervention at all, doctors were rightly held in some skepticism. That's currently where public school teachers are right now.

And what, may I ask, are you? A doctor?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'll try to put this as simply as possible. At the end of the day, you can teach skills, or you can teach skills *and* content. But the non-negotiable part is the skill. Currently DCPS--and this isn't open to question--IS NOT SUCCESSFULLY TEACHING EITHER SKILLS OR CONTENT.

agreed

[Anonymous]

16:24 I agree content matters and we need to get smarter about that role in the curriculum. As I understand it that was one of the benefits of Janey's reforms and ultimately of common core standards, but I have to agree without the skills it is pretty hard to get to the content part. In DC you too often have a situation where our teachers think so much about the test that they don't think content. However that does not mean they are mutually exclusive it means you get smarter about the curriculum. You can do history while you are doing literacy they are not exclusive, but they require you to think outside the box.

[Anonymous]

Children do not come into our schools without content knowledge or vocabulary. However, some children come to our schools with a lot less vocabulary and background knowledge than others.

Here's the research on the word gap

http://www.ipoddess.com/iPoddess/Resources/Entries/2008/10/23_The_Very_Best_of_iPod_and_Podcasting_files/30MillionWordGap-by-age3.pdf

In fact, reading, or the ability to understand written text, is very much influenced by a child's spoken language. Here's a nice video on the relationship between content knowledge and reading.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RiP-ijdxqEc

[Anonymous]

I frequently read this blog and realize that DC is exactly how I describe it to people in NYC...extremely segregated not by race but by SES. To the point about the parents' level of education will determine the childs....I would have to disagree. My friends and I grew up in neighborhoods similar to those in Ward 7 and 8 with parents who may or may not have earned a high school diploma. Guess what? We all have 3 or more higher education degrees. So I just want to make it clear that research ALSO shows that parents from lower SES want their children to achieve more than they were able accomplish, but lack some of the skills necessary to effectively advocate.

[Anonymous]

I totally agree with 22:20 the main difference for a lot of kids of poorer parents is not the ambition, but the skills and time to intervene with administrators. I am the second generation of college grad in my family, all six of my siblings have college degrees. However as parents we are much more involved in my advocating for our kids. I don't think it is just more helicopter parenting, but also that we know more than our parents, but we are no less or more desirous of educationtal opportunity than our parents.

[Anonymous]

The benefits of bringing middle class parents into the system are huge. Here's just one minor example:

http://bit.ly/919sRg?r=td

This is why its so toxic for certain cynical local pols--and short-sighted for poorer parents in DCPS (and in DC in general)--to complain about how "everything is done for the rich, and "some" (e.g. the poor) are being left behind. It's often been perverted by right-wing agenda, but there's a lot of truth to the cliche "a rising tide lifts all boats", at least on the local level.

[Anonymous]

I'm a solidly middle class parent. My child attends a Title I school. I see the disparity in both the budget and the attention from the main office between my child's school and the more affluent schools in the District.

Am I allowed to point out these disparities, often to the tune of $1000 per child in terms of the overall school budget? Is this the trickle-down theory of urban school reform? Judging from what 8:22 says, if I point out inequities, I'm being "toxic."

[Anonymous]

My child attends a Title I school. I see the disparity in both the budget and the attention from the main office between my child's school and the more affluent schools in the District.

As someone pointed out earlier, almost all of these budget disparities are explained by choices made *by* the schools. There's a certain type of person who *always* feels resentment that someone else might be getting something more than them.

This phenomenon completely explains the Tea Party phenomenon.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm a solidly middle class parent. My child attends a Title I school. I see the disparity in both the budget and the attention from the main office between my child's school and the more affluent schools in the District.

Am I allowed to point out these disparities, often to the tune of $1000 per child in terms of the overall school budget? Is this the trickle-down theory of urban school reform? Judging from what 8:22 says, if I point out inequities, I'm being "toxic."

This is Rhee's doing. She ended weighted student formula for funding.