The Current State of the American Education System.

[Easy Bakes 253]

Not that i know a  lot about it 

But an interesting article caught my eye in the Dallas Paper today.

Dallas teacher representatives asked trustees Thursday to reconsider a policy that prevents teachers from giving students who are failing any grade lower than a 50.

Also Online

Dallas ISD blog: Join the discussion

"With all the talk about increasing academic rigor, [the policy] is hypocritical," said Aimee Bolender, president of the teacher group AFT-Alliance. "Teachers need to be able to give the grades kids earn."

Currently, students can receive a grade no lower than 50 for any marking period, even if they do no work. District officials said that's a long-standing policy meant to give students who bomb their work early in the semester a chance to earn a passing grade if they clean up their acts.

If students received a grade of zero for the first six-week grading period, for example, they would be unable to pass the class even if they produced near-perfect work in the rest of the course. Administrators fear kids would realize that and give up entirely.

"The only reason this policy exists is to give kids a chance to recover from a short-term failure," district curriculum chief Denise Collier said. "A student who gets a zero or a 20 has absolutely no hope of passing."

Superintendent Michael Hinojosa agreed.

Even when students receive 50s, "they still have to work double-time to pass," he said. "Are we interested in seeing kids fail or seeing them be successful?"

Dr. Collier said she has found that the 50-grade policy is common around Texas.

But teacher groups see a double standard. At a time when the district will begin paying bonuses to teachers based on student achievement, the policy requires that students be given points for doing inadequate work.

"To assign actual grades earned by students, instead of grades of not less than 50 percent, is a vital part of raising the achievement bar," Alliance-AFT vice president Maureen Peters said. "An education is not something a child is given. An education is something the child must work for and earn."

Trustees were split on whether they support the policy.

Lew Blackburn said the policy tells kids "you can come and do nothing and still get half your pay. ... A student who does nothing should get nothing."

Jerome Garza said he thought kids should get the grades they deserve. Trustee Leigh Ann Ellis said the policy sends a mixed message at a time the district is trying to ratchet up standards.

Trustee Edwin Flores said kids deserve a second chance. Part of learning, he said, is rebounding from failure.

Board president Jack Lowe said he supported the minimum grade of 50 because, ultimately, the most important thing is whether students learned the material, not what their grade was in the first six weeks of class.

Trustee Nancy Bingham, a former teacher in Mesquite whose district had the same policy, said she doesn't want teachers to be able to give grades lower than 50.

"You fail with a 50 just as much as with a 25," Mrs. Bingham said.

The requirement is part of a larger policy about student grading that is under review, along with many other policies. Trustees will be asked to vote this month on proposed revisions that don't affect the 50-grade requirement. Teachers asked the board at a mee

[coolotter88 2]

we did have an E grade, which means failing with effort, but they defenestrated it this year. it was supposed to help failing students who tried their best.

(then again, you ARE looking at an article about Texans )

[krbe 193]

Percentages as grades? Nice on multiple choices, but what about essays and such? How do you measure an essay by percentages?

When I went to secondary/upper secondary (high school), a grde was a grade, and your final score was calculated from all of them (not mathematically, even tough we use numbers) were some grades were weighted higher, usually later in the course (as you were supposed to learn something!). I got a 2, meaning about 50-70% in my first law test in upper secondary 2^nd year, but still managed a 5 (ca. 85-95%) as my end score both on exam and final year.

[patriots_1228 51]

Our teachers in public schools are way too lienent. Anything below 50 automatically gets bumped up to a 59 or whatever an F is. They let way too many people get extra credit or retake tests.

[Psycho_Teddy 25]

Haha, nice copycat thread

Oh well, good idea, I wish I'd thought of this thread myself...

ANYWAYS, Springfield, OH (my hometown) has some of the worst public education in the state of Ohio. Standardized testing results recently revealed that a mere 43.2% of our students in a city of 120,000 people were proficient in all five testing areas. This is an absolute disgrace to our state and there is almost nothing being done to remedy the problem. The state comes in and cuts funding for sports and extracurricular activities (because they think that these things lower grades) and cut teacher's pay as punishment. Many parents are now (well, the ones with some common sense) are sending their kids to private schools, like mine did. You wouldn't believe how much of a difference it makes. When we transferred from public to private, my sister and I were considered TWO YEARS behind their curriculum.

[outriderdriver 4]

I had a great idea come to me one day when I thought of what I would do if I won 300 Million dollars or more.

I would take the money and go out and buy as many football teams as I could afford. I would then start to sell all of the overpaid and oversexed players off to other teams and eventually be left with nothing but a lump of cash that I would then toss into the school system. (sorry Patriots)

This probably would not work out as planned if action was taken like this and might cause more problems. But I really dont see why sports are more important than education.

[Duke87 1,070]

It's little secret that public schools tend to suck unless you've got a town full of rich people. Because budget skimping cuts things out, and a lot of things get caught up in politics and bureaucracy. In my town (Stamford, CT), the northern part of town is mostly white middle class families while all the working class minority families live further south. The result of this is that in order to keep the demographics of the schools close to the town demographics things are districted such that kids from opposite corners of the town are going to the same school- because if things were districted in a strictly geographic manner we'd have one high school full of white kids and another full of minority kids- and that doesn't look good. So all those school buses are burning extra gas to take kids further away from home so we can shuffle the races and intelligences about. The schools are overcrowded but no money is being spared to build any new ones since there's too much money going into pork jobs for people in the good ol' boy network.

On the other hand, the private schools are doing just fine.

[saltandsauce 0]

well im not an expert on education in the US but as far as i know the funding is justwrong

in several places in florida the roads budget exceeds or approaches the educational budget

and in new york city parking fines fund the schools

again im no expert on the USA teaching methods and i don't quite know if the latter statement was true nut i know about the florida statement

[belfastuniguy 18]

Well of course private schools are doing fine Duke.......

I'm not an expert on American education. I do know that in general it is crap.

Unless...as duke stated

The local school is located in a wealthy middle class town or suburb where local tax revenue is high and more money can be spent. While in poorer areas the schools are horrendous giving poor education from stressed and over-worked teaching staff and good many of them I think I'd be fair in saying no longer care or have a lack of interest as they get no job satisfaction whatsoever.

This in turn just deepens the socio-economic divide in American society and only entrenches the view that education is not important and a waste of time, this can also be applied to comprehensive schools in England (I have not used UK, I will explain why later). Like some American towns, good schools in England tend to be surrounded by middle-class families and relative wealth.

I'll explain a little of how we do things in Northern Ireland. In NI we use selection at 11, this is however to be phased out, but we are fighting to maintain our grammar schools right to select based on academic ability.

Now some will see this as cruel and unfair. However.......I went to one of the best grammar schools in the UK, while I come from a privileged background, I had many many friends at school that did not, but their natural academic ability allowed them to pass the national selection test (11+) and were able to go to grammar schools and now many are in universities such as Cambridge, Oxford, St. Andrews and so on.

If they had lived in the United States of England they would have had to attend the local school which would not have been able to cater for their abilities and allow them to flourish and develop. This is the reason why we have it. I have no shame in stating that Northern Ireland has the highest academic standards and results in the UK and some of the best in Europe, we have a world class education system. This also applies to our secondary schools (high school 11-16/18 years old) which also have higher standards than UK comprehensives, This is due to the fact they cater to the students that attend them, they tend to focus on more vocational subjects as well as academic.

This does not happen in the US where the best schools seem to be reserved to the private sector and rich towns, and even within those towns the poorer parts have worse schools, the reality is also that a lot of the worst schools are in ethnic areas where they have a large black, Hispanic or foreign populations. The best schools also of course cream off the best teachers, facilities and would have greater access to good universities and employers.

From what I know, there is not much that can be changed to solve this bar tremendous educational reform, which I don't think would work and could prove disastrous if not carried out correctly.

[panthersimcity4 162]

The only thing I can think of that I hate about our schools is that they're too big. I have 2,500 peeps at my school, which I guess isn't alot for some, but it is for me... How many people can possibly live in a freakin suburb?!

[Meg 368]

Originally posted by: belfastuniguy

I'll explain a little of how we do things in Northern Ireland. In NI we use selection at 11, this is however to be phased out, but we are fighting to maintain our grammar schools right to select based on academic ability.

Now some will see this as cruel and unfair. However.......I went to one of the best grammar schools in the UK, while I come from a privileged background, I had many many friends at school that did not, but their natural academic ability allowed them to pass the national selection test (11+) and were able to go to grammar schools and now many are in universities such as Cambridge, Oxford, St. Andrews and so on. quote>

Northern Ireland still uses the 11+ exam?  When I was in England visiting friends, the subject of the 11+ exam came up.   The way it was explained to me was three of my friends had taken it. 

One of them failed it.   He felt very cheated that he was relegated to second class schools from that point on.  

One of them passed it but "wasn't supposed to have" passed it.   She was soon nudged back into the schools where she "belonged". 

The third one passed and was apparently supposed to and had an experience similar to what you described. 

The fourth said he was in Ireland when he was 11 so he didn't have to take it.

When I asked the one why she wasn't supposed to have passed this test, she replied that her father's job wasn't good enough, which left me going 

The one who failed thought he was capable of doing more than the test claimed he could; that he was just a bit rowdy as a lad and didn't take the test as seriously as he might have.  He believes his life was sent in the wrong direction from that point forward because of the stigma of failing this test.  (He is currently a forensic detective; it's not like he is a bum.)

I found the whole thing rather puzzling.  

They told me it wasn't given anymore, which sounded like a good thing to me.

[belfastuniguy 18]

The test isn't compulsory. The test is not happening this year, it has been phased out. No-one want to keep it, but we do want to allow our grammar schools to maintain academic selection as it works here.

There is a cultural difference here, many in primary school take the test seriously as they want to get to the grammar schools or good secondary schools. In some working class areas as in all part of the world, with some families education is not seen as important. Though I did have a friend that came from that background and is now doing law at Cambridge, his family did change their views once they saw that our school was doing him good.

Those that 'fail' go to secondary school. Now although this doesn't sound good, our secondary schools are very good so they do get a very good education, though they do have more 'skill' based education and vocational courses that do suit the students more. If students do well academically in secondary school then they are able to follow a more academic route to prepare them for university by staying at the school or transferring to a Grammar school to take their AS and A-Levels. Many do this as grammar schools really are the best places to prepare for university. Although I do also have friends that went to secondary and go to great universities also.

[Meg 368]

I hear ya.  But some people over there who are my age who don't like that system at all.  The one quite resents being relegated to "secondary" school based on something that happened when he was 11.

[Frankie_Grove 32]

Before the bashing of the US Education system starts, remember that the US has no national curriculum. (The last thing we need is the national government controlling what we learn..) That being said, you cannot compare the US as a whole to other nations that have national curriculums. Each and every state is different. different laws, different tests, etc. Example, SC has the "worst" system in the country statistically, yet we have the highest standards, and more high school graduates in SC attend some form of further education than in any other state. Mississippi is another example, statistically bad schools, yet the standards are higher than just about any another state in the country.

Easy Bakes: In most schools here, no matter what, the lowest grade, per semester, you can make is a 62. A 62 is failing WITH credit. So no matter what you don't repeat a class....However, you can make anything the first quarter, but your final grade cannot be lower than 62. (on block schedule)

[belfastuniguy 18]

Wowwww did not know that America does not have a National Curriculum....

Maybe that actually would not be that bad....having countless different systems, testing, standards and basic learning achievements sounds very very messy to me and bound to cause inequality and problems.

Of course the UK has one, but each region (England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland) all have some freedom to select what they can teach. We do have the same testing procedures (apart from Scotland) which does make things easier.

[BurroDiablo 222]

Scottish system ommits virtually all English history from the cirriculum... its quite sad, considering we did topics on segregation in America and the Russian Revolution. Just sounds to me like the authority who outlines the Cirriculum was looking for any other history that isn't English, that wasn't World War 2 or the Welfare state (wich was still kinda WW2, lol)

[Psycho_Teddy 25]

Once again I'm hearing people on the slippery slope of fear (of socialism).  Nationalized curriculums would actually work here, and I don't see what the big deal is... While we're at it, let's allow the federal government to control funding, that way, plans like "no child left behind" would be much easier to restructure and modify to allow them to actually take effect.  The government already controls what you learn, you just don't realize it.

[Easy Bakes 253]

Originally posted by: Frankie_Grove

Easy Bakes: In most schools here, no matter what, the lowest grade, per semester, you can make is a 62. A 62 is failing WITH credit. So no matter what you don't repeat a class....However, you can make anything the first quarter, but your final grade cannot be lower than 62. (on block schedule)quote>

 

So thier passing them along no mater what? thats even worse then 50, cause they get passed on to harder classes  the next grade and couldnt pass the eaiser ones.

Sounds like a very fast downward spiral for those kids.

[BurroDiablo 222]

Originally posted by: Psycho_Teddy Once again I'm hearing people on the slippery slope of fear (of socialism).  Nationalized curriculums quote>

That made me laugh... how deep does this US socialist paranoia go?! I've never once associated the National cirriculum with socialism...

[Psycho_Teddy 25]

Originally posted by: El Burro

Originally posted by: Psycho_Teddy Once again I'm hearing people on the slippery slope of fear (of socialism).  Nationalized curriculums quote>

That made me laugh... how deep does this US socialist paranoia go?! I've never once associated the National cirriculum with socialism...quote>

You would be very surprised, my friend...

[Frankie_Grove 32]

Originally posted by: Easy Bakes

Originally posted by: Frankie_Grove

Easy Bakes: In most schools here, no matter what, the lowest grade, per semester, you can make is a 62. A 62 is failing WITH credit. So no matter what you don't repeat a class....However, you can make anything the first quarter, but your final grade cannot be lower than 62. (on block schedule)quote>

 

So thier passing them along no mater what? thats even worse then 50, cause they get passed on to harder classes  the next grade and couldnt pass the eaiser ones.

Sounds like a very fast downward spiral for those kids.

quote>

Most unfortunately, I believe they do it due to overcrowding issues...they want students out as quick as possible so that the next wave is not hindered.

[Voar Tok 4]

Originally posted by: belfastuniguy Wowwww did not know that America does not have a National Curriculum....

Maybe that actually would not be that bad....having countless different systems, testing, standards and basic learning achievements sounds very very messy to me and bound to cause inequality and problems.quote>

We don't have countless different systems all with their own testing standards running around like a complete hodge podge of scholastic knowledge.  While it is true that all the states get to determine what they expect of their school districts, and school districts all get to influence their curriculum to a degree, all of them know that there are national standards that they're expected to be able to measure up to.  Those standards are know as the GED, SAT, and ACT tests.

The GED is a test for someone to take if they decide that they want to drop out of high school or some such thing.  The short and sweet explanation is that the GED is basically a high school diploma for those who didn't finish high school for some reason.  It's the same test anywhere in the nation, so no matter of what school you went to, you either measure up to a national standard or you don't.

The SAT and ACT tests are college entrance exams that test you to see how much you know from high school.  They're basically like the GED, except that they test you on different things and don't count as a diploma.  The primary difference is that the GED is run by some conglomeration that determines what a high school graduate should know.  The SAT and ACT tests are governed by two conglomerations of universities

The other basic difference is that there is no passing or failing point on the SAT and ACT tests.  They give you a score on how well you did on them, and then whatever university you apply to uses your score as part of their considerations on whether or not to admit you.

[saltandsauce 0]

Originally posted by: El Burro Scottish system ommits virtually all English history from the cirriculum... its quite sad, considering we did topics on segregation in America and the Russian Revolution. Just sounds to me like the authority who outlines the Cirriculum was looking for any other history that isn't English, that wasn't World War 2 or the Welfare state (wich was still kinda WW2, lol)quote>

that is probably to try and level out national pride for fear of the union

history used to be about dates of this was invented in what year and when was the battle of Culloden

now its about how man is an evil scourge of the planet and should be wiped out because its so evil that is the same with geography it is YOUR FAULT THAT THE RAINFOREST IS BEING DESTROYED

[Psycho_Teddy 25]

Originally posted by: Voar Tok

Originally posted by: belfastuniguy Wowwww did not know that America does not have a National Curriculum....

Maybe that actually would not be that bad....having countless different systems, testing, standards and basic learning achievements sounds very very messy to me and bound to cause inequality and problems.quote>

We don't have countless different systems all with their own testing standards running around like a complete hodge podge of scholastic knowledge.  While it is true that all the states get to determine what they expect of their school districts, and school districts all get to influence their curriculum to a degree, all of them know that there are national standards that they're expected to be able to measure up to.  Those standards are know as the GED, SAT, and ACT tests.

The GED is a test for someone to take if they decide that they want to drop out of high school or some such thing.  The short and sweet explanation is that the GED is basically a high school diploma for those who didn't finish high school for some reason.  It's the same test anywhere in the nation, so no matter of what school you went to, you either measure up to a national standard or you don't.

The SAT and ACT tests are college entrance exams that test you to see how much you know from high school.  They're basically like the GED, except that they test you on different things and don't count as a diploma.  The primary difference is that the GED is run by some conglomeration that determines what a high school graduate should know.  The SAT and ACT tests are governed by two conglomerations of universities

The other basic difference is that there is no passing or failing point on the SAT and ACT tests.  They give you a score on how well you did on them, and then whatever university you apply to uses your score as part of their considerations on whether or not to admit you.quote>

A.) SAT and ACT testing is not required for graduation, only college/university admission.  These are meant to be gauges of your proficiency of general High School material.

B.) GEDs, while retaining their name as "Graduate Equivalent Diploma", are not considered so by colleges, universities, and employers.  GEDs are highly frowned upon and having one will likely get you turned down by many universities and employers.

C.) In my state, we have the OGT (Ohio Graduation Test), which is a standardized test that you must pass to graduate from high school.  In my recent high school experience, I was forced to take the OGT TWICE (passing both times, but there was some strange loophole that my class fell under), and the older Proficiency Tests twice, once again, passing both times.  No, we weren't a borderline class, we all passed with flying colours, I in fact, achieved scores as high as 85th percentile on my proficiency test (a national test).  There are far too many standardized tests, but I think a few are necessary...

[BurroDiablo 222]

Originally posted by: saltandsauce

Originally posted by: El Burro Scottish system ommits virtually all English history from the cirriculum... its quite sad, considering we did topics on segregation in America and the Russian Revolution. Just sounds to me like the authority who outlines the Cirriculum was looking for any other history that isn't English, that wasn't World War 2 or the Welfare state (wich was still kinda WW2, lol)quote>

that is probably to try and level out national pride for fear of the union quote>

Ah, yes... so we all become brainwashed Soltire waving nationalists... Salmond is only doing this to win over the voters so he can stay in power,  but i'm sure even he isn't stupid enough to let Scotland leave the Union, the Economic backlash would get him lynched.

[Voar Tok 4]

Originally posted by: Psycho_Teddy

Originally posted by: Voar Tok

Originally posted by: belfastuniguy Wowwww did not know that America does not have a National Curriculum....

Maybe that actually would not be that bad....having countless different systems, testing, standards and basic learning achievements sounds very very messy to me and bound to cause inequality and problems.quote>

We don't have countless different systems all with their own testing standards running around like a complete hodge podge of scholastic knowledge.  While it is true that all the states get to determine what they expect of their school districts, and school districts all get to influence their curriculum to a degree, all of them know that there are national standards that they're expected to be able to measure up to.  Those standards are know as the GED, SAT, and ACT tests.

The GED is a test for someone to take if they decide that they want to drop out of high school or some such thing.  The short and sweet explanation is that the GED is basically a high school diploma for those who didn't finish high school for some reason.  It's the same test anywhere in the nation, so no matter of what school you went to, you either measure up to a national standard or you don't.

The SAT and ACT tests are college entrance exams that test you to see how much you know from high school.  They're basically like the GED, except that they test you on different things and don't count as a diploma.  The primary difference is that the GED is run by some conglomeration that determines what a high school graduate should know.  The SAT and ACT tests are governed by two conglomerations of universities

The other basic difference is that there is no passing or failing point on the SAT and ACT tests.  They give you a score on how well you did on them, and then whatever university you apply to uses your score as part of their considerations on whether or not to admit you.quote>

A.) SAT and ACT testing is not required for graduation, only college/university admission.  These are meant to be gauges of your proficiency of general High School material.quote>

I didn't say they were.  However, you're going to have to take at least one of those if you're going to go to college, and no school district in the country plans their curriculum without thinking about the fact that their students are going to have to be able to pass these tests.  Even if you live in Hicksville, Wherever, they know that a good number of their students are going to be something other than farmers in their lives.

B.) GEDs, while retaining their name as "Graduate Equivalent Diploma", are not considered so by colleges, universities, and employers.  GEDs are highly frowned upon and having one will likely get you turned down by many universities and employers.quote>

Depends on what you do with it.  Employers can do pretty much whatever the hell they want, but no state university denies a GED.  Private universities can do whatever the hell they want.

[Easy Bakes 253]

If i recall correctly the army started to require HS diplomas

rather then GEDs though they may have relaxed that policy since the war started.

[fukuda 351]

Originally posted by: El Burro

Originally posted by: saltandsauce

Originally posted by: El Burro Scottish system ommits virtually all English history from the cirriculum... its quite sad, considering we did topics on segregation in America and the Russian Revolution. Just sounds to me like the authority who outlines the Cirriculum was looking for any other history that isn't English, that wasn't World War 2 or the Welfare state (wich was still kinda WW2, lol)quote>

that is probably to try and level out national pride for fear of the union quote>

Ah, yes... so we all become brainwashed Soltire waving nationalists... Salmond is only doing this to win over the voters so he can stay in power,  but i'm sure even he isn't stupid enough to let Scotland leave the Union, the Economic backlash would get him lynched.quote>

Well, the goverment gave control of the education to the autonomous regional governements here, so each "historical region" rearranges their history books and laws to glorify their nation. For instance (in catalonia), the teachers must speak catalan when teaching, instead of spanish, by law. Luckily, no one follows that law  .

 And the teachers are not not chosen by talent, they are chosen in basis of how well they speak the language. The history book of high school should be called "History of spain" it is instead called "History" here, and it's clearly a book on catalonia's history, so clearly that our former history teacher had to use another book to remain neutral.

The goverment calls this "positive" discrimination 

[BurroDiablo 222]

Makes me think if it would be any better under English jurisdiction. I can imagine if I was still at High School, learning about English history would be fine... I wouldn't think anything of it. But the English would freak out over learning about Scottish history as it wouldn't interest them in the slightest... the same if they had to learn French history, they simply can't think outside their own country, and its the same up here these days.

The whole country needs to pull the Union back together again, regardless of the Nationist tendancies of either side. Its depressing how little I know about English history because of this system, even though I only live 5 miles from the border...

[Palpatine001 57]

50 different states, 50 different education systems, talk about a chaotic situation in the USA.

Lets see what we have over here in New Zealand; a universal education public education system as well as the Private Schools.

Regardless of which one you go to you all get taught from the National cirriculum set by the Ministry of Education, although teachers and the schools have some flexibility in dealing with the National Cirriculum. To get into one of our 8 Universities, every Year 13 student has to sit and the Year 13 level National Education Certificate of Achievement (NCEA) [as well as complete levels 1 and 2 at Year 11 and 12 before hand] (schooling here starts at Year 1 at the age of 5) and gain a certain amount of credits in order to gain entry into University.

On the side, I sat the old Busary System where an A, B or C Bursary was required at Year 13 to get in (I got an A + scholarship by the way).

Once in University, the University Councils and the University Vice Chancellors Comittee (where all 8 universities Vice Chancellors get together for pow wows) with Ministry of Education guidence set what Universities teach and whether degrees are added, dropped or changed.

And yes

What is it with Universal Healthcare and Education that makes Americans scream socialism, quite no DAMN FUNNY actually