Life in the 21st century
Jun 09 2007
Evan O’Dorney, 13, of Danville, California won the 2007 Scripps National Spelling Bee. For his efforts, he earned an interview on CNN and Jimmy Kimmel Live:
That was a brutal…how’d Jimmy do?
Home schooling is great, but it has been know to cause a bit of social awkwardness…
Dec 11 2006
You have to figure it is only a matter of time in front of the computer before we all forget how to write. I’m guilty. I needed to write a paper check the other day and had to read the instructions. I type much faster (and more legibly) then I write, plus the spell-checker is my best friend.
Most adults have had some experience with a pen and pencil, but schools today are pushing more and more technology. One would think all the time in front of the computer must have a cost. What are we taking out of the day to make room for keyboarding instruction?
One school in Scotland is bucking the trend and teaching their kids the lost art of writing with a fountain pen:
There is no clacking of keyboards in most classrooms at the Mary Erskine and Stewart’s Melville Junior School, although there is a full range of facilities for computer lessons and technology isn’t being ignored.
But the private school’s principal believes the old-fashioned pens have helped boost the academic performance and self-esteem of his 1,200 pupils.
“The pens improve the quality of work because they force the children to take care, and better work improves self-esteem,” principal Bryan Lewis said. “Proper handwriting is as relevant today as it ever has been.”
Interesting. Because they cannot easily correct their mistakes, the kids are required to focus and exert more care in their work. But, writing with a fountain pen? Do they still make those? Is that legal? I thought they made the ink out of endangered animals or something like that. Will PETA be raining red on schools?
Maybe there is a middle ground; a way to get keyboarding/technology skill into the classroom and still maintain that feeling of care in your work. Bring back the typewriter! Not those fancy ones with the ball, give me the good old-fashion typewriter with little golf clubs and hit your paper. You know, the ones that build finger strength while making that cool swatting sound. That would be great!
I love the sound of typewriters in the morning…
Aug 14 2006
School districts are facing a problem; filling classrooms with teachers. One logical solution to this problem would be to work hard and retain the valued services of experienced, district-trained teachers. These are teachers who have been indoctrinated to district methodologies as well as the policies and procedures. What is the cost of not retaining your employees?
As most HR managers know, the cost of turnover adds hundreds of thousands of dollars to a company’s expenses. While it is difficult to fully calculate the cost of turnover (including hiring costs, training costs, productivity loss), industry experts often quote 25% of the average employee salary as a conservative estimate. For example, if the average salary is $20,000/yr the cost of one employee turnover is $5,000.
In school districts, 25% of $41,000 is $10,250 per teacher. Business has learned this lesson and it makes logical sense to apply the same principle to schools. Right?!?
Wrong. Take a look at some example salary schedules of local Houston school districts and their salary schedules according to their own web sites:
In these 5 districts, starting teachers average $40,754. Not a bad start to a profession. However, after 10 years of experience, the average salary has only gone up to $45,227. That means after 10 years, teachers can look forward to a service pin and a whopping $4,473 raise over their un-experienced colleagues. On top of that, these teachers are expected to mentor the younger teachers; after all, they are just learning the job.
Most offensive is Spring Branch ISD where a teacher with 6 years of experience earns $707 more than their unexperienced peers. Why on earth would someone want to stay with a district that so clearly is looking only for new employees?
Note to Spring Branch parents: What type of teacher would you rather have teaching your children, brand new or exprienced. Remember that at the next board/bond election.
Why are districts having problems holding on to teachers? Try valuing your resources and realizing that service can and should be rewarded.
Local school district salary schedules:
Aug 04 2006
In the latest round of the insanity that is the No Child Left Untested (sorry) No Child Left Behind Act, a suburban high school in northwest Houston has been deemed Persistently Dangerous by the state.
The suburban, middle-class Cypress Ridge High School is the first Houston-area campus to be deemed “persistently dangerous,” an emotionally charged label that it earned, in part, for reporting a high number of drug violations.
The state of Texas is actually saying (with a straight-face) that a suburban middle-class high school is more dangerous than schools in the much rougher areas of Houston.
What does the school district have to say?
Cypress-Fairbanks leaders said their school is being unfairly targeted for aggressively tracking every on-campus violation and for encouraging students to report crime. Other schools with far more notable instances didn’t appear on the latest list, which tracks crimes from 2002 to 2005.
A typical suburban follow-the-rules school gets in trouble for doing what they are supposed to do while others who don’t follow the rules appear to be superior schools. What about the student perspective?
Sophomore Kouazou Njowo said she’s shocked that her seemingly well-regarded school made the list, while others, such as Westbury High School in Houston, where there was a rape and riot this year, didn’t.
That sums it up nicely. Clearly, having Prozac in your locker is much worse than a riot. Way to go TEA!
Others blogging:
Aug 01 2006
DARE, the very popular drug education program found in many schools across the country, is starting to be dropped by some schools.
Karen Chilson, an educational consultant at CESA 11, said many schools have stopped using DARE to teach drug and alcohol prevention, even though the programs is popular with many parents, teachers and students. The problem is that requirements for obtaining federal aid for these prevention classes have “become much more stringent” in recent years.
In particular, there is increasing pressure that these programs funded by federal dollars must have scientific evidence showing that the classes effectively reduce or delay the onset of drug and alcohol use, Chilson said. Proof of changed behaviors and retained knowledge about drugs is also strongly encouraged.
This article comes out of Barron Wisconsin and goes on to further outline the issues with federal funding and the DARE program.
When I went to school, DARE was really just beginning. My kids have had DARE and, as a parent, I was happy with the program. Of course, you have to do more than rely on the school system to educate your kids on drugs, but every little bit helps. From reading the replies listed below, I’m getting a different picture of the program.
Others blogging:
DARE is a program that people want to like; say no to drugs, have pride, make good decisions, etc. It “feels” right to support DARE. Does it work? I has to have some impact, but I suspect parents and peers still hold all the cards.
DARE can be expensive. Someone has to pay for the police officers who conduct the program. There is also instructional costs; time away from regular classroom instruction. We keep squeezing more requirements into the school day, but never take anything out.
In the end, I believe that the most important decision a kid can make is to decide to keep drugs out of their lives. With that in mind, programs like DARE have to continue. If only one kid per class is changed by the program, the cost is justified.
Check out the DARE site for more.
Jul 21 2006
Remember when the back-to-school ads didn’t start until mid-August? Well, here we are again, weeks away from the start of another school year and “the seat belt” issue has arisen again. The latest in Texas is outlined by the Houston Chronicle:
The seat belt issue has been thrust to the forefront again after Beaumont teens traveling to a girls’ soccer playoff were thrown from their seats after their charter bus, dodging some debris, overturned on a rainy stretch of U.S. 90 on March 29.
Texas Department of Public Safety investigators said injuries would have been greatly reduced if the passengers had been restrained in their seats because the frame of the bus remained intact.
Two girls died, and 21 were injured, including one teen whose arm was amputated.
So, why again are there no seat belts on buses? We have them on cars, planes, and event the little rides at Chuck-E-Cheese. Why not school buses?
According to the National Education Agency :
To understand the question of school bus seat belts, one really has to look at the larger questions of student supervision, discipline, and safety on and around buses. There has been a lot of recent attention given to the problems that disruptive, or even violent, students can cause in schools. Bus drivers must contend with these same students.
Unlike teachers, bus drivers must care for up to 50-70 student charges at a time, while manuevering a large vehicle, contending with traffic, bad weather, and adverse road conditions. And do it all with their backs turned to the students!
Good point. Consider this from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration:
The NTSB concluded in a 1987 study of school bus crashes that most fatalities and injuries occurred because the occupant seating positions were in direct line with the crash forces.[2 NTSB stated that seat belts would not have prevented most of the serious injuries and fatalities from occurring in school bus crashes. In 1989, the NAS completed a study of ways to improve school bus safety and concluded that the overall potential benefits of requiring seat belts on large school buses were insufficient to justify a Federal mandate for installation.[3] NAS also stated that the funds used to purchase and maintain seat belts might be better spent on other school bus safety programs and devices that could save more lives and reduce more injuries.
What does the other side have to say? Here is a word from the National Coalition for School Bus Safety:
Opponents say they are harmful to small children. If this is true then why is there a child restraint law in every state. Seatbelts are on school buses have been endorsed by the American Medical Association, American Academy of Pediatrics, American Academy of Orthopedic Surgeons, American College of Preventative Medicine, Physicians for Automotive Safety, and Center for Auto Safety.
Opponents claim that seatbelts on school buses are not cost effective and that school districts should weigh costs vs. their school systems safety record. Yet they ignore the fact that seatbelts would cost most districts about $1.50 a child per year or less than a penny a day for this added protection. Even districts with proper driver screening and the best safety records, cannot predict the performance of the “other driver”.
No, not the other driver!
The Philadelphia Daily News thinks something is fishy:
I think something is fishy, too - mostly because of things that the current anti-belt research doesn’t note.
Like the chance that school buses may be safer than cars because they’re mostly driven short distances, at low speed, by drivers on a well-known route.
The context of their use, in other words, might have as much to do with their high safety rating as “compartmentalizing” does.
The research also notes that certain restraint systems can actually cause injuries - but doesn’t raise similar questions regarding injuries that might be avoided with belt use.
Is the research sloppy - or slanted?
Bottom line as I see it; school districts face daunting tasks with limited funds. Should buses have restraints? Of course they should. Will they every have them? I suspect seat belts will start appearing in buses near you very soon.
Others blogging:
Jul 20 2006
The latest battle front of the battle of science versus religion in education is Oshkosh Wisconsin where a required physics from from University of Wisconsin-Oshkosh wants change.
From thenorthwestern.com:
Sandra Gade, a retired University of Wisconsin-Oshkosh physics professor, is leading the drive for an advisory referendum on the November ballot that would require teaching evolution with facts for and against the theory and information on the “testability” of evolution.
[...]
She argues the district is violating the First Amendment rights of students under its current method of teaching evolution.
“The way evolution is being taught is antagonistic to students’ religious beliefs. Students are told that it is a scientifically established fact that evolution, a purely natural process made all living things. Certainly that is antagonistic to religion. It says God is redundant,” Gade said on her Web site in comments delivered to the school board June 28.
“But you ask, what about theistic evolution?” she added. “Evolutionists would say ‘How foolish to believe in a supernatural cause which is completely unknowable and undetectable when science has proven the existence of a natural cause, namely evolution.’ Of course, the big lie that evolution is a fact is perpetuated by concealing contrary evidence. Now that you have been enlightened, you must make changes or else stand accused of violating students’ First Amendment rights.”
According to the article, Gade actually claims students are “being brainwashed” by evolution. That got me thinking; what is brainwashing anyway? Well, here is what Wikipedia has to say on the topic:
Brainwashing, also known as thought reform or re-education, is the application of coercive techniques to change the beliefs or behavior of one or more people usually for political or religious purposes. Whether any techniques at all exist that will actually work to change thought and behavior to the degree that the term “brainwashing” connotes is a controversial and at times hotly debated question.
We can certainly all agree, this is a hotly debated question, but is it really brainwashing? Maybe it’s just the case of using the wrong soap. To quote Marge Simpson in a recent episode on the Catholic Church: “It’s like Simon Says without a winner!”
The current issue of Time Magazine has an article with a different perspective; a book by an “evangelical biologist”
The pious young scientist had a question about human origins and the attention of one of the foremost geneticists in the world. Standing up in a crowded Hilton-hotel conference room in Alexandria, Va., the inquisitive Ph.D.-M.D. candidate asked Francis Collins, who mapped the human genome, about an attempt to reconcile science and faith: Did Collins think it possible that all species are products of evolution–except for humanity, which God created separately? “Based on everything we know,” the young man asked, “would that tie together evolution and [a literal reading of the Bible] and make room for God to intervene?”
Collins showed no surprise that a star scholar poised to contribute to the future of medicine should entertain the idea that evolution might not apply to humans. Indeed, the question was almost predictable, since the room was filled with Harvey Fellows, high-performing young academics devoted to bringing a Christian presence to fields where Evangelicals are underrepresented. And Collins, that rarest of raritiesa superstar evangelical biologistand author of the new book The Language of God: A Scientist Presents Evidence for Belief (Free Press; 304 pages), was perfectly qualified to answer. He did. That notion “gets you into a series of real problems,” he replied. He sketched one out: the human genome contains nonfunctional elements in the precise spot where they can be found on the chromosomes of lower animals. If God was creating humans afresh, Collins asked, “why would he insert a pseudo-gene that has lost its ability to do anything in the same place that it appears in a chimp?” Barring evolution, “you’re forced to the conclusion that God was trying to mislead us and test our faith–and I have trouble with that kind of conjecture.”
Perhaps Sandra Gade may want to add The Language of God: A Scientist Presents Evidence for Belief to her summer reading list. Of course, we all know that knowledge is evil. After-all, look what happened to Eve.
For more points of view on this issue, check out the following:
You get the idea…
Update 7/25: Read Cheesehead physicist wants to teach the controversy, a very interesting post from Clever Beyond Measure.
Of course, Gade has a website that’s chock full of all of the standard creationist canards; lack of transitional forms, the idea that evolutionary theory can’t account for the origin of life, the idea that evolutionary theory isn’t testable, etc., etc. I won’t bother to quote any of it here; it’s all been done to death and you can have a look at Gade’s site for yourself if you’re interested.
Jul 17 2006
We’ve all heard/said it; too much time in front of the TV makes you loose IQ points. Does that same logic transfer to the computer screen? Yes, it does according to Waine Lawton in an article by David Powles.
He [Lawton] fears children are no longer being asked to challenge the facts they find or consider and discuss the issues they cover.
Instead, he worries that pupils spend too much time regurgitating facts and figures from the internet, transferring them to their exercise books or exam papers and ensuring good grades will follow.
He believes increased use of computers means children are neglecting to read books, while he even told of his fears that youngsters minds are being so under-taxed that many would not be able to answer the simple questions about the community in which they live.
The notion has me thinking. As a recovering middle school computer teacher, I have seen first-hand the impact of technology in the classroom. I always believed computers were an asset in the classroom; providing three keys were in place:
- The kids knew how to use them. They could start the appropriate program, create/edit files, and save/open/print them as needed.
- The teacher knew how to use them instructionally. This does not mean that the teacher is a Computer Science major, it means they now how to utilize technology to satisfy the curriculum requirements for their subject area. Too often, teachers are expected to be desktop support agents instead of trained instructional professionals. Factor in an ever growing list of instruction objectives with 22-30 kids, and then we’re going expect a teacher to problem-solve a printer communication issue? That’s like asking your boss to figure-out the budget, manage personnel, and trouble-shoot the latest calendaring issue. It cannot happen.
- All the computers WORK. By that I mean the computers come on, the monitors display images, all workstations have the appropriate (and legal) versions of the required software, all have the same set-up, and there is some way to save work to be shared and/or recovered again in the future. Seems basic right? Go visit your local school and see if their labs work.
If any of these cannot be met, don’t bother. You will spend more time fighting technology than using it for sound instruction.
Now, the contention is, computers make us dumber. Hmmmm. Well, yes, I use a calculator or spreadsheet to do math. Does that mean I don’t understand the basic math principles? I think not. Anyone who has gone to battle with Bill Gates via Excel knows you have to understand a lot of basic math to get the results you want.
Another point, we are getting lazy and not remembering basic information and just depending on the technology to provide the answers. I’m a history major and have a fairly solid grasp on things that have happened in the past. In fact, my grasp is so solid that I understand that history is not only written by the victorious, but it is almost always one-sided. With the advent of global communications, we now that the opportunity to hear from the other side of the issues. Besides, I can’t tell you the exact date of every historical event, but I know where to find it.
Kids are not spending time reading. Well, it’s fair to say that what kids are reading is changing. I don’t read much in print anymore, but I’m reading more now than I ever have by getting information online. There is so much information out there that what I read changes on a daily basis. Yes, you need to make sure your kids know what a book looks and feels like and make sure they know books don’t require batteries or a memory card.
I guess the bottom line is, like anything, moderation. Yes, sitting for hours text messaging and playing video games will turn your brain to mush. But, anyone who would let their kids do that is already swimming in the shallow end of the intelligence-pool.
Jun 30 2006
Sherman Independent School District (SISD) considers extending the school day by 30 minutes according to the Herold Democrat:
SISD Interim Superintendent Al Hambrick proposed the extended school day during the last regular board meeting June 19. He explained that teachers are requesting more lesson time in core subjects, particularly math and science.
Hambrick and the district’s curriculum coordinators looked at the alternatives to an extended school day and determined that elective courses, such as art, music and theater, would be cut to provide more core subject education.
The extended school day would eliminate some of the “pull out†tutoring, where teachers remove students from other classes to receive additional help in areas in which they struggle.
The extra 30 minutes in each day could be used differently at each campus depending on its individual needs.
Hambrick said the district will recommend the change, but the decision would ultimately be up to the principals and teachers.
For years, we have been adding more and more to the school day without removing anything. This proposal appears to be a step in the right direction; provided the extra time for instruction.
John Murphy likes the idea of a longer school day:
Why not extend the school day to better reflect regular hours in the workforce? It might be a better way to condition future workers for employment. If this initiative can be done cost efficiently, I would be curious to find out how or if it works.
CyberFayden thinks it’s a bad idea:
The reasoning behind the “extended school†effort is pretty lame - mostly that many other nations keep their kids in school longer and their kids test better. You know what, I really don’t want the USA to be like other nations, so I don’t generally care what they do.
Part of my opposition, admittedly, is that I hated school. I was bored silly, I didn’t think much of most of my teachers, I didn’t like people telling me what to do and there were always more interesting things to do with my time outside of school. I didn’t like going in the morning and couldn’t wait for the end-of-day bell to ring. Of course, my favorite day of the year was getting out for the summer break. Freedom!
This issue is being raised across the country. For other perspectives see:
Jun 21 2006
Attracting and retaining qualified teachers continues to be a key struggle for most school districts across the country. At Riverside-Brookfield High School in Illinois, they seem to have a plan.
Riverside-Brookfield High School will pay nearly $60,000 to teachers this summer for non-classroom work. Teachers will be paid $30 per hour for work done in the summer to prepare for the next academic year starting in August. This pay is in addition to their contracted salary.
Teachers are typically paid on a 10 month contract. Many have the “misunderestimation” that teachers “get the summer off.” In fact, most teachers are only contracted to work for the calendar months/days when school is in session. So, for at least 2 months a year, teachers are not earning any money. Additionally, there is an expectation that the summer is to be used for improving skills, taking-down and/or setting-up classrooms, and preparing for the coming school year all, generally without compensation.
Some school districts in Houston provide as little as one work-day for teachers to set-up classrooms prior to the arrival of children. Trust me when I say, you do not want your child with a teacher who thinks one day is ample for classroom set-up. Most spend about a week getting ready; all on their “non-contract” time.
Not only does Riverside-Brookfield help teachers during the summer, they have an extremely competitive compensation plan.
The starting salary at RB for the 2006-07 year for a teacher with a bachelor’s degree with no experience will be $45,564 for a 10-month contract. The gross pay for a 20-year teacher with master’s degree plus 45 additional hours of graduate work is $104,573, according to a salary chart provided by the district. This does not include any additional stipends for coaching, club advising, chairing a department or summer work.
I’m planning on doing more research into the Riverside-Brookfield school system…
Read the complete article in the Riverside Brookfield Landmark.
