Julianne:
There are mixed opinions about the proposed budget cuts for charter schools around Ohio. According to the Columbus Dispatch, Governor Ted Strickland has proposed a 20 percent cut in funds for these schools. The cuts will carry through this year but within the next two years the budget will increase, not reaching the original figure though. Strickland’s head education advisor, John Stanford, believes that schools not only need to be grateful for the money being given to them but also should be able to manage their schools with whatever funding is being given.
There is always going to be issues about insufficient funding from schools. The government will continue to lower these funds and most of the time there is nothing we as educators can really do about it. Educators can ask for more money from tax payers but that seems to be a failing issue as each election passes. Petitions can be sent to local representatives, but that seems to be getting nowhere as well. Therefore, what else can educators do? I find myself thinking about this idea, and have not reached any well educated conclusions. The only thing I feel educators can do is to accept what is being given and to wait and see what comes next.
At the very end of this article, there are a few words about Strickland wanting to put an end to paddling in schools. This shocked me. Not only was it irrelevant to the main article, I was surprised to find that they were still punishing students this way. With how strict and law-suit oriented our society has become, I am in disbelief that paddling is still allowed as a form of punishment. This may be because my parents negative feelings towards hitting children has rubbed off on me, it is beyond me that teachers are allowed to be using physical means as punishment.
Cathleen:
Less money for stabilizing the state’s budget and school construction would flow into Ohio under the Senate version of the stimulus package that emerged over the weekend. Sherrod Brown currently remains a supporter of the stimulus package, while Senator George Voinovich remains a non-supporter. $16 billion in school funding for construction would be cut under the senate version. Ohio would have gotten $561 million for it in the first version. There have been mixed feelings about both sides of this bill, and I personally do not appreciate what Brown is supporting.
I’d like to think we as educators have some sort of say in what is happening with this senate version of the stimulus package (or any other educational matters for that matter), but there really isn’t a whole lot we can do. I noticed the article gave a lot more devotion to Sherrod Brown’s opinion of supporting it rather than Voinovich’s. Brown thinks it will “quickly pump dollars into the ailing tax economy.” I understand that we must cut somewhere, but schooling is not the place for that.
Petitions can be sent to state and local representatives, but how much good to these petitions actually do? It’s sad to think that government thinks it’s okay to cut money from education in order to invigorate a failing economy. What about cutting small amounts from high-salary jobs on Capitol Hill? It might not be that much of a change, but in an economy like this every little bit helps.
Jessica:
Education and schools are always in the media. Articles can be positive, such as community service activities. Sometimes they are unbiased, such as sports reports. Most of the time, they are quite negative. Teachers being forced to take administrative leave for various reasons, students getting suspended, or even expelled, for fighting, and one of the biggest is funding for education. The focus should be shifted to the positive because the negative things do not happen as much as the media proposes.
When the story is positive, it does not stay on the front page for long or a long clip on the news in the evening. Students have organizations like National Honor Society, CACY, and others that do not get the coverage they deserve for the good works they do. Most of the time, if at all, when the story is in the news it is only a short 30 second clip or on page 5C of the newspaper.
When the story is negative, it is front page and interviews are conducted. Stories of fights are in the news and students get suspended. A teacher says something inappropriate and it is on the front page of the newspaper for the entire week to follow the story. Recently, in Mansfield City Schools, a teacher was put on administrative leave for inappropriate comments to students. The story began with the story, but it then went into detail of her teaching style and classroom management. Recently, in the same school district, a story of a fight is now being followed. There was even video and it was posted on the newspaper’s website.
In order for schools to be more positive and successful places, students need to see the good things occurring in schools on a regular basis. This could be volunteering, school plays, or even success by students in other areas. Sports are an important extracurricular activity for some students, and it is usually reported fairly. Other things could be reported as well that reflect well on teachers and the school district. Students participate in music programs as well as other clubs and organizations. National Honor Society works repeatedly with places to volunteer and organize donations. These are the things that should be focused on, not only the negative. Negative things can be covered in the news, but they should not be the priority when it comes to student success and producing quality citizens for the future.
Monday, February 9, 2009
Monday, January 26, 2009
Annot. Bib. 2
“For most people, college is a waste of time.” Opening an article with a title such as this one really catches people attention. Especially those who have some type of relation to post secondary education. Whether that is current college students, professors, graduates, or especially high school students looking into furthering their education and bettering their chances at a well paying career. Charles Murray speaks his mind to this audience, explaining his opinion of post-secondary education and the lack of necessity it currently holds in our society.
Murray argues that there is less of a need for a Bachelors degree nowadays then in the past years. He believes that a BA only tells future employers what “intellectual ability” the potential employee holds. It dismisses the qualifications the employee holds. Therefore, Murray has the belief that everyone should take certification tests. With the understanding that not all people are on the same intellectual level, Murray knows that scores will vary depending on the student and where they are furthering their education. He used the example of a student taking online college courses and compared them to prestigious colleges and universities. To clarify further, he does not believe that post secondary education should be disregarded. He is trying to convince his audience that they need to not only get an education at a college or university, but also be prepared to take certification test in order to test all aspects of a person’s intellect, talent, and skills.
It is hard to fully agree with him. Certification tests might be beneficial for some professions, but not for all. Getting a good education at a decent college is enough certification and proof that a future employee is capable of benefiting a company or business. Relating this to the education field, getting four years of experience is proving itself enough “certification” that an extra test is unnecessary for teachers. There are many loops a pre-teacher must pass through before actually becoming a teacher. Between classes, field experiences, student teaching and state tests, adding an extra “certification” test seems pointless. For the state of Ohio, Praxis III could be considered the final “certification” test to prove that the test-ee has the skills to be a teacher. Even in this case, getting a four year education before teaching is the way to go. Not everyone can walk off the streets, apply for a teaching position, be hired and demonstrate great teaching characteristics. Even persons who received an online degree do not have the same characteristics as an actual college degree adult. They lack the field experiences gained during a four year course of study. Without that experience, teachers go into teach blind to any type of teaching. It would be challenging and discouraging.
I am all for a four year degree, no matter how much time some people think is being wasted. Without the experiences I have gone through and the relationships built, I am not sure I would still want to become a teacher. Perhaps Murray is not referring this article to the education field. However, that is the course of study and focus right now, and comparing his thoughts helped me make new realizations about teaching, and my education. Knowing what I need to do test wise in the upcoming years, allows me to disagree with the idea of adding “certification” tests for all careers. Educators may be certified in their own way, not all jobs need this certification to take place.
Murray argues that there is less of a need for a Bachelors degree nowadays then in the past years. He believes that a BA only tells future employers what “intellectual ability” the potential employee holds. It dismisses the qualifications the employee holds. Therefore, Murray has the belief that everyone should take certification tests. With the understanding that not all people are on the same intellectual level, Murray knows that scores will vary depending on the student and where they are furthering their education. He used the example of a student taking online college courses and compared them to prestigious colleges and universities. To clarify further, he does not believe that post secondary education should be disregarded. He is trying to convince his audience that they need to not only get an education at a college or university, but also be prepared to take certification test in order to test all aspects of a person’s intellect, talent, and skills.
It is hard to fully agree with him. Certification tests might be beneficial for some professions, but not for all. Getting a good education at a decent college is enough certification and proof that a future employee is capable of benefiting a company or business. Relating this to the education field, getting four years of experience is proving itself enough “certification” that an extra test is unnecessary for teachers. There are many loops a pre-teacher must pass through before actually becoming a teacher. Between classes, field experiences, student teaching and state tests, adding an extra “certification” test seems pointless. For the state of Ohio, Praxis III could be considered the final “certification” test to prove that the test-ee has the skills to be a teacher. Even in this case, getting a four year education before teaching is the way to go. Not everyone can walk off the streets, apply for a teaching position, be hired and demonstrate great teaching characteristics. Even persons who received an online degree do not have the same characteristics as an actual college degree adult. They lack the field experiences gained during a four year course of study. Without that experience, teachers go into teach blind to any type of teaching. It would be challenging and discouraging.
I am all for a four year degree, no matter how much time some people think is being wasted. Without the experiences I have gone through and the relationships built, I am not sure I would still want to become a teacher. Perhaps Murray is not referring this article to the education field. However, that is the course of study and focus right now, and comparing his thoughts helped me make new realizations about teaching, and my education. Knowing what I need to do test wise in the upcoming years, allows me to disagree with the idea of adding “certification” tests for all careers. Educators may be certified in their own way, not all jobs need this certification to take place.
Wednesday, January 14, 2009
Annot. Bib. 1
Learning all the ins and outs of teaching in our current society can easily bring confusion to future and even veteran teachers. With all the standards that need to be followed and met, shown with test scores, teaching students has become a challenge. For some teachers, this challenge becomes too overwhelming in which case they cannot keep up with every detail. These details boil down to standardized tests and the scores that one’s students receive. Based on these scores, shows state education departments how our teachers are doing on their job. If scores are low, then they must be teaching poorly. And if scores are off the charts, then they must be the best teachers in the world. Right? I cannot agree with these two statements. There are too many factors that go into testing and too many administrators look right over them. Looking at some of the standards, I think back to my high school math courses and what I learned. It does not all match up. This makes me question the testing more and more.
By the end of your junior and senior years of high school, one should be able to “Construct logical verification or counter examples to test conjectures and to justify or refute algorithms and solutions to problems.”(page 179) I do not remember doing anything mentioned above in any high school math class. My first recollection of doing this was in my second semester here at Capital, in my Discrete Mathematics course. If all teachers were suppose to be teaching this I feel like I missed out greatly and that they failed in meeting these standards. I question if this benchmark was even part of any standardized test given to me. If it was, I failed that section of the test. If it was not part of the tests, however, why has it become a benchmark that teachers are suppose to teach? And if they are not teaching this concept to their students, then are they bad teachers? Would they be teaching to the test or following benchmarks that are suppose to teaching to the test that are not? I keep questioning this system and find myself questioning in circles. Everything is leading back to these standards we are to follow yet; there seem to be flaws and mishaps.
James McKernan states “The reality of school teaching nowadays is that one must ‘cover the ground’ at a furious pace.” (page 76) This is an unfortunate but true statement. Because of results of test scores, teachers must rush through a curriculum at rigorous speeds to prepare the students to pass these tests. The students get burned out with all the cramming of information and then when they do not pass the test with the correct score, they have to do start all over again. For some students this is an unfair process. I believe all students have the potential to do their best and can succeed at anything. These tests do not seem to agree with that idea. If one fails the math section, due to a bad test day, or an anxious attitude, or even an “I don’t care” attitude, I do not believe that they should be penalized for future math courses. I have experienced students who were poorly placed in math courses due to these “poor” tests scores, when they already know what the class is about and could teach it themselves. I believe that we need to tweak the system to allow fluctuation for these students. There needs to be another way to ‘test’ these students to see where they fit into classes. I’m hoping in the very near future, there are more changes that benefit the students and help them get the best learning experiences that will benefit them in their future. Not just to benefit them with the best test scores that make the nation look smart. I think that we are doing more harm then good and it in return makes the nation look less smart.
By the end of your junior and senior years of high school, one should be able to “Construct logical verification or counter examples to test conjectures and to justify or refute algorithms and solutions to problems.”(page 179) I do not remember doing anything mentioned above in any high school math class. My first recollection of doing this was in my second semester here at Capital, in my Discrete Mathematics course. If all teachers were suppose to be teaching this I feel like I missed out greatly and that they failed in meeting these standards. I question if this benchmark was even part of any standardized test given to me. If it was, I failed that section of the test. If it was not part of the tests, however, why has it become a benchmark that teachers are suppose to teach? And if they are not teaching this concept to their students, then are they bad teachers? Would they be teaching to the test or following benchmarks that are suppose to teaching to the test that are not? I keep questioning this system and find myself questioning in circles. Everything is leading back to these standards we are to follow yet; there seem to be flaws and mishaps.
James McKernan states “The reality of school teaching nowadays is that one must ‘cover the ground’ at a furious pace.” (page 76) This is an unfortunate but true statement. Because of results of test scores, teachers must rush through a curriculum at rigorous speeds to prepare the students to pass these tests. The students get burned out with all the cramming of information and then when they do not pass the test with the correct score, they have to do start all over again. For some students this is an unfair process. I believe all students have the potential to do their best and can succeed at anything. These tests do not seem to agree with that idea. If one fails the math section, due to a bad test day, or an anxious attitude, or even an “I don’t care” attitude, I do not believe that they should be penalized for future math courses. I have experienced students who were poorly placed in math courses due to these “poor” tests scores, when they already know what the class is about and could teach it themselves. I believe that we need to tweak the system to allow fluctuation for these students. There needs to be another way to ‘test’ these students to see where they fit into classes. I’m hoping in the very near future, there are more changes that benefit the students and help them get the best learning experiences that will benefit them in their future. Not just to benefit them with the best test scores that make the nation look smart. I think that we are doing more harm then good and it in return makes the nation look less smart.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)