8 Myths That Undermine Educational Effectiveness

[eohrnberger]

In the US it does. Wealthier districts by and large out perform poorer ones. Comparing different countries to the U.S. and educational spending is comparing apples to oranges.

Even before the changes that you propose the US is already spending more and getting less for it. That's not a ringing endorsement for a successful organization nor for a successful methodology of educating.

No, some more fundamental changes need to be made to enable the US education system to not only have greater student achievement, but also doing so with no more than the resources already allocated, if not greater results for even fewer resources.

The US has been on an ever increasing resources binge for quite a number of decades, and continually falling short of the mark is all the results that have been achieved.

I'm inclined to blame management.

 

[sangha]

Do please read what I post. That's not what I said. I propose to collect the school system's gadruate's college freshmen GPA as a measure. Were in that do you read "teacher performance"? It's the entire school system's performance.

Collecting a school systems graduates college freshman GPA scores is not cost effective because it's not effective. It doesn't achieve anything.

How positively Soviet of you. Have you ever gotten a raise? Gave it back did you?

You're becoming incoherent. Merit pay has nothing to do with the soviets or getting a raise. If you're going to promote a policy, you should learn what it is.

The federal take over and dictation and implementation of weak academic standards that have liberal / progress indoctrination wirtten all over it. Yeah. Right.

You said that the system did not permit change. Now that I've proven you wrong, you're trying to change the topic with a lie about how Common Core is a federal takeover.

If our education system is doing so well, why is it that the US is only in this middle of academic achievement ranked against all the rest of he world, but spends by far the most money? That is a typical union level of performance and excessive cost for what you get.

If our system is doing so poorly, why is it that the US has the worlds strongest economy and the only superpower?

Guess I could same the same of your lack of change.

The only lack of change demonstrated in this thread is your refusal to address the factors that most strongly affect student performance in favor of unproven pipe dreams.

 

[jet57]

My greatest gripe against schools is the buildings. Communities keep putting big dollars into school building projects instead of teacher salaries. When the Community suffers an economic depression, it lays off teachers and staff because you can't lay off buildings. I may be jaundiced because, as a parent of a successful home-schooler, I realize that it is the motivating force behind students that creates achievement, not expensive buildings.
....

What's really happened is the liability problem. Parents will sue a school, teacher AND district over little of nothing because little Johnny got into a playground fight. A teacher sends a kind into the hall, the parents sue because his civil rights were violated... and on and on it goes. The politically correct public education system is ruled under parental threat. Kids can't walk 6 blocks to school anymore mom has to drive'em, so there's a traffic jam in front of the place every morning and afternoon. Not to mention every kid has every toy and gadget phone and video game with'em, that they really don't have to pay attention anymore.

 

[eohrnberger]

Collecting a school systems graduates college freshman GPA scores is not cost effective because it's not effective. It doesn't achieve anything.

How does it not measure the level of preparedness for college the freshmen received from his high school?

You're becoming incoherent. Merit pay has nothing to do with the soviets or getting a raise. If you're going to promote a policy, you should learn what it is.

To me merit pay is an increase or bonus because you've done a good job, have earned it, or have increased your value contribution to the organization. You've stated that you are against merit pay. So you must be against doing a good job, earning pay increases, or against increasing one's contribution to the organization. If not, I leave it to you to define what you think merit pay is, and why it's a bad thing.

You said that the system did not permit change. Now that I've proven you wrong, you're trying to change the topic with a lie about how Common Core is a federal takeover.

How about a change for the better? (Which I don't think Common Core is).

If our system is doing so poorly, why is it that the US has the worlds strongest economy and the only superpower?

The US economy is he least encumbered, or at least was until recently, the least encumbered economies for starting the small businesses that are the economies vitality and life's blood. While the US has this position now, it isn't going to last, at least not very much longer (I have to revise this statement: China Overtakes US As World's Largest Economy - Business Insider)

The only lack of change demonstrated in this thread is your refusal to address the factors that most strongly affect student performance in favor of unproven pipe dreams.

So hostile to a mere idea. Hmm.

I acknowledge, and always have in this thread, that there are other factors in student achievement, just as I acknowledge that those factors are not within the state's ability to significantly influence.

 

[sangha]

How does it not measure the level of preparedness for college the freshmen received from his high school?

How does it help students?

To me merit pay is an increase or bonus because you've done a good job, have earned it, or have increased your value contribution to the organization. You've stated that you are against merit pay. So you must be against doing a good job, earning pay increases, or against increasing one's contribution to the organization. If not, I leave it to you to define what you think merit pay is, and why it's a bad thing.

I see you can't refute anything I've said so you've made things up and pretended I said them.

That's dishonest.

How about a change for the better? (Which I don't think Common Core is).

How about not moving the goalposts. I don't want to discuss the merits (or lack thereof) of CC; I want to discuss the merits of what you said which was that the school system does not permit change. Reality proves you're wrong about that

The US economy is he least encumbered, or at least was until recently, the least encumbered economies for starting the small businesses that are the economies vitality and life's blood. While the US has this position now, it isn't going to last, at least not very much longer (I have to revise this statement: China Overtakes US As World's Largest Economy - Business Insider)

You'r moving the goal posts again. We're talking about the school system and our economy is proof that the schools are doing a fine job. With or without regulatory obstacles, our economy would not be doing so well if our population was poorly educated.

So hostile to a mere idea. Hmm.

You're the one who is hostile to every idea but one (ie your own)

I acknowledge, and always have in this thread, that there are other factors in student achievement, just as I acknowledge that those factors are not within the state's ability to significantly influence.

Reality says otherwise. The state has demonstrated great competence in significantly influencing all of those other factors.

 

[eohrnberger]

How does it help students?

Tells them which school systems, or rather tells their parents which school systems, have a track record of success in preparing high school students for college, if that's the direction the parents wish their children to go.

I see you can't refute anything I've said so you've made things up and pretended I said them.

That's dishonest.

Hold on here. I'm not being dishonest. Did you not post this:

. . .
I support? I don't, and never have, support merit pay
. . .

I was allowing that you may have a slightly different definition of merit pay, and if so, wanted to know what it would be, and why you are against merit pay.

How about not moving the goalposts. I don't want to discuss the merits (or lack thereof) of CC; I want to discuss the merits of what you said which was that the school system does not permit change. Reality proves you're wrong about that




You'r moving the goal posts again. We're talking about the school system and our economy is proof that the schools are doing a fine job. With or without regulatory obstacles, our economy would not be doing so well if our population was poorly educated.




You're the one who is hostile to every idea but one (ie your own)



Reality says otherwise. The state has demonstrated great competence in significantly influencing all of those other factors.

Whatever. I tire of this and the role you take in it. Seems we can't discuss things. No loss to me. Not my fault that you take everything I post, and try and contort it to some sort of perverse advantage superiority complex thing. I'm done here.

 

[sangha]

Tells them which school systems, or rather tells their parents which school systems, have a track record of success in preparing high school students for college, if that's the direction the parents wish their children to go

That has nothing to do with educational effectiveness, which is what this thread is about.

Hold on here. I'm not being dishonest. Did you not post this:

I said that but I didn't say the other BS you made up and pretended I said.

I was allowing that you may have a slightly different definition of merit pay, and if so, wanted to know what it would be, and why you are against merit pay.

I'm against it because it doesn't work

Myth #8: Merit Pay for Teachers Improves Student Performance
The full argument is that merit pay is a good way to increase teacher performance, because teachers should be evaluated on the basis of student performance, and rewarding or punishing schools for student performance will improve our nation's schools. However, evidence suggests that competition between teachers is counterproductive and interferes with collaboration. Measuring teacher effectiveness is very difficult, and no simple measures effectively do this. There is no evidence that merit pay correlates with improved student achievement, but there is strong evidence that basing teacher salaries on student performance is counterproductive and ethically wrong -- it frequently punishes teachers and schools for socioeconomic factors over which they have no control.

Whatever. I tire of this and the role you take in it. Seems we can't discuss things. No loss to me. Not my fault that you take everything I post, and try and contort it to some sort of perverse advantage superiority complex thing. I'm done here.

It's not my fault you propose policies who benefits are mythical, as the article in OP makes clear. perhaps you should actually read the article before posting in a thread that discusses the article.

 

[eohrnberger]

That has nothing to do with educational effectiveness, which is what this thread is about.




I said that but I didn't say the other BS you made up and pretended I said.

I made nothing up.

I'm against it because it doesn't work

Unproven as it's not been implemented anywhere, nor even fully developed as a concept, it's just an idea. It may, or it may not work.

It's not my fault you propose policies who benefits are mythical, as the article in OP makes clear. perhaps you should actually read the article before posting in a thread that discusses the article.

Whatever.

 

[ALiberalModerate]

True, they do. This would give them unequivocal and irrefutable data on which to make those decisions. What's wrong with that?

You can lookup the performance in terms of gpa, test scores, graduation rates, college admission rates and so on for any public school. While seeing info on individual teachers would be nice, it would have nothing to do with what school district you choose to live in as people look at the district and school performance as a whole for that.

 

[sangha]

I made nothing up.

Sure you did. You even went so far as to tell me what I must believe.

Unproven as it's not been implemented anywhere, nor even fully developed as a concept, it's just an idea. It may, or it may not work.

No, not unproven. Disproven.

You would know that if you read the article,but that would require a desire to discuss the topic of this thread instead of lecturing everyone else.

Whatever.

Just more proof that you have no interest in discussing the topic.

 

[Dittohead not!]

Even before the changes that you propose the US is already spending more and getting less for it. That's not a ringing endorsement for a successful organization nor for a successful methodology of educating.

No, some more fundamental changes need to be made to enable the US education system to not only have greater student achievement, but also doing so with no more than the resources already allocated, if not greater results for even fewer resources.

The US has been on an ever increasing resources binge for quite a number of decades, and continually falling short of the mark is all the results that have been achieved.

I'm inclined to blame management.

Wealthy districts do outperform poor districts, but it's not necessarily due to the resources allocated to education.

It's more likely due to having more educated parents in the district making more money and therefore being able to live in the wealthier district. The real factor is t he parent's educational level, not the money being spent per pupil.

 

[Dittohead not!]

Regarding "merit pay":

Myth #8: Merit Pay for Teachers Improves Student Performance
The full argument is that merit pay is a good way to increase teacher performance, because teachers should be evaluated on the basis of student performance, and rewarding or punishing schools for student performance will improve our nation's schools. However, evidence suggests that competition between teachers is counterproductive and interferes with collaboration. Measuring teacher effectiveness is very difficult, and no simple measures effectively do this. There is no evidence that merit pay correlates with improved student achievement, but there is strong evidence that basing teacher salaries on student performance is counterproductive and ethically wrong -- it frequently punishes teachers and schools for socioeconomic factors over which they have no control.

 

[eohrnberger]

Wealthy districts do outperform poor districts, but it's not necessarily due to the resources allocated to education.

It's more likely due to having more educated parents in the district making more money and therefore being able to live in the wealthier district. The real factor is t he parent's educational level, not the money being spent per pupil.

The difference is the parents and what they emphasis with their children. State's not going to be able to do much about that.

Regarding "merit pay":

I read this as more nothing is the teacher's fault, and there need be no accountability for them.

Just keep shoveling good money after bad, and expect no better results. Brilliant plan that. It appears that we are doomed to a course of things getting much worse before they'll get better.

 

[sangha]

I read this as more nothing is the teacher's fault, and there need be no accountability for them.

Then you're reading things that aren't there

Just another example of the need to ignore reality in order to support rainbows and unicorns.

 

[eohrnberger]

Then you're reading things that aren't there

Just another example of the need to ignore reality in order to support rainbows and unicorns.

Maybe I'm reading it wrong.

• Myth #1: Teachers Are the Most Important Influence on a Child’s Education = It's not the teacher's fault
• Myth #2: Homework Boosts Achievement = don't assign homework the teacher has to grade, that's like work
• Myth #3: Class Size Does Not Matter = make my class size smaller to it's easier, and I don't have to work so hard
• Myth #4: A Successful Program Works Everywhere = even if the program is successful elsewhere, don't expect the same from me
• Myth #5: Zero-Tolerance Policies Are Making Schools Safer - a truthful one for a change
• Myth #6: Money Doesn’t Matter = Let's spend more money and expect the same results
• Myth #7: College Admissions Are Based on Academic Achievement and Test Scores = It's not my fault I didn't prepare your kid for college
• Myth #8: Merit Pay for Teachers Improves Student Performance = you need to pay me more and you may not get a better result

Let us not forget that the NEA Union, to which the vast majority of the teachers belong to, isn't about the kids.

It’s hard to forget former National Education Association (NEA) General Counsel Bob Chanin’s farewell address during the 2009 NEA national convention. “It is not because we care about children; and it is not because we have a vision of a great public school for every child,” Chanin boasted. “The NEA and its affiliates are effective advocates because we have power.”

NEA Convention Reminds Us: It’s About Union Power, Not Children

Yeah, pretty much liberal and union, a more expensive inferior product. No wonder businesses are forced to import the highly education labor they need. Can't seem to find it around here.

 

[sangha]

Maybe I'm reading it wrong.

• Myth #1: Teachers Are the Most Important Influence on a Child’s Education = It's not the teacher's fault
• Myth #2: Homework Boosts Achievement = don't assign homework the teacher has to grade, that's like work
• Myth #3: Class Size Does Not Matter = make my class size smaller to it's easier, and I don't have to work so hard
• Myth #4: A Successful Program Works Everywhere = even if the program is successful elsewhere, don't expect the same from me
• Myth #5: Zero-Tolerance Policies Are Making Schools Safer - a truthful one for a change
• Myth #6: Money Doesn’t Matter = Let's spend more money and expect the same results
• Myth #7: College Admissions Are Based on Academic Achievement and Test Scores = It's not my fault I didn't prepare your kid for college
• Myth #8: Merit Pay for Teachers Improves Student Performance = you need to pay me more and you may not get a better result

You think making up more things the article doesn't say is a defense that you're not reading things that aren't there? :lamo

 

[Dittohead not!]

The difference is the parents and what they emphasis with their children. State's not going to be able to do much about that.

Absolutely.

I read this as more nothing is the teacher's fault, and there need be no accountability for them.

Just keep shoveling good money after bad, and expect no better results. Brilliant plan that. It appears that we are doomed to a course of things getting much worse before they'll get better.

But merit pay has been shown not to work. I'm all for teacher accountability, but basing pay on test results is not the way to go about it.

 

[Dittohead not!]

Maybe I'm reading it wrong.

• Myth #1: Teachers Are the Most Important Influence on a Child’s Education = It's not the teacher's fault
• Myth #2: Homework Boosts Achievement = don't assign homework the teacher has to grade, that's like work
• Myth #3: Class Size Does Not Matter = make my class size smaller to it's easier, and I don't have to work so hard
• Myth #4: A Successful Program Works Everywhere = even if the program is successful elsewhere, don't expect the same from me
• Myth #5: Zero-Tolerance Policies Are Making Schools Safer - a truthful one for a change
• Myth #6: Money Doesn’t Matter = Let's spend more money and expect the same results
• Myth #7: College Admissions Are Based on Academic Achievement and Test Scores = It's not my fault I didn't prepare your kid for college
• Myth #8: Merit Pay for Teachers Improves Student Performance = you need to pay me more and you may not get a better result

Let us not forget that the NEA Union, to which the vast majority of the teachers belong to, isn't about the kids.


NEA Convention Reminds Us: It’s About Union Power, Not Children

Yeah, pretty much liberal and union, a more expensive inferior product. No wonder businesses are forced to import the highly education labor they need. Can't seem to find it around here.

So, you want to add myth #9, unions are for the children?

Problem with that is, a myth has to be believed if it's to have some effect. Surely, no one believes that teachers pay unions dues for an organization that doesn't benefit them, do they? Why would they? The purpose of a union is to bargain for better pay and working conditions for its members. If it didn't do that, the members wouldn't support it.

 

[eohrnberger]

Absolutely.



But merit pay has been shown not to work. I'm all for teacher accountability, but basing pay on test results is not the way to go about it.

I suppose we can agree on that point, but then there must be some other sort of empirical method of rating / raking teachers then?
How else would you identify the ineffective teachers? Or is it that you can never get ride of a bad teacher?
Or is it that there is no such thing as a bad teacher just bad students and bad parents? And bad budgets?

 

[eohrnberger]

So, you want to add myth #9, unions are for the children?

Problem with that is, a myth has to be believed if it's to have some effect. Surely, no one believes that teachers pay unions dues for an organization that doesn't benefit them, do they? Why would they? The purpose of a union is to bargain for better pay and working conditions for its members. If it didn't do that, the members wouldn't support it.

Yeah, it makes sense that teachers would support a union that furthers their interests. Still would be nice that the kid's best interests be in there someplace too.

 

[Hard Truth]

From OP's artiticle "The most significant variable is socioeconomic status, followed by the neighborhood, the psychological quality of the home environment, and the support of physical health provided..."


socioeconomic status-We should end the practice of funding schools with local property taxes and instead fund schools based on need. Schools with low income students, high crime rates in the community and many students with non-English speaking familys should get more funding not less, as is curently done.

the neighborhood-Same as above, plus provide resources to address the student's trauma and stress from unstable homes, crime and poverty. Implement longer school days so kids are kept away from neighborhood temptations. Replace homework with supervised and assisted goal oriented work periods to reduce the influence of home life on the student's abilities.

psychological quality of the home environment-Again, eliminate homework, lengthen the school day and provide resources to address the student's mental health and amount of stress.

support of physical health-Provide healthy and good tasting breakfasts and lunches and have healthy snacks available. Provide more recreational/fitness breaks with both structured activities and free time. Provide resources for a greater range of physical actitivities such as making and fixing things, biking, skateboarding, and other types of play.

Schools compete with mobile devices, TV, computers, video games etc for student's attention. They need to improve the entertainment quality of presentations with engaging teachers, use of video and computer presentations and more interactivity. When leaning is done by choice by consenting adults who are seeking knowledge and skills rather than a degree, we use those techniques (example: TED talks). Children, with their shorter attention spans, deserve nothing less.

Schools also need to reexamine their priorities. After the basics are taught, the emphasis should be on teaching people to enjoy learning and how to teach themsleves. Education should be a lifetime experience and students with problems should experience delays at times, but not failure. K-12 and community colleges should be integrated so certification can be modular and not time sensitive, so that a student good in one area, but having trouble in another area can use their strengths and concentrate on their deficiencies. Returning to school to address past delays should not be difficult or stigmatized as a sign of failure for anyone at any age. For example an 18 year old student good at math, but with an incomplete education in history should have certificates in the areas where they have reached a defined level of proficiency and the ability to take more classes in history later rather than simply flunking out of high school and having to repeat a K-12 grade with redundant classes.

Yes, these measure will cost more, but the future savings in welfare, law enforcement/incarceration and mental health costs will be sufficiently reduced to offset the investment.

 

[Dittohead not!]

I suppose we can agree on that point, but then there must be some other sort of empirical method of rating / raking teachers then?
How else would you identify the ineffective teachers? Or is it that you can never get ride of a bad teacher?
Or is it that there is no such thing as a bad teacher just bad students and bad parents? And bad budgets?

No, there are bad teachers as well as bad students, bad parents, bad budgets, bad administrators.

I think I've dealt with all of them at one time or another over four decades in the public schools.

There is no simple solution to any of it, but more local and less state and no federal control would be a good start.

 

[eohrnberger]

No, there are bad teachers as well as bad students, bad parents, bad budgets, bad administrators.

I think I've dealt with all of them at one time or another over four decades in the public schools.

There is no simple solution to any of it, but more local and less state and no federal control would be a good start.

On this, sir, I believe we agree.

 

[sookster]

I'd like to see supporting data on the link between playing video games and IQ if you have any.

And, sadly, I think you're assuming an intellectual curiosity that doesn't necessarily exist and also an interest in reading.

Any child has intellectual curiosity. That's being human. I think children will have a more interest in reading if they got to read what they wanted to read. There would be other things to do, but I think the main thing that should be encouraged is reading.

Look, I don't need scientific studies and you shouldn't either. Watch starcraft II pros, and League of Legends pros. It's common sense that video games influence intelligence. If you watch interviews of these players, you can tell they are intelligent. You HAVE to be intelligent to play well in these games. I know because I have played them. Not saying I was good at them, but I know the ins and outs of the games, and it exercises the mind like our current educational system does with certain classes.

 

[chromium]

Buildings matter. I remember when I was at uni, we moved campus from old 70s style concrete block buildings with long corridors needing a coat of paint, to a modern campus building with open spaces and inviting classrooms and so on. The mood among students went up big time as did attendance and hence learning. You should not under estimate the importance of the environment where students learn, it is almost as important as the quality of teachers.

i can imagine it would matter for younger kids, but aren't the most highly ranked colleges in europe all ancient, with very old buildings? Learning can take place anywhere, outside even.

I've noticed that where students are serious about their education and the teachers about educating, attendance is near 100%, even in the dreary lecture halls