Responding to a message by Dan, to Charles on ...
DT>Actually I don't buy the idea that we are behind other nations.
You are not the only person writing in this echo who feels that way. 
 Since there have been many well-publicized reports (A Nation At 
Risk, U.S. Ed. Department NAEP scores, etc.) over the years 
indicating that our students score lower in math and writing than do 
children in other nations, a few of which I've quoted here, can you 
cite evidence to support your position?
DT>We are graduating more students than ever before.
But at what level of competence?  How many colleges and employers, 
both, are complaining about the lack of basic skills among recent 
high school graduates?  In what manner does this show that our 
students are better educated than children from other nations?
DT>When one looks at test results from year to year for a 
DT>comparison, all factors must be considered.  We have more 
DT>students in the lower 60% taking tests and thus driving down the 
DT>results.
In the most recent administration of the international exams, an 
analysis was done of the top ten percent of kids in each of the 
participating nations in order to check this hypothesis.  The top 
10% of U.S. students still scored 13th out of 14 nations.  I posted 
Al Shanker's report on this sometime last winter or spring.
DT>I am not looking at any data in front of me but I'm willing to 
DT>bet our results are much better when we take a second look at 
DT>_all_ contribution factors.  
Americans do have a tendency to always want to believe they are the 
best at everything.  In the 1960's this was characterized in a book 
about American diplomacy called _The Ugly American_.  It manifests 
itself in other ways, such as the cheering at the Olympics in 
Atlanta that was disruptive to athletes of other nations.  In one of 
the first tests given comparing students in various nations, 
American students scored near the bottom in all categories, except 
for self-esteem, in which they scored the highest.
DT>Research has shown that when learning is made meaningful, children want 
DT>to learn and learn better.
I've not run across these studies anywhere.  How was the learning 
made more meaningful?  To what degree were the kids more successful? 
 Was there any difference in the impact of more meaningful 
instruction between children of different races or socio-economic groups?
DT>The same concepts can be taught in boring fashion or in ways that 
DT>engage and challenge the learner.  Sounds like you opt for boring 
DT>while I opt for engaging learning through meaningful activities.
Interesting interpretation.  I would tend to see things a bit 
differently.  Although I do give some effort each year to a few 
changes in my teaching style, I do not see my job as that of an 
entertainer.  My job is to educate.  I try to make the math 
interesting by connecting it to other branches of math or science, 
or by connecting it back to something the kids did earlier in math.  
I present some history and a few anecdotes about the math as I go, 
but I do *not* bring in pies to teach the kids how to do fractions.
If a child finds the math we are doing to be of interest, good for 
them.  If they do not find it interesting, I still expect them to 
learn it - knowing it will make transitions to other learning 
easier.  If a child makes a mistake doing the age-appropriate math I 
am teaching, I tell them they are wrong and teach them how to 
correct it.  I do not teach in such a manner nor discipline in such 
a manner as to protect their fragile egos - they are in school to 
learn and I expect them to exert some effort toward that end.
I think you are the product of the "self-esteem first" education 
system.  You believe that if the kids have strong self-esteem they 
will learn better, so you go out of your way to make the kids happy 
and comfortable at all costs (e.g., making learning meaningful and 
inventive spelling).  I believe that standards are lowered to 
achieve this state of euphoria and a false sense of self-esteem may 
be created.
I think the learning style you espouse is ineffective, presents a 
false view of the world to the kids, and reduces the children's 
ability to adapt in the upper grades.
DT>I really don't think you understand young children.  You are a 
DT>high-school teacher right?
Middle school.  Still, I think I understand young children quite well 
- I was one once.  I think you just want to coddle the children and 
don't realize the impact that not imposing standards will have on 
them later in life.
DT>CB>I'm afraid I don't follow this.  My point is this...if we establish
DT>CB>that  we want all 3rd graders in this country to be able to read at a
DT>CB>3rd  grade level on the XYZ Exam, then I don't care *what* the kids
DT>CB>think is  boring, we teach them to read at the proper level by the
DT>CB>3rd grade.  The  adults are in charge, not the kids.
DT>
DT>If you want a child to learn 3 digit adding before they are 
DT>developmentally ready it doesn't matter one bit who is in charge.  Kids 
DT>can only learn what they are able to comprehend developmentally.  I 
DT>again refer to Piaget (as well as many others who have contributed to 
DT>the idea of cognitive development).
At no time have I argued that we ask Kindergarten children to learn 
3-digit addition.  You *have* argued, however, that when *you* 
determine a child is not developmentally ready to do something in 
Kindergarten, even if it is part of the program, you don't push the 
child.  You lower the standards for that child, and that student 
will be below grade level for the rest of his/her life.  Instead of 
making excuses for the child and letting them off the hook, seek 
intervention - get the child tested, get the child a tutor, provide 
additional practice, get the parents involved - but DON'T let the 
kid fall behind the others!
DT>I agree with you that we should not lower standards.  Standards should 
DT>be set that are appropriate.  One questions that I have pondered is 
DT>whether we should design curriculum bottom up or top down.  What do you 
DT>think?
I'm willing to listen to both sides, but generally speaking I believe in 
top down curriculum.  We should decide on our graduation standards, then 
work backwards to decide what our kids need to learn at each grade level to 
get them to graduation.
___
* UniQWK #5290* My other computer's a... er... well, it's a piece of junk 
o.
--- Maximus 2.01wb
---------------