Education (common core, charter schools, other stuff)

[Deleted]

First off, it's not info on 'your kid' it's info on a random number assigned your kids demographics and data.

And the why is, we spend shitloads of money on education every year... We've been trying to reinvent the wheel constantly since public education began... There was never a golden age... So the point is to try to track what might actually WORK so that we can implement proven best practices and move towards the outcomes we seek. 

[Deleted]

Common core doesn't require teachers be assessed by test scores.

I don't think there is any current 'signing off' of colleges to place test passing kids into credit bearing classes. The thing you posted the other day said they were looking to give out grants to DEVELOP a system, schools and colleges collaboratively, that would streamline, so that content taught in high schools actually Prepared, and assessments assessed, the things colleges required for prerequisites, so that when the kids passed the high school test, they went into credit bearing classes. Tes, once developed, with college input, this subsystem would have colleges place kids who passed directly in credit bearing, not remedial classes. 

Can you explain your concerns with such a system? 


Eta: that don't have to stop offering remedial classes, I'm sure not everyone will pass the test... 

[The Captain]

Jul 10, 2014 12:22:08 GMT -5 @wrongsideof30 said:

The part about colleges signing commitments to only give credit bearing classes came from the Common Core documentary. I was looking for information about that. Colleges not being able to offer remedial courses would be a concern to me. The people that I spoke with don't anticipate anything like that happening here. 

Have I explained myself enough yet, Oped? 

Just want to engage in this thought a bit.  I'm surprised colleges offer remedial courses.  I thought there certain minimum standards a student had to meet in order to be admitted?

I may not be thinking right about what is considered a remedial course.  My experience is stuff like remedial reading in HS when a freshman can't even read at the 6th grade level. 

At the college I went to they had (waaayyy back) what were call "zero level" courses where you went to the class in order to get up to speed if your HS didn't offer something (like physics or calculus).  The classes didn't count for credits but you still had to pay full tuition on them.  That's different then offering (IMHO) basic algebra or biology to a college freshman who tanked in HS classes but decides they want to be a pharmacist.

Are we talking about the same thing?

[The Captain]

Jul 10, 2014 12:57:29 GMT -5 @wrongsideof30 said:

Jul 10, 2014 12:41:22 GMT -5 The Captain said:

Just want to engage in this thought a bit.  I'm surprised colleges offer remedial courses.  I thought there certain minimum standards a student had to meet in order to be admitted?

I may not be thinking right about what is considered a remedial course.  My experience is stuff like remedial reading in HS when a freshman can't even read at the 6th grade level. 

At the college I went to they had (waaayyy back) what were call "zero level" courses where you went to the class in order to get up to speed if your HS didn't offer something (like physics or calculus).  The classes didn't count for credits but you still had to pay full tuition on them.  That's different then offering (IMHO) basic algebra or biology to a college freshman who tanked in HS classes but decides they want to be a pharmacist.

Are we talking about the same thing?

A lot of the students that come to the community college that I work at haven't taken the SAT/ACT. We give them a placement test and many don't score high enough to be placed in a "college level" course, even though they took and passed the appropriate math classes in high school. That happened to me. I tested just under what I needed to. I begged and pleaded for the school to let me take the credit class. They let me and I failed.

I think Connecticut has out-lawed non-credit college remediation classes and Florida has something in the works.

Got it. My bad, I forgot the community college angle.

FWIW (and I am NOT a community college snob) I was thinking from the angle of traditional 4 year universities.  To me it's a pretty expensive route to go if you are not up to speed on some subjects and need to take remedial classes.

Community colleges (at least in my area) only require (and in some cases even, don't) a HS diploma so I could see students needing to beef up or take a "do over" in a class in which they want to be stregthened. In addition, since community colleges are more reasonable cost wise, it makes sense for "catch up" classes to be offered so the student can take higher level classes.

We have a pretty good community college system where I now live.  I wish there was one when I first started college but (we checked) non of the credits from my then community college would have transferred to any of the schools I wished to attend.

 

[billisonboard]

Jul 10, 2014 12:57:29 GMT -5 @wrongsideof30 said:

...

I think Connecticut has out-lawed non-credit college remediation classes ...

I researched what truth is and here it is: www.ct.edu/initiatives/dev-education

[Mardi Gras Audrey]

Jul 10, 2014 13:13:16 GMT -5 The Captain said:

Jul 10, 2014 12:57:29 GMT -5 @wrongsideof30 said:

I think Connecticut has out-lawed non-credit college remediation classes and Florida has something in the works.

Community colleges (at least in my area) only require (and in some cases even, don't) a HS diploma so I could see students needing to beef up or take a "do over" in a class in which they want to be stregthened. In addition, since community colleges are more reasonable cost wise, it makes sense for "catch up" classes to be offered so the student can take higher level classes.  

IMHO, this is scary. I understand that people should be prepared for college but what about those who aren't?  I'm not talking about people with a HS diploma (they should be prepared if they have that diploma) but the people who didn't do high school for whatever reason?  By removing all remedial classes from college, where do they go?  They can't go back to HS if they are adults so they are just doomed to never get anywhere because they messed up/had issues/ etc while in high school?  That's not right.

This subject hits close to my heart.  My BFF was one of these people.  She dropped out of HS as a freshman and had marginal attendance in high (before dropping out) and middle school.  She worked some min wage jobs and had a child at 17 (single mom).  At 18, she got it together and wanted to do better.  It was too late for HS (She was almost 19 and would have had 4 years to complete).  She got a GED and then went to the local CC.  She took some remedial classes (A GED doesn't mean you are ready for college) and was able to keep going there.  She ended up being able to get a BA and MA and is now a professional.  

She is a hero in my book.  She is smart and worked her a$$ off for herself and her child. She was helped by the fact that the CC offered remedial classes to get to level.  Should she have been stuck in perpetual min wage jobs/no career because she made a bad choice at 15 to drop out?  I would hate to think that we live in a country where one bad mistake (that didn't harm anyone else and wasn't a crime) as a teenager permanently puts you in a position to get nowhere in life. 
 

[Deleted]

Jul 10, 2014 12:57:29 GMT -5 @wrongsideof30 said:

Jul 10, 2014 12:41:22 GMT -5 The Captain said:

Just want to engage in this thought a bit.  I'm surprised colleges offer remedial courses.  I thought there certain minimum standards a student had to meet in order to be admitted?

I may not be thinking right about what is considered a remedial course.  My experience is stuff like remedial reading in HS when a freshman can't even read at the 6th grade level. 

At the college I went to they had (waaayyy back) what were call "zero level" courses where you went to the class in order to get up to speed if your HS didn't offer something (like physics or calculus).  The classes didn't count for credits but you still had to pay full tuition on them.  That's different then offering (IMHO) basic algebra or biology to a college freshman who tanked in HS classes but decides they want to be a pharmacist.

Are we talking about the same thing?

A lot of the students that come to the community college that I work at haven't taken the SAT/ACT. We give them a placement test and many don't score high enough to be placed in a "college level" course, even though they took and passed the appropriate math classes in high school. That happened to me. I tested just under what I needed to. I begged and pleaded for the school to let me take the credit class. They let me and I failed.

I think Connecticut has out-lawed non-credit college remediation classes and Florida has something in the works.

The whole point is to get rid of the need for placement tests. The effort is to align the needs of the college with the course in the high school so that the kids are being taught and assessed the content they need to prepare them, and then if they pass the course test, that is the placement test. It streamlines the process and it eliminates redundancy in the process. 

I don't see how that is a bad thing? 

There re would still be a need for remedial coursework if the student didn't pass the test. So I'm sure they could still offer remedial courses for those students. But in that system, why should do  fine who passed the test have to go for remediation? 

[The Captain]

Jul 10, 2014 13:53:29 GMT -5 Mardi Gras Audrey said:

Jul 10, 2014 13:13:16 GMT -5 The Captain said:

Community colleges (at least in my area) only require (and in some cases even, don't) a HS diploma so I could see students needing to beef up or take a "do over" in a class in which they want to be stregthened. In addition, since community colleges are more reasonable cost wise, it makes sense for "catch up" classes to be offered so the student can take higher level classes.  

IMHO, this is scary. I understand that people should be prepared for college but what about those who aren't?  I'm not talking about people with a HS diploma (they should be prepared if they have that diploma) but the people who didn't do high school for whatever reason?  By removing all remedial classes from college, where do they go?  They can't go back to HS if they are adults so they are just doomed to never get anywhere because they messed up/had issues/ etc while in high school?  That's not right.

This subject hits close to my heart.  My BFF was one of these people.  She dropped out of HS as a freshman and had marginal attendance in high (before dropping out) and middle school.  She worked some min wage jobs and had a child at 17 (single mom).  At 18, she got it together and wanted to do better.  It was too late for HS (She was almost 19 and would have had 4 years to complete).  She got a GED and then went to the local CC.  She took some remedial classes (A GED doesn't mean you are ready for college) and was able to keep going there.  She ended up being able to get a BA and MA and is now a professional.  

She is a hero in my book.  She is smart and worked her a$$ off for herself and her child. She was helped by the fact that the CC offered remedial classes to get to level.  Should she have been stuck in perpetual min wage jobs/no career because she made a bad choice at 15 to drop out?  I would hate to think that we live in a country where one bad mistake (that didn't harm anyone else and wasn't a crime) as a teenager permanently puts you in a position to get nowhere in life. 
 

I think I may not have been clear in my point.  In my area you can enroll in CC in some cases without a hs diploma OR GED and still earn credits (you will need to pass the GED in order to be able to "graduate" from CC). I think the ability for a "do over" is important and should be available.

I do not think it is wise to have an unprepared individual get thrown into the deep waters of a traditional 4 year college - that is almost certainly dooming them to failure.

Yes - community colleges should have remedial classes - they are much more cost effective.
No - traditional 4 year universities shouldn't really have remedial classes, if you need them you probably should not have been admitted in the first place.

[Deleted]

Yes. That's why they are trying to develop, per the grant program you posted yesterday, with high school and secondary input, a system which seamlessly moves kids from high school to college with the skills they need... It's why they want it uniform. And why they want it to reflect university needs. 

Ie. Passing Algebra 2 means the same thing everywhere, and being Proficient (or whatever the designation is) means you have the skills needed for blank coursework... 

We aren't there yet. But I certainly see the value in getting there.... And understanding what efforts increase the likelihood kids will get there... 

[Deleted]

Jul 10, 2014 14:11:59 GMT -5 @wrongsideof30 said:

The whole point is to get rid of the need for placement tests. The effort is to align the needs of the college with the course in the high school so that the kids are being taught and assessed the content they need to prepare them, and then if they pass the course test, that is the placement test. It streamlines the process and it eliminates redundancy in the process.

I don't see how that is a bad thing?

My high school diploma was "endorsed" because of a math test that I took at the end of the year. That was supposed to be important and mean something. But in reality, my math skills sucked.

If the common core is going to do such a great job getting students college ready, than why make it mandatory for colleges to offer only credit bearing classes? Obviously all of the students will score high enough on the entrance exam that this won't be an issue, right?

Excuse me, but cc has hardly been implemented. And you haven't said they won't be able to offer remedial. Just that, if a system as described is developed, a student who passes the readiness test must be put into a credit bearing class...

[Deleted]

It's the kids who pass the Algebra 2 test. (In this example)

And no one said they expected everyone to pass it. Just that the sysyptem should be developed so that if a kid Does pass it (or whatever prerequ class test there is). They go into a credit bearing class. 

The kids who don't pass would still need remediation... Or a different path forward. 

[Deleted]

So what happens to all the kids who aren't college ready at the end of high school? These are the ones who scraped by with a D.   Sorry, but a student who earned a D is rarely ready for a college course.  The C's are better prepared, but are sometimes marginal as well.

Let the high school diploma mean what it originally means.  You successfully completed the requirements of high school . . . sometimes minimally.  Colleges and universities used transcripts and test scores to determine which of these high school graduates should attend college. 

The idea that every single student is able to be ready for a university-level introductory composition, math, biology, etc. course is nice on paper unless you want some of the kids to simply get a certificate of attendance.  Some kids shouldn't go to college; they lack the ability and/or motivation.  Do we want to say to them, "Thanks for showing up for 12 years.  Your performance doesn't demonstrate that you have the capability to be successful at the university level, but, hey, here's a certificate of attendance."

This is doubly cruel because we pretty much force all kids to stay in school until they graduate.  In Alabama you will lose your driver's license if you drop-out except in extremely extenuating circumstances.  They have to be 18 to drop-out without losing their license.

Let's go back to making the high school diploma mean that you are competent to deal with life.  You know how to read well, write decently, and figure out how much carpet to buy for your house based on square footage.  Let's add some vocational training for those who already know that 12 years of formal education is about all they can stand for right now.

Let the colleges and universities come up with how they decide who can attend and continue to offer community college as another avenue for those who still want it but are struggling either academically, financially, or whatever.

Yes, we watered down education in part to make sure that everyone graduates.  That's how a lot of high schools are judged: by graduation rates.  So, of course, a high school diploma doesn't mean what it used to.  But it never absolutely meant that you would be successful in college. 

This is a rant with lots of holes in it, but I feel like we have done kids a lot of disservice in the past forty years.  The public moans about falling test scores without remembering that we didn't use to test everyone.  We want everyone to take the ACT now; the state of Alabama pays for it for every student.  That sounds great, but everyone doesn't want to go to college.

It is just making the testing company richer.

[billisonboard]

Jul 10, 2014 14:32:42 GMT -5 @wrongsideof30 said:

Jul 10, 2014 14:18:48 GMT -5 oped said:

Yes. That's why they are trying to develop, per the grant program you posted yesterday, with high school and secondary input, a system which seamlessly moves kids from high school to college with the skills they need... It's why they want it uniform. And why they want it to reflect university needs. 

Ie. Passing Algebra 2 means the same thing everywhere, and being Proficient (or whatever the designation is) means you have the skills needed for blank coursework... 

We aren't there yet. But I certainly see the value in getting there.... And understanding what efforts increase the likelihood kids will get there... 

I agree that it would be great if all students who passed Algebra 2 came out with the same skills. I don't agree with expecting that to actually happen.

Time will tell.

I have no problem setting up the grading system to say if you have received a passing grade in a high school Algebra 2 class that you have a minimum skill set. I think kids need to not be able to say, "What do you mean I need to take a remedial class? I passed my Algebra 2 class."

[Mardi Gras Audrey]

Susana, I totally agree.

Even when I was in high school (1990s), they seemed to be under the delusion that everyone is supposed to go to college. Our high school was particularly brutal, pushing kids into college prep classes (Spanish 2?) who weren't going to go to college because they had no motivation and weren't interested. They cut the classes which would give you actual skills for life (metal shop, etc) and tried to force kids out who were clearly not cut out for college (These kids would be disruptive in the college prep classes and get low grades. Our school admin actively would tell you to drop out and that "we don't need students like you here" instead of putting them in classes that would be more appropriate.

Other schools in our district were better (would encourage job training programs/classes) but it still seemed to be an attitude of "you need to go to college or else you're trash". It was sad. These kids would pass by the skin of their teeth (with low Ds) and having retained nothing. If they went to college (most didn't), they still had no understanding of the material and were not prepare for it at the college level.


ETA: To make things more ridiculous, it took an act of god to fail a student.  If a student was given an F, the teacher had to write up gobs of paperwork saying what they did wrong as a teacher for the kid to fail.  Even if they failed because they didn't show up or showed up and did nothing.  Most of the teachers didn't want to deal with the BS so they would give them a D to get rid of them.  

It was a system that failed the students, the teachers, and the community (Our community thought our school was the best academically because we had the highest GPAs.  Well, it's easy to have the highest GPAs when you have rampant grade inflation and kick out anyone who isn't doing well).

[Deleted]

Jul 10, 2014 14:45:19 GMT -5 @southernsusana said:

So what happens to all the kids who aren't college ready at the end of high school? These are the ones who scraped by with a D.   Sorry, but a student who earned a D is rarely ready for a college course.  The C's are better prepared, but are sometimes marginal as well.

Let the high school diploma mean what it originally means.  You successfully completed the requirements of high school . . . sometimes minimally.  Colleges and universities used transcripts and test scores to determine which of these high school graduates should attend college. 

The idea that every single student is able to be ready for a university-level introductory composition, math, biology, etc. course is nice on paper unless you want some of the kids to simply get a certificate of attendance.  Some kids shouldn't go to college; they lack the ability and/or motivation.  Do we want to say to them, "Thanks for showing up for 12 years.  Your performance doesn't demonstrate that you have the capability to be successful at the university level, but, hey, here's a certificate of attendance."

This is doubly cruel because we pretty much force all kids to stay in school until they graduate.  In Alabama you will lose your driver's license if you drop-out except in extremely extenuating circumstances.  They have to be 18 to drop-out without losing their license.

Let's go back to making the high school diploma mean that you are competent to deal with life.  You know how to read well, write decently, and figure out how much carpet to buy for your house based on square footage.  Let's add some vocational training for those who already know that 12 years of formal education is about all they can stand for right now.

Let the colleges and universities come up with how they decide who can attend and continue to offer community college as another avenue for those who still want it but are struggling either academically, financially, or whatever.

Yes, we watered down education in part to make sure that everyone graduates.  That's how a lot of high schools are judged: by graduation rates.  So, of course, a high school diploma doesn't mean what it used to.  But it never absolutely meant that you would be successful in college. 

This is a rant with lots of holes in it, but I feel like we have done kids a lot of disservice in the past forty years.  The public moans about falling test scores without remembering that we didn't use to test everyone.  We want everyone to take the ACT now; the state of Alabama pays for it for every student.  That sounds great, but everyone doesn't want to go to college.

It is just making the testing company richer.

Who said every single kid had to be ready for college? 

The issue was, if someone passes a skills test in high school, should that translate into having the skill base necessary to enter into a specific credit bearing class... 

 I really don't understand the issue. 

Ie. To graduate here, kids are going to have to pass the Algebra 1 test. Minimal standard. I doubt that pass is going to get them into college class A... But there should be some class/test that, when passed, ensures adequate preparation for 'college class A'

[Deleted]

There are tests already, Oped. They are the college admissions tests like the ACT and SAT. If you make a certain score, you are adequately prepared for "college class A."

The end-of-course test for Algebra I means you have passed the concepts covered in Algebra I. If it is an assurance that you are adequately prepared for Algebra II, then there should be no grade lower than C. You made an acceptable score on the test, or you didn't.  You could be very weak on some concepts and make up for it on others . . . hence, the D.  It would take at least a C to be close to assuring that you were ready for Algebra II.

I have no idea if UA still does this, but back in the 1980s, there were no final grades of less than a C in English 101 and 102.  You didn't make an F; you received no credit and had to repeat the course.

It's an interesting concept, but I don't think high school parents would stand for it. 

[zibazinski]

I not think the future is going to handle a lot of college grads. People have figured out meaningless degrees aren't going to pay the bills and want bang for their buck. I have a friend who went and got an X-ray tech certification because her degree got her no job whatsoever. Her certification did. You're still going to have the parents who say FOLLOW YOUR DREAMS and they will pay for it. Okay, that's their decision. My kids knew they had to get degrees they could support themselves with. I was told the same thing. I can follow my dreams now if I want. Dreams change, needing to support yourself never does.