Re: In the News: Science, faith clash in class

Robert Grumbine wrote:
> In article <1134576418.562127.96360@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
> A. Grace Haliburton <kaosgrace@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> >Robert Grumbine wrote:
> >> In article <1133117495.144979.308790@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
> >> <gesres@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >> ><<The unpreparedness of U.S. elementary school teachers in the public
> >> >schools in their subject matter fields is well documented. Those who
> >> >can, do. Those who can't teach.>>
> >> >
> >> >Even if the teachers were better prepared, do you think it would really
> >> >matter if the current environment in the schools didn't support or
> >> >encourage higher achievement in this area?
> >> >
> >> >I read a book a while back by a 30-year public school teacher who said
> >> >that his efforts to instill a strong, fundamental understanding of
> >> >mathematics in his students was frustrated to a degree by the school
> >> >administration who were displeased by the slow progress of his classes
> >> >to march through the syllabus.
> >>
> >> I was just thinking this morning that one of our enemies in getting
> >> math and science taught well is the desire from parents and school
> >> boards to have a checklist of facts 'taught'.
> >
> >Parents and schoolboards? Most of them don't even know what they want
> >taught. They just want their kids to do well in some "objectively
> >measureable" way, such as standardized tests.
>
> And why the pretense of 'objectively measurable'? Dunno, as you
> know, I was more concerned with my kid learning stuff, than about
> the 'objective' scores.
>

That's because you knew the "stuff" your kid ought to be learning. As
you know very well, you are an exception. Most people, even if they do
in fact know something about the subjects their high-schooler is
studying, don't always know enough about the big picture to decide
what's most important to know. Most parents don't know every subject in
enough depth to determine whether a given curriculum is appropriate.
Most parents need something simple to help determine how their kids are
doing and whether their schools are doing a good job.

And as far as not being concerned about your kid's objective scores:
it's easy to say that when you hardly ever had a reason to worry about
them.

> >One effective way to get
> >your student population to do well (on average) on cheap
> >state-administered standardized tests is to have them memorize a list
> >of facts. The list of facts is generated by the people who writhe the
> >test. There's no telling where they get it from. But you're not getting
> >anywhere by blaming parents and schoolboards; most of them had
> >essentially the same education their kids are getting, which means
> >they've probably forgotten all the lists by now.
>
> Yet another reason I dislike the lists.

Kind of my point.

> The responsibility is somewhere. Teachers are constrained by
> school boards and parents. If the latter two decide that expert
> opinion doesn't matter, then teachers _must_ teach to the test.
> If school boards and/or parents respected expertise, then experts
> could write the curricula. Dover, Kansas, et al., demonstrate
> otherwise.

We agree the responsibility for the current flawed system is somewhere.
We even more or less agree on where. I'm reluctant to blame parents,
myself, because I know most of them are doing the best they know how.
And it's hard to blame schoolboards, given that they're mostly
political organizations, and local ones at that; it's hard to be
professional and political at the same time, especially when you're not
an expert in the field you're trying to be professional about. It's
much easier to just go along with whatever the nicest-sounding "expert"
says, or whatever you think will make your constituents happy.

But it is pretty clear that the responsibility for the current
situation lies with those two groups. What is not clear is your plan
for fixing it through those groups. And if you don't have a plan to
help them fix it, what's the good of pointing out that it's their
fault?

> Doing unto your kids the mistakes that were done unto you is
> not good parenting, nor school boarding.

Granted. But if you don't know any better way, what are you supposed to
do? These parents and schoolboards you speak of...do you really think
they're actually out to deliberately miseducate their own kids? Do you
think they want them to do badly?

> >> I don't see any good solution. It's true that after learning math
> >> and science, one does know a fair list of facts. The thing is, this
> >> is byproduct, not goal. The problem is that the byproduct is much
> >> more readily measured than the goal, and is readily achieved without
> >> advancing to the goal (memorization of the checklist).
> >
> >A partial solution would be convincing someone to fund the development
> >of national standard AP-style curricula and tests at lower grade
> >levels. APs have a well-deserved reputation for requiring actual
> >comprehension and general subject knowledge - so much so that virtually
> >every university will accept at least some of the tests as equivalent
> >to its own introductory courses. There is no reason a similar tactic
> >could not be applied to at least a few courses throughout every
> >student's education. At least then you'd be teaching to a *good* test.
>
> Better. Still have my questions about good.
>
> But this is back, as you note below with your MSPAP illustration,
> to whether the desire is a _good_ test. The desire is mainly
> for a _cheap_ test. One way of driving down the cost of the test is
> to grade many of them very fast -- essays 'read' at 2000 wpm, but
> mostly machine-scored multiple guess.

Point taken.

> Cheap, 'objective', tests are list-oriented tests, unavoidably.
> 'We want education, but we want it cheap.'

No...look at how much money we spend on education. It's ridiculous. We
want education, we're willing to pay top dollar for it - but only if
that money buys us pretty shiny computers, new gyms, ergonomic
classrooms, glib administrative staff with silver tongues and
expensive-sounding PhDs, "multicultural" programs, or anything else
that sounds modern and progressive. But we're not willing to pay any
more than we absolutely must for those less-shiny improvements: no
money for improved testing, none for teachers to buy classroom
supplies, none for high-quality textbooks unless they're shiny,
colourful and "multicultural." We won't pay to increase teacher
salaries to levels commensurate with other college-educated
professionals. We won't pay for better screening in the hiring process.
We won't pay extra for people who really truly know their subject. We
won't pay to improve music, drama, art or science facilities unless our
programs are good enough to catch the public eye. We also won't pay to
repair and rebuild schools in poor areas with low voter turnout and low
tax revenue. It's truly shameful.

And the reason for all this? Because our schools are controlled by
elected politicians. Their job is to please their constituents.
Constituents are easily pleased by good test scores (no matter what the
test) and pretty pictures of new gyms.

> >One must be careful, though. The virtue of APs (and other good tests)
> >is not the mere existence of an essay/free-response section. It's in
> >*how that section is graded.* I failed the Maryland Functional Writing
> >Test (for the third time) in the same year I got 5s on the AP
> >Literature, Language, and Latin Prose exams. I finally discovered the
> >problem the following year, thanks to my sympathetic English teacher: I
> >was writing sentences of more than one clause. When I broke down and
> >stuck with "This book is good. I like it very much. I read it last
> >month. It was long. The main character was John. John was nice..."
> >miraculously, I passed! Therein lies the problem of grading essays by
> >formula and checklist.
>
> Not so much formula and checklist, but high-speed scanning of
> the writing (followed by formula and checklist). But grading
> 300 essays per hour is much cheaper than grading 10 per hour.
> One of my HS teachers was a grader for the 'achievement' tests
> (still from ETS -- between AP and SAT in nature). The high speed
> was one of the things that they were ordered into.

Like the SAT IIs? I took some of those. There's really no comparison
between that and APs; the essay questions on SAT IIs, like on the new
SAT Writing test and the state functional tests, are designed
specifically to be speed-graded. AP tests ask genuinely in-depth,
open-ended questions. For instance, one of my questions on my AP
Literature exam asked me to compare or contrast Pride and Prejudice
with David Copperfield: what points were the authors of both books
making about 19th century British culture, and why were they similar or
different? (can't remember the exact wording but it was something along
those lines) That's not an essay that lends itself to being
speed-graded.

In contrast, my SAT II Writing essay question was of the "Read this
short, boring passage and answer these questions about it" sort. That
kind of essay is not only speed-graded by formula, it's actually
written by formula. A computer could do it.

And all APs have free-response sections - it's not just essays. AP Chem
asks you to come up with an experiment to test some hypothesis (among
other things - it's got plenty of the easily-graded equation-balancing,
calorimetry and other such simple problems). AP Physics and Calculus
have you solve some really disgustingly messy problems of the sort one
sees on college finals in the same courses. AP Latin has a translation
section and a literary analysis section. AP Music Theory requires a
portfolio including a short original composition. AP Spanish has you
critique Spanish poetry - in Spanish. AP Computer Science asks you to
write a program in C++ (on paper). AP US History was the only one I
wasn't impressed with; all the essays were on the same topics one
studies at great and tedious length every year for the entire span of
one's American public education, such as the socioeconomic causes of
the Revolution. But that's one of those problems with recent history:
all the interesting questions have already been overanalyzed.

Anyway, there's a way to test understanding of any academic subject.
Much as I love multiple-guess (my specialty), it is far outshined by
properly written and graded free-response.

<snip>

-Grace

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Outsourcing in reverse
    ... Parents send undisciplined children to school for teachers to ... Parental non-involvement with their kids, and the school. ... at those pay rates. ... any support but that on the free market. ...
    (misc.news.internet.discuss)
  • Re: On the issue of scholarships: question to Dan Christensen
    ... Parents get lower pay as a result of these benefits you said. ... Give us even one example of a Cuban child that could not attend school ... Students in Cuba can't freely choose the further education they want. ...
    (soc.culture.cuba)
  • Re: Building wealth
    ... Make them earn the money for the new skate ... to work to pay it off. ... What if your parents had matched your ... school money? ...
    (rec.gambling.poker)
  • Re: OT OT OT -- Oh My Gawd!!!!!
    ... If the parents don't have the money then maybe the ... state can pay for it. ... the troubled child is in. ... school is capable of. ...
    (alt.support.diabetes)
  • OT humor
    ... the psychic devastation that claimed her son. ... had dropped out of graduate school, ... one whose parents were woefully unequipped to recognize it. ... "We try hard to engage all of our students in fun, ...
    (misc.survivalism)